ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “China”

Security

How Edward Snowden’s New Leaks Are Distracting From The Conversation He Wanted

By Hayes Brown on Jun 17, 2013 at 1:20 pm

Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden (Credit: The Guardian)

Two weeks ago, the first leaks regarding the National Security Agency’s troubling spying programs’ became public, leading to calls for increased scrutiny in how these actions affect the American public. In the intervening weeks, however, the focus has shifted away from the potential violation of civil liberties and towards the functions of the NSA in general — and that’s a problem.

The revelations to the Guardian of the NSA’s secret court orders to siphon metadata from the majority of Americans’ cell phone conversations launched wide-ranging concern over the program. That only increased with the disclosure of further programs from the agency — with codenames like PRISM and BLARNEY — that allow access to the content of information sent across some of the Internet’s most popular platforms. The response from privacy advocates across the political spectrum has been condemnation of the programs’ secrecy and overarching intrusiveness on the part of the federal government.

However, that focus on the potential violations of civil liberties is being undercut the more former NSA contractor Edward Snowden reveals. The shift began with the news that President Obama had signed off on a directive to begin planning for how the United States could bring to bear offensive capabilities in cyberspace and against whom. A summary of the directive had been made public months earlier, but the directive itself had remained classified and secret until it was first reported in the Guardian. While the previous leaks had been related to the public’s right to know about what actions the government was taking against U.S. citizens, the cyberwar document could not be considered the same.

Likewise, the next scoop featured what was touted as an all-seeing system through which the NSA could easily sort through where the communications data it collects came from — including the United States. Its existence has caused no small amount of trouble for Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who had previously indicated to Congress that the NSA did not collect this type of information from Americans without a warrant. “Not wittingly, there are cases where they could inadvertently perhaps collect, but not wittingly,” Clapper told Congress at the time. What the program — known as Boundless Informant — revealed, however, went beyond the information collected on U.S. citizens, instead also detailing the NSA’s collection work from networks in Iran, India, and Pakistan.
Read more

Climate Progress

Heartland Institute’s Chinese Academy of Sciences Fantasy

By Climate Guest Blogger on Jun 16, 2013 at 10:54 am

Update: The Chinese Academy of Sciences has released an official response to Heartland’s “misleading statement”, which reads in part:

The Heartland Institute published the news titled “Chinese Academy of Sciences publishes Heartland Institute research skeptical of Global Warming” in a strongly misleading way on its website, implying that the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) supports their views, in contrary to what is clearly stated in the Translators’ Note in the Chinese translation. The claim of the Heartland Institute about CAS’ endorsement of its report is completely false…

If the Heartland Institute does not withdraw its false news or refuse to apologize, all the consequences and liabilities should be borne by the Heartland Institute. We reserve the right for further actions to protect the rights of CAS and the translators group.

by Dana Nuccitelli, via Skeptical Science

As Cook et al. 2013 (also known as The Consensus Project) showed, the consensus in the peer-reviewed scientific literature that humans are causing global warming has been growing over the past two decades.  In 2011, 98% of papers taking a position on the cause of global warming agreed that humans are causing it.

consensus growth

Percentage of “global warming” or “global climate change” papers endorsing the consensus among only papers that express a position endorsing or rejecting the consensus.  From Cook et al. (2013).

However, as Graham Readfearn recently documented, over those same two decades, fossil fuel interests have engaged in a number of campaigns to cast doubt on the existence of the consensus on human-caused global warming.  Convincing the public that this settled science is still in dispute has long been a top priority for industry groups.

consensus vs. denial

The results of Cook et al. 2013 juxtaposed with some fossil fuel-funded campaigns to deny the scientific consensus.  Image by jg.

Read more

Climate Progress

IEA: CO2 Rose 1.4% In 2012, Climate Catastrophe Looms, Delaying Action Until 2020 Costs World $3.5 TRILLION!

By Joe Romm on Jun 10, 2013 at 7:15 pm

So the good news is that the International Energy Agency reports U.S. emissions dropped in 2012 “while total CO2 emissions growth in China was one of the lowest in the last decade.” China’s annual carbon pollution now exceeds our by 60%!

The IEA sums up the not so good news in this slide:

Yes we are headed toward up to 9°F warming if we keep listening to the do nothing and do little crowd. And that, according to Executive Director Maria van der Hoeven, has “potentially disastrous implications in terms of extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and the huge economic and social costs that these can bring.

Doing nothing to reduce carbon pollution this decade also has a staggering net cost of $3.5 trillion — assuming that post-2020 we then tried to get back on the 2 C (3.6 F) pathway, as the report explains:

Delaying stronger climate action to 2020 would come at a cost: $1.5 trillion in low-carbon investments are avoided before 2020 but $5 trillion in additional investments would be required thereafter to get back on track.

