Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: But, but, but, China....  (Read 90785 times)

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2241
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #400 on: May 29, 2017, 10:08:56 PM »
So---
We now wait one year?
My point is that doing nothing is about as bad a choice as we can make.
If we started a few HSR projects, we'd have the use of these even if some years down the line HL proves to be better. We can do both if need be, but we can't continue to do neither.
Terry

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #401 on: May 29, 2017, 11:46:29 PM »
Depends, Terry.

If some countries want to take the risk then they can get going with HSR.  Up to them.

IMO, it's a lot like watching Georgia and South Carolina starting to build new nuclear reactors when it was obvious to many of us that wind and solar prices were coming down so fast that expensive new nuclear was a major economic mistake.  And it's proven out to be so.

YMMV.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9616
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #402 on: May 30, 2017, 04:21:02 PM »
"Growth of large-scale solar power plants that are located far from the cities have slowed as the transmission infrastructure to move that electricity must be further developed. As such – Installations atop factories, malls and airports are likely to surge sixfold to almost 40 gigawatts by the end of 2020 and 125 gigawatts by 2040. That’s a lot of volume."
- Electrek


China Pushes Solar to the Roof as Bigger Plants Stay Idle
May 25, 2017
China is seeking to boost demand for solar panels mounted to roofs of homes and businesses as the market for larger utility-scale plants dries up.

Installations atop factories, malls and airports are likely to surge sixfold to almost 40 gigawatts by the end of 2020 and 125 gigawatts by 2040, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. That would give China roofs installed capacity roughly equal to the entire solar market in the U.S. at the end of 2016.

The move would help manufacturers led by JinkoSolar Holding Co. and Trina Solar Ltd. weather a slump in demand for bigger projects far from cities, where a lack of grid connections and a flood of new projects has depressed power prices and prompted regulators to seek slower growth from the industry. Rooftop projects currently account for 9 percent of China’s solar market, compared with about 35 percent for commercial and residential solar in the U.S.
...
https://about.bnef.com/blog/china-pushes-solar-to-the-roof-as-bigger-plants-stay-idle/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2241
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #403 on: May 30, 2017, 10:14:08 PM »
Depends, Terry.

If some countries want to take the risk then they can get going with HSR.  Up to them.

IMO, it's a lot like watching Georgia and South Carolina starting to build new nuclear reactors when it was obvious to many of us that wind and solar prices were coming down so fast that expensive new nuclear was a major economic mistake.  And it's proven out to be so.

YMMV.


Since the US and Canada still don't have HSR decades after that technology was proven I doubt very much that they will try Hyperloop should it ever prove itself.
Face it - We live in backward countries that don't even try to compete.
I live in a community that was promised high speed transportation for decades, when the plans were finally unveiled it turned out that we're getting high speed express buses. Buses that will get us to the nearest city in less than twice the time than the aged electric rail took in 1908.


Terry

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 565
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #404 on: May 31, 2017, 03:25:34 AM »
In Ontario, Canada there is talk again about HSR - from Toronto to Windsor. Maybe by 2032!

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2241
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #405 on: June 01, 2017, 06:00:24 PM »
Depends, Terry.

If some countries want to take the risk then they can get going with HSR.  Up to them.

IMO, it's a lot like watching Georgia and South Carolina starting to build new nuclear reactors when it was obvious to many of us that wind and solar prices were coming down so fast that expensive new nuclear was a major economic mistake.  And it's proven out to be so.

YMMV.


So---
America leads us into the 21st Century, but only after others have tested the waters.
It is possibly prudent to let the others forge ahead, but shows timidity in anyone claiming a leadership role.


China, apparently is willing to risk something in order to gain huge rewards. I'd argue that their risk is already paying huge dividends & that Canada and the US are already paying through the nose for their lack of courage. When a have-not country ponders whose influence they want to be under I suspect that they will be influenced by the progress they see in China rather than the provincial proclivities that the America's evidence.


The Eu has been into HSR for decades, linkage with the New Silk Road just makes sense. If HL does work as advertised it will augment the millions of miles of HSR already in place. The American dream of linking countries through maritime dominance faces the need to rebuild every salt water port due to sea level rise & huge freight planes do so much damage to the atmosphere that their days are surely numbered. When faced with the need to rebuild a gigantic freight port every time the ocean rises above a certain point, or to enhance your rail system to handle modern HSR, won't most opt for the second alternative?


