Beijing officials were recently accused of falsifying statistics and manipulating data to make the city's air pollution seems less of a problem in the run-up to the Summer Olympics. Unsurprisingly, a spokesperson for the city's Environmental Protection Bureau refutes the accusation, insisting, "We will honor all the environmentally related pledges made during the Olympic bid. Our targets will be definitely met, there is no doubt about that."
Be that as it may, the city is facing further concern about water supplies, as drought intensifies in the northern province of Hebei, which supplies Beijing with much of its drinking water. In an interview with the Financial Times, another provincial official suggests that all of the water being pumped to Beijing to ensure a hydrated Olympics is threatening the livelihood of peasants in northern provinces.
Will be interesting to see what happens when the Games roll around ...
How industry pressures and competing national agendas dim prospects for a climate treaty
U.S. puts onus on China for climate deal
Comments
View as Flat
Tasermons Partner Posted 4:28 am
28 Feb 2008
If they do meet air pollution standards for the games, they'll do it just by shuttin' down the plants and factories for the games duration, and as soon as it's done with, they'll ramp right back up and be outta standard again.
They've already had to clean the transparent roof over the aquatic sports facility several times 'cause ash and other particulate matter was buildin' up so thick on the roof that the it starting to block the natural light.
Permalink
bookerly Posted 12:46 pm
28 Feb 2008
Dear Sarah,
Surely you have heard of the South/North water diversion project (similar to the California canal system)? Water will be shipped from the very wet Eastern South up to Beijing. I often bicycle past some of the work sites on my way to teach. Is it an idea above criticism? I dunno, but it is happening, and will ensure water supplies for the city (which it does need, thanks to the ongoing drought, perhaps a global warming present from America? (smile)). Will it help enough, what will it's impact be on surrounding areas? Stay tuned.
In any case, China certainly faces a lot of water problems, as does pretty much every part of the planet right now. Beijing is better off than Atlanta for the moment, but worse off than the Western US, for the moment.
If we don't learn to work together and discuss issues in a win-win manner, we will never solve the problems of global warming, and everyone's water problems will get worse.
If Grist is going to cover the world, it should endeavor to do so in a balanced manner, which would mean deeper research into world environmental issues. I suggested in another thread once, that Grist should invite environmental scientists from different developing countries to provide information regarding the challenges they face, and what solutions they see.
Here are some of today's articles related to the environment. You will see that while many of them reflect optimism, they certainly don't attempt to cover up of hide the challenges China faces.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-02/29/content_649 ...
http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90779/90867/6363415.ht ...
http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90776/90884/6361152.ht ...
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-02/27/content_7677 ...
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-02/29/content_7692 ...
Dear Tasermons Partner,
Once again, you make outrageous claims about Beijing without providing any references. Do you have any?
I live here, and the air is bad sometimes, but the average day is not worse than LA on its worst days. Today the sky is blue and clear. In the last two weeks, we have had maybe two bad days (and they weren't as bad as you are describing!).
It is quite clear you hate China, though not so clear why. But really, if you want to criticize, you should at least make some kind of attempt to be accurate.
One of the problems America has is with truth. All of the lies told by George W. Bush about Iraq not only caused damage to Iraqis (whom most Americans don't seem to care much about), but to America and it's credibility around the world.
The environmental movement is frequently attacked and accused of factual misstatements by people who are interested in weakening it. Anyone can be wrong, but there is a difference between making mistakes, and deliberately disregarding the truth. Whatever our personal prejudices, we should at least attempt to be factually accurate, if we care about the earth.
patrick in Beijing
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 2:43 pm
28 Feb 2008
As for claims on a personal level, I have had friends who have been there and have told me as much.
As for verifiable claims, just check the internet. Type in "Beijing air pollution" and you'll get plenty of hits to verify it.
The World Health Organization says that air pollution levels on an average day in Beijing are nearly five times above World Health Organization standards for safety.
