Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: But, but, but, China....  (Read 152098 times)

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5664
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 771
  • Likes Given: 0

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #451 on: April 25, 2018, 08:18:43 PM »
China install 9.65 GW of solar in Q1 2018.  That's up 22% over Q1 2017.

The grid problems which had left solar curtailed 20% have apparently been addressed which means that previously installed solar will make a larger contribution to the grid going forward.

China installed 52.83 GW of solar in 2017.

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/04/24/china-installs-nearly-10-gigawatts-of-solar-in-first-quarter-up-22/

It is expected that solar will generate more electricity than wind and nuclear in 2018, taking third place behind coal and hydro.  This is an extremely rapid ramp up.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18904
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2026
  • Likes Given: 255
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #452 on: April 25, 2018, 09:53:19 PM »
China's Belt and Road initiative, BRI, could make their Paris Pact pledges look good, while having a large negative impact of Earth Systems by transfer environmental degradation from China to its neighbors:

Title: "China’s Belt and Road poised to transform the Earth, but at what cost?"

https://news.mongabay.com/2018/04/chinas-belt-and-road-poised-to-transform-the-earth-but-at-what-cost/

Extract: "
•   The BRI is the largest infrastructure initiative in human history, and includes the Silk Road Economic Belt, a land transportation route running from China to Southern Europe via Central Asia and the Middle East, and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road, a sea route connecting the port of Shanghai to Venice, Italy, via India and Africa.

•   The potential environmental impacts of the mega-construction program could be severe, warn analysts. China has committed to BRI environmental and sustainability standards, at least on paper, but the sheer size of the initiative, along with China’s past environmental record and its autocratic institutions, are cause for deep concern.

One question of great concern to environmentalists is transparency. History has shown that rigorous environmental protections are most likely to be instituted and enforced in open societies where an independent judicial branch, media, activists and public can freely challenge government and business interests. China has no such history, and its construction projects around the world have long been plagued by a troubling environmental record."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #453 on: April 25, 2018, 10:07:18 PM »
Since China seems to be dedicated to electrifying their transportation and replacing coal generation with low carbon sources I would expect the New Silk Road would mean a significant decrease in carbon emissions.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 896
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #454 on: April 26, 2018, 02:06:09 AM »
Since China seems to be dedicated to electrifying their transportation and replacing coal generation with low carbon sources I would expect the New Silk Road would mean a significant decrease in carbon emissions.


The huge drop in air travel alone will make BRI a huge environmental winner.


Centralized governments have the advantage of being able to pivot rapidly during emergencies. We are facing a number of emergency situations in which the slowly churning wheels of democracy may prove a hinderance.


Compare hurricane response in Cuba to the responses in Puerto Rico, New Orleans, or Florida.
Terry

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #455 on: May 07, 2018, 09:07:25 PM »
China's dependency on imported oil, especially from the Middle East, is a huge security issue for them (just look up "Straits of Malacca"). So electrification plays to both security and environmental issues, as well as helping drive China's thrust into the "next economy".

Will be very interesting to see when electrification gains the scale to cause China's oil imports to fall, that will be a major geopolitical and economic event. With increasing oil and gas imports from Russia, and the US fracking its way to "energy independence", the medium term scenario for the Middle East and North Africa oil and gas producers could be very dark.  If China also decides to favour Iran for oil and gas imports (protecting the BRI), the Saudis could be in real trouble.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #456 on: May 07, 2018, 09:49:04 PM »
China's dependency on imported oil, especially from the Middle East, is a huge security issue for them (just look up "Straits of Malacca"). So electrification plays to both security and environmental issues, as well as helping drive China's thrust into the "next economy".

Will be very interesting to see when electrification gains the scale to cause China's oil imports to fall, that will be a major geopolitical and economic event. With increasing oil and gas imports from Russia, and the US fracking its way to "energy independence", the medium term scenario for the Middle East and North Africa oil and gas producers could be very dark.  If China also decides to favour Iran for oil and gas imports (protecting the BRI), the Saudis could be in real trouble.

I'm looking for an oil crash within the next five years similar to what has happened to coal.  At least clear signs that the crash has started which will mean a large decrease in oil company values and a major slowdown in new well development.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #457 on: May 07, 2018, 11:04:27 PM »
Between being one of the epicentres for climate change, the poisoned legacy of great power politics, massively expanded populations grown on the back of the oil boom, and drastically reduced oil revenues the Middle East could be a way more of a shit-show than it is currently. Just imagine the Saudi rulers not being able to afford the bribes and security needed to keep their population from taking them out. Trump may be doing Iran a favour by driving it further into the arms of China and the BRI, it desperately needs to diversify its economy.

Perhaps us "westerners" will not care about the Middle East anymore once we don't need the stuff thats under their lands. If a coup takes place in a country with no MSM reporters or western military is it really important? All those skyscrapers in Abu Dhabi could look like incredible malinvestments.

ivica

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1044
  • Kelele
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 56
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #458 on: June 18, 2018, 07:10:41 PM »
https://gbtimes.com/china-finland-cargo-train-link-extends-to-norway-and-sweden

"The first direct cargo train route linking China and Finland is being extended to Norway and Sweden as part of a Finnish city’s plans to establish itself as a Northern European logistics hub for China-bound rail freight.

The route linking the southeastern Finnish city of Kouvola with Xi’an and Zhengzhou in central China was opened last November and the service has run in both directions every week since April. It takes 10 to 12 days to complete the one-way journey from Finland through Russia and Kazakhstan to China, compared to eight weeks when shipping by sea."

