【Weekly Topic】- Do pollutant emission limits affect corporate development?
Thread Content
Jiangxi Province recently issued the \"Notice on Issuing the Work Plan for the Pilot Program on the Paid Use and Trading of Emission Rights across the Province\" (hereinafter referred to as the \"Notice\"), officially launching the pilot program for the paid use and trading of emission rights. The Notice specifies the pollutants and the scope of the pilot program in Jiangxi. Initially, the four pollutants for which total emission control is required during the 12th Five-Year Plan period are chemical oxygen demand, ammonia nitrogen, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides; other pollutants will be added as appropriate, depending on the progress of the pilot program. Pilots for the paid use and trading of discharge rights for chemical oxygen demand and ammonia nitrogen will be carried out among enterprises in the papermaking and printing and dyeing industries across the province, while pilots for the paid use and trading of discharge rights for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides will be conducted among enterprises in the thermal power, steel, and cement industries across the province. These initiatives will gradually be extended to other industries or sectors throughout the province. The Notice states that existing pollution-emitting units in Jiangxi must pay a fee for the right to use such facilities, while new (renovated or expanded) projects in pilot industries must purchase the corresponding pollution discharge rights from the market. Furthermore, in areas where environmental quality does not meet the requirements, trading of emission allowances to increase the total amount of pollutants in that area is not permitted. Polluting enterprises located in areas with restricted emission permits are not allowed to purchase emission rights from other areas ； Polluting entities that exceed their emission allowances, have poor environmental compliance records, are under mandatory environmental supervision, or are required to rectify pollution sources shall not engage in any transactions until they assume the corresponding legal responsibilities and complete the necessary corrections. This completely restricts the development of companies that emit pollutants as well as the investment in new projects. Do people think this is going too far? Will it have a direct impact on employment and lead to a decrease in our incomes?
This post was last edited by Desert Fish on 2015-6-1 at 10:43. This approach completely restricts the development of companies that emit pollutants as well as the investment in new projects. Do you think this is going too far? It was time this happened; companies should find ways to manage the situation or opt for processes that produce less pollution. Will this have an immediate impact on employment and lead to a decrease in our incomes? You can refer to the story of blood diamonds
Fighting over the sofa… Do you think it’s going too far? It can be said that no method of correction is excessive; we should also be those who remain untainted while reaping the benefits! Will it have a direct impact on employment and lead to a decrease in our incomes? Yes, but it’s not in the way the original poster suggested; there are only negative effects.
This completely restricts the development of companies that emit pollutants as well as investment in new projects. 1. Do you think this is going too far? When things reach an extreme, they reverse. . . 2. Will it have a direct impact on employment and lead to a decrease in our incomes? I’m really not sure about this. . . It always feels so turbulent and unstable, which is very detrimental to the overall environment. . . .
I don’t think it’s overcorrection; it’s just that control was applied too late. Many major polluters have already created the problem, and it is extremely difficult to make corrections. The negative impact on economic growth and employment rates is definite, but it should be positive in the long run. There’s no need to worry about employment; China is currently facing a labor shortage. Emission rights trading is a theoretically excellent policy, but its effectiveness in practice is uncertain. For the same carbon emission trading system, what are the implementation results in different regions?
I hope to see the actual results of implementation, rather than just talking the talk while doing something else
Since the standards to be followed are the same, the impact on corporate development will be identical; the key lies in whether these standards can be strictly implemented. Environmental protection issues still require strict enforcement and severe penalties – take a look at the severity of pollution nowadays.
This completely restricts the development of companies that emit pollutants as well as the investment in new projects. Do people think this is going too far? Since the policy of reform and opening up, there has been a constant emphasis on economic growth and GDP. Large-scale land development and the use of new technologies have led to environmental degradation, widespread fraud, serious problems with food hygiene, and an inability to address environmental pollution effectively. With all development centered around the economy, our natural environment, on which we depend for survival, is suffering increasing damage. If nothing is done to correct this situation, future generations will have no place to live. **The circular economy that is promoted today emphasizes environmental protection and governance; it takes a long-term perspective and acts in the interest of future generations, striving to safeguard the environment and nature so that we can live more comfortably and enjoy greater happiness over the long term, even with abundant material resources. Therefore, from a long-term perspective, doing so is beneficial for the people. Will it have a direct impact on employment and lead to a decrease in our incomes? It is inevitable that the implementation of any reform will impact certain old systems or harm certain interests. The most obvious example is the downturn in the coal industry; as environmental protection has become a priority, progress in many coal-based chemical industries has slowed down, which in turn has led to employment challenges for professionals in this field. Combating pollution is an inevitable trend in societal development, and such progress requires sacrificing the interests of some people – which is both possible and normal.
:) Blindly launching industrial projects with overcapacity in order to achieve high returns at extremely low production costs – in other words, it’s like killing the chicken in order to get its eggs! The development trajectory of British industry has set a model of success for the world! ~~~
1. Pollution of the environment affects future generations. In this way, it won’t be going too far in correcting the mistake. 2. That won’t happen; long-term pain is not the same as short-term pain, and it may even give rise to new technologies.
Such control is conducive to the healthy development of enterprises, as well as the benefit of the country and its people.