The clear role of carbon
Charles Hong asserts that “the environmental impact of carbon dioxide on global warming is still controversial.” He could not be more wrong (Letters, Sept. 29, page 8).
There is no scientific controversy over the contribution of carbon emissions to global warming, only a political one that mainly occurs in the US.
Further, his examples of Typhoon Fanapi and Typhoon Morakot serve to underline his apparent confusion of local weather events with the global climate — a common misunderstanding.
The science, built up over the last 35 years or so, is very clear. Global warming is largely the result of increased carbon dioxide, a key factor of which has been human activity.
National political -discourse in the US in particular, from where Hong writes, has struggled to come to terms with this in the last decade or so, but has arrived late to an argument that has long since moved on to what we can do about global change — not whether or not it is happening or what is causing it.
Appealing to electric cars as a solution will not really help, because it is not a carbon neutral option.
The US at the moment is struggling to meet its current energy demands at peak times in a system largely built in the 1930s; and most of the power stations burn fossil fuels. Electric cars will inevitably increase demand for power — and increase carbon emissions.
Paul Deacon
Kaohsiung
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS