(Photo via Market Sense)

Wired magazine interviews Stanford University’s Jeremy Carl, a research fellow in the Program on Energy and Sustainable Development.

Here’s what he has to say about China’s role in the coal industry:

• All We Are Saying Is, Give (Clean) Coal a Chance
  By Alexis Madrigal
  November 6, 2007

Wired News: Can you give us an idea of the scale of coal power? Can you put coal in context as an energy source?

Jeremy Carl: Only oil makes a bigger contribution to global energy. In terms of energy in the industrial world, it’s about 40 percent of electricity production.

WN: How dirty is coal?

Carl: Coal is as dirty as it gets. Coal has every element in the periodic table. And depending where in the world you get it from, “coal” can mean 100 different substances. If you sent the sort of coal you might use in a typical Indian plant to a supermodern boiler in Japan, it would shut the place down.

WN: We hear a lot about China’s coal industry. Can you compare it with the U.S. industry, which ranks second in the world?

Carl: We mine about (1.1 billion tons) of coal per year. China was at about 1.4 billion tons seven years ago. Now they are at 2.4 billion tons. So, they essentially took the second-biggest coal industry in the whole world and replicated it in seven years. And if you look at the Chinese plans, they plan to ramp it up even more in the future.

WN: Given the obvious environmental impacts of these plants, why don’t we have better answers for these problems than the Kyoto Protocol (which the United States didn’t sign, and which exempted China and India from emissions restrictions)?

Carl: I’ll give you a speculative, personal answer. It has to do with the politics of the type of people who were negotiating Kyoto. And the pressure put on by environmental groups that were uncomfortable with coal. There was just so much pressure on the symbolic importance of getting a deal done.

WN: What would you have rather seen?

Carl: I think there has been some really good criticism that says, “Was the U.N. really a good forum for this? Or would it have been better to have taken the 10 countries who consume 60 percent of global energy and do something with real teeth in it?” I think that would have been a much better approach.

I would have happily traded every emissions gain from Kyoto for eight clean coal plants sequestering carbon in different countries. Because then we could have a real discussion that says, “This works. Now let’s see who has to bear the cost.”

WN: Why would that be such a big deal?

Carl: Because right now we’re having a conversation with China and India where we’re trying to get China and India to build clean coal plants by saying, “Here’s this thing that’s never been tried before at a mass scale. You should build one.” And that’s not going to work.

[tags]coal, energy, China[/tags]

A recent article from The McKinsey Quarterly, the business journal of the management consulting firm McKinsey & Company, recommends ways to cut the growth in worldwide energy demand. “The key is a concerted global effort to boost energy productivity,” the report says, and China, especially, plays a “crucial role” in that effort.

• Curbing the growth of global energy demand
  Web exclusive, July 2007

Here are some key points about China’s involvement in improving energy productivity:

• CHINA LEADING IN THE COMMERCIAL SECTOR: Most of the current energy demand in the commerical sector–i.e. office and retail buildings, hotels and restaurants, etc.–comes from the developing world. However, according to McKinsey, 75 percent of the growth expected in commercial-sector energy demand by 2020 will come from the developing world—and 48 percent of that high demand will be from China.

• IMPLEMENTING ENERGY-EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGY: China has already proved itself to be an attractive place for new capital development. During its time of surging growth, China should implement “best-practice energy-efficient technologies in all new Chinese industrial-production capacity” to potentially cut global energy demand in 2020 by 13 QBTUs, which is 10 percent of the global energy productivity opportunities.

• COOLING DOWN: Likewise, McKinsey estimates that China could save eight QBTUs by 2020, or 6 percent of the global energy productivity opportunity, by introducing “world-class insulation standards and energy-efficient heating and cooling packages in new residential construction.”

• INFLUENCING THE WORLD ECONOMY: McKinsey estimates that China’s power sector alone will generate 16 percent of the global growth in energy demand from 2003 to 2020, which means it is very important whether or not the country meets this demand by maintaining current efficiency levels or by developing new, high-efficiency plants. “Although addressing such issues will be difficult,” the report says, “we believe that measures to improve energy productivity can actually help China’s economy. In fact, given the country’s relatively low labor costs in building, these opportunities may well have higher returns there than the 10 percent or so we have observed elsewhere. Moreover, China could be a considerable source of innovation as it develops and tests new energy-efficient devices for use in markets around the world.”

[tags]China, energy, McKinsey, energy productivity[/tags]

(Photo via fueleconomy.gov)

According to Reuters, via the International Herald Tribune:

Green credit: To fight pollution, China takes the capitalist route
July 30, 2007

BEIJING: The Chinese environmental agency is working with the banking authorities to identify companies that fail pollution checks or bypass environmental assessments for new projects and to restrict their access to fresh credit.

