Jump to content

Talk:Climate policy of China

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

wikification

[edit]

I removed the 'needs to be wikified' tag on 23 march, after adding internal wiki links and correcting syntax of the external links. If there's more wikification that needs to be done, please do it, or indicate to me here (I'm watching) what needs to be done. Thanks. --CathCarey (talk) 21:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I just emptied out the external links section, as it contained mostly news articles about climate change in China. As most if not all of these constitute reliable sources, I'll post them here if anybody wants to use them to build up the article.

ThemFromSpace 05:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Add Bill McKibben's June 2011 National Geographic article Can China Go Green? No other country is investing so heavily in clean energy. But no other country burns as much coal to fuel its economy

[edit]

Add Bill McKibben's an Can China Go Green? No other country is investing so heavily in clean energy. But no other country burns as much coal to fuel its economy June 2011 National Geographic. 99.181.156.9 (talk) 18:33, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resource by Bill McKibben in the June 2011 National Geographic ...

[edit]

Can China Go Green? No other country is investing so heavily in clean energy. But no other country burns as much coal to fuel its economy June 2011 National Geographic 99.56.120.252 (talk) 05:00, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added. 108.195.138.38 (talk) 05:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification needed in section References regarding ... * Update: Climate change: Holding back hail

[edit]

Clarification needed in section References regarding ...

Relevance? And doesn't that counteract the claim that climate change causes insured damage? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 05:39, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Art, please attempt to focus, you are again not helping to clarify wp articles ... see Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation, this article. 99.181.145.99 (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you frequently introduce discussions of topic A linking to topic B on topic C's page. And you've been edit warring to include a Swiss insurance company's estimates of damage due to global warming on multiple articles. This statement notes that global warming may reduce damage due to hail, which the Swiss company undoubtedly did not take into account.
But relevance to this article is still questionable. It might relate to a different article on climate change in China, but it does not relate at all to the subject of this article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:55, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Look at where the Nature (journal) Update is now in the article and who put it there. One must endeavor to understand first, and attempt to communicate second, please. 99.181.157.60 (talk) 18:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Nature article by Tim Reid has original article citations by Xie, B., Zhang, Q. & Wang, Y. Trends in hail in China during 1960–2005. Geophysical Research Letters doi: 10.1029/2008GL034067 (2008). Is this "Update relevant to this article, maybe moved to Effects of global warming, and/or Regional effects of global warming? 99.181.128.190 (talk) 04:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Removed; clearly irrelevant to this article. Thanks for pointing it out. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 07:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(od) moved to Talk:Climate change in China. 108.195.138.38 (talk) 05:30, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Add "China to cap energy use in national low-carbon plan; Limit is expected to form cornerstone of five-year plan to curb surging greenhouse gas emissions" source

[edit]

China to cap energy use in national low-carbon plan; Limit is expected to form cornerstone of five-year plan to curb surging greenhouse gas emissions by Tania Branigan in Beijing via guardian.co.uk 4 August 2011 , excerpt

A cap on energy consumption is expected to be at the heart of a Chinese low-carbon plan to be issued this year, experts believe, amid reports that officials have now agreed its level. China is the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, making up a quarter of the global total. Experts say setting an energy limit would add certainty to the country's attempts to rein in emissions and should make it easier for emissions trading schemes to get off the ground. The cap has been anticipated for some time but is now thought likely to emerge in the low-carbon plan understood to have been broadly approved by a panel set up by the state council, China's cabinet, and chaired by the premier, Wen Jiabao. It should be formally passed later this year. Reuters reported[1] that officials have settled on a total energy cap of 4.1bn tonnes of coal equivalent (TCE) by 2015 – a level more than 25% higher than last year. Analysts warn that the plan has yet to be nailed down and that a cap could still be delayed by disagreements, to re-emerge in a later policy document. ...

