Tomorrow, the WSJ will publish an editorial called "China's Environmental Whitewash". Here is a quote from their piece that mentions me:
"This is the context for Supreme Leader Xi Jinping ’s pledge last week “to achieve the peaking of CO2 emissions around 2030,” which has U.S. officials rejoicing and academics such as UCLA’s Matthew Kahn enthusing that “China’s political system is more nimble at getting green things done.” So nimble it will take 16 years to start."
The WSJ piece doesn't bother to weblink to the actual article where I was quoted: Here are my quotes in the article:
From China's perspective, the deal looks smart. "The leader of China is killing three birds with one stone," said Matthew Kahn, an environmental studies professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. First, Chinese President Xi Jinping is showing the rest of the world that his country can be a leader on climate change, the global issue of ultimate importance. Second, a move away from coal -- now a crucial source of China's winter heating and electricity -- will help the country combat the notorious smog problem that has galvanized political protests and threatens to drive some of China's most talented citizens, not to mention foreigners, away. And third, says Kahn, climate change mitigation is "creating a new export market for China," as Chinese-made solar panels and wind turbines head to fields and roofs around the world.
a few paragraphs down
It may be easier for China to achieve its targets than the United States, and not just because it's easier to reach a peak than it is to make a cut. China's command-and-control political system can make big things happen -- and faster -- than the United States' messy democracy. "China's political system is more nimble at getting green things done," said Kahn. For example, he said, mayors will start taking environmental problems seriously because the central government is starting to evaluate them on their respective city's energy intensity (output per energy used), as opposed to simply economic productivity and degree of civil unrest. And mayors want to keep Beijing happy.
a few paragraphs down
It may be easier for other countries to join the climate fight if the United States and China go first. That's because, as Kahn points out, the United States, China, the European Union, and other early actors can show how greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced without flattening the economy. Will China's cap-and-trade schemes work better? Or Europe's? Or California's? Will American coal-plant regulations result in emissions cuts without harming the economy? If China and the United States seem set to meet the emissions targets set out in the new deal and are still able to deliver prosperity to their citizens, even the Indians may be convinced that it's possible.