Where will sustainable technologies come from and where will they take hold

[Torsten]

It is interesting to see that europe and the US have lots of sustainable technologies but aren't developing many of them. In many cases this is because the market is limited. For example, why try and sell a tiny, fuel saving car to an american family that has 3 monster SUVs in the garage? or why sell solar panels to people who can have the convenience of grid power at over 95% of the population?

Solar power is somewhat popular in australia, because of the cost of getting connected to the grid in many rural areas. It is virtually unheard of in the cities. Doesn't that mean that technologies like solar and fuel savign cars are more likely to take off in countries that are currently poor, but are emerging to become more wealthy. Isn't it much easier to sell solar tech to someone who has never had power and is now faing the choice of high bills versus one-off government subsidised investment? isn't it also much easier to sell fuel saving cars to people who have relied on bikes and public transport in a very smog ridden city?

I don't think it is any accident that many sustainable technologies are being snapped up by places like China and India. They have the need for them, they have the market for them, but most importantly they have the production facilities and labour source for them. I think China in particular is the place to watch as their less than democratic government can make unpopular and non-market driven decisions without losing power and can make these decisions with long term targets that reach well beyond the 4 year re-election term that other countries suffer from.

China is the first to have built a closed cycle city and they are continually giving tax breaks an subsidies to new sustainable technologies. It will be countries like China that will be ready for when the fuel runs out or when it becomes prohibitively expensive. So if the USA was the superpower of the century of oil, then china is well set to become the superpower of the century of sustainable energy.

[Torsten]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070422/ap_on_...nghai_auto_show

Chinese automakers showcase eco-cars

By JOE McDONALD, AP Business WriterSun Apr 22, 3:03 PM ET

One experimental clean-energy car runs on natural gas. Another uses ethanol distilled from corn. A third has a zero-emissions electric motor powered by a hydrogen fuel cell.

These alternative vehicles were created not by a global automaker but by China's small but ambitious car companies, which displayed them Sunday alongside gasoline-powered sedans and sport utility vehicles at the start of the Shanghai Auto Show.

At a time when they are still trying to establish themselves in international markets, Chinese automakers are already investing in such avant-garde research in a bid to win a foothold in the next generation of technology.

"This is the tide of the industry. If you don't go with the tide, the industry will pass you by," said Qin Lihong, a vice president of China's biggest domestic automaker, Chery Auto Co., in an interview ahead of the show's opening.

China's communist leaders are encouraging the development as part of efforts to cut pollution and rising dependence on imported oil and to make this country a creator of profitable technologies.

Chinese manufacturers are getting help from foreign automakers in joint ventures and from research alliances with Chinese universities and government laboratories.

Beijing has made cleaner cars a policy priority, targeting the field as one of 11 priority areas in a 15-year technology development plan issued in February 2006. It promised grants and tax breaks to support industry efforts.

The campaign embodies one of Beijing's strategies in technology development: Pick new areas with no entrenched competitors so China can make breakthroughs without huge costs.

While foreign automakers have a lead in conventional technology, "in new energy we're starting from almost the same line," said Chen Hong, the president of Shanghai Automotive Industries Corp.

"So we believe we can catch up with other auto companies and make great progress in developing new energy vehicles," Chen said.

China's leaders are pressing its auto, steel, manufacturing and other industries to improve energy efficiency and cut pollution.

They see China's rising reliance on imported oil as a strategic weakness, especially since much of it comes from the politically volatile Middle East and crosses seas beyond Beijing's control.

China already is the world's No. 2 oil consumer after the United States and saw imports soar by 14.5 percent in 2006, driven by economic growth that has topped 10 percent for the past four years.

A boom in car sales has added to smog shrouding China's major cities, which are among the world's dirtiest. Vehicle sales jumped 25.1 percent last year to 7.2 million units, including 3.8 million passenger cars.

At the Shanghai show, both SAIC and Chery displayed experimental fuel-cell sedans, while they and a third Chinese automaker, Chang'an Automobile Group Co., also showed gasoline-electric hybrids.

SAIC said it will start selling its hybrid next year, while Qin said Chery's would go on the market in two to three years.

"The hybrid will be our focus," SAIC chairman Hu Maoyan said at a news conference. "The fuel cell will be our direction."

SAIC has spent 100 million yuan ($12 million) on fuel cell research, according to state media.

Chery had the widest array of alternative vehicles on display at the Shanghai show. They included models outfitted to run on bio-diesel made from vegetable oil or a "flexible fuel" choice of compressed natural gas or ethanol.

Foreign automakers also are playing a role in China's research.

