Put aside that the Kyoto Protocol is fatally flawed, based on bogus number that even supporters admit would have little impact on their own much-vaunted (but equally useless) computer model predictions. The fact is, where it matters, no one cares.

China is exempt from the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol, given a pass because it argued that the "world's factory" needed more growth to finish emerging from the status of a developing country. Sure. Whatever. But even if China, as one of the planet's largest producers of greenhouse gases, was included in Kyoto, it wouldn't have mattered.

As illustrated on Car Free Day, one of the world's most carefully controlled populations under the rule of one the world's most enduring dictatorships simply ignored the government-supported environmental initiative.

China will be hosting the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing. The population at large is strongly supportive of the Olympic Games. National pride matters a great deal to the Chinese, both the government elite and the masses. In a dictatorship like China, it matters even more. A crisis in pride is a crisis for the government, because in a dictatorship, the Party and the State are one.

But despite the shared investment in having the Games be a success, the population drew the line when the government instituted a Chinese version of Car Free Day as a means of fighting the pollution that poses a serious risk to the Games. Just for one day, certain areas of the capital and other cities were off limits to cars.

The Chinese press (a mouthpiece for the government) heavily promoted the importance of Car Free Day:

Today's Car-Free Day is significant both for China and the rest of the world.

It is the first time that 108 Chinese cities will take part in the annual global event, which dates back to the 1950s.

China is an important participant in the campaign. The country became the world's second-largest auto market and third-largest carmaker last year.

It has also become the second-largest greenhouse gas producer in the world, and is rapidly catching up with the United States, the largest emitter.

While Car-Free Day in Beijing got a lukewarm response two years ago, the keen participation of 108 cities this year shows growing public concern about the traffic and environmental problems caused by cars.

Today, all cars will be barred from selected areas in these 108 cities. People will be encouraged to walk, cycle and use public transport.

A massive week-long campaign promoting the use of public transport started in all of these cities on September 16. Many government officials have also pledged their support by vowing to use only public transport.

In true Chinese style, the government points out how important it is for China to participate to give anything legitimacy:

In this sense, China's participation will greatly strengthen the Car-Free Day movement.

And guess what? People said screw this Car Free Day crap, I have to get around:

More than 100 Chinese cities including Beijing staged a "Car Free Day" Saturday to fight congestion and pollution, but the streets of the capital remained defiantly clogged with traffic jams.

Beijing's middle class climbed into their cars to go shopping and touring as usual, apparently disregarding an injunction to leave the vehicles at home -- a pattern that seemed to be repeated in the other 107 participating cities.

"It's the same as always," said taxi driver Dong Yongjun, as he navigated up the capital's congested Third Ring Road. "I don't see any difference."

The situation was similar in other major cities, such as Shanghai and Wuhan, a vast industrial city in the centre of the country.

A time-limited prompted by a specific goal, with the full support of the government propaganda machine, and they couldn't pull it off. Kyoto and any follow on treaties would require broad permanent reductions, and with specific goal or event, just some vague reference to warming. Even if the temperature continues to go up (which it would if this turns out to be connected with natural solar cycles) the proponents will unprovably argue it would have been worse. Why would people in China or anywhere else agree to that when they couldn't even agree to leave their cars at home for one day?

Posted by: Steve Janke at 07:44 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 717 words, total size 5 kb.