cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/39423227
[...]
The European Union (EU) and China have made headlines with their latest joint climate statement ahead of COP30. While the agreement emphasizes clean energy and green technology, it stops short of committing to reducing coal use—a decision that has left many environmental groups concerned.
[...]
The EU and China’s climate focus now leans heavily toward clean technology development and cooperation.
[...]
China’s Medog Dam: Climate Win or Ecological Fallout?
One of the most ambitious pieces in China’s green energy puzzle is the Medog Dam project in Tibet. With an estimated cost of $137 billion, the dam will become the largest hydropower station in the world.
However, the project has drawn criticism for its environmental and geopolitical risks:
- Built in a fragile ecosystem, near the Yarlung Tsangpo Grand Canyon, the dam could harm biodiversity, impact river flows, and disrupt agriculture downstream.
- Local communities face displacement, raising humanitarian concerns.
- The dam’s location near the India-China border adds fuel to regional tensions, especially over shared water resources.
[...]
Is China Exporting Clean? And at What Cost?
China is stepping up its global presence as a major exporter of clean technologies [...] However, there’s one more side of the leaf which isn’t so green. The environmental costs of producing these technologies can be significant. Mining and manufacturing components like lithium and rare earth elements often lead to high emissions.
If these upstream processes are not cleaned up, China could end up exporting “dirty green” solutions that undermine the broader climate goals. Life-cycle emissions, i.e., from raw material extraction to final product delivery, must be included when evaluating the real impact of these exports.
Thus, China needs to decarbonize its supply chains and ensure the climate benefits of its clean-tech exports are genuine and lasting.
It is noteworthy that China’s proposed coal mine developments risk creating an oversupply and derailing climate goals, according to Global Energy Monitor.
[...]
Carbon markets are only effective if they are transparent and based on actual, verified reductions in emissions. Strict rules and enforcement are necessary to prevent greenwashing and to ensure the system does not simply shift emissions from one place to another.
Without trust, data accuracy, and mutual accountability, the effectiveness of carbon markets will remain limited. Both the EU and China must ensure that any expansion of the carbon credit system is built on strong governance and integrity.