The use of concrete exploded to fuel China’s rise. Now the costs of this weighty material are being counted.
China’s cities are sinking – apparent victims of their own success. Large swathes of the country’s population now live in major cities that are subsiding at more than 3mm (0.1in) per year, according to a recent study. Some areas are sinking by more than 45mm (1.7in) each year, such as parts of Beijing. And by 2120, around a quarter of China’s coastal land will be beneath sea-level, the researchers predict.
While there are a number of reasons for the subsidence, the researchers have pointed to the rapid rate of urban development as among the culprits. The huge amounts of groundwater abstraction needed to support urban populations alongside the weight of the buildings and city infrastructure were singled out by the researchers as contributing to the sinking.
It follows similar research in New York City that found the enormous weight of the concrete, glass and steel – an estimated 762 million tonnes – in the city’s skyscrapers were contributing to subsidence of the land they sit upon.
Both studies have shone a light on some of the unexpected effects of urban development. But the Chinese research in particular has highlighted just how rapidly China’s cities have developed and the scale of urban expansion in the city.
If it only was JUST the use of concrete…
In China, real-estate and owning a home is a big show or success in life and therefore highly desirable.
Over the years the construction sector ran rampant, building homes faster then they could be sold by banks to bidders. A lot of these homes are so shoddy, they are starting to fall appart while people are living inaide them (google “tofu-buildings” and see for yourself, its horrific).
With high ammounts of corruption and in-party dealings, China continued to overbuild, using up massive ammounts of concrete on buildings with the lifespan of an average laptop. If they would build highly efficient buildings to house the massive population with high quality and affordable rooms, that would probably justity the high us of concrete and material.
But they are not…
And here we are now, locked in a perpetual cycle of building and breaking stuff, because a lot of finances and political positions are entwined with constructionnand lland-dealings.
The CCP could intervene, they are the fake-communist authoritarian rulers after all and their word is law. Im just not sure they want to. Or know how.
What you’re saying just isn’t true though. China isn’t overbuilding by any meaningful metric. Their urbanization rate is really low compared to developed nations like the US. They have a huge population so their total rate of construction while urbanizing is unique. However the actual process of urbanization isn’t unique at all.
If you look at historical data the US followed a very similar trend with rapid urbanization ramping up until around the 1960s. That rapid development included a mix of shoddy and quality construction. Additional urbanization was more difficult to achieve and growth slowed. That’s basically what you’re seeing in China now too.
Nonsense. The US didn’t build entire fake cities that are totally empty, because they solely exist as investment scams and are not suitable for people to live in.
Aren’t those ghost cities now mostly filled with people?
In most cases yes. However there is a range to that success. Some developments have been in such high demand that they’re now expanding. Others are still struggling.
They are not. Everything indicates that they remain uninhabited. Ghost cities are usually built in regions with cheap lease prices for land, which are cheap for a reason: Poor infrastructure, few jobs and opportunities.
The US definitely had its fair share of housing developments that were basically real estate investment scams. Most of the endless suburban sprawl in California was developed that way. One of my favorite examples is California City. It’s still mostly empty and is located in the middle of the desert. Also if you ever watched the show Arrested Development, it was making fun of the people who ran these kinds of real estate scams.
What’s happening in China isn’t all that different. It’s just happening on a much larger scale given the population size and the kind of urban density China is targeting. That’s what I think is shocking to anyone not looking at numbers. Instead of empty blocks of houses you might get empty apartment buildings instead.
If it’s not that different (if) is not less stupid and wasteful.
Certainly something to consider when people advocate increased urbanization
Only China uses cement.
Really? We’re going to chastise China for using cement? Yes I know it produces CO2, but it’s pretty hard to build much without it. We’re talking basic stuff: buildings, hospitals, schools, bridges, sidewalks. These are basic needs of a modern society. And guess what? As more countries develop (see Africa) they’re all going to want the same things. Are we really going to say “no, not you, you don’t deserve a sidewalk, only we deserve a sidewalk”? Chastise then for burning coal, not basic necessities of modern life.
If you read this to the end they even change it to “world”.
To tackle the linked climate and environmental challenges, the world’s concrete addiction must be further addressed. Yet, although there is still room for improvement, cement industry bodies are hopeful their member companies can accelerate the decarbonisation of the sector. And there are already some efforts at rehabilitating old quarry mines in China, notes Andrew Minson from the Global Cement and Concrete Association.
“I think China’s experience can help other developing countries think about how to take advantage of concrete’s wonderful advantages while mitigating its downsides,” says Downie. “I don’t think China will be the last nation to urbanise and industrialise with concrete so prominent – concrete is fundamental to modern building and infrastructure. So the world will have to find a way to make it in a low-carbon fashion.”
mmmm you didn’t actually read the article, didja?
They start off with sinking before going to the good old mining and pollution problems. Thanks.
How do you read any of that and come to the conclusion that anyone is “chastising” China? The other poster is right, you either didn’t read it or are just a troll.
Pretty much the entire article is complaining that China is using too much concrete, from causing their cities to sink below sea level, to increased CO2 emissions.
The entire story is about how their increased concrete use is hurting themselves and the environment.
The article is using China as an example that increased concrete usage and its accompanying production is bad for the environment. The article is not chastising China for trying to provide for its “basic fucking needs of a modern society” by building “hospitals, schools, bridges, fucking sidewalks.”
I don’t think the article is actually all that critical. It might have been worth providing more context for why China is using that much concrete. However, even without that I think it’s fine.
The real problem I think is the headline. It frames China’s concrete use as an irrational mental illness which is just absurd. I’m betting that was the work of one of the BBC’s editors and not the actual author.
Developing countries should use modern technology. There’s no need for them to repeat the mistakes that the western world went through before better stuff was invented. Concrete is very carbon expensive and better ways of producing it, using it and avoiding it are popping up all the time currently.
Emm, what’s the modern equivalent to cement?
Removed by mod
I did! They start off with sinking before going to the old mining and pollution. Thanks.
Only China uses cement, everyone knows that.
Removed by mod
Removed, civility.
Removed, civility.
