[jameso]

This article (originally NY Times, syndicated all over the US) is a blatant piece of anti-China propaganada. Given the NY Times reputation for making stories up, the identities of the Chinese couple it interviews should be checked out - many of the other facts in the story are at best one-sided and at worst inaccurate.

#1 "The increase in global-warming gases from China's coal use will probably exceed that for all industrialized countries combined over the next 25 years, surpassing by five times the reduction in such emissions that the Kyoto Protocol seeks."
---And California will "probably" sink into the ocean. China is, at least for now, on track with its Kyoto targets. Unlike, for example, Canada, which said last week it had given up.

#2 "But Chinese utilities have in the past preferred to buy cheap but often-antiquated equipment from well connected domestic suppliers instead of importing costlier gear from the West."
--Who said this? Or did the reporters make it up? China has some of the most advanced clean coal technology in the world - it is exporting its coal gasification technology to Australia, for example. China is not a backward nation! This article seems to suggest the country is full of sooty savages desperate for American technology.

--#3 "Asking customers to shoulder the bill would set back the government's efforts to protect consumers from inflation and to create jobs and social stability."
The 11th 5 year plan passes on the extra cost of renewable energy to consumers.

#4 "But each year China defers buying advanced technology, older equipment goes into scores of new coal-fired plants with a lifespan of up to 75 years."
--Most plant has an economic lifetime of 25 years.

#5 Another stumbling block has been that China wants foreign manufacturers to transfer technological secrets to Chinese rivals, instead of simply filling orders to import equipment, said Anil Terway, director of the East Asia energy division at the Asian Development Bank.
Andy Solem, vice president for China infrastructure at General Electric, a leading manufacturer of coal gasification equipment, said he believed that China would place orders in 2007 or 2008 for the construction of a series of these plants. But he said some technology transfer was unavoidable.
--"Unavoidable" as in GE is spending US$50m investing in a joint research facility at Tsinghua University to push its Ecomagination products to China? It's not a huge investment, but it shows cooperation, rather than the image of Chinese stealing this technology from GE. Why not mention that in the story, when GE is interviewed? Because then the Chinese cannot be portrayed as dirty little secret thieves. And what about this story? London Mayor to become chairman of Chinese FGD company. Chinese has power technology. This is just one example. Why does the NY Times make no mention of this sort of project?

The New York Times article paints a very negative picture of China. The small family it interviews "have a stereo, a refrigerator, a television, an electric fan, a phone and light bulbs, paying just $2.50 a month for all the electricity they can burn from a nearby coal-fired power plant."

Just as I sit here with stereo, refrigerator and light bulbs and PC, paying through the nose for all the electricity I can burn from the Lamma Island power plant. $2.50 for the family interviewed is 1% of their monthly income, a similar level to an average US electricity bill (while HK is prob about 10%!)

I'm not defending China's environmental record - but I find this article offensive and one-sided. It has spawned a wave of anti-China sentiment across the US press and online. One blogger suggested LA's pollution was thanks to China. Really. Compare China's 8 cars per thousand people to the US, 482 cars per thousand people. Compare China's per CO2 emissions of 2.7 tonnes per person per year, against the US figure of 20.2 tonnes per person per year (World Bank figures).

So who's the bad guy? Maybe Hong Kong's crappy air comes from LA, not China after all! Or maybe it's just because 6 million people are crammed into too-small a space.

well I feel so much better for writing that, I wonder if anyone has read down this far??!

[hullexile]

I gave up believing what I read in the papers years ago. It is so frustrating sometimes that you want to scream.

[dwoo]

I like reading the NY Times. Its well-written, liberal slant perks me up after work. Indeed, the newspaper likes to to paint an unflattering picture of China's "growing pains"; but, not all of its China articles are sensationalistic, mud-slinging tripe like this. In fact, there are numerous articles that have been written by this newspaper that display a more balanced, moderate journalistic approach, even when reporting on the nefarious Chinese Communist Party. If you want to challenge me, and if I have the time, I could perhaps dig them up.

I also don't think articles like this should be taken as a slight to the Chinese people. I am Chinese, and I love China as a nationalistic, cultural entity; but I really, really hate the Chinese Communist Party. I don't view articles like these as slights to the people of China; certainly, I see them as slights to the Communist Party, and that's good!

As with many things in life, if you don't like this article, and you don't like the newspaper, don't read it! I suggest you read the China Daily - it's always full of rosy, morale-boosting tidbits about the greatness of China!

[jameso]

dwoo, I didn't take it as a slight to the Chinese people. What I found offensive is that it covers up the real issues - and that this article is being taken as some kind of authority in the US,. It is being hugely quoted in newspapers, media, blogs. The Washington Times editorial today says pollution in California is from China. It states this as fact, based on the NYT report. My worry is that "facts" like this end up driving policy. If the US blames China for its pollution, it may be less inclined to clean up its own mess. I don't know how high up these sorts of articles go.... but there is a dearth of China information in the US, and anything with a few quotable facts and figures will be given perhaps more authority than it deserves.

Sure it's easy to read only newspapers which don't annoy you. I could just wrap up the fish and chips and forget about it. But I am a writer and journalist, so it really bugs me! I can't help it! Therapy from the good people of GeoExpat may be needed.........

Anyway dwoo you are right. I have decided to stop complaining about this and write exactly the same article, but from China about the US and publish it.

And for anyone remotely interested in spin, watch how this one plays out: Sinopec is reportedly interested in purchasing drilling rights from Fidel Castro.... the newspapers can really get the juices flowing with this, there is going to be a pound of hyposcrisy a minute coming out of the US. Cuba/China will be drilling for oil 45 miles off the Florida coast. Hahahaaha! The US energy companies want in - but they can't, because it's Cuba; and also because the US isn't allowed to drill within 100 miles of its coast (thanks to Jeb Bush). And China's going to sail in and take the oil and gas away from under their noses. HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

I need to get a life. Anyone up for drinks tomorrow?