back to article Chinese government to spend $277 BEEELION on air-quality improvements

The Chinese government has launched an ambitious – and expensive – new plan to aggressively combat some of the world's worst air pollution. According to a report in the US edition of China Daily, the central government has pledged to invest 1,700 billion yuan ($277bn) in support of the effort, which will focus on improving air …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. nanchatte


    At least Lewis Page will be chuffed with US's response to the pointless lefty, treehugging, liberal expendature on the environment.

    1. TheVogon

      Re: Optional

      I hope they realise that lots of America will end up underwater due to global warming:

      Hopefully they will get lots more tornados, hurricanes, etc, too seeing as they are one of the worst climate offenders...

      1. Pez92

        Re: Optional

        Humans are responsible for such a small percentage of carbon emissions. Everyone could leave their lights on all day and swap out their car for a 10MPG hummer and we'd still produce a spec per year compared to one volcano or forest fire. Too many people live under the illusion that the status quo of the universe can be maintained, that we don't live in an ever-changing climate that has historically adapted or killed off every species that's ever inhabited it. This is largely due to our egos, thinking we're both the problem and the solution, and also due to our shortsightedness. Man-made global warming is nothing but a selling point for Mr. Gore.'s film career...if you don't believe me just consult his annual energy consumption.

        It is, however, true that energy pollution lowers air quality, lowering quality and quantity of life for those around us, and it is also true that the polar ice caps will raise the sea level. Thus, it is not an inconvenient truth, merely a convenient lie as although cutting back on emissions won't delay the inevitable, it will raise air quality. The unfortunate side effect, however, is people with THAT mentality. Tisk tisk.

  2. JaitcH

    $277-Billion is a drop in the bucket

    Almost every city, and decent sized town, has severe pollution problems. And by severe includes rivers catching fire. Yet the country has an aggressive recycling industry that starts with old ladies (no pension plan in China) going house-to-house ad apartment-to-apartment buying for cash discarded cardboard, newspapers, pop bottles, plastic wrap and even foam cups and food containers. Never realised foamed food containers could be recycled.

    These collectors, in turn, turn the collected items in to district recycling companies who reimburse them based upon weight.

    THEN the pollution begins! Some types of plastic are heated up whilst others, such as pop bottles are washed (in a river or lake) then they are shredded and dried in the sun.

    Electrical cables are particularly polluting. They set huge piles of cable on fire to burn off the insulation, then the copper is recovered.

    In VietNam the government is proactive. A Taiwanese owned food additive producer was polluting a river system and the discharge pipe was discovered by amateur ecologists. The only thing that got the company's attention was when the general population refused to buy their products. Some supermarket chains also stopped selling their products.

    Another anti-pollution step has been the government reducing the supply of charcoal brickettes - used by street vendors and some residential users - as the fumes from smouldering charcoal is as bad as the old night watchmen's oil barrels filled with garbage to keep warm.

    Countries should be forced to dispose, or process, their own disposable products - no more ship stripping on the beaches of Asia or e-waste off Africa < >.

    TaiWan has decreed all vehicles must be fitted with EFI (Electronic Fuel Injection). Since TaiWan is the base for may small-engined vehicles manufacturers, including motorcycles and scooters, the 'spill over' effect has migrated to all regional consuming countries with the result air is cleaner and fuel consumption lowered. The vehicles are also speedier!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: $277-Billion is a drop in the bucket

      What's up with the spurious CamelCase CountryNames?

      ChiNa not deserving of the same treatment, eh?

  3. Winkypop Silver badge

    New Chinese export opportunity

    Every Chinese made item for export will be accompanied by an equivalent (by weight) bag of Beijing air.

    I'll get my HAZMAT suit.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    $277 Billion doesn't sound like a drop in the bucket

    It is an incredibly huge sum of money - more than double that of the Chinese military or UK NHS; or 1/3 of the US military budget. I'm not saying the pollution in China is not a big problem, but wisely spent, that money is a very serious commitment to doing something about it.

  5. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. King1Con

    Americans not spending $277 Billion is not a drop in the important bucket

    With an annual U.S. borrow rate of about $813 Billion ($1,400 Billion borrowing started when Americans elected a new government of Democrats in their Presidency, House of Representatives, and Senate... a newly elected Congress decided to start re-collecting the proper amount of Social Security for the old people, helping to bring down their borrow rate) - there needs to be A LOT LESS SPENDING!

    Americans not spending $277 Billion (that they do not have) is not even "a drop in the bucket" of balancing their Federal Budget! Americans, for the most part, feed large portions of the world, secure large portions of world trade, and design the hi-tech products used (or copied by others) around the world.

    The Dumb better figure out QUICKLY that the world economy will collapse from Americans voting for politicians with crazy borrow & spend mentality - there will soon be a lot more to worry about than: how much [non-existent] money can be borrowed to spend on economically unsustainable plans to possibly slow down a possible catastrophic event that may possibly happen in the future.

    We all need clean environmental policies, but new policies must be economically sustainable. A clean enviornment for a few years, which destroys the economy, and destroys a government, will result in a much worse environmental disaster when there is no more government with the power to regulate pollution.

    The proverbial "cut off your nose to spite your face" scenario.

    The Road to Greece...

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like