China Building 15 New Coal Fired Power Plants
- Thread starter MrHotDice
- Start date
---
That anybody gave this little lunatic a nanosecond of attention tells you all you need to know about "Climate" culture.
Assuming man made climate change is real, you don't do anything. If China, India, and Russia do nothing, our efforts won't alter climate change. So the coast line will still flood, farm land will still dry out, and irreversible change will happen. So why would you wreck your own economy when the effort is meaningless?
Coal and oil are only bad for the environment when it's used for America's benefit. Hasnt anyone learned anything the last few years?
Damn, we developed fast. 246 years old, but China is still developing. 1200 BC to 2022 AD and still not baked.
Or, China just say “Eff you COP27.” And, for good reason. It’s freaking COP 27.
I'm glad people are gambling millions of lives on that bet without any real clear data backing it up.
China is building new coal fired plants in more than 20 countries. It's not just what's happening in China.
www.newscientist.com
China is building more than half of the world's new coal power plants
China accounted for 52 per cent of the 176 gigawatts of coal capacity under construction in 20 countries last year, according to the Global Energy Monitor
More good news;
The entire essence of an electric vehicle is its battery, but it turns out that you can’t produce car-sized batteries in Europe, because manufacturing batteries requires a lot of energy:
The entire essence of an electric vehicle is its battery, but it turns out that you can’t produce car-sized batteries in Europe, because manufacturing batteries requires a lot of energy:
I learned at lot by ignoring your “source” and reading what was actually said
“Schafer praised the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act for offering "companies highly attractive incentives to invest in new plants and production," and criticized the EU for not doing enough to help with energy plans for the future.
"On the international stage, Germany and the European Union are rapidly losing their attractiveness and competitiveness," he wrote.”
The only way to solve climate change is to first get to zero racism.
And of course, get everyone vaccinated. Vaccinated against racism.
And of course, get everyone vaccinated. Vaccinated against racism.
I’m responding to pop
Are you slow?
www.linkedin.com
He wants energy to be more subsidized so he will have energy cheap enough to produce batteries.
If he has to pay for the energy himself, he gets squeezed.
He wants the tax payer to pay for his energy. He can’t complete with other parts of the world that are still burning hydrocarbons.
The US is only competitive because, just like Covid, we are two weeks behind the EU.
Keep on closing power plants in the US and adding more electric vehicles charging on the grid. Which way will US electric prices go?
We will be in the same boat as the eu. Reduce supply and increase demand. Europe and North America will produce nothing that the commoners can purchase.
We will have gone from dependent on Middle East oil to China manufacturing and rare earth metals in one generation.
Are you slow?
Thomas Schäfer on LinkedIn: #competitiveness #volkswagen #habeck #ipcei | 70 comments
Today, I’d like to discuss something other than new products or technologies, though they are otherwise very much the focus of my work. It is a fundamental… | 70 comments on LinkedIn
He wants energy to be more subsidized so he will have energy cheap enough to produce batteries.
If he has to pay for the energy himself, he gets squeezed.
He wants the tax payer to pay for his energy. He can’t complete with other parts of the world that are still burning hydrocarbons.
The US is only competitive because, just like Covid, we are two weeks behind the EU.
Keep on closing power plants in the US and adding more electric vehicles charging on the grid. Which way will US electric prices go?
We will be in the same boat as the eu. Reduce supply and increase demand. Europe and North America will produce nothing that the commoners can purchase.
We will have gone from dependent on Middle East oil to China manufacturing and rare earth metals in one generation.
Last edited:
I’m responding to pop
Are you slow?
Thomas Schäfer on LinkedIn: #competitiveness #volkswagen #habeck #ipcei | 70 comments
Today, I’d like to discuss something other than new products or technologies, though they are otherwise very much the focus of my work. It is a fundamental… | 70 comments on LinkedIn
He wants energy to be more subsidized so he will have energy cheap enough to produce batteries.
If he has to pay for the energy himself, he gets squeezed.
He wants the tax payer to pay for his energy. He can’t complete with other parts of the world that are still burning hydrocarbons.
