As I waded through websites and information packets from law schools touting their specialized environmental programs in the fall of 2009, trying to finalize my decisions about where to apply, one opportunity in particular made Vermont Law School (VLS) stand out.  This opportunity came in the form of the U.S.-China Partnership for Environmental Law’s “joint research projects” (JRPs).  I had previous experience meshing time abroad with writing policy papers, and after spending time in Geneva, rural Bangladesh, and Copenhagen for the United Nation’s 15th annual climate change conference (UNFCCC COP15), I found the type of work that would cement my decision to attend law school: environmental justice.

In spite of my earlier experiences, I had never written a comparative paper with a partner living in the country of comparison.  The JRP program presented such a unique opportunity to not only study a country that has become a major player in environmental law, but to really understand it from the perspective of my equal on the other side of the world.  Knowing I needed to make this opportunity a part of my law school experience, I applied and was accepted during the spring of 2011.  Shortly thereafter, I was partnered with Wang Pianpian, a student at Sun Yat-sen University (SYSU) in Guangzhou, based on our common interest in exploring the role of public participation and environmental justice in waste incineration facility siting decisions.

As one of the few JRP participants who had no previous experience studying or spending time in China, my partner graciously let me use a significant portion of the fall semester getting a grasp on the relevant Chinese law and the current state of affairs in the areas where the waste incineration facilities are being proposed and built.  Relying entirely on email and Skype, Pianpian and I developed a working outline of the paper, began to amass research, and set out on the writing process.  In spite of my partner’s incredible spoken English, we encountered the inevitable misunderstandings associated with this type of work, and we both looked forward to our face-to-face meeting at the end of the semester to sort through these challenges.

Along with several other JRP colleagues, I flew into Hong Kong the evening of December 23rd and arrived in Guangzhou by train on the afternoon of the 24th where our group was greeted by my partner and other students from SYSU.  I was the only VLS student partnered with a Chinese student in Guangzhou; everyone else would be meeting up with their JRP partners at their respective universities in Beijing later in the week when our VLS group traveled north.

The SYSU campus was quite unlike any of my own U.S. university experiences, attending first a small liberal arts college in Pennsylvania and then coming to even smaller VLS.  Noticeably greener than anything I had or would end up seeing during my three weeks in the country, the campus met Professor Jason Czarnezski’s description as an oasis in the middle of urban China.  Although disappointed that I wouldn’t be able to spend much time exploring Guangzhou as my classmates, I feel lucky to have been able to experience the campus from a student perspective – using its café spaces to work and dining in its canteens with Pianpian.

After a big group dinner on campus the night of the 24th hosted by Professor Czarnezki and his family, Pianpian and I got to work preparing our presentation set to be given the afternoon of the 27th at SYSU School of Law.  The next day we were scheduled to meet with Pianpian’s advisor, and so we spent the morning preparing and editing a bilingual PowerPoint presentation on our paper as we had been writing it.  It became apparent during our afternoon meeting with Li Zhiping, Pianpian’s advisor, and Adam Moser from the US-China Partnership that there had been some misunderstanding about the core definition of “participation” in our paper.  Up until that point, I had been under the impression that we were broadly considering “public participation” while Li Zhiping stressed the importance of moving beyond public to the new realm of “community participation.”

Although Pianpian assured me otherwise, I was concerned her advisor would not receive our presentation well if we didn’t find a way to incorporate her recommendations and expectations on the 27th.  Both of us, tired from a long day and the prospect of reworking our presentation, opted for dinner at one of the SYSU canteens and calling it an early night in order to start fresh the next morning.

The weather on the 26th supported our renewed enthusiasm for the project as we spent the morning and afternoon enjoying the sunny warm weather working outside at a café on campus.  After having spent two days together we found ourselves in a comfortable working groove as we switched back and forth, sharing the tasks of reading, writing, and eating.  That afternoon we visited the Urban Planning Office for an interview to help with our project’s research.

