Jonathan Leake, writing in the Sunday Times today, described reports of reductions in carbon emissions from China as “unlikely … in such a fast growing economy.”

He highlighted a US initiative to launch a satellite to monitor carbon emissions. ‘We’re goin’ to smoke you (Chinese) out!’ is one interpretation. So is the Chinese Government really fiddling the books about carbon emissions?

Of course we’re all thoroughly (self) trained to repeat the mantra about the Chinese are building a coal fired power station every day or two so what possible difference can my solar panel make etc … (although no doubt that unmentionable supermarket chain’s motif about ‘every little helps’ comes into mind).

So talk of 5% (or any) cuts in Chinese carbon emissions are instantly filed in the rubbish tray by many westerners. ‘They are obviously cooking the books, what can you expect of a communist government’ is, I am sure the general trend among the richer sections of chattering Sunday Times classes who are reeling from relief from the worry of a potential Miliband Government taxing their mansions,

A wide spread of statistics indicate the cuts are genuine

Except that I have a sneaking feeling that reports of cuts in carbon emissions are not to be discounted. Indeed I will be rather surprised if the Chinese are making it up. Sorry Jonathan.

There are various reasons why I believe the Chinese statistics. First, if you look at the data for changes in production of various sorts, it would require some highly integrated coordination to get a bunch of statisticians to weave together such a convincing story of how contextual figures for cement production, industrial production of various sorts and energy production to tally.

China is an authoritarian state, yes, but it’s not North Korea. Somebody somewhere is likely to leak some details of what is really going on, if the stats books are really being cooked to that degree. There are an awful lot of very intelligent people in China. Really.

But perhaps an even bigger reason why it would be wrong to place to much emphasis on sceptical western opinion is are the clues from the wider energy, social, economic and political context. Westerners received wisdom of what is happening in China is basically flawed in some crucial senses.

Busting the China myths

One myth is that China is still in the midst of a transformation from a rurally based population to an urbanised population requiring vast investments in buildings and infrastructure that will carry on until the cows come home in their newly built mass sheds.

In fact, for the large bulk of the population, this has already happened. Chinese people mainly live in towns and cities already. There has been a big building boom in recent years, but that may be less connected to people coming in from the fields than in pure property speculation funded by a lot of governmental graft.

In fact the government led by President Xi Jinping has been busy cutting down on government graft and seems to be well aware of the distorting impact of an economy heavily influenced by corruption – and incidentally under great pressure to do something about the appalling levels of air pollution suffered in these urban centres in China.

And there is a lot of contextual evidence that the corruption crackdown is real, for example the cries of pain from the gambling ventures in Macao. So there are likely to be big reductions in speculative building constructions. This certainly connects with official statistics showing a big slowdown in cement production, and therefore in outputs of carbon emissions.

Sure a lot of coal fired power stations being built, but there are now far too many of them compared with electricity demand, which has barely increased in recent times. This has had the collateral effect of allowing production to be focussed on the newer, more efficient power stations.

Coal prices have plunged on the world markets in recent times, Australian and other coal traders are reacting with horror at import curbs on coal with high ash content, and of course, the world economy has been slow to rebound, influenced no doubt by ‘sluggish’ Chinese economic growth.

A clue: now 30% of China’s electricity is renewable

Now ‘sluggish’ is definitely a relative term when is comes to economic growth rates. A Chinese economic growth rate hovering, as it has been in the last 12 months, just above 7%, would hardly be regarded as sluggish in the UK, but in China it is a big decline from the 10% or more annual growth that they have been chalking up.

But that has big implications in that this will send carbon emissions in (relatively) downwards direction. Now, the western press believes the official statistics showing a relative decline in Chinese economic growth, but doesn’t believe their stats on carbon emissions. Odd.

Added to which the Chinese have actually been adopting a lot of renewable energy sources – up from 10% of electricity to around 30% over a decade. And they also making much more efficient use of the coal they are burning. Yes, that’s energy efficiency, also helped by a shift to production of less energy intensive goods and services.