General Motors Corp. has a joint-venture technology center with SAIC in Shanghai and operates three experimental fuel cell buses in the city. DaimlerChrysler AG has three of its own fuel cell buses running regular routes in Beijing in a research project with the technology ministry.

Foreign automakers including GM, Ford Motor Co., BMW AG and Honda Motor Co. displayed their own hybrids and experimental fuel cell cars at the Shanghai show.

Company officials said hydrogen fuel cells, which produce power with no exhaust, are the cleanest option. But they say it could be a decade or more before such technology is commercially feasible, due partly to the need to create a network of hydrogen filling stations.

Chinese authorities also are looking at other possible fuels such as natural gas and methane extracted from coal, said Mei-Wei Cheng, the president of Ford's China operations.

"This is not an easy decision, because every option has pros and cons," Cheng said. "The government is trying to find a solution as quickly as possible, but this is a difficult problem."

___

[Pala]

There was an interesting article in Seed Magazine about China's role in taking a stand towards sustainable living.

One of the more interesting points, and which is illustrated for example in some of the policies Torsten mentioned, is that when China wants to do something it does it. Democracy may allow for more individual liberty, but democracy is also the reason why India is unable to slow their population growth.

Chinese policies are often more about appearances, but they can do things here and now. For example when it was revealed that a group of buses were extremely pollutive, then they were taken immediately off the streets. Obviously they took action because it "looked good", but one can imagine a Western government haggling over whether or not an inquiry should be allowed to evaluate whether a think-tank should be allowed to propose an option for public-transport replacement.

[botanika]

Thats strange, I see more Porsche Cayenne's than low emision vehicles here... and there's plenty of buses and trucks blowing smoke out their ass and not being pulled from the streets! Still got a long way to go has china... it has a huge opportunity for sure but its copying a lot of the wests mistakes first and has to push through that. A lot of people here are obsessed with 'catching up' to the rest of the developed world rather than trying to go in a new direction and lead with their own identity. They have watched but not learnt as much as they could have. They sort of have to have their piece of capitalist cake first before they realise how fattening it is. Lets face it, presently the chinese are much better at copying than innovation, and most of the ideals they have taken on board so far are economic. Its going to take a big helping hand from other countries experience for it to succeed, but luckily they are asking for that help, do value it and are trying many new initiatives. 1.6 billion people: they HAVE to. They are not afraid to say 'we want to learn' and 'we can't close our doors for the future, we need to be interdependent'. Id like to see the US talk of interpendancy more often. A huge benefit in seeking that help is that china is establishing many positive relationships around the world - something the US is not succeeding at in the same way. The asian culture of 'showing face' can often divert things away from the truth but it also creates great opportunities to market initiatves to companies and leaders. Often companies and government bodies will make decisions based on what their Mayor likes or based on how it will improve their 'ranking'. Its true that quite often these sorts of agencies are keen to use environmental initiatives to look good in front of their leaders or peers. That whole scene can be manipulated towards a very positive environmental angle. Keep in mind its often foreign expertise that pushes the positive change in china as well as setting up greedy starbucks everywhere. Deep in their heart everyone wants a better environment.

Democracy vs Socialism? Both have their pores... freedom fills the holes in socialism and regulation fills the holes in democracy. Neither are completely bouyant.

The current reality of shanghai's streets is this though: Buses jam packed with people like sardines surrounded by many taxi's carrying only 1 person each. Opportunities for pedestrian mobility (and even bike and motorbike mobility) have unfortunately been reduced in favour of cars and new gated residential estates. The government could easily provide a greater range of public transport (and housing) choices like smaller fuel efficient buses or electric tuk tuk drivers, like they had in the past, for single taxi commuters. They have made some decent progress with motorbikes - you can no longer ride a 2 stroke around - only LPG, electric bike or low emision newer petrol bikes. Its a good thing but the air's still brown. GM and VW are here for money first, environment a distant second. They are here to make export cars cheaply and sell local cars to the emerging chinese middle class. Futuristic sustainable cars at expo's? Hey c'mon man I grew up on that stuff watching Beyond 2000 in the 80's - it still hasn't come to fruition as it should have. The decision the chinese gov made in establishing those foreign automotive industries in china was almost completely about economics and it has not impoved the countries environment or traffic - only its logistics, economics and consumer vehicle model choices (mostly luxury and high end choice). China might have experimental buses but across the board its fleets of vehicles are poorly maintained and pollutive in comparison to australia or the US. Their building standards are still way behind. There is much more development concerned with buildings and roads than parks or open space networks, further disconnecting people from nature. Australia, the US and europe are miles ahead in general construction quality and environmetal protection laws/regulations. Farmers are the backbone of the chinese construction industry, not skilled labour. So many buildings here are incredibly inefficient and its no wonder each summer and winter they suffer energy crisis. China's lack of general wealth doesn't nessarily mean it adopts sustainable technology out of necessity - often it just means adopting the cheapest and quite often the environentally unsound option ('what's wrong with developing a chemical factory in a floodplain?').

