Why Chinas environmental and human rights record has a long way to go.

How the world’s priorities have changed over China: not so long ago the US Congress was earnestly debating China’s human-rights record. Today all anyone cares about is that China’s economic wheels keep turning, so it goes on filling its shelves with our goods. Far from worrying about China’s repressive regime, foreign politicians are mainly concerned that it keep a lid on the discontent caused by widespread official corruption. That’s why the outside world got a graphic glimpse of the rioting in Hunan. The crackdown on the 20,000 or so demonstrators was incredibly vicious, yet remarkably, a BBC TV reporter was allowed to film it. You can be sure that was no accident. Hu Jintao‘s regime is the most media savvy in China’s history: it wanted to show the world that, fine words about justice aside, it has the situation well under control, even if it means sending in a couple of thousand baton-wielding troops and declaring martial law.
The Sky Just A Moment Ago
photo credit: Zebra Pares
It’s a pity China wasn’t as tough on curbing the terrible price exacted by the steep economic growth. Once sleepy rural towns are now boxed in by factories and power plants belch acrid smoke. Even with a face mask it’s hard to breathe when you go outside. The sky is black – cars always drive with their headlights on; the soil is chemically contaminated (vegetables that grow there are covered with ugly black patches); and people are getting sick from skin infections, breathing disorders and cancers. Drinking water is the biggest worry: 90% of China’s water is now seriously polluted.

Europeans also make things worse by sending China all their supermarket packaging and plastic bags. Britain alone dumps around two million tonnes of waste in China every year. What can’t be recycled is melted down in acid baths, or burned, creating noxious fumes and appalling health problems for the locals.

However, China’s main problem is that most of its growth is fuelled by coal. Within a few months, its emission of greenhouse gases will exceed that of America: in 25 years, if left unchecked, it will be twice that of all developed nations put together. Yet China’s leaders remain reluctant to take any steps to stem it, fearing that to curb growth would be to invite social unrest which is crazy since pollution itself is now a prime cause of public anger. Two years ago, there was rioting when four million people had their water cut off following a chemical spill in the Songhua River. Other such accidents, albeit on a lesser scale, occur every other day, and it’s local politicians and businessmen, putting careers and profits before environmental safety, who are blamed for them.

Sunny Suzhou
photo credit: Orange And Milk

Chinas leaders used to blame the West for global warming, pointing out China has contributed less than 8% of CO2 emissions since 1850. But now they’ve signalled that they’re ready to engage in international negotiations on global warming. Beijing might well commit itself to binding caps on emissions (thereby robbing the US of its key excuse for not doing likewise). Better still, it aims to raise energy efficiency by 20% in four years – mainly by greater reliance on renewable sources and cut-backs in iron and steel production. This is ambitious as these targets far exceed those set by Western countries. Still, there’s an encouraging precedent. In the Sixties, Tokyo and Osaka were as polluted as China’s cities are now, but thanks to tough policies, Japan is now more energy-efficient than any other country. Let’s hope, for the world’s sake, that its neighbour can pull off the same trick.


“Approximately 80 % of our air pollution stems from hydrocarbons released by vegetation, so let’s not go overboard in setting and enforcing tough emission standards from man-made sources.”

Reagan, Ronald

What do you think? Leave a comment below:

Enjoy this post? Get more like it by subscribing


Sausage sandwich
photo credit: adactio

Should fat people be blamed for conributing to global warming?

No diet will remove all the fat from your body because the brain is entirely fat. Without a brain, you might look good, but all you could do is run for public office.

George Bernard Shaw

We all know that drinking alcohol is both big and clever but it does sometime provoke a wee bit of violence, which doesn’t matter as long as you can fight, but it ultimately leads to weight problems. Think darts player.

Fat people can’t catch a break these days in a society that prizes thinness above all. We make the obese the butt of our jokes, berate them for running up health care costs and treat them like modern-day lepers. And we’re even blaming them for global warming. A new study estimates that America‘s cars burn a billion gallons of extra petrol a year, just to lug around the extra pounds of their lardy bodies.

Silhouettes representing healthy, overweight, ...

Image via Wikipedia

Another study estimates that commercial planes burn another 350 million gallons of fuel for the same reason. People will apparently seize on any ammunition, however tenuous, to scapegoat the fat and get them to change their dissolute ways. Subjecting the obese to a non-stop diet of criticism is not just cruel – it’s also counter-productive. A researcher recently asked 3,000 fat people how they responded to stigmatisation and discrimination. Almost everyone said they ate more. Perhaps they should jog more, mind you look at what happened to Jim Fixx.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


Britney Spears

To the casual observer the life of Britney Spears looks like a tram wreck and that’s no doubt true on a personal level. In business terms, however, the troubled singer is at the centre of a thriving economy.


Image by EuPaparazzi via Flickr

Her own earnings, estimated at around $9m a year, are chicken feed next to the earnings she generates for record companies, promoters, perfume makers, the paparazzi and the media. A rough calculation of all these spin-off profits suggests the Britney Industrial Complex is worth around $120m a year to the struggling US economy. One photo agency, X17, estimates that she accounts for 30% of its revenue: the agency sold $2.5m worth of Britney photos in 2007 alone. And in the weeks that America’s celebrity tabloids put her on the cover, they each sell an average of 1.28 million newsstand copies, some 33% more than they sell in normal weeks.

Britney no VMA

No wonder, then, that between January 2006 and July 2007, she graced the front of six such magazines 175 times. Britney is equally ubiquitous on the internet, topping the annual Yahoo search rankings for six of the last seven years.

The 26-year-old’s life may be spiralling out of control, but the Britney economy is doing better than ever.

Enjoy this post? Get more like it by subscribing
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]