4 ms·

It would be nice if the whole world would transition away from fossil fuels all in lockstep, but that's just not realistic. The energy transition is going to be

It would be nice if the whole world would transition away from fossil fuels all in lockstep, but that's just not realistic. The energy transition is going to be/already is very uneven. It's going to happen first in the places that have a strong desire to lead and the financial and the natural resources (e.g. abundant sun) to enable that. Hawaii happens to fit all those criteria.

matthewdgreen 3y ago
The country leading the renewables transition right now is China. Since they’re also the country that (not coincidentally) builds everything, outsourcing goods manufacturing to them seems like an okay bet, for the climate at least. (And yes, I know they’re building coal, but their emissions are still set to peak because they’re building more renewables than industry can consume while paying to idle coal plants.)
- graemep 3y ago
  Why are they building coal plants if they are not going to increase their coal fired output? My guess is that their motive for moving to renewables is more to reduce their reliance on imported oil and gas (vulnerable to blockade in the event of war). Maybe they will reduce oil and gas and increase both coal and renewables use?
  - ZeroGravitas 3y ago
    Theyr rebuilding, newer, cleaner, more flexible plants as in the Chinese system the coal plants need to perform the same role as gas plants in areas with easy access to gas i.e. running intermittently at low capacity factors.
  - matthewdgreen 3y ago
    It is entirely reasonable to believe that China is transitioning away from fossil fuels in the medium term and that they're freeing themselves from vulnerable oil+gas supply lines in the short term, in preparation for a possible Pacific conflict. What alarms me (for both reasons) is that the US and its allies are not doing the same thing. (*Yes, I know the US itself has plenty of domestic oil, but plenty of our critical allies are equally vulnerable to blockade.)
  - Qwertious 3y ago
    >Why are they building coal plants if they are not going to increase their coal fired output? Because 30% of their GDP comes from construction - building coal plants creates jobs. And as a marginal benefit, they even get a spare coal plant at the end. They've been building all sorts of infrastructure projects that don't make sense to build, coal isn't special here.
    - defrost 3y ago
      Or, more rationally - China has closed way more coal plants (small, inefficient, old technology) than it has built new coal plants (larger, new filters, scrubbers, adjacent to fresh coal fields with better grades of coal), in addition to having expanding demand for power. Currently in China new nuclear construction is slightly below new wind+solar addons, and nuclear+wind+solar are together still a small fraction of total power due to coal. Yes, China is phasing out coal - but it's a beast. In the meantime old sulphur filled coal field are being retired, new fields are being opened, and new plants with cleaner burning technology is built next to new fields in order to minimise transport costs (and associated C02 from transport).
davidw 3y ago
Something I see so much in local politics is that things don't all happen in a nicely coordinated fashion like one might want. Say, building some denser housing with more transit. But people telling you to wait until everything lines up 'just so' most likely want neither. Things happen in fits and starts in the real world.
bluGill 3y ago
I find it interesting that places like Iowa, Texas, and Kansas are leading the transition in the US despite none being places anything thinks associated with environmentalism. While states you might expect to care are way behind. Hawaii has had expensive energy all along and was an early installer of wind, but somehow is still way behind.
- hot_gril 3y ago
  Easier to build in places like Texas, I suspect.

matthewdgreen 3y ago

The country leading the renewables transition right now is China. Since they’re also the country that (not coincidentally) builds everything, outsourcing goods manufacturing to them seems like an okay bet, for the climate at least. (And yes, I know they’re building coal, but their emissions are still set to peak because they’re building more renewables than industry can consume while paying to idle coal plants.)

graemep 3y ago
Why are they building coal plants if they are not going to increase their coal fired output? My guess is that their motive for moving to renewables is more to reduce their reliance on imported oil and gas (vulnerable to blockade in the event of war). Maybe they will reduce oil and gas and increase both coal and renewables use?
- ZeroGravitas 3y ago
  Theyr rebuilding, newer, cleaner, more flexible plants as in the Chinese system the coal plants need to perform the same role as gas plants in areas with easy access to gas i.e. running intermittently at low capacity factors.
- matthewdgreen 3y ago
  It is entirely reasonable to believe that China is transitioning away from fossil fuels in the medium term and that they're freeing themselves from vulnerable oil+gas supply lines in the short term, in preparation for a possible Pacific conflict. What alarms me (for both reasons) is that the US and its allies are not doing the same thing. (*Yes, I know the US itself has plenty of domestic oil, but plenty of our critical allies are equally vulnerable to blockade.)
- Qwertious 3y ago
  >Why are they building coal plants if they are not going to increase their coal fired output? Because 30% of their GDP comes from construction - building coal plants creates jobs. And as a marginal benefit, they even get a spare coal plant at the end. They've been building all sorts of infrastructure projects that don't make sense to build, coal isn't special here.
  - defrost 3y ago
    Or, more rationally - China has closed way more coal plants (small, inefficient, old technology) than it has built new coal plants (larger, new filters, scrubbers, adjacent to fresh coal fields with better grades of coal), in addition to having expanding demand for power. Currently in China new nuclear construction is slightly below new wind+solar addons, and nuclear+wind+solar are together still a small fraction of total power due to coal. Yes, China is phasing out coal - but it's a beast. In the meantime old sulphur filled coal field are being retired, new fields are being opened, and new plants with cleaner burning technology is built next to new fields in order to minimise transport costs (and associated C02 from transport).

davidw 3y ago

Something I see so much in local politics is that things don't all happen in a nicely coordinated fashion like one might want. Say, building some denser housing with more transit. But people telling you to wait until everything lines up 'just so' most likely want neither. Things happen in fits and starts in the real world.

bluGill 3y ago

I find it interesting that places like Iowa, Texas, and Kansas are leading the transition in the US despite none being places anything thinks associated with environmentalism. While states you might expect to care are way behind. Hawaii has had expensive energy all along and was an early installer of wind, but somehow is still way behind.

hot_gril 3y ago
Easier to build in places like Texas, I suspect.