A scary set of footprints

February 8, 2006

The rapid growth of China and India poses critical environmental questions writes Ross Gittins.

THE greatest economic, geopolitical and environmental event of our times is the rapid economic development of China, closely followed by India. I'm sure you know that, but its full ramifications are yet to dawn on us.

The bit we haven't twigged to is what it might do to the environment.

Two hundred years ago, the countries of the West experienced an industrial revolution that eventually made them far, far richer than all other countries.

What's happening now is that China and India are going through their own industrial revolutions. But it's taking decades, rather than centuries, because they're able to pick up off the shelf the latest Western technology, as well as Western capital to finance massive investment in factories and infrastructure.

Since 1980, China's economy has been growing at a rate averaging about 9.5 per cent a year. That means it doubles in size every eight years. India's economy has been growing by about 5.5 per cent a year, meaning that it doubles every 13 years.

What makes this spectacular growth far more significant, however, is that China and India are the two most populous countries in the world, each with populations exceeding a billion.

Between them, they account for almost 40 per cent of the world's population. By contrast, the rich countries of North America, Europe, Japan and Australasia account for less than 15 per cent.

What happens when two such huge countries sustain such rapid rates of economic growth? Well, for a start, you get a lot of growth in international trade, since both countries are pursuing export-oriented growth strategies.

The Chinese are rapidly turning themselves into the globe's chief source of manufactured goods, while the Indians have captured about half the global offshore outsourcing business. This is the bit that's frightening people in America and Europe. All they see is low-skilled jobs migrating to Asia.

But the next effect is the two countries' rapidly growing appetite for energy, food and raw materials, which perpetually threatens to outstrip supply and thus keeps upward pressure on world prices.

According to a briefing paper on energy insecurity from the Lowy Institute, China is the second largest consumer of energy in the world (after the United States), while India has moved into sixth place.

Their joint share of world primary energy consumption has roughly doubled in the past two decades. Industrialisation means fast growth in energy-intensive sectors such as iron and steel and chemicals. But energy demand in both countries is also being boosted by rising incomes and growing urbanisation. It's predicted to double again by 2025.

We're most conscious of the effect of demand on oil prices. By 2030, China is expected to be importing three-quarters of the oil it needs, while India imports more than 90 per cent.

But oil accounts for only between a quarter and a third of the two countries' total energy consumption. Most of the rest comes from … coal. (Sound of Aussie cash registers chinking.)

By contrast, both countries are largely self-sufficient in their consumption of food, even though the average Chinese now consumes twice as much grain - wheat, rice and corn - directly or in the form of livestock feed, as in 1980.

But it's hard to see how this self-sufficiency can last. If extended prosperity were again to double Chinese grain consumption per person - to roughly the European level - the equivalent of nearly 40 per cent of today's global grain harvest would be needed in China.

Then there's water. According to a special article in this year's State of the World report by the Worldwatch Institute in New York, China has just 8 per cent of the world's fresh water to meet the needs of 22 per cent of the world's population, while the World Bank has described India's water situation as "extremely grave".

Cropland in China and India is becoming less productive because of erosion, waterlogging, desertification and other forms of degradation. (Now where have we heard that before?)

Beyond worries about what may happen to the scarcity and prices of energy and food, the world will need to grapple with a more fundamental constraint: the ability of Earth's ecological systems to support a continually growing global economy while absorbing the vast quantities of pollution it produces.

"As China and India add their surging consumption to that of the United States, Europe and Japan, the most important question is this: Can the world's ecosystems withstand the damage - the increase in carbon emissions, the loss of forests, the extinction of species - that are now in prospect?" the institute asks.

I doubt it. A country's "global footprint" shows what its economy needs from nature - measured as the number of global hectares of land and water - to provide its material inputs and accommodate its wastes.

The US, with less than 5 per cent of the world's population, requires a remarkable quarter of global biocapacity to support its people. Europe and Japan, with 10 per cent of the world's population, require another quarter. China and India, with almost 40 per cent, require the third quarter.

Now ask yourself what happens if the Chinese and Indian economies double in the next decade. Remember that China already uses 26 per cent of the world's crude steel, 32 per cent of the rice, 37 per cent of the cotton and 47 per cent of the cement.

"Global ecosystems and resources are simply not sufficient to sustain the current economies of the industrial West and at the same time bring more than 2 billion people into the global middle class through the same resource-intensive development model pioneered by North America and Europe," the institute concludes.

"Limits on the ability to increase oil production, shortages of fresh water, and the economic impacts of damaged ecosystems and rapid climate change are among the factors that make it impossible to continue current patterns on such a vastly larger scale.

