The NYTimes has a nice long article on the global environmental effects of coal demand (Pollution from Chinese Coal ...). The acid rain problem sounds incredible, but that can be fixed. The article covers the mis-steps: the fact that scrubbers must be turned on to work and that government solutions that mess with market prices have unintended consequences (they capped coal prices from the mine to the power plant and the mines sent low quality coal!). It seems that when the Chinese get tired of the health and environmental problems caused by S02, then they'll be willing to pay the costs of cleanup. Yawn.
The big intractable problem, to me, seems to be the impacts of a massive increase in coal use on global warming:
Unless China finds a way to clean up its coal plants and the thousands of factories that burn coal, pollution will soar both at home and abroad. The increase in global-warming gases from China's coal use will probably exceed that for all industrialized countries combined over the next 25 years, surpassing by five times the reduction in such emissions that the Kyoto Protocol seeks.
So, China (and India) are the problem children ... right? Wrong:
For all the worries about pollution from China, international climate experts are loath to criticize the country without pointing out that the average American still consumes more energy and is responsible for the release of 10 times as much carbon dioxide as the average Chinese. While China now generates more electricity from coal than does the United States, America's consumption of gasoline dwarfs China's, and burning gasoline also releases carbon dioxide.
Jeez. Today, I'm changing my carbon-based lifestyle. I'm walking, instead of driving, down to the mailbox to get my Sunday paper.*
And, ahem, the environmental economist mantra: current gas prices are too low, not too high.
*Note: I don't get a Sunday paper.
