Tag Archives: chinese
‘Climate Bomb’ Warning Over China Coolant Release
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1c273ab0-dbe4-11e2-8853-00144feab7de.html#ixzz2X7AUUxXp By Kathrin Hille in Beijing A “climate bomb” of potent greenhouse gases 15,000 times more damaging to the climate than carbon dioxide is set to be released by some of the world’s leading producers of refrigerants following a ban on climate credits. The companies, the majority of them in China, argue that a ban on trading of climate credits for the incineration of HFC-23 makes it no longer financially viable to destroy the gas, which is a byproduct of a substance used in air conditioners and refrigerators. A warning by the Environmental Investigation Agency in a report to be released on Monday will raise the pressure on China to ban such gases and end economic incentives for their production in multilateral talks. Some 19 factories – 11 in China – making HCFC-22 have been receiving climate credits under the UN’s Clean Development Mechanism for installing and operating incinerators to burn HFC-23 that is created during the manufacturing process, instead of venting it into the atmosphere. Facilities in developing countries can sell emission reduction credits to buyers in developed countries to allow the latter to meet their targets under the Kyoto protocol. However, the European Emissions Trading Scheme, the world’s largest carbon market, banned trading in those credits last month after finding that the financial incentive drove companies to produce more HFC-23 instead of curbing it. Other climate exchanges have said they will follow, causing substantial revenue streams for the producers to dry up. The EIA said an investigation had shown that most of China’s non-CDM facilities were emitting HFC-23 already. “If all of these facilities [under the CDM] join China’s non-CDM and vent their HFC-23, they will set off a climate bomb emitting more than 2bn tonnes of CO2 equivalent emissions by 2020,” it said. People involved in the sector in China said this was likely to happen. “If there is no more funding, the CDM plants could start venting as well,” Mei Shengfang, deputy secretary-general of the China Association of Fluorine and Silicone Industry, said. He added that authorities were considering offering support. An executive at China Fluoro Technology, one of the largest Chinese CDM plants, said: “Our company is still incinerating the HFC-23 now. If the money is used up, we can stop incineration. We can’t go on doing this, we can’t afford it and we have no duty to do it.” Releasing HFC-23 into the atmosphere is not illegal. China has been blocking proposals for a ban as part of multilateral talks under the Montreal Protocol to phase out hydrofluorocarbons, which continue on Monday in Bangkok. China raised hopes this month when President Xi Jinping and President Barack Obama of the US said at a summit that they had agreed to work together to reduce the production and consumption of hydrofluorocarbons. “This is a reversal of China’s attitude, and all eyes are on China now to see if it’s for real,” said Alexander von Bismarck, executive director at EIA. Additional reporting by Li Wan Continue reading
Missouri Moves To Lift Ban On Foreign Farm Owners
Alan Scher Zagier, AP 4:47 p.m. EDT June 18, 2013 (Photo: Amanda Lucier, AP) JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — Weeks before a Chinese conglomerate agreed to buy Smithfield Foods in the largest such takeover of a U.S. business, Missouri lawmakers quietly approved legislation removing a ban on foreign ownership of agricultural land. Missouri is one of several Midwest states with little-known laws passed in the 1970s amid concerns over Japanese investment that prohibit or restrict foreign farmland ownership. The company has operations in 26 U.S. states, including several in the Midwest. Smithfield has said it doesn’t believe these issues will be an obstacle to the takeover deal being approved. Meanwhile, Smithfield announced Tuesday it is laying off 120 more workers as part of its previously announced closure of a Virginia facility that makes hot dogs and deli meat. The Smithfield, Va.-based pork producer plans to close its Portsmouth, Va., plant in the middle of August, said Jeff Gough, Smithfield’s senior vice president for human resources. A northern Missouri legislator whose amendments to a pair of larger bills helped push the plan through the state legislature and onto the desk of Gov. Jay Nixon said he wants to provide greater oversight of foreign ownership, which will be capped in Missouri at 1% and require state approval. The changes were approved on the final day of the legislative session. “The law doesn’t work,” said Rep. Casey Guernsey, R-Bethany, citing legal loopholes that allow foreign owners to mask their assets behind domestic-based groups. “What I want to do is make it work … It will provide a degree of accountability for an international corporation that it wouldn’t have before.” Shuanghui International Holdings announced its plans to purchase Smithfield Foods on May 29 in a deal that still requires shareholder approval and a federal regulatory review by the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment. The deal’s expected value is $7.1 billion, including debt. In Oklahoma, the law limiting foreign farmland ownership exempts swine operations, said Diane Clay, an Attorney General’s Office spokeswoman. And in Iowa, the office of Attorney General Tom Miller said it expects Smithfield Foods’ new owner to “comply with all (laws and) agreements,” including a consent decree related to livestock production by meatpackers. “We hope to close the loop soon, whether it’s a final letter from Smithfield to us or a memo of understanding from our office to Smithfield,” said Geoff Greenwood, a Mille spokesman. The Missouri bill awaits Nixon’s approval, and his office declined to say whether he would sign it. The offices of Attorney General Chris Koster and the state Department of Agriculture also declined to comment. A Columbia-based group that opposes the corporate consolidation of the agriculture