According to a tiny sample (11) of visitors to Nanjing (http://www.numbeo.com/pollution/city_result.jsp?country=China&city=Nanjing), drinking water accessibility and quality is “moderate” but general levels of water pollution are “high”. An even tinier sample (me) walking in the sticky dusk to the metro over the bridge, the smell is that of an open sewer, and the view is of sheets of slime, floats of ‘algal blooms’ as nature consumes the nitrogenous organic matter and oxygen then converts it to green matter on the water surface.
Environmentally speaking, China is poised at a fork in the road. “We should treat the environment like our own lives, like our eyes” – the sentiment is there, and the laws are increasingly in place – but can they be enforced?
There is no such thing as a free lunch as they say, and feasts are common in China. As are free clean water both to drink and rivers for waste disposal, trees, fuel, soil, even spectacular views. All these are nature’s services, and if they are in balance, they keep the environment stable. Push nature too hard, however, and her generosity may flicker with uncertainty, then end, tipping us all into oblivion. For years, we have taken water quality for granted, and costed it as priceless in the sense that it was believed such “ecosystem services” as the jargon goes, were impossible to value. Recently, however, the argument has been made that giving an actual monetary value to these will make humans appreciate them more. Of course that is difficult, some would say impossible, but the sums have to add up, or future generations will pay that price.
Take a look through China’s recent history: water quality stayed stable until the economic boom of the late eighties, then started falling slowly through the nineties, finally plummeting off the scale by the mid 2000s. For example, Erhai Lake in Yunnan has seen its water quality drop severely in the last couple of decades, especially with the rapid development of Xiaguan (New Dali) and its accompanying water pollution from sewage, industrial waste, and excess fertilizer use on fields and in fish farms.
You may ask if this is necessarily a bad thing. Urbanisation and increased food productivity has been one of the factors responsible for lifting millions or rural Chinese out of poverty. Does it really matter if the natural environment takes a bit of a hit? The answer may be yes if the damage reaches a tipping point – if water quality changes prove to be irreversible.
The extent to which China can repair its environment and how long it will take are very relevant questions. For air pollution, the robust implementation of new and existing regulations and technology would go a long way to reversing the damaging trends. But for water pollution in lakes and rivers, the situation is more complex. In Taihu Lake, en route to Shanghai, for example, more than the equivalent of US$ 16 billion has been spent on preventing the entry of nutrients into the lake and on algal bloom controls since 2007, but such blooms still reoccur almost every year.
China’s recent efforts to tackle these issues are immense and ambitious. The new environmental protection law that took effect in January 2015 is the strictest to date; the dragon fangs are showing. Severe punishments include ccriminal charges being brought against 740 polluting businesses, and 782 were punished with police administrative detention. Some 292 cases incurred an accumulating daily fine within the first 6 months, totaling 236 million yuan (US$37 million).
Perhaps most importantly, local governments are cooperating with the new law; impotent officialdom may be a thing of the past.
Ecological considerations must come before GDP growth says the new law.
You would not find the UK’s David Cameron saying this – and certainly not Jeb Bush. As Xi stated in 2013: "We have to understand that to protect the environment is to preserve our productivity and to improve the environment is to develop our productivity. Such concepts should be deeply rooted"
First published in the Nanjinge 2015
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v525/n7569/full/525321a.html
Environmentally speaking, China is poised at a fork in the road. “We should treat the environment like our own lives, like our eyes” – the sentiment is there, and the laws are increasingly in place – but can they be enforced?
There is no such thing as a free lunch as they say, and feasts are common in China. As are free clean water both to drink and rivers for waste disposal, trees, fuel, soil, even spectacular views. All these are nature’s services, and if they are in balance, they keep the environment stable. Push nature too hard, however, and her generosity may flicker with uncertainty, then end, tipping us all into oblivion. For years, we have taken water quality for granted, and costed it as priceless in the sense that it was believed such “ecosystem services” as the jargon goes, were impossible to value. Recently, however, the argument has been made that giving an actual monetary value to these will make humans appreciate them more. Of course that is difficult, some would say impossible, but the sums have to add up, or future generations will pay that price.
Take a look through China’s recent history: water quality stayed stable until the economic boom of the late eighties, then started falling slowly through the nineties, finally plummeting off the scale by the mid 2000s. For example, Erhai Lake in Yunnan has seen its water quality drop severely in the last couple of decades, especially with the rapid development of Xiaguan (New Dali) and its accompanying water pollution from sewage, industrial waste, and excess fertilizer use on fields and in fish farms.
You may ask if this is necessarily a bad thing. Urbanisation and increased food productivity has been one of the factors responsible for lifting millions or rural Chinese out of poverty. Does it really matter if the natural environment takes a bit of a hit? The answer may be yes if the damage reaches a tipping point – if water quality changes prove to be irreversible.
The extent to which China can repair its environment and how long it will take are very relevant questions. For air pollution, the robust implementation of new and existing regulations and technology would go a long way to reversing the damaging trends. But for water pollution in lakes and rivers, the situation is more complex. In Taihu Lake, en route to Shanghai, for example, more than the equivalent of US$ 16 billion has been spent on preventing the entry of nutrients into the lake and on algal bloom controls since 2007, but such blooms still reoccur almost every year.
China’s recent efforts to tackle these issues are immense and ambitious. The new environmental protection law that took effect in January 2015 is the strictest to date; the dragon fangs are showing. Severe punishments include ccriminal charges being brought against 740 polluting businesses, and 782 were punished with police administrative detention. Some 292 cases incurred an accumulating daily fine within the first 6 months, totaling 236 million yuan (US$37 million).
Perhaps most importantly, local governments are cooperating with the new law; impotent officialdom may be a thing of the past.
Ecological considerations must come before GDP growth says the new law.
You would not find the UK’s David Cameron saying this – and certainly not Jeb Bush. As Xi stated in 2013: "We have to understand that to protect the environment is to preserve our productivity and to improve the environment is to develop our productivity. Such concepts should be deeply rooted"
First published in the Nanjinge 2015
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v525/n7569/full/525321a.html