"Humanity is now on a collision course with the world's ecosystems and resources. In the coming decades, we will either find ways of meeting human needs based on new technologies, policies and cultural values, or the global economy will begin to collapse."

- source: Sydney Morning Herald

What effects will China's water shortages have on surrounding countries with shared river systems ?

invest in uranium mining companies , and those with patents in the water desalination field.

Locally farmed organic produce is best for you and the environment.

Scarry stuff !!!

What is it about the human race that we don't seem to give a ###### about the planet we live on? It's our sustenance!!! When it's gone, we are gone but it doesn't seem to register too loudly even though the warnings are getting louder and clearer!

We are too busy fighting each other over imaginary higher beings and rights to fuel (not to mention food and water in the near future) to notice. The lack of response to this thread is evidence enough.....

The chinese have never had much respect for the environment, now they are in a postion to screw it up for the entire planet, and they probably will

The chinese have never had much respect for the environment, now they are in a postion to screw it up for the entire planet, and they probably will

The Chinese gov't saw that they had a problem with water erosion, flooding, and short supplies so they reduced their cutting of trees and started the largest reforestation project that has ever existed.

well thats good news at least, but what about all thiose dam's they are building, drying up the mekong, and all the pollution they pour into the rivers, etc etc etc

well thats good news at least, but what about all thiose dam's they are building, drying up the mekong, and all the pollution they pour into the rivers, etc etc etc

I guess China is just like any other country....when it becomes clear that destroying the environment is counter-productive then something will be done...I guess we all just hope it doesn't happen too late.

[i guess China is just like any other country....when it becomes clear that destroying the environment is counter-productive then something will be done...I guess we all just hope it doesn't happen too late.

We better pray!

Several of me and my wife's friends have kids who are majoring in Chinese Studies with a heavy emphasis on Mandarin at Chula U.

The modern Thai sees it coming...

It is very easy for us to bash developing countries, however, put yourself in their shoes, they want the standard of living 'westerners' have, and who can blame them.

The west, and particularly the USA has been screwing the planet for a very long time now. Lets work on stratagies to improve the situation in all of the world, or, as the OP states, we are all screwed!

Stronger Future for Nuclear Power

Nuclear reactor builders are jostling for business as energy utilities take another look at nuclear power.

Some two dozen power plants are scheduled to be built or refurbished during the next five years in Canada, China, several European Union countries, India, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, and South Africa. In the US and the UK, governmental preparations are under way that may lead to 15 new reactor orders by 2007.

About 16% of the world's electricity supply comes from nuclear power, and energy demand is increasing (see PHYSICS TODAY, April 2002, page 54). Worldwide, nearly 80% of the 441 commercial nuclear reactors currently in operation are more than 15 years old. To maintain nuclear power's position in the overall energy mix, new reactors will have to replace decommissioned ones, says a report from the Paris-based International Energy Agency.

http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-59/iss-2/p19.html

I believe Pebble Bed Reactors are the energy source of the near future and many more countries will be constructing this type of power plant.

large amounts of cheap power makes Desalination economically feasible , which will be the method for many countries to ease the demand on limited water resources.

...

What's happening now is that China and India are going through their own industrial revolutions. But it's taking decades, rather than centuries, because they're able to pick up off the shelf the latest Western technology, as well as Western capital to finance massive investment in factories and infrastructure.

What bothers me most about this, is the social and political ramifications of a rapid industrial development.

There have been two major examples in history of industrialisation proceeding too rapidly - beyond the "peoples" ability to comprehend:

The first was the Tzar's attempt to industrialise Russia. This resulted in a popular revolution and over 50 years of totalitarian communism.

The other example is Iran, where the Shah's too rapid attempts at industrialisation was a prime cause of the fundamental Islamic revolution.

Both attempts were initiated by strong centralised governments. Whilst India may not reflect exactly this pattern, China with the dictatorship of the communist party does.

As to what systems revolutions in these two countries would produce, can one only speculate.

And, perhaps, fear?

Stronger Future for Nuclear Power

Nuclear reactor builders are jostling for business as energy utilities take another look at nuclear power.

Some two dozen power plants are scheduled to be built or refurbished during the next five years in Canada, China, several European Union countries, India, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, and South Africa. In the US and the UK, governmental preparations are under way that may lead to 15 new reactor orders by 2007.

About 16% of the world's electricity supply comes from nuclear power, and energy demand is increasing (see PHYSICS TODAY, April 2002, page 54). Worldwide, nearly 80% of the 441 commercial nuclear reactors currently in operation are more than 15 years old. To maintain nuclear power's position in the overall energy mix, new reactors will have to replace decommissioned ones, says a report from the Paris-based International Energy Agency.

http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-59/iss-2/p19.html

I believe Pebble Bed Reactors are the energy source of the near future and many more countries will be constructing this type of power plant.

large amounts of cheap power makes Desalination economically feasible , which will be the method for many countries to ease the demand on limited water resources.