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #459 on: June 18, 2018, 08:57:44 PM »
Quote
It takes 10 to 12 days to complete the one-way journey from Finland through Russia and Kazakhstan to China, compared to eight weeks when shipping by sea."

The time difference is going to take a tremendous amount of freight off the seas and onto land. 

We know how to run trains on very low carbon electricity.

BenB

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 283
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #460 on: June 19, 2018, 12:54:28 PM »
I don't know whether this belongs here or in the cars thread, but 97,000 EVs were sold in China in May, including 12,624 of the market-leading BAIC EC-Series:

http://ev-sales.blogspot.com/2018/06/china-may-2018.html

Several of the cars have recently upgraded batteries, including the BAIC Ex-series crossover with a 48kWh battery and the BYD e5 with a 61 kWh battery.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9109
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3598
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #461 on: June 19, 2018, 01:30:40 PM »
Hullo BenB,

An entry in the cars,more cars.... thread is a good idea. China is really ahead of the game. Even when Tesla gets to 5 6 7 8 9 10 thousand cars a week, it is likely China will have got way ahead.

I don't know whether this belongs here or in the cars thread, but 97,000 EVs were sold in China in May, including 12,624 of the market-leading BAIC EC-Series:

http://ev-sales.blogspot.com/2018/06/china-may-2018.html

Several of the cars have recently upgraded batteries, including the BAIC Ex-series crossover with a 48kWh battery and the BYD e5 with a 61 kWh battery.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #462 on: June 19, 2018, 04:07:21 PM »
China's impact right now is to cause other car companies to develop good, affordable EVs if they want part of the Chinese market.  That means that those companies will have models and experience that they can use in western markets as demand switches from ICEVs to EVs.

Chinese manufacturers may have all the market they can handle inside China for some time as their growing middle class buys their first cars and the Chinese government pushes buyers away from ICEVs.  We might not see China exporting many EVs or building factories outside China for some years.  But their in country use of EVs may speed up the transition outside China.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #463 on: June 20, 2018, 08:32:08 PM »
BP's 2018 Statistical Review of Global Energy is now online.  2017 data.  Seems like a good time to see how China is doing since it's a major GHG country.

Overall fossil fuel use increased some from 2016 but it could be mostly noise as China plateaus out.  It will take a few more years or a drastic increase/decrease to determine.  Coal consumption was down a small amount with oil and natural gas increasing.



Fossil fuel use for electricity is declining in terms of the percentage of electricity generated.  Coal is losing market share.



Low carbon (hydro, wind, nuclear, and solar) are taking market share away from fossil fuels.  Over the last six years low carbon generation has taken about eight percent of the market from fossil fuels.



Non-hydro renewables and nuclear have been  growing but not so much hydro in terms of percentage of generation.



Wind caught up and passed nuclear fairly quickly.  It is expected that solar will move higher than nuclear this year or next.



Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1376
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 204
  • Likes Given: 129
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #464 on: July 03, 2018, 01:52:48 AM »
China's emissions may have peaked:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-carbon/china-carbon-emissions-in-retreat-after-structural-break-in-economy-study-idUSKBN1JS1Y4

Quote
SHANGHAI (Reuters) - China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell from 2014 to 2016 and might already have peaked, according to a study published on Monday, with structural economic changes allowing Beijing to meet targets earlier than expected.

China vowed before the Paris climate talks in 2015 to bring CO2 emissions to a peak by “around 2030”, and the country’s top climate official, Xie Zhenhua, has already said it could meet the pledge ahead of time.

But the study, published by Nature Geoscience, said “in retrospect, the commitment may have been fulfilled even as it was being made”, with emissions hitting a record 9.53 gigatonnes in 2013 and declining in the following three years, dropping to 9.2 gigatonnes in 2016.

While emissions rose by an average of 9.3 percent per year from 2000 to 2013, China’s economy underwent a “structural break” in 2014, and is shifting to less carbon-intensive high technology sectors, it said.

“Unless there is a significant amount of change - a large government intervention like the stimulus package of 2008 - then China’s emissions will stabilize and gradually go down,” said Dabo Guan, a professor of climate change economics at the University of East Anglia (UEA), one of the authors of the study.

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3423
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 576
  • Likes Given: 277
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #465 on: August 17, 2019, 08:01:41 PM »
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/15/climate-china-global-translations-1662345
Often considered the bogeyman of global climate diplomacy, China is making greater and faster strides than expected away from fossil fuels — becoming the world’s largest investor in solar and wind technology and boasting more jobs in solar energy than in coal-mining. It’s all part of a longterm economic strategy to dominate in critical technologies.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #466 on: August 18, 2019, 10:40:35 PM »
China's emissions may have peaked:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-carbon/china-carbon-emissions-in-retreat-after-structural-break-in-economy-study-idUSKBN1JS1Y4

Quote
SHANGHAI (Reuters) - China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell from 2014 to 2016 and might already have peaked, according to a study published on Monday, with structural economic changes allowing Beijing to meet targets earlier than expected.

China vowed before the Paris climate talks in 2015 to bring CO2 emissions to a peak by “around 2030”, and the country’s top climate official, Xie Zhenhua, has already said it could meet the pledge ahead of time.

But the study, published by Nature Geoscience, said “in retrospect, the commitment may have been fulfilled even as it was being made”, with emissions hitting a record 9.53 gigatonnes in 2013 and declining in the following three years, dropping to 9.2 gigatonnes in 2016.