With Asia, Europe, England, Africa and India linked by rapid, clean transport. What need is there to spend trillions upgrading ports that will only serve as links to Australia and the Americas? Already the Eu is contemplating laws that restrict dirty ships from their waters. Running a freighter on relatively clean #1 Diesel adds hugely to the costs of maritime trade, and even now they suffer when compared to HSR.


Britain ran an Empire from a small island, America attempts the same from an isolated continent. China will run her version from the worlds largest landmass, with little need of maritime might or trade. Unconnected islands and continents will simply become backwater regions. Trading between themselves with the now outmoded, dirty, expensive and slow ships that once brought glory to the British Empire.


At one time barge traffic was dominant, and towns along the canals grew. Steam Rail ended that. Then Diesel Rail and roadways came into their glory, fed by maritime trade. Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York & London, Paris, in Asia every safe harbor blossomed & all was well with the world.
Then High Speed Rail raised it's streamlined head. First linking the old port cities, then expanding inland and connection former backwaters until they bloomed. The old port cities now show signs of aging, overcrowding and are pricing themselves out of most markets. The brightest opted for Silicon Valleys regardless of their local, businesses prefer stable, low tax environments with great schools, great healthcare and a decent climate. Transportation isn't high on their list because HSR connects everywhere to everywhere - as long as you're connected. Huge cities are sprouting along the main lines just as cities had once gravitated to sites along the canal, or along the tracks, or beside the freeway.
This wont stop unless climate change or an atomic apocalypse closes everything down.
If the Hyperloop does prove itself, who will be the first to exploit it's advantages? Certainly not cultures that haven't yet entered the HSR age.


Terry

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 565
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #406 on: June 01, 2017, 06:07:49 PM »
Well said Terry! Great point about transport by rail when the sea ports will be constantly forced to rebuild/move by sea level rise.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2241
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #407 on: June 01, 2017, 06:41:37 PM »
In Ontario, Canada there is talk again about HSR - from Toronto to Windsor. Maybe by 2032!
WoW!
Imagine, in my grandson's generation it may be possible to get from Waterloo to Windsor 21 minutes faster than I now can. He could drive to Toronto and park in 1:10 then take the next High Speed Rail to Windsor in only ~1:20. By 2032 he'll be able to cut the 2:51 journey down to 2:30, if he is able to time the Toronto departure perfectly.
While the human body may be capable of these extreme speeds, the human mind may crumble. Jet lag without the Jets. Arriving in Windsor without a car. Paying for Toronto parking while on a walking tour of Windsor. Trying to explain to everyone why you wanted to go to Windsor. All of these combined could take a huge bite out of one's mental health.  :-\
Terry

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2241
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #408 on: June 01, 2017, 06:49:32 PM »
Well said Terry! Great point about transport by rail when the sea ports will be constantly forced to rebuild/move by sea level rise.
Thanks!
I wonder what effect SLR will have on the St. Lawrence Seaway, the Panama Canal, and the Suez Canal?
Terry

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #409 on: June 01, 2017, 11:54:27 PM »
Sea level rise would be an assist to the Panama Canal. 

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1716
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #410 on: June 02, 2017, 12:54:29 AM »
Re: Panama Canal.

Got to rebuild locks of 90 odd feet

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #411 on: June 02, 2017, 01:05:19 AM »
Re: Panama Canal.

Got to rebuild locks of 90 odd feet

Nope, bottom lock has to fill/empty less to reach sea level if the sea level rises.

If the sea level rises enough then just leave the bottom lock gates open.  The total lift is around 90' with each lock doing about a third of the life/drop.

Took my sailboat through the Canal several years back.  Quite an experience.  Especially when I got a large plastic bag wrapped around the prop and lost all power/steerage while on a collision course with a very large ship. 

I quickly hauled up the jib while the required onboard Canal pilot screamed at me that sailing was not allowed in the canal.  Told him to quit being an ass and jumped over with a knife to cut the bag free.

He apologized once he realized what had happened....

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 565
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #412 on: June 02, 2017, 03:02:50 AM »
Saint Lawrence seaway tends to be above sea level. Was an expensive misuse if funds as containerization pretty much killed the need for ships to go far inland.

