So, who do you think has the best approach to dealing with climate change among the biggest world powers? There’s the U.S. who chose not to be part of the Kyoto Protocol because we said it wasn’t fair, tend to drag our heels on anything that could maybe possibly be detrimental to the economy, but have recently agreed to a North American cap and trade market openness with Canada and Mexico. Then there is the EU, which seems like it is tripping over itself to be out front, calling for cuts and pledging massive reductions in carbon emissions over the next few decades. Then there is Russia, who basically says, hey, we got a raw deal when the Soviet Union broke up and since that made our carbon emissions look like nothing when you all set the benchmark, we’re just going to keep on like we have been- oh, and start mining some gold in the Gulags too, just in case all ya’ll’s currencies disintegrate again: Peace out.

And then there is China- now deemed the world’s largest emitter of carbon emissions and greenhouse gasses. In many instances China has been trying to follow the lead of the EU, and they made some broad agreements with the U.S. when Obama recently visited. But then they are also building ambitious dam projects that will ruin their rivers and there is that pesky human rights issue. The country has decided to respond to a worldwide call for concrete plans and commitments with… well, with politics.

In a recent document that came out of a meeting this week chaired by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, China presented broad plans to reduce carbon emissions and blamed those emissions (everyone’s, not just theirs) for droughts, floods and melting glaciers. China said it would:

"Make controlling greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to climate change an important basis for setting the medium- and long-term development strategies and plans of government at every level.”

Um, so you have clarified your plans by saying you will make plans very soon. Ok.

The document continued, saying China would:

"Nurture new points of economic growth that feature low carbon emissions and accelerate development of a low-carbon emissions systems for industry, construction and transport sectors."

Better, but still none of those elusive specifics. Maybe the U.S. can get them into the North American cap and trade market. I have to believe that that will become a world market with thinly veiled regional destinations, even more uniform than the stock markets today. Why wouldn’t rich countries with lots of emissions figure out a way to trade their emissions with poor countries for trees planted there or something else that will qualify?

Point being, China has made a public statement to reduce their emissions with no specifics. So, right now they are right about where the U.S. is -but they seem more serious, using straightforward language to convey their belief that climate change and global warming are human-caused and dangerous.

They also said they believe that rich nations should make big cuts and poor nations should be given room to continue to grow, and even increase emissions. Maybe Obama will be making another visit to talk about that one soon.