Unfounded Optimism?

A brief post following something I read yesterday morning in the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong. As I've mentioned in other posts, many here are filled with optimism that China has the potential to lead the environmental movement going forward because of the centralized authority of the national government. In highlighting this ability, optimists generally point to the targets set in the 11th Five Year Plan to reduce energy intensity (energy use per unit of GDP) by 20% by 2010. Facing difficulties to meet the last bit of these targets, China's government ordered the shut down of more than 2,000 low efficiency steel and cement factories last month, effective during September. This may reduce production capacity in the short term, but in the long term it may both help meet the energy goals and increase efficiency and production at larger plants, providing economic benefits through lower operating costs and lower costs to consumers. However it will take time to build up the necessary efficient capacity.

However new doubts were cast on China's ability to meet its goals last week, according to the SCMP article, which highlights Premier Wen Jiabao's confession last week at the Global Economic Forum in Tianjin that in the first half of 2010, energy intensity actually increased. After posting reductions of 15.6% in energy intensity in the previous year, the latest numbers showed a setback in reaching the goals. This setback was attributed to the economic stimulus package of 4 trillion yuan (US$588 billion) which led to a rise in heavy industry plants. Despite this increase, Premier Wen said that China will "spare no effort in meeting" its lofty goal of 20% reductions by the end of the year, even at the expense of economic growth.

While this is cause for both skepticism and hope, some of the methods already being put in place across 8 provinces encouraged by the National Development and Reform Commission to take urgent action give reason for alarm. Governments in more than 20 provinces have ordered power cuts to steel and cement mills and other high-emissions industries. Some have even rationed power to schools, residents, traffic lights, and hospitals. These cuts go so far, the article continues, as to diminish fresh water supples because of the inability to run water pumps and the inability to use the toilet for the same reason in the town of Anping. Though the government has lashed out at Anping's government for such actions, it did not rule out the potential of using blackouts to meet the goals. Experts note that this imbalance is a sign of the government's need to reconsider how it balances energy conservation and economic growth going forward in the 12th Five Year Plan.

Personally, I think the biggest concerns here are that these last-ditch efforts to meet the goal and "save face" on the international stage (the concept of "face" is very important in China) are impermanent and will in the long run negatively impact the concept of energy conservation within the country and mar China's reputation internationally. The inconvenience and drop in standard of living and employment faced by many as a result of these will leave a negative impression of the idea of "energy efficiency" but more importantly creates unsafe conditions, even if temporary. And that is not to mention the fact that as soon as the numbers are crunched and the targets either met or not, the blackouts will likely unceremoniously end, thus boosting energy intensity once more. If they continue, the government risks turmoil over the permanently decreased standard of living in areas such as Anping. Finally, on an international stage, China has now set itself up for a situation where it cannot easily win. If they meet the targets via these methods, international organizations and leaders (such as WWF, which was quoted in the article) will realize the impermanence of these measures. These cuts will overshadow the investment in energy efficiency China has created in the last several years. Furthermore, should China announce that it has met its target, skepticism is likely over the calculation of these numbers. Following this admission of an increase, international bodies may rightly question whether a reversal of fortune and a subsequent decrease in intensity of 5% over the last half year is possible. Since the Chinese government will allow no independent auditing of their emissions achievements, international leaders are right to speculate over the accuracy of such a bold turnaround, should one be achieved.

Well, those are my thoughts. I think such news puts a damper on the optimism but is not a reason to throw up our hands yet. China still is positioned to alter its course in a way no other country has regarding sustainability. Perhaps if they fail to meet the targets, it will cause a rethinking on a holistic level of how to achieve sustainability in China. Rather than shrinking away from targets in the 12th Five Year Plan perhaps we will see a stronger target and a stronger resolve to meet it using truly efficient technologies. This would be a way for the Chinese government to save face should it fail to meet its goals by the end of 2010, and an encouraging sign for us all.

If you want to read more about Premier Wen Jiabao's announcement, you can access the SCMP article here (you may need to set up a free trial to read it unless you are a subscriber) or read similar announcements here and here.