While emissions rose by an average of 9.3 percent per year from 2000 to 2013, China’s economy underwent a “structural break” in 2014, and is shifting to less carbon-intensive high technology sectors, it said.

“Unless there is a significant amount of change - a large government intervention like the stimulus package of 2008 - then China’s emissions will stabilize and gradually go down,” said Dabo Guan, a professor of climate change economics at the University of East Anglia (UEA), one of the authors of the study.

China CO2 emissions went up 2.7% in 2018, following 1.7% growth in 2017. Doesn't look like "stabilize and gradually go down" to me. Carbon brief is an excellent source for up to date CO2 emissions data:

Quote
The stronger growth in 2018 indicates that 2017 was not a blip

Quote
Like in 2017, coal consumption grew again, after having gone down from 2014 to 2016. Also like in 2017, the biggest single contribution to coal consumption growth was increased electricity production, which grew at 7.7% in 2018 and accounts for roughly half of coal consumption in China.

From 2014 to 2016, expanded renewable and nuclear power generation was able to cover slow growth in overall electricity consumption. This allowed coal-fired power generation to fall. In 2017 and 2018, however, electricity demand grew so fast that new low-carbon sources could not keep up.

Quote
China’s oil (+6.5%) and gas consumption (+17.7%) grew rapidly in 2018, continuing recent trends. Even though they account for a much smaller share of the country’s CO2 emissions than coal, this rapid growth helped push the growth in total CO2 emissions well above the rate for coal alone.

Due to discrepancies between coal production (higher) and coal consumption (not as much higher) numbers, the actual CO2 increase could be as high as 4% for 2018!

Quote
Whatever the case, the discrepancy over coal means that overall CO2 growth could be as high as around 4% – compared to 2.3% reported in the communique – even before accounting for other sources of uncertainty that we usually include in our analyses. Those factors push the uncertainty range even wider, to -0.4% to +6.7%.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-chinas-co2-emissions-grew-slower-than-expected-in-2018

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3423
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 576
  • Likes Given: 277
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #467 on: September 04, 2019, 06:16:59 PM »
Chinese Belt and Road plan ‘may result in 2.7C warming’
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/09/02/chinese-belt-road-plan-may-result-2-7c-warming/
Quote
China’s multi-trillion dollar global investment plans could blow the 2C warming limit set by the Paris Agreement without curbs on pollution, a new study said on Monday.

The 126 countries in the Belt and Road region now account for 28% of global emissions, but on their current trajectory, that could rise to 66% by 2050, researchers, led by Ma Jun, a special advisor to China’s central bank, said.

That could mean global carbon levels would rise to nearly double the level needed to keep temperature increases to below 2C, a major goal of the Paris Agreement.

“If B&RCs (Belt and Road countries) follow historical carbon-intense growth patterns… it may be enough to result in a 2.7 degree path, even if the rest of the world adheres to 2 degree levels of emissions,” the report said.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

blumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #468 on: September 04, 2019, 06:52:33 PM »
That strikes me as very pessimistic. In 30 years, oil and gas will be so expensive compared to renewables, China wouldn't be competitive anymore if they still relied on fossils.

So it's either less CO2 emissions because they switched to renewables or less CO2 emissions due to a broken down economy.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #469 on: September 05, 2019, 03:17:51 AM »
That strikes me as very pessimistic. In 30 years, oil and gas will be so expensive compared to renewables, China wouldn't be competitive anymore if they still relied on fossils.

So it's either less CO2 emissions because they switched to renewables or less CO2 emissions due to a broken down economy.

The developing countries are in a great position as they will be adding net new electricity generating plants (no sunk costs) and increasing motorcycles/trains/buses/trams/cars with all the advances being made by China etc. available to them. It may take a few more years, but new new fossil fuel plants/transport will become a thing of the past, so the CO2 emissions growth curve may flatten.

Shame is that we need to have it pointing downwards big time and the UN IPCC math that the report relies upon massively understates the probable temperature response.That needs to rich nations to step up to the plate.


blumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #470 on: September 05, 2019, 07:17:36 AM »
Agreed, Rboyd.

Long term the math doesn't work out for fossils anymore (30 years). Hard to say what happens short term though (within 10 years). I guess in this timeframe we do see higher growth year by year and a sharp cut after that.

Implications are known to the considerate reader. We really should have started to phase out 30 years ago...

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 896
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #471 on: September 06, 2019, 09:41:37 AM »
Agreed, Rboyd.

Long term the math doesn't work out for fossils anymore (30 years). Hard to say what happens short term though (within 10 years). I guess in this timeframe we do see higher growth year by year and a sharp cut after that.

Implications are known to the considerate reader. We really should have started to phased out 30 years ago...


If we had ended ff use 30 years ago we'd be faced with a difficult, but solvable problem today.


I don't believe "winning" is possible for most of the world's population. We might still be able to mitigate the very worst, if we were all willing to sacrifice today for the benefit of generations yet unborn. We won't make these sacrifices so ...


Terry

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3423
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 576
  • Likes Given: 277
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #472 on: September 06, 2019, 10:54:45 PM »
China’s Industrial Heartland Fears Impact of Tougher Emissions Policies
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/04092019/china-climate-change-policy-economic-slowdown-impact-industrial-heartland-factory-shutdown
Quote
Chinese regulators have come down hard on polluting industries in recent years. Around Hebei province, the impact of Beijing's industrial reorganization is profound. Small towns like Dazhang village are now surrounded by shuttered and partially dismantled factories. Chained gates and idle yards line the streets.

