5 ms·

> China is to phase out coal and become carbon neutral by 2060, it will need an energy source that can help it reliably meet baseload demand (the minimum level

> China is to phase out coal and become carbon neutral by 2060, it will need an energy source that can help it reliably meet baseload demand (the minimum level of power required to keep things running). Wind and solar are less suited to this, as they depend on the co-operation of nature. But nuclear fits the bill. In any scenario, renewables are going to do more of the heavy lifting in displacing coal in China. This framing seems designed to avoid this reality. > When it comes to energy generated, China’s nuclear stations outperform today’s installed solar capacity (though not wind). Again, I could argue about the framing here, but their underlying facts are suspect too. I wonder what their source is, as I believe both wind and solar are above nuclear production as of 2022 and growing at a faster rate. solar: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/solar-share-energy?tab=chart&country=CHN https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/solar-share-energy?tab=ch... wind: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/wind-share-energy?tab=chart&country=CHN https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/wind-share-energy?tab=cha... solar and wind: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-primary-energy-from-solar-and-wind?tab=chart&country=CHN https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-primary-energy-f... nuclear: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/nuclear-primary-energy?tab=chart&country=CHN https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/nuclear-primary-energy?ta... second source that agrees: https://ember-climate.org/countries-and-regions/countries/china/ https://ember-climate.org/countries-and-regions/countries/ch... Looking forward here's the IEA on the plan for Chinese carbon neutrality by 2060: > Renewables-based generation, mainly wind and solar PV, increases seven-fold between 2020 and 2060, accounting for almost 80% of generation by then. By contrast, the share of coal drops from over 60% to just 5%, and unabated coal-based generation stops in 2050. https://www.iea.org/reports/an-energy-sector-roadmap-to-carbon-neutrality-in-china/executive-summary https://www.iea.org/reports/an-energy-sector-roadmap-to-carb...

Arnt 3y ago
https://nitter.net/CleanPowerDave/status/1729784959890506150#m https://nitter.net/CleanPowerDave/status/1729784959890506150... says China will likely install 240GW of solar this year, which is about 90% of what the entire world installed last year. I agree that the piece sounds as if it's trying not to mention renewables.
- ZeroGravitas 3y ago
  The update to the old IEA misprediction of solar graph found in that thread is illustrative: https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media%2FGADZCdnWEAA6XhK.jpg https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media%2FGADZCdnWEAA6XhK.jpg
- matthewdgreen 3y ago
  They built more solar and wind in the first nine months of this year than the total future generation of their whole reactor fleet under construction. And with battery storage manufacturing rates/cost also on a similar (albeit earlier) exponential curve, it’s hard to see the economic case for nuclear 20-30 years from now.
  - bognition 3y ago
    Solar and wind are great but they don’t provide a continuous source of energy. Batteries are great too and should help smooth out the supply dips. That said you should absolutely have something around that can rapidly scale in the event of the inability to provide enough energy. Nuclear probably won’t be the main source but it will be a necessary mow part of the solution.
    - matthewdgreen 3y ago
      As of today, China is anticipating that nuclear will make up only 18% of its electrical generation by 2060, and nearly all of the rest will be renewables and storage. That 18% isn't enough generation to handle the "surge to make up for renewable sources suddenly drying up" use case, even if that's a real thing to worry about (which it isn't, when you're building a mostly-renewable grid at continental scale.) But even that 18% is already starting to look like it's out of date. Energy generation, battery storage and renewable generation are all growing exponentially and well beyond the government's targets. I think it's much more likely that renewables and storage will vastly outpace nuclear generation, and that 18% estimate will prove to be absurdly high. Once you've got a grid that's 90+% renewables and storage, a few nuclear plants aren't going to make much of a difference.
defrost 3y ago
Regardless of what The Economist has to say the stated China objective (which they have to hold to) is a nuclear (20%) renewable (805) future .. which makes sense in their planning. https://www.iea.org/countries/china https://www.iea.org/countries/china Gives the International Energy Agency overview of the China mix and history 1990 - 2020, in recent years nuclear and wind|solar have increased together from bugger all to roughly similar proportions when compared to the overbearing coal + gas + oil consumption. IIRC IEA charges for the most recent reports with most up to date tabulations along with a handful of teaser stuff that's up to date.
- Arnt 3y ago
  Why does China have to hold to those plans? It seems to me that the government there has an unusual ability to change its policy abruptly.
  - defrost 3y ago
    They have stated a goal, they have have to hold to a path to reach that goal. Or not - they could also decide ditching coal is too hard and abandon nuclear and solar altogether. But they do have to hold to a plan in order to reach their most recently stated objective.
  - adhesive_wombat 3y ago
    Seems to me they're rather better at sticking to a long-term constructive plan then most have been over the last few decades, whether it's long-distance UHVDC lines, high-speed rail, space stations or nuclear reactors.
    - whythre 3y ago
      Their high speed rail is a propaganda instrument. It is meant to be a high profile asset that makes their whole country look good, but it is a failure-prone money pit.
      - adhesive_wombat 3y ago
ikesau 3y ago
Here's another useful view that shows the breakdown in a stacked area chart: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-consumption-by-source-and-country?country=~CHN https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-consumption-by-sou...

