Browsing Tag: the

    Underground Railroad 2015: Life of a Freedom Seeker
    Articles, Blog

    Underground Railroad 2015: Life of a Freedom Seeker

    August 12, 2019

    I wanted to tell the truth, I tried to get
    right at the truth in telling these stories about African Americans during the time of
    the Underground Railroad and I did a lot of research to make sure that you know I had
    at least as much accuracy about each segment of that persons life to where I could do these
    paintings. What prompted me to do this was the fact that my son, he was working on a
    paper to do with Harriet Tubman and when I heard that paper that he did orally it excited
    me so much that I wanted to hear more about the Underground Railroad. So that is probably
    the first that sort of stroked my interest and then I further read more information on
    it and afterwards you know I said I could do a lot of work to do with the Underground
    Railroad and its important, even myself I don’t know very much about the history of
    African Americans here in the United States and how they evolved and just what happened.
    So I could see vividly in my mind that I could do a lot of paintings you know with this,
    I could make great paintings from this and telling the story. I can tell the visual story
    people don’t know and its not taught enough in schools, grade school or high school, you
    know you have to major in it to really know about black history and so with these paintings
    here I just feel like I could be very vivid, these are pictures, imagery, you know it sticks
    in peoples mind. That’s one of the reasons why some of these paintings are life sized
    is because that I want the viewer to be a part of it in a way where they’re in the scene,
    not so much to be apart to where they’re in action of it but you know they feel what’s
    going on, it moves them in that sense, they’re like a bystander but they’re there. I try
    to think about how can I make the composition in a way where it keeps the viewer’s eye moving.
    Action is really important, you know that you’ve saw in these pieces so when I started
    drawing, I think about how I can sort of exaggerate the imagery to really get the person really
    involved or know what I’m trying to say with the people right away. If you were a slave
    back then and you wanted freedom and you were you know determined to get it you would experience
    this, so you know I can talk about it in a calm way but people would not get the impact,
    people would not have the idea what it took for a freedom seeker to attain freedom. I’m
    not watering it down, I’m giving it to you like it was written and like I said when I
    heard this story I said I can make paintings out of this, I can show it very vividly. Now
    I’m not trying to you know promote violence or anything like that but its just what happened
    and people tend to want to water things down and I just want people to know the truth,
    I’d like for them to come away with a good sense of history or knowledge about African
    American history and not just with blacks but with Whites, all types of nationalities,
    I want them to know about the history that’s very important to me and also to get a sense
    of satisfaction by the artistic-ness of the artwork, conveying that idea or the story.

    KYTC Minute – February 24, 2011
    Articles, Blog

    KYTC Minute – February 24, 2011

    August 12, 2019

    Hi this is Miranda Thacker with your KYTC
    Minute. A project funded in part with a seventeen-and-a-half million dollar grant under the American Recovery
    and Reinvestment Act is creating jobs by rehabilitating railroad infrastructure in Kentucky and two
    other Appalachian states – Tennessee and West Virginia. Governor Steve Beshear this
    month joined with officials of the R.J. Corman Railroad Group to celebrate the kick-off of
    the company’s Appalachian Regional Short Line Project. This video shows a crew working
    on R.J. Corman track in downtown Frankfort. In Kentucky, the project will result in improvements
    to 246 miles of track along lines in 12 Kentucky counties. They are Bullitt, Clark, Fayette,
    Franklin, Jefferson, Logan, Nelson, Shelby, Scott, Todd, Warren and Woodford. Work includes
    rail and grade crossings and bridge and tunnel improvements. Terms of the project are outlined
    in a grant agreement between the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Kentucky Transportation
    Cabinet. The funding is from a so-called TIGER grant. TIGER stands for “Transportation
    Investment Generating Economic Recovery.” This has been your KYTC minute. Visit
    every Thursday for updated information.

    The Industrial Economy: Crash Course US History #23
    Articles, Blog

    The Industrial Economy: Crash Course US History #23

    August 12, 2019

    Episode 23: The Rise of the Industrial Economy Hi I’m John Green this is Crash Course U.S.
    History and today we’re going to discuss economics and how a generation of-
    Mr. Green, Mr. Green, is this going to be one of those boring ones no wars or generals
    who had cool last words or anything? Alright, Me From The Past, I will give you
    a smidge of Great Man history. But only a smidge.
    So today we’re gonna discuss American industrialization in the decades after the Civil War, during
    which time the U.S. went from having per capita about a third of Great Britain’s industrial
    output to becoming the richest and most industrialized nation on earth.
    Libertage Meh, you might want to hold off on that Libertage,
    Stan because this happened mostly thanks to the Not Particularly Awesome Civil War, which
    improved the finance system by forcing the introduction of a national currency and spurred
    industrialization by giving massive contracts to arms and clothing manufacturers.
    The Civil War also boosted the telegraph, which improved communication, and gave birth
    to the transcontinental railway via the Pacific Railway Act of 1862, all of which increased
    efficiency and productivity. So thanks, Civil War!
    Intro If you want to explain America’s economic
    growth in a nutshell chalk it up to G, D, and L: Gerard, Depardieu, and Lohan. No, Geography,
    Demography and Law. However, while we’re on the topic, when
    will Gerard, Depardieu, and Lindsay Lohan have a baby? Stan, can I see it? Yes. Yes.
    Geographically, the U.S. was a huge country with all the resources necessary for an industrial
    boom. Like, we had coal, and iron and, later, oil. Initially we had water to power our factories,
    later replaced by coal. And we had amber waves of grain to feed our growing population which
    leads to the Demography. America’s population grew from 40 million
    in 1870 to 76 million in 1900 and 1/3 of that growth was due to immigration.
    Which is good for economies. Many of these immigrants flooded the burgeoning cities,
    as America shifted from being an agrarian rural nation to being an industrial, urban
    one. Like, New York City became the center of commerce
    and finance and by 1898 it had a population of 3.4 million people. And the industrial
    heartland was in the Great Lakes region. Chicago became the second largest city by 1900, Cleveland
    became a leader in oil refining, and Pittsburgh was a center of iron and steel production.
    And even today, the great city of Pittsburgh still employs 53 Steelers.
    Last but not least was the Law. The Constitution and its commerce clause made the U.S. a single
    area of commerce – like a giant customs union. And, as we’ll see in a bit the Supreme
    Court interpreted the laws in a very business friendly way.
    Also, the American constitution protects patents, which encourag4B-es invention and innovation,
    or at least it used to. And despite what Ayn Rand would tell you,
    the American government played a role in American economic growth by putting up high tariffs,
    especially on steel, giving massive land grants to railroads and by putting Native Americans
    on reservations. Also, foreigners played an important role.
    They invested their capital and involved Americans in their economic scandals like the one that
    led to a depression in 1893. The U.S. was at the time was seen by Europeans as a developing
    economy; and investments in America offered much higher returns than those available in
    Europe. And the changes we’re talking about here
    were massive. In 1880, for the first time, a majority of the workforce worked in non-farming
    jobs. By 1890 2/3 of Americans worked for wages, rather than farming or owning their
    own businesses. And, by 1913 the United States produced 1/3
    of the world’s total industrial output. NOW bring out the Libertage, Stan.
    Libertage Awesome. And even better, we now get to talk
    about the perennially underrated railroads. Let’s go to the Thought Bubble.
    Although we tend to forget about them here in the U.S., because our passenger rail system
    sucks, railroads were one of the keys to America’s 19th century industrial success. Railroads
    increased commerce and integrated the American market, which allowed national brands to emerge,
    like Ivory Soap and A&P Grocery Stores. But railroads changed and improved our economy
    in less obvious ways, too: For instance, they gave us time zones, which were created by
    the major railroad companies to make shipping and passenger transport more standard. Also
    because he recognized the importance of telling time, a railroad agent named Richard Warren
    Sears turned a $50 dollar investment in watches into an enormous mail order empire, and railroads
    made it possible for him–and his eventual partner Roebuck–to ship watches, and then
    jewelry, and then pretty much everything, including unconstructed freaking houses throughout
    the country. Railroads were also the first modern corporations.
    These companies were large, they had many employees, they spanned the country. And that
    meant they needed to invent organizational methods, including the middle manager–supervisors
    to supervise supervisors. And for the first time, the owners of a company were not always