The tension between China's slowdown and its climate ambitions has global implications, as world leaders prepare for a 2020 deadline for new international targets to reduce emissions that contribute to global warming.

But after two decades of near double-digit expansion, gross domestic product has slowed to 6.2 percent growth in the second quarter — the weakest official pace since the early 1990s.

If China, the world's second-largest economy, does not get tough on its emissions, other countries might not be willing to either.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3423
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 576
  • Likes Given: 277
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #473 on: September 13, 2019, 09:49:39 PM »
UN ‘very confident’ China plans to raise climate ambition
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/09/11/un-confident-china-plans-raise-climate-ambition/
Quote
Speaking ahead of the high-level meeting convened by UN secretary general in New York on 23 September, UN special envoy on climate change Luis Alfonso de Alba said he was “very confident that China will come to the summit with a clear commitment on a number of areas… with a much higher level of ambition”.

Referring to a statement signed by China, France and UN chief António Guterres on the margins of the G20 summit in July, De Alba said the communique had “made some important announcements”.

“One of them is a commitment of China to enhance their [national climate plan] and to come in September with a proposal on that,” he said.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3423
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 576
  • Likes Given: 277
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #474 on: September 24, 2019, 10:26:02 PM »
Jerry Brown partners with China to fight climate change
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/09/23/jerry-brown-uc-berkeley-china-climate-institute/
Quote
Jerry Brown isn’t finished fighting climate change just yet.

The former California governor is launching a new partnership with China and UC Berkeley — the California-China Climate Institute — to research new solutions for cutting carbon emissions and averting the disastrous impact of global warming, he announced Monday.

“We want to provide a forum and an open line of communication between Americans and Chinese on one of the most important challenges we face,” Brown said in an earlier interview. The plan is to “do everything we can not only to contribute to China and California carbon reduction, but being a force for the rest of the world to emulate.”
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1376
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 204
  • Likes Given: 129
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #475 on: September 26, 2019, 06:46:42 PM »
The linked article states that China has phased out subsidies for renewable energy products and increased investment in fossil fuel projects.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/why-chinas-renewable-energy-transition-is-losing-momentum

Quote
In addition, as renewable energy prices have fallen and the central government has grown increasingly concerned about the impact of the U.S.-China trade war on China’s economy, renewable subsidies are being phased out. Wind and solar facilities must now compete directly at auction with other forms of power generation. China’s green energy sector seems increasingly capable of winning that competition, but solar energy installations are nevertheless expected to drop by about half this year, from a peak of 53 gigawatts in 2017.

And while curtailing subsidies for wind and solar power, the central government has sharply increased financial support for what it calls “new energy” extraction, which includes fracking of shale gas and separating methane from coal. Those subsidies are an important reason behind China’s rising CO2 emissions.

Quote
To reduce the country’s CO2 emissions, experts say it is crucial that power produced in provinces like Qinghai be transmitted seamlessly to the industrial and population centers along China’s coast. Many larger renewable projects are located in remote landlocked provinces like Qinghai, Gansu, and Inner Mongolia. Until more transmission lines are built and government reforms are enacted that better enable power to be transferred to other provinces, far-western “battery provinces” like Qinghai will mainly end up generating power for themselves.

What’s needed, Tu says, is for the central government to eliminate barriers of inter-provincial power trading and to simultaneously give renewables priority in the transfer and dispatching of electricity.

Alvin Lin, an energy and climate expert with the Natural Resources Defense Council who has worked in China for more than a decade, says that an important near-term element in the climate battle is to sustain the momentum of China’s renewable energy drive so that the country’s CO2 emissions peak before 2030. Many experts increasingly argue that the 2030 target date is insufficient.

“We and others would like to push for an earlier carbon peaking around 2025,” Lin says. “China would need to stop building new coal plants now and bring coal power capacity and generation down rapidly.”


rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #476 on: September 28, 2019, 02:04:25 AM »
The linked article states that China has phased out subsidies for renewable energy products and increased investment in fossil fuel projects.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/why-chinas-renewable-energy-transition-is-losing-momentum

Sad, but makes sense from a short term energy security point of view. China's natural gas demand is exploding, so they want to produce as much domestically as possible rather than importing from the Middle East and Australia etc.

They have cut the EV subsidies and now also the wind and pv subsidies, very sad. They should be going full throttle on these things.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 896
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #477 on: September 28, 2019, 06:28:36 AM »
^^
The "Power of Siberia" pipeline was charged up at the end of August and will begin pumping gas this December.
This turns China's energy situation on it's head. Cheap Russian gas as opposed to expensive LNG, no US dollars required, and a big expansion project already on the drawing boards.


The new low priced energy will make renewables a hard sell & will alleviate the need to subsidize projects that no longer make sense financially, even if they do lessen the need for imported energy.
A China with an abundance of low cost energy will be hard for anyone to compete with. If Europe follows Trump's dictates and shuts down Nord Stream 2 European manufacturing will pay a very heavy price.
Terry


Hefaistos

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 708
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 368
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #478 on: September 28, 2019, 06:50:00 AM »
... If Europe follows Trump's dictates and shuts down Nord Stream 2 ...

Won't happen! Trump just uses some russiaphobic political arguments to promote US business interests, as the USA hopes to be able to export its expensive LNG instead of the cheap Russian one.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 896
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #479 on: September 28, 2019, 07:03:21 AM »
... If Europe follows Trump's dictates and shuts down Nord Stream 2 ...