The cost of staying on the 2C path this decade is not costly. IEA Chief Economist Fatih Birol, who is the report’s lead author, said “We identify a set of proven measures that could stop the growth in global energy-related emissions by the end of this decade at no net economic cost.”
In this “4-for-2 C Scenario, global energy-related greenhouse-gas emissions are 8% (3.1 Gt CO2 equivalent) lower in 2020 than the level otherwise expected,” thanks to 4 key strategies
Read more

Climate Progress

U.S. And China Aim To Phase Down Use Of Potent Greenhouse Gases Known As HFCs

By Ryan Koronowski on Jun 8, 2013 at 7:12 pm

The United States and China announced on Saturday that they will work together and with other countries to “phase down” the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), which are extremely potent greenhouse gases. A global phaseout would be the equivalent of cutting 90 gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions by 2050.

President Barack Obama and President Xi Jinping just finished a two-day meeting in California initially thought to be more of an unscripted chance for the two leaders to forge a personal relationship than a meeting with any specific policy agenda. This is Xi’s first meeting with Obama as the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, which is the analogue to the Chinese presidency. Recently China has made news on plans to cut carbon emissions but then appeared to partially walk some of that news back. The fact that powerful greenhouse gases were on the agenda during their talks is a welcome sign. And if the so-called “Group of Two” regularly acts to reduce the use of substances that cause climate change, it makes it much more likely that the rest of the world will agree to do the same.

Congressional Democrats urged the President to bring up HFCs during the meeting in a letter on Wednesday. According to the White House, the specific agreement between China and the U.S. reads:

Regarding HFCs, the United States and China agreed to work together and with other countries through multilateral approaches that include using the expertise and institutions of the Montreal Protocol to phase down the production and consumption of HFCs, while continuing to include HFCs within the scope of UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol provisions for accounting and reporting of emissions.

HFCs are used in air conditioning, refrigeration, and if released, stay in the atmosphere for 15 years. Their use has skyrocketed as a replacement for chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), the ozone-destroying compounds whose production was banned in 1990 through a global agreement known as the Montreal Protocol. This agreement was signed in 1987 and required reductions in CFC use but an amendment in 1990 required a complete phaseout. Every country in the world is a party to this agreement. At the time, experts saw HCFs (and HCFCs, which were eventually regulated under the Montreal Protocol) as “one of the best substitutes for reducing stratospheric ozone loss.” In the 1990s, all new vehicle air conditioning systems began to use HFCs.

Yet HFCs are powerful greenhouse gases. While carbon dioxide is the most famous human emission that causes climate change, other so-called “super pollutants” are responsible for nearly half of global warming. HFCs are one of these super pollutants. Automobile manufacturers are aware that the air conditioning systems they sell contain substances that do this, and they encourage consumers to recycle their vehicles so that chemicals like HFCs can be reclaimed.

Read more

Security

What’s At Stake In Obama’s Meeting With Chinese President Xi Jinping

By Hayes Brown on Jun 7, 2013 at 1:33 pm

Obama and then-Vice President Xi meet in 2012 (Credit: Reuters)

President Obama will meet face-to-face on Friday evening with Chinese President Xi Jinping, in an informal meeting that has many hoping for a new start on many of the issues that plague the relationship between the two countries.

The meeting, at a desert estate in Rancho Mirage, CA, was something of a surprise when it was first announced two weeks ago. The brainchild of outgoing National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, who flew to Beijing last week to help put the final touches on the event, it’s hoped that the two leaders’ one-on-one encounter will help forge something of a personal relationship between them.

Xi only formally took office as the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, their analogue to the presidency, in Nov. 2012, making this his first meeting with Obama in this role. A senior White House official described the meeting as a chance to “get to know and to start work with the guy who the President will be dealing with over the next four years.”

For two countries that some have described as potentially forming a “Group of Two” in setting the agenda for the next century, the meeting is an unscripted chance for the leaders to hash out their own visions of what that would look like. Xi brings to the table a history with the United States, forged in his time spent as an student living and conducting research in Iowa, and leadership of a country still attempting to determine its own path of growth. Meanwhile, Obama’s foreign policy has attempted to steer itself towards Asia in recent years, shifting its focus away from the Middle East, a move that has drawn concern from China.

While issues of contention such as accusations of cyber-espionage originating in China will dominate speculation before the event itself, there are several areas where the United States and China share key interests. Combating climate change, an issue that Obama has advocated strong action on, is one where China has traditionally been seen as antagonistic to American goals. However, recent announcements from Beijing on reducing carbon emissions could prove to be a welcome starting point for discussions between the two leaders.
Read more

Climate Progress

June 5 News: China Noncommittal On Carbon Cap

By Ryan Koronowski on Jun 5, 2013 at 10:06 am

China, contrary to previous reports, will not announce a plan to adopt an absolute cap on carbon emissions at the UN talks in Germany. [Bloomberg]

China’s Chief Climate Negotiator Su Wei reaffirmed his nation’s commitment to lower emissions relative to economic output while dismissing reports that it will adopt an absolute cap on greenhouse gases.