The US is only competitive because, just like Covid, we are two weeks behind the EU.
Keep on closing power plants in the US and adding more electric vehicles charging on the grid. Which way will US electric prices go?
We will be in the same boat as the eu. Reduce supply and increase demand. Europe and North America will produce nothing that the commoners can purchase.
We will have gone from dependent on Middle East oil to China manufacturing and rare earth metals in one generation.
Okay bub. I’ll tell the people in Clarksville TN they need to say no to the massive investment in a new battery facility by LG that’s going to bring over 500 high paying jobs to the area because of the Chinamen and Eurotrash.
Why would you assume moving towards alt energy sources "wrecks your own economy"?
Capital outlays for wind or solar are much less expensive then building and manning a coal-fired steam plant, and the field of alt energy is creating huge numbers of jobs which is great for the economy:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/07/renewable-energy-jobs-us/
We have been over this before, but solar and wind are not less expensive than building base load dispatchable generation. Wind and solar are not dispatchable and often times do not provide power during peak periods. For example in the midwest, many utilities peak in the winter between 6 am and 9 am. Solar is not providing power during those hours. When solar and wind are installed they have to be installed along side of other resources that are dispatchable, usually combined cycle combustion turbines or single cycle combustion turbines. Solar and wind are not currently lowering utility generation costs. They are increasing it. It's being installed because regulatory agencies are pushing it. Neither solar or wind passes the least cost planning criteria that has been used in generation planning for decades and has been required by regulatory agencies before they will grant authority for utilities to add resources. But politics has thrown least cost planning out the window. In Kentucky, for example, most utilities have installed at least one solar field. None of them have been presented to the commission based on least cost planning. All were requested based on them being "green" and to gain experience with how green energy impacts their grid.Why would you assume moving towards alt energy sources "wrecks your own economy"?
Capital outlays for wind or solar are much less expensive then building and manning a coal-fired steam plant, and the field of alt energy is creating huge numbers of jobs which is great for the economy:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/07/renewable-energy-jobs-us/
Obviously, when regulatory agencies are requiring some portion of the generation be "green" with no regard to least cost planning, then jobs will follow the production and installation of those products. It doesn't make it economically sound.
According to a report from the World Resources Institute, the United States can add 4.5 million jobs per year for 10 years if it invests in clean energy and low-carbon growth strategies.
The International Renewable Energy Agency’s 2021 Renewable Energy and Jobs annual review projects that global renewable energy jobs will increase from 12 million in 2020 to 38 million by 2030 and 43 million by 2050.
That sounds pretty good for the economy to me.
https://www.business.com/articles/the-impact-of-green-energy-on-the-economy/
Like I said, you can pick any product and if the government has a way to push it's sales, then jobs will be created. Does that mean it's the most efficient utilization of those resources? Probably not.
Thanks and that is correct, but most on this thread don't care.
They sound like George Wallace in the schoolhouse door: Coal today, coal tomorrow, coal forever!!!
It sounds pretty good for the economy but is it really?
Direct taxpayer subsidies for EVs have cost you and me $10 billion dollars to date, and we’re on the hook for more. The government just extended the EV subsidy until 2032 and removed the cap on the number of vehicles eligible for the subsidy.
It gets worse. The US government also just approved spending an additional $7.5 billion of taxpayer money on EV charging stations.
So to date, we’re spending TWENTY-THREE DOLLARS for each gallon of gasoline saved … economic suicide.
Direct taxpayer subsidies for EVs have cost you and me $10 billion dollars to date, and we’re on the hook for more. The government just extended the EV subsidy until 2032 and removed the cap on the number of vehicles eligible for the subsidy.
It gets worse. The US government also just approved spending an additional $7.5 billion of taxpayer money on EV charging stations.
So to date, we’re spending TWENTY-THREE DOLLARS for each gallon of gasoline saved … economic suicide.
My stats are bigger than your stats. That’s what the ladies tell me.
