LyrArc Article Gist
Darren Woods of Exxon gives the view of many in business in the U.S. when he says of the Paris climate change accords of 2015- "We need a framework like that to address the threat of climate change." GE's CEO Immelt says a decision to leave the Paris accords "is not going to change one thing we do for energy efficiency, and I think all business is going to feel the same way." Most utilities including AEP see the political changes in government as coming and going, making it important to base their long term strategies on the economics and the general trends worldwide. Only support for the move to leave is coming from some coal companies and the steel industry, a small fraction of the overall industry in the U.S. Not mentioned here is the moves worldwide, by China motivated by health and pollution concerns to shift away from coal after disastrous pollution effects seen in China, and the decades old effort in Germany that has made the country self sufficient in renewable energy through use of solar and wind energy. India has set aggressive targets for renewables energy and is likely to join this long term trend as the economics shift in favor of wind and solar, especially when the health costs are counted in.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Yaroslav Trofimov gives his reflections on what the war means for Russia in this Essay in WSJ, and the sense within Russia that the war itself was a mistake. A result of miscalculations and a result that leaves Russia in no way better than it was in 2021 before the conflict. Hard won economic gains achieved by Mr. Putin during the last two decades have in fact been compromised by the conflict. No discussion has even been done on the transition away from fossil fuels that have been accelerated by the conflict. This is particularly relevant for Russia where the question of redundant fossil fuel assets during the rapid transition to renewable energy is a problem that needs to be tackled. The Ukraine diversion in this way affects the Russian economy and acts as a distraction from important economic goals. Global public opinion is also affected in ways that do not look favorable for Russia the longer the war goes on particularly the effect on food insecurity in poor countries, and energy security in Europe for poor households, the senseless destruction of infrastructure in Ukraine and millions of women and children displaced, all creating a sense of overwhelming moral failure. Mr. Modi of India is reported by FR24 to have told Mr. Putin at a meeting on September 15 that "this is no time for war." This is shown on today's pages in Lyrarc. How could it be a time for war when the pandemic has taken lives of over 1 million people in the US, over 2 million in Europe, millions in Asia, Latin America and Africa, and the world is only now coming out of it. The competition is not between countries for major power status but between countries on achieving better lives for its people, stronger economies, and better job, health, infrastructure and services to ordinary people, tackling problems on a common basis such as climate change. In most situations even the advanced countries of North America and Europe are facing the same problems faced by middle income countries such as China,Russia, and developing countries such as India- how to combine market economy with State participation in the economy and government ensuring fairness to all, better distribution of incomes and wealth, ensuring that there is a level playing field for all and opportunities for all. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Current responses to China's different posture in international relations obscure the huge investments made by US and European Union business in China that lead to about $1 trillion in exports from China to US and EU in 2021. This could not happen without the hyper investment in China by business in the US and EU that not only neglected manufacturing technologies in the home country but did this on a immense scale that would end up shipping almost the whole of the manufacturing supply chains to China from the US and EU. Done as a carefully planned shift of some manufacturing operations it could have benefitted both China and the US and EU. In what way was this hyper move in pace and scale damaging? China's water, air and land was contaminated at a rapid pace never before seen in history, seen as early as 2005. And the hyper shift by 2015 and in 2020 is now showing the severe effects of climate change with droughts, floods and fires all over the world. The German Environment Ministry today counts the cost at 90 times in the use of coal and fossil fuels over time. On the scale that this massive and fast shift was done of manufacturing to China even more so- a hugely imprudent response of US and EU business management and executives. Instead of tackling and confronting head on the challenging problems of quality control and cost in the 1990's through 2000 and beyond at home, management at Apple and other companies simply shifted all manufacturing to China. The other ill effect of the imprudent response of American business was in the massive and wholesale shift of supply chain to China by offshoring practically the entire manufacturing base. It was to lead to the massive losses that workers, families  and communities in the US and EU that countries could not cope with as it moved on an accelerated hyper level and pace. The result was to lead to intense criticism of China and a level of rancor that has poisoned the relations with China. Some of this counsel to China was given to leaders of the Communist party who had little knowledge of American capitalism operating within constraints of social democracy in 1990. Some of that counsel was self interested given by investment banks to Chinese officials- investment bankers that have now disappeared from view- who themselves lacked an understanding of the social constraints of American and European democracies. It is that rancor that is now leading to China and the US disconnecting the supply chains leading to questions one is certain within China about how this will affect unemployment in China in the years to come. The pandemic simply accelerated this realization on both sides of this untenable situation. Still a trillion dollars in exports are taking place even as the political situation is now totally adrift -as the situation in Taiwan in August 2022 shows- the political and trading relationships at opposite ends and seemingly at war with each other. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Negotiations between European leaders, especially Germany's Merkel and the Obama administration on climate change at G8 meeting. The U.S. and Europe try to work out differences. The U.S. is vague about some language such as the starting year against which emissions reductions will be measured, and has resisted the European pressure to set strong goals over the next 10 years. Europe wants 1990, while the USA, Australia and Japan prefer 2005. Europe wants to see language in aformal document that is being developed for the G-8 meeting, which also includes developing countries, for limiting the rise in global temperatures to 2 degrees celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, above pre-industrial levels.