The problems with particulate matter and ash covering the olypic stadiums have also been widley reported over here. supposedly the city is going to try and reduce the amount of vehicular travel by half during the games in an attempt to "look" cleaner. I'm not quite sure how they will accomplish that though (see first link). Some of the teams from other countries are trying to come up with strategies as to how to compete in Beijing's polluted air (see second link).
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/24/world/asia/24beijing.ht ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/24/sports/othersports/24ma ...
And please stop using Iraq as some type of comparison. It's totally unrelated to the topic. Ya don't see people here bringing up the takeover of Tibet or the Tiananmen Square incident in every article 'bout China, do ya?
Permalink
bookerly Posted 4:34 pm
28 Feb 2008
Your "friends" said the air was dirty all the time? Gee, my "friends" say it isn't (and I live here). That is not a very compelling argument!!! Where do you live, I'll ask my "friends" about it. Sigh.
Let's look at your links (which at least was something you read somewhere!). The first article says "Traffic restrictions have been anticipated for the Olympics since last August, when Beijing conducted a four-day experiment that limited motorists to driving on alternate days, depending on whether the last number on their license plate was odd or even. That test eliminated more than one million vehicles each day, easing traffic but having a less substantial effect on air pollution. " This is true. I was here, and surprisingly the air didn't get any better (at least noticeably, I am not a measuring station!!).
BUT (and a very big BUT!!) the very next day (when all the cars were back), the sun came out, the sky was blue and the air was clean and fresh. This lasted for almost three weeks (everyone was laughing about it). Which shows that air pollution is more complicated than just eliminated cars. The irony, though, is that the very day all of the alarming headlines in the western media appeared, was a day with clean air and clear blue skies.
You would think that one or two of the reporters would look out their window and notice. Gee, no wonder I don't think much of MSM coverage of China.
The second article contains the following "Mr. Rogge and Peter Ueberroth, the U.S.O.C. chairman, recalled that pollution was a concern before the Summer Games in 1984 in Los Angeles and in 2004 in Athens, but that the air quality was not a problem when competition began." It is a concern. Air pollution sucks (in the US, too! Two years ago I moved my belongings cross country, and began coughing from the bad air an hour outside of Chicago.)
About the standards and the Games.
http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/olympiccities/beijing/n2142 ...
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071 ...=
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/10/25/asia/AS-GEN-OLY ...
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/3881
"And in October, a United Nations Environment Program report cast more doubt on the prospects for cleaning up the city in time for the Games. In some cases, the report found, Beijing pollution levels are more than three times the safe limits set by the World Health Organization. "
http://news.cleartheair.org.hk/tag/world-health-organisat ...
"Millions of Chinese in cities and the countryside are suffering from health problems due to air pollution and water contamination, says a report by Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington. It estimates air pollution in China annually causes 400,000 premature deaths and 75 million asthma attacks.
Part of the problem, says the center, is that U.S. and foreign vehicle manufacturers are reluctant to transfer pollution-control technologies to China due to concerns about intellectual property rights."
http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/Article.aspx?id=1028
You said "The World Health Organization says that air pollution levels on an average day in Beijing are nearly five times above World Health Organization standards for safety. " Do you have any links for this. I find where OTHER people say that the air pollution levels for some substances are between three and twelve times WHO standards, but nothing from WHO itself. The only WHO report I can find (which is often quoted to provide the statistics) is from 2001. That's a long time ago in Beijing!!!
But, hey, why not look at the report that everyone is citing??
http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?Do ...
The UNEP report says that particles are as much as 200 percent of the recommended WHO levels. Bad news. But you should read the whole thing, and try to understand how the geography, season, location as well as other factors figure into Beijing's air. If you did (and were objective), you might conclude that there are legitimate concerns, but also reason to believe that solutions will be found.
As far as my using "Iraq", I believe the cite is relevant. You can cite anything you want (duh!).