    day-to-day managers, because railroads were among the first publicly traded corporations.
    They needed a lot of capital to build tracks and stations, so they sold shares in
    the company in order to raise that money, which shares could then be bought and sold
    by the public. And that is how railroads created the first captains of industry, like Cornelius
    “They Named a University after Me” Vanderbilt and Andrew “Me Too” Carnegie (Mellon)
    and Leland “I Named a University After My Son” Stanford. The Railroad business was
    also emblematic of the partnership between the national government and industry. The
    Transcontinental Railroad, after all, wouldn’t have existed without Congressional legislation,
    federal land grants, and government sponsored bond issues.
    Thanks, Thought Bubble. Apparently it’s time for the Mystery Document.
    The rules here are simple. I guess the author of the Mystery Document
    and if I’m wrong, which I usually am, I get shocked.
    Alright. “The belief is common in America that the
    day is at hand when corporations far greater than the Erie – swaying such power as has
    never in the world’s history been trusted in the hands of mere private citizens, controlled
    by single men like Vanderbilt…– will ultimately succeed in directing government itself. Under
    the American form of society, there is now no authority capable of effective resistance.” Corporations directing government? That’s
    ridiculous. So grateful for federal ethanol subsidies
    brought to you by delicious Diet Dr. Pepper. Mmm I can taste all 23 of the chemicals.
    Anyway, Stan, I’m pretty sure that is noted muckraker Ida Tarbell. No! Henry Adams? HOW
    ARE THERE STILL ADAMSES IN AMERICAN HISTORY? That makes me worry we’ll never escape the
    Clintons. Anyway, it should’ve been Ida Tarbell. She has a great name. She was a great
    opponent of capitalism. Whatever. AH! Indeed industrial capitalists are considered
    both the greatest heroes and the greatest villains of the era, which is why they are
    known both as “captains of industry” and as “robber barons,” depending on whether
    we are mad at them. While they often came from humble origins,
    took risks and became very wealthy, their methods were frequently unscrupulous. I mean,
    they often drove competitors out of business, and generally cared very little for their
    workers. The first of the great robber barons and/or
    captains of industry was the aforementioned Cornelius Vanderbilt who rose from humble
    beginnings in Staten Island to make a fortune in transportation, through ferries and shipping,
    and then eventually through railroads, although he once referred to trains as “them things
    that go on land.” But the poster boy of the era was John D.
    Rockefeller who started out as a clerk for a Cleveland merchant and eventually became
    the richest man in the world. Ever. Yes, including Bill Gates.
    The key to Rockefeller’s success was ruthlessly buying up so many rivals that by the late
    1880s Standard Oil controlled 90% of the U.S. oil industry.
    Which lack of competition drove the price of gasoline up to like 12 cents a gallon,
    so if you had one of the 20 cars in the world then, you were mad.
    The period also saw innovation in terms of the way industries were organized. Many of
    the robber barons formed pools and trusts to control prices and limit the negative effects
    of competition. The problem with competition is that over
    time it reduces both prices and profit margins, which makes it difficult to become super rich.
    Vertical integration was another innovation – firms bought up all aspects of the production
    process – from raw materials to production to transport and distribution.
    Like, Philip Armour’s meat company bought its own rail cars to ship meat, for instance.
    It also bought things like conveyor belts and when he found out that animal parts could
    be used to make glue, he got into the glue-making business.
    It was Armour who once proclaimed to use “everything but the squeal.”
    Horizontal integration was when big firms bought up small ones. The best example of
    this was Rockefeller’s Standard Oil, which eventually became so big incidentally that
    the Supreme Court forced Standard Oil to be broken up into more than a dozen smaller oil
    companies. Which, by the way, overtime have slowly reunited
    to become the company known as Exxon-Mobil, so that worked out.
    U.S. Steel was put together by the era’s giant of finance, J.P. Morgan, who at his
    death left a fortune of only $68 million – not counting the art that became the backbone
    of the Metropolitan Museum of Art – leading Andrew Carnegie to remark in surprise, “And
    to think he was not a rich man.”[1] Speaking of people who weren’t rich, let
    us now praise the unsung heroes of industrialization: workers.
    Well, I guess you can’t really call them unsung because Woody Guthrie. Oh! Your guitar!
    And my computer! I never made that connection before.
    Anyway, then as now, the benefits of economic growth were shared…mmm shall we say…a
    smidge unevenly. Prices did drop due to industrial competition,
    which raised the standard of living for the average American worker. In fact, it was among
    the highest in the world. But due to a growing population, particularly of immigrant workers,
    there was job insecurity. And also booms and busts meant depressions in the 1870s and 1890s,
    which hit the working poor the hardest. Also, laborers commonly worked 60 hours per
    week with no pensions or injury compensation, and the U.S. had the highest rate of industrial
    injuries in the world: an average of over 35,000 people per year died on the job.
    These conditions and the uncertainty of labor markets led to unions, which were mostly local
    but occasionally national. The first national union was the Knights of
    Labor, headed by Terence V. Powderly which grew from 9 members in 1870 to 728,000 by
    1884. The Knights of Labor admitted unskilled workers,
    black workers, and women, but it was irreparably damaged by the Haymarket riot in 1886.
    During a strike against McCormick Harvesting Company, a policeman killed one of the strikers
    and in response there was a rally in Chicago’s Haymarket Square at which a bomb killed seven
    police officers. Then, firing upon the crowd, the police killed
    four people. Seven anarchists were eventually convicted of the bombing, and although Powderly
    denounced anarchism, the public still associated the Knights of Labor with violence. And by
    1902, its membership had shrunk considerably–to 0.
    The banner of organized labor however was picked up by the American Federation of Labor
    under Samuel L. Gompers. Do all of these guys have great last names?
    They were more moderate than the anarchists and the socialist International Workers of
    the World, and focused on bread and butter issues like pay, hours, and safety.
    Founded in 1886, the same year as the Haymarket Riot, the AFL had about 250,000 members by
    1892, almost 10% of whom were iron and steel workers.
    And now we have to pause to briefly mention one of the most pernicious innovations of
    the era: Social Darwinism: a perversion of Darwin’s theory that would have made him
    throw up. Although to be fair, almost everything made him throw up.
    Social Darwinists argued that the theory of survival of the fittest should be applied
    to people and also that corporations were people.
    Ergo, big companies were big because they were fitter and we had nothing to fear from
    monopolies. This pseudoscience was used to argue that
    government shouldn’t regulate business or pass laws to help poor people. It assured
    the rich that the poor were poor because of some inherent evolutionary flaw, thus enabling
    tycoons to sleep at night. You know, on a big pile of money, surrounded by beautiful
    women. But, despite the apparent inborn unfitness
    of workers, unions continued to grow and fight for better conditions, sometimes violently.
    There was violence at the Homestead Steel Strike of 1892 and the Pullman Rail strike
    of 1894 when strikers were killed and a great deal of property was destroyed.
    To quote the historian Michael Lind: “In the late 1870s and early 1880s, the United
    States had five times as many unionized workers as Germany, at a time when the two nations
    had similar populations.”[2] Unions wanted the United States and its citizens
    to imagine freedom more broadly, arguing that without a more equal economic system, America
    was becoming less, not more, free, even as it became more prosperous.
    If you’re thinking that this free-wheeling age of fast growth, uneven gains in prosperity,
    and corporate heroes/villains resembles the early 21st century, you aren’t alone.
    And it’s worth remembering that it was only 150 years ago that modern corporations began
    to form and that American industry became the leading driver in the global economy.
    That’s a blink of an eye in world history terms, and the ideas and technologies of post
    Civil War America gave us the ideas that still define how we–all of us, not just Americans–think
    about opposites like success and failure, or wealth and poverty.
    It’s also when we people began to discuss the ways in which inequality could be the
    opposite of freedom. Thanks for watching. I’ll see you next week.
    Crash Course is produced and directed by Stan Muller. Our script supervisor is Meredith
    Danko. The associate producer is Danica Johnson. The show is written by my high school history
    teacher, Raoul Meyer, Rosianna Halse Rojas, and myself. And our graphics team is Thought
    Café. Each week there’s a new caption for the
    Libertage. You can suggest captions in comments where you can also ask questions about today’s
    video that will be answered by our team of historians.
    Thanks for watching Crash Course. Make sure you’re subscribed. And as we say in my hometown,
    don’t forget to be awesome. Industrial Economy –
    ________________ [1] Brands, American Colossus p 6.
    [2] Lind, Land of Promise 171