industry criticized Guernsey’s handling of the legislation. Language removing the foreign ban was added to two Senate bills in late April while in the House Agribusiness Committee, which is chaired by Guernsey. The underlying bills to which the amendments were added deal with farm loans and University of Missouri Extension districts. In early May, Guernsey added an amendment while the bill was on the House floor that doubled the allowable foreign farmland ownership from half a percent to 1%. “To call it a coincidence is doing a disservice to the democratic process,” said Tim Gibbons of the Missouri Rural Crisis Center, referring to the legislative votes that preceded the Smithfield sale announcement and the absence of broader debate. “These things should have been discussed. And they weren’t.” Guernsey, a dairy and beef cattle farmer, countered that he introduced a similar bill in May 2012. He bristled at suggestions that the foreign ownership ban was lifted at the request of Smithfield, which he said is the largest employer in his five-county district and a campaign contributor of Guernsey’s. “I didn’t even know about Smithfield until we were out of session,” he said. “Trust me, the last person Smithfield tells about any of their business decisions is Casey Guernsey.” While Guernsey said he “can’t stand the thought of the Chinese owning our largest employer,” he’s eager to see the potential economic benefits of a deal that some observers believe was driven by greater demand among Chinese consumers for U.S.-produced food. U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt shared a similar sentiment. “That’s a great opportunity for U.S. agriculture and a great opportunity for American agriculture,” he said. “Once people get better food they universally do not want to go back to the bad food again. Not only is there going to be more people but there’s going to be more demand and more competition for the food that’s out there. ” Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed Continue reading
Brazil’s Unrest: Should Investors Worry?
http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2013/06/19/brazils-unrest-should-investors-worry/#ixzz2WqmHIlTT Jun 19, 2013 4:11pm by Jonathan Wheatley The scenes have been extraordinary. Not only the size of public demonstrations in Brazil’s major cities over the past week but also the violence with which they were met by supposedly elite police units have made for surprising and shocking viewing. Are investors worried? And should they be? The short answer to the first question is, apparently, No. To be sure, Brazilian stocks have had a rough ride lately but equity investors are far more worried about the US Federal Reserve than they are about protesters, and the Bovespa index has been heading south since long before they took to the streets. The same is true of the currency and other assets. Beyondbrics has not seen a single analyst make any connection between the demonstrations and asset prices (we would be more than interested to be advised otherwise). To the second question, though, the answer must surely be, Yes. “What is going on is the result of slow growth and that is unlikely to go away,” says Alfredo Behrens, a professor of management at FIA, a business school in São Paulo. Which about sums it up. As one articulate young video blogger puts it, this month’s protests are about more than the 20 centavo increase in bus and metro fares that initially sparked them: “If everything was working, health, education, public transport itself,” she says, “nobody would be on the streets demonstrating.” Parallels have been drawn with the recent protests in Turkey (indeed, protesters in São Paulo and Istanbul saluted each other). Other parallels could be drawn with recent demonstrations in Chile, and even with the upper middle class protesters of Moscow and Chinese micro-bloggers. In all cases, newly economically-enfranchised people, the much-cited new middle classes, are looking about and finding themselves dissatisfied, often because their taxes are not being properly spent. They may feel their freedoms are being curtailed in other ways, too, but common among them is a sense of getting the bad side of a bargain with the state. Many have been quick to point out that Brazil’s protesters may be more privileged than the newly-enfranchised “classe C”. As newspaper Folha de S.Paulo noted on Wednesday, three quarters of the demonstrators have university degrees and more than half are aged under 25. But to dismiss them as a bunch of upper crust urbanites with nothing better to do would be a serious mistake. The educated young have led big revolutions in Brazil in the past (and around the world). And the first thing on the shopping lists of many joining the classe C has been a university eduction for their children. Why should investors worry? One threat to their interests is that the government may react in an overly placatory manner. Reversing the increase in transport fares would be fiscally irresponsible. (Doing what some protesters demand and making public transport free would be fiscal suicide.) The government may be doubly tempted to damp down the protests with floods of cash by the fact that next year is election year – and voter support for President Dilma Rousseff, until recently seen as a shoo-in for re-election, has slipped severely in recent weeks. Another threat is that the government may simply ignore the protests, assuming they calm down over time. That would leave Brazil stuck in its low-growth rut. This may no longer be as appealing to policy-makers as it once was. Slow growth of around 2.5 per cent is probably enough to keep unemployment at a level acceptable for voters. But voters are getting upset all the same. Ideally, of course, the government will listen to the voices from the streets and take energetic action to fight corruption and inefficiency in the public service. On the evidence of recent performance, the chances of that are slim. Even the leading Brazilian politicians who were convicted last year for corruption in a landmark case have yet to actually do any time. Continue reading
