Lambert here: Let’s hope so!

By Haley Zaremba, a writer and journalist based in Mexico City. She has extensive experience writing and editing environmental features. Originally published at OilPrice.com.

  • China accounted for nearly half of the world’s renewable energy investment in 2022, far exceeding the US and EU, but also greenlit most of the world’s new coal plants.
  • China’s pursuit of renewable energy appears to be driven more by securing its energy supply and achieving geopolitical influence than by goals of decarbonization.
  • Despite its heavy investment in renewables, China’s reliance on coal remains high due to its perceived reliability and concerns over the potential economic and political instability that could arise from phasing out coal.

While China crushes the competition in terms of clean energy spending, the country is also almost single-handedly keeping the global coal industry alive and well. The story of China’s renewable revolution has always taken place against the backdrop of a severe and persevering reliance on coal. This is by design. China’s place at the helm of global renewable energy expansion has never been about decarbonization – it’s about energy security. Renewable energy in China is not poised to displace coal, but is being developed in tandem as another source of energy production to add to the energy mix to try to produce sufficient supply in a country where energy demand is virtually insatiable.

Last year, China alone was responsible for nearly half of global spending in the renewable energy sector in 2022, at a whopping $546 billion. That’s nearly four times the $141 billion that the U.S. spent. The European Union came in second place, at $180 billion, according to figures from a recent BloombergNEF analysis. The International Energy Agency projects that China’s spending on renewable energy will average nearly $250 billion a year between 2021 and the end of 2023, which is approximately as much as every rich nation combined. And China shows no sign of slowing down. China is expected to install 154 gigawatts of solar panels in 2023, accounting for nearly half the global total (344GW), as well as to produce more than half of the global share of wind power brought online between now and 2030. 

Beijing is also reaping major benefits from its dominant positioning in global renewable supply chains. China’s solar panel supply chain is so enormous that it’s already approaching the scale needed for the world to hit net zero, but, again, these gains seem to be more motivated by political influence and energy security than any lofty decarbonization goals. China has made itself indispensable in global clean energy markets, and with that comes a lot of leverage. Being the King of Green will give increasing returns as more of the world tries to decarbonize in coming years.

But China isn’t just the King of Green, it’s also the planet’s biggest champion of coal – the dirtiest fossil fuel. lmost all of the coal plants greenlit last year were in China, and Beijing’s current pace of new coal-fired power plant approval is currently trending upward, and is now at its highest level since 2016. “The world’s coal consumption would have peaked in 2018 were it not for the additional 862 million tons of annual production China has added since — a pile of solid fuel equivalent to every ton burned in the US and European Union, put together,” Bloomberg reported earlier this month. 

Indeed, China has the ability to make or break the world’s ability to meet global climate goals and emissions targets. China has the second biggest economy in the world (second only to the United States), but it is the world’s single largest greenhouse gas emitter. In order for the world to reach global decarbonization pledges, China will not only have to continue its green energy spending spree, it will also have to phase out its coal sector. This will not be easy. 

Coal is synonymous with energy security in China. Time and time again when other forms of power have failed, coal has been a stalwart fallback. Just this year, as drought has majorly stressed China’s massive hydropower sector, the coal sector has stepped up production to keep the lights on. Coal is not just deeply embedded in China’s energy security strategy, it’s also a symbol of reliability and safety in the cultural conscience. Quitting coal isn’t just difficult for China – it’s deeply scary. According to Joanna Lewis, an associate professor of energy and environment at Georgetown University, China fears that dropping coal as an energy source would lead to elevated risk of economic and political instability. “I think there’s this fear of moving away from the status quo and into this new realm of clean and advanced energy technologies, even though they’re extremely well positioned to do so,” she was quoted by Popular Science last year.  

This entry was posted in China, Energy markets, Global warming on by Lambert Strether.

About Lambert Strether

Readers, I have had a correspondent characterize my views as realistic cynical. Let me briefly explain them. I believe in universal programs that provide concrete material benefits, especially to the working class. Medicare for All is the prime example, but tuition-free college and a Post Office Bank also fall under this heading. So do a Jobs Guarantee and a Debt Jubilee. Clearly, neither liberal Democrats nor conservative Republicans can deliver on such programs, because the two are different flavors of neoliberalism (“Because markets”). I don’t much care about the “ism” that delivers the benefits, although whichever one does have to put common humanity first, as opposed to markets. Could be a second FDR saving capitalism, democratic socialism leashing and collaring it, or communism razing it. I don’t much care, as long as the benefits are delivered. To me, the key issue — and this is why Medicare for All is always first with me — is the tens of thousands of excess “deaths from despair,” as described by the Case-Deaton study, and other recent studies. That enormous body count makes Medicare for All, at the very least, a moral and strategic imperative. And that level of suffering and organic damage makes the concerns of identity politics — even the worthy fight to help the refugees Bush, Obama, and Clinton’s wars created — bright shiny objects by comparison. Hence my frustration with the news flow — currently in my view the swirling intersection of two, separate Shock Doctrine campaigns, one by the Administration, and the other by out-of-power liberals and their allies in the State and in the press — a news flow that constantly forces me to focus on matters that I regard as of secondary importance to the excess deaths. What kind of political economy is it that halts or even reverses the increases in life expectancy that civilized societies have achieved? I am also very hopeful that the continuing destruction of both party establishments will open the space for voices supporting programs similar to those I have listed; let’s call such voices “the left.” Volatility creates opportunity, especially if the Democrat establishment, which puts markets first and opposes all such programs, isn’t allowed to get back into the saddle. Eyes on the prize! I love the tactical level, and secretly love even the horse race, since I’ve been blogging about it daily for fourteen years, but everything I write has this perspective at the back of it.