    Chinese-Latin American Relations in a Warming World: Toward a More Sustainable Paradigm?
    Articles, Blog

    Chinese-Latin American Relations in a Warming World: Toward a More Sustainable Paradigm?

    August 12, 2019

    OK, so good morning everyone. My name is Timmons Roberts. I’m Ittleson Professor
    of Environmental Studies and Sociology here
    at Brown University. Welcome to the Watson Institute
    for International Studies. Watson seeks to promote
    a just and peaceful world through research, teaching,
    and public engagement focusing on three main
    areas, development, security, and governance. The Institute leverages
    Brown’s tradition of true interdisciplinary
    to foster innovative policy-relevant
    scholarly activities. So, a warm welcome to
    all of our speakers for making the trip
    here, and a special warm welcome to Fundacion
    Botin alumni, scholars, and others that are
    watching online. We will be remembering
    you, and hopefully we’ll be getting your questions
    in during the session. We’ll be live tweeting
    for the event. So those who are
    watching online, you can follow the discussion
    at the hashtag #CHLACC. And that catchy hashtag should
    get pretty busy during the day. We had an event back
    in April that we had 2,000 online viewers
    actually about Latin America and climate change. And so we’re hoping to get a
    large fraction of that today, and we welcome everybody. And do send in your
    questions for your panelists, which we’ll try to incorporate
    into the discussion. The conference is
    being organized today by Brown’s Climate
    and Development Lab at the Institute at Brown
    for Environment and Society and the Center for Latin
    American and Caribbean studies here at the Watson Institute. It relates to a project
    we’re being carried out between the lab– the
    Climate Development Lab– and one of the UK’s leading
    environmental organizations, E3G. So, our Climate
    and Development Lab works on policy-relevant
    research. It’s sort of a think tank of
    faculty, students, and staff. And we’re all traveling
    to the Lima negotiations in about two weeks for the
    United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
    Change, and we’ve been going for about
    the last four years. A huge thank you to
    the Fundacion Botin for generously funding this
    event, and a big thanks to the Center for Latin
    American and Caribbean studies, Professor Richard
    Snyder, and the center director and center manager,
    administrator Kate Goldman, for their support in helping
    us organize this event. Finally, thanks to the CDL team,
    the Climate and Development Lab, who which led
    the organization, Guy Edwards the mastermind,
    Allie Reilly– Allison Reilly– Marguerite Suozzo-Gole, Maria
    Camila Bustos back here, [INAUDIBLE], and Sophie
    Purdom, and Tory Hoffmeister. The timing of the conference
    is particularly pertinent. China’s is playing a major
    role across Latin America as a creditor, as an investor,
    and as a trade partner. The UN Commission for Latin
    America– ECLA, otherwise known as CEPAL in Spanish–
    and the Caribbean predicts China could displace
    the European Union to become Latin America’s second
    largest trade partner in the next year or two. The Intergovernmental Panel on
    Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report just released
    in the last few weeks. The summaries confirms that
    China and Latin America are highly vulnerable
    to the climate impacts, such as floods,
    droughts, and sea level rise. We could say much
    more about that, but we’re going to be brief. Next month, the UN Climate
    Change Negotiations will meet in Lima, which
    puts the Peruvian government in an important position as
    the chair of the negotiations. It’s hoped that countries
    will agree there on at least the basic
    framework for a draft for a new global agreement,
    which will take effect starting in 2020, but it’s
    going to start working in 2015. It has to be finalized
    in Paris next year. As the world’s largest emitter
    of greenhouse gases and soon to overtake the United
    States as the world’s largest economy, measured according
    to purchasing power parity, this year China’s contribution
    to the global response to climate change is pivotal. And the agreement in
    the last two weeks now between the United
    States and China is, I think, giving a new
    impulse to negotiations, to actions around
    the world, we hope. We’ll see in Lima really
    where we’re going. Latin American
    countries also play important roles at the
    UN Climate Negotiations, especially Brazil
    and Mexico, but also other countries like Peru,
    Venezuela, Ecuador, Chile, and Colombia. Latin America is not currently a
    major region for greenhouse gas emissions in the global sense. It depends on how you define
    that, but it’s not irrelevant. It’s about 11% of
    global emissions, with most of these coming
    from deforestation, but that’s changing as well. Deforestation rates have fallen
    sharply, especially in Brazil, by about 2/3 from their high
    in the mid-2000s as Brazil has focused particularly
    on this issue. However, sustained
    economic growth is driving an increase in
    Latin America’s emissions from energy generation and
    energy exploration, energy transport, and from agriculture,
    and from urban transportation especially. The recent US targets, I want
    to spend just a minute on. It’s being heralded as
    a vital contribution to build the momentum. The US, as you
    probably know, intends to achieve an
    economy-wide target of reducing its
    emissions by 26% to 28% below its 2005 level
    in 2025, or by 2025. China intends to achieve
    peaking of its emissions by 2030 and make its best efforts
    to peak before then. It’s also trying
    to have about 20% of its energy come from
    non-fossil fuels, which means nuclear, solar,
    wind, and other renewables. This has potentially
    enormous consequences for clean energy in
    China and in its role as the leader of green energy. In Latin America’s case,
    various Latin American countries are taking steps to
    confront climate change. Mexico has passed a
    comprehensive climate change law in 2012 with targets to
    reduce emissions by 30% by 2020 and 50% by 2050. Brazil has established a
    national greenhouse gas reduction target of
    about 36% below business as usual projected
    emissions by 2020, largely based on reducing
    deforestation rates. And they’re actually beyond
    that level right now. But deforestation may
    be coming back up. By early 2014, at least
    19 countries in the region had renewable energy policies,
    and 14 had renewable energy targets, such as Chile,
    which aims to cover about 20% of its electricity with
    renewables by 2025. At the APEC– the Asia Pacific
    Economic Cooperation– meetings and the G20– Group
    of 20– meetings earlier this month, China
    and Latin American countries discussed various new agreements
    to increase their cooperation. Mexico and China plan
    to set up a $2.4 billion investment fund to support
    infrastructure, mining, and energy projects in Mexico. You’ll hear more
    about this later. Latin America has a remarkable
    endowment of natural resources and energy reserves,
    including about 25% of the planet’s arable land,
    22% of the world’s forest areas, home to the second
    largest oil reserves outside of the Middle East. What happens to those
    fossil fuel reserves if they stay
    underground or are burnt and their carbon launched
    into the atmosphere will have determinant
    effects for Latin America and the world’s future. So as we can see, China-Latin
    American relations are very significant with
    potentially far-reaching consequences for global climate
    change and for its governance. And as an important example
    of South-South cooperation. Further, these relations
    have important ties with the Watson
    Institute’s focus on development,
    security, and governance, getting back to what we’re
    here as an institution to do. So allow me to hand over the
    program to Guy Edwards, who will moderate the session. Guy is our research
    fellow and the co-director of the Climate and
    Development Lab here at Brown
    University’s Institute at Brown for the
    Environment and Society. He’s also manages the lab’s work
    on Latin America and climate change. He’s really, I think,
    emerging as one of the world’s–
    what’s the word? I want to say the greatest
    experts on Latin American climate change. He’s been focused on this issue
    for almost a decade full time. He was the person who set
    up a site originally called Latino Cambio. It then became Intercambio
    Climatico in a partnership with the platform Latino
    Americano on Climate Change. Guy has a master’s degree
    in Latin American studies from the Institute
    of the Americas at the University
    College London. And we just completed
    a book manuscript, I’m thrilled to
    say, from MIT Press, which you’ll be
    hearing some more on as the day goes on and in
    our work in the future. It will be out I guess
    sometime next fall, but we’d be eager to get some
    feedback from some people if you have any
    interest in seeing it. So thank you very
    much for coming. I’m looking forward to the
    morning, and here you go, Guy. Thanks. [APPLAUSE] Thanks very much, Timmons,
    for that very generous introduction. And to the panelists,
    thank you for coming. We’ve been following your
    work in a number of cases for a few years
    now, so we’re really excited you could come here. Thanks to you all
    for coming as well and for those in the
    live stream joining us. I’m just going to take
    a couple of minutes just to make some
    opening remarks and then describe
    the plan for the day and then introduce our speakers
    to get the ball rolling on the presentations. So, one of the reasons we
    organized this conference today is following a
    paper Timmons and I wrote for Brookings
    Institution earlier this year called “A High-Carbon
    Partnership, Chinese-Latin American Relations in a
    Carbon-Constrained World.” This paper was far
    too short to cover the complex and
    far-reaching connections China is building
    in Latin America. So our hope for the
    conference today is to build on some of
    these initial thoughts and provide a
    platform for new ideas on the subject given the broad
    expertise and knowledgeable of our speakers. So, just a couple of points. China’s investment trade
    in loans in Latin America, like those of other major
    powers in the region, tends to focus on
    high-carbon activities, including fossil
    fuel extraction, large-scale agriculture, and
    energy-intensive industries such as mining. China’s rapidly increasing
    investment trade in loans in Latin America
    may be entrenching high-carbon development
    pathways in the region. In other words, the
    type of interactions between China and Latin
    American countries appears to be out of
    sync with those calling for greater emphasis
    on decarbonizing the global economy and
    low-carbon and sustainable development. It’s just worth mentioning
    that China is not creating a new problem
    for certain Latin American countries of
    resource dependency, but it’s extending,
    transforming, and increasing an old one. One of our key questions
    is whether there is a tie between China’s
    role in opening up vast resources in Latin
    America and the way those nations make
    national climate policy and how they act at
    the UN Climate Talks. We’ve just heard from
    Timmons that China and Latin America are both critical to
    the success of any global effort to address climate change
    and how both are very vulnerable to climate impacts. Therefore, staying on or moving
    towards low-carbon development parkways is critical
    for these countries. But substantial
    Chinese investments in natural resources
    and commodities, when combined with those
    of other nations and firms, run the risk of taking
    Latin American countries in an unsustainable direction. So the rapidly expanding
    economic, commercial, and political ties between
    China and Latin America could have far-reaching
    implications for the climate change agreement
    next year in Paris and global climate governance
    in the decades to come. And just a couple
    more very brief points, and I hope this
    is something we’re really going to look at today. Chinese investments and imports
    of Latin American natural resources may be strengthening
    the relative power of political and commercial
    domestic constituencies and of dirty ministries
    such as ministries of mining, agriculture,
    and energy in relation to environmental climate change
    ministries and departments. So these cleaner ministries
    are traditionally weak and marginalized
    in the region. So China may be
    inadvertently undermining Latin American
    countries’ efforts to deal with climate change by
    reinforcing and strengthening actors within those
    countries and governments that do not prioritize climate
    change in the first place and that regards efforts
    to protect the environment or carbon development as a
    break on economic growth. So, of course there is
    two sides to this story. And with the slide
    and the poster for the event with
    these two bubbles coming together with the wind
    turbines and then the chimney spewing carbon
    emissions, we really want to talk about the
    two sides to this story. And there is a very
    positive situation going on, which if could be expanded
    could be really quite transformative for Latin
    America’s low carbon development, And that is that China
    is interested in working with the region
    on climate change, but thus far official or
    multilateral exchanges have been limited. But I think the opportunities
    for low carbon growth are considerable. And just one example is
    China’s growing influence in global renewable
    energy markets, which present excellent
    opportunities for the region. So to wrap up, the
    aim of this conference is to better understand the
    development of Chinese-Latin America relations and explore
    some of the opportunities and limitations
    towards establishing a more sustainable agenda
    and tackling climate change. The timing is
    particularly relevant given preparations are under
    way to hold the first China Community of Latin American
    and Caribbean States– CELAC– forum and the launch
    of a new Chinese, Latin American, and the
    Caribbean cooperation plan from 2015 to 2019,
    which is going to be happening early next
    year in January apparently. So therefore there’s an
    important opportunity to discuss how the issues
    of climate change, promoting low carbon development, and
    protecting the environment might feature in Chinese-Latin
    American relations going forward. So that’s just a couple