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1716
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #413 on: June 02, 2017, 06:47:38 AM »
Re: Panama Canal

I was advised by marine engineer with degree in geology that Panama would need extensive reengineering including locks. So would the London flood barrier, Netherlands Zuider Zee dikes, but not so much Suez. Tokyo Bay was another. Apparently depth matters for footings. I dunno why, will have to ask him next time i see him.

sidd


Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1057
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #414 on: June 02, 2017, 07:21:21 AM »
 The costs of the reworking of the dikes and the Suez is of course a legal matter. Parties involved with these should sue the largest emitters of pollution in US for compensation.
A quantity relates to a quantum like camel's back relates to camel's _______ ? (back, vertebra, vertebral tendon, spinal disc, paralysis)

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #415 on: June 02, 2017, 07:50:59 AM »
Re: Panama Canal

I was advised by marine engineer with degree in geology that Panama would need extensive reengineering including locks. So would the London flood barrier, Netherlands Zuider Zee dikes, but not so much Suez. Tokyo Bay was another. Apparently depth matters for footings. I dunno why, will have to ask him next time i see him.

sidd


I fail to see how footings would be impacted since they already sit in saturated soil.  (Most likely on bedrock.)  The lower lock footings on the Pacific and Atlantic sides are always underwater.  The water in the lower locks never falls below sea level.

My way of thinking is that if the lowest locks now raise ships 21 feet and the sea level rises 10 feet they will still function the same way but their lift would be only 11 feet.  There would actually be less pressure on the lower lock gates.

The higher locks would not be impacted unless the water rose more than 21 feet. 

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 565
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #416 on: June 05, 2017, 12:08:02 AM »
China, the King of Coal, Is Getting Gassy

"Though gas remains a small and expensive component in China’s fuel mix, demand is rising faster than expected for domestic and imported supplies. In April, consumption was 22 percent higher than the same month in 2016, and the total for the first four months of the year is up more than 12 percent, data from the National Development and Reform Commission show."

"The results are encouraging analysts to upgrade their demand forecasts and may signal the government is on track to reach its goal of getting as much as 10 percent of its energy from gas by 2020. It’s also bolstering the outlook for hundreds of billions of dollars in possible investments by companies as far away as Russia, Australia and the U.S. to build gas pipelines and export infrastructure to feed the growing Chinese market."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-25/coal-king-s-shift-to-more-gas-wins-believers-as-china-use-surges

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 565
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #417 on: June 14, 2017, 07:27:54 PM »
China Huadian joins Blackgold's 600 MW coal-fired project in Indonesia

More building of coal plants in foreign countries by Chinese companies.

https://www.enerdata.net/publications/daily-energy-news/china-huadian-joins-blackgolds-600-mw-coal-fired-project-indonesia.html

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9616
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #418 on: June 28, 2017, 03:28:49 PM »
Six Million People in China Just Went 100% Renewable for a Week
It's the first major test of renewable energy on the grid in China.
...
“Clean energy is the ultimate way,” Han Ti, general manager of the Qinghai grid company told local news outlet Xinhua. “We need to reduce reliance on fossil fuel, improve our energy structure, and reduce carbon emissions.”

The Qinghai province has 19.7 million kW of renewable energy installed, and makes up a little over 82 percent of all the energy production in the province. Qinghai is the fourth largest province in China, spanning the northeast part of the Tibetan plateau and has the headwaters of the two largest rivers in China, the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers. Most of the energy during the test week was produced by hydro-electric power, thanks to the major rivers. Because of its renewable energy output, and the fact that it is one of the most sparsely populated regions of China, it is the ideal place to test the using only green energy.
...
https://www.inverse.com/article/33426-china-renewable-energy-seven-days
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 565
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #419 on: August 30, 2017, 10:05:42 PM »
China Becomes World’s Third-Largest Shale Gas Producer

Not a good thing for China: take away the climate-dimming SO2, then add fugitive emissions to the CO2 to make it much worse than the coal you are replacing. As the climate dimming effect is localized, the temperature effect will be much greater in China itself. Of course, the measured CO2 emissions will go down whilst the fugitive methane is under-counted/ignored and the reduction in dimming is ignored.

Production to go from 8 billion cubic metres in 2016, to increase to 30 billion by 2020 and 80-100 billion by 2030. Looks like they are ramping natural gas usage the same way that they ramped coal usage earlier.

"China has become the world’s third-largest shale gas producer, after only the U.S. and Canada, Iran’s PressTV reports, adding that last year, China pumped almost 8 billion cubic meters of shale gas. The annual result was a 76.3-percent improvement on 2015, China’s Ministry of Land and Resources said – a record amount. Investments in shale gas exploration reached US$1.3 billion.

