Thank you. It turned out to be a browser misconfiguration here. ...and a little opinion commentary on what I've seen.
A principled small group in NASA was the first, as far as I know, to find and show that our world's leaders are mainly harming arable lowlands (lack of runoff and filtering) around our large cities by concentrating populations in them. A generation before mine--a generation with more common sense--knew that "urban sprawl" was the enlargement of our cities and not movement into rural areas. For example, about a 100 years ago, there were a couple of communities in the Rockies of more than 60,000 people each. Now each of those areas are hardly populated at all.
Most environmental concerns about residential areas are improperly, IMO, focused on sterile but pretty places (mountains, deserts). Isn't it nice to have no near neighbors (little sarcasm there) where so many lowlanders love vacation (money and exclusivity). Corporations that use natural resources have fronted greenie relatives and other associates to push small competition out of the way (saw it here in the lumber industry and housing developments).
So China has built its factories and other plants in the lowlands (no runoff for filtering) and is inviting tourists to its mountains (pretty but naturally sterile). And the world is pushing schemes like the hypocritical Kyoto Accord with a blind eye toward smoky China.