    of opening comments. So, the plan for
    the day, we’re now going to hear from
    our panelists, who are going to present for
    about 12 minutes each. That’s the aim. So I’ll try and
    keep you on time. I’ll give you a
    wave from over here. Then I’m delighted to say
    we’re being joined by Dr. Gao Jian, who is the
    former vice governor of the Chinese Development
    Bank, which is the largest vendor in Latin America,
    who will be commentating on the presentations. We’re then going to
    have a quick break, and we’ll come back
    for a discussion. But let me introduce
    our speakers for this morning panel. Firstly, Lisa Viscidi, who’s
    director of the Inter-American Dialogues Program on
    Energy, Climate Change, and Extractive Industries. Lisa has written numerous
    reports on energy policy, climate change, social
    environmental impacts of natural resource development,
    and the geopolitics of energy. Sandra Lopez, on the far end,
    works for the Inter-American Development Bank as a
    consultant in the climate change as the sustainability
    division in charge of the promotion of low
    emissions development strategies in Latin America
    and the Caribbean countries. Sandra used to work
    for Colombia’s Ministry of Environment and
    Sustainable Development and was also a former member
    of Colombia’s delegation to the UN climate change talks. Rebecca Ray is a research
    fellow of the Global Economic Governance Initiative of
    Boston University’s Pardee School of Global Studies. She’s a PhD student in
    economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. And her research examines
    development strategies in Latin America and the
    impact of international finance on domestic labor
    markets, living standards, and environmental
    sustainability. And then we have Reggie
    [INAUDIBLE] from the Institute of Latin American Studies in the
    University of Texas at Austin. Reggie’s a second-year
    master student, and her research interests
    include the political economy of development, human
    environment relations, migration, gender,
    and ethnic studies. And we’re excited
    to hear about how her work on Ecuador’s
    hydroelectric projects, which are being financed
    by China, which is a really important case study. And then finally, Dr. Gao Jian. He’s a senior economist advisor
    of the China Development Bank, and he’s currently a visiting
    scholar in the Department of Economics at Harvard. And he was formerly
    vice governor of the China Development Bank. So, a very warm welcome to you
    all, and thank you for coming. Lisa, should we– Perhaps we should– yeah. Thank you. Thank you so much for
    the invitation, Guy. I’m just going to talk about
    some of the– sort of set the stage of the background of
    the China-Latin America climate change relationship. And I think we have
    some interesting data both from my organization,
    the Inter-American Dialogue, and from other sources. So, as a general
    picture, emissions from China and other developing
    countries are rising. As we know, China and the
    US are the largest emitters. And Asia is the
    fastest growing region. Latin America, interestingly,
    has quite low emissions per capita. The main exception
    is Brazil, and that’s because of deforestation that
    causes very high emissions. And this also
    gives you a picture of how Latin America counts for
    a relatively small percentage of emissions in the world. Latin America’s total greenhouse
    gas emissions actually decreased over a decade
    from 2000 to 2010, and this occurred
    despite the fact that it was a period of
    high economic growth. However, emissions are
    increasing in the region. So Latin America, the main
    cause behind the emissions is actually deforestation,
    because the region has among the biggest area
    of forest in the world. So reductions in
    deforestation are expected to drive a major
    reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. But emissions are growing
    from other sectors, so essentially energy-related
    emissions are rising. Particularly, electricity
    and transportation emissions will more than double over
    the next couple of decades. So, globally, the norm
    is for approximately 2/3 in most countries of
    emissions to come from energy, and about 1/3 comes
    from land use. Latin America is reverse. 2/3 approximately come from land
    use, and 1/3 comes from energy. So this is very important,
    because Latin America in terms of emissions,
    it’s a very unique region. You have extremely clean energy
    compared to the global norm, and the majority of that
    is because the region is so dependent on hydropower. You have several of
    the largest countries in the region– Brazil,
    Colombia, Venezuela– they’re all around 70%
    dependent on hydro. You compare that to
    China, India, the US, where the majority
    is from coal, and you come with extremely low
    emissions in the electricity sector. Transportation is more
    traditional makeup, coming mostly from fossil
    fuels, although Brazil has significant
    ethanol, so that also lowers their
    transportation emissions. However, as I said, you have
    a huge land mass of forests, and because Latin America
    has maintained so much of the forests,
    any deforestation leads to higher emissions. And what we’re
    seeing is the picture in Latin America is moving more
    towards the global average, which is more energy
    emissions, less land emissions because
    deforestation is coming down. But then that’s speaking
    about the region as a whole, and of course you have
    to look by country. So it varies a lot by country. Brazil with the Amazon is
    really the largest emitter. The other countries are smaller. Even Mexico, which
    is a large economy, it’s not nearly
    as high as Brazil. And then also looking
    between countries, so Brazil and Argentina, they’re
    major agricultural producers. They have a lot of
    land-use related emissions, while Mexico and
    Venezuela have much higher energy-related emissions. Venezuela in particular has
    extremely high per capita emissions. And that’s because
    they have incentives for the use of fossil fuels that
    are really distorting markets. You have the lowest gasoline
    prices in the world. You have extremely
    low electricity prices as well and huge inefficiencies,
    and so the per capita emissions are very high,
    which is not really the average for the region. Then to bring in the
    picture of China, growing Chinese
    demand has increased Latin American
    commodity exports. So mining exports to
    China including energy have grown significantly. Just looking at the oil
    sector, 10 years ago, exports, oil exports
    to China were insignificant or even zero. And they’ve really
    ramped up quickly in the last couple of years,
    especially from Venezuela. Exports to China
    account for up to 8% of Latin American
    countries’ GDPs. So exports to China are really
    important for these countries. It’s a relationship
    that’s become extremely important over
    the last couple of years, some countries more than
    others, but overall it’s definitely growing. Energy-intensive sectors attract
    the most Chinese investments. So not just talking
    about exports, but also talking about foreign
    direct investment, there’s a huge
    amount of investment coming into coal, oil, metals,
    all of these industries. So we have the breakdown here. Also, Chinese foreign
    direct investment has stimulated Latin America’s
    oil and gas industries. So if you look at these two,
    what this chart shows is overall investment
    from the world, the portion that’s oil and
    gas, for example, is only 15%. But when you look at the
    breakdown from China, it’s very different. It’s 70% is in oil and gas. Now, what impact that
    has on the industry is another discussion,
    because I think you would have to ask
    whether these– there’s a demand for oil and gas, so
    these investments may be coming from somewhere else anyway. That doesn’t necessarily mean
    that if the Chinese weren’t investing that there
    would be no oil and gas production in the region. Of course that’s not true. But it does mean if
    there’s more capital, it could bring down costs,
    and it could make it easier to extract oil and gas. But that’s something that
    we would have to debate. This is a snapshot from
    the Inter-American Dialogue and Boston University database,
    which if you haven’t seen, it’s hosted on our website,
    and we get a lot of the data from BU. And this is something that
    my colleague works on, but it’s very important
    for the discussion that we’re having, so I
    wanted to show a snapshot. China’s provided over $100
    billion in loan commitments to Latin America. That’s more than all of
    the major development banks combined. It’s really significant. And this database is
    updated every year, and it shows you by
    country, by sector. So a lot of what I’m talking
    about comes from here. In terms of
    environmental impacts, there’s been a lot
    of controversy. And many people say
    Chinese banks have low environmental standards. I think that it’s hard
    to really generalize. So it’s true,
    certainly Chinese banks include environmental provisions
    in their loan agreements. The standards are
    not necessarily the same as the
    Western institutions, and there are some cases where
    Chinese firms have been fined for environmental degradation. There’s a project in
    Peru that was widely cited as an example of poor
    community engagement and lax standards. But you really have to
    look at it case by case, and it varies a lot. And some recent
    research has shown that there’s been some major
    improvement in this area. So I think that’s
    something that needs to be continually monitored. In terms of the climate talks
    coming up right now in Peru, there’s also an interesting
    relationship, I think, between China and Latin America. So, China has certainly
    had a leading voice in some of the negotiating groups. So you’ve got the like-minded
    developing countries that take the
    hardest line, saying developing countries are not
    as responsible for emissions, and the burden needs to
    fall on developed countries. You have the ALBA
    nations– Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, and
    Nicaragua are part of that. Then you also have the
    basic group with Brazil that has a similar stance. But then you have other
    Latin American countries that are more progressive
    in their views. And I know some of
    the other speakers will be able to talk
    more about that. And then Timmons
    also mentioned there are some plans in the region
    for emissions reductions. I think that these are
    pretty much voluntary, so I don’t think that there’s
    a really strong commitment. But I think as I
    mentioned, it’s also a region that already
    has very clean energy. But this is kind of interesting. It’ll be interesting to see how
    the Latin American countries align with China on this. There are also some
    challenges that are common to many developing
    countries in that we can talk about in terms of
    China and Latin America. So just to give two examples,
    fuel efficiency standards. Fuel efficiency standards are
    extremely important in terms of reducing oil demand. The US oil demand has
    come down substantially since it peaked in
    2005, and that’s basically because of improved
    fuel economy standards. Latin America basically has no
    fuel economy standards at all. Mexico was the only country that
    just introduced them last year, and then China is
    also a new area. So I think this is a
    really important area where they face similar challenges
    and need to do more. And then similarly
    with carbon markets, this is sort of a nascent
    initiative that’s happening in a couple of countries. You’ve got carbon
    taxes that have been very recently introduced in
    some countries, carbon markets, and that’s something that we
    see in Latin America and China. And then there are opportunities
    for technical cooperation. I think there’s not a whole
    lot going on right now. We did a report that I
    had brought some copies about Chinese investment
    in Brazil’s energy sector. We looked at oil and gas
    renewables and transmission. And I think that there is this
    China-Brazil center that’s cooperating on renewables,
    but it’s still pretty small. We found that,
    for the most part, the investments in renewables
    in Brazil by Chinese firms were extremely limited,
    but it was mainly because the conditions
    for investing in renewables in Brazil aren’t
    good for any firm really. So there’s not the
    right incentives. There’s a lot of distortions
    because of prices, the way the tariffs are set. It’s not a very stable
    environment for investments, so that affects Chinese
    firms as well as other firms. And I think this
    is the last slide. So China is slowly
    increasing investment in low-carbon technologies. So there has been some
    expansion in this area even though I said
    that it was limited. But hydropower is the main
    area where there actually is a lot of Chinese
    investment, especially State Grid is investing in
    a transmission line that’s going to be bringing energy
    from a major hydro project. Other renewables, as I
    said, it’s more limited, but there is some
    growing investment in Chile and other
    places, and then also nuclear with
    Brazil and Argentina. So I will wrap up there,
    and I’m sure there will be a lot more to discuss
    in the next session thank you. [APPLAUSE] Well, so, thank you very
    much for inviting me to this interesting conference. As Lisa has given us a good
    picture of GHG– Greenhouse Gas– emissions
    in Latin America, now I would like to
    provide some examples on how the bank, the
    Inter-American Development Bank, is contributing
    to the region and how Chinese investments
    are included in those projects. Firstly, the Inter-American
    Development Bank is helping its borrowing
    member countries, basically 26 Latin American
    and Caribbean countries, adapt to climate change impacts
    and review greenhouse gas emissions through
    lending operations, technical cooperation,
    and knowledge generation. The IADB’s response
    to climate change focuses on land
    use and forestry. As we have seen previously,
    forestry degradation is a huge source of emissions,
    agriculture and livestock, energy efficiency, sustainable
    urban transport, water resource management and sanitation,
    and also renewable energy. I would like to highlight
    about that, by 2015, 25% of the total bank
    lending support operations in climate change,
    environmental sustainability, and sustainable energy,
    it’s a huge target for lending operation,
    which has no precedents. The IADB is working to meet this
    25% goal through its climate change strategy that
    promotes the development and use of a range of public
    and private-sector financial and non-financial instruments
    to enhance the region’s institutional, technical, and
    financial capacity to address climate change. It also provides guidance
    for the bank’s dialogue on regional and national
    climate policy agendas with governments, private
    society, and private sector, and civil society. Regarding mitigation activities
    promoted by the Inter-American Development Bank, I
    would like to highlight some of the
    operations of the bank to give you an example on the
    importance of collaborating not only internally within different
    divisions within the bank, but also extending outreach
    with different governments, development banks,
    and multi-donor funds in order to achieve resource
    mobilization for greenhouse gas emissions reductions
    projects that also contribute to quality
    of life and private sector participation. So firstly, we have
    the Ecocasa program, which is a sustainable
    housing program in Mexico. Last year, exactly last
    year on November 20, the United Nations Framework
    Convention on Climate Change awarded the Ecocasa
    program a global example in the fight against
    climate change. The Ecocasa program
    supports the construction of 27,000 efficient
    homes that will help to reduce GHG
    emissions by at least 20% compared to conventional homes
    while improving quality of life and low-income families
    who live in these houses. So Ecocasa, it’s a good
    example of collaboration, of resource mobilization
    from different governments, development banks,
    and multi-donor funds. It is involve IADB Bank,
    some resources from the Clean Technology Fund,
    German industry, and European Union’s Latin
    American Investment Facility. Both are administered
    by the KfW, which is the German development bank. This is a loan for $49.5 million
    and has an estimated target to reduce 1.1 million
    tons of CO2 per year. A second project that I
    would like to highlight is our recently approved loan
    through the Clean Technology Fund. This is the Geothermal Financing
    and Risk Transfer Program. The risk mitigation
    and financing program will apply innovative
    geothermal financing schemes such as guarantee and
    insurance mechanisms to reduce risks associated
    with exploration of geothermal energy,
    one of the main obstacles to the development of this
    clean energy source in Mexico and also in Latin American
    and the Caribbean countries. This is a $31.5
    million loan that could reduce approximately 1
    million tons of CO2 per year in a period of six years. A third project is the
    promotion of development of local solar
    technologies in Chile. This is a global environment
    fund, the GEF fund, that approved funding for these
    projects that will contribute to support transfer
    of technology to develop the solar
    industry in Chile by reducing technology and
    financial barriers that prevent the development of this
    type of technologies in Latin American countries,
    promote a market approach, and encourage the participation
    of the private sector, and provide the necessary
    policy regulation. This is $2.7 million
    and is assumed to be provided on a
    non-reversible basis. And it has an estimated
    emission reduction potential of 1.1 million tons
    of CO2 per year. This is a good example to link
    Chinese efforts on the climate change agenda. As a result of the
    promotion and development of local solar
    technologies in Chile, the IADB is now
    working on preparing two loans for the private
    sector to implement solar energy in Chile
    with Chinese resources. Another Chinese example,
    participation on clean energy has been made through a
    private sector loan approved by the IADB for up
    to $132.6 million to partially
    finance construction of two wind farms in Uruguay. Financing includes $88.4
    million from the bank’s ordinary capital
    and $44.2 million from the China coal
    financing fund for Latin America and the Caribbean. The project aims to contribute
    to the diversification of Uruguay’s energy
    matrix and will help to mitigate the
    vulnerability of the country’s electricity sector to variations
    in hydrologic conditions and reviews CO2 emissions by
    an average of 300,000 tons annually. Then, regarding to
    knowledge generation, Chinese contributions
    to public sector have been promoting
    institutional capacity as threatening. For example, by promoting
    knowledge and capacity building through the regional
    policy dialogue, which constitutes one of
    the IADB’s main mechanisms to promote knowledge sharing
    between high-level government officials from Latin
    America and the Caribbean and experts in key
    development areas. This dialogue covers the
    strategic topics for the region through its 17 networks. To mention some, we have the
    Water and Sanitation Network, Climate Change Network,
    Education, Energy, Disaster, Risk Management Network,
    Gender Equality, Transport, among others. To give you an example of these,
    last year’s policy dialogue of the Climate
    Change Network was focused on mainstreaming
    climate change into urban public
    housing programs. It has already mentioned
    that urbanization in Latin American countries
    has been increasing rapidly, so there were some
    high-level policy discussions that based on opportunities
    for promoting development. On one hand, sustainable
    public housing, which comprises energy-efficient materials,
    energy conservation, and energy efficiency, and
    also land planning and density and public sector. On the other hand,
    receiving public housing to adapt to climate change. Next year’s dialogue
    will be focused on urban planning and its
    role on climate change mitigation and adaptation. This topic becomes
    an important issue to bring together
    national-level authorities with local governments in order
    to analyze the main drivers for increasing greenhouse
    gas emissions in Latin America and the Caribbean
    due to the rapid urbanization and motorization rates and
    inadequate mass transit options and large commuting distances. This is another example
    of Chinese experience that could provide support to
    Latin America and the Caribbean to tackle climate change. Referring to the
    transport sector, as mentioned by Mr.
    Roberts, we are currently developing some
    technical corporations with Ecuador and Paraguay,
    assessing clean vehicle technologies for mass
    rapid transit buses. The studies will compare
    electric and hybrid buses, and also trolley buses in terms
    of GHG emissions reductions, performance, and
    capital investments. China is well known
    for being [INAUDIBLE] of these electric buses, and
    can create a great opportunity for future collaborations. As highlighted by
    Guy, now, at least, we have low emissions
    development strategies to contribute to a
    low carbon pathway. So finally, in
    this topic, the IDB is working on giving support
    to the low emission development strategy initiative. In Latin American and
    Caribbean countries, it’s called LATS LAC which is
    a community of practice that brings together leaders of low
    admissions development in Latin American and the Caribbean
    international institutions. It is a platform for changing
    experiences, best practices, and lessons learned. So you’re very welcome
    to enroll this platform. To conclude, I believe
    there are many opportunities for collaboration
    between China, Latin America, and the
    Caribbean countries, not only for capacity building
    activities, technology, transfer, deployment,
    and local development of those technologies,
    but also to work together on a low carbon path
    and climate change. Thanks. [APPLAUSE] Thanks very much San Joon. Rebecca, would you
    like to join us? Before you get started, do
    you have a Twitter handle? Do I have a Twitter handle? I’m sorry, I don’t. Does BU? Yeah, he does. But I’m afraid it’s
    brand new, and I don’t know what the handle is yet. I’m sorry. So good morning, everybody. Thank you for joining us. A special thank you for
    everyone who’s here in person and braved this icy, New
    England morning to be with us. My name’s Rebecca Ray. I’m a research fellow
    at Boston University. And today, I’m going to
    share with you some brand new preliminary results from
    a multi-year study that Kevin Gallagher and I are
    just finishing up, funded by MacArthur and Mott. It’s an eight country case
    study intensive project looking at the social and
    environmental implications of Chinese involvement in the
    economies in these eight Latin American countries. And today, in this
    presentation, I’m just going to focus on the
    environmental aspect of it, keeping up with our theme
    today, specifically, in these three areas– GHG
    emissions, water footprint, and deforestation. And our data shows that exports
    to China from Latin America are much higher in their
    greenhouse gas intensity and in their water footprint, as
    well as in their deforestation implications. The Latin Americas exports
    elsewhere in the world. Lisa has already showed you
    this in terms of the investment, incoming money. But also, in terms of
    trade, it’s the same story. If I have time at
    the end, I’d also like to share some of
    the best practices, some of the good news
    that we’ve learned from various countries
    in the region, as well as Chinese Lenders
    and NGOs in the region. As Lisa’s already shown a
    US similar chart to this, looking at investment. But here’s the trade
    side of things. Along the bottom, you’ll see,
    we have LAC exports to China to the right, to the world as
    a whole, and Chinese imports. As you can see in
    the middle column, all that, the American
    exports, are fairly balanced between ag,
    extraction, and manufacturing. But LAC exports to
    China are overwhelmingly concentrated in extraction. And we have ag secondarily,
    whereas Chinese imports are overwhelmingly
    concentrated in manufacturing. So this story of concentration
    from Latin America to China is actually quite unique
    for that relationship. And that’s going to
    be the basis for a lot of the rest of my presentation. When we move on to greenhouse
    gas and water intensity, like I said, we see along the
    bottom all economic activity, all Latin American exports,
    and all Latin American exports to China. And we can see that
    the greenhouse gas intensity of those
    exports is higher for Latin American
    exports to China than for the rest of the world. Also, the weather
    footprint is much higher. And the reason for
    that is Glen Peters at the University of Oslo, he’s
    put together fantastic data, looking at the greenhouse
    gas intensity of production by sector and country. We can combine that
    with UN trade data to look line by line at the
    sources of greenhouse gas emissions in train flows. And this includes embedded
    upstream emissions, so land use change,
    for example, as well as if we’re talking, for
    example, about ranching all of the inputs to that
    are also taken into account. You might be surprised. We tend to think of
    greenhouse gas emissions as primarily an
    industrial thing. But in Latin America, the
    largest, most intense sector for greenhouse gas emissions
    is actually ranching. We see the major factors
    here, the second column is the greenhouse gas
    intensity for each of them. And from the
    Peter’s data, we can see that the highest greenhouse
    gas intensity sectors in Latin America is ranching, with
    actually, surprisingly perhaps, wool being the absolute
    pinnacle of greenhouse gas intensity for the region. And going to the
    right, we see they are shared, the share way
    sectors over the last decade in all exports from Latin
    America and exports to China, specifically. If we look just at
    the highest greenhouse gas intensity
    sectors, that would be the first four of those. Those comprised in 2002. They comprise 30% of exports
    to the world, but nearly 70% of exports to China. And that gap has
    actually continued. It’s closing some, but it’s
    rising in both of these export markets. In 2012, the highest greenhouse
    gas intensity exports to the world as a
    whole had grown to 43%, but had grown to over
    70% of exports to China. So this is an intensification
    of the commodity basket towards more intense things. I’m afraid half of those
    text boxes didn’t show up, but I’ll walk you
    through what it is. Exports are obviously only
    half of the trade relationship. If we take into account
    imports as well, we have to take into account
    the fact that the greenhouse gas intensity of Chinese
    exports to Latin America are actually even higher
    than the greenhouse gas intensity of Latin
    American exports to China. So all of the products, or
    as the basket as a whole, Latin America’s
    imports from China would have a lower
    greenhouse gas intensity if they were produced
    domestically in Latin America. So if we take into
    account, the red line is embedded imports from
    China to Latin America. This middle line is embedded
    in Latin American exports to China. So as you can see, the
    greenhouse gas emissions from imports to China are
    actually higher than those from the exports to China. So the import story is
    a very important part of the overall greenhouse
    gas intensity of the trade relationship with
    China, that the imports of manufactured
    goods from China is a huge part of the overall
    demand based greenhouse gas emissions from Latin America. Moving onto water, as I
    said, it’s much higher when it comes to
    exports to China than to the rest of the world. As you can see, that varies
    dramatically by country, especially in Argentina
    and Brazil is largely where that concentration comes from. And it’s because of the
    enormously soy plantations and the enormous
    ranches primarily, is what we’re talking about here. Obviously, that
    does not hold true for countries that are
    more manufacturing driven. But again, we can do a balance
    of payments type analysis and look at the role of
    imports, as well and exports. And we can see, I
    have references there for the volume of
    the Three Gorges Dam, as well as the volume
    of Lake Nicaragua. So we can see in
    general, currently, as of 2012, Latin
    America was importing about the volume of
    the Three Gorges Dam every year, just in embedded
    water in their imports. But they were exporting
    about 1.5 times the size of Lake Nicaragua in
    their exports to China. So the water locally that’s
    being sent to China embedded in the exports is much higher. I’m going to end by talking
    about deforestation, which several one
    of the speakers today have already talked about. It’s a crucial part