China set to cap energy use in national low-carbon plan By David Stanway in Beijing Aug 4, 2011 via Reuters (Editing by David Fogarty). 99.181.138.215 (talk) 00:35, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excerpts

"If you have a total energy cap you can translate that into an emissions number or trade energy credits -- it gives a lot of different options," said Deborah Seligsohn, a climate policy expert working for the World Resources Institute in Beijing. "You can use a cap for lots of other purposes but you need a ceiling to create the incentive to trade," she said. ... Han Wenke, the head of the Energy Research Institute, a government think-tank, told a meeting this week it will be formally passed later this year once recommendations from other government departments have been collected. Few surprises are expected, with many of China's five-year carbon dioxide (CO2), energy and pollution targets already confirmed. But formal recognition is likely to be given to six pilot low-carbon zones in the provinces of Guangdong and Hubei and the cities of Tianjin, Beijing, Chongqing, and Shanghai.

99.181.138.215 (talk) 00:48, 18 August 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Zhang Guobao, formerly China's senior energy official, told state news agency Xinhua after his retirement in March that the cap would stand at 4 billion TCE, and some scholars involved in the discussions last year were proposing a figure as low as 3.6 billion TCE. "The number is definitely at the higher end, there's no doubt about that, and this tells you how fierce the debate has been internally," said Wu Changhua, China representative with London-based NGO The Climate Group. "But it is a good starting point. There were a lot of very aggressive scholars arguing forcefully for a much lower cap, saying there is no way we can carry on like this, but there were also moments of doubt whether the cap would be there or not."

99.181.138.215 (talk) 00:53, 18 August 2011 (UTC) [reply]

It eventually plans to bring carbon intensity down by 40-45 percent by 2020 from 2005 levels, following a pledge it made before global climate talks in Copenhagen in 2009. ... Last week, the National Development and Reform Commission for the first time published the names of regions that were struggling to meet targets, including undeveloped and resource-dependent Ningxia, Qinghai and Xinjiang in the northwest as well as the economic powerhouse of Jiangsu on the eastern coast. "The NDRC are playing a watchdog role to see if they are going to make it or not. I interpret this very positively, and it is part of the lessons they learnt from previous years," said Wu of The Climate Group. ... The plan is also likely to include absolute targets to restrict a series of major pollutants, targets already passed by the Ministry of Environmental Protection. Reports suggest it will also propose tougher energy-saving building codes, more backing for hybrid cars and further instructions to eliminate aging industrial capacity

99.181.138.215 (talk) 01:03, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Senior energy official" appears to be Vice Chairman of the National Development and Reform Commission. 64.27.194.74 (talk) 20:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This will take some review time, I'll attempt to get back to this later. 108.195.138.38 (talk) 05:32, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resource for PRC green growth boom industry, from 4.February.2011

[edit]

China plots course for green growth amid a boom built on dirty industry; National economic blueprint set to tackle pollution and waste, and invest in renewable energy by Jonathan Watts, Asia environment correspondent via guardian.co.uk 4.February.2011 99.181.138.215 (talk) 01:11, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added. 108.195.138.38 (talk) 05:32, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

resource in current issue of Environment (Vol. 53, 5, Sept/Oct 2011)

[edit]

From resource in current issue of Environment (Vol. 53, 5, Sept/Oct 2011) ... http://www.environmentmagazine.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/2011/September-October%202011/climate-change-full.html ... on Table 1. Flagship Legislation, China's National Climate Change Programme (2007), stating Main purpose ...

"This program focuses on five key areas:

  • (i) greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation;
  • (ii) adaptation
  • (iii) science and technology;
  • (iv) public awareness' and
  • (v) institutions and mechanisms.

