BP #12 China pushing for more coal


Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/business/energy-environment/china-coal-climate-change.html?&hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Global warming has been a pretty shaky topic, especially with this years elections. According to the article, America has a uncertain stance on the issue. Recently, Trump has decided to partner with other countries to help reduce the greenhouse admissions. He has given China the opportunity to be e leader to help prevent and fight against future global warming.Currently, China is the largest source of carbon emissions, hence the reason Trump has targeted the country. The real problem at hand is that even that China had agreed to this leading role, they are still digging for more coal and continuing to burn. It looks like the mines are now reopening, due to the scarcity of resources, Coal has been their main source electricity. It raises ethical issues, that China commits to global efforts, yet continues  to work against it. Is there alternatives , rather than coal to provide electricity and power?

When I read the article, I looked at it from a utilitarianism perspective. First off, when china committed to these global efforts, that were technically abiding by the social contract that has been laid out and agreed upon on a world wide level. According to Mill, there are doctrines that actions are right if they are useful and benefit the majority. Looking at the situation, either action that China chooses, they are still going to lose out. Either they will have a decline in resources for power and electricity, or they will experience the first hand effects of global warming and carbon emissions. According to utilitarianism, the action is deemed morally right, it produces the greater balance of good to bad consequences. Mill would consider China choosing to abide by the efforts and stop coal mining and emissions, would have a greater balance of good.  This will be beneficial to the entire world, reducing the overall effects of global warming. While the other action, effects a much smaller population, being the people of China is need of energy sources.

In my mind, I also believe that with taking up this leading role in fighting against global warming, that China should have made an effort to find another resource, that does not influence the environment as much. What about wind, and solar power? What do you think the optimistic action was?


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s