China's Hopenburnin'

In anticipation of the Copenhagan (Hopenhagen) Climate Change Conference on December 7th, advocates of mandatory carbon targets are again flogging China as the world’s largest carbon emitting political body. There are those who dismiss China’s efforts to-date and those who demand more action. Perhaps the most disconcerting argument i’ve encountered comes from Steve Forbes of Forbes Magazine:

Last year, China surpassed the U.S. in carbon dioxide production, even though China’s economy is less than one-third the size of ours. By 2020, China’s emissions will be twice ours… Our CO2 emissions increased only 1.3% from 2006 to 2007–proof that we are already more efficiently pursuing economic growth. Even if the U.S. drastically cut back on its CO2 output, its impact on global temperatures would be barely noticeable. It could be three-tenths of a degree Fahrenheit at best.”

If i’m reading this right, Forbes is arguing that high existing economic activity perforce justifies high continued carbon emissions. In other words, those who have managed to get out there early and accumulate wealth, largely by burning carbon, should be allowed to continue to burn the most carbon. What if, for example, the UK had three times more economic activity than the US — would they then be permitted three times the quantity of carbon warrants? Any equitable and democratic assignment of obligation regarding the costs of carbon must first consider per capita emissions. See how long it takes you to find China on this list.

At the same time, it should be comforting to know that the government responsible for the world’s largest population is arguably making the most concerted efforts to develop the most efficient technologies to reduce their economy’s dependence of heavy-carbon productivity. Consider this from The Climate Group:

China ranked second for the absolute Dollar amount invested in renewable energy in 2007 with approximately US$12 billion, trailing the leader Germany which invested US$14 billion.7 The nominal sizes of the Chinese and German economies were almost equal at US$3.3 trillion in 2007,8 meaning that China trails leader Germany only slightly in renewable energy investment as a percentage of GDP.”

The energy intensive economic growth model acutely seen in China and through the Asia Pacific region has brought more people out of poverty than any system in human history. Evidence suggests that global warming is a very real and nasty problem — but as far as I can tell it is not nearly as dangerous as the non-linear pains of poverty and destitution. Despite the doomsday rhetoric, or perhaps because of it, we should take Jim Manzi’s lead and simply rethink the costs and benefits of carbon taxes that could accompany binding carbon targets.