Measures include strengthening the existing energy legal system, improving the national energy program, implementing the Renewable Energy Law, promoting favorable conditions for renewable energy development and GHG mitigation, stimulating energy price reform, optimizing the energy mix, and promoting innovation and efficiency improvements in various power-generating technologies (renewable and nonrenewable), including nuclear power." Date passed: 2007 (revised in 2008 and 2009) 97.87.29.188 (talk) 20:59, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added formatting. 99.35.15.199 (talk) 03:05, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll attempt later to find potential location. 108.195.138.38 (talk) 05:35, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Politics of global warming resource

[edit]

From Talk:Climate change fund ... China: Economic woes no excuse for climate change inaction "Ahead of major climate change talks in Durban, South Africa (Cop17), China's top climate official said that economic turmoil in the West should not get in the way of fighting global warming. " in November 22, 2011 csmonitor.com by David Stanway (Reuters); excerpt ...

"After the financial crisis, every country has had its problems, but these problems are just temporary," Xie Zhenhua, vice-director of the National Development and Reform Commission, told reporters on Tuesday.

Beijing has been one of the big winners of the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism, which allows industrialized countries to earn carbon credits by investing in clean projects in developing nations. China has by far the largest number of CDM projects and its success has prompted Europe, the biggest carbon credit market, to seek changes to the CDM and the Kyoto Protocol beyond 2012, saying it currently lacks environmental integrity. Russia, Canada and Japan have said they will not support a second phase of emissions cuts under Kyoto, saying it is meaningless if the biggest emitters, China and the United States, do not sign up to binding curbs.

See Late-2000s recession, Kyoto Protocol and Post–Kyoto Protocol negotiations on greenhouse gas emissions, Emission intensity (amount produced per unit of GDP), Cancun Summit

99.181.147.59 (talk) 06:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll attempt to check article for usefulness later. 108.195.138.38 (talk) 05:36, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cop17 resource

[edit]

China Pushes Clean-Energy Agenda Ahead of Summit November 22, 2011, 6:33 A.M. ET. by Zhoudong Shangguan, excerpt ..

China plans to push for more funding for clean-energy technologies in the developing world even as it repeated its opposition to mandatory emissions cuts, underscoring the challenges at climate-change talks beginning next week in South Africa. International climate-change officials are meeting in Durban ahead of the expiration of the Kyoto Protocol global-warming treaty next year, but any formal agreement is considered unlikely by experts. In addition to continued opposition from major greenhouse-gas emitters China, India and the U.S.—factors that hobbled similar talks in Copenhagen two years ago—Europe continues to grapple with its debt crisis. That makes any new cuts that could curb economic growth and new spending on green initiatives much less likely. Meanwhile, Japan is considering its plan to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 25% by 2020 after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster led political leaders to reconsider the nation's nuclear ambitions.

See Politics of global warming

141.218.36.43 (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some what side comment, but see International reaction to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster#Germany for a notable voter/political reaction. 99.181.134.134 (talk) 06:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(od) added. 108.195.138.38 (talk) 05:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NYT resource here?

[edit]

Weighing Tariffs on Chinese Solar Panels January 30, 2012, 6:23 pm by Matthew L. Wald Or maybe Sino-American relations? 97.87.29.188 (talk) 01:46, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe Politics of global warming (United States)? 99.109.124.44 (talk) 08:15, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Now that makes sense; may still be WP:UNDUE weight there, but it's a plausible location. This article is not. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:46, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:24, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:27, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:31, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Merger with the many overlapping articles on China and the environment?

[edit]

Is this article a candidate for merger? There seem to be far too many articles dealing with China environmental topics, many aspects of which are significantly out of date. I'm not an experienced enough editor to know how to approach this. There is an article on Pollution in China. Another for Greenhouse gas emissions by China. There's Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation. And the two best articles of the bunch, Environmental policy in China and Environmental governance in China. For the sake of completeness, I will add this comment to the talk page of each. Hopefully someone more experienced than me can suggest how to streamline. JArthur1984 (talk) 00:13, 17 June 2022 (UTC)JArthur1984[reply]

Looks to me like the only one of those other articles that might work for a merger with this one is Greenhouse gas emissions by China. But perhaps this is a legitimate subarticle of that one. Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:39, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve added a subarticle template at the top of this talk page. Anythingyouwant (talk)}

Should this article be protected?