Unfortunately, the representative did not speak English but Pianpian, as always, stepped in to help translate and ensure that I could participate effectively.  Our interviewee shed light on the factors that go into shaping facility siting decisions, indicating that his office seeks to strike a cost-benefit balance between the plans set forth by different levels of government, the societal costs associated with potential protests, the expense of transporting waste from urban to rural areas, and the opinions of the community along with other information retrieved from the EIA.

After a dim sum breakfast with guests Gloria Ma and Dan Cederberg from the U.S. Consulate Environmental Office, the JRP students traveled to SYSU School of Law located in the incredibly oversized university “mega center,” home to 11 Chinese universities.  After a tour of the law school and still full from the incredible process of our dim sum breakfast, we were presented with lunch in one of the law school’s conference rooms, and then it was time for Pianpian and I to give our presentation.  It prompted questions from both students and professors, Chinese and U.S. alike, and that process helped Pianpian and I clarify our own approach to the subject and provided new outlets for us to consider as we move forward this semester.

Ultimately through this process, our project has come to focus on first defining community, whether that be geographically, economically, or through common interests, and then considering the platforms available to differently situated communities to participate in the process of site selection for the incineration facilities.  This comes in the context of the general trend that wealthier communities tend to become involved after the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process is complete, but prior to construction of the facility, often defining victory as preventing the facility from being built.  Poorer communities, on the other hand, tend to become involved in questioning a facility’s placement only after it’s been built and health effects are felt which can be tied, at least theoretically, to the nearby facility, often defining victory as being repaid for injuries.  Recognizing this pattern has similarly arisen in the United States, the paper will utilize a comparative method to determine what dictates success for different types of communities.  The paper will also seek to determine whether there’s a way to circumvent this pattern, which raises a host of environmental justice implications, to ultimately define success across communities by their ability to participate in an original and thoroughly completed EIA.

Shortly after our presentation, I said good-bye to Pianpian as the VLS students boarded the bus to head to the Guangzhou airport for our flight that evening to Beijing.  Having gotten my academic obligations out of the way during the first leg of the trip, I had the opportunity to spend some more time exploring areas of Beijing I would have never discovered on my own with Adam, the city’s resident and unofficial tour guide extraordinaire.  After my JRP colleagues gave their respective presentations at CUPL and Renmin University, I took the opportunity to spend some more time in the city with three other VLS students, eventually traveling to Harbin together to see the ice festival and ineffectively escape the conditions of a more typical Vermont winter.  I arrived back in Vermont on January 9th to start up the spring semester at VLS, and both Pianpian and I are looking forward to making big strides in our work for the VLS version of our presentation later this spring, and eventually for our completed project.

China’s promise of easier living herds Tibetan nomads into jobless penury
Sydney Morning Herald

EU asks airlines emissions fee opponents for alternatives
AFP

19 February 2012

Weatherwatch: Dirty glaciers melt faster than clean glaciers
The Guardian

18 February 2012

Apple Factories in China Open Doors amid Concerns About Worker Conditions
PCWorld

17 February 2012

China Raises Resources Tax on Iron, Tin, Molybdenum Production
Bloomberg

Guizhentang, Company Linked To Bear Bile Extraction, Blasted By Chinese Critics
Huffington Post

16 February 2012

China Holds Key to Climate Change
The Diplomat

15 February 2012

Emerging economies slam Canada over Kyoto withdrawal
Montreal Gazette

Worsening air pollution costs China dearly: study
Reuters

14 February 2012

EU Airline Carbon Tax Hurts Climate Change Fight, Claims China …
The Huffington Post

Why Electric Cars Are More Polluting than Gas Guzzlers — at Least in China
TIME

EU airline charge hurts climate fight-China, India
Reuters

Apple Says Fair Labor Association Began Foxconn Inspection
Bloomberg

13 February 2012

Chinese Electric Car Pollution More Harmful to Humans Than Gas Cars
U.S. News & World Report

EU Vows to Keep Airline-Emission Levies as China-India Opposition Mounts
Bloomberg

12 February 2012

Aviation industry warns of trade war over EU carbon tax
AFP

Chemical Waste Dumping, a Cottage Industry in China
The Epoch Times

11 February 2012

Calgary may have to wait several years for giant pandas
Calgary Herald

This past December I visited China for the first time in four years.  I won’t try to explain what it meant for me to see the place again, but I can say that I was reasonably prepared for the changes I saw.  I’ve spent much of my adult life tracking China’s changes.  I first visited China in 1999, and stayed for a year.  I then began graduate work in modern Chinese history.  In the two years leading up to the Beijing Olympics, I found myself in Beijing working on assignment as a sports journalist and sometime freelance writer, with a dose of civic development research on the side.  Given the chance to explore Beijing again just a few months ago, I saw much that was altered, but still the place was familiar enough.  Economic and industrial growth, accompanied by new social currents; I felt I recognized the patterns.  However, this time, in December 2011, I arrived as a Joint Research Project fellow at the VLS US-China Partnership for Environmental Law, and I found that this let me engage with those patterns in a way that was not previously available to me.

My experiences while living and working in China strongly informed my decision to pursue a career in environmental law and policy.  For the Chinese and foreign journalists and academics I worked with, the environmental consequences of China’s growth formed a topic of growing concern.  A concern for China’s natural environment and associated public health issues hung in the background of any given story, be it a straight-forward account of growing industrial production or be it an analysis of the growing income disparity between rural and urban areas.  At some point, I decided that I wanted to engage with the processes of change in China more directly, and I guessed that the environmental question would offer the most comprehensive avenue.

Students involved in the VLS US-China Partnership have the opportunity to work with directly with counterparts in China to develop an environmental research project with real and immediate policy implications, all the more so because of the growing importance of environmental issues in China’s policy discourse.  There’s a great deal to navigate in the process, but looking back so far I’m amazed by how far we’ve come.

In September 2011 I made contact with my research partner, Pan Qing, and we began to work together over email and the ever-reliable Skype.  We began with a simple premise: we would research China’s renewable energy development in light of recently published production targets set in the Twelfth Five Year Plan.  Pan Qing is a doctoral candidate at Renmin University in Beijing, specializing in China’s renewable energy policy, and as such offers an indispensable perspective.  Over the first two months or so, we refined our topic to cover the development of large-scale wind-generated electricity.  We came to this topic gradually, and almost in real time as new materials became available and the scope of the central government’s plans for wind power became more clear.

China is currently the world’s leading energy consumer, and the world’s foremost producer of greenhouse gas emissions.  The International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook predicts that, given the continuation of current trends, China’s overall energy consumption will account for 30% of global growth in energy demand between 2009 and 2035.  Faced with this prospect and wary of the threats posed by pollution and global climate change, central government planners hope to greatly reduce the carbon intensity of China’s energy-producing industries.  Electricity production accounts for most of China’s energy consumption, and as a result wind-generated electricity now plays a major role in low-carbon energy policy.

Wind-generation capacity in China has grown rapidly over the past decade or so, from an estimated 28 MW in 1996 to 42 GW, or ten times that amount, in 2010.  Policy makers project that this trend will continue, and even increase.  The Twelfth Five Year Plan calls for an increase in share of non-fossil energy in the total national energy mix from its current level of 8.3% to 11.4% by 2015, with wind-generated electricity playing a major role.  Looking further ahead, the IEA’s China Wind Energy Roadmap 2050, jointly published with China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), provides for new 20 GW of wind capacity to be installed every year between 2020 and 2030, by this time accounting for some 15% of all installed power capacity.  Currently, both state-owned and private companies are developing massive wind farms in Inner Mongolia and in Gansu province.

