45 ms·

If the US buys only great for the air products - anyone that sells in US must make them. Once you have the infrastructure in place - it may be cheaper to produc

If the US buys only great for the air products - anyone that sells in US must make them. Once you have the infrastructure in place - it may be cheaper to produce all clean instead of half clean/half polluting.

mikeash 10y ago
Why should the US put all that effort into cleaning up the air in China? For something like CO2 it makes perfect sense. That has global impact, so emissions anywhere are essentially the same. But when it comes to particulates and air quality, it's mostly a local problem. Polluting Chinese factories and cars hurt people in China. The Chinese government and people should be the ones making the effort to clean it up. There's no reason for the US to take it on, unless you're suggesting that we do it as some sort of massive charity scheme.
- ptaipale 10y ago
  >Why should the US put all that effort into cleaning up the air in China? 1) For altruistic reasons: help people who suffer. 2) For selfish reasons: block from markets industrial competitors who are gaining an advantage by applying much poorer environmental norms and therefore take market share.
  - oldmanjay 10y ago
    For additional selfish reasons: there's only one atmosphere. ruining it anywhere ruins it everywhere i'm sort of surprised that would need to be pointed out, though
    - mikeash 10y ago
      Bad air quality in China has very little effect on air quality here, so that's not really true. It is true for CO2, but it's not true for many other pollutants.
    - ptaipale 10y ago
      This was specifically about other pollutants than CO2. Those have local impact, so bad air in China doesn't show up in America or Europe.
      - venomsnake 10y ago
        It does. Diluted but it does. I think that 20% of the LA smog could be traced to be of Chinese origin. Sources - probably a guardian article an year ago.
        ptaipale 10y ago
        That is clearly not feasible. Just think about it: Right now, air quality index in central San Francisco is 15 [0]. That's "good". In central Los Angeles, it is 84, a "moderate" day [1]. Those figures are on linear scale [2]. The cities are about on an equal distance from China, and the figure for San Francisco is 18 % of that in LA. If 20 % of Los Angeles pollution would be from China, then 110 % of San Francisco air pollution would be from China. Hey, it could only be 100 %. You took a bait. Advice: don't believe everything in Guardian. [0] https://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.local_city&zipcode=90037 https://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.local_city&zi... [1] https://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.local_city&cityid=317 https://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.local_city&ci... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_quality_index#Computing_the_AQI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_quality_index#Computing_th...
        venomsnake 10y ago
        It was nytimes. Sorry. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/world/asia/china-also-exports-pollution-to-western-us-study-finds.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/world/asia/china-also-expo... https://pnas.altmetric.com/details/2061087#score https://pnas.altmetric.com/details/2061087#score Link to the paper. Abstract: tmospheric modeling shows that transport of the export-related Chinese pollution contributed 3-10% of annual mean surface sulfate concentrations and 0.5-1.5% of ozone over the western United States in 2006. This Chinese pollution also resulted in one extra day or more of noncompliance with the US ozone standard in 2006 over the Los Angeles area and many regions in the eastern United States. On a daily basis, the export-related Chinese pollution contributed, at a maximum, 12-24% of sulfate concentrations over the western United States. As the United States outsourced manufacturing to China, sulfate pollution in 2006 increased in the western United States but decreased in the eastern United States, reflecting the competing effect between enhanced transport of Chinese pollution and reduced US emissions. Our findings are relevant to international efforts to reduce transboundary air pollution.

mikeash 10y ago

Why should the US put all that effort into cleaning up the air in China? For something like CO2 it makes perfect sense. That has global impact, so emissions anywhere are essentially the same. But when it comes to particulates and air quality, it's mostly a local problem. Polluting Chinese factories and cars hurt people in China. The Chinese government and people should be the ones making the effort to clean it up. There's no reason for the US to take it on, unless you're suggesting that we do it as some sort of massive charity scheme.

ptaipale 10y ago
>Why should the US put all that effort into cleaning up the air in China? 1) For altruistic reasons: help people who suffer. 2) For selfish reasons: block from markets industrial competitors who are gaining an advantage by applying much poorer environmental norms and therefore take market share.
- oldmanjay 10y ago
  For additional selfish reasons: there's only one atmosphere. ruining it anywhere ruins it everywhere i'm sort of surprised that would need to be pointed out, though
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Bad air quality in China has very little effect on air quality here, so that's not really true. It is true for CO2, but it's not true for many other pollutants.
  - ptaipale 10y ago
    This was specifically about other pollutants than CO2. Those have local impact, so bad air in China doesn't show up in America or Europe.
    - venomsnake 10y ago
      It does. Diluted but it does. I think that 20% of the LA smog could be traced to be of Chinese origin. Sources - probably a guardian article an year ago.
      - ptaipale 10y ago
        That is clearly not feasible. Just think about it: Right now, air quality index in central San Francisco is 15 [0]. That's "good". In central Los Angeles, it is 84, a "moderate" day [1]. Those figures are on linear scale [2]. The cities are about on an equal distance from China, and the figure for San Francisco is 18 % of that in LA. If 20 % of Los Angeles pollution would be from China, then 110 % of San Francisco air pollution would be from China. Hey, it could only be 100 %. You took a bait. Advice: don't believe everything in Guardian. [0] https://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.local_city&zipcode=90037 https://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.local_city&zi... [1] https://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.local_city&cityid=317 https://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.local_city&ci... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_quality_index#Computing_the_AQI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_quality_index#Computing_th...
        venomsnake 10y ago
        It was nytimes. Sorry. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/world/asia/china-also-exports-pollution-to-western-us-study-finds.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/world/asia/china-also-expo... https://pnas.altmetric.com/details/2061087#score https://pnas.altmetric.com/details/2061087#score Link to the paper. Abstract: tmospheric modeling shows that transport of the export-related Chinese pollution contributed 3-10% of annual mean surface sulfate concentrations and 0.5-1.5% of ozone over the western United States in 2006. This Chinese pollution also resulted in one extra day or more of noncompliance with the US ozone standard in 2006 over the Los Angeles area and many regions in the eastern United States. On a daily basis, the export-related Chinese pollution contributed, at a maximum, 12-24% of sulfate concentrations over the western United States. As the United States outsourced manufacturing to China, sulfate pollution in 2006 increased in the western United States but decreased in the eastern United States, reflecting the competing effect between enhanced transport of Chinese pollution and reduced US emissions. Our findings are relevant to international efforts to reduce transboundary air pollution.