And by the way, while the Chinese have been building a few nuclear power plant, this makes little difference compared to the growth in renewable energy. Wind power alone is now outstripping nuclear power in electricity production.

Putting this all in perspective, Chinese per capita emissions are roughly on par with average EU per capita emissions, and about half those of per capita US emissions. It is positive news that the Chinese are most unlikely now to catch up the Americans.

A big question is, how fast is the USA curbing down its emissions? And by the way Uncle Sam, why are you virtually banning imports of solar power from China and helping to curb the fall in world solar PV prices?

Dr David Toke is Reader in Energy Politics in the Department of Politics and International Relations in the University of Aberdeen.

David’s latest book, Ecological Modernisation and Renewable Energy, was published in March 2011 by Palgrave.

This article was originally published on David Toke’s blog page.

Jonathan Leake, writing in the Sunday Times today, described reports of reductions in carbon emissions from China as “unlikely … in such a fast growing economy.”

He highlighted a US initiative to launch a satellite to monitor carbon emissions. ‘We’re goin’ to smoke you (Chinese) out!’ is one interpretation. So is the Chinese Government really fiddling the books about carbon emissions?

Of course we’re all thoroughly (self) trained to repeat the mantra about the Chinese are building a coal fired power station every day or two so what possible difference can my solar panel make etc … (although no doubt that unmentionable supermarket chain’s motif about ‘every little helps’ comes into mind).

So talk of 5% (or any) cuts in Chinese carbon emissions are instantly filed in the rubbish tray by many westerners. ‘They are obviously cooking the books, what can you expect of a communist government’ is, I am sure the general trend among the richer sections of chattering Sunday Times classes who are reeling from relief from the worry of a potential Miliband Government taxing their mansions,

A wide spread of statistics indicate the cuts are genuine

Except that I have a sneaking feeling that reports of cuts in carbon emissions are not to be discounted. Indeed I will be rather surprised if the Chinese are making it up. Sorry Jonathan.

There are various reasons why I believe the Chinese statistics. First, if you look at the data for changes in production of various sorts, it would require some highly integrated coordination to get a bunch of statisticians to weave together such a convincing story of how contextual figures for cement production, industrial production of various sorts and energy production to tally.

China is an authoritarian state, yes, but it’s not North Korea. Somebody somewhere is likely to leak some details of what is really going on, if the stats books are really being cooked to that degree. There are an awful lot of very intelligent people in China. Really.

But perhaps an even bigger reason why it would be wrong to place to much emphasis on sceptical western opinion is are the clues from the wider energy, social, economic and political context. Westerners received wisdom of what is happening in China is basically flawed in some crucial senses.

Busting the China myths

One myth is that China is still in the midst of a transformation from a rurally based population to an urbanised population requiring vast investments in buildings and infrastructure that will carry on until the cows come home in their newly built mass sheds.

In fact, for the large bulk of the population, this has already happened. Chinese people mainly live in towns and cities already. There has been a big building boom in recent years, but that may be less connected to people coming in from the fields than in pure property speculation funded by a lot of governmental graft.

In fact the government led by President Xi Jinping has been busy cutting down on government graft and seems to be well aware of the distorting impact of an economy heavily influenced by corruption – and incidentally under great pressure to do something about the appalling levels of air pollution suffered in these urban centres in China.

And there is a lot of contextual evidence that the corruption crackdown is real, for example the cries of pain from the gambling ventures in Macao. So there are likely to be big reductions in speculative building constructions. This certainly connects with official statistics showing a big slowdown in cement production, and therefore in outputs of carbon emissions.

Sure a lot of coal fired power stations being built, but there are now far too many of them compared with electricity demand, which has barely increased in recent times. This has had the collateral effect of allowing production to be focussed on the newer, more efficient power stations.

Coal prices have plunged on the world markets in recent times, Australian and other coal traders are reacting with horror at import curbs on coal with high ash content, and of course, the world economy has been slow to rebound, influenced no doubt by ‘sluggish’ Chinese economic growth.