[edit]

I note the tone header. Because this article deals with a potentially sensitive political topic, should it be protected? This is the sort of ongoing journalistic type of article that occasionally might be tweaked by non-neutral parties in order to reflect a particular political entity in a positive light. Atomic putty? Rien! (talk) (talk) 15:49, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think not necessary at the moment unless anyone has a specific problem Chidgk1 (talk) 18:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know it has POV header but still

[edit]

Like is anyone going to address ever how succinct and encyclopedic the pros section is, and how argumentative, non-neutral and nebulous the con-side is? It’s alarmingly unbalanced and reads like a PRC propaganda article in whole. Raiders88 (talk) 22:53, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know - are you? Chidgk1 (talk) 18:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 January 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 12:30, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation → Climate policy of China – 1) Title is rather long and specific - climate policy would allow other aspects to be added

2) To be more similar to Climate change policy of the United States

3) The word ‘economic’ before ‘responsibility’ seems outdated as China is now profiting from EV battery manufacture for example Chidgk1 (talk) 16:32, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Climate change has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Environment has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject China has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would like clarification on the proposal. The proposed destination is currently a redirect to Energy policy of China.
I take it in this scenario, climate policy would no longer re direct to energy policy? JArthur1984 (talk) 22:46, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes because climate policy is more than just energy transition - for example China support of EV manufacturing Chidgk1 (talk) 11:58, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How does that square up with the existing Environmental policy of China page? Seems like much potential overlap.
Overall, I’m in agreement that this article is weak and poorly titled. Pretty sure this is what’s called a POV fork.
So I join your suggestion of changing but I’m not so sure of what the destination should be.
Maybe merge this article into Climate change in China or Environmental issues in China? JArthur1984 (talk) 17:00, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JArthur1984 Ah I did not know that Environmental policy in China existed thanks. However the US has separate articles for environmental policy and climate policy so why not China too? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:24, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can turn this article into an acceptable content fork by spinning off Climate_change_in_China#Mitigation. 94rain Talk 22:51, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@94rain Sorry I don’t understand what you mean - can you explain in more detail please Chidgk1 (talk) 16:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To move this article to Climate policy of China, it needs to be thoroughly rewritten. To do that, we can extract information from Climate_change_in_China#Mitigation to expand the article, essentially creating a WP:SPINOFF fork of that section. Then Climate_change_in_China#Mitigation can be turned into a summary style overview. 94rain Talk 23:44, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@94rain Ah I see yes that sounds good. So you support my rename proposal? Chidgk1 (talk) 07:07, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. A standalone article on Climate (change) policy of China can definitely exist. We don't need to merge it into other articles. 94rain Talk 07:18, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hope various people can improve the article

[edit]

@94rain@JArthur1984@Raiders88@Atomic putty? Rien!@Anythingyouwant@Mx. Granger@Rotide4321 and anyone else interested in this very important topic.

Now the article has a better name and scope I hope some of you can pitch in and improve it further. Feel free to revert, disagree with, amend or discuss any changes I make as your ideas may well be better. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I briefly looked at Climate change policy of the United States and it seems in poor shape so I guess we don't want to copy that structure. What should the structure of the article be? Chidgk1 (talk) 13:36, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You could maybe get more from https://chineseclimatepolicy.oxfordenergy.org/ Chidgk1 (talk) 19:50, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I began incorporating some material here, including on policy-making in this area. JArthur1984 (talk) 20:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The government of China also published a white paper on Responding to Climate Change: China's Policies and Actions, which can be a good primary source to refer to. 94rain Talk 05:05, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Environmental Politics

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2024 and 20 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sveit1 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Bsbl2004, BoredOnASunday.

— Assignment last updated by Envpoli (talk) 12:52, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I removed these because they are so old Chidgk1 (talk) 19:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Climate_policy_of_China&oldid=1263439741"