Economics is a tricky parasite - for a country to develop sustainably it has to develop economically to a degree. One of the benefits of this development is people tend to move to the cities, educate themselves better and have fewer children - thus changing population and education dynamics - and to me our population and education is a hugely critical thing in regard to sustainability. But then what happens is the smaller family in the city uses up more resources than the larger family in the country and becomes increasingly seperated from natural systems! That the chinese government can take swift action, sometimes regardless of public support, could be a major advantage in creating a nationwide environmental paradigm shift. The only memorable time Ive seen an australian politician take major nationwide action, ignoring public opinion, was John Howard when he sent us to War in Iraq!

I was dissapointed to watch an entire 1 hour documentary on CCTV9 the other week on the Beijing 'green' games. The 1 hour special detailed only the installation of 2000 wooden birds nests in Beijing. Call me a spoil sport but I reckon we should let the birds make their own nest - there's actually plenty of trees in china and things to make a nest with - there's just not many birds because Mao got rid of most of them! Wouldn't it be better to establish bird breeding programs and habitat allocation? Id rather see 2000 birds let loose. There was only mention of the wooden boxes in this doco. The chinese are good at doing things ornamentally, but still lack a total understanding of bio-diversity I think. Ive seen similar things happen with wetland projects where gardeners go around removing leaf litter and trimming hedges and so no insects have a home in the debris layer, no place for decomposition to occur, no mushies...all these gardners walking around habitat only areas - no wonder the local and migratory birds keep flying north and dont land. They need some peace and quiet to roost and nest!

Another thing Im noticing here is the change in housing and the social scene of the street. Older streets are often ablaze with young and old people, haggling, gossiping, bartering - basically interacting. Bang! Suddenly its demolished and up goes a 30 storey residential complex called 'Santa Barbara' and people interact much differently. People stay in their apartments, interact less and shop at a mall. Then they sit there ant tell you all about the cultural gap between china and the west in their Levi's and Nike's while watching chinese 'pop stars' on a 50' Sony flatscreen. How china responds to its cultural past, present and future narratives is very important. China has to understand sustaining its own culture as well as its technology and environment.

I see a lot of positive change in people's perceptions here though. A great thing about china is they are generally free of religous doctrine but still retain decent morals and family support (Im talking individuals). They haven't got the powerful church lobbyists and extremist jewish chambers of commerce in the way. Im beginning to see a lot more mature investments and less impactful high tech parks taking over the big heavier industries. Its a shame there's so many people here and so few of them have travelled to see what the rest of the world is really like.

So yeah heaps of opportunities, but as a matter of course china is currently not really sustainable - its problems are speeding away from its solutions. Their government's undemocratic nature maybe does hold the key in an unorthodox way. I get the impression the chinese are like sheep even without their government's influence - they easily conform, accept and follow. In facing sustainability issues and the survival of future generations I guess its worth asking how benficial is control and comformity and how beneficial is freedom and diversity in the long run? What do we value the most? Our choices or our childrens choices? Many people buy the big new apartment, SUV and other resources for their children. Its also quite difficult for someone in the west to say a 40 year old chinese business man shouldn't buy a Porsche Cayenne when all his life he may not have ever had to opportunity to buy a car at all. The house in the suburbs with two big cars and lots of expensive appliances is not just the american dream.

Im certainly learning a lot here and do have a lot of hope. At least china is trying to balance the east with west, unlike the USA which is trying to balance the middle east with the west

Edited June 4, 2007 by botanika

[komodo]

surely china, with its massive manufacturing sector, will need nuclear baseload generators? theyve pushed hydro to the limit with the three gorges dam (a damn scary piece of engineering), and solar, while its getting going there, is limited by storage issues (unless a global power alliance/superconducter network is set up)... i'm thinking they aren't going to be so sustainable at all, instead going for hardcore uranium fission in the near future. a lot of which will be supplied by australia, and some of that is likely to end up in nuclear warheads.. very scary really..

[XipeTotec]

surely china,

china actually has an experimental island (in the yangzee? not sure) with is almost entirely operated with renewable technologies. Can't remember details, but Im sure someone will know.

[botanika]

China has plenty of nukes. It needs the uranium for energy. America takes on the world with soldiers and weapons - asia does it with labour and commerce. Most of civilisation is unsustainable - but its kinda hard for everyone to back to subsistence and hunter gatherer lifestyles.