When I arrived in Beijing in December, Pan Qing and I had two days to conduct interviews with wind energy experts around Beijing and to prepare to present on our research at Renmin University Law School.  Over the previous few months our focus was China’s Renewable Energy Law (REL), which creates a feed-in tariff regime intended to foster the growth of renewable energy industries.  A feed-in tariff system provides incentives for renewable electricity developers by providing a guarantee that they can sell electricity to their local electrical grid at a set rate for a set length of time, and thus ensure a return on their investments.  Following this model, the REL regime requires that grid companies purchase all wind-generated electricity in their regions at set rates that vary by region, and that they provide grid-connection services.  However, this program faces considerable obstacles, not the least of which is inconsistent enforcement of the REL itself.

Over the very busy two days before our presentation, Pan Qing and I first interviewed administrators at a major state-owned wind power development company, and then interviewed regulators at SERC, a state organ responsible for regulating China’s electrical infrastructure and pricing systems.  Our brief fieldwork produced a significant shift in the perspective we brought to our research.  Our informants explained that, yes, the REL feed-in tariff was an important driver of wind power development.  However, they also explained that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), pursuant to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, played a similarly strong role in encouraging the spread of wind power by drawing indirect investment from more developed countries.  We learned that we had picked an exciting moment for our research, in that the CDM board had recently voted to end funding for China’s wind power projects, judging that internal policies such as the REL should be sufficient for continued growth.

Pan Qing and I thus learned that our research could be further narrowed to a simple question: what drives the growth of wind-generated electricity in China?  This question opens discussions on the role of the CDM program, the strengths and weaknesses of the REL, and the vital role played at all times by changing technologies.  Once we stumbled across this question, sometime between 2 and 3 in the morning, I think (fortunately, Renmin boasts a couple of nice all-night cafes), our presentation developed smoothly.  Despite the general fatigue, I think Pan Qing and I really enjoyed presenting on our material, and we garnered much- needed and useful feedback from her advisor and other scholars.

Following our presentations, Pan Qing and I dined with our fellow Joint Research Program participants, and then generally went our separate ways.  I stayed in Beijing for about a week, visiting old friends and colleagues, and meeting once more with Pan Qing to set out a rough plan for the Spring semester.  I told many people about my project, and the responses were interesting.  In general, I encountered a widespread interest both in China’s environmental challenges and in the efforts being made to answer them.  I found many of my old contacts to be surprisingly well-informed as the technologies involved in building China’s wind farms, and enthusiastic as the great scale of the effort.  It was a nice way to finish my trip.  The challenges to making China’s low-carbon energy policy function in the long term are significant, but I found an optimism and deliberate application to the effort of it, and I’m excited to see what happens next.

There are numerous reasons put forward for why Chinese ODI is different from that of the West. An important factor is that Chinese companies are late to the game, and this means that earlier investors already grabbed the best places for extraction projects, those that are easier to access and in relatively politically stable areas – hence, China in Sudan. It’s alleged that China supports dictators, but how this differs significantly from US support for the Saudis or several Central Asian dictators is rarely detailed. (Though, China’s $98 million “loan” toward the completion of the Robert Mugabe School of Intelligence does it no help in the realm of public opinion.)

For all the attention paid to addressing China’s ODI issues, events unfolding in the US at the Securities and Exchange Commission and at the Supreme Court hold the potential to significantly impact the future of ODI around the world. The SEC will soon close a long comment period on new disclosure requirements for extractive industry issuers, as required by the 2010 Dodd-Frank Law (Section 1504). Meanwhile, the US Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments at the end of this month in the case of Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, and decide whether corporations can be held liable for human right violations under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS).

Both of these developments could impact Chinese companies. The SEC’s proposed rules would require companies broadly engaged in extractive industries to disclose “in an interactive format” payments made to governments on a per project basis. The rules would directly impact nearly every major oil and gas company, including PetroChina, and eight of the world’s most profitable mining companies. More importantly, the EU and the London Stock Exchange are considering the adoption of similar disclosure rules. (Read more at Greenwire.)

Bill Gates is supportive of the SEC’s push for disclosure. He advocated for the EU to adopt such rules at the G20 meeting in the fall of 2011, and recently wrote to encourage the SEC to NOT give into industry pressure to weaken proposed rules.

Predictably, many of the same companies opposed to the SEC’s rules have submitted amicus briefs to the Supreme Court urging it to limit the reach of the Alien Tort Statute when it decides the Kiobel case. Those companies are not alone. The Government’s of the UK, the Netherlands and Germany also submitted amicus briefs in support of Shell, putting them at odds with the Obama administration. (More at Lawfare, including a link to all amicus briefs.)

It’s worth noting that these legal events are at opposite ends of the spectrum, but both are nearly universally opposed by industry. The SEC rules under Section 1504 of Dodd-Frank only require disclosure of payments made to governments, something that should not increase liability risks for companies that are operating ethically. At the other end of the spectrum is the ATS, and corporate liability for internationally recognized human right violations. One hopes that complicity from corporations in human rights violations is not so common as to be a real concern for all the companies that have submitted amicus briefs in support of Shell.

What’s really at stake? Merely change. Increased transparency in the extractive industries and corporate liability for human rights abuses under the ATS could potentially propel a change in how international investments are done – a change not seen since the end of colonialism.  It is a change that is needed to ensure the more sustainable and more equitable use of resources.

The reason Chinese ODI raises eyebrows, is the same reason that China’s economic growth raises eyebrows. If every person in China consumes like the average US consumer, then we know sustainable development does not exist. If every Chinese company invests abroad in the same manner as extractive industries from the West did for so long, then it is unlikely that the old model of invest, plunder, develop and pollute will change either. If there is to be hope for a more sustainable development model, then it should start with those that have already reaped so much from the old model. Those companies and nations have a responsibility to the developing world and to their own youth, to help develop a more responsible system of international resource investment and trade.

I handed in my last exam and began packing for my trip to China over winter break: this year I would not be headed home for the holidays. We landed in Hong Kong in the late evening, but unable to sleep, we walked to the waterfront to take in some of the city. After eating some fish ball soup and seeing the remnants of a large night market it finally sank in that I was back in China.

The next day we took the train to Guangzhou for the first official stop on our tour. Guangzhou is home to Sun Yat-sen University, the home school of one of the Chinese law student partners. My partner, Dong Po, studies at China University of Political Science and Law (CUPL) in Beijing so I have a few days to relax before we will get to work. Guangzhou is a very modern city with some great food and attractions. We eat hot pot, a dish where meat and vegetables are cooked in a pot of boiling spicy water at the table and some excellent seafood.

After three days in Guangzhou, we boarded a plane to China’s capital for the second leg of our journey. Beijing is a massive, sprawling city with some of the worst traffic and pollution in the world. Our research project is about the link between these two problems: cars. The night we arrive at our hotel my partner is waiting to greet us. It’s great to finally meet my partner who, up until now, I’ve only seen as a small blurry image on my computer as we Skype. After chatting for a while we part ways with plans to get to work early the next day.

On our first work day we meet one of Dong Po’s professors at CUPL. We go through a draft of our paper with him and he offers some “big picture” suggestions for what we should focus on and some advice about what problems we might encounter. Our paper is about using market-based incentives to clean up China’s vehicle fleet. One thing we want to be careful about in our research is finding any unintended consequences of incentives or disincentives in the market. For example, in the United States there is something called the “Gas Guzzler” tax, which is levied on vehicles that do not reach the specified fuel efficiency. Unfortunately, this disincentive failed to cover SUVs and Congress never fixed the loophole. The result was that a well-intentioned law that sought to encourage fuel efficiency had a role to play in the rise of the infamously inefficient SUV.