You don’t speak ill about Donna Hargreaves or her sloppy joes ever again!
i always enjoy laughing when people that don't want a topic discussed post in it and jump it right back to the top.
How did Solydra work out for us? hint.... China got a bunch of free tech and supplies.
But most of those will probably be govt subsidized somewhat not businesses generating money. And China will laugh at us spending all this money while they give zero effs about the environment and will continue to increase their economic power while buying up more US land, stealing our tech growing stronger every year while we lose money building green energy projects that won’t even have a scintilla of an affect on the overall environmental health of the world just so people sleep well at night thinking they’re doing their part. Focus on staying #1 or it won’t matter what we do with the environment.
Your wrong on two counts.
1. China spends more money on green energy then any other country in the world. This chart shows it to be over 83 Billion annually in 2019 but it's over 100 Billion annually now.
Clean energy investment worldwide by major country 2019 | Statista
Chinese investment in clean energy is the highest worldwide.
www.statista.com
2. Alt energy is a booming private sector industry in the US (and other countries too). This story from Bloomberg (which unfortunately is mostly behind a paywall) shows that U.S. Clean Energy Draws Record $105 Billion in Private Investment up 11%.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
www.bloomberg.com
Burning stuff to create electricity is a 19th century technology that is nearing the end of it's life cycle as we get better and better and creating technology to get free, clean energy from the sun. We still need fossil fuels and the petrochemical industry will be around for along time, but even the integrated oil companies like Exon and Shell have aggressive alt energy R&D programs going on themselves.
It's fair to argue how big or small government's roll should be on kick starting the alt energy industry, but the transition is inevitable and the countries that were there first with the best technology will be the winners, others that continue to rely too heavily on fossil fuels will be the losers. And I agree with you that controlling pollutants in the atmosphere is a global program, and I would add that the key to improving it will be to make alt energy sources more economically advantageous then conventional sources, not through treaties.
Your wrong on two counts.
1. China spends more money on green energy then any other country in the world. This chart shows it to be over 83 Billion annually in 2019 but it's over 100 Billion annually now.
Clean energy investment worldwide by major country 2019 | Statista
Chinese investment in clean energy is the highest worldwide.
2. Alt energy is a booming private sector industry in the US (and other countries too). This story from Bloomberg (which unfortunately is mostly behind a paywall) shows that U.S. Clean Energy Draws Record $105 Billion in Private Investment up 11%.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
www.bloomberg.com
Burning stuff to create electricity is a 19th century technology that is nearing the end of it's life cycle as we get better and better and creating technology to get free, clean energy from the sun. We still need fossil fuels and the petrochemical industry will be around for along time, but even the integrated oil companies like Exon and Shell have aggressive alt energy R&D programs going on themselves.
It's fair to argue how big or small government's roll should be on kick starting the alt energy industry, but the transition is inevitable and the countries that were there first with the best technology will be the winners, others that continue to rely too heavily on fossil fuels will be the losers. And I agree with you that controlling pollutants in the atmosphere is a global program, and I would add that the key to improving it will be to make alt energy sources more economically advantageous then conventional sources, not through treaties.
China investing money in something doesn't mean its productive. They are currently destroying huge sections of cities that they never even used.
How many jobs could we create if we mandated all energy be created by humans running in giant hamster wheel generators?
Are you just going to ignore that China's coal increase alone from now until the magic 2030 level off date is greater than the totality of what Europe and North America are burning today?
The west burning less fossil fuels does nothing. Every powerplant the west closes, China adds one that burns 50% more tonnage. It's so 19th century.
But spending money on it and actually doing something to change things are completely different. If you’re building brand new coal factories that you prob plan on running for 50 years what does it matter?Your wrong on two counts.
1. China spends more money on green energy then any other country in the world. This chart shows it to be over 83 Billion annually in 2019 but it's over 100 Billion annually now.
Clean energy investment worldwide by major country 2019 | Statista
Chinese investment in clean energy is the highest worldwide.
2. Alt energy is a booming private sector industry in the US (and other countries too). This story from Bloomberg (which unfortunately is mostly behind a paywall) shows that U.S. Clean Energy Draws Record $105 Billion in Private Investment up 11%.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
www.bloomberg.com
Burning stuff to create electricity is a 19th century technology that is nearing the end of it's life cycle as we get better and better and creating technology to get free, clean energy from the sun. We still need fossil fuels and the petrochemical industry will be around for along time, but even the integrated oil companies like Exon and Shell have aggressive alt energy R&D programs going on themselves.
It's fair to argue how big or small government's roll should be on kick starting the alt energy industry, but the transition is inevitable and the countries that were there first with the best technology will be the winners, others that continue to rely too heavily on fossil fuels will be the losers. And I agree with you that controlling pollutants in the atmosphere is a global program, and I would add that the key to improving it will be to make alt energy sources more economically advantageous then conventional sources, not through treaties.
If I kill a person but make a baby, it doesn’t mean I made things even overall.
---
Would you expect a study/public relations release from the International Renewable Energy Agency to say something other than this?
I'm not ignoring China's building new coal fired steam plants nor do I excuse it, but that has nothing to do with what they are spending on alt energy. The have an energy deficiency situation due to their rapid growth and are dealing with it by whatever means are available alt or conventional but they are moving more towards alt.
I wouldn't say the west burning less fossil fuels does nothing, but your right to point to the fact that this is a global issue and will only be solved when the largest polluters India and China ramp up and move more rapidly off fossil fuel.
I'm going to go ahead and guess the future. Tons of people will die in Europe this winter from the cold. Experts will blame global warming and not their energy policy. Next year will see huge spikes in hunger. Experts will blame it on climate change and not the fact they banned fertilizer and livestock.
It's like watching a car wreck in slow motion.
How are they moving toward alt by expanding coal?
Moving towards alt would be no additional coal, decommissioning coal plants, and only building renewable.
Ya know, the bullshit we are doing.
You're saying we need to shut down our fossil fuel plants so that China can build additional fossil fuel plants. That is the reality.
China isn't having to replace energy on their grid like we are. We are exchanging reliable for unreliable. They are expanding power usage where they have never had it. They are not going without. It's hard to miss something you have never had.
Move more rapidly off fossil fuel?
They are expanding coal capacity. Why would you expand capacity in 19th century technology? If you have the cash to expand, why make a 50 year investment in old tech that you want to abandon in a decade?
If they believed in what you are pushing, all of that expansion investment would go into renewable. Energy is energy right? China holds all of the cards with rare earth metals. They certainly have enough land for wind and solar. They have cheap manufacturing, yet they dump more money into coal.
"They have to build coal plants because they are expanding so rapidly!!!"
What, the lead time for 4000mw coal plant to come on line is shorter than the lead time for 4000mw of wind or solar?
They do just enough in renewable to give you a talking point.
Last edited:
“They do just enough in renewable to give you a talking point.”
I think that’s exactly correct. So when people say “why are you building coal plants!?!??!” They can say “well we’re spending 100 billion on renewable we just need a stop gap for now”
That way environmental activists will say “oh okay! See everyone look how great China is!”
Meanwhile China is playing the Kansas City shuffle with you all, look over here at our green efforts while we build a f**k ton of coal plants over there.
Anyone that thinks China does ANYTHING for the good of the rest of the world is ignorant. They’re happy to play the longest long game in history as long as it ends with them dominating the world again and they’re killing it so far.
I think that’s exactly correct. So when people say “why are you building coal plants!?!??!” They can say “well we’re spending 100 billion on renewable we just need a stop gap for now”
That way environmental activists will say “oh okay! See everyone look how great China is!”
Meanwhile China is playing the Kansas City shuffle with you all, look over here at our green efforts while we build a f**k ton of coal plants over there.
Anyone that thinks China does ANYTHING for the good of the rest of the world is ignorant. They’re happy to play the longest long game in history as long as it ends with them dominating the world again and they’re killing it so far.
I’ll believe it’s a crisis when the people who keep telling me it’s a crisis start acting like it’s a crisis.