Arnt 3y ago

https://nitter.net/CleanPowerDave/status/1729784959890506150#m https://nitter.net/CleanPowerDave/status/1729784959890506150... says China will likely install 240GW of solar this year, which is about 90% of what the entire world installed last year. I agree that the piece sounds as if it's trying not to mention renewables.

ZeroGravitas 3y ago
The update to the old IEA misprediction of solar graph found in that thread is illustrative: https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media%2FGADZCdnWEAA6XhK.jpg https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media%2FGADZCdnWEAA6XhK.jpg
matthewdgreen 3y ago
They built more solar and wind in the first nine months of this year than the total future generation of their whole reactor fleet under construction. And with battery storage manufacturing rates/cost also on a similar (albeit earlier) exponential curve, it’s hard to see the economic case for nuclear 20-30 years from now.
- bognition 3y ago
  Solar and wind are great but they don’t provide a continuous source of energy. Batteries are great too and should help smooth out the supply dips. That said you should absolutely have something around that can rapidly scale in the event of the inability to provide enough energy. Nuclear probably won’t be the main source but it will be a necessary mow part of the solution.
  - matthewdgreen 3y ago
    As of today, China is anticipating that nuclear will make up only 18% of its electrical generation by 2060, and nearly all of the rest will be renewables and storage. That 18% isn't enough generation to handle the "surge to make up for renewable sources suddenly drying up" use case, even if that's a real thing to worry about (which it isn't, when you're building a mostly-renewable grid at continental scale.) But even that 18% is already starting to look like it's out of date. Energy generation, battery storage and renewable generation are all growing exponentially and well beyond the government's targets. I think it's much more likely that renewables and storage will vastly outpace nuclear generation, and that 18% estimate will prove to be absurdly high. Once you've got a grid that's 90+% renewables and storage, a few nuclear plants aren't going to make much of a difference.

defrost 3y ago

Regardless of what The Economist has to say the stated China objective (which they have to hold to) is a nuclear (20%) renewable (805) future .. which makes sense in their planning. https://www.iea.org/countries/china https://www.iea.org/countries/china Gives the International Energy Agency overview of the China mix and history 1990 - 2020, in recent years nuclear and wind|solar have increased together from bugger all to roughly similar proportions when compared to the overbearing coal + gas + oil consumption. IIRC IEA charges for the most recent reports with most up to date tabulations along with a handful of teaser stuff that's up to date.

Arnt 3y ago
Why does China have to hold to those plans? It seems to me that the government there has an unusual ability to change its policy abruptly.
- defrost 3y ago
  They have stated a goal, they have have to hold to a path to reach that goal. Or not - they could also decide ditching coal is too hard and abandon nuclear and solar altogether. But they do have to hold to a plan in order to reach their most recently stated objective.
- adhesive_wombat 3y ago
  Seems to me they're rather better at sticking to a long-term constructive plan then most have been over the last few decades, whether it's long-distance UHVDC lines, high-speed rail, space stations or nuclear reactors.
  - whythre 3y ago
    Their high speed rail is a propaganda instrument. It is meant to be a high profile asset that makes their whole country look good, but it is a failure-prone money pit.
    - adhesive_wombat 3y ago

ikesau 3y ago

Here's another useful view that shows the breakdown in a stacked area chart: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-consumption-by-source-and-country?country=~CHN https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-consumption-by-sou...