Problems, yes, there are problems. However, a little real knowledge would provide some perspective. Americans have a long history of being afraid of China, and of media mis-information (going back over a hundred years). It especially matters now, because as the world changes, Americans have to decide, do they want to make friends around the world or enemies.
Ironically, despite it all, a lot of Chinese still think positively about America. They want to be friends, work together, engage in win-win enterprises. It's not clear what Americans think these days.
patrick in Beijing
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 6:21 pm
28 Feb 2008
It was actually in one of those links I posted earlier. The second one, I think.
The only WHO report I can find (which is often quoted to provide the statistics) is from 2001. That's a long time ago in Beijing!!!
Given Beijing's tremendous growth, and expansion of vehicular traffic, I'd imagine that that would mean Beijing probably has worse pollution than it did in 2001.
Permalink
bookerly Posted 9:13 pm
28 Feb 2008
The second link says that "some researchers say" the pollution is 5 times WHO standards. It never identifies the researchers, and it is not the WHO who says so. In fact most of the references to pollution in Beijing are similarly sloppy. Which doesn't mean that there isn't pollution (and we all dislike it), but it means that the MSM is mighty careless, and why not? Most Americans are like Tasermons Partner, ready to believe anything bad they hear about China, who cares if it's accurate or not.
I moved here in 2002. The air was much worse then. Is it great now? No way! But it's average is not worse than LA of its very worst days. And it is not true that days of clear air are rare. (Though we wish they were all clear!!).
Read the articles in the links. They talk openly about the problems (unlike the American government which is in complete denial about it's air pollution problems!). They also talk about what has been done to try to make things better, what is ongoing, and what the expectations are.
Maybe they're too open for Americans to handle after eight years of denial.
patrick in Beijing
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 2:49 am
29 Feb 2008
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/29/europe/EU-MED-P ...
The article states:
The standard pollution index, which measures the amount of dangerous substances per cubic meter, usually hits the mid-20s in London and New York. In Los Angeles, it is nearly 40. But in Beijing, it regularly tops 100.
Beijing's air pollution levels are more than 250% that of L.A.'s
Permalink
bookerly Posted 3:42 pm
29 Feb 2008
Do you mean the "Pollutant Standards Index" PSI? A quick internet search for the "standard pollution index" didn't find anything useful (I used dogpile).
Most measurments don't try to lump all pollutants together, but rather measure each type. This kind of comparison might be useful. But "measures" ALL "the dangerous substances per cubic meter" doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. It makes sense to measure each of the substances and compare them.
Nor does the article say what "regularly" means. Sloppy writing from the IHT is not very meaningful. If you have any real figures, please put them up. But I am guessing you just went searching for quotes to support your anti-China bias.
I noted that you didn't quote everything related in the article. Such as "Experts were also worried about pollution at the 2004 Olympics in Athens. To cut noxious fumes, Greek authorities blocked car traffic surrounding the Olympic venues, and asked major factories to stop production during the Games".
And you ignored this quote.
"Bob Larsen, an assistant coach with the U.S. Olympic track team in 2004, said he didn't think runners would be bothered by the air quality, but that other considerations might be important.
"There of course could be negative psychological reactions for unprepared athletes when they don't see clear blue sky when they arrive in Beijing," said Larsen, who coached Meb Keflezighi to a silver medal in the marathon at the Athens Games.
"For endurance athletes, I think the heat and humidity will pose a bigger challenge than the pollution," added Larsen, who visited Beijing to test conditions after the city was awarded the Games."
Is there pollution in Beijing? Yes. Also in LA and Houston. No one disputes that air pollution in all of these and many other cities around the world is a problem.
What needs to happen is for people to work together to find solutions to the problems. Then to work together to implement them. It is impossible to work with people you are busy demonizing.
So, all I really get from you is that you don't want to work with China. So, don't!! Put your energy into something positive!!! And enjoy your work!!
patrick in Beijing
Permalink