A clue: now 30% of China’s electricity is renewable

Now ‘sluggish’ is definitely a relative term when is comes to economic growth rates. A Chinese economic growth rate hovering, as it has been in the last 12 months, just above 7%, would hardly be regarded as sluggish in the UK, but in China it is a big decline from the 10% or more annual growth that they have been chalking up.

But that has big implications in that this will send carbon emissions in (relatively) downwards direction. Now, the western press believes the official statistics showing a relative decline in Chinese economic growth, but doesn’t believe their stats on carbon emissions. Odd.

Added to which the Chinese have actually been adopting a lot of renewable energy sources – up from 10% of electricity to around 30% over a decade. And they also making much more efficient use of the coal they are burning. Yes, that’s energy efficiency, also helped by a shift to production of less energy intensive goods and services.

And by the way, while the Chinese have been building a few nuclear power plant, this makes little difference compared to the growth in renewable energy. Wind power alone is now outstripping nuclear power in electricity production.

Putting this all in perspective, Chinese per capita emissions are roughly on par with average EU per capita emissions, and about half those of per capita US emissions. It is positive news that the Chinese are most unlikely now to catch up the Americans.

A big question is, how fast is the USA curbing down its emissions? And by the way Uncle Sam, why are you virtually banning imports of solar power from China and helping to curb the fall in world solar PV prices?

Dr David Toke is Reader in Energy Politics in the Department of Politics and International Relations in the University of Aberdeen.

David’s latest book, Ecological Modernisation and Renewable Energy, was published in March 2011 by Palgrave.

This article was originally published on David Toke’s blog page.

Jonathan Leake, writing in the Sunday Times today, described reports of reductions in carbon emissions from China as “unlikely … in such a fast growing economy.”

He highlighted a US initiative to launch a satellite to monitor carbon emissions. ‘We’re goin’ to smoke you (Chinese) out!’ is one interpretation. So is the Chinese Government really fiddling the books about carbon emissions?

Of course we’re all thoroughly (self) trained to repeat the mantra about the Chinese are building a coal fired power station every day or two so what possible difference can my solar panel make etc … (although no doubt that unmentionable supermarket chain’s motif about ‘every little helps’ comes into mind).

So talk of 5% (or any) cuts in Chinese carbon emissions are instantly filed in the rubbish tray by many westerners. ‘They are obviously cooking the books, what can you expect of a communist government’ is, I am sure the general trend among the richer sections of chattering Sunday Times classes who are reeling from relief from the worry of a potential Miliband Government taxing their mansions,

A wide spread of statistics indicate the cuts are genuine

Except that I have a sneaking feeling that reports of cuts in carbon emissions are not to be discounted. Indeed I will be rather surprised if the Chinese are making it up. Sorry Jonathan.

There are various reasons why I believe the Chinese statistics. First, if you look at the data for changes in production of various sorts, it would require some highly integrated coordination to get a bunch of statisticians to weave together such a convincing story of how contextual figures for cement production, industrial production of various sorts and energy production to tally.

China is an authoritarian state, yes, but it’s not North Korea. Somebody somewhere is likely to leak some details of what is really going on, if the stats books are really being cooked to that degree. There are an awful lot of very intelligent people in China. Really.

But perhaps an even bigger reason why it would be wrong to place to much emphasis on sceptical western opinion is are the clues from the wider energy, social, economic and political context. Westerners received wisdom of what is happening in China is basically flawed in some crucial senses.

Busting the China myths

One myth is that China is still in the midst of a transformation from a rurally based population to an urbanised population requiring vast investments in buildings and infrastructure that will carry on until the cows come home in their newly built mass sheds.

In fact, for the large bulk of the population, this has already happened. Chinese people mainly live in towns and cities already. There has been a big building boom in recent years, but that may be less connected to people coming in from the fields than in pure property speculation funded by a lot of governmental graft.