After doing some work on our presentation, Dong Po and I felt it was time for a little field trip into the city. Our mission? To find some of the electric car charging stations that China’s State Grid has constructed in Beijing. China’s ambitious goals for “new energy vehicles” include rapid adoption of electric vehicles as a leapfrog technology. Unfortunately, it appears Beijing’s charging stations are few and far between and the stations that do exist are not currently being used. One of the larger stations is actually behind a private parking lot and it appears the only entrance currently requires would-be chargers to pay a fee to enter the lot. We snap a few pictures at two different locations and head back for a group dinner.

The next day, Dong Po and I head to an interview with Vance Wagner at the International Council on Clean Transportation. We talk more specifically about car exchange rebate programs where consumers receive a subsidy towards the purchase of a new vehicle in exchange for scrapping their older, high-polluting vehicles. The subsidy program, similar to the US’s “Cash for Clunkers” program is available nationwide in China, but Beijing also adds a hefty additional subsidy as an additional incentive. We learn that the vehicle exchange program is going to play a major role in China’s NOx reduction targets in the Twelfth Five Year Plan. After our interview, we get to work on finalizing our presentation for the next morning at CUPL.

The next day, we listen to presentations about China’s energy security, nuclear power, the renewable energy feed-in tariff law, and hydropower development on the Mekong Delta. Our presentation goes well and the students seem interested in our research. We cap off the evening with a group dinner and prepare to part ways for the rest of our break.

Looking back, our trip was a great success. Not only did we gain valuable information through interviews and field trips that we would not have been possible, I also made a good friend in my partner Dong Po. Our collaboration, like our friendship, will continue and contribute to the mutual cooperation between the United States and China.

China’s strategic change on climate has wider aim
The Australian

9 February 2012

High demand for sea turtles in China sends poachers toward Philippines
Public Radio International PRI

Apple Hit With 250000 Signatures Protesting Labor Conditions in China
Mashable

More enviro-tech sectors added to China’s ‘encouraged’ list
Environmental Finance

Beijing to cut air pollution by 15 percent by 2015
Reuters

8 February 2012

Mixed messages
National Post

The Himalayas and nearby peaks have lost no ice in past 10 years, study shows
The Guardian

7 February 2012

Reports: China environmental crises, costs rising
Boston.com (AP)

China spends $50 billion a year on renewable energy
The Citizen Daily

China’s Booming Paper Industry Bad for the Environment
The Epoch Times

6 February 2012

China bars its airlines from paying EU carbon tax
Associated Press

China escalates trade war with EU by banning airlines from paying carbon taxes on flights
Daily Mail

EU Rebuffs China’s Challenge to Airline Emission System
New York Times

Pollution takes heavy toll on China
UPI.com

5 February 2012

Malaysia plant threatens China grip on rare earths
AFP

4 February 2012

Chinese environment official fired after toxic river spill
GlobalPost

Special Case Study

Chinese Lawyer Barred From Meeting With Merkel
ABC News

2 February 2012

China quietly shelves new diesel emission standards
The Guardian

Eight Questions: Tim Wright on China’s Blood-Stained Coal
Wall Street Journal (blog)

Op-Ed: China — an environmental nightmare for the world
DigitalJournal.com

Li Keqiang and Green Growth
The Diplomat

1 February 2012

China’s disregard for the environment shows no sign of improving
Telegraph.co.uk

31 January 2012

China’s largest freshwater lake dries up
The Guardian

China mulls tough emissions rules for cement makers -media
Reuters

China rare earths safe from WTO ruling on export curbs
Reuters

China detains seven over river pollution scandal
Telegraph.co.uk

China hits potholes on road to green autos
Edmonton Journal

China Loses WTO Appeal on Raw-Material Exports
Wall Street Journal

30 January 2012

US, China and the Rest – Is the Global Order Really Changing?
Huffington Post UK

China to pilot emissions trading system
FutureGov Magazine

Cadmium spill threatens water supplies of major Chinese city
The Guardian

China’s Game-Changing Water Policies
Council on Foreign Relations (blog)