    of the climate story, especially in Latin America. Research from
    renowned ecologists have pointed very directly
    to the most important source of deforestation in
    Latin America is not just the extraction projects, is not
    just the dam projects, but is the roads getting there. Overwhelmingly, this is
    all roads, all railroads, all commercial waterways. That is the source
    of the deforestation. And the mechanism is
    that it brings humans. It brings ranches, it
    brings small settlements. This is especially true
    in countries like Ecuador, for example, that
    border places that have civil unrest until you have a
    lot of displaced people coming out from the border and
    looking for places to settle. If there’s brand new roads
    opened up into the jungle, that’s where they settle. A great or rather
    depressing example of this if the famous
    Repsol Block 16 in Ecuador. This is often considered one
    of the most progressive setups in the region in terms
    of extraction projects. It’s a nearly
    roadless development in which the only roads into
    and out of the extraction site don’t connect to the rest of the
    highway system in the country. They connect only to a river. So everything coming in and
    out has to go through a barge. But even so, estimates are
    that within the next 50 years, that within the 2
    kilometer border of that road from the
    river, 50% of the jungle will be gone within 50 years,
    just from human settlement. So these roads really are the
    crux of the deforestations. Or if you want to talk
    about deforestation, you can’t just talk
    about the massive soy plantations in Brazil. You have to talk
    about the access roads to get those to a port. And what we’re seeing more
    and more in the region is Chinese financing
    of these accessorants, of these rail roadways, to get
    these products to the ports to get them back to China. If you want to talk about
    the most important pieces to focus on deforestation
    in the region, this is a fantastic
    map that was recently published by Bass et al. All the reference is up there
    on overlapping biodiversity hotspots. So they have four groups of
    species, mammals, plants, amphibians, and birds. Where there is red
    on this map, that is a place that is a
    biodiversity hotspot for all four of those groups. And it scales down to
    green is everywhere that there’s a biodiversity
    hotspot of one of those groups. And now, I’m going to overlay
    on top of that Chinese financing in the region. Now that you know that roads
    are the biggest danger, the black lines are Chinese
    finance highway systems that are coming in. The grey is Chinese
    financed railroads. This light blue here is
    Chinese oil concessions. Obviously, that red is
    the most important place to talk about conservation. And these triangles
    are mines, which are less concentrated in
    those super important areas. These brackets are dams and
    new commercial waterways that are being financed. So these are the
    very sobering picture of where we’re headed next,
    because these are not realities yet. These black and grey
    lines are financed, but have not yet been developed. So this is where
    we’re headed next in the deforestation story. When we talk about
    best practices and where the bright spots
    are looking in the future, because there is good
    news in that region, some of the countries
    in our case studies have really shown us
    examples that we can learn from the NGOs, can learn from
    in different countries to say, well, we can learn from
    our neighbors who are doing this thing very successfully. One of the most important
    things that NGOs have been doing to push
    against deforestation is to push for
    community consultation. And there have
    been huge advances. And community consultation with
    local communities as projects advance into forested
    areas and compete with traditional livelihoods. Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador have
    all new legislation about this. Bolivia and Peru have
    really shown us tremendously successful community
    consultation programs. In Bolivia, they’re
    bringing online their new world’s
    largest lithium deposits, which are huge for anyone
    talking about climate. You can’t talk about
    climate without talking about lithium deposits. Bolivia is holding the line
    with community consultation. And we are seeing that
    Chinese financed lithium mines and development
    plants, processing plants are being located in communities
    that are accepted but are minimal to them,
    and therefore, going to have a lower deforestation
    impact and a lower traditional livelihoods impact. So that is very good news. And moving onto Brazil, we’re
    seeing very innovative changes in their regulatory regime
    when it comes to financing. Of course, in Brazil,
    public financing is very important to all sorts
    of industrial development. And while in the past,
    polluters have been able to tie up in the courts fines
    from the environmental ministry for years to be able
    to just either consider those fines just another
    cost of doing business or put them off for many years. But now, there’s this
    innovative lending rules from the
    public banks saying, if you’ve ever had any
    environmental irregularities, or if you any environmental
    irregularities that are still stuck in their courts, we
    will not lend you any money. And this is especially
    important in Brazil, where the Chinese involvement
    story is one of exporting soy. It’s not too much investment
    in new extraction projects, for example. So these are
    Brazilian plantations that are getting public
    financing for the expansion of their projects. But they’re not going
    to be able to do it if they’ve had deforestation
    finds that are still pending, for example. And that is great. It’s great news to see that. And Peru is the first
    Latin American country to join and become compliant
    with the EITI, which is the Extracted Industry
    transparency Initiative, where the reports of flows of funds
    from extractive companies to the government from any
    agreements with communities have to be published
    internationally and verifiable. And since corruption is one
    of the worst places where these legal frameworks fall
    apart, that’s a huge advance. And the Chinese mining
    companies, as of very, very recently, just
    within the last few weeks, have become compliant
    with it, as well. So this is a huge step
    forward in transparency, which is a crucial part of
    the deforestation story. In China– and I hope
    we’ll hear more about that very soon as the day
    goes on, new green credit initiatives coming out of
    China, putting requirements on their firms going
    abroad about living up to the environmental
    standards of the countries where they’re operating. And finally, NGOs, [SPEAKING SPANISH] These two organizations
    from Ecuador and Peru have done phenomenal work
    of connecting communities that are affected by these
    firms with the Chinese lenders back home in China so they
    can send back information to those lenders about whether
    or not these firms are living up to their standards, which
    is a phenomenal innovation in terms of networking
    and coming together. Finally, I want to end
    with one more chart, which is Latin American countries
    have a lot of leverage when it comes to setting their
    ground for these industries. And the reason is that these
    resources are very location specific. As Lisa shared earlier,
    these are the five most important exports
    from Latin America to China in order of
    importance– refined copper, copper ores and concentrates,
    iron ores and concentrates, soy, and crude petroleum. And in each of
    these categories, we can see up the y-axis is the
    market share of world trade that Latin America accounts for. And just as an example,
    when it comes to copper, Latin America
    accounts for a quarter of all world imports of China. It originates in Latin America. Overwhelmingly, that’s Chile. They account for 1/3
    of the copper of China, which means they have
    tremendous negotiating power, tremendous
    bargaining power that they can bring to
    the table and enforce those environmental regulations. They don’t need to worry about
    chasing away demand for copper, because they account for
    1/3 of China’s imports. It has tremendous market power. It’s much greater when
    we talk about copper ores and concentrates. Over half of the world imports
    of copper ores and concentrates comes from Latin America. Similarly, of course,
    you can’t talk about this without talking
    about soy and Brazil. Brazil accounts for such a huge
    share of China’s imports of soy that they can set the
    environmental ground rules. They have the negotiating
    power for this. So I’m going to end
    there on that happy news to turn it over to
    the next speaker. Thank you so much. [APPLAUSE] Great. Thanks very much Rebecca. Rachel, would you– Yeah. Thanks very much for
    the previous speakers for outlining very
    exciting instructor analysis for the low carbon
    future between China and Latin America. I’m going to be
    bringing a more case study that I did for my master’s
    thesis research, what I’m doing, I’m completing my
    researching University of Texas at Austin. What I’m doing is I’m looking
    at hydroelectric, hydropowered development that China
    is financing and building in Ecuador right now. So the government of Ecuador
    plans to generate more than 90% of its electricity
    from hydropower between 2016 and 2020. And China is financing
    and constructing up to more than 10
    new projects there. But those projects
    are generating numerous environmental
    and social protest. So I did empirical
    field research in one of the biggest ongoing
    hydroelectric project China is constructing
    right now in Ecuador, which is the Coca Coda Sinclair
    Project, which is not a dam. And they started in 2010. So the export and
    import, Bank of China provides 85% of finance for
    the $1.7 US billion project. And the inauguration of the
    biggest hydroelectric project, which is CCS, as I will
    refer to later, in 2010, kicked off a new
    face of cooperation in infrastructure building
    between China and Ecuador. And I will give
    two case examples to demonstrate the ways
    in a low carbon future and more environmentally
    friendly operation can be achieved between
    Chinese protects in Ecuador, and also, some of the
    challenges and obstacles lying ahead in doing so. So my case studies
    concentrate on the interaction between Ecuador government,
    its public agencies, the Chinese state companies,
    and in environmental issues, and the implications for
    responding to climate change. The first case will
    trace the design for the project,
    which will likely lead to positive
    outcomes for reducing deforestation due to our
    better coordinated effort. This map, you can
    see, is compiled by the NGO, which
    Rebecca just mentioned from the Centro Derechos
    Economicos Sociales in Ecuador. And they mapped some of
    the biggest projects, including hydropower, and
    infrastructure building, and other mining projects
    in Ecuador, which is huge, as you can see from the map. But here is another picture
    of the direct environmental impacts that people
    often talk about when they refer to the Coca
    Coda Sinclair Project. So when I try to
    access, I want to try to assess the environmental
    impacts of the project. I observed that over the course
    of the project construction during the past five years, the
    public criticism and concerns over the environmental
    impacts of the project have reduced considerably. I think initially,
    the biggest concern was the destruction of the
    tallest waterfall in Ecuador. Right now, you can
    see from the picture that I took when I was
    doing research there. This is the San Rafael
    Waterfall of Ecuador. So the concern was that after
    the project was completed, there will be reduced amount of
    water flowing to the waterfall, and then until a level that
    will completely dewater this entire beautiful scene. So right now, hardly any
    criticism of the project concerns this issue. My research provides
    me some of the ways to observe why this happened. And I think there are two major
    reasons contributing to this. First of all is the
    Ecuadorian government’s environmental consciousness and
    their really strict supervision during the construction
    phase of the project, as well as Chinese companies
    adapted to strategies to the higher
    environmental standards in the hosting country. So in fact, during the
    project construction phase, the Ecuadorian public company,
    which presents the Coca Coda Sinclair dam, and the Chinese
    designing firm for the dam coordinate to manage the
    environmental impacts and deforestation of the surface
    vegetation and watershed. So the Ecuadorian state agency
    strictly controls the design and avoids damming
    the river, and avoids taking large areas for forest
    in the northern Amazon, where the project happens. So under the current
    design, which you can see from the
    slide, a diversion dam directs water through
    an underground tunnel so that instead of
    permanently reducing the water level of the
    river, the amount of water will only be significantly
    reduced during dry seasons, because it’s a divergent
    that does not completely dam the river. And it directs the
    water underground, which avoids deforestation
    on the surface level of the forest. So due to the explicit goal
    to protect the watershed, both Ecuadorian state company
    and the Chinese design firm have placed environmental
    standards and impacts in a more prominent
    role for consideration. And besides, the Chinese
    state construction firm, which you can see now, is
    their base for operation for the CCS Project. The Synohydro company has
    adapted considerably also to the local
    environmental regulations in terms of constructing
    the residential compartments and the actual project
    sites for construction. For example, as you
    can see from the slide, the design of the main camp
    for administration offices and housing for the project
    went through multiple versions of change and improvements
    to fit the National environmental standards for
    construction compartments, and the company’s
    operation are also under very strict supervision
    by a CCS public company from Ecuador and the
    third party supervision company from Mexico. However, as we know, the large
    resource extraction projects, and also infrastructure
    building projects do directly cause large
    scale deforestation, as Rebecca mentioned,
    especially when people open up new roads and construction
    sites in some part of the primary rainforests. As you can see in the picture,
    for example, although, according to the contract,