In fact the government led by President Xi Jinping has been busy cutting down on government graft and seems to be well aware of the distorting impact of an economy heavily influenced by corruption – and incidentally under great pressure to do something about the appalling levels of air pollution suffered in these urban centres in China.

And there is a lot of contextual evidence that the corruption crackdown is real, for example the cries of pain from the gambling ventures in Macao. So there are likely to be big reductions in speculative building constructions. This certainly connects with official statistics showing a big slowdown in cement production, and therefore in outputs of carbon emissions.

Sure a lot of coal fired power stations being built, but there are now far too many of them compared with electricity demand, which has barely increased in recent times. This has had the collateral effect of allowing production to be focussed on the newer, more efficient power stations.

Coal prices have plunged on the world markets in recent times, Australian and other coal traders are reacting with horror at import curbs on coal with high ash content, and of course, the world economy has been slow to rebound, influenced no doubt by ‘sluggish’ Chinese economic growth.

A clue: now 30% of China’s electricity is renewable

Now ‘sluggish’ is definitely a relative term when is comes to economic growth rates. A Chinese economic growth rate hovering, as it has been in the last 12 months, just above 7%, would hardly be regarded as sluggish in the UK, but in China it is a big decline from the 10% or more annual growth that they have been chalking up.

But that has big implications in that this will send carbon emissions in (relatively) downwards direction. Now, the western press believes the official statistics showing a relative decline in Chinese economic growth, but doesn’t believe their stats on carbon emissions. Odd.

Added to which the Chinese have actually been adopting a lot of renewable energy sources – up from 10% of electricity to around 30% over a decade. And they also making much more efficient use of the coal they are burning. Yes, that’s energy efficiency, also helped by a shift to production of less energy intensive goods and services.

And by the way, while the Chinese have been building a few nuclear power plant, this makes little difference compared to the growth in renewable energy. Wind power alone is now outstripping nuclear power in electricity production.

Putting this all in perspective, Chinese per capita emissions are roughly on par with average EU per capita emissions, and about half those of per capita US emissions. It is positive news that the Chinese are most unlikely now to catch up the Americans.

A big question is, how fast is the USA curbing down its emissions? And by the way Uncle Sam, why are you virtually banning imports of solar power from China and helping to curb the fall in world solar PV prices?

Dr David Toke is Reader in Energy Politics in the Department of Politics and International Relations in the University of Aberdeen.

David’s latest book, Ecological Modernisation and Renewable Energy, was published in March 2011 by Palgrave.

This article was originally published on David Toke’s blog page.

Pope Francis has endorsed a petition calling for bold climate action after meeting with the newly created Global Catholic Climate Movement (GCCM) at the Vatican this week.

Protocol means Pope Francis cannot sign himself, so he asked the Pontifical Ceremonieri, Monsignor Guillermo Karcher, to sign the petition on his behalf to emphasise his endorsement and encourage Catholics to sign as well.

The Pope’s move is another sign that he intends to lead Catholics into an active response to climate change.

“Pope Francis was very supportive of the work we are doing to engage Catholics around the world in a coordinated response to climate change”, said Tomás Insua, the Argentinian co-founder of the GCCM.

“The Pope even joked that we were competing against his encyclical. His endorsement of our work is extremely important to raise awareness within Catholic circles globally, and to collect more signatures.”

‘A clear, definitive and ineluctable ethical imperative to act’

The idea for the petition came as a response to Pope Francis’ call last December, in which he said: “On climate change there is a clear, definitive and ineluctable ethical imperative to act.”

The signatures will be presented to world leaders in December 2015, when they will meet at the United Nations climate summit in Paris.

“The support of Pope Francis to the petition is very important as climate change is a great and urgent moral issue”, said Allen Ottaro, director of CYNESA based in Kenya and co-founder of GCCM.

“Climate change hits the poorest first and hardest, and will leave an unnecessarily dire legacy for future generations. We Catholics need to step up against climate change and raise a strong voice asking political leaders to take action urgently. I encourage all to sign the petition on our website.”

