Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
China Power

China To Plow $361 Billion Into Renewable Fuel By 2020 (indiatimes.com) 117

China will invest $361 billion in renewable power generation between 2016 and 2020, the National Energy Administration (NEA) said Thursday, as the world's largest energy market pushes to shift away from coal power. From a report: The investment will create over 13 million jobs in the sector, the NEA said in a blueprint document that lays out its plan to develop the nation's energy sector in a five-year period. The NEA repeated its goal to have 580 million tonnes of coal equivalent of renewable energy consumption by 2020, accounting for 15 percent of overall energy consumption.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China To Plow $361 Billion Into Renewable Fuel By 2020

Comments Filter:
  • to build anything in China
  • Good for China (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PvtVoid ( 1252388 ) on Thursday January 05, 2017 @03:19PM (#53612613)

    Good for China, and good for us: the sea level rises for everybody equally, no matter which country is at fault. Today, the U.S. and China [wri.org] emit vastly more greenhouse gases than the EU, India, and Russia combined. Those two countries have a responsibility to the rest of the world to get their houses in order.

    China is doing something about it, albeit first steps. The U.S., by contrast, is being run buy delusional nuts who think global warming is some kind of scam. Makes me ashamed to be an American.

    • To help protect our future and environment, we generally need to cut back a bit on consumption. China has a much greater population than Canada and the United States combined so of course they are a massive Greenhouse contributor. Not only that but a lot of the things they produce aren't even for themselves but for us since their own population is not yet wealthy enough to buy all the luxuries they can get their hand on if any. While it's great that they're trying to cut back, it's embarrassing for us if

    • China isn't doing it because they're environmentally conscious, they're doing it because that's where the MONEY is. They're miles ahead of the US in solar, decades ahead in nuclear adoption - having taken the renaissance that we failed to do, catching up in wind....and in 10-20 years when they have a stranglehold on the world's supply of generation supply and are seen as the world's "energy country" like the U.S. is now a "services country" ...

      Well, hindsight is 20/20, and a new brand of politicians in the

      • by imgod2u ( 812837 )

        Renewables aren't quite (but will very soon be) more profitable than coal/oil in terms of cost/MW. China has been dumping money into solar/wind/nuclear for almost a decade now, long before it was even remotely economical. They play the long game because their population is tired of being able to only see 2 feet in front of them and their leadership knows climate change has human causes and severe negative consequences.

        Renewables just happens to be reaching economically advantageous levels nowadays thanks, i

        • by Anonymous Coward
          I suspect the other reason they play the long game is because they can. They don't have share holders and Wall Street telling them to be profitable this quarter at the expense of five to ten years from now.
          That's an over-simplification, but that's the gist of it, IMO.
        • if you account for externalities like pollution, risk, defense, and so on. See Amory Lovins' research. That has been an economic tragedy from market failure of the last few decades. Markets don't work well when people don't pay the true price up front but can instead privatize benefits for themselves and socialize costs to other people. For example, some companies in the Midwest got cheaper electricity from coal, but I can't eat fish around where I live because they are contaminated with mercury from Midwe

      • China isn't doing it because they're environmentally conscious, they're doing it because that's where the MONEY is.

        Seriously, why on Earth would you even think that? Reports have been coming from China for many, many years about their pollution problem, and even in recent days there have been articles of the heavy air pollution alerts for multiple days in a row [seattlepi.com]. It's a problem that they have been working hard to fix [nytimes.com]. Here's a quote from the first article:

        On Sunday, 25 cities in China issued "red alerts" for smog, which triggers orders to close factories, schools and construction sites.

        So I really do wonder why you tho

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Meanwhile the new 'Dear Leader' of the USA sticks his orange head into the sand and says
      "Gimme Coal, Black Shiny Coal"

      Now that he's about to nuke the EPA and has 'Big Oil' in his cabinet the USA is well on the way to becoming the Environmental Leper of the world.
      Watch out for tariffs to be applied to USA goods exported to the rest of the world. Make Amercia Great... Yeah right.

    • ... more greenhouse gases than the EU, India, and Russia combined...

      I travel to India frequently. When I see the smog in Delhi and all the dirty diesels and 2-stroke autos (auto being the term Indians use for powered rickshaws, a.k.a. tuck tucks) in Bangalore, I have a really tough time believing that the U.S. somehow produces more greenhouse gases than India. Especially with all of our regulations and how clean generally our cars and trucks and industry are.

