Evaluate the success of strategies to reduce the impact of acid rain or photochemical smog Oliver Demaine Acid rain

n is rain which becomes acidic due to pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and sulphur dioxides, produced from burning fossil fuels. This problem is something which has been developing and increasing as the world becomes more globalised, with the increase in consumption of fossil fuels to power industry. However, acid rain has a number of negative externalities to the give area affected. Human and wildlifes health is put at risk, trees see damage from the acidic fumes and buildings begin to erode from the toxic chemicals. But to try and reduce these damaging impacts from acid rain, a number of measures have been put into place to lower the output of these gases and therefore stem the growing tide of acid rain. To evaluate these methods I will look at both the UK and China, who are both at different levels of economic development and have had different levels of success. In turn, radical methods are needed to try and decrease the impacts of acid rain, but the ability to do this depends on a variety of economic factors, which could therefore hinder any tolerance to become more green. Acid rain causes the rain to become highly acidic, which has a number of ramifications. Vegetation and eco-systems are damaged as flora is killed by this acid rain, which in turn makes the whole ecosystem unbalanced and unsustainable. This is the case for Norway, which due to the SW prevailing winds has to deal with Britains acid rain, and in turn has seen its forests being killed off. Acid rain also means that buildings, especially those with soft rocks like sandstone, are eroded by the acid rain. This means that businesses operating with these buildings have to deal with greater costs to repair these buildings. It also means that peoples homes are damaged, having social ramifications along with economic ones. In managing the effects of acid rain, China has had to implement a number of strategies ranging from decreasing its energy consumption and using clean coal. In 2003 acid rain fell on to more than 250 cities and caused a direct economic loss of $13.3 billion, nearly 3% of Chinas GDP that year. This shows how unsustainable acid rain was to the China economy, thus kick-starting strategies to limit it. The acid rain as strong too, with over 70% of cases with a pH of less than 5.0. This increase in acid rain has been due to Chinas huge economic growth rate, fuelled by an increase in population and an abundance of cheap coal. China used this cheap coal to offer low prices to the world markets, allowing it to have a comparative advantage in manufacturing and textiles. However, by 2010 China plans to reduce the amount of total industrial waste water so that it is lower than that of 1995. It is also setting in place quotas for the use of coal in certain areas. But, by 2003 the amount of sulphur dioxide emissions was up 12% from 2002 and the consumption of coal is predicted to be greater than 1.8 billion tonnes by 2005, therefore emitting an additional 6 million tonnes of sulphur dioxide. This is a clear sign that the strategies of quotas and reducing energy consumption has worked at all. China is relatively still an LEDC, with high inequalities and disparities in incomes. To effectively manage its acid rain problem it needs to move away from coal and to carbon neutral energy such as nuclear energy and HEP. Therefore it is clear the success of strategies to reduce the impact of Chinas acid rain has been limited and acid rain will remain a problem in China unless it moves away from its coal dependence. This is an example of how a country whose whole industry depends on a single resource has very little room to change. If China invests into more greener energy, the price of their productivity will increase and the Chinese economy, for industries such as textiles, will

dramatically decrease in demand. This shows that the Chinese government is unable to invest as the economic loss would be drastic for the economy. The UK has significantly reduced its air pollution since the 1950s. The UK government was forced into acting on the problem of pollutants, when a series of severe smog problems affected London and other large cities in the 1950s. Statue Law was passed by parliament, through the 1956 Clean Air Act, which forced factories to act on their output of fossil fuels. However, the most successful method was when the UK has to follow EU legislation, such as the 1989 Air Quality act which helped to reduce the output of sulphur dioxide further. The success of the UK governments efforts to reduce its pollutants levels can be seen, as between 1970-99 there has been a -82% reduction in sulphur dioxide and -30% in nitrogen oxide, both are the main chemicals involved in acid rain. The government also moved away from coal power gas stations, to cleaner energy sources, such as natural gas which is now 28%, and non-carbon energy sources now takes up 32% of the UKs energy mix. However, the UK government is still producing large amounts of pollutants, with the UK still producing half a million tonnes of sulphur dioxide in 2012. But, this is still a reduction of 6.5 million tonnes, which equates to a 92.858% reduction from 1970-2012, supporting the argument that the UK has been able to manage its emissions. Due to the UK being more developed than China, with a greater proportion of its population using a car and other motor transport networks, this has been an example of how the development of a country alters how to act on making it more green. The UK government has introduced an energy policy of 21% of the gas used by households to be reinvested into green projects such as wind farms or subsidising solar panels. The government has also invested into green projects such as 1bn into carbon capture policies, and a green bank which has a pool of 6bn to invest into green projects. In turn, this will help to reduce the UKs pollution and reduce its acid rain problem. However, this shows that the difference between developed and undeveloped nations is great, between how they can afford to take real action on the environment. This gap between LEDCs and MEDCs such as the UK and China means that effective global action is hard to take, as LEDCs are unable to afford the required capital for the changes. In conclusion, it is clear that China has been unable to take effective methods to reduce its acid rain problem. Although the Chinese government is open to change, it knows it would harm its economy drastically and therefore wouldnt take the risk. However, the UK has been able to decrease its emissions, with a clear decrease in toxic chemicals such as sulphur dioxide. This is due a string of investment and laws that have been effective in working to improve the UKs environment. Therefore, the success of the strategies has been effective for some western countries, but fundamentally less successful for those less developed countries like China.