Won't happen! Trump just uses some russiaphobic political arguments to promote US business interests, as the USA hopes to be able to export its expensive LNG instead of the cheap Russian one.
I hope you're right.
Terry

bluice

  • Guest
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #480 on: September 28, 2019, 09:01:54 AM »
I find interesting how posters here see increasing dependence on Russian fossil fuels as a good thing.

Both China and Europe also have the possibility to develop local zero carbon energy sources.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #481 on: September 28, 2019, 06:14:29 PM »
From a geopolitical point of view it is very intelligent for China to reorient their natural gas and oil imports to friendly nations with over-land transportation. Same as attempting to ramp up domestic natural gas production. This helps remove their oil and gas imports as a weakness that the USA can utilize in a conflict (just like with Japan just before Pearl Harbour). They have also built up a very large strategic oil reserve.

They should also be going full speed with EV's as they replace imported oil with domestic electricity production (coal, natural gas, nuclear and renewables). Their removal of subsidies to EV's and the renewable sector is very short sighted geopolitically and really bad for the climate. Even at 80% coal share in electricity production EV's generate less CO2 due to the efficiency of the electrical engine (and power generating stations).

Wildcatter

  • New ice
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 38
  • Likes Given: 48
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #482 on: September 28, 2019, 06:57:42 PM »
From a geopolitical point of view it is very intelligent for China to reorient their natural gas and oil imports to friendly nations with over-land transportation. Same as attempting to ramp up domestic natural gas production. This helps remove their oil and gas imports as a weakness that the USA can utilize in a conflict (just like with Japan just before Pearl Harbour). They have also built up a very large strategic oil reserve.

They should also be going full speed with EV's as they replace imported oil with domestic electricity production (coal, natural gas, nuclear and renewables). Their removal of subsidies to EV's and the renewable sector is very short sighted geopolitically and really bad for the climate. Even at 80% coal share in electricity production EV's generate less CO2 due to the efficiency of the electrical engine (and power generating stations).

Removing subsidies actually makes perfect sense for China, although it does suck for climate. Although, it could potentially even out.

They "plant 1000 seeds", scale up, start to corner markets, and then they drop subsidies to encourage further cost efficiency, separating the wheat from the chaffe, and monopolize global markets. That's how they do it, and it's very efficient. They did it with solar, EVs, and will do it with batteries (probably). And they've cornered silicon, solar, and will outpace everyone in battery production by multiple times, while having the biggest EV market that will dominate exports to SE Asia, and anyone who imports them, as well as having a huge presence in global electric buses.

It's actually very effective, in a cutthroat kinda way. They are very good at it. I say it may even out, because they drop costs so significantly through scale, and then optimization + innovation and iteration in manufacturing. They're basically the reason why solar is as cheap as it is, and why batteries will drop in costs as well, at economies of scale. So, it's a catch 22.

What we can expect is that they'll do a "tick, tock" type installation with renewables. They're also going to scale up offshore wind with all their coastal population. By tick tock, I mean they installed a large amount, now they're letting domestic suppliers scale up massively and corner markets, also dropping costs, and when this new expansion has optimized processes and cost efficiency with a whole bunch more supply, they'll do another series of large installs, so it doesn't hamper their global supply too much and they maximize value domestically.

It also has the effect of letting them catch up on grid utilization. As can be expected, they had a good amount of grid problems adding all those renewables, lot of curtailment, bottleneck issues, transmission/distribution. A period of slower growth means they can alleviate some of these issues, while letting them plan better for the future. In the near term, they'll likely be adding grid storage while building their grid, to try and get the most effective options, to aid in transmission/distribution and ancillary services for example.

I guess the positive with China is knowing that they actually want energy independence. Besides the global markets, their rate of oil consumption was projected to be astronomical, which has pushed them towards EVs more. Removing subsidies was actually to reduce costs as fast as possible. No one should be too surprised if they renew some EV subsidies in the future, when their markets stabilize a bit and EVs are even more cost efficient and producing more at scale.

It's no surprise about natural gas, it allows them to flex their muscles in Central Asia as well as strategic agreements in the Middle East, part of the Belt n Road. It also allows them to get plentiful of cheap supply, and to them it's less damaging than coal, so it's a win/win for them as it also helps influence + good faith with all those countries as well as pipelines and $$.

I don't really agree with their methods, but removing subsidies has been an effective way to reduce costs. They'll probably renew some of them at a later date. They know their current rates of consumption are basically unsustainable, so that's a silver lining I guess. There is a method to their madness though, so we'll see. If the world goes into a recession, it will probably hurt renewables + EVs, but I imagine we'll see efforts pick up again in the near future. Hopefully, anyway.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 896
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #483 on: September 28, 2019, 09:55:09 PM »
Thanks Wildcatter!
Well written & logical.
Terry

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #484 on: September 29, 2019, 09:36:29 PM »
A extremely rational analysis - welcome Wildcatter!

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #485 on: October 01, 2019, 06:13:35 AM »
Guest post: Why China’s CO2 emissions grew 4% during first half of 2019

Quote
Estimates based on preliminary data for the first half of 2019, compared to the same period last year, indicate that:

China’s coal demand increased by 3%;
Oil demand was up 6%;
Gas demand rose by 12%; and
Cement production increased by 7%.

Quote
At the same time, the debate about energy targets for the 14th five-year plan, to run from 2021 to 2025, and a longer-term plan until 2035, has taken off in earnest.