Check out ITER Its the big fusion reactor being bulit in France. No guarantee that it will work but so far there is no theoretical reason it won't work....but it will take about 15 years to get results....after this reactor the next thing will be a commercial style power plant if all goes well. Just Google "ITER" and it will be the first on the list.

The lack of response to this thread is evidence enough.....

Sorry Khall, I didn't read the topic untill now.

1. 'We' are kind of blaming China and India now, having such large populations; is that fair?

Is it fair to blame these countries for the problems that lie ahead?

Or could it also be 'us' who have to look in the mirror of our own lifes, spoiling and poisoning the World?

2. More than 50% but closer to 60% of the WORLD population IS in the Far East, but 'we' forgot all about about them, especially since China was 'closed' for many and many decades, if not centuries. Who cared in the West?

3. the remark of Phuketsiam:

""The chinese have never had much respect for the environment, now they are in a postion to screw it up for the entire planet, and they probably will""

is too easy.

The USA are the LARGEST pollutors in the World (with a relatively small population) and 'Washington' turn their heads the other way, doing little to nothing about it...Oh yes, I know, GW said we have to step away from Oil, but that will be a long way to go. For the time being the Western and Eastern world needs the Oil/Gas from countries which are not so friendly towards their buyers...Middle East, West Africa, Venuzuela, Russia etc.

4. WHY are China and India such large producers, and therefore need all the Oil/Gas and other commodities?

Right: because the West demand their -much cheaper produced- products....a lot of them new, unnecessary products, creating a 'better' and more luxurious lifestyle.

I sometimes ask myself "HOW on earth did I do my job/lived my life before, without all the new technologies", such as Television, faster cars, better homes, more holidays (cheaper and bigger planes), fax, (after the Telex, remember?) and now PC's and Internet....

5. Let me tell you that the enormous output of products, made in the Far East, was NOT created by the Eastern people (yes: produced, but not created) but demanded, invented, ordered, bought and sold by the majority of the Western countries/people, which includes most of 'us' here on this Forum.

Question: would you buy a product (PC, Aircon, TV-set, clothes, shoes etc.) in your home-country that is 2 or 3 times the price for a product that is produced in the East? Come on!

6. Is there light on the Horizon?

Let's hope so. The whole world, and not just China/India, have to watch out for disturbing and creating an Armageddon for all of us.

One of the points WE should be thinking of is Modesty and think twice before buying new (maybe uncessesary) products.

But yeah, hey, I know, we all love the new products...so....what are we going to do about that?

And, yes, as one of you mentioned before it could very well be 'fear' for these countries.

Why?

Yes: the unknown and unfamiliarity with the countries/languages/culture. But I assure you that the governments of these countries are not stupid and much more intelligent than we see or think...

Do you think they (leaders) would 'harm' the golden lifestyle they are living right now? NO, and therefore they will need the West to go ahead and continue the progress of environmental control/improvement and that includes watermanagement and the search for new systems of energy.

They have to do that one way or another....the same as we have to do!

But, to blame China/India/Far East for the enormous problems that lie ahead, is way to easy.

LaoPo

Nice post, LaoPo!

Excellent post Lao Po. And because China - especially - is the production pool of western consumption, is it not a collective responsibility to ensure that China adopts more green-friendly industrial practices for the sake of the planet?

In actual fact, I remember reading 10 or so yrs ago that China had developed a system to treat mass-scale sewerage and turn human waste into an environmentally friendly fertlilizer for croplands. That's a great start for a nation that has a billion people who clog the sewers everyday...

1. Excellent post Lao Po. And because China - especially - is the production pool of western consumption, is it not a collective responsibility to ensure that China adopts more green-friendly industrial practices for the sake of the planet?

2. In actual fact, I remember reading 10 or so yrs ago that China had developed a system to treat mass-scale sewerage and turn human waste into an environmentally friendly fertlilizer for croplands. That's a great start for a nation that has a billion people who clog the sewers everyday...

Thanks Khall !

1. You hit the nail on the head.

2. Speaking about Sewage.

When Marco Polo* visited China in the 13th century, he found that Hangzhou/Zhejiang Prov. had already 1.5 million people...in a time that London had just around 50/100.000 people...

Hangzhou had already a sophisticated sewer system...

*Wikipedia:

""The Venetian Marco Polo visited Hangzhou in the late 13th century and referred to the city as "beyond dispute the finest and the noblest in the world." "The number and wealth of the merchants, and the amount of goods that passed through their hands, was so enormous that no man could form a just estimate thereof."

""

LaoPo

I would have to say that Asian countries will be more likely to be environmentally friendly. They have religious and social traditions which place value on the environment. People in the west took God's word to heart that the land was there for us to use.

The Queen's Death Star

Depleted Uranium Measured in British Atmosphere

from Battlefields in the Middle East

By Leuren Moret

2-26-6

The Sunday Times Online, February 19, 2006, reported on a shocking scientific study authored by British scientists Dr. Chris Busby and Saoirse Morgan: "Did the use of Uranium weapons in Gulf War 2 result in contamination of Europe? Evidence from the measurements of the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE), Aldermaston, Berkshire, UK". The highest levels of depleted uranium ever measured in the atmosphere in Britain, were transported on air currents from the Middle East and Central Asia; of special significance were those from the Tora Bora bombing in Afghanistan in 2001, and the "Shock & Awe" bombing during Gulf War II in Iraq in 2003. Out of concern for the public, the official British government air monitoring facility, known as the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE), at Aldermaston was established years ago, to measure radioactive emissions from British nuclear power plants and atomic weapons facilities.

article continued here

Am not picking on China here but this is another example of how humans can be so wasteful to the detriment of the planet. Why don't they just carry their own chopsticks and save 10 million trees a year? :

Move to stop chopstick use disposing of forests

March 24, 2006

BEIJING: Diners in China are being encouraged to change their habits in order to save the country's forests from destruction.

Disposable chopsticks would be subject to a 5 per cent consumption tax from April 1, the Finance Ministry said.

The aim is to curb the plunder of timber and protect the environment.

China makes 15 billion pairs of throwaway chopsticks a year, consuming some two million cubic metres of wood, equivalent to 10 million trees, which would occupy 46sq km. Every lunchbox comes equipped with a pair. Small restaurants nationwide offer the free hygienic option to customers who may be nervous about cleanliness in the kitchen.

At home or in smarter restaurants, re-usable chopsticks, often made of plastic, are the norm and the tax is expected to encourage their greater use.

Chopstick etiquette, however, has not changed for centuries. Eat with the right hand and turn the palm face upwards. A palm facing downwards allows fortune to fall from one's hands. For girls, the further she holds her chopsticks from the tip, the further from home will she find her husband.

Break a chopstick and you will have bad luck. Drop one and you will have to pay for the meal - but only after waiters have scurried to replace it with a clean and new pair.

Never stand chopsticks point-first in a bowl of rice, for this resembles incense burning in the temple symbolising death.

At Jiaren Gourmet, a Beijing sidestreet restaurant, the owner shrugged his shoulders at the new tax. "The cost won't be enough to make me change from disposable chopsticks."

The Times

The lack of response to this thread is evidence enough.....

I am actually quite impressed by the amount of response to this thread. We often feel helpless when the bigger picture is offered to us. I think we should focus more on what we as individuals can do.

For example, here in the UK, I am amazed how many people leave the tap running when brushing their teeth or shaving (I see this in the gym all the time ). Re-cycle more, re-use anything that we can. I stopped using plastic bags from supermarkets, and what ones I did have I re-used for other things. Don't use the dish washer or washing machine until they are full. Switch to more environmentally friendly products. If you have to drive, can you car share. Etc, etc.

These are just a few things I try to do, I'm sure you can think of others. We really can make a difference.

China makes 15 billion pairs of throwaway chopsticks a year, consuming some two million cubic metres of wood, equivalent to 10 million trees, which would occupy 46sq km.

Yes, I read that too. It's a good start (tax on wooden chopsticks) and aparently 'Beijing' is aware of the problems (ahead) and is doing something about it.

It takes time though but better now than never.

LaoPo

For myself, I don't worry one whit about the future of our planet. That's certainly not to say that I don't care what happens to our world. I do. But I do recognize that I will never play a major role in solving the more serious issues facing it. I also recognize that there are people who are in a much better position to deal with whatever issues need to be addressed and that as the needs and challenges of our planet evolve and present themselves those who will make a difference will be there. In the meantime, I'll play my 'insignificant' role and remain unalarmed.

I feel that much of the doom and gloom propaganda that serves to fuel our fears is itself distorted by the same fears that create the doom and gloom hypothetical senarios in the first place. That's not to infer that we all stick our heads in the sand and pretend that we can simply ignore the effects which are actions have. Awareness of a problem is important, and yet that awareness rather automatically comes about anytime a problem becomes big enough. I feel that the average man and woman, though, does not possess an extensive enough picture of the immense complexities involved in, nor the mechanics of, the creation and maintenance of our world to be able to accurately predict a particularly disastrous worldly outcome. That includes myself.

The world has existed since, literally, God knows when. I fully trust, and have immense faith, that it will continue to exist and prosper. There are forces involved in the creation of the world which are as yet not comprehended, nor recognized for that matter, and we are not alone. Humans, I believe, do not have the sole authority to decide what will become of our little world since we share this globe with many others, both known and unknown.

I fully believe that man will prevail in his rather happy existence, since I do not have such a poor opinion of our creaturehood to think that we are only and ultimately destructive of ourselves and everything we perversely happen to contact with. An utterly foolish concept, IMHO. But I understand how the attitude is birthed when an inordinate and unbalanced attention is given to the worst of man's errant creations. Man has made mistakes in the past, makes mistakes in present time, and will continue to make mistakes in the future. Such is the nature of man; to be perfectly imperfect. And yet there is, I believe, a great deal of leeway built into our existence to correct any negative situation we may imagine and thus create for ourselves, due to our ignorance of the true nature of our reality and ourselves. Man's creativity is such that necessity often becomes the mother of invention. The nature of ideas and inspiration is such that certain knowledge does not come forth until there is a use or need calling it. But the timing is always divinely perfect.

So, jai yen yen. And my sound advice is to not lose a nanosecond of sound sleep over the 'demise' of our planet. All is well.

7 April 2006

Uranium’s Effect On DNA Established

The use of depleted uranium in munitions and weaponry is likely to come under intense scrutiny now that new research that found that uranium can bind to human DNA. The finding will likely have far-reaching implications for returned soldiers, civilians living in what were once war-zones and people who might live near uranium mines or processing facilities.

Uranium - when manifested as a radioactive metal - has profound and debilitating effects on human DNA. These radioactive effects have been well understood for decades, but there has been considerable debate and little agreement concerning the possible health risks associated with low-grade uranium ore (yellowcake) and depleted uranium.

Now however, Northern Arizona University biochemist Diane Stearns has established that when cells are exposed to uranium, the uranium binds to DNA and the cells acquire mutations, triggering a whole slew of protein replication errors, some of which can lead to various cancers. Stearns' research, published in the journals Mutagenesis and Molecular Carcinogenesis, confirms what many have suspected for some time - that uranium can damage DNA as a heavy metal, independently of its radioactive properties. "Essentially, if you get a heavy metal stuck on DNA, you can get a mutation," Stearns explained. While other heavy metals are known to bind to DNA, Stearns and her team were the first to identify this characteristic with uranium.

Depleted uranium - what is left over when the highly radioactive isotopes of uranium are removed - is widely used by the military. Anti-tank weapons, tank armor and ammunition rounds are just some of the applications. "The health effects of uranium really haven't been studied since the Manhattan Project (the development of the atomic bomb in the early 1940s). But now there is more interest in the health effects of depleted uranium. People are asking questions now," Stearns said.

Her research may shed light on the possible connection between exposure to depleted uranium and Gulf War Syndrome, or to increased cancers and birth defects in the Middle East and Balkans. And closer to home, questions continue to be asked about environmental exposure to uranium from mine tailings; heavily concentrated around Native American communities. "When the uranium mining boom crashed in the '80s, there wasn't much cleanup," Stearns said. Estimates put the number of abandoned mines on the Navajo Nation in Arizona at more than 1,100.

Source: Northern Arizona University

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/200603070...trunc_sys.shtml

For myself, I don't worry one whit about the future of our planet. That's certainly not to say that I don't care what happens to our world. I do. But I do recognize that I will never play a major role in solving the more serious issues facing it. I also recognize that there are people who are in a much better position to deal with whatever issues need to be addressed and that as the needs and challenges of our planet evolve and present themselves those who will make a difference will be there. In the meantime, I'll play my 'insignificant' role and remain unalarmed.

We see eye to eye on this one Tip!

Fear not.

Fear not.

FEAR So!!!!!! It's people like you, Tippy, that scare the pants off me! What hope do our children have with an attitude like that?

Question, question, question!? You are so wrong if you don't!!!! The planet is being run by corporations and you don't mind that?

My dear sis, do you lack faith in humankind? Do you truly believe that man will destroy his planet? That man alone has dominion over the earth? That if push came to shove money-grubbing corporations and/or corrupt governments would triumph over the rest of the world's population? That greed alone could run so rampant that it would obliterate all other human traits which are life-giving? That our children are helpless to deal with their world?

These are the questions I ask of myself. In all instances the reply is, "NO." Fear not, dear sis.