The Financial Times and Independent newspapers both said last month that China is looking to introduce a cap in 2016. The Independent cited a proposal by the National Development and Reform Commission, the economic planning agency where Su works. The FT cited Jiang Kejun, an NDRC carbon-policy researcher.

“The paper quoted an expert,” Su said today in an interview in Bonn, where two weeks of climate talks began yesterday. “It’s not necessarily presenting the view of the government or the NDRC. The NDRC would reaffirm that we have committed to a carbon-intensity target by 2020.”

Su’s comments are the first by a senior Chinese negotiator since the reports were published. While not an outright denial, they suggest China isn’t ready to announce a cap at the United Nations talks in Germany, where such a move may have spurred other nations to step up measures against global warming. …

China’s current goal is to reduce emissions per dollar of economic output by 40 percent to 45 percent in 2020, from 2005 levels. With a growing economy, that may still allow emissions to rise, whereas an absolute cap would set a carbon ceiling.

According to the American Petroleum Institute (!), the State Department is considering one final public hearing on the Keystone pipeline this summer. [The Hill]

Top scientists told the State Department that the draft environmental impact statement on the Keystone pipeline is “without merit in many critical areas.” [InsideClimate News]

A House bill would almost entirely cut EPA out of regulating coal ash. [The Hill]

The world’s largest coal company is looking to install solar panels to reduce its energy costs. [Renew Economy]

The Koch brothers are behind recent efforts to weaken Maine’s Renewable Portfolio Standard. [Bangor Daily News]

Google is touting its support for a 2012 legislative effort by Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) to strip the EPA of its ability to regulate mercury and other toxic emissions. [DeSmogBlog]

Read more

Economy

119 Dead After Chinese Poultry Factory Catches Fire With Hundreds Locked Inside

By Alan Pyke on Jun 3, 2013 at 9:33 am

Photo credit: Xinhua News Agency

The death toll in a fire at a poultry slaughterhouse in northeastern China continues to rise, from an initial count of 43 deaths reported late Sunday night to 119 as of early Monday morning. There were over 300 workers locked inside the factory at the time of the fire, and China’s Xinhua state news service reported that “about 100 workers have managed to escape” despite locks on the plant’s gate. The fire, which began around 6:00 am local time during a shift change, burned for six hours before firefighters were able to extinguish it.

A similar tragedy featuring locked-in workers in the U.S. in 1911 helped galvanize the workplace safety movement, but the deadly fire at Jilin Baoyuanfeng Poultry’s Mishazi plant is a reminder that no such sweeping reform has followed previous calamities for Chinese workers. Locked or blockaded fire exits exacerbated the loss of life in a 1993 fire that killed 87 factory workers in southern China, and another in 1999 that killed dozens more.

Yet Reuters notes that locked or inaccessible fire exits remain common in Chinese factories, in part because “regulations can be easily skirted by bribing corrupt officials.” Geoffrey Crothall of the workers’ rights organization China Labour Bulletin told the New York Times that “many factories are locked for what the owners or managers consider to be security reasons.”

Coming on the heels of fatal workplace accidents in Cambodia (3 dead) and Bangladesh (1,127 dead), and amid news that a Chinese agriculture company is attempting to buy the largest American pork producer, the Mishazi fire underscores concerns about the interplay between globalization and worker safety around the world.

Health

Chinese Meat Firm With Terrible Food Safety Record Buys The Largest Pork Producer In The U.S.

By Aviva Shen on May 31, 2013 at 1:00 pm

Smithfield pigs (Credit: Karen Kasmauski/Science Faction/Corbis)

Two global meat giants with shady food safety histories are planning to merge in hopes of becoming the most powerful meat producer in the world. Smithfield Foods, the largest pork producer in the U.S., has been bought by China’s Shuanghui International Holdings Limited for $4.7 billion. If deal is cleared by Smithfield shareholders and the U.S. government, the global meat industry, controlled by just a handful of companies, will become even less competitive than it already is.

With one giant conglomeration controlling most of the meat market, food safety standards may drop to even more abysmal depths. Neither Smithfield nor Shuanghui have shown much interest in reforming their production practices, even after sickening thousands. In 2011, a Shuanghui plant was caught feeding their pigs an illegal additive, clenbuterol, to speed muscle growth. Five people were charged with harsh criminal sentences and dozens of others were punished. A month after the discovery, nearly 300 people fell violently ill from eating clenbuterol-tainted pork.

