Talk:Climate change in China

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject China (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Environment / Climate change  (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Climate change task force.
 

Why China-US comparison?[edit]

Can someone explain to me the idea behind the "comparation" (shouldn't it be "comparison"?!?) between the US and China??!? Are we all starting to compare to the worst now instead of comparing ourselves to the best? And why does it matter anyway? If the Americans feel like letting the planet go down the toilet, why do the Chinese have to do the same? Is it really helpful to mention that "fuel economy standards [...] are more stringent than those in Australia, Canada and the United States"? How about comparing to some EU countries? How about some hard facts (studies, scientific reports) on the devastating effects of climate change on China in the future? ... There's lots of work to be done here!! --MarsmanRom (talk) 15:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

This article is very biased, and against China. Although chinese CO2 output is the highest worldwide, the per-capita (per person) CO2 production is far, far lower than that of the US - one american is equivalent to about 6 chinese people when it comes to emissions. Furthermore, very little of the chinese CO2 production is emitted in producing goods for the domestic market - almost all of it is a result of production for exports - most of which go to the US and Europe. So really, it's the US and EU's taste for cheap plastic that accounts for the bulk of Chinese emissions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.152.21.103 (talk) 01:03, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

99.* errors[edit]

The following has been added repeatedly by the 99.* anons, without an attempt at explaining relevance:

  1. {tlx|For|current global climate change|Global warming}}
  2. (in the "See also" section) Scientific opinion on climate change
  3. {{sustainability}}

Arthur Rubin (talk) 09:11, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

moved[edit]

from Talk:Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation ...

Clarification needed in section References regarding ...

  • Update: Climate change: Holding back hail Nature (journal). The amount of hail falling in China has almost halved since 1980 because of global warming...hail is also decreasing in the United States Therefore the pattern could be a global phenomenon linked to climate change.... 03 Sep 2008, Research Highlights from Nature China 99.181.156.173 (talk) 00:09, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Relevance? And doesn't that counteract the claim that climate change causes insured damage? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 05:39, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Art, please attempt to focus, you are again not helping to clarify wp articles ... see Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation, this article. 99.181.145.99 (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Well, you frequently introduce discussions of topic A linking to topic B on topic C's page. And you've been edit warring to include a Swiss insurance company's estimates of damage due to global warming on multiple articles. This statement notes that global warming may reduce damage due to hail, which the Swiss company undoubtedly did not take into account.
But relevance to this article is still questionable. It might relate to a different article on climate change in China, but it does not relate at all to the subject of this article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:55, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Look at where the Nature (journal) Update is now in the article and who put it there. One must endeavor to understand first, and attempt to communicate second, please. 99.181.157.60 (talk) 18:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
The Nature article by Tim Reid has original article citations by Xie, B., Zhang, Q. & Wang, Y. Trends in hail in China during 1960–2005. Geophysical Research Letters doi: 10.1029/2008GL034067 (2008). Is this "Update relevant to this article, maybe moved to Effects of global warming, and/or Regional effects of global warming? 99.181.128.190 (talk) 04:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Removed; clearly irrelevant to this article. Thanks for pointing it out. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 07:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

(od) moved here. 108.195.138.38 (talk) 05:29, 13 June 2012 (UTC)