Shale gas production in China has continued to grow this year, as it seeks to move away from crude oil and bets increasingly on gas as the cleaner fuel amid government efforts to reduce pollution levels. ...

 ... This year, however, Beijing announced plans to increase the proven reserves of shale gas in the country to more than 1.5 trillion cubic meters by 2020. This would involve some major investment in recovery technology as well as infrastructure. Production is also slated to expand to 30 billion cubic meters by 2020, according to the Ministry, and further to 80-100 billion cubic meters by 2030."

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/China-Becomes-Worlds-Third-Largest-Shale-Gas-Producer.html

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #420 on: August 31, 2017, 05:16:07 AM »
Things are more complex than "Gas bad.  Coal pollution good?"

Coal pollution is killing a lot of people - right now.  And coal pollution is making a lot of people ill - right now.  Cutting coal pollution means healthier air for hundreds of millions of people.

As you point out, cutting coal pollution will allow more heat from the Sun to reach the Earth and warm us up faster.

But those coal particles in the air over China are really cutting down on the performance of their solar panels.  Which means that they have to burn more fossil fuel.
 
We have forest fires in my area right now, the haze is almost nothing compared to the polluted skies of China but my solar panel output is greatly attenuated.  I'm having to run my generator every 2-3 days to make up for what my panels are not producing.  On a clear day my batteries would be full by lunchtime.

Then there's the dispatchability issue.  Gas plants are much easier (quicker) to cycle off and back on.  Coal plants take a lot longer.  China may not yet have enough wind and solar online to allow significant amounts of fossil fuel use to be suspended when renewables are pumping it out, but they will get there before long at the rate they are going.

Good or bad?  It would take some serious study to figure that one out.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9616
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #421 on: October 29, 2017, 06:38:30 PM »
In the winter, many Chinese homes burn coal for heat, worsening pollution.

China Has Shut Down Up to 40% of Its Factories in an Unprecedented Stand Against Pollution
In previous winters, city officials have been directed to enforce closures for only a few weeks at a time, but with 2017’s end-of-year targets just months away, China is shuttering polluters at a rate Li calls “unprecedented”.

“These special campaigns are not a one-off, instead it is an exploration of long-term mechanisms,” Li announced this week.

“They have proven effective so we will continue with these measures.”
https://futurism.com/china-shut-down-factories-stand-against-pollution/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2241
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #422 on: October 29, 2017, 08:54:06 PM »
Things are more complex than "Gas bad.  Coal pollution good?"

Coal pollution is killing a lot of people - right now.  And coal pollution is making a lot of people ill - right now.  Cutting coal pollution means healthier air for hundreds of millions of people.

As you point out, cutting coal pollution will allow more heat from the Sun to reach the Earth and warm us up faster.

But those coal particles in the air over China are really cutting down on the performance of their solar panels.  Which means that they have to burn more fossil fuel.
 
We have forest fires in my area right now, the haze is almost nothing compared to the polluted skies of China but my solar panel output is greatly attenuated.  I'm having to run my generator every 2-3 days to make up for what my panels are not producing.  On a clear day my batteries would be full by lunchtime.

Then there's the dispatchability issue.  Gas plants are much easier (quicker) to cycle off and back on.  Coal plants take a lot longer.  China may not yet have enough wind and solar online to allow significant amounts of fossil fuel use to be suspended when renewables are pumping it out, but they will get there before long at the rate they are going.

Good or bad?  It would take some serious study to figure that one out.


Bob
Just to add one more level of complexity to the equation.


Once CH4 is captured it is much better to burn it than to allow it to escape to the atmosphere. Just as flaring off is better than allowing CH4 to escape, burning gas to provide electricity, or for heating or industrial use is preferable to wasting those BTUs by flaring.


If China is doing shale primarily to recover oil, then gas could be seen as a byproduct that needs to be utilized, rather than simply flared off, or allowed to escape.


Terry

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2315
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #423 on: November 06, 2017, 03:20:22 PM »
China continues to lead the world in wind turbine installations and electricity generated. There goal is to have 15% of electricity generated by wind by 2020, a nearly 4 fold increase over 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_China

China has identified wind power as a key growth component of the country's economy.

http://newenergyupdate.com/wind-energy-update/china-fund-boost-wind-turbine-trade-exports-grow

"Because Chinese wind manufacturers are now capable of producing 40 GW worth of turbines annually, while the Chinese government’s target is to install just 20 GW of new capacity per year between 2015 and 2020, they are aggressively growing their export markets to meet the rapidly growing world demand for wind turbines.