    which is the one, the sites for project
    compartments and roads will be restored after
    the project is completed. But when I did interviews
    and observations on the site, it reviews that. It remains very
    ambiguous whether or not the local government wants to
    keep the compartment facilities for community building and
    for hosting more people who will likely move to the area for
    better chances of livelihood. So if they do keep those
    projects and facilities, it means that we will
    lose more rain forest coverage in Northern Amazon,
    which will likely have a larger impact on climate
    change and carbon absorption in the long run. And this is another picture. You can see when they
    open roads to build those hydroelectric projects in
    different parts of the forest. So my other case study suggests
    how Ecuadorian government are environmental advocates and
    Chinese companies are situated in the debate for environment
    protection and climate change. I hope this can help us imagine
    some of the possible spaces and strategies to reduce
    high impacts and high carbon emission in the near future. So one of the emerging
    environmental concerns at this concluding
    phase of the project happens around the
    route of transmission for the electricity that will
    be generated from the project. The electricity corporation
    of Ecuador, which is Celec, contracted the Chinese state
    company, Harbin electric international, to
    build and operate the transmission aligned
    for the CCS Project. Since the transmission
    line will go through, will cause very, very
    large scale deforestation where it goes through, and adversey
    affect climate change, contestations arise because
    the proposed electricity line, as you can see, which
    is the red line right now, will partially go through
    a UNESCO Sumaco biosphere reserve. And the environmental
    activists and conservationists in this area affected
    by the transmission line have been negotiating
    with the electric company Ecuador, which is Celec. They have proposed a
    new transmission route, which will avoid going
    past this reserve directly, and will also reduce some of
    the volcanic and seismic risks. As of now, the
    Ecuadorian company, the state agency Celec, has
    signed an initial agreement to change the route due
    to the pressures given by private stakeholders. However, the Chinese company,
    Harbin Electric International remains very passive,
    and was not even involved in the
    decision making process. So when conservationists
    and environmental activists negotiate with Celec, the
    Chinese company, Harbin, is not included in the process. And the discourse in sentiments
    has that they are only the contractors of the
    project, and they do not have the rights to change
    the route of the transmission line or the plans that the
    Ecuadorian government has. So this very picture
    depicts one of the conflicts between a team of
    geologists from Harbin who went out to the
    proposed transmission ground site for our geological survey. And they accidentally
    invaded an area of private land reserved for
    conservation and wildlife observation. Now, the owners of
    the conservation site are negotiating with
    Celec to change the route. And they’re also
    seeking legal actions against those Chinese invaders,
    who are not necessarily informed about the changes that
    the government is negotiating with the private
    entities about the route. So the ongoing
    construction of CCS Project and its transmission
    line briefly reflect some of the
    environmental concerns and different rows
    that Ecuadorian state, its public agencies, and the
    civil society and Chinese state owned companies are playing
    in this entire game, or in this entire planning
    for the future of a low carbon development. On the other hand, I find
    that civil society advocates seem to have some leverage. And as Rebecca also suggested,
    that the government has a lot of control
    over policies that will reduce higher environmental
    constitutes, climate change. But on the other
    hand, there seems to be a lack of coordination
    between Ecuadorian public companies and their
    so-called Chinese contractors or partners, in terms of taking
    concrete actions to reduce carbon emission or other,
    more impactful operations. So although Chinese companies
    have improved and adapted considerably to higher
    environmental standards in Ecuador. Currently, they remain
    very passive in responding to emerging concerns over
    global warming and a low carbon future. It becomes very problematic
    if the Ecuadorian state and Chinese companies maintain
    this model of corporation around the environmental
    impacts, carbon emission, and climate change, because
    especially considering the models of
    cooperation are moving to other areas for
    imminent carbon intensive projects, such as
    mining, petroleum, exploration, and other infrastructure
    building projects. So my research suggests that
    both Ecuadorian government agencies and the
    Chinese partners need to cooperate
    and collaborate more to achieve other goals in
    reducing environmental impacts in those emerging infrastructure
    and resource extraction projects. Thank you. [APPLAUSE] Great. Thanks very much, Reggie. If I could ask the speakers
    to come back to the front and invite Dr. Gao Jian to come
    and comment on the speakers, that would be fantastic. So let’s– Gao, please. Thank you, Professor,
    for inviting me here. I was here actually
    three weeks ago in this room for a speech on
    Chinese investment in Africa and the development aid
    elsewhere in the world. So this is a different subject. And I think maybe I made
    some of the remarks. It’s hard to see the issues
    currently of the environment, even though they
    impact conference has finished in Beijing. And Chinese people, Beijing–
    I’m the resident of Beijing. We’re called the APEC Blue Sky,
    because the government removed all the factories
    and all the factories in the surrounding promises. And as a resident in Beijing,
    the first thing I think is the air in Beijing. But 30 years ago, when
    we started to reform, we never thought about the air. We thought about how
    we can have a house, we can even have a rental house. Very limited space of life,
    living standard improved. We think about the air. And that is natural. And perhaps the first priority
    for the central government in Beijing is
    apparently with the air. But it is difficult,
    because Beijing removes all the factories away, and
    the surrounding provinces still has emissions. It’s a big problem. And then I understand China
    has the largest carbon emission countries. But imagine, China
    is a world factory. And all the consumer
    goods American consume, enjoy,
    they are produced in China that has a consequence
    of the carbon emissions. And I found $600 to $1,000
    in Chinese factories less than $20, the wages. But still, we have the
    consequence of the environment. So China produces a majority
    of the consumer goods. And then it becomes
    a world factory so that Europe and Americans
    can enjoy relatively better air. But maybe, this argument
    is not welcome here. But I’m not a politician. I’m retired. I used to work in the
    [INAUDIBLE] finance for many years, and
    I moved to the bank. I’m the government officials,
    but I’ve retired now. I’m the outside observer
    to see the issue. Anyway, I think the
    environment is important. China needs to pay
    greater attention to that. We folks are on the
    Latin America now. But China development back, and
    the largest investor overseas was invented a lot in Africa,
    Middle East, western Europe, central Europe, Eastern Europe,
    Russia, Asia, elsewhere, were not focus on the entry
    resources and commodity. I traveled to all these regions
    except for Latin America. So when you invited me here,
    I feel a little bit reluctant, because I feel
    vulnerable for criticism, because Latin America is the
    only region I know in travel. But I’ve been to some countries
    where I can say something. The president,
    ruler, which is where the headquarter of
    the city is– twice. And the president of
    Venezuela, [INAUDIBLE] the city headquarter three times. So when you talk about
    a Chinese regimen, it looked like Chinese banks
    and companies are [INAUDIBLE] and this is not the
    culture [INAUDIBLE] for their own profit. But that is not true. In Latin America, that is a
    country to country cooperation. It’s a bank to bank
    cooperation that is based on the
    comparative advantage. Latin America, they don’t
    have other projects. And so they will
    have some commodity. I think that is the emission
    of the local government, not the Chinese government, and not
    the Chinese development bank. I’ve been to Latin America. I personally met with the
    current president of Mexico when he was the governor
    of New Mexico state, and he [INAUDIBLE]
    Hong Kong, Beijing. Or maybe we talked
    a lot about it. So the first thing local
    country thinks about is economic development. That is their
    political perspective. This is the priority. So they will initiate
    some projects. All of the countries
    around the world, when they start
    economic development, they have the
    accumulation of capital, but in different models. In Europe, 200 years ago,
    they focused on the trade colonialisms, slaves. And I read the new
    book, American Slaves in the 19th century, from
    1900– is it from 1800, 1860s– the 60 years build up
    the base of the US capitalism. That is, initial accumulation. And China is relying on the
    exploration of the farmers and the depositors. The depositors has in real
    terms, [INAUDIBLE] return. And the farmer have very low
    prices in the government, and they have cheaper
    lands, and cheaper money. So it accelerates the
    investment, the accumulation of the capital. So China’s city
    primitive has come up, imagine they accumulated
    very quickly. But some customers, like
    Russia and Latin America, they have the advantage of
    resources and commodity. So they want to
    develop faster, not to use financial depression. This is their comparative
    advantage, to develop faster. So we need to find the roots
    of the [INAUDIBLE] problem. So when we talk about the
    environmental problems, we need to think of political
    logic, economic logic, and the environmental
    logic to come into line. This is my first view. Second, China going abroad
    is a kind of rebalancing. Not just a great deal
    of Chinese firms. This is a government
    public, because we’ve drawn a kind of account separate. And we have to balance
    our external account by the capital content deficit. So we make the balance
    payment balance. So this is the strategy. So we have money accumulated. We need to invent. But there are a lots of
    demand for that– Africa, to get rid of the
    colonialism, tribal fighting, and that this
    [INAUDIBLE], they start to think about
    economic development. We invested in Eastern Europe
    because Eastern Europe always looked westward. And then when they discovered
    the financial crisis, the West cannot support
    money for their development, they look eastward, to China. So all the presidents
    came to Beijing to see. And then they asked for the
    money for the investment. And China’s investment is
    at four different levels. The first is government
    to government. And we have government
    assistance that is small, because that’s from the budget. We have the action
    banks investment that is substantive as a government. And we have the bank level that
    [INAUDIBLE] China Development Bank and other commercial
    banks like ICBC, CCBB will see that they own the
    largest in the world in terms of assets. And they invest in the region,
    but under the directory of the government guidance. They always sign the
    agreement with a witness of the leaders of
    the local government and Chinese government. So this is just
    the way they do it. And a certain level is state
    only, the conglomerate. You can use a vehicle,
    the constructors, and the operators, and
    there are many others. And they are a private company,
    like [INAUDIBLE] and JT. And they will come to these
    small private companies. When we see the environmental
    issues, this private company issue, they’re not under the
    direction of the government. They go to somewhere
    on their own, even without the notification
    to the local embassies. And this is a problem
    we’ve discussed many times. So the [INAUDIBLE] companies are
    small, private companies, not SOE. Because SOE– one
    minute– the SOE, they’re not sick for the
    mathematics and prophet, because the major
    salaries is control. The solution is again,
    the political logic, economic logic, and
    environmental logic come into line. I think we have a lot
    of new initiatives. And this conference
    is very important. We had a conference just
    two months ago in Brazil, in St. Paolo, and it was held
    by MIT, and China, and Latin America. This is a subject not focused
    solely on the environment. And I was a speaker
    in that conference. And I think this
    conference very important to draw the attention to
    the environmental issues, just like CDP and many times
    companies, local government, start to realize the
    importance of the environment. This is very important. And CTP has, what we
    call responsibilities. We need that. And the
    responsibilities, we need the work of the local people. So we invest in a lot in Africa
    in agriculture, irrigation, residential housing, small,
    medium sized enterprise, and micro financing. So every single on
    this [INAUDIBLE]. We’ll continue to do
    that in Latin America. We have less discussion with
    Latin American countries, because this is far away. We take about 30 hours, two
    trains from the US to China. So this is a very time
    consuming, less discussion. I think this kind of
    conference should be held more in China, in Latin
    American countries, and that the local government
    of Latin American countries need to shift their
    attention to the environment. And also, they need to
    introduce updated technologies. And I think the project
    invest in Africa for the hydro electricity is a good example. But maybe they have many others. And the Chinese
    government and the CDP would definitely
    like to go that way, like we committed in China. And after I return to Beijing,
    I will talk again with them about the investment
    in Latin America. I think we can do a lot by
    the multiple initiatives from the academic and
    from the local government, from China’s government, and the
    [INAUDIBLE], and many others. It’s concerted effort
    towards that direction. I think that is it. So this is the right time
    to have this subject. Thank you. [APPLAUSE]