Fireworks And Air Pollution Linked In Beijing Lunar New Year Celebration
Huffington Post Canada

27 January 2012

China cadmium spill threatens drinking water for millions
Reuters

Seven years ago, I visited China for the first time not really knowing whether to believe the reports of the country’s prodigious growth. However, the sea of cranes and the array of rising steel skeletons across the Shanghai skyline confirmed the reports from the news media heralding China’s extraordinary development. At the time, I was an environmental consultant specializing in environmental site assessments and hazardous waste site cleanup; so naturally, I wondered what kind of implications this type of breakneck growth would have on the environment.

The US-China Partnership has given me a chance to research and write about these implications. The program enables Vermont Law School students to partner with Chinese law students to write about an important environmental issue in China. While so many topics appeared to be ripe for research, the issue of nuclear safety seemed particular relevant to me. Earlier in the year, the tragedy of Fukushima Daiichi in Japan not only thrust nuclear safety to the forefront of international environmental issues, but it provided a much needed impetus to update, or in some cases, craft nuclear safety regulation across the world. Nuclear safety is of particular importance in China where, due to ever-increasing energy demands, the government has embarked upon a plan to increase its nuclear power capability by a factor of nearly eight by 2020. Already, there are more than two dozen nuclear power plants under construction and many more are in the planning stages. Many in the nuclear industry, however, are concerned that this rapid development may be done at the expense of safety.

My project partner, Dong Xuemin, from the Chinese University of Political Science and Law (CUPL), shares my interest in exploring nuclear safety issues and has in fact studied the issue in the past. Over email, the phone, and skype, we spent the fall semester researching, outlining, and then writing a draft paper about nuclear safety in China.

After four months of planning, dozens of skype sessions, and a take-home exam written on a plane somewhere over the Pacific Ocean, my wife and I arrived in China…almost. Our first stop was Hong Kong, a “Special Administrative Region” or SAR, located just east of China. In retrospect, Hong Kong was the ideal in-between destination for a Vermonter visiting mainland China. The blend of western and Chinese culture provided us with the “training wheels” we needed to make the adjustment to the Far East. There was, however, no adjustment needed from a culinary perspective: starting with my first pork bun at Lin Heung Teahouse, I was smitten with the food of China. From the dim sum in Hong Kong (called yum cha in Guangzhou) to the Sichuan hot pot to the array of Yunnan mushroom dishes, I loved every bite I took on this trip.

After an eventful few days touring Hong Kong, we met up with the other VLS students and took the train to Guangzhou. We were greeted on arrival by Sara Imperiale’s partner who graciously escorted us from the train station to the beautiful tree-lined campus of Sun Yat-sen University. Over the next few days while Sara was busy collaborating with her partner on what turned out to be an excellent presentation, the rest of the VLS group had a tremendous few days in Guangzhou exploring the city and preparing for our own presentations later that week.

The next stop on our trip was a cold and snowy Beijing. It was here, after dozens of emails and countless skype sessions, that I finally met Xuemin, my Chinese research partner. For the last four months, Xuemin and I had engineered a most amazing collaborative system of knowledge sharing. Beginning in August, we would skype nearly every week to discuss our project. During each session, we would brainstorm questions that we had about nuclear safety either in China or the United States. We would then assign one another the questions, spend the week researching, and report back the following week with our results. While we both gathered some incredibly helpful information, the secretive nature of nuclear power in both the United States and especially in China stymied our progress.