The Pope also presented GCCM with the book ‘The Sun’s Energy in the Vatican‘ as a gift to emphasise the Holy See’s commitment to renewable energy as a means to address the climate change crisis.

A 1.5C temperature target

The GCCM adopted the benchmark of 1.5°C “because it is an accepted convention being offered by scientists and others around the world”, explained Bill Patenaude, a GCCM co-founder.

“That degree-and-a-half of thermal energy is the amount of warming presumed to be about as high as you want to go before global systems begin to shift even more dramatically than people around the world are already observing.

“World leaders can’t tweak every variable that affects global temperatures, but they can help build a world with fewer greenhouse gases discharged from the lifestyle choices of so many (like me). And whether or not you take stock in the accepted science of climate change, isn’t reducing emissions of anything a good thing?

“Of course, lots of people accept the science of climate change. They do so not because they are climatologists but because they are fishermen, farmers, bird watchers, gardeners, and other vocations that require them to keep track of nature’s cycles.

“These people are noticing changes. And what they’re noticing is consistent with what happens when the atmosphere holds more thermal energy-even if the change is a bit chaotic, as one would expect from a complex system like a planet.

“Then, of course, there are places like the Philippines that have been repeatedly pummeled by severe storms. And there are places that have seen increased precipitation intensities, and others with less.

“All this (and more) has prompted the need to be heard and to do something and to demand that our leaders act. This need is growing because so many people feel that they have no way to contribute solutions to a big and frightening problem.”

Vatican’s climate action to intensify

The Catholic Church is becoming increasingly vocal on climate change. Two weeks ago, the Vatican hosted a high-level summit about climate change and released a declaration that stated:

“Human-induced climate change is a scientific reality, and its decisive mitigation is a moral and religious imperative for humanity.”

Once Pope Francis’ encyclical on ecology is published in June, it is expected that action will continue to intensify.

The petition: ‘To world leaders: Climate change affects everyone, but especially the poor and most vulnerable people. Impelled by our Catholic faith, we call on you to drastically cut carbon emissions to keep the global temperature rise below the dangerous threshold of 1.5°C, and to aid the world’s poorest in coping with climate change impacts.’

The GCCM is an international network of over 100 Catholic organisations, working to rally catholics worldwide to take action on climate change as the Pope prepares to publish his highly anticipated encyclical on ecology this coming June.

Immediately preceding the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, the country that now demands others acknowledge its “right to exist” depopulated and destroyed over 400 Palestinian towns and villages, forcing the inhabitants to flee for their lives.

The new state planted trees and established national parks over the ruins of dozens of villages where Israelis now spend quiet afternoons and enjoy picnics in the shade.

The cries of the dead are drowned out by the laughter of children playing on the remains of ancient homes. The Arabic names of the destroyed villages have been erased.

The Israeli state still clings to the myth of ‘A land without a people, for a people without a land’, and deny the Nakba took place – just as many Americans still deny an indigenous genocide in ‘our’ country.

Zochrot, an Israeli NGO, has identified and mapped every destroyed Palestinian village and town in order to re-educate the Israeli public. Their message is largely ignored.

The evidence that could not be erased – the millions of displaced people living across Israel, in what remains of Palestine, in camps in neighboring Arab countries and the wider Palestinian diaspora are marginalized in an attempt to silence them.

Silenced, they are more easily forgotten.

Gaza obliterated

Take Gaza for example. As Hamas and Fatah announced critical gains toward establishing a unity government in the summer of 2014, Israel escalated hostilities in Gaza. In response to Israeli violence, including drone strikes and targeted assassinations, rockets are fired from Gaza into Israel. Both sides escalate the violence.

Suddenly, Gaza exists again – as a threat to the state. Hamas is condemned in the media. Politicians declare, “Israel has a right to defend itself!”

Israel, with the backing of the United States, begins an assault that includes a sustained aerial bombardment as well as a ground invasion using tanks, howitzers, and thousands of troops against a largely unarmed, civilian population. From Gaza rockets continue to fly in unprecedented numbers.