Read this article
1. Do you think that removing a portion of the older cars and heating systems will be enough to help improve the air quality?
2. What makes china's seemingly uncontrollable pollution a problem, while large cities like Los Angeles are able to stay so much cleaner?
1. Unfortunately, I personally agree with the bloggers that Beijing is a lost cause when it comes to improving the air quality. Taking 180,000 cars away from the streets won't make any difference or reduce the amount of pollution in the air because, like the blogger says, about 250,000 new cars are introduced to the streets of Beijing each year. Also, there are about 12 million people who currently live in Beijing, so replacing coal-burners with clean energy systems for 44,000 houses will not do much of a difference either. Although it is a valiant effort by the major to attempt to reduce the pollution in Beijing, the cleansing of the city would take the participation of ALL the citizens, and clearly it can be seen through this article that the majority of the population does not care enough to take action.
ReplyDelete2. I think that what makes cities such as LA to stay clean as compared to cities like Beijing is that the government promotes cleanliness in such a way that inspires people to keep their environment clean. In Beijing, the concept of improving pollution levels is forced upon the people- making them follow laws and not giving them a choice; people in LA have a desire to keep their city clean while people in Beijing see it as a punishment from the government. Also, another reason why LA is able to be so clean compared to Beijing is because the national US government funds programs, which gives people more options of how to be eco-friendly.
1. I don't think it will, because these people obviously need the cars and heating, and taking away that many cars and heat systems will only trigger a mass purchase of new one, which will most likely cause so much pollution to produce the new units that by the time it balances out, it won't even be worth it because more people will now potentially need to replace their cars. The same principle applies to heating.
ReplyDelete2. In other cities, the government give people incentives to buy green products, rather than force them to buy new products. It also is not as much of a problem because solutions were starting to rise before it became a problem, which gave people time to change,where it Berlin, one could argue that it is already to late for them.
1. I don't think that improving the heating systems and bringing in more efficient cars will help. From a mathematical point of view, removing 180,000 cars will not help when 250,000 are added each year. In addition, China has the largest population in the world and if we improve the heating systems in 44,000 homes, that will not help the overall pollution rate. In my opinion, China needs to find a way to decrease its population or to spread it out because it is all centralized in Beijing and Hong Kong. If the populations continue to rise, that will mean an increase in cars and houses for people which will increase pollution.
ReplyDelete2. I think cities like LA have less pollution because of education. People in LA have the incentive and the education to understand that polluting is wrong. Also, the population of LA is not as large as Beijing or Hong Kong. Lastly, I believe as a nation, the US is more aware of environmental damage and is willing to be more eco-friendly than China.
1. I don't believe that the removal of a minute amount of cars and the changing of heat systems would actually change anything about the air quality in Beijing. As the bloggers states, more cars appear on the streets then they are removed, therefore by removing some cars, the Chinese government is only slowing down pollution increase. Heating systems work the same way. In order to make a difference, a substantial amount of change needs to occur, but by only removing old cars and changing a few thousand heaters, the pollution in Beijing would not get any better, but would continue to increase.
ReplyDelete2. The difference between the cities of Beijing and LA is government involvement and enforcement. In China, the Communist government doesn't care as much about pollution as the American government which is why we see the extremely toxic levels of pollution in the Beijing area. Specifically, the US Government gives people incentives to be green and also enforces and enacts laws to be green and not cause pollution.
1. Replacing high pollution heating systems and cars is a positive step, so long as they can be replaced with more efficient ones. Still there is a question as to who will pay for the replacements. Besides, with 250,000 additional cars hitting the road each year, replacing some old ones will not offset the pollution increase due to growth.
ReplyDelete2. China has several major problems that lead to the uncontrollable pollution. First is their large-scale industrialization. While pollution in most western nations has already leveled off, China is still in a rapid growth phase.
Second is their continued dependence on coal, with the use of coal increasing rather than decreasing. China's factory processes are generally higher polluting than in cities like LA which are strictly regulated.
1- I don't believe that removing a portion of the older cars and heating systems will be enough to help improve the air quality in Beijing. There are still many many cars in China and removing older ones would only be a very small portion of the cars, making little to no difference. To make a worthwhile change that would make an actual difference to the air quality, much more cars should be taken out or another alternative should be considered.
ReplyDelete2- What makes China's seemingly uncontrollable pollution a problem is the different governments and their involvements. I believe the American government promotes recycling, keeping our planet clean in a way that makes it look easy and accessible to everyone while perhaps the Chinese government makes it seem like it is only for specific people and doesn't not make it look easy.
1) While eliminating older cars and improving heating systems is certainly a move in the positive direction, it will not come anywhere near putting a dent in the pollution problem, which clearly has its roots far deeper than simply cars. There is also an issue with the feasibility of this option.
ReplyDelete2) China, as a developing country, is very invested in development, and st countries involved in the increase of development often have problems with their outputs of things such as CO2 and many other pollutants. As China is the largest developing countries, it stands to reason that they output an enormous amount of pollution.
1. I do not believe that removing older cars and heating systems will improve the air quality in Beijing, because more cars will be introduced to the streets than will be removed.
ReplyDelete2. In cities like LA, the air (which is not clean), is cleaner than Beijing, because in LA there is incentive to keep the air clean and to help the environment, but in Beijing it's a forced task, and not a self motivated task.
1) I don't believe that by removing older cars and improving heating systems that it will improve the amount of pollution. Their environment is in such a horrible state that by removing such a small factor it will not cause a huge change. There are many more factors in China that is causing their pollution to rise that the amount of pollution at this state is a lost cause at this point that this small change will not have a large enough effect even though it is a positive change for their ecosystem.
ReplyDelete2) I believe the difference between the two is that in a city such as LA they are more worried about the environment and its effects on it. The government also promotes clean living along with regulations that have been in placed to help with cleaner living. Whereas in a city such as Beijing they are more worried and focused on the advancing economically and are not as worried about their effects on the environment
1. I think that it won't be "enough" to improve the air quality, but would have a great effect on their environment by reducing the air pollution. On the other hand, there are problems with this plan. First off, it's not ideal since most people drive older cars so not everyone would or even could make the transition in terms of the cost of purchasing a newer car. Additionally, cars are the not the only things contributing to the air pollution so even though replacing the older cars won't happen quickly, there are other methods of reducing air pollution that the people to have to suffer paying for.
ReplyDelete2. I think the difference is that China has to accommodate a larger population and there aren't strict enough regulation in contrast to large cities like LA. The article says "Smoke from factories and heating plants, winds blowing in from the Gobi Desert and fumes from millions of vehicles can combine to blanket the city in a pungent shroud for days." Large cities, such LA, don't have to deal with this geological issue and in the US, we're promoting and developing eco-friendly vehicles. Additionally, China is a developing country and so there's a lot of imports from China and so there are factories and buildings that further pollute the environment.
1. I don't think taking 180,000 old cars will make much of difference when so many new cars are introduced very year. I think to be able to make a difference in pollution China will have to perform a clean up not a reform because there is so much pollution already in the atmosphere. Redoing heating systems will take a lot of money and time and still after this is done there will still be much more things polluting the atmosphere.
ReplyDelete2. I think China cannot contain their pollution because they do not have as strict regulations as everyone else. Also China has the biggest population and population density in the world. It is very hard to control and monitor that many people. China also has many industrial factories and they produce a great amount of fog in the city.