We originally hoped to take a “lessons learned” approach from the United States and China by exploring both the successful and not so successful elements of nuclear safety regulation in each country. However, it became clear that finding any information regarding nuclear safety in China would be extremely difficult. Nonetheless, Xuemin gathered some helpful information, particularly regarding the many levels of regulation in China. Currently, China does not regulate nuclear safety issues under one law as the United States does with the Atomic Energy Act. Instead, the agency tasked with regulating nuclear safety in China, the National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA), uses an assortment of laws, rules, regulations, and treaties to regulate nuclear safety. To complicate matters further, the corporations that build and operate nuclear power plants in China are state-owned and are charged by their superiors at the highest levels of government with ambitious expansion plans. Thus, it appears that the NNSA, a relatively low-level agency, may have considerable difficult in enforcing the existing framework of nuclear regulation.

Over the course of the three days Xuemin and I had together in Beijing, we worked furiously on our paper and on the presentation we would give at the end of the week. The only breaks we took were for some excellent meals at Xuemin’s and Dong Puo’s (Brian Marshall’s partner) favorite local restaurants. Thanks in part to Xuemin’s determined work ethic and to the wonderful food that energized our late-night study sessions, we made substantial progress on our paper and put together an excellent presentation. In the evening after our presentation, I bid Xuemin goodbye hoping that she would come to Vermont Law School to study this summer (several of our partners will travel to Vermont to study starting in May).

The next morning, my wife and I traveled to Shanghai for a few days to visit friends and then traveled to Tengchong, a city in the far southwest portion of China near the border with Myanmar (Burma). While the foreign media has largely focused on industrial growth in China, we witnessed another side of China’s development in Tengchong: a rapidly growing tourist and retirement infrastructure. Apparently, this city at the foot of several dormant volcanoes and in close proximity to a series of hot springs known as the Sea of Heat, has been pegged as a domestic tourist and retirement center. Gated communities promising the “dreams of Napa California living” ringed the City and scores of hotels were being built above the Sea of Heat (including one in which we stayed where water from the hot springs was pumped in Jacuzzis located in each room).

Considering all the wealth that has accumulated in China and the travel limitations that the Chinese face, I suppose it should come as no surprise that the domestic tourism industry in China is thriving. In the end, it’s just another manifestation of the prodigious growth I witnessed seven years ago in Shanghai. It is this growth, in addition to extraordinary industrial and commercial development, that drives the urgent demand for energy of all kinds including nuclear power. While news pieces and scholarly articles can certainly tell this story, seeing it firsthand helped me put our project and everything I’d read about China into focus.

Economic ties will stabilise strategic relations with China: Ronen Sen
Times of India

China counter: Arunachal to get mega hydel project
Hindustan Times

Eco Etiquette: Is ‘Made In America’ Better For The Environment?
Huffington Post

Global strategy dictates China’s green stance
The Australian

25 January 2012

Dispute over drug in feed limiting US meat exports
msnbc.com

Conoco Phillips agrees $160m payout for China oil spill
BBC News

China, India enter heating-up Arctic race
Asia Times Online

24 January 2012

Pipeline serves only China’s oil interests not Canada’s
Owen Sound Sun Times

23 January 2012

China hits back at US wind turbine import investigation
The Guardian

China’s environmental year in review – in pictures
The Guardian

China urbanisation rattles on, but at what cost?
Yahoo!7 News

22 January 2012

Political Pollution: How Bad Air is Slowly Changing China
TIME (blog)

China Releases More Detailed Air Pollution Data
RedOrbit

Asia loses its taste for shark fin
AFP

21 January 2012

Beijing begins measuring tiny air pollutants
Reuters

20 January 2012

Report: Climate Change Could Hamper China’s Rise
China Briefing

Can China Support Its New Urban Majority?
The Atlantic Cities

19 January 2012

China issues grim warning on effects of climate change – mirror.co.uk
The Daily Mirror

China moves to tackle ‘grim’ pollution issues
Irish Times

Yangtze Basin lakes shrinking as climate change, development takes its toll
WWF International

Cheap Chinese Panels Spark Solar Power Trade War
NPR