Skip to content

Last year China generated almost 3 times as much solar power as the EU did, and it's close to overtaking all OECD countries put together (whose combined population is 1.38 billion people)

Technology
149 54 27
  • This has been going on for years and will continue.

    China really really really needs a robust and diverse energy infrastructure.
    Industry needs huge amounts of energy. AI needs huge amounts of energy. The military needs huge amounts of energy.

    Coal is unreliable and dirty. Oil can be blocked at the Straight of Malacca and a few pipelines.

    China is also the world’s factory. They own the entire logistics chain for producing renewable generators; from raw materials to final assembly. They have all the infrastructure to not only build solar panels and wind turbines at scale, they’ve scaled up building the machines that build them.

    Coal is unreliable and dirty.

    China use absurd amounts of coal and they're not slowing down. They're the worlds largest producer and consumer of coal. They're increasing use of all power generation types - coal, solar, nuclear.

  • Good for China on that!

    To add some perspective, China is about 2 and a quarter times as large as the EU nations, and according to currentresults.com seems to get a bit more sunshine than the EU does. So the difference isn't quite as stark as this post makes it seem.

    But still, it's good that China is taking solar power seriously. I didn't realize they were doing that well.

    China are the worlds biggest coal producer and consumer, started building like 100GW of coal power plants last year alone, and are increasing their use of coal every single year.

    People getting excited about china's massive solar power generation are hilarious. Basically unless china stop using coal, the rest of the world being completely net-zero is irrelevant.

  • Amazing how fast you can build stuff when there's safety standards, no environmental regulations, no labour rights and the government can expropriate property without a time consuming legal process!

    Though I think a prefer living in a country where I have rights even if it takes a bit longer to build stuff.

    To give China credit the solar push was very capitalistic and very well executed. There are so many solar salesmen that will bother you to no end with one offering better deals than another. They come install everything and set up for you and guarantee returns in like 5 years plus mountains of other bonuses (obviously based on location etc.). The environment kinda make you feel stupid for not taking the deal too so you're really pressured which imo is a win. It's basically a free market under a dictatorship for a product in high natural demand.

    Though I can't comment on industrial solar panel fields but the consumer part is very well executed and the rest of Asia is like 10 years behind.

  • Las Vegas has already achieved 97% storage supply for its needs - a city that barely sleeps at night.

    Again, where is your evidence that it is not going to improve across the board, and will all fail?

    "It's not all happening right now," is not even close to a convincing answer. If that was the reason to exclude any technology, there'd be none.

    And it's an especially ironic answer given that it takes up to 20 years to commission a nuclear power plant. And they are down for scheduled maintenance for up to a month a year, etc.

    Las Vegas has already achieved 97% storage supply for its needs - a city that barely sleeps at night.

    Hard data is where? And I bet LV heavily relies on hydro and gas powerplants. Solar is a tiny fraction, even though, where is its energy stored?

    Again, where is your evidence that it is not going to improve across the board, and will all fail?

    Instead of trying to pick a fight, please read what I write: "Perhaps somewhen in the not so near future, but today?"

    And it’s an especially ironic answer given that it takes up to 20 years to commission a nuclear power plant. And they are down for scheduled maintenance for up to a month a year, etc.

    The difference with nuclear power plants is that we have the technology today. Can you say the same for batteries? Also you'd build a surplus of nuclear energy power plants (or have another backup plan) just for cases like you mention. The maintenance frequency varies, i.e. for a Slovene one is once per 18 months. But that's something you know in advance and one plans for.

  • OP sepcifically mentioned EVs. This sector is deflationary even in US, where better value/performance cars cost less every year. More dramatic deflation in less corrupt countries. Australia home solar costs under 1/3rd of US due to different politico-social corruption levels.

    EVs and home solar are a great match that permits going offgrid at substantially lower cost if an EV is parked at home during day. That same dynamic allows a society/community to power itself through solar+batteries, and EVs parked at work. It's not a question of look at our corrupt obstructionist oligarchical monopoly state of societies for examples of lack of economic success as proof that it will forever be impossible.

    EVs are rare (in the context of total energy consumption, even more so because not so many models offer this feature), limited to houses (what do you do when you live in a flat?) and not a reliable source - "honey, I need to drive fetch some groceries, you won't have energy in meantime". How many houses with only EVs as energy storage are disconnected from grid? I bet the number is next to 0.
    OTOH EVs as energy storage can provide buffering to energy grid when properly connected. This feature has its place, but they can't be used for reliable storage.

  • Last year, China generated 834 terawatt-hours of solar power.