The five-year plans for different sectors will be published in 2021-22 and will include detailed targets for different energy sources, power generating capacity, share of coal in total energy and so on. This plan will be immensely important in charting the country’s future energy policy, as almost all detailed targets are currently for 2020. One of the proposals being discussed is adopting a CO2 emission cap for 2025.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-why-chinas-co2-emissions-grew-4-during-first-half-of-2019

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #486 on: October 01, 2019, 10:13:28 PM »
The Global Rise of China: Alvin Y So and Yin-wah Chu

Read this really good book on the development of the Chinese economy over the past few decades, the author refers to the policies as "State Neoliberalism" with neoliberalism (deregulation, privatization, market orientation) being used to maintain the state (and the Party) in power instead of handing power over to the corporations.

Seems they still believe in the mixed economy, where natural monopolies and state-subsidized businesses (e.g. banking, energy supply, railways, arms manufacturers, aerospace etc.) should be owned by the state and the basic costs should be somewhat protected from rentier corporations. Also that anti-competitive behaviour should be punished and restrained - the new business social credit system is an interesting move in that direction.

An authoritarian bureaucracy overseeing what used to be called "embedded capitalism" prior to the 1970's, with oversight to make sure that the market actually functions more for the benefit of society. Still lots of problems though, especially with local corruption and exploitation which is permitted as a cost of rapid development, especially outside the major cities.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-28/china-s-social-credit-for-companies-sparks-alarm-eucham-warns

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #487 on: October 10, 2019, 01:14:44 AM »
China is on track to meet its [so2 and no and particulate] emissions goals for 2020

The good news - the local air pollution from coal plants in China has been cleaned up a lot.
The bad news - the climate cooling levels of SO2 from Chinese coal plants have been reduced a lot

Quote
The team found that between 2014 and 2017, China's annual power plant emissions of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate matter dropped by 65%, 60% and 72% each year respectively from 2.21, 3.11 and 0.52 million tonnes in 2014 to 0.77, 1.26 and 0.14 million tonnes in 2017, which is in compliance with ULE standards.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/10/191007113327.htm.

blumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #488 on: November 06, 2019, 04:59:05 PM »
China meets ultra-low emissions in advance of the 2020 goal. China's annual power plant emissions of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate matter dropped by 65%, 60% and 72% from 2.21, 3.11 and 0.52 million tons in 2014 to 0.77, 1.26 and 0.14 million tons in 2017, respectively.

Link >> https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-11/caos-cm110519.php

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1417
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 170
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #489 on: November 07, 2019, 04:21:00 AM »
China can't have much more pollution. In fact, as it's citizens get more affluent, it needs to reduce pollution to satisfy the masses.

But fossil fuels are huge energy sources for a society that will continue to use more energy than any other country in the world.

(Emissions metrics per country make no sense, of course. The only real measure of a society is the per person emissions, but whatever.)

China will emit more than any other country for decades.


The good news (maybe), is that because China is the most tightly controlled large advanced economy, they can implement fairly radical policies if they choose.
big time oops

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1244
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 128
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #490 on: November 07, 2019, 06:52:08 PM »

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #491 on: November 09, 2019, 11:36:13 PM »
China's coal based electricity fleet way more efficient that the US

Interesting report on the Chinese coal-fired electricity generation fleet. 50% is already made up of super-critical and ultra super-critical units (higher temperatures and steam pressure produce more electricity per unit of coal) and by 2020 all units will have to meet an efficiency level that the top 100 units in the US cant meet. With the very low utilization rate of the fleet, less efficient ones can be shut down without the need for replacement. All new plants are at the least super-efficient, so will increase the efficiency of the whole fleet.

Quote
Since China’s fleet uses more advanced technology, it also consumes less coal: an average of 286.42 grams of coal equivalent, or gce, consumed per kilowatt-hour of power produced in China versus 374.96 gce consumed per kilowatt-hour produced at lower heating value in the United States.

In 2016:
- Subcritical coal power plants in SE Asia were on average 32% thermally efficient
- SuperCritical coal power plants in SE Asia were on average 36% thermally efficient (that's 12.5% more efficient than subcritical)
- Ultra SuperCritical coal power plants in SE Asia were on average 39% thermally efficient (that's 22% more efficient than subcritical)

China already has Ultra Supercritical plants that are 10 years old running at 45% efficiency (thats 41% more efficient than subcritical). The goal is to get to over 50% efficient.

This means that China may very well be able to cut coal usage in electricity production while actually increasing the amount of electricity generated from coal.

At these levels of efficiency coal plants are pretty close to natural gas plants for CO2 emissions and have much less fugitive methane emissions during production and transport of the coal/NG.

There is also significantly less flue gas to deal with for the sulphur and nox scrubbers to deal with.

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2017/05/15/432141/everything-think-know-coal-china-wrong/

https://www.worldcoal.org/file_validate.php?file=The%20Power%20of%20high%20efficiency%20coal%20-%20WCA%20-%200316.pdf

https://www.power-technology.com/projects/yuhuancoal/
« Last Edit: November 09, 2019, 11:49:52 PM by rboyd »

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1376
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 204
  • Likes Given: 129
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #492 on: November 12, 2019, 06:29:56 PM »
^^^

That article from 2017 relies on some information that appears to be incorrect.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/29/climate/china-coal-climate-change.html

Quote
China’s Coal Plants Haven’t Cut Methane Emissions as Required, Study Finds
By Somini Sengupta
Jan. 29, 2019

China, the world’s coal juggernaut, has continued to produce more methane emissions from its coal mines despite its pledge to curb the planet-warming pollutant, according to new research.

In a paper published Tuesday in Nature Communications, researchers concluded that China had failed to meet its own government regulations requiring coal mines to rapidly reduce methane emissions, at least in the five years after 2010, when the regulations were passed.