Because of this, Asian installed wind power capacity rose to 142GW at the end of 2014, surpassing Europe where capacity totalled 134GW, according to a report by the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC). Asia will continue to lead the growth in wind power, providing 40-45% of the annual global going forward, GWEC said.

GWEC is expecting an additional 140 GW to be installed in Asia between 2014 and the end of 2019, a doubling of the existing installed capacity.

China wind turbine companies see greater growth opportunities outside of China based on recent export figures, according to a report from CCM. A diverse group of countries are buying Chinese-made turbines. The top ten buyers include large economies such as the US, Australia, and Italy, but also Panama, Romania, and Ethiopia, according to CCM.

Exports accounted for just 4.3% of Chinese turbine manufacturers’ total sales volume in 2013, but this figure is rising rapidly and this will increase competition in the international wind market. Chinese exports more than tripled between 2011 and 2013, whereas domestic demand fell slightly during that period, the report said."


This is pathetic. The U.S. use to pride itself in introducing and advancing emerging technologies.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 03:46:06 PM by Shared Humanity »

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2315
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #424 on: November 06, 2017, 03:50:28 PM »
The entire article is a great read.

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 317
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #425 on: November 06, 2017, 04:03:00 PM »
China about to export a ton of windmills is great news for the world. There'll be howls of fury calling for tariffs, but whatever.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2315
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #426 on: November 06, 2017, 04:37:29 PM »
China leads world in solar power production. Graduates in solar science from American universities are moving to China because that is where the opportunities are.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-40341833

In the 1980's, engineering graduates from India stayed in the U.S. because few opportunities existed at home. Now most of these graduates move back to India due to a rapidly expanding technology industry. The U.S. is now becoming a third world supplier of talent to China.

Pathetic.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2315
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #427 on: November 06, 2017, 04:48:44 PM »
China is crushing the U.S. in renewable energy

http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/18/technology/china-us-clean-energy-solar-farm/index.html

"More than 2.5 million people work in the solar power sector alone in China, compared with 260,000 people in the U.S., according to the most recent annual report from the International Renewable Energy Agency. While President Trump promises to put American coal miners back to work, China is moving in the opposite direction.

Coal still makes up the largest part of China's energy consumption, but Beijing has been shutting coal mines and set out plans last year to cut roughly 1.3 million jobs in the industry. The Chinese government has also moved to restrict the construction of new coal power plants.

For the first time ever, China's National Energy Administration in January established a mandatory target to reduce coal energy consumption. It also set a goal for clean energy to meet 20% of China's energy needs by 2030. Analysts expect China to easily meet that target. Greenpeace noted in a report earlier this year that the country's clean energy consumption rose to 12% at the end of 2015. Renewable energy sources account for about 10% of total U.S. energy consumption, according to official statistics.

To help reach the 2030 goal, China is betting big on renewable energy. It pledged in January to invest 2.5 trillion yuan ($367 billion) in renewable power generation -- solar, wind, hydro and nuclear -- by 2020. The investment will create about 10 million jobs in the sector, the National Energy Administration projects. China currently boasts 3.5 million jobs in clean energy, by far the most in the world, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency."

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #428 on: November 06, 2017, 06:21:10 PM »
China about to export a ton of windmills is great news for the world. There'll be howls of fury calling for tariffs, but whatever.

That depends on whether they charge a reasonable price or go predatory.

ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 606
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #429 on: November 06, 2017, 06:39:23 PM »
China about to export a ton of windmills is great news for the world. There'll be howls of fury calling for tariffs, but whatever.

That depends on whether they charge a reasonable price or go predatory.
The history of US tariffs indicates predatory pricing has almost nothing to do with barriers put up by the US. Whenever the US is at a competitive disadvantage they make up subsidy and dumping storys.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #430 on: November 06, 2017, 07:43:37 PM »
Whenever the US is at a competitive disadvantage they make up subsidy and dumping storys.

That's bullshit.  The US is often outpriced on many things.

There's a difference between being priced out and dumping.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2241
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #431 on: November 06, 2017, 08:11:21 PM »
Whenever the US is at a competitive disadvantage they make up subsidy and dumping storys.