    Which is more than the G7 countries generated, and more than the US and EU combined. In fact the only country group that generates more solar power than China is the OECD, all 38 countries of it.

    Data:
    @ember-energy.org

    Source: https://bsky.app/profile/nathanielbullard.com/post/3lsbbsg6ohk2j

    Ain't that neat! Do they just happen to be the biggest coalie bois too?

  • No. We get exactly what his comment is about.

    If he was in the renewables camp, there would be no point, in this discussion over solar, to bring up nuclear. It's absolutely unrelated.

    What he's doing is pushing the thought into people's heads that nuclear is a good solution, and that's why I'm calling him out for. For being a shill.

    And that's your reach apparently - insulting people without anything to contribute whatsoever.

  • Amazing how fast you can build stuff when there's safety standards, no environmental regulations, no labour rights and the government can expropriate property without a time consuming legal process!

    Though I think a prefer living in a country where I have rights even if it takes a bit longer to build stuff.

    Like america but more competent

  • In a market or effincient economy, where peak occurs mid hot summer day, 100% solar dominated renewables makes sense. In Spring and fall, EVs can absorb daily oversupply and profit from trading back at night. Winter is when solar can fail to meet heating and electricity needs, and so either backup energy sources or having much more than 100% peak demand in order to make green H2 that can be exported to where it gets cold is needed.

    0 new nuclear is best amount of nuclear for any economy.

    If you trade too much EV energy during night, then you can't drive during the day. And again, EVs capacity is not reliable at all. As per green H2, please show me a production and a storage capable of providing energy to a city. Or at least a real project that's building it. Storing H2 is a big problem, like a huge one. If nothing else, Hindenburg tells a story. The fact that energy loss is at more than 50% when producing green H2 is a minor problem compared to storage.

  • Last year, China generated 834 terawatt-hours of solar power.

    Which is more than the G7 countries generated, and more than the US and EU combined. In fact the only country group that generates more solar power than China is the OECD, all 38 countries of it.

    Data:
    @ember-energy.org

    Source: https://bsky.app/profile/nathanielbullard.com/post/3lsbbsg6ohk2j

    to be fair, they have about 3x the population too. but nonetheless good to see that they are moving fast. dictatorship works faster when it comes to regulation ¯_(ツ)_/¯ 🙂

  • to be fair, they have about 3x the population too. but nonetheless good to see that they are moving fast. dictatorship works faster when it comes to regulation ¯_(ツ)_/¯ 🙂

    It's not about regulation. China has almost the complete photovoltaic production of the world. Essentially all panels installed in the rest of the world are also Chinese. It's about a smart government knowing which technologies to pursue, instead of things like the Spanish "sun tax" of the 2010s that killed whatever solar industry there might have been in the sunniest country in Europe.

  • Amazing how fast you can build stuff when there's safety standards, no environmental regulations, no labour rights and the government can expropriate property without a time consuming legal process!

    Though I think a prefer living in a country where I have rights even if it takes a bit longer to build stuff.

    Gotta love how you jump to the whataboutism when it comes to good China news. "Yeah sure, they may be saving the environment by going solar, but what about... Uh... Environmental regulation?"

    Like, mate, manufacturing 90% of the world's photovoltaics is the best thing you can environmentally do.

  • China are the worlds biggest coal producer and consumer, started building like 100GW of coal power plants last year alone, and are increasing their use of coal every single year.

    People getting excited about china's massive solar power generation are hilarious. Basically unless china stop using coal, the rest of the world being completely net-zero is irrelevant.

    How much coal has China cumulatively used in its history compared to the US or Europe? Spoiler alert: much less. Almost as if countries in the process of developing used coal for a reason...

  • Why is Polution per GDP a better measure? I don't care how much they export when they're killing the planet at a faster rate every year with no intentions to stop it. I will praise China and the rest of the world when they reimplement and follow through with plans to ethically lower the world population, such as investment in education especially for women and incentives or fines based on numbers of children.

    It's a better measure because western countries outsource manufacturing and associated pollutions to other countries and then pretend to be green.

  • It's not about regulation. China has almost the complete photovoltaic production of the world. Essentially all panels installed in the rest of the world are also Chinese. It's about a smart government knowing which technologies to pursue, instead of things like the Spanish "sun tax" of the 2010s that killed whatever solar industry there might have been in the sunniest country in Europe.

    oh yeah, that too.

  • Nice I love seeing China Greenwashing get reposted. Remember that China is 3x the size of the EU so them having 3x the solar power is a stupid comparison. China also continues to increase coal generation by more than renewables. China is only %27 renewables while the EU is 47%. China is 17% of the world and almost 40% of the emissions.

