During her visit to China last week, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that her country is considering imposing heavy tariffs on imported Chinese products such as EVs, solar panels and lithium batteries, arguing: "China is simply too big for the rest of the world to absorb this enormous capacity." She added: "When the global market is flooded with artificially cheap Chinese products, the viability of American and foreign companies is called into question."

It's worth pointing out that Yellen hasn't brought up the issue of China's contribution to global warming, although China is, by far, the absolute leader in carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions. That said, the problems we are experiencing are due, fundamentally, to the actions over the last 150 years of the United States and Europe, which have brought us to where we are and enabled them to dominate the world.

Now it is the turn of China — and India to a lesser extent — to pursue a development strategy that involves increasing their emissions until they reach their maximum around 2030, in the case of the former, or even beyond in the case of the latter, with all that this entails for the climate emergency. And of course, when warnings to stop their development come precisely from those largely responsible for the mess we're in, the likelihood of united action to do something to reduce the increase in global heating is significantly reduced.

The point here is that China's increased output is precisely in the products that the world needs to reduce its emissions: EVs, solar panels and batteries. Each of these products has a net positive effects on emissions: of course producing an EV, a solar panel or a battery generates emissions, but it is beyond doubt that over its life cycle, the outcome is for the greater good.

The data has long exposed the lies that EVs produce more emissions in their manufacture and charging than they saved by not using petrol or diesel: even in Poland, which burns more coal than any of its neighbors to produce electricity, EVs are making a valuable contribution to reducing emissions.

China's argument is that that although its cycle is somewhat behind schedule because its entry into the developed world has come later, its industrial contribution is fundamental and necessary for the decarbonization of the world to be carried out on time. This is debatable, but certainly contrasts with the attitude of US or European governments, which are simply slowing down their their use of fossil fuels, rather than banning them.

The automotive sector is proof of this: China is now the world leader in EVs, while carmakers Europe and the United States, with the obvious exception of Tesla, are dragging their feet, prefering to lobby for postponing deadlines and the implementation of lower emission levels. China pollutes more, undoubtedly, but the products it manufactures and sells to the rest of the world generate significant emissions savings, something that cannot be said of the United States or European Union, where carmakers are still focused on traditional vehicles, and at best introducing pointless hybrids.

Does it make sense to sanction China with strong tariff barriers for driving decarbonization, in return for strong economic development and sharply increasing its emissions, with a view to a somewhat later decline, from 2030 onwards?

Is it logical to punish China for selling more EVs, solar panels, and batteries than anyone else? Does it make sense to punish China with tariffs for becoming the real engine of the world's decarbonization, even at the cost of polluting more for a few years?

At face value, it seems the West is both resisting decarbonization for as long as possible while preventing China's long-term economic growth. What kind of sense does that make?

(En español, aquí)