That's bullshit.  The US is often outpriced on many things.

There's a difference between being priced out and dumping.


Could you please explain the 300% tariff on Canadian Airplanes then?
Terry

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #432 on: November 06, 2017, 11:32:05 PM »
Could you please explain the 300% tariff on Canadian Airplanes then?

Nope.  Have no knowledge.  Might it have been because the galleys were set up to only serve poutine?

You do realize that "whenever" is an all inclusive word, do you not?

ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 606
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #433 on: November 06, 2017, 11:42:29 PM »
You do realize that "whenever" is an all inclusive word, do you not?
Yes, that is what I meant but I really didn't mean to disrupt the thread. I apologize.

oren

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1590
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #434 on: November 07, 2017, 08:05:40 PM »
If China wants to dump solar panels and wind turbines on any nation, that nation should gladly accept with thanks. "Dumping" is a strange concept when someone hands out capital goods.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #435 on: November 07, 2017, 08:11:27 PM »
If China wants to dump solar panels and wind turbines on any nation, that nation should gladly accept with thanks. "Dumping" is a strange concept when someone hands out capital goods.

Dumping is a technique used to drive the dumped on country's industry out of business.  Then after the competition has been wiped out the dumper raises prices to what would have otherwise been possible.

It's an unfair trade practice.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2241
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #436 on: November 07, 2017, 10:18:28 PM »
If China wants to dump solar panels and wind turbines on any nation, that nation should gladly accept with thanks. "Dumping" is a strange concept when someone hands out capital goods.
If a competitor is selling a product for less than their cost of production it might be considered "dumping", however it might also be a "loss leader", or even an "inventory reduction sale".
Americans might be more familiar with the year end sales in which retailers dump their merchandise below cost to avoid annual inventory taxation.


When China builds a billion solar panels, and their competitor's output is < a million, it's safe to assume that the volume manufacturer's costs per unit will be less than their competition. Perhaps not a level playing field, but should General Motors price their product so that hand built cars made in a London suburb can compete?


The money/jobs that solar and wind offers will be on the installation and maintenance side. The lower the cost of the hardware being installed, the more installations, and these will require more maintenance. Placing high tariffs on foreign made hardware costs America jobs.
Increasing the costs of renewable energy, increases fossil fuel usage. Increasing energy costs leads to more expensive American manufacturing costs, which again leads to fewer American manufacturing jobs.


Tariffs are a two edged sword.


Terry

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #437 on: November 08, 2017, 12:26:42 PM »
Loss leaders used to bring customers into your store where they are likely to buy goods that aren't discounted is acceptable. 

Selling at a loss in order to force competing stores to go out of business is not.

China had already taken over a lot of the PV market via their lower cost manufacturing.  Apparently a case has been made that they were doing even more than just reasonable competition. 

(I haven't followed this issue in any detail.)

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 317
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #438 on: November 08, 2017, 02:27:14 PM »
The dumping case against Chinese solar panels is not that they’re selling units at a loss, but that there was too much state support to help the companies get set up, so the unit price has too little fixed cost embedded in it. Similarly for the Bombardier C-series.

In both cases, it’s pretty easy to get around sanctions targeted at one company or one country. The upcoming solar panel tariff “fixes” that by imposing the tariff on all imports, regardless.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2315
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #439 on: November 08, 2017, 03:46:35 PM »
The upcoming solar panel tariff “fixes” that by imposing the tariff on all imports, regardless.

Some fix.

All tariffs on imports will, in the long run, result in domestic industries no longer being competitive in the international markets. A strong case can be made that the tariffs put in place in the late 1960's to protect the steel industry actually accelerated the decline of the industry as they no longer had to modernize to meet domestic demand at a profit.

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 13296
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #440 on: November 15, 2017, 03:13:24 PM »
Currently, China wastes a lot of renewable energy and thus needs to balance this wasted energy by burning a corresponding amount of coal.

Title: "China aims to stop renewable energy being wasted by 2020"

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-renewables-waste/china-aims-to-stop-renewable-energy-being-wasted-by-2020-idUSKBN1DD136

Extract: "China aims to prevent power generated by its renewable energy sector being wasted by 2020, the country’s National Energy Administration (NEA) said on Monday.

Power from wind, solar and hydro plants is often wasted as there is not enough transmission capacity to absorb it, leading to high curtailment rates, especially in northwestern China."

Coal-fired power capacity across the country will be capped at 1,100 gigawatts by 2020, the NEA said."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #441 on: November 16, 2017, 04:15:42 AM »
Currently, China wastes a lot of renewable energy and thus needs to balance this wasted energy by burning a corresponding amount of coal.

Title: "China aims to stop renewable energy being wasted by 2020"

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-renewables-waste/china-aims-to-stop-renewable-energy-being-wasted-by-2020-idUSKBN1DD136

Extract: "China aims to prevent power generated by its renewable energy sector being wasted by 2020, the country’s National Energy Administration (NEA) said on Monday.

Power from wind, solar and hydro plants is often wasted as there is not enough transmission capacity to absorb it, leading to high curtailment rates, especially in northwestern China."

Coal-fired power capacity across the country will be capped at 1,100 gigawatts by 2020, the NEA said."

It's not the first time that wind/solar installations have gotten ahead of installation.  In the US about 17% of onshore wind was being curtailed in Texas (ERCOT), increased transmission dropped it to less than 1%.

Germany had a problem with offshore wind that was ready to produce but transmission was not in place.

Italy essentially stopped large scale solar installation due to a backlog of transmission projects.

A small topic shift - I played around some with solar insolation numbers for China and their reported solar CF numbers.  It looks China is losing a lot of potential output due to pollution.  As China cleans their air it looks like the amount of electricity produced by solar could soar.

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 13296
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #442 on: November 16, 2017, 04:36:28 PM »
A small topic shift - I played around some with solar insolation numbers for China and their reported solar CF numbers.  It looks China is losing a lot of potential output due to pollution.  As China cleans their air it looks like the amount of electricity produced by solar could soar.

While I appreciate China's efforts to promote renewables; however, in my opinion (and that of Climate Action Tracker) their current targets and efforts to fight climate change are weak (as is the case for most countries that signed the Paris Agreement).  Until nations around the world implement strong progressive carbon fee and dividend plans, then I consider them all addicted to fossil fuels and that we will blow past the 2C upper limit and past several tipping points w.r.t. such mechanisms as a WAIS collapse and Hansen's ice-climate feedback mechanism:

Title: "As Climate Negotiators Debate Nations' Pledges, Scientists Worry It's Not Enough

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/16/564384950/as-climate-negotiators-debate-nations-pledges-scientists-worry-it-s-not-enough

Extract: "Researchers say the emissions reduction targets made at Paris — and what countries are doing to meet them — are weak. Hanna Fekete is with the New Climate Institute. She cites new research by a European group, Climate Action Tracker.

"What we actually find is that a large number of countries is in the category of weak targets and even weaker implementation," she says, "and that is specifically worrying because there are many large emitters in this weaker category." That weak target and effort category includes countries such as the U.S., Russia and China."

Furthermore, in my opinion, due to the 'Chinese Dream', no matter how much renewable energy they produce up to the 100-yr anniversary of the PRC, their carbon footprint will increase until at least 2049 (by which time I am convinced that GMSTA will be well above 2C):

Title: "What Xi Jinping Wants"

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/05/what-china-wants/528561/

Extract: "China’s leader is determined to turn his country into “the biggest player in the history of the world.” Can he do it while avoiding a dangerous collision with America?

Xi is so convinced he will succeed in this quest that he has blatantly flouted a cardinal rule for political survival: Never state a target objective and a specific date in the same sentence. Within a month of becoming China’s leader in 2012, Xi specified deadlines for meeting each of his “Two Centennial Goals.” First, China will build a “moderately prosperous society” by doubling its 2010 per capita GDP to $10,000 by 2021, when it celebrates the 100th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party. Second, it will become a “fully developed, rich, and powerful” nation by the 100th anniversary of the People's Republic in 2049. If China reaches the first goal— which it is on course to do—the IMF estimates that its economy will be 40 percent larger than that of the U.S. (measured in terms of purchasing power parity). If China meets the second target by 2049, its economy will be triple America's."

&

Title: "Why China aims to be number one superpower by 2049

http://www.oxfordtoday.ox.ac.uk/features/why-china-aims-be-number-one-superpower-2049

Extract: "The seeds of world ambition are historical but it would be reckless to dismiss them, says Oxford analyst Tom Miller."