    OECD countries are actually working on emission reduction instead of china which continue to increase emissions with absolute no signs of stopping. They have missed every single renewable target and goal they're set. But dont worry im sure they will stop building more coal plants in 2030, im sure it wont be to late by then.

    China is 17% of the world and almost 40% of the emissions.

    Deceiving metrics. What percentage of world PPP GDP is China? China doesn't pollute due to its population, it pollutes because it's the industrial hub of the world. How comfortable of you to sit in your office and import Chinese products disregarding the effect of that in the pollution metrics of your country and China.

    China is only %27 renewables while the EU is 47%

    And how long did China take to develop? What are the cumulative CO2 emissions of China vs those of the US or Europe? Furthermore: where are the solar panels that Europe uses manufactured? Europe may have a blossoming wind industry, but photovoltaics are almost entirely Chinese.

    What a chauvinistic and anti-Chinese point of view. BTW, you got completely proven wrong on China building more coal than renewables, you're just spitting disinformation.

  • Ain't that neat! Do they just happen to be the biggest coalie bois too?

    True, but the positive dynamics is there.

    The country needs a lot of energy, and it does good job making a lot of it renewable/hydro. The coal industry growth is slowing down, while solar roars up

    5 years ago, they had one-third of the current solar capacity.

  • I think you call it eminent domain in the US. But I think it can still be challenged in court, but wait a couple months.

    Yes, the US is becoming China. You put a guy into power that admires Xi Jinping for the same reason China made Xi President for life: wanted a strongman to run the economy and protect you from evil foreigners. And now you're getting corporate socialism, just like China has.

    Yes, the US is becoming China

    Where's the High Speed Rail?

  • People talk about China's energy use like it's not* their* energy use. They used that power to produce the stupid shit that you bought, dumbass. You're responsible for that energy use, despite it being generated in China.

    It's a bit hard to believe, but the vast majority of China's manufacturing is consumed in China. They're actually not that export oriented compared to other countries like Germany or Japan, it's just the scale that makes them such an export juggernaut. The flip side of this is that most of the energy use is also actually China's own energy use.

    And China's energy use is increasing simply because its people are getting richer and consuming more. Based on this, I don't think China is the main concern. There are lots more developing countries that will likewise use more energy as they develop. China's green transition seems to be going full tilt, but I'm not sure those other countries can transition as quickly.

  • Last year, China generated 834 terawatt-hours of solar power.

    Which is more than the G7 countries generated, and more than the US and EU combined. In fact the only country group that generates more solar power than China is the OECD, all 38 countries of it.

    Data:
    @ember-energy.org

    Source: https://bsky.app/profile/nathanielbullard.com/post/3lsbbsg6ohk2j

    3 times as much solar as the EU.

    Has 3 times the population.

    🤷

    They are using 50% of the world's coal though, so maybe let's not start tugging each other off just yet.

  • 28 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    captainastronaut@seattlelunarsociety.orgC
    If you had asked me during the Obama administration I would have said this a chance of becoming law. Today I give it 0.002%.
  • WhatsApp rolls out AI-generated summaries for private messages

    Technology technology
    26
    1
    96 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    W
    So I think, but I'm not sure, this is for group chats. Group chats are only encrypted to/from the server because the server broadcasts the message to each recipient. As the messages are unencrypted on the server, they can feed them to LLMs. This is different to Signal. On Signal it's your phone encrypting each copy of the message before sending to each recipient individually.
  • How will the space race affect our environment? (Video 25mins)

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    17 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 23 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    D
    Whew..... None of the important file hosters ..
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • 8 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    S
    %100 inherited and old lonely boomers. You'd be surprised how often the courts will not allow POA or Conservatorship to be appointed to the family after they get scammed. I have first hand experience with this and also have a friend as well.
  • Is Washington state falling out of love with Tesla?

    Technology technology
    10
    1
    61 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    B
    These Tesla owners who love their cars but hate his involvement with government are a bit ridiculous because one of the biggest reasons he got in loved with shilling for the right is that the government was looking into regulations and investigations concerning how unsafe Tesla cars are.
  • Reddit will tighten verification to keep out human-like AI bots

    Technology technology
    24
    1
    84 Stimmen
    24 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    O
    While I completely agree with you about the absence of one-liners and meme comments, and even more left leaning community, there's still that strong element of "gotcha" in discussions. Also tonnes of people not reading an article before commenting (at a better rate than Reddit probably), and a generally even more doomer attitude is common here.