For years, China was seen as a major obstacle to global efforts to combat climate change because of its refusal to reduce emissions under the Kyoto Protocol.
Now, for some, the concern is not that China is moving too slowly, but that it is rushing ahead so fast that clean-energy companies in the West will be left in the dust.
Demands on China for verifiable monitoring of emissions have been a long-running source of tension in climate negotiations. They helped to sour the mood at the UN climate meeting in Copenhagen a year ago, which broke up in acrimony after poorer countries balked at accepting limits on their emissions.
Heading into this year, however, there were some surprising signs of renewed movement in efforts to control greenhouse gas emissions.
A UN climate meeting last month in Mexico pleased many environmentalists by putting global talks back on track. And this month, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, a research group, reported that investors had injected a record US$243 billion into cleaner sources of energy last year as the rising price of oil gave a lift to the prospects for renewable and low-carbon alternatives.
With the gloomy atmosphere dissipating, organizers at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, said last week they expected that business leaders would be ready to pay attention again to climate issues.
The meeting in Mexico showed an “enhanced spirit of cooperation” on cutting emissions, said Caio Koch-Weser, who leads sustainability initiatives for the forum and is vice chairman of the Deutsche Bank Group.
And the clean-energy sector “has never been more dynamic than it is today,” he said.
However, along with such optimism, there is also mounting anxiety about which countries — and whose companies — will benefit from the clean-energy boom. As financially struggling governments in Europe and the US trim support for clean-energy development, emerging countries, led by China, have been pouring state resources into the sector.
China represents “a huge challenge” for established clean-energy businesses, said Connie Hedegaard, the EU’s commissioner for climate action. “We can never subsidize it as much as they would do in China.”
She said China was preparing a five-year plan that would be the clearest indication yet of its determination to become a clean-energy powerhouse.
European nations would need to “pool our efforts better” to remain competitive, said Hedegaard, who was expected to attend the forum.
Investment in clean energy in China rose 30 percent last year, to US$51.1 billion — by far the largest figure for a single country — and represented more than 20 percent of the total global investment of US$243 billion, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
At the same time, the issue of clean-energy subsidies in China is at the heart of an investigation US President Barack Obama’s administration started last month. The administration is looking at bringing a case against China, including accusations about manufacturing subsidies for wind turbines, before the WTO.
This month, in what looked like a countermove, Obama signed a law that contained a “buy American” provision for US Department of Defense purchases of solar panels.
The European Commission has raised concerns with China about access to rare earth minerals and other elements used in clean-energy industries, including the manufacturing of electric cars, but so far, the commission has taken no formal action on trade in the wind and solar industries.
Not everyone sees China’s drive to dominate the clean-energy sector as worrisome.
“China is moving so far into the lead” on a number of clean-energy technologies “that we don’t have to worry as much about whether they’ll really keep their commitments, because they have a commercial drive to do it,” said Jonathan Lash, president of the World Resources Institute, an environmental research group in Washington.
The surge of investment in climate-related industries, as well as growing concerns about extreme weather, should deliver significant business opportunities in the coming year, and not just in China.
Vincent Mages, a director for climate change initiatives at Lafarge, the giant cement company based in France, said catastrophic flooding in Australia and Pakistan and a scorching summer heat wave in Russia should be good for businesses like his.
Cities and regions grappling with a changing climate increasingly need the kinds of products made by Lafarge, he said, to make buildings and infrastructure more energy-efficient and robust.
However, he added, Europe and the US could do more to support domestic industries by adopting tougher rules for new buildings and retrofittings now, rather than setting goals that are decades away for cutting emissions or adopting renewable power.
“China talks about programs and policies rather than focusing on targets,” Mages said. “We focus on targets too much.”
The main tool most governments in the developed world are counting on to cut emissions and drive investment into climate-related industries is carbon trading, also known as cap and trade. The EU established its system six years ago. Its goal is to cut emissions by one-fifth from 1990 levels by 2020.
Carbon trading has run into obstacles in Europe, where the system has been rocked by extreme volatility, computer attacks, tax fraud, recycling of used credits and suspicions of profiteering.
In Australia, Japan and South Korea, governments that have supported carbon trading have been delayed by political concerns.
Koch-Weser said he believed that “shortcomings” in international carbon trading could be overcome, adding that he saw no need to invalidate any existing carbon credits.
He also said business leaders at the World Economic Forum would push for progress on a Green Climate Fund for countries most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, which could help to channel US$100 billion each year by the end of the decade.
The committee running that fund should include representatives from the private sector and multilateral lenders, he said.
Failure to raise that money, he said, would “reinforce mistrust and breed cynicism” in the developing world before the next round of global climate talks, in Durban, South Africa, in November.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past