Smithfield, meanwhile, routinely abuses animals, employees, food safety, and the environment. In 1997, two slaughterhouses owned by the company were found guilty of dumping waste in a major Virginia river. Smithfield was fined $12.6 million for nearly 7,000 violations of the Clean Water Act — but that didn’t stop them from cutting dangerous corners in other areas. Millions of gallons of waste from Smithfield factories is dumped in enormous lagoons that easily overflow and have contaminated rivers. In 2010, a Humane Society video exposed horrific conditions inside a Smithfield factory. The company pledged to reform their practices within ten years, but it has yet to be determined if Smithfield will keep the promise now that they have been sold to Shuanghui.

The merger could also mean Smithfield’s factory farms will expand even more aggressively to keep up with new demand. Though Americans are stereotyped as ravenous meat-lovers, pork consumption in China dwarfs that in the U.S. by a staggering 41.6 million tons a year. China’s pork production has shot up dramatically in the past few decades and now comprises half the pork in the entire world:

On the other side of the globe, Americans are eating less pork — and less meat in general. The new, intensive demand from China will likely bolster and expand the factory farming operations that might have declined if Americans continue to trend away from industrial pork.

Climate Progress

How China May Have Just Changed The Climate Game

By Zack Beauchamp on May 30, 2013 at 3:40 pm

Last week, the Chinese government made a critical move toward placing a cap on the amount of carbon dioxide it would emit. That’s a significant decision especially when seen in context of the local emissions permit trading schemes being tried out around the country. Depending on how tight the cap is, this could be a big deal in its own right: China is the world’s largest and fastest-growing emitter. Its citizens are already suffering as a consequence.

But the impact of the Chinese decision could be even broader. Understanding why requires seeing climate change as an issue that’s every bit as much about the structure of international politics as it is about domestic policy or environmental science.

That climate change is a principally international issue should be obvious. Though American CO2 emissions have fallen 13 percent since 2007, we’ve just hit 400 atmospheric CO2 parts per million — a level last reached several million years ago, when the Earth was about 14 degrees Fahrenheit hotter than it is today. That’s partly because the U.S. hasn’t dropped off enough, but also in large part because the rest of the world has ramped up its carbon burning. Globally, we emit at least 48 percent more than we did in 1992.

The question of how to stop this destructive trend is usually posed in reference to this-or-that meeting or specific initiative: what will be accomplished at Bonn? How can we better comply with the Kyoto framework? But whether the global climate agenda will succeed in any specific sense depends on deeper issues about what the structure of international politics permits. Are states capable of cooperating to reduce emissions given the realities of international politics? Why wouldn’t they be? What could get them on board?

There’s a metric ton of research on these questions. I’m sure you’ll bear with me while I greatly simplify it.

Read more

Security

Why Iran May Pose A Greater Cybersecurity Risk Than China

By Andrea Peterson on May 24, 2013 at 1:30 pm

China and Iran have shared a position as cyber-bogeymen over the past year, but a new report from the Wall Street Journal about Iranian infiltration of U.S. energy firms shows why their cyber-assaults could pose a greater immediate threat to U.S. national security.

While China pursues aggressive cyber-espionage campaigns against major U.S. companies and news sources, Iranian-backed hackers are more overtly hostile — targeting critical infrastructure vulnerable to sabotage or engaging in disruptive economic actions, like when Iranian-backed hackers leveraged data centers to wage a massive distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack against financial institutions.

From a strategic standpoint, the differences between the Chinese and Iranian strategies make sense. The Chinese government is interested in the long game and is a key player in the global market, while as Tom Kellerman, Vice President of cybersecurity firm Trend Micro, told the Wall Street Journal, “Iran has been successfully ostracized from global economics” so destructive cyber attacks serve “not only empower themselves but to signal to the Western world they are capable in cyberspace.” Proving that capability may be especially important to Iran because its nuclear program was the target of Stuxnet malware, reportedly jointly developed by U.S. and Israeli cyber-forces.

The more recent Iranian-backed attacks go a step further than outside disruptions like the DDoS attacks according to U.S. officials, showing that hackers penetrated the computer networks running energy companies and gained access to the software controlling oil and gas pipelines. With access to that control-system software, hackers could potentially manipulate the flow of fuel, possibly even trigger power outages — something that could have truly devastating national security implications, especially considering that about 85 percent of the energy infrastructure the Department of Defense depends on is commercially owned.

In a March worldwide threat assessment statement to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the Director of National Intelligence identified cybersecurity threats as the top threat facing the United States, specifically noting while “advanced cyber actors” like Russia or China were unlikely to launch a devastating attack on our power grid, but “less advanced but highly motivated actors could access some poorly protected U.S. networks that control core functions, such as power generation, during the next two years.”

A report on the vulnerability of the electric grid released by the offices of Congressman Edward Markey (D-MA) and Henry Waxman (D-CA) last week suggests a substantial number of those networks are poorly protected, with many only implementing mandatory cybersecurity measures from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) that are often several years behind the current cyber-threat landscape.

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up