It matters because coal is the world’s dirtiest fossil fuel, and China is, by far, the largest producer in the world.

Coal accounts for 40 percent of electricity generation globally and an even higher share in China, which has abundant coal resources and more than four million workers employed in the coal sector. Scientists and policymakers agree that the world will have to quit coal to have any hope of averting catastrophic climate change.

Quote
“Our study indicates that, at least in terms of methane emissions, China’s government is talking the talk but has not been able to walk the walk,” Scot Miller, a professor at Johns Hopkins University who led the research team, said in a statement.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07891-7#citeas

Quote
Miller, S.M., Michalak, A.M., Detmers, R.G. et al. China’s coal mine methane regulations have not curbed growing emissions. Nat Commun 10, 303 (2019) doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07891-7

Quote
Abstract

Anthropogenic methane emissions from China are likely greater than in any other country in the world. The largest fraction of China’s anthropogenic emissions is attributable to coal mining, but these emissions may be changing; China enacted a suite of regulations for coal mine methane (CMM) drainage and utilization that came into full effect in 2010. Here, we use methane observations from the GOSAT satellite to evaluate recent trends in total anthropogenic and natural emissions from Asia with a particular focus on China. We find that emissions from China rose by 1.1 ± 0.4 Tg CH4 yr−1 from 2010 to 2015, culminating in total anthropogenic and natural emissions of 61.5 ± 2.7 Tg CH4 in 2015. The observed trend is consistent with pre-2010 trends and is largely attributable to coal mining. These results indicate that China’s CMM regulations have had no discernible impact on the continued increase in Chinese methane emissions.

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1376
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 204
  • Likes Given: 129
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #493 on: November 12, 2019, 06:38:52 PM »
And when the world urgently needs to retire coal power plants, not build more of them, let's compare and contrast countries.

The United States is retiring larger and newer coal plants now.

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2019/07/26/bigger-younger-coal-plants-are-retiring/

Quote
Bigger, younger coal plants are retiring

An analysis of coal plant retirements from the U.S. Department of Energy shows that more than 100 GW of coal-fired power plants have already retired this decade, as solar, wind and gas eat coal’s lunch.

July 26, 2019 Christian Roselund

The last decade has seen a dramatic change in the U.S. generation fleet, with hundreds of older coal-fired power plants being shut down, and replaced with at first gas plants, and increasingly wind and solar.

Quote
It’s hard to draw too many conclusions from the overall capacity of coal plants that have retired, as the pattern is highly uneven from year to year. But of the 546 coal-fired power plants totaling over 102 GW which have gone offline during the last decade, the ones that have shut down in the last few years have been both younger and larger than previous plants.

According to EIA, The average age of coal plant that shut down in 2018 was 46 years – 10 years younger than the ones that shut down in 2015. Additionally, the average capacity of plants that are shutting down has nearly tripled, from around 100 MW in 2015 to 350 MW last year. And this means that it is not only small, ancient coal plants that are feeling the heat, but younger, bigger units, which have better economies of scale.

China keeps building new coal plants.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/28/asia/china-coal-plant-inner-mongolia-intl-hnk/index.html

Quote
China struggling to kick its coal habit despite Beijing's big climate pledges
By David Culver, Lily Lee and Ben Westcott, CNN

Updated 9:06 PM ET, Sat September 28, 2019

Inner Mongolia, China (CNN)On the coal-rich plains of Inner Mongolia, thick white smoke curls from the huge chimney of a thermal coal power plant which the Chinese Communist Party had pledged to stop constructing two years ago.
The huge Mengneng Xilin Thermal Power Plant's third unit, expected to deliver 700 megawatts of power to China's north, was ordered to cease construction in January 2017.

The order came from China's National Energy Administration as part of a government plan to eliminate millions of tons of "overcapacity" caused by a rush of approvals and the construction of "illegal" power plants. It is also part of President Xi Jinping's pledge to reduce the country's reliance on coal and reach peak carbon emissions by 2030.

But even as China reiterated its commitment to reducing emissions last week in New York, earlier this month at least three large, new coal-fired power stations appeared to be either operating or under construction in Inner Mongolia in northern China -- including Mengneng Xilin.

Quote
According to Climate Action Tracker, China's carbon emissions rose an estimated 2.3% in 2018, the second consecutive year of growth after emissions appeared to stall between 2014 and 2016.

Quote
Mengmeng Xilin isn't the only coal power plant to have quietly restarted construction or gone into operation since the notice was sent in 2017.

Huaneng North Victory Thermal Power Plant is due to begin operating in October 2019, generating more than 1,000 megawatts of power. Similarly, Xilinhot's Datang Power Plant is expected to finish construction in July, set to provide up to 1320 MW, despite also being on the list of power stations put on hold.

Satellite images from Google Earth show that, after a brief pause in 2017, the construction of all three suspended plants continued. The resumption work has raised questions about the status of dozens of other supposedly suspended heavily-polluting power stations across the country.

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1376
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 204
  • Likes Given: 129
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #494 on: November 12, 2019, 07:07:30 PM »
More about China's supposedly efficient coal plants.

https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3037206/problem-chinas-clean-coal-push-there-no-such-thing-clean-coal

Quote
The problem with China’s ‘clean coal’ push is that there is no such thing as ‘clean coal’

China’s leadership in renewable energy is at odds with the fact that it has too much coal-fired power capacity. But Beijing is not yet ready to make the tough decisions necessary to acknowledge the problem and downsize coal production

Melissa Brown 
Ghee Peh 
Published: 10:00pm, 11 Nov, 2019

Quote
Yet in October, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang renewed the focus on what the global public relations arm of the mining industry calls “clean coal” with comments on China’s potential for development of new coal and coal bed methane technologies.

