LyrArc Article Gist
Increasing regional tensions with a more assertive Japan and China. U.S. president Obama's so called "pivot to Asia," appears to have little impact. China has tended to look for its own security architecture in Asia that excludes the U.S. U.S. efforts to reduce tensions are being ignored by China in May-June 2014, as China asserts itself in waters that are in dispute with Vietnam. The lack of U.S. influence compares unfavorably with the situation that prevailed since 1900, when the U.S. had the most significant influence in Asian waters. It has more to do with a policy of withdrawal under the Obama administration than U.S. capabilities. The policy of withdrawal in the Middle East comes after much of the sacrifice had been made and the situation in Iraq changed, so that for a much smaller incremental effort the U.S. could have both lived up to its principles and ideals for democracy and freedom as well as win public opinion in the Arab countries of North Africa and the Middle East. This withdrawal in the Middle East has given Russia and China the wrong signal leading to more assertive stance in Europe and Asia, and creating uncertainty where little uncertainty existed about U.S. determination. Under whatever terms it is wrapped the policy of the Obama administration is one of withdrawal. It is dangerous because it will mean a more costly effort would be needed under a future administration to restore the situation which prevailed earlier- in which the U.S. has helped create a climate in which the entire region including China and Japan have prospered economically, without the region descending into a competition between Russia, China, Japan, South Korea and India. The Obama administration with its muddled policies has inadvertently created this situation....

LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the flaws in China's development model are shown by the Economist. Over half of the economy is dominatd by state run enterprises. And the remainder is also heavily influenced by local government and officials from the government. Financing goes through state run banks which lend to state run enterprises, and only a small fraction of lending goes to small businesses. These busineses are not actively looking to support innovation and new products. The other weakness that the Economist correctly points out, is that by contrast even in the 1960's, about 10 years into Japan's postwar development, quality control was a big thing with companies in Japan. The Deming Prize was seen as the most prestigious prize for Japanese companies, and Japanese engineers tried to learn everything they could about quality control to make Made in Japan mean high quality. They succeeded by the 1980's in making this happen, with leading global brands like Sony, Matsushita, Panasonic, Toyota, Honda, Canon and a host of other brands. If 1980 in China, is where Japan was in 1950, now about 30 years later there is nothing like what was seen happen in Japan in the area of quality and global brands. The area in which the freewheeling culture of capitalism has been most successful is the economic zone, a 2 hour drive between Guanghou and Shenzen. It manufactures mostly low tech goods like toys and apparel and shoes, and these manufacturing facilities are of low quality, with poor conditions for labor. With the efforts by the government to move to higher value added and high tech products these businesses came under pressure by mid 2007, with new labor laws, more enforcement, pollution control laws and resulting higher costs. As they felt the impact by mid 2008 from the higher costs, some businesses disappeared. Then another and even bigger problem hit these businesses. The global economic crisis, the shortage of credit in western countries to sustain import orders, and the rapid fall off of demand from highly indebted consumers in the USA, has led to closure of most of these businesses. The rapidity with which many of these businesses closed is amazing, as row after row of these buildings are now empty in the Guangzhou-Shenzen area. Another development is happening in Taiwanese firms like Hon Hai, that with little disclosure, make IPods, laptops, PC's, and other electronic products in the same area. At one point this firm employed 250,000 people in a industrial city sized factory campus. Now it is shifting production to places like Vietnam. Now Taiwanese reports say that the workforce of Hon Hai in Shenzen area will drop to 100,000. Other Taiwanese firms are also shifting production to other countries. Climate change and the heavily polluting industries that are widespread in China is one of the other flaws in the Chinese development model. Another is the lack of energy efficiency in these industries. With all these changes exposing the deeper flaws in the model China has used for development for the last 30 years, this a time for change in the way economic development takes place in China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, the oldest person on the U.S. Supreme Court dies at 87. The U.S. Supreme Court is unique in that there is no retirement age as in India and other countries. She died of pancreatic cancer. She is one of the rare jurists in that she continued to work almost to the end. She was unique in other ways because she got along well with colleagues on the court of different persuasion. Justice Scalia who was the complete opposite in thinking and views than Ginsburg said that this did not matter much as Ginsburg was "fun to be with." Former president Clinton nominated Ginsburg in 1993. Recently Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh joined Roberts, Alito, and Thomas,  for a 5-4 majority on the court for conservatives. Ginsburg was a woman's rights advocate in the 1970's. She will be missed mostly for her vigorous personality and feisty attitude to life working and being active even with her health condition. The death of Ginsburg means that the court is now deadlocked with 4 to 4 and no majority for conservatives or liberals. The country has also changed. Both conservatives and liberals claim they uphold the constitution of the country. Ginsburg saw this as the inclusiveness the founders intended- for women, and minorities. The conservatives see this also from the vantage of inclusiveness as the country has splintered into those who are largely college educated and tech savy, and the high school educated and less tech savy more rural and in small town that lost jobs and social services from the shift of manufacturing to China. The conservatives  see the lack of inclusiveness for the rural communities and small towns left out in the tech booms of the last three decades and shift of manufacturing overseas. Cultural attitudes add another layer to basic economic issues and a sense of alienation on both sides. In this climate and with an approaching election in 41 days the Republicans want to nominate their conservative choice supported by their Senate majority, and the Democrats want to block this appointment till after the election.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How will posterity view Angela Merkel. As she ends a fourth term this BBC News report says it will remain a contested legacy. Much of what went right has already been written. A woman, a pragmatic scientist who hewed to the center not just as a scientist but with a knack for politics. Much of her early period in office was one in which she had to tackle the eurozone crisis. The euro's weakness had its roots in the way Mr Kohl allowed eurozone membership for countries such as Greece without adequate entry requirements. Some of the other problems were also left behind by an overzealous mentor Helmut Kohl who pushed for German reunification that never really happened in terms of bringing all east Germans into the idea of the Federal Republic. These problems in a neglected eastern part of Germany around Dresden were never tackled by Merkel. They were social issues that Merkel's pragmatic thinking failed to grasp. Letting in migrants from Arab and African countries was a move that Merkel made without realizing the full implications. This policy was reversed but led to the emergence of extreme right wing sentiment in parts of the country. It is left to a future German leader to tackle the social and economic disparities that affect Germany today. As time passes people reflect and a more careful view prevails. Dr Rudiger Schmitt-Beck reflects this when he says that the Merkel years were about  a bizarre mix of modernization and backwardness. Merkel rejected nuclear energy after the events at Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan. As a scientist she was able to tackle such issues. Yet on the major social issues of the day Prof. Schmitt-Beck of the University of Mannheim, says she left Germany "grotesquely behind"- on child care, climate policy, digitization, infrastructure building, on demographic change. These are the issues that the Social Democrats and the Greens are standing up for today. Ironically Merkel may be remembered more for something that is not even mentioned in this BBC report. This is the European solidarity shown by action to financially support all EU countries including Italy with EU funding during the coronavirus pandemic.  This may be her biggest achievement because it will be lasting. Without it Europe would not be the better place it is today, resilient in the face of the pandemic.  Seen from outside Merkel will be seen as a German leader who failed to see the potential for India and other Asian countries with almost twice the population of China. Fascinated with 13 visits to China she studied Chinese history, politics and economics, says the WSJ. And did too little to balance Germany's close business and trade ties with China, with efforts in India and other countries. Seen from America as pointed out in the WSJ front page on September 23, Merkel made no effort to rebuild US relations with the Biden administration after the tumultuous period under presidents Obama with spying on her phone and with Mr. Trump over the EU's participation in NATO defense. She seemed resigned to a view that America had seen her best years, a belief that today does not exist anywhere in America. US president Biden's first phone call to Merkel was put off for a few days says the WSJ, and Merkel continued to build close ties with China, ignoring the fact that this was a new administration closer to that of presidents FDR and Harry Truman who did so much for Germany. And a president very different than any of Biden's five predecessors. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The full text of the letter is given here. In this letter the U.S. sets out some important facts about events that happened during the coronavirus crisis during the crucial 4 month period from December 2019 to March 2020. Every week lost in this time due to reasons of a lack of transparency, openness meant hundreds of thousands of people more infected and tens of thousands of deaths worldwide. There are questions of transparency, of openness and this raises questions about the manner in which the World Health Assembly operates with hundreds of small countries in Africa and Asia having votes equal to that of the U.S., India, Brazil, Mexico with votes taken of over 200 countries. The entire election process can now be seen as questionable, when over a billion people in one country alone such as India or hundreds of millions in Brazil and Mexico would have to bear the consequences of poor decisions made by small countries that can be swayed in one direction or another based on political bias and other considerations that have nothing to do with global health.  At the conclusion of the letter by the U.S. to the current WHO shaped by a controversial election in 2017 the following is stated about the standards set by Gro Harlem Brundtland and which helped the world prevent the SARS crisis which originated in China in 2003 from spreading to the large countries of the world India, Brazil, Mexico, and other such countries in Asia and Africa, Latin America, and the U.S. European Union. "In 2003, in response to the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in China, Director-General Harlem Brundtland boldly declared the World Health Organization’s first emergency travel advisory in 55 years, recommending against travel to and from the disease epicenter in southern China. She also did not hesitate to criticize China for endangering global health by attempting to cover up the outbreak through its usual playbook of arresting whistleblowers and censoring media. Many lives could have been saved had you followed Dr. Brundtland’s example." Even this does not come to grips with the flawed way in which the election of WHO head is done. It can no longer be relied on when there is the danger that lack of transparency can emerge in the WHO leadership itself because of a flawed process. It risks endangering the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions in countries such as India, Brazil, Mexico, as well as in the relatively small countries of Africa and Latin America where even basic water supplies are at risk but which could tilt elections at the World Health Assembly. Consider that a cyclone just hit the Indian state of West Bengal and Bangladesh on May 20 just as the coronavirus pandemic is spreading. That this region of 1.5 billion people had just 2 votes out of over 200 cast at the World Health Assembly in 2017 shocking. And even these votes cast based on old geopolitical considerations not how good the candidate is, and how good the country he is coming from is in terms of its record  on public health. The irony here is that private foundations in the advanced countries in the U.S. and Europe some of whom are major donors to WHO did not think that more experienced candidates in their own countries with a better record of public health such as in France or Germany are better qualified, in a flawed NGO support mentality left from the Clinton years. Basically the people in these large countries such as India, Brazil, Mexico were disenfranchised, when the austerity policies were consuming the European Union, and the U.S. had just elected a new administration itself groping for ways to reverse years of neglect of public services and infrastructure priorities. They would trust good leaders no matter where they come from, who have a record of transparency, leadership, and all the values we cherish together no matter where we come from. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Areddy describes the choices facing China's president Xi Jinping as he faces protests in Hong Kong demanding the resignation of Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying. Protestors are also calling for canceling of a plan to limit nominations for chief executive to a committee loyal to Beijing. Xi Jinping has experience with Hong Kong affairs as he held the portfolio for Hong Kong affairs as part of the leadership when he was vice president. There are precedents where Beijng has changed course, as it sees it important to put memories of Tiananmen protest suppression behind. In 2003 six years after Britain handed Hong Kong to China -under an agreement for "one country, two systems," that granted separate status and system of government to Hong Kong- an anti-subversion law was pulled back. And the unpopular Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa, a shipping magnate, resigned after 18 months. Beijing has to balance its concern for the "contagion effect" of protests on other parts of China, with the need to maintain the right climate for business and investment in Hong Kong and other financial centres. With slowing growth and limits to overexpanding credit, a crackdown in Hong Kong would further exacerbate problems with the international community, and create tensions in Taiwan about future reintegration with China. China warned foreigners not to interfere, and the American Consulate in Hong Kong stated it "strongly supports Hong Kong's well-established traditions and Basic Law protections of internationally recognized fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of expression and freedom of the press." The British government also pointed to Hong Kong's "fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to demonstrate," which were in the spirit of the 1997 transfer agreement....

LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Inozemtsev of the Institute of Post-Industrial Studies in Moscow, asks the question wht if the Russian economy shows no growth in 2017, and 2015-2016 become the beginning of a serious downturn. If oil prices remain low for an extended period as now looks likely with factors such as shale oil technologies, Iranian oil, and Saudi policy, playing an increasingly long term role, Russia could face some of the problems former finance minister, Alexei Kudrin, other business leaders including head of Sberbank, warned about. A major problem that Inozemtsev points to is the change in the business climate for foreign investment in 2012-2016 as the Russian economy looks more inward, and the departure of many foreign companies. During the period 2000-2008, a major boost to the economy came from foreign investment which brought with it management and technological improvements. No emerging market country, including China, can have a bright future without access to new technologies and investments from foreign investment. The current period starting in 2009 stands in sharp contrast to the earlier period with the Russian economy lacking the boost from foreign investment, facing capital outflows, and international conflicts creating a long term effect on oil prices. Russia needed time to move its economy away from commodity dependence through technological improvements and investment, yet this does not appear to be happening, raising serious questions....

LyrArc Article Gist
India's emissions rates up by 57% and China's by 34% in the past decade. U.S. contributes 25% of the world's greenhous gas emissions.

LyrArc Article Gist
A whole range of issues can be seen in the debt crises in developing countries. The margin for error shrinks with poor governance, lack of honest assessment and transparency for finances, wars and conflicts within or outside the countries, living beyond their means, lack of focus on development, infrastructure that is unproductive or unaffordable including some Belt and Road Initiative infrastructure at higher interest rates. Countries that are dependent on overseas remittances, tourism, that were hit hard by the pandemic have seen their finances further weakened reducing the margin for error even more to the point that the smallest tipping point can lead to huge crises. Once the finances are weak all it takes is an external tipping point that creates serious crisis. The war in Ukraine with shortages of wheat, fertilizer and skyrocketing oil prices acted as that tipping point. Because this was a major blow the crises have a level of magnitude that is more than a payments crisis. One sees this in South Asia in Sri Lanka and Pakistan, and in the Middle East for countries such as Egypt and Tunisia shown in this WSJ report. It is now not simply a crisis but a crisis of great magnitude because in the case of Sri Lanka and Pakistan this WSJ report says that both countries foreign exchange reserves have dwindled to the point where they can pay for only one or two months of imports according to central bank data, analysts and IMF. This crisis has affected countries that were seeing steady foreign investment such as Turkey for decades, then a sharp falloff in foreign investment with a change in the climate for foreign investment. The crisis has taken the form of high inflation, significant depreciation of currency that makes imports costlier so that shrinking revenues from loss of remittances, tourism, or other sources will now have less value in supporting import needs. Lack of a credible path can delay setting a path out of the crisis. The $1.5 billion fuel and electricity subsidy made by the prime minister of Pakistan in late February was done without IMF approval leading to the IMF program having to be renegotiated. Lack of national political and cultural consensus on a solution simply makes it that much more difficult to find the way through it. In this regard South Korea was able to tackle the 1997 financial payments crisis effectively because of a national consensus. The situation in Egypt- Egypt has borrowed $20 billion from the IMF since 2016., placing it second to Argentina in aid from IMF since 1980's.  In 2020 and 2021 Egypt' government spent more than 40% of its revenue servicing its debt, and is forecast to do the same in 2022. The situation in Tunisia- A shortage of sugar, flour, and other critical supplies, and government delaying wage payments to civil servants. The government got $400 million in financing last month from the World Bank and hopes to secure a lifeline from the IMF. Compared to the period between the 2 World Wars the two bright spots are China and India where lessons of the past of civil wars, religious or political conflict, and poor governance, lack of knowledge of how the western countries industrialized and modernized, was replaced with the conviction that drives patient effort, courage in the face of adversity, honesty, and humility to learn including from western countries that have forged their own path through the same difficult road. The most difficult experiences have offered lessons which were learned- for South Korea the Korean War and invasion from the north, China the civil war and Japanese invasion, for India the partition of India and million of refugees. Stagnation from stumbled efforts also taught lessons, the Great Leap Forward in China, the License Raj with corruption in India.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Obama calls for countries to join together for action on the important global issues- nuclear proliferation and disarmament, poverty and hunger, climate change, economic growth, financial crisis- without naming them.

LyrArc Article Gist
Natural Gas is set at a target of 15% by 2030 of India's energy mix from 6% in 2024. India is learning from China's experience where LNG is used to fuel heavy and medium commercial vehicles. As new LNG terminals to gas pipelines infrastructure takes time to be built the use of SSNLG or Small Scale Natural Liquified Gas projects is being adopted to speed up shift to natural gas which costs less and is less damaging for climate change.

LyrArc Article Gist
As OPEC members met again in June 2015 for the first time since the meeting in November 2014, there is a sense that OPEC no longer exerts the same influence on oil prices. There are 4000 oil companies in the U.S., says one U.S. State Department official, even if OPEC were to cut production the cuts could be matched by shale oil producers in the U.S. quickly increasing output. This is the new reality, say experts. OPEC expects to keep production at the same level of the current production ceiling of 30 million barrels a day in place for the 7th meeting in over 3 years. Algeria and Nigeria, both hurt badly by the drop in oil price, have called for cuts but failed to persuade the Saudis. With Russia unwilling to join a coordinated production cut, there is not much talk about doing this. The Saudis and Iraq have continued to pump more oil, with April 2015 production of 30.84 million barrels a day the highest monthly average since 2012. Other factors also remain in the minds of the Saudis and other producers such as the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar- policies on climate change, use of less energy and more from friendlier sources for the same amount of economic output demonstrated by countries such as Germany, advances in technology, energy saving transitions in emerging markets such as China and India....

LyrArc Article Gist
Chinese company investments in Korean companies are not doing well because of widespread feeling among Korean workers in these companies that the Chinese company is only interested in transferring the Korean company technology to China. Also hopes of selling products in the Chinese market have not been realized. Instead the experience is that the Korean company ends up up laying off most of the employees after being hollowed out. In 2003 BOE a Chinese company paid $380 million for Hydis, a Korean maker of displays for cellphones and laptop computers. After the transfer of technology to build a new display panel factory in Beijing, Hydis was left o hollow out and went into bankrupptcy protection in 2006. Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation bought a controlling stake in Ssangyong Motor of South Korea in 2004. Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation, one of China's top state owned companies saw this as a push abroad, as China accumulated large dollar reserves from foreign trade, and a chance to acquire foreign technolgy for SUV and luxury car manufacture. Shanghai Automotive has partnerships with GM and VW to use foreign technology to make cars in China. The Korean economy after the financial crisis of 1997 was opening up to foreign investment. In this climate the Korean side was expecting China to open its market to Korean cars from Ssangyong, but this did not happen. Instead Korean workers say the company transferred technology to its Chinese parent, and after 5 years the partnership is falling apart in protests by the workers, layoffs and bitter battles amid declining sales. The Korean workers even have a word for such foreign companies that have come to Korea, during Korea's opening to foreign investors after the 1997 banking crisis, when Korean firms went for fire-sale prices. That word is "meoktwi", a slang term that means "a thief who eats and runs away." This has hurt China's reputation in South Korea, and its reputation as an enlightened investor in other countries. It also is what may be happening with Taiwanese investment in China in this downturn. Companies like Hon Hai, with its Chinese subsidiary Foxconn, are reported by the Economist to be shrinking their Chinese operations in a large industrial city sized campus employing 250,000 workers in the Shenzen area, to 100,000 workers. That factory city made laptops, PC's cellphones for Western companies using foreign technology....

LyrArc Article Gist
Thomas Friedman of the NYT sees a climate change as an area in which Trump has ignored the information of eminent scientists. He sees a weakness of the Trump administration in Trump's putting no importance to briefings by experts from climate change to national security briefings. Friedman sees Russia and hacking as a major issue facing the new Trump administration, including the new hearings in Congress from leading Republicans on the cyberattacks.

LyrArc Article Gist
Awareness about climate change is increasing. A poll in 2017 shows 61% of people in 38 countries seeing it as a big threat. Only terrorists inspired bigger fear. Even with the U.S. withdrawal from the climate change agreement many cities and states in the U.S. including California and New York are committed to the goals set in the Paris Accords. China is making a shift away from coal and fossil fuels. Yet the huge demands in Asia, particularly India as it shifts from a rural to an urbanized economy, mean that the shift away from fossil fuels is going to be very difficult. In the last decade 2006-2016 energy demand in Asia increased by 40%, according to the Economist, oil and coal use increased by about 3% a year and natural gas at 5.2% a year. Solar energy and wind power use is increasing and solar becoming cost efficient. Yet Asia still depends on fossil fuels. Even the use of electric cars in China as it pushes for higher numbers of electric vehicles means use of energy coming from a electricity grid powered two thirds by coal, producing more carbon dioxide than some very efficient gasoline driven car models. There are short term costs in the shift from coal but this comes with a better cleaner air demanded by urban residents, and less costs in health. In certain countries like India the costs are to be balanced with the need to tackle rural poverty.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's energy efficient industry is a role model for the western world and for India and China. For years Japan has had a national consensus on consuming less energy an industry has focused on developing energy efficent technologies and investing in it even when oil prices were low. Japan wants to now contribute to the world in this area at the G8 summit on the island of Hokkaido. According to the International Energy Agency in Paris, Japan consumes half as much energy per dollar worth of economic activity as the European Union or the United States, and one-eighth as much as India or China in 2005. According to the Japanese Economic Ministry data corporate Japan has kept its energy consumption annually at a billion barrels of oil since the early 1970's even as the country's economy doubled in size during the 1970's and 1980's. The Japanese steel industry invested $45 billion dollars between 1972 to 2006 in developing energy saving technologies, according to the Japan Iron and Steel Federation. By capturing heat and gases that go into waste JFE Steel at its Keihin mill on Tokyo Bay uses it to power generators that produce 90% of the plant's electricity. The Japanese government is now pushing an initiative that sets Japan's level of energy conservation as targets of global industries. For instance the group leader of JFE's climate change policy group says that by adopting Japanese conservation technologies the global steel industry could reduce carbon emissions by 300 million tons a year. The sector approach advocated by Japan means setting the same numerical goals for all companies in an industry, regardless of location. At next week's summit meeting Japan willl back an initiative that sets its conservation induced energy levels as the new standards for global industries. This will also promote the sale and use of Japanese energy saving technologies around the world....