LyrArc Article Gist
Under new proposed changes carbon emissions permits would be sold to industry and heavier polluters would have to pay more. And to make it fair to European companies exporters in other countries like China would have to buy these carbon permits to be able to export to Europe. There is similiar discussion about this in the USA which expects caps on greenhouse gas emissions in a few years. These changes wouldn't go into effect till 2013 at the earliest and industry will be trying to create a level playing field by then. Countries like China and India because they are developing have been exempt from the greenhouse caps under the Kyoto Protocol which expire 2012. Under the Kyoto Protocol which Europe signed and the USA did not sign, European companies are giving carbon permits free to emit a certain amount of greenhouse gas every year, the heavier polluters have to buy the permits from the ones that pollute less creating an incentive for companies to reduce emisssions.

LyrArc Article Gist
Xi Jinping is seen in this WSJ report as putting China on a course as a competitor of the US compared to other leaders such as Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin, yet these prior leaders faced a enoromous gap in technology and capital to make it ludicrous. The shrinking of this gap is a result of free markets theory that took no account of the national interests of the US or of the European Union in shifting manufacturing lock stock and barrel to China.  A deeper look at China requires looking at it from putting oneself in China's situation since the period of the 1912 revolution and the 1919 May 4th movement for Science, Modernization and Democracy, to better understand its motives and realities. Jiang Zemin could not pose the question of competing with the US at the time because China's per capita GDP was less than $100 in 1990 and by 2000 during Hu Jintao's term still about a tenth of American per capita GDP.  Even today with population in North America of about 500 million in the economies of US, Canada and Mexico, China lags far behind in technology and capital resources. The Biden administration does not believe in this idea of free markets theory, wrong from the beginning that prevailed incredibly and puzzingly for too long, that it does not matter where you make as long as it is made at the least cost anywhere. It ignored what China and the US under Biden both believe for the US or China that the US is its people and the people is the country. For the US the Civil war itself as Lincoln said in rallying people to the Union, was fought because labor was more important than capital. When looked at the situation in China as stated by Xi at the party congress recently is for having made progress for the overriding goal of Modernization to build a moderately prosperous socialist economy. Huge problems in China remain hidden- ensuring self governance that is honest and accountable to the people, creating jobs and opportunities for hundreds of millions of young people even as supply chains shift after the pandemic in Europe and the US, India and other countries to their home countries for Made In USA, Made in Europe, and Made in India. China is not such a believer in the flawed free markets theory of the non existence of national interest to not grasp the natural aspects of the US and EU, India wanting to build their own manufacturing up again to the fullest. In this situation it also probably realizes the need for a pause to the rampant free markets type of growth that has damaged China's water, air and environment as much as it has damaged the world through climate change. Quality of growth is the new ethos and this gives the US and China, India, the EU and other countries a common frontier to shoot for. The nuclear aspect is also there and managing this well is a common interest for all countries exercizing responsible leadership. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The International Energy Agency says China used 2.252 billion tons of oil equivalent in 2009 compared to the 2.170 billion tons of oil equivalent used by the USA. This oil equivalent measure covers crude oil, nuclear energy, coal, natural gas and renewable energy like hydropower. To give an idea of the scale of the increase- China's total energy use was only half of that of the USA in 1999 ten years ago. China plans to reduce emissions by cutting the carbon dioxide per unit of GDP by 40-45% from 2005 levels by 2020. But China looks at higher energy use in the years ahead. Much of the energy use is propelled by infrastructure building and energy intensive use in industries.

LyrArc Article Gist
The sense of conflict in China and US relations may not have developed in the shaping of Xi Jinping's thinking till the emergence of Mr. Trump. Jinping comes into the China shaped by Deng and Zemin after the collapse of the purely Communist experiment with modernization without access to western technologies and capital, and the experiment with American help. It is only after the realization that the Communist party had lost its sense of purpose in these years leading to the Bo Xilai episode, and the rhetoric of Mr. Trump against China, that the idea of first friction and then conflict emerged. The initial idea for Jinping before Trump was that this has worked for China- the experiment with the cooperation of the US in modernizing China. Trump's rhetoric and the Republican party's rhetoric about China stealing American jobs and technology after 2015 may have been targeted to win the election but it had an unintended effect after the tariffs of shaping Jinping's thinking about the future for China. Between the Bo Xi Lai episode in 2012 when it appeared he would be attempting to manipulate the Communist party's direction in unknown and unpredictable ways, Bo's trial in 2013 and the anticorruption campaign and the 2015 election campaign of Mr. Trump in the US, there must have been much soul searching in the party that shaped Jinping's thinking about the future for China after all the tumult of the 20th century starting with the Boxer rebellion in 1901. Stability is highly prized in China particularly for modernization. This perspective is important to grasp for world peace to be preserved with different coexisting perspectives about the world based on national as well as shared interests in issues such as climate change. US after its own disastrous experiment with capitalism that led to widening inequality of the kind not seen since Lincoln in the 1850's, the 2009 crisis, and the shift of jobs to China under a purely capitalist idea of how economies should function, had its own national interests in jobs, local manufacturing and Made in the USA. Once this process was underway after 2016 and grasped by president Biden after 2020, and supply chain reconstruction made the goal after covid, the US and China were on divergent economic and political paths.   That rethinking by Xi Jinping is not over as it may still be going on. The war in Ukraine may even convince Jinping and China's No. 2 leader Li Keqiang who studied the US constitution and American urbanization under mentors when he was in college, that Russia's prolongation of the war in Ukraine does not serve the interests of China. That risking relations with the European Union as Russia prolongs the war and finds itself in the complex problems of  a war it started, is not in China's interests in setting its own course for the future. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What is Antifa. during the protests this term keeps coming up, yet no one is really sure what it is.  It started in Germany in the 1920's and basically means anti-fascist or in German antifaschistisch. Most Germany parties from the SPD, CDU and the Greens to other parties accept this as a point of view considering Germany's Nazi past.  Yet DW.com asks is it only referring to all those opposed to fascism in Germany or to black clad anarchists and leftists facing police on German streets. The last such confrontation with police happened in Germany in Hamburg during the 2017 G20 summit. A famous scene from that time is pictured in DW.com. There the meaning becomes complex as the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) adopted the phrase and the disinctinve two flag logo for the 1932 election campaign, in Weimar Germany's last free election, which the Nazis could not win fully but with the left parties split emerged as winner. After the formation of the GDR, the German Democratic Republic in East Germany, the interwar KPD party veterans like Walter Ulbricht came to power in GDR. GDR became part of the Soviet bloc countries during the Cold War and used antifascist in a way that was synonymous with anticapitalism. This same movement then langusihed in the Germany of the early post war years under Cologne's former mayor, Korad Adenauer. In the 1970's and 1980's the left movement revived in Hamburg and Berlin, coalescing with a antinuclear movement and widespread protests against president Reagan's stationing of nuclear missiles on German soil aimed at the Soviet Union bloc. After the reunification the protests against coal, for climate change action, and for anti-globalization. There is even an overlap with anti-Zionism. Germany's internal intelligence agency says the antifa movement is the "main field of agitation" for autonomous leftist groups, with some groups supporting "militant actions." Yet when there are broad uncontroversial protests there can be people from all walks of life, not just the anarchist or far left groups.  So that the protests in the U.S. were met with comments of antifa - Saskia Esken of the SPD saying "58 and atifa. Obviously." To which the General Secretary of the CDU said "Against fascism, and for democracy and human rights. Without violence. Obviously, for me. It's sad that the chairwoman of the SPD lacks the strength to differentiate."  To which Esken says it is only a point of view that antifa refers to, not some action. To which the the youth organization of the Angela Merkel CDU/CSU alliance the Junge Union (founded 1947) replied: " 73 and appalled" getting the final word.  Search for a dictionary and you are left with no clear meaning either. DW.com says Germany's duden dictionary only says antifa refers to the " entirety of the movements and ideologies, which oppose fascism and national socialism."    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Coral Davenport of the NYT provides some of the basics of the Paris climate change agreement. This includes an effort to cut greenhouse gas emissions by half to avoid a situation in which atmospheric temperatures rise by 2 degrees Celsius or 3.6 degree Fahrenheit.  The earlier effort to negotiate an accord failed in 2009 in Copenhagen. This time all 186 countries were asked to signup with the USA and China, the No. 1 and No. 2 polluters and India leading the way. Germany is well on its way to self sufficiency through development of solar and wind energy with the German government leading the way, and France leads in the use of nuclear energy. How did this happen now? As Davenport points out there are scientific studies. But this is not the primary reason China is shifting.Davenport fails to emphasize the health concerns and pollution concerns that motivated China to shift away from coal. China's industrial revolution of the last 3 decades has come at a huge cost in pollution of air and water, and president Xi Jinping has decided to make the shift away from coal a top priority. It is estimated that mortality rates for areas of high coal use north of the Yangzte river have higher mortality rates than areas of lower use of coal south of the Yangzte river. The other big polluter India is shifting because it is learning from China's experience. Davenport mentions the resistance to the scientific evidence in the Republican party. As a result it is already clear that it lacks support in Congress and under a future Republican administration. In a fashion similar to healthcare, president Obama failed to create a consensus before proceeding in the hope that this would be better than waiting. However American industry is already moving away from coal as documented in Links- "The Trump executive order on coal and the continuing shift to natural gas." Utilities in the U.S. are making the shift away from coal because of the economics and planning ahead as governments can change every four years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The increase in natural gas supplies from shale in the U.S. is dampening the interest of energy companies in the development of nuclear reactors. It is also changing the whole trajectory for energy sources in the U.S. The Energy Information Administration's forecasts for new additions of power generation capacity 2010-2035 show that natural gas will be the dominant source with 58.1%, nuclear is only 4%. Wind is 13% and other renewables including solar is 16%, giving renewables about 29%. Coal and fossil fuels are at 8% and hydropower 1.6%. This is a major development in the energy industry, for the U.S. efforts to reduce dependence on imported energy supplies.

LyrArc Article Gist
The air quality around Chinese cities is worsening because of coal fired plants and increasing demand for energy, and because of exhaust from automobiles filling the highways. The air quality around Beijing violated the WHO standards more than 80% of the time during the fourth quarter 2008 period. China's Ministry of Environmental Protection says in a report that more than 25% of China's rivers, lakes and streams are too polluted to be used for drinking water. And acid rain is a problem in 200 of 440 cities it has monitored. Efforts to control the exhaust pollution from cars by putting driving restrictions in Beijing are not as effective. One report says that even after 20% of private cars are taken off the road each weekday, the 250,000 new cars that were added to Beijing's streets in the Jan-April 2010 period, have left things as bad as they were before.

LyrArc Article Gist
A traffic jam on Highway 110, leading from the border with Inner Mongolia to Beijing for 60 miles, is now passing 10 days, with traffic inching along at 3 miles per hour. With roadwork on a highway from Beijing to Tibet starting August 13, sections of a major road which circles Beijing have been closed. Chinese bought 13.6 million vehicles in 2009, compared to 9.4 million in 2008. China is building roads, but cannot keep up with this surge in automobile use, especially in Beijing. A study by IBM puts China at the top for "commuter pain," the pain suffered by drivers as they stay stuck on roads. In fact China's media reported that average driving speeds for Beijing could go as low as 9 miles per hour, if car sales in Beijing keep growing at the rate of 2000 new cars per day. According to the Beijing Transportation Research Center, Beijing will have 7 million vehicles by 2015. Beijing was once known for bicycles in the Mao era, and this could be the pace that traffic moves says the Center....

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says president Obama's second inaugural address missed the opportunity to bind old wounds with a reference to King on Martin Luther King day. The president chose to set forth a broader liberal agenda including climate change. The editorial points to the tone of the inaugural as setting the tone for the rest of the term and the possibility of return to the rancor that characterized the first term. "We the People" from the Consititution was mentioned several times in the sense of "collective action" that defined this text as government action. The programs of Medicare Medicaid and Social Security as "committments we make to each other." And the programs "do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great," which are seen by the Journal as not appropriate for an Inaugural address that rises above the fray of politics.

LyrArc Article Gist
As Japanese prime minister Noda prepares to restart the Oi nuclear plant in June 2012, former prime minister Naoto Kan, who was premier during the Fukushima nuclear disaster, answers questions in a parliamentary inquiry. He says he realized how dangerous nuclear power can be when it got to the point where the evalcuation of Tokyo was being considered, Japan was then on "the verge of national collapse." His fears were that a number of meltdowns could together " release into the air and sea many times, no, many dozens of times, many hundreds of times the radiation released by Chernobyl." The Japanese public has focussed on the parliamentary hearings because the previous inquiry is thought to have been perfunctory, and not really examined in depth all the issues the Fukushima disaster had raised, and the general feeling is that a proper public dialogue had not taken place. In contrast in Germany the issues had been discussed openly, and the Angela Merkel government which had been receptive to nuclear power reversed its stand on nuclear power. Germany is phasing out dependence on nuclear energy. Kan pointed out that the "nuclear village," the network of nuclear power companies, bureaucrats, and researchers, had hijacked national nuclear policy and was putting Japan back on the same path. He went so far as to compare it with the situation facing Gorbachev in Russia after Chernobyl: "Gorbachev said in his memoirs that the Chernobyl accident exposed the sickness of the Soviet system. The Fukushima accident did the same for Japan." In his assessment of what happened Kan said: "It is impossible to ensure safety sufficiently to prevent the risk of a national collapse. Experiencing the accident convinced me that the best way to make nuclear plants safe is not to rely on them, but rather to get rid of them."...