As China knows, “clean coal” simply does not exist. “Clean coal” describes a hope that new technology like emissions abatement or carbon capture and sequestration might one day solve the coal problem. To date, both technologies have proven uneconomic and unsuccessful in reducing emissions.

Quote
While it is tempting to believe that China’s leadership may be hatching some special plans for “clean coal”, the more likely scenario is that they are using the “clean coal” narrative to distract attention from a more uncomfortable problem.

Simply stated, China has far too much under-utilised coal-fired power capacity. In commercially driven power systems, this would be unsustainable. Beijing, however, is not yet ready to make the tough decisions necessary to acknowledge the problem or to fund the type of regional stabilisation programmes that may be needed to downsize coal production and power.

And here's where the article discusses those new coal plants that are so much more efficient than the older plants that the United States is retiring:

Quote
These decisions are tough for three reasons. The first is that China’s coal power fleet is young – reflecting a legacy of planning mistakes and overbuilding due to local government incentives. Tragically, much of this overbuilding took place over the past five years even as Chinese renewable energy technologies were winning market share.

Quote
The third reason relates to the fundamental nature of coal itself. In a word, coal is dirty and any effort to make it “clean” raises costs and reduces operational efficiency.

Quote
China’s leading coal-fired power companies are enthusiastic about reporting to investors on dramatic improvements they have made with their new ultra-low emission coal-fired power units. For example, China Shenhua reports reductions in per kilowatt hour emissions of “soot”, SOx and NOx of 5.5 per cent, 9.3 per cent and 17.9 per cent respectively over the past five years.

These improvements must be put in context, however. China Shenhua increased its installed capacity of coal power by 46.8 per cent during the same period and coal generation by 25.1 per cent. This means that any gains are offset by more coal-fired generation, adding to the company’s conventional pollution emissions and its still unreported carbon emissions.




rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #495 on: November 15, 2019, 11:44:53 PM »
As per my post in the coal thread, China has a strategic reason to keep its coal-fired generating fleet at relatively low levels of utilization of about 50% - to act as a reserve to replace seaborne natural gas imports and to power greater use of electrical transport (trams, trains, buses, taxis and the couple of a million and increasing number of personal EV's) to replace seaborne oil imports.

This is strategic energy security planning so that they can withstand an energy blockade (as was done with Japan in the months before Pearl Harbour) during any hostilities with the US. By showing that they can, they greatly reduce the possibility of such hostilities. They have also been building up their strategic oil reserve in the past few years and oil and gas imports from Russia and Central Asia through pipelines.

Renewables and nuclear are still at a pretty small amount of Chinese energy use (and capacity), even after the rapid growth of the past few years. So coal will be the bedrock of Chinese energy security. Geopolitics is getting in the way of climate change actions.

If things with the US escalate further, probably after the next Presidential election, I would not be surprised to see China announce a quite radical date for the end of ICE sales in China. EVs move energy supply from oil to electricity (and even with the current Chinese electricity mix reduce lifetime vehicle CO2 emissions). This would also reduce local air pollution a lot (the coal pollution issue having been fixed through very tough particulate matter regulations), especially in the cities, adding to the political legitimacy of the CCP.

So, could be coal use up and CO2 emissions down before 2030 (the Chinese Paris commitment).

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6201
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2253
  • Likes Given: 1892
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #496 on: November 16, 2019, 08:43:30 AM »
Your analysis makes a lot of sense.
I am susprised Japan is not making a larger move into renewables for the same strategic consideration of reducing reliance on imports.

blumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #497 on: November 16, 2019, 11:31:42 AM »
This is strategic energy security planning

I want to emphasise this point with an anecdote.

Since i'm also interested in bitcoin i know a little about the utilisation of unused renewable power in China.

There are some huge dams build for power production that are not yet utilized. So what do you do if you are responsible for an idling dam in China?
You buy bitcoin mining machines and use the power you have plenty of to mine bitcoins.

For what i can say, the vast majority of bitcoin mining is done this way.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #498 on: November 16, 2019, 11:18:55 PM »
Your analysis makes a lot of sense.
I am susprised Japan is not making a larger move into renewables for the same strategic consideration of reducing reliance on imports.

Japan is a subservient ally of the US (with a lot of US bases on its territory, such as Okinawa), so it  will not be affected by a US blockade. They can get their coal and NG from Australia, not affected by the blockade or any hostilities in the South China Sea. Ships from the Middle East may have to take a more circuitous route, but would still be able to get safely to Japan. In an emergency they could switch back on many of those idled nuclear plants. They also have an excellent, fully electrified, public transport system - from subways to high speed trains.

There is a large amount of trade between Japan and China, so there could be a lot of problems with supply chains etc.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #499 on: November 16, 2019, 11:20:33 PM »
This is strategic energy security planning

I want to emphasise this point with an anecdote.

Since i'm also interested in bitcoin i know a little about the utilisation of unused renewable power in China.

There are some huge dams build for power production that are not yet utilized. So what do you do if you are responsible for an idling dam in China?
You buy bitcoin mining machines and use the power you have plenty of to mine bitcoins.

For what i can say, the vast majority of bitcoin mining is done this way.

A lot of bitcoin miners in Iceland with their cheap energy and cool temperatures to reduce the power needed to keep all the servers from overheating.