In essence, the country’s worst polluters will be blacklisted from borrowing money from banks. And, according to the article, “officials will also consider incorporating environmental standards in tax, insurance and stock market regulations.” In a country where there is no shortage of corner-cutting money grubbers, this might actually work!

Greening the world through capitalism is nothing new, but it’s definitely becoming more of the norm, rather than the exception.

In Crain’s Chicago Business (where I intern in the research department), there’s a front-page story about Richard Sandor and the Chicago Climate Exchange. The story is available to subscribers only, but you can read more about the organization on its Web site.

Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) is the world’s first and North America’s only legally binding rules-based greenhouse gas emissions allowance trading system, as well as the world’s only global system for emissions trading based on all six greenhouse gases.

CCX emitting Members make a voluntary but legally binding commitment to meet annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets. Those who reduce below the targets have surplus allowances to sell or bank; those who emit above the targets comply by purchasing CCX Carbon Financial Instrument™ (CFI™) contracts.

The CCX was modeled after the European Climate Exchange.

China has also established a “green credit” exchange.

China Aims to Shed Its Dirty Dragon Image
BusinessWeek
By Brian Bremner
February 14, 2007

China gets its share of international criticism for its world-class air pollution, toxic river systems, and colossal energy inefficiency. And much to the chagrin of Beijing, its dirty dragon image seems likely to expand later in the decade when it is forecast to overtake the U.S. as the world’s biggest emitter of greenhouse gases.

However, China’s decision on Feb. 6 to team up with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and launch the developing world’s first carbon-credit exchange could alter that scenario. It’s a diplomatically artful move by Beijing that will increase incoming foreign investment in green technology on the mainland—and could be a game-changer for the $22 billion global trading market for carbon credits down the road.

I say, if businesses are the ones running the game, they should definitely be responsible for setting the rules. We’ll see how China does on the playing field.

Related links:

China and the United Nations are working to set up a carbon trading exchange in Beijing – a move that could establish the Chinese capital as an important centre for the multibillion-dollar global trade in carbon credits, according to the UN’s top official in China.

BEIJING - After a series of failed administrative campaigns to enforce pollution controls, China is hoping to use financial means to restrain its big polluters.

[tags]China, green credit, banking, Chicago Climate Exchange, European Climate Exchange[/tags]

WAIT, BUT I THOUGHT…

Energy-saving lightbulbs (or CFLs, “compact fluorescent lamps“) are supposed to be good for the environment, right? Better than those traditional, incandescent fixtures, right?

They last longer, they save money, they use less electricity, they reduce greenhouse gas emissions…and they’re also becoming hip and trendy among Generation Y and Hollywood stars (Julia Louis-Dreyfus, a.k.a. Elaine from “Seinfeld,” distributed Phillips energy-saving bulbs to every graduating student at Northwestern University’s commencement ceremony. See? Even the kids are into it!)

But according to some skeptics, there’s a darker side to this supposedly eco-friendly invention.

WHAT A WASTE?

The merits of CFLs depends on what’s involved in the process of manufacturing, shipping and selling the product.

Scientists often point out the harmful effects of mercury.

And let’s not forget there was a recall of Chinese-manufactured Teng Fei Energy Saving Light Bulbs, back in 2004, because it posed a fire hazard.

There are also all those costs associated with the transportation of the bulbs (over THOUSANDS of miles) and then the inevitable (and potentially hazardous) disposal of them in overcrowded landfills.

BRIGHT IDEAS FOR CHINA

Here’s a list of Mainland China manufacturers and trading companies that sell energy-saving light bulbs.

In 2005, China produced a total of 1.76 billion energy-saving lights, accounting for 90% of the world’s total. Out of these, 70% were exported, according to figures from the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC).

You can read all about China’s government plan for efficient lighting at the “Green Lights Project” home page.

BEING RESPONSIBLE

Some companies are trying to be responsible about the shift toward these “green” lights. MEGAMAN, a German brand, claims that it tries its best to keep environmental costs low.

MEGAMAN sells nine different brands of its energy-saving “lamps,” including the innovative DorS DIMMING series.

Here’s a snazzy 8-minute video on YouTube about a MEGAMAN factory in Xiamen, China.

What do you think: RESPONSIBLE OR NOT?

Megaman Factory in China

Megaman Factory, Xiamen, China.
Megaman energy-saving lightbulbs - or ‘lamps’ as they prefer to call them - are manufactured across several sites in Xiamen, China - from raw materials to finished product.
Gavin Hill was hired to make a video showcasing Megaman’s state-of-the-art processes for screening at trade lighting exhibitions worldwide.
The video was edited in Bangkok, Thailand.
Client: Megaman.
Produced, directed and filmed in Xiamen, China by Gavin Hill.
Creative Consultant: Gordon Tan.