&

See also the linked Wikipedia articles entitled "Two Centenaries" & " Chinese Dream":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Centenaries
&
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Dream

Edit: The attached images support my claim that we are likely to blow past the 2C limit before 2040 (when projecting using paleo-based dynamical estimates of ECS).
« Last Edit: November 16, 2017, 06:35:33 PM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 317
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #443 on: November 16, 2017, 10:43:45 PM »
What's your source on the claim that their carbon footprint will increase until 2049?

It's been stagnant for years already, just a few years after their first climate pledges (presumably they made the pledges as soon as it was apparent they'd be meeting them anyway for regional pollution reasons).

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 13296
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #444 on: November 16, 2017, 11:50:07 PM »
What's your source on the claim that their carbon footprint will increase until 2049?

It's been stagnant for years already, just a few years after their first climate pledges (presumably they made the pledges as soon as it was apparent they'd be meeting them anyway for regional pollution reasons).

Obviously, no one (including me) has a crystal ball as to what China will do by 2049, but here are two article indicating that China's 2017 CO₂ emissions have increase from last year and that they are outsourcing their dirty industries to nearby countries in order to decrease the size of their reported carbon footprint but not their actual carbon footprint:

Anthropogenic CO₂ emissions are projected to increase in 2017 primarily due to increased coal use in China:

Title: "First CO2 rise in four years puts pressure on Paris targets"

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-41941265

&

It looks like China is currently meeting their climate commitments by exporting their pollution (just like developed countries):

Title: "Is China really stepping up as the world’s new climate leader?"

https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-11-08/china-really-stepping-world-s-new-climate-leader

“China is in many respects simply exporting its pollution,” said Elizabeth Economy, director for Asia studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. She’s talking about China’s massive “Belt and Road” initiative, a nearly trillion-dollar infrastructure investment plan that includes almost 70 countries.

“[China] is on track to export as many as 100 coal-fired power plants,” Economy said. “There’s also going to be plans to export steel capacity and cement production and many other polluting industries.”

Part of China’s commitment to addressing climate change, Economy said, must be a commitment to “green” the Belt and Road."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 13296
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #445 on: November 16, 2017, 11:54:41 PM »
Here are more specific number's on China's increase in emissions in 2017:

Title: "After years of nearly flat growth, global fossil fuel emissions are inching up, according to report by Stanford-led group"

https://news.stanford.edu/2017/11/13/growing-carbon-emissions/

Extract: "Leading that increase is China, where emissions are projected to grow by approximately 3.5 percent in 2017. Coal use there is up an estimated 3 percent, oil use is up 5 percent and natural gas use is up nearly 12 percent."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 317
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #446 on: November 17, 2017, 12:44:25 AM »
One year of growth after several years of stagnation doesn’t give me much expectation of continued growth until 2049.

It’s definitely not a steep decline year over year like we’ve been needing the past twenty years, but stagnation is better than anything in anyone’s lifetime.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2241
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #447 on: November 17, 2017, 05:38:47 AM »
One year of growth after several years of stagnation doesn’t give me much expectation of continued growth until 2049.

It’s definitely not a steep decline year over year like we’ve been needing the past twenty years, but stagnation is better than anything in anyone’s lifetime.
I believe that China also experienced high GDP growth, even while keeping their CO2 emissions flat. Quite an inspiring feat when deniers have claimed that GDP growth requires increased GHG production.
Eliminating coal, as Quebec and Ontario have both done, is not just possible, it's an attainable goal that everyone, at least everyone in North America, should strive for. Without cleaning up our own act it's hard to complain about others.
Terry



numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 317
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #448 on: November 17, 2017, 02:54:20 PM »
Hopefully we can eliminate coal like the UK has: from 40% to 2% in five years.

The Quebec model includes dispossessing indigenous people on a huge area of low population density. It’s a bit harder to replicate, either morally or physically.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2240
    • View Profile
Re: But, but, but, China....
« Reply #449 on: November 19, 2017, 09:28:59 PM »
China has very aggressive wind and solar programs but have some problems to overcome before they can enjoy the full impact of their efforts.  Wind curtailment is very high (I've seen 39%) due to the need for more transmission and a need to restructure their energy market.

China is building lots of new transmission.  I think they are also going to start installing offshore wind which will put generation close to the coastal cities where the electricity is needed.

They have coal plants which were built with the guarantee that they would have first access to demand.  This has to be restructured (some sort of government buyout) so that low carbon electricity gets used first rather than last.