Skip to content

China’s Low CO2 Climate

September 29, 2014

By Paul Homewood 




According to China Daily, developed countries are to blame for today’s climate, because of our cumulative emissions since the industrial revolution.

Perhaps they would prefer to return to their low CO2 climate!







And in 1935, more Yangtze floods claimed 145,000 lives.

 China’s 1935 Yangtze river flood; 145,000 dead



Four years later, the terrible floods of 1939 took an estimated half a million lives on the North China Plain.




Moor floods in 1954.



Then in 1959, the Yellow River flooded, killing an estimated 2 million, according to the official International Disaster Database, making it the second worst flood since 1900. Wikipedia go on to comment:

In July 1959, the Yellow River flooded in East China. According to the Disaster Center, the flood directly killed, either through starvation from crop failure or drowning, an estimated 2 million people, while other areas were affected in other ways as well.

In 1960, an estimated 60% of agricultural land in northern China received no rain at all. The Encyclopædia Britannica yearbooks from 1958 to 1962 also reported abnormal weather, followed by droughts and floods based on Chinese government sources. This included 760 millimetres (30 in) of rain in Hong Kong across five days in June 1959, part of a pattern that hit all of Southern China.



Then there was the typhoon season of 1959, which Wiki describe:


The 1959 Pacific typhoon season was regarded as one of the most devastating years for Pacific typhoons on record, with China, Japan and the Philippines sustaining catastrophic losses.







The history of China is littered with droughts and great famines.

The four famines of 1810, 1811, 1846, and 1849 are said to have taken a toll of not less than 45,000,000 lives.

13 million more were said to have died in the Northern Chinese Famine of 1876–1879, after a drought which started in 1875, while Droughts in North China in 1920, and between 1928 and 1930 led to more than three million deaths. 



Benefits of the Industrial Revolution

Fortunately, because of the benefits brought by the industrial revolution, the toll from these sort of weather disasters is much reduced. Better planning and infrastructure have literally saved millions of lives, and modern farming methods and transport mean that food aid can be easily diverted to where they are needed in the event of flood and drought.


But as we know, of course, for the Chinese Government this has very little to do with climate, and everything to do with money. 

  1. September 29, 2014 7:07 pm

    Reblogged this on the WeatherAction News Blog.

  2. R2Dtoo permalink
    September 29, 2014 7:22 pm

    The population of China has been and still is huge! That means they have consumed much of the world’s food for centuries. I think they should have to pay the world for all the starvation experienced by others. I can only imagine how much water they have consumed.

  3. David permalink
    September 29, 2014 8:13 pm

    It’s a good point Paul and one very often conveniently overlooked by the ‘greens’. The Industrial Revolution has brought us far more benefits than costs. It would be a fool or an advocate of some sort who would pretend otherwise.

    That doesn’t mean that industrialisation hasn’t also brought some problems; climate change being an obvious case in point.

    My view is that this problem is by no means insurmountable. However, a critical component of overcoming any problem is coming to an acceptance that it exists.

    Once we’re all on board with that, I believe we’ll get there quite easily.

    • September 29, 2014 9:26 pm

      Why should climate change be a problem, whether natural or not?

    • Derek permalink
      September 30, 2014 11:16 am

      So, David, you think that once we all accept that there is a “problem with the climate” we will soon be able to solve it. I beg to differ. The climate is one of the most chaotic and complex systems there is and as we all live in different places we all experience different climates. We are nowhere near solving anything to do with it. We have hardly begun to understand it.

    • September 30, 2014 11:27 am

      Do you read any of the stuff on this blog, or not? Did you read the post on which you commented? Did any of it go in?

  4. John F. Hultquist permalink
    September 29, 2014 9:28 pm

    David says “. . .climate change being an obvious case in point.

    Sorry, but it is not obvious to me. I look around and see the same sorts of animals and plants that have been in my area for thousands of years. When the plants all die and are replaced by others not now here, climate change will be obvious.

  5. Sceptical Sam permalink
    September 30, 2014 7:26 am

    Well, given that increased levels of CO2 are having a minimal effect on global average temperature let the Chinese industrialise as fast as they can. It’s all good.

    The latest, and far stronger, science is showing climate sensitivity to CO2 to be far lower than the alarmists (and the IPCC) would have us believe.

    The positive is that with more CO2 we will have more photosynthesis which will help grow more grain and pasture. Hence more food, lower cost, less hunger. The science on that is also very clear.


  1. Screw the Hottest Year Ever have you seen that Massive Coronal Hole? | the WeatherAction News Blog

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: