主题：【原创】温室气体减排：妖魔化中国的新话题 -- hwd99
家园 【原创】温室气体减排：妖魔化中国的新话题 温室气体减排：妖魔化中国的新话题
气候变暖，是否是二氧化碳排放引起的，还是一个问题，笔者并不相信，曾在《博客中国》上转载几篇文章分析，却被删除。就是成立，造成大气二氧化碳浓度从100多年前290ppm升高到现在390ppm，也主要是西方发达国家的贡献。从历史来看，中国人均贡献不到美国等发达国家几十分之一。现实来看，中国人均排放也仅相对于美国四分之一到五分之一。即使不追究发达国家历史上向大气排放的大量二氧化碳，也应当是西方首先削减二氧化碳排放，使人均排放等于中国人均水平，才有资格讨论中国的减排问题。但是，西方舆论不是这么给西方的老百姓解释的，而是宣传，最近几年二氧化碳排放量增加很快，主要是中国经济高速发展，带来二氧化碳排放量高速增长的结果，将矛头指向中国。其实中国人生产的产品，40％销售给美国等发达国家，主要为发达国家服务，换回美元欠条，眼看着美元贬值，还无法使用，等于免费奉送。老百姓当牛做马，累死累活，连个温饱都谈不上，中国社会科学院最新报告显示，85％老百姓买不起房子。所谓的经济发展，不过是精英们在吹牛，欺骗老百姓。由于外资在中国的资产还超过23000亿美元，辛辛苦苦积累的23000亿美元外汇储备，实际还是属于外国资本家，因为外国资本家将其在中国的资产兑现，就抵消了外汇储备。但是西方却抓住精英们吹牛，大肆宣传，中国经济所谓的高速发展是气候变暖的主要祸首之一。
此次哥本哈根会议之前，中国就高调宣布温室气体减排措施，到2020年单位国民产值排放二氧化碳降低40－45％，而美国却不愿承诺，1997年京都协议书通过的国际协定，而是搞了一个无约束的哥本哈根协议。美国作为这个世界的黑社会老大，就是承诺了，如曾签署了京都协议书，2002年小布什宣布作废，各国也没有什么办法。但是，美国媒体却不忘抓住哥本哈根会议妖魔化中国。笔者在纽约时报和华盛顿邮报上仅仅各看了一篇报道，就看到了西方记者精彩的妖魔化中国的文章，其中华盛顿邮报说中国长期以来反对确认（削减排放），将其看成是对主权的侵犯（当然美国是赞成的，全文附后，有多处妖魔化中国的评述）。新加坡联合早报也加入到妖魔化中国的大合唱，说：设定减排年限是先进国的要求，但遭到中国的强烈反对。
西方要求中国参加减排，其根本目的，并不在于中国减排多少，而是非常在意监控中国减排，从而让中国重蹈伊拉克的覆辙。中国一天不上套，这个扯皮会就不会结束。哥本哈根协议成功地让中国在这个方向上前进了一步（答应减排，同时答应交流通报减排措施，笔者另文分析其后果）。下面且看西方媒体的表演：
纽约时报
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/12/05/world/climate-graphic-players.html
China
China, with the world’s largest population and largest emissions of greenhouse gases, could be viewed as one of two 800-pound gorillas in the room, with the United States. A developing nation, China has refused to accept firm limits on its emissions but has instead proposed a “carbon intensity” target, reducing its emissions per dollar of economic output by 40 to 45% by 2020.
中国是世界上人口最多的国家和排放温室气体最多的国家，可以看成是房间中两个800磅大猩猩中的一个，另一个是美国。作为发展中国家，中国拒绝接受确实的排放限制，而是提出了一个所谓“碳强度”目标，到2020年减少每美元经济产出所排放的40－45％
United States
The other 800-pound gorilla, the United States ranks among the biggest emitters of carbon dioxide per capita of any large country. (Certain small countries like Qatar emit more per person.) With the Senate unable to pass climate legislation before the Copenhagen meeting, the Obama administration will be limited in what it can offer. Yet President Obama has signaled a greater willingness to cooperate with international efforts to reduce emissions than his predecessor, George W. Bush
另一个800磅大猩猩，美国是大国中人均排放二氧化碳最多国家（还有一些小国，如卡塔尔人均排放更多）。由于在哥本哈根会议之前，参议院没有通过气候法案，奥巴马总统所能采取的措施有限，但是奥巴马总统签署了一个同国家社会合作减少排放的协议，比其前任布什总统前进了一大步。
新加坡联合早报：http://www.zaobao.com/gj/gj091220_001_1.shtml
《哥本哈根协议》也并未列明各国的减排目标，支持协议的国家只承诺把全球暖化的幅度限制在摄氏2度。设定减排年限是先进国的要求，但遭到中国的强烈反对。
但《哥本哈根协议》倒是详细列出了富国会给予穷国的援助数额，以协助它们应付气候变化所造成的海平面上升、水灾、旱灾、风暴等。富国承诺在2010至2012年之间，提供300亿美元的援助，其中110亿美元来自日本、106亿美元来自欧洲联盟、36亿美元来自美国。各国还定下到了2020年援助数额达1000亿美元的长期目标。
奥巴马同四个发展中大国的领导人会谈后曾说，此项协议是一个起点。他说：“这样的进度得来不易，但我们也知道，单有这样的进度是不足够的。”他也强称协议提供了日后加强对抗气候变化的工具，算是取得“空前突破”。
华盛顿邮报
Copenhagen climate deal shows new world order may be led by U.S., China
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/19/AR2009121900687.html
By Anthony Faiola, Juliet Eilperin and John Pomfret
Sunday, December 20, 2009
COPENHAGEN -- If the talks that resulted in an imperfect deal to combat global warming provided anything, it was a glimpse into a new world order in which international diplomacy will increasingly be shaped by the United States and emerging powers, most notably China.
Friday's agreement, sources involved in the talks said, boiled down to President Obama and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao personally hammering out a pact both could live with, even if many other leaders could not. Wen even squelched his own negotiator's protests.
What Obama heralded as a "breakthrough" -- after getting India and other rising powers to sign on -- was decried by some nations as too little, too late. The leaders of Europe, Japan and other countries at the summit were largely left to rubber-stamp the deal. The Swedish prime minister's office dubbed it "a disaster."
Ever since the concept of a G2was proposed this year by former U.S. national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, the idea that the United States and China together are going to solve all the world's problems has been pooh-poohed by both American and Chinese officials. China hated the notion because it put too much responsibility on a country that has done very well rising in the shadows. Many U.S. officials opposed the idea on the grounds that the best way to influence China was through multinational partnerships.
So, more than anything else, critics said, Friday's climate agreement reflected the domestic political realities in Washington and Beijing. Both nations, the two biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, remain more cautious than, say, the governments of Europe about establishing a strict set of international rules to combat global warming. Not coincidentally, the agreement allows nations to set their own emission reduction targets and provides no deadline for signing a binding international accord.
A shifting relationship
As such, the deal may portend how issues from world trade to nuclear proliferation will be negotiated in the years ahead, with China leading a caucus of rising powers on one side and the United States on the other.
"The mark is being stamped on a new political world," said Duncan Marsh, who directs international climate policy for the Nature Conservancy. Said Jake Schmidt, international climate policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Fund: "Coming into this conference, it was about 193 countries, and coming out of it, it clearly came down to a conversation between the leaders of those two superpowers."
Orville Schell, a longtime China watcher who is director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society, said the erratic dance between China and the United States is another example of how the bilateral relationship is at a tipping point. China is becoming a major player, albeit reluctantly; the United States, with similar unease, is making room for China at the table of world leaders.
"We're not exactly partners, but we're much more equals," Schell said. "The Chinese miss the idea that there's some grander, stronger authority. They are not used to this role of actually helping to fashion and form things."
Indeed, the events at the summit showed how the U.S.-China relationship remains stormy and complex, constructive and adversarial. At one point in Friday's tense talks, for instance, China's top climate change negotiator exploded in rage at U.S. pressure after Obama walked in on the Chinese while they were holding talks with the Indians, South Africans and Brazilians. After Obama asked whether the Chinese could commit to listing their climate targets in an international registry, Xie Zhenhua launched into a tirade, pointing his finger at the U.S. president.
A compromise from China
The United States had made any deal contingent on international verification of emission cuts made by nations, seeing it as key to winning over skeptical lawmakers on Capitol Hill who are still resistant to sweeping climate change legislation at home. But there was no way China would agree to international verification, Xie told the Americans.
It was a position that China had held to closely over months of negotiations with the United States and other countries. China's vice minister of foreign affairs, He Yafei, had reiterated it just hours earlier.
But this time, something different happened, according to Chinese and Western sources close to the talks. Wen instructed his Chinese interpreter not to translate Xie's fiery remarks. When Xie erupted again, Wen, who was chairing the meeting, ignored him. After Wen handed Obama a draft text of an agreement that included verification language Obama couldn't abide by, the two men led a lengthy debate that ended in a working compromise, sources said.
China has a long history of opposing verification, seeing it as a violation of its sovereignty（中国长期以来反对确认（排放削减），将其看成是对其主权的侵犯）. It has also used the sovereignty argument as a way to cover up for failures or weaknesses. When China tracked air pollution in Beijing in the run-up to the 2008 Summer Olympics, for instance, authorities in the capital moved monitoring stations into areas with less congestion to get positive ratings. When the U.S. Embassy in Beijing established an air-quality monitoring site on its grounds -- and began sending pollution readings out on Twitter -- the Chinese took umbrage and implied that the action was an interference in their country's internal affairs. Twitter later was blocked nationwide.
But on Friday, Wen ultimately agreed to stronger verification language. By the nature of the agreement, however, China's participation will be voluntary.
The fate of any future global climate change treaty will now effectively rest in the hands of the two largest emitters. For at least the next several years, the lack of a binding international treaty may result in a piecemeal response to the problem, with action being taken largely on a national and regional level.
Yet proponents of the Copenhagen agreement stress that the Obama administration is taking unprecedented action at home, pushing for a national switch to green energy and for a cap-and-trade system that could help dramatically curb emissions.
Wen, according to several Americans who have interacted with him on this issue, is also passionate about climate change. He chairs a high-level Communist Party group on climate change, which sets policy and makes major decisions.
In addition, Ken Lieberthal, a former senior director for Asia at the National Security Council who is now a China expert at the Brookings Institution, said that for China to even tentatively agree on an international verification regime and on the necessity of registering its climate goals marks substantive movement.
"Of course you could say, 'It's just words; they won't do anything,' " Lieberthal said. "But words matter internationally. You can hold people to their words and shame them if they don't comply."
Pomfret reported from Washington.
本帖一共被 3 帖 引用 (帖内工具实现)