An interesting article, reflecting what anyone who has been alive since the 1960s has long predicted, China's economic miracle will go up in a cloud of pollution if it follows the western path of industrialization instead of the new frontier of perpetual ecologically sustainable development. The comments below raise some interesting questions. Is China's investment in green tech simply a green washing marketing campaign to put one over on the international development community and to sell green tech abroad?
The comment below illustrates the false choice that is a prevalent perspective on economic development, that decreased environmental quality and human health are the cost of increasing economic prosperity. The statement is pure illogic. Practically speaking, the tradeoff works when the environment is pristine and when the human population and economy, and associated environmental degradation is low. After 200 years of industrialization and exponential population and economic growth and environmental impacts, the tradeoff begins to unravel and reveals the essential interrelationship between the environment and the economy. After a point, increases in economic prosperity decrease environmental quality to the point where it starts to compromise human health and economic productivity. This unfortunate understanding prevents pursuing green solutions, which empower and expanding and durable, ecologically powered economic prosperity that enhances not only economic productivity but environmental quality as well.
Excerpts:
Cancer is now the leading cause of death in the Asian country; it's linked to one in four deaths nationwide. Lung cancer is the most common form.
, , , In rural areas, lung cancer is less dominant. Liver, lung and stomach cancers each accounts for about one fifth of cancer deaths. A Chinese farmer's risk of liver cancer is more than three times the worldwide average. Rural Chinese people die of stomach cancer at twice the global average. Both types of cancer are linked to consumption of polluted water. According to the Chinese government itself, half of the country's rivers and more than three out of of four lakes and reservoirs are too polluted to provide safe drinking water even after treatment. But those waters nonetheless supply huge numbers of people.
Comment: I'm not going to deny that China is polluted or that pollution can have health effects, but some context is in order here.
1) Life expectancy in China has increased from 62 to over 73 since 1970 (source: World Bank). Cancer is generally an old person's disease, so we would expect cancer rates to increase. Furthermore, because the age distribution has shifted upwards due to the one child policy, you would expect to see a higher cancer rate. The numbers need to be adjusted for age. Does this explain the entire increase? I doubt it, but it does provide some explanation.
Would it be better for China to return to its previous level of development had live shorter lives? I think that would be a tough sell. "You'll die sooner, but at least it won't be from cancer!"
2) "According to the Chinese government itself, half of the country's rivers and more than three out of of four lakes and reservoirs are too polluted to provide safe drinking water even after treatment." How much clean water did they have when China was impoverished? Access to clean drinking water is a major problem in most poor countries, so this is a problem that probably has been going on for decades if not centuries.
June 20, 2011 at 09:05PM 