      Notice that that I'm only saying I have a tough time believing – I'm not saying I don't believe.

      India needs to

      • amount of smog /= amount of greenhouse gases produced.

        Also, no one is letting India off the hook. Their government is actually doing more than the US.

        http://indianexpress.com/artic... [indianexpress.com]

      • There is little relation between "pollution" and CO2.

        When you burn hydrocarbons, those carbon atoms have to go somewhere. The best scenario is that they go to create CO2, which does not cause smog, and is pretty harmless except for the greenhouse effect. US regulations ensure that as much CO2 as possible is created by combustion.

        Where there is less regulation, there are motors and fires which run "dirty". Much of the carbon goes to create CO, or carbon dust, or benzene or other random chemicals. Also, in th

    • by nwaack ( 3482871 )

      China is doing something about it, albeit first steps. The U.S., by contrast, is being run buy delusional nuts who think global warming is some kind of scam. Makes me ashamed to be an American.

      I'm happy that China is doing this as well, but I doubt China is doing this for the good of the planet or anything like that. China's air quality is so poor that their people are basically choking to death on it. They HAD to do something about it.

    • by hey! ( 33014 )

      Well, I don't know whether they're doing it because of AGW, but they certainly have good reasons [google.com] to move away from coal.

      While they could probably do more in the short term by switching to natural gas, renewables hits a couple of points that are important to the Chinese government: national independence and the development of indigenous technological capabilities. Public funding for applied R&D is a lot more controversial in the US.

    • Hate to break it to you but US carbon emissions have fallen faster than any other nation. The economic shift that occurred with fracked gas cut carbon emissions 20%, combined with the efficiency program implemented by Bush Jr, US energy consumption has either held level or fallen (depending on location), this has cut Coal's contribution to energy generation from 60% to 40%. In addition the rise of Wind in particular and the increasingly relevant solar sector US energy production is shifting dramatically tow

      • by dbIII ( 701233 )

        Hate to break it to you but US carbon emissions have fallen faster than any other nation

        Indeed.
        Something happened in 2008.
        If there's not a lot of manufacturing or other economic activity then there's not a lot of emissions.

    • the sea level rises for everybody equally, no matter which country is at fault.

      This is not true, interestingly.

      The large ice masses have a gravitational pull that influences the sea level around them, which leads to quite wildly varying effects on sea levels when they melt; in some places the sea level actually drops as a result of the ice masses melting:
      - http://sealevelstudy.org/sea-c... [sealevelstudy.org]
      - http://harvardmagazine.com/201... [harvardmagazine.com]

    • by renzhi ( 2216300 )

      Per capita wise, I'd say China is still pretty efficient in terms of emission. China has more than four times the population of the USA, but less than twice the total emission of the USA's. So, should we say China is at least twice as efficient as the USA? If you apply the same per capita calculation across all the countries on that list, China is still more efficient than all of them, except India.

      And Canada, with a tiny population, the total emission is incredibly high. We, as Canadians, should get off

  • I honestly can't wait for China to swoop in and become as clean (or cleaner) than EU/NA. Mainly to see all of these idiots going on about "Why should we clean up our ways when China is pumping out x times more crap than us?". They also seem to forget that China is a toxic mess because they're producing all the crap for the cleaner countries.
    • I have seen the exact same person (Canadian pundit J.J. McCullough) switch from "Why should we clean up our ways when China is pumping out x times more crap than us?" to "The rest of the world is going to clean up whether we do it or not, so why should we bother?" I figure it will be even easier for people who don't have to have their justifications on record to switch to the opposite one.
  • But hard for the USA because China doesn't care about the pollution that the production and disposal of the materials. The EPA would make mining and production operations too expensive to be competitive in the USA.

    • by skids ( 119237 )

      Don't worry, I'm sure Pruitt will let all sorts of stuff into your water supply so you can have a job to feed your two-headed kid and the one with the webbed fingers.

  • So much for that bit about we can't/shouldn't do anything about global warming because China isn't so any effect on our part is pointless.

  • In other words, roughly the amount of a single year's-worth of trade deficit between the US and China.
    https://www.google.com/#q=us+t... [google.com]

"How many teamsters does it take to screw in a light bulb?" "FIFTEEN!! YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?"

Working...