If China is going green, why did those 10,000 coal trucks get caught in the Mother-Of-All-Traffic Jams?

Did you hear about that epic 75-mile long traffic jam they had in China earlier this week? Yes, you read that right, it was a traffic jam that stretched for 75 miles.

Here in the nation's capital, people are amazed when I-95 heading south of town or the Beltway around the city develop jams that go for 10 miles.

But incredible as a 75-mile traffic jam is in and of itself, there was something else of importance worth noting in the Chinese traffic choker - it was mainly caused by trucks hauling coal. According to China Daily, "more than 10,000 trucks mainly carrying coal are stuck in a 120 km (75 mile) traffic jam in the north Chinese region of Inner Mongolia, in the latest dramatic snarl-up on the country's roads."

Imagine that, 10,000 trucks hauling coal. There is a reason for that, however. China's massive manufacturing economy runs on coal, a fact that somehow gets lost in President Obama's frequent exhortations to Americans that we must go green because China allegedly is doing it faster than we are.

But according to The New York Times, China uses more coal that the U.S., Europe and Japan combined, and is the world's leading emitter of greenhouse gases.

Officially, the country's communist regime now requires new coal-fired plants to use "clean coal" technology, but that doesn't change the essential fact that China is and will remain for the foreseeable future the world's leading greenhouse gas producer because of its reliance on coal to power its manufacturing and power-generation.

As the Times explained last year:

"Without doubt, China’s coal-fired power sector still has many problems, and global warming gases from the country are expected to continue increasing. China’s aim is to use the newest technologies to limit the rate of increase.

"Only half the country’s coal-fired power plants have the emissions control equipment to remove sulfur compounds that cause acid rain, and even power plants with that technology do not always use it. China has not begun regulating some of the emissions that lead to heavy smog in big cities.

"Even among China’s newly built plants, not all are modern. Only about 60 percent of the new plants are being built using newer technology that is highly efficient, but more expensive."

Now you know why there can be a 75-mile long traffic jam made up mostly of trucks hauling coal. Think about that the next time Obama exhorts us to mimick China's "green policies."

Source

Comments   

 

# amirlach 2010-09-03 11:24

I have friends who do bussiness in China. They have alot of parts made there for their factory.

They have considered building a factory there. The Chinese Government is more pro-bussiness, they have alot less RED tape(ironically) and they encourage new enterprise. In north america the regulations and taxes are choking them to death.

Now add a carbon tax and higher energy costs to the mix and then wonder why jobs vanish to the third world.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

 

 

# Ralph 2010-09-03 22:31

If China is going green why would China buy $A70b of Australian coal?

news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-business/china-to-buy-a70b-of-australian-coal-20100206-njko.html

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

 

 

# amirlach 2010-09-03 22:41

Or invest in Alberta Oil Sands? Why bother with cuts to emmisions only to sell coal to a country that has far lower standards than your own? Any cuts we make will be dwarfed by emerging economy's.

China might build green energy gizmos to sell to us. They won't use more than a token amount of them cause they aint stupid.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

 

 

# 4TimesAYear 2010-09-04 02:07

I understand that acid rain is a myth:
THE CONTINUING MYTHOLOGY ABOUT ACID RAIN
www.fortfreedom.org/n15.htm
"in 1987, epa research raised doubts about the destructiveness of acid rain. Then came the most complete study of Acid Rain ever conducted, the half billion dollar National Acid Precipitation Assessment Project (napap), which concluded that the allegedly horrific effects of Acid Rain were largely a myth. Among other things, the study found that lakes were, on average, no more acidic than before the industrial era; just 240 of 7000 Northeast lakes, most with little recreational value, were critically acidic, or “dead”; most of the acidic water was in Florida, where the rain is only one-third as acidic; there was only very limited damage to trees, far less than that evident elsewhere in the world where so2 emissions are minimal; half of the Adirondack lakes were acidified due to natural organic acids; and crops remained undamaged at acidic levels ten times present levels. In the end, napap's scientists figured that liming the few lakes that were acidic would solve the problem at a fraction of the cost of the Clean Air Act's Acid Rain provisions."
www.acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-8-number-3/environmentalism-triumph-politics

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator