World leaders kick climate policy into the long grass

The significance of the Chinese proposal is that it indicates that China is willing to join Europe, the United States and others in a fantasyland of climate policy detached from policy reality. It is hard to believe how that outcome leads some to greater optimism on climate policy.
–Roger Pielke Jr, 31 August 2009
The way to see how it leads to some greater optimism is by decoding what the Chinese said. I’ve worked with a “Chinese Business Partner” from Hong Kong for about 30 years, on and off. Along the way I got have a bit of a clue about the ways in which the Chinese speak without saying anything…
You listen for the negative space. What ought to have been said but was not said. You also listen for the OOPART – Out Of Place Artifact.
Negative space:
1) There were no numbers given. There will be no reduction in Chinese carbon consumption unless they are stuck with a firm commitment with a size. Otherwise, you will get one new coal plant delayed in its startup by a week; the missed date will be claimed as reduction of coal consumption, and then it is back to business as usual.
2) There was no discussion of the evil of AGW. They don’t buy into the thesis.
3) There was no claim that the west would have to compensate. Do you really expect China to take a hit and not at least ask for the “gimmie” ?
OOPARTS:
1) They talked about change in proportion to GDP. The Chinese “angle” is that they ought to be allowed to produce just as much carbon PER $ or Euro OF GDP as the west. Given their much lower cost basis in dollars or Euro it is pretty clear that the “game” here is to say they get to produce MORE total carbon than the rest of us since their GDP is so low measured in our currencies. Now the second bit of this is that GDP is often measured “per capita” and they have one heck of a lot of capitas… This is sort of a ‘negative space’ issue in that they did not actually make it clear if it was total GDP or per capita, but the rule with Chinese negotiators is that if it is unsaid, it is interpreted as the one that is most in their favor unless and until you force the issue and get a statement to the contrary (preferably in writing and by a high ranking counter party…) This, IMHO, is the “smoking gun” that says China is NOT on board with the whole carbon reduction thing.
2) The mention of needing western partnership to achieve reductions. Any time a Chinese negotiator is talking about a ‘partnership’, check for your wallet. They are simply fishing for how much money the west will pony up if they look like they will play along. Will we fund a few dozen new “clean coal” or “carbon capture ready” coal plants in exchange for shutting down some of their oldest and most decrepit plants that are near death anyway? Will we transfer interesting technologies with licenses to manufacture (hey, if we are going to be buying a lot of windmills and flue scrubbers, someone will be making them at a profit: send license, China make!)
3) The claim that they had goals of some percent (was it 20%?) energy from renewables and would be planting forests for carbon capture. They are so starved for energy, and so much of the country is not near any infrastructure, that they have no real choice but to get a lot of their energy from ‘renewables’ (i.e. the old fashioned way of burning wood and damming rivers; but also some newer construction techniques and solar panels). Heck, they denuded a lot of their forests in stupid central planning schemes some time ago, they NEED to replant them for fiber and fuel. So they plant now, maybe with us sending buckets of money for “Carbon Credits” then in 1/4 century when ready to harvest, they cut and run. I could even see old growth being logged and new plantings being claimed as “new sequestration”. No Problem. And the one place where things like solar really makes sense is the rural village with one TV and a small well water pump. So China has the cheapest cost to manufacture solar panels and the largest rational need (no way to make a country sized grid in less than a decade or two). OK, now all they need is a western subsidy and it’s party time in Bejing.
There were other more subtile weasel words, but you get the picture.
Just remember that the cultural norm is not to say “You are wrong you idiot”, it is to say “I understand your issues and would like to work as a partner” while thinking “How can I fleece this idiot most efficiently while leaving them happy with the process?”
Heck, I could even see them working an angle where they take our technology licenses for mitigation gear, build the products to sell back to us, and ask for a share of the “carbon credit” money for the fact that they have forgone using the devices themselves so that we might have them faster to meet our goals… just to be helpful to a ‘partner’ …
BTW, for anyone who wants to try to spin these observations into some kind of denigration of Chinese: I was sitting on the same side of the table as my Chinese partner and we worked the contracts together, both making money. I admire the skill even if I can’t stretch the truth that much myself. I was just glad not to be on the other side of the table. (I was the ‘token white guy’ public face.) Then there is also the fact that I had a serious crush on a Chinese girl I grew up with (and who was my date at the High School Reunion). I am very much favorably inclined toward Chinese and their culture. Just don’t ever think you know what game is being played unless you are on their side in the planning sessions…
So my read on all this “China is on board” stuff is simple:
1) They aren’t
2) They do smell money
3) They don’t want to spook the marks by being “against” them
4) They are doing an initial volley in a 5 year “negotiation”
5) They expect to win big in the “Carbon Credit” casino
6) They will.
The only real question I see is which western politicians and countries will be most effectively and efficiently fleeced. (Done well, they will never even realize they were “had” and will likely advertise their great “partnership” and how satisfied they are with the “servicing” they have gotten!)
My guess is Germany and England will head the list, with some minor EU countries in tow. France is fairly good at working the angles itself, so I don’t expect it to get taken much (I do expect them to get some kinds of contracts out of it, probably for joint sales of something to OTHER countries. The French know how to cut a deal to sell stuff to places like, oh, Iran with a Chinese partner and be on the right side of the table… See the deals they have done for arms and nuclear gear, for example.) Russia will sit back and watch, trying to figure out how the Chinese are doing this, them emulate it a bit more ham handedly. Finally, the U.S.A. will be a mixed bag of some folks being taken, some being on the right side of the table, and some smart enough to let the “deal” go by.
That, BTW, is one of the major advantages of a capitalist society. The jokers who get taken go out of business leaving behind a more competent set of players. In central planned and socialist oligopolies, they just get a ‘bail out’ from the government and attend a conference where they announce their next grand plan… using your money…
BTW, if any Chinese companies need a “token white guy public face”, I’m experienced at it and like being on the winning side. Look good in a suit, know when to shut up and let the mark take the bait. Keep secrets well. Also like the “off the menu” Chinese food that can only be ordered by folks who grew speaking Chinese and know what to ask for…
(God I miss that. My partner would order so many interesting things that were never on any menu. And the staff were delighted to have someone who knew what to order, not just the usual stuff. I need to round up another Chinese friend with an expense account… Though he did have a good laugh at me when I ate the “little red peppers that you are not supposed to eat”. Heck, if they are in the food, how are you supposed to know not to eat them?! Was a bit hot, though. About like Uncle Ken’s Texas Chili 8-0 !! but worth it 🙂 We had some kind of 7 garlic beef tendon once that was a delight. Like 18 hour brisket in flavor and tenderness and LOTS of garlic. Yes, beef tendon. Amazing what those folks can do with parts of an animal we toss out…)
In summary: Expect “happy talk”. Do not expect any reduction in carbon emissions unless highly profitable from western money. Even then, check for hidden new emissions outside of the contract.