    Overgrown Railroad Crossing
    Articles, Blog

    Overgrown Railroad Crossing

    August 12, 2019

    Hello ladies and gentlemen, I’m over here are about two blocks West of the Miami International Airport, and I’m going to show you guys an overgrown FEC industrial spur There’s two tracks here One is still used. I doubt this one is, this is a track view like This would be north east Right and check out this growth over here Doubt that they used that See the switches in the back over there Two switches one two okay then you got this track It’s pretty rusty Right? Yeah And then over here, what have we here? Cut… Look at that, is that sabotage? Oh wow Somebody vandalized it, they don’t work anymore Okay, so then over here we got Three concrete guards an MI signal base This looks like it might be a GRS? gate mechanism This is old, the lights are also a MI Modern Industries lights, Modern Industries bracket WC Hayes mechanical bell Emergency contact info Those are definitely incandescent lights My personal favorite My personal favorite visors as well Rico lights on the Crossing gate Another look at the cut wires, look at that Man this is a shame And then the grade crossing isn’t in too bad of a condition, I’ve seen worse You got track view here, South West That one like I said, might still be in use. Then you got the relay case right there, NW 70th Avenue and the DOT number I don’t think trains been thru here for a while Perhaps it’s lightly used, but doubt it Northwest 70th Ave, the DOT number and then in case you want to rail fan Or look at an abandoned railroad or semi abandoned railroad got a sofa right there And then on this side you got this guy And you got more growth on the track over here, a lot more growth A few years ago, I think like in 15 there was an abandoned mail train parked right over here But they since moved it It used to come out on Google Maps. I’m not sure if it does, but I’ll include a Google map link to this location So you guys can go back in time and see it. So then here you got a different one, you got a Harmon signal base. You have a oh, WABCO my bad the other one wasn’t GRS. It’s a Wabco gate mechanism. You can see WABCO Wow You can even see here well I don’t know if you can see here, but Beneath the the spray paint, it says model 75 grade crossing gate mechanism So yeah, then we got MI lights all around here, too MI bracket, no mechanical bell on this side and Rico lights on the crossing gate. Here you got the old, the old ties The real is from 1950 1-9-5-0 I know Mel Perry tells me that the weight of the rail is right next to the date, but I do not see it here Okay, so you got that then yeah, it’s just growth all the way this way see Growth, not good See a piece of a crossing gate here, all messed up, man! All messed up! So yeah guys That’s gonna conclude this tour, please subscribe or Like. Thank you very much for viewing Over and out

    The Tech Model Railroad Club of MIT
    Articles, Blog

    The Tech Model Railroad Club of MIT

    August 12, 2019

    [MUSIC PLAYING] [TRAIN CROSSING BELLS] [TRACKS RATTLING] It was founded in 1947. The Tech Model Railroad Club–
    or “Tuh-merk”, as we call it– started, for the first 50 years
    of its life, in Building 20, which was a place they called
    “the magical incubator”. It was basically
    built for the war, as a temporary war building. So it was wooden. It was the kind of thing that
    no one really cared about. Which was great,
    because it meant that all of these students
    could move in and do things to that building that
    they couldn’t really do to any other
    Institute buildings. If you cut a hole in the
    floor– who cared, right? So the Institute was
    very willing to let students do unauthorized things
    in Building 20, basically. So the Tech Model Railroad
    Club got its start in that culture of–
    well, we can do anything. Many years ago, when there
    were more members to the club, we used to have work
    sessions, essentially every night of the week. And we’d have very formal
    business meetings on Saturdays. Now we very rarely
    have formal meetings. Mostly we have work sessions. And everybody has their
    own little projects, their favorite things to do. And they generally
    do those things. [SOFT RATTLING] I really like the way you
    have to think about scale. Especially when it comes to
    modeling natural objects. It’s really amazing that you
    can get a piece of a branch to look like a full tree. And it’s all a question
    of context and scale. It’s a question of
    how you position it. A lot of the things here
    that are vines, and bushes, and grass, and brush, are really
    pieces of much larger types of foliage. And it’s amazing
    how well that works. And you have to adjust
    your thinking a little bit. And think about,
    how can this shape work at a very small scale? Like most model railroads,
    we supply power to the train through the rails. So the rails are metal,
    and they’re electrically conductive. But that is where we break apart
    from traditional model trains. So traditionally, you’d
    get your little Lionel set under the Christmas tree. You’d put together all
    of this pre-made rail, and you’d put together
    a big oval or something. You’d put your train on it,
    you’d turn the throttle, and it would just go. And that works great when
    you have 10 feet of track and you have one train. We don’t have 10 feet of track. We have miles and
    miles of track. And we have successfully run
    10 or 15 trains at a time. We have what we call System 3. This is the third generation
    of control system for TMRC. It’s totally built from the
    ground up by MIT students. It operates very similar
    to real railroads, and especially
    similar to subways. And basically,
    the idea is, there are sections of
    track called blocks. And every time you hit
    the end of a block, we just cut the
    rails, and there’s a little gap in the rails. And basically, each
    block is a unit of train. So there can be a
    train on the block, or there can’t be a
    train on the block. And basically, what we
    do is, we have a bunch of complicated electronics
    that can provide power to this block. And say I know this
    train is moving along the rails
    in that direction. Then we put power
    on the next block. And then, we
    actually have sensors that we built that can say, is
    there a train on this block? And if there is, we can follow
    this train around the layout. So we know exactly
    where trains are. We can give them names. We can track them as
    they’re moving around. Before I came to
    graduate school, I was living in a little
    town in California, which was a beach town. And there were train tracks
    that came along the pier. People would be at the
    beach, surfing, doing all kinds of things. And the train would come by, and
    everybody would stop and look. And it’s amazing. It’s like, you’re at the beach. You’re doing all
    these amazing things. But the train still
    fascinates people, you know? It’s this piece of engineering. It’s part of a system. It’s like a system made visible. There are little jokes. Like, Pessim Steel
    here– the title says, the Allen Pessim Company. Well, there was a fellow named
    Larry Allen who was always very pessimistic about everything. So that’s where the Allen
    Pessim Steel comes from. [GENTLE RATTLING] Modeling things has been
    around since forever. Since the beginning of,
    I think, human thinking, people have been making
    models of things. So it’s part of a long,
    long tradition of that. But it’s also part of MIT’s
    history in a very special way. [TRAIN CROSSING BELLS]

    I LIKE TRAINS (asdfmovie song)
    Articles, Blog

    I LIKE TRAINS (asdfmovie song)

    August 12, 2019

    I LIKE TRAINS Hey! Have you heard
    of the I Like Trains kid? He’s pretty cool, but there might be
    something wrong with him I don’t know if he’s cursed
    or if it’s something with his brain But the only thing he ever says is:
    “I Like Trains.” I LIKE TRAINS From birth the I Like Trains kid
    never spoke a word Not even to his parents,
    not a single sound was heard But on the first day of school the teacher
    asked his name All he did was smile as he said:
    “I Like Trains” I LIKE TRAINS They put him on some Ritalin
    to see if that would help The doctor found the perfect dose
    and asked him how he felt He stared at the doctor
    with that little creepy smile And the I Like Trains kid said:
    “I feel great!” He got a fancy job
    and he straightened out his life He met a nice girl
    who he asked to be his wife As they stood at the altar
    and prepared to say their vows He put a ring on her finger, and he said: I LIKE TRAINS Got bad grades? I LIKE TRAINS Awkward Date? I LIKE TRAINS Don’t like trains? … I LIKE TRAINS

    The 10 Most Dangerous Jobs In The World
    Articles, Blog

    The 10 Most Dangerous Jobs In The World

    August 12, 2019

    [Music] the 10 most dangerous jobs in the world underwater welder underwater welders face a series of dangers on the job every day including the risk of shock explosion decompression sickness and even wear on their dental fillings about 30 welders die out of 200 welders on the job annually crab fishermen 128 Alaskan crab fishermen died in 2007 alone which is 26 times more dangerous than the average job 80% of fatalities are due to hypothermia or being thrown overboard and drowning crab fishermen also suffer from serious injuries due to heavy machinery and gear loggers the logging industry has some of the highest work-related fatalities in the country with loggers being 30 times more likely to die on the job than most other career fields the majority of logging related deaths comes from equipment errors or trees falling on workers microchip manufacturers computer chips are created with numerous hazardous chemicals including arsenic and while manufacturing chips may not be immediately fatal there are long-term effects to health such as high rates of miscarriages birth defects cancer and respiratory illnesses bush pilots bush pilots have more risks in their career for less pay than average commercial pilots with a rate of 13 point 59 accidents for a hundred thousand flight hours the general aviation accident rate for pilots in Alaska is two times higher than pilots in the rest of the US [Music] bull riders bull riding his search in popularity since the 1990s with promises of big money for an eight-second ride but bull riders can suffer at least one significant injury per every 15 events they partake in including concussions broken bones and fractures which may not be worth of potential cash payout Steel Workers all those safety harnesses have been implemented Steel Workers still risk a fall from great heights the job also includes risk of serious injury from steel beams or walls collapsing on workers in 2005 Steel Workers still had a fatality rate of 56 deaths per 100,000 workers oil riggers most offshore oil riggers work 16-hour shifts often with very little sleep fires and oil rig explosions topped the list for job-related dangers with the rate of 27.1 deaths per hundred thousand offshore workers annually prostitutes prostitutes always run the risk of being arrested for selling sexual favors to John’s but even more dangerous are the threats of STDs rape and even physical assault or death the death rate for prostitutes is 204 deaths for every $100,000 snake milking is a dangerous yet completely necessary job that saves numerous lives per year while there are safety procedures in place each milking procedure has a high risk factor in fact snake milking has a low rate of people who have not been bitten while on the job [Music]

    Trump border wall materials can be shipped on our railroads, Union Pacific CEO says
    Articles, Blog

    Trump border wall materials can be shipped on our railroads, Union Pacific CEO says

    August 12, 2019