China's CO2 Emissions Have Been Flat Or Falling For Past 18 Months, Analysis Finds
- Reference: 0180040058
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/11/11/0119210/chinas-co2-emissions-have-been-flat-or-falling-for-past-18-months-analysis-finds
- Source link:
> Rapid increases in the deployment of solar and wind power generation -- which grew by 46% and 11% respectively in the third quarter of this year -- meant the country's energy sector emissions remained flat, even as the demand for electricity increased. China added 240GW of solar capacity in the first nine months of this year, and 61GW of wind, putting it on track for another renewable record in 2025. Last year, the country installed 333GW of solar power, more than the rest of the world combined. [...]
>
> The [2]analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (Crea), for the science and climate policy website Carbon Brief, found China's CO2 emissions were unchanged from a year earlier in the third quarter of 2025, thanks in part to declining emissions in the travel, cement and steel industries. But China has a record of underpromising and overdelivering on climate targets. Li Shuo, the director of the China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute, a US-based thinktank, said in a recent note that the latest Chinese climate targets should be seen as a baseline and not a ceiling.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/11/china-co2-emissions-flat-or-falling-for-past-18-months-analysis-finds
[2] https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-have-now-been-flat-or-falling-for-18-months/
Re: (Score:1)
And/or demographic collapse.
Re: (Score:2)
Projections show their population still growing for another 15 years (from 1.43 to 1.46 billion), and then need another 15 years to decline back to the same value. These changes are not large nor fast and we wouldn't call them a collapse at this point. [1]https://chinaeconomicindicator... [chinaecono...icator.com]
[1] https://chinaeconomicindicator.com/demographic-challenges/
the world should reward them (Score:1, Interesting)
China should be rewarded for this. I am tired if this anti china war mongering, china is the future.
Re: the world should reward them (Score:2)
Yes, just as Hitler was the future in 1933.
Democracies will win again.
Re: (Score:3)
and you americans are goign all in to destroy the current environment for the future.
Re: the world should reward them (Score:2)
China has a form of democracy, so sure.
Yet CO2 levels have gone up... (Score:3)
... by the greatest leap in a year ever recorded last year - 3ppm.
I get the feeling that positive feedback mechanisms are starting to kick in and soon anything we do re human emissions will become irrelevant.
Re: (Score:2)
At least China has now proven that not only can an economy thrive with renewable energy (remember all the hand wringing about the lights going out and destroying manufacturing?), but it can in fact be a hugely lucrative market.
The other big emitters should be looking at China with envy, and seeking to catch up before they are left behind with only expensive fossil and nuclear power.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it all depends on how you define "thrive", eh? China has mastered creative accounting like few others.
Re: Yet CO2 levels have gone up... (Score:2)
Bollocks.
Re: (Score:2)
Link to the actual and verifiable evidence for that claim otherwise otherwise it falls into the conspiracy theory bin.
Re: (Score:2)
This is due to natural systems not being able to absorb as much of human emissions as they did in the past. For the sake of argument, if we stopped all emissions today, then CO2 levels will still fall, just not as fast as if we stopped all emissions 10 years ago. We're not into "positive feedback" of CO2 levels, we are just into reduced "negative feedback".
Re: (Score:2)
I hope you're right.
Re: (Score:2)
> I get the feeling that positive feedback mechanisms are starting to kick in
Like electing far right morons hell bent on destroying the earth for a dollar? Positive feedback is the same as a negative feedforward right ;-)
Extrapolation (Score:3)
According to the article's numbers, China is adding ~ 350 GWp of solar per year, more than the rest of the world, so let's say the world is adding 700 GWp of solar each year, and another 100-200 GW of wind, so 1 TWp of solar + wind. Let's assume that solar+wind production averages out to 25% of their peak capacity. Then this 1TWp of added renewables per year averages out to 250 GW. The world consumes [1]23000 GW [ourworldindata.org], of which about 70% (16000 GW) is from fossil fuels. At the current pace, it would then take 64 years to replace all fossil fuels with renewables, without taking into account increasing energy use or running out of space to put solar+wind, or energy storage. These are very rough estimates. The time frame seems comparable to the transition from coal steam boats to diesel engines. The first oil refinery was built in 1856. The Titanic still burned coal in 1912.
[1] https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-consumption
Re: (Score:2)
The estimates are very rough indeed. If you do the math for any city, you will find out that just the roofs in that city provide enough space for Solar to power the city. It's not that we will run out of space for Solar very soon.
And then, you are projecting linear growth for Solar and Wind, but the actual growth rates are exponential. Roughly every three years, the amount of Solar and Wind installed is doubling - doing so for the last 15 years. In 2027, the World will install 1400 GWp, in 2030, it will b
Re: (Score:2)
I completely lose all respect for anyone who looks at a section of a curve and extrapolates that trend onto the next twenty years as if nothing could possibly ever happen in that timeframe to change that.
I mean just look at that statement: Taking your 25% estimate we will install as much Solar in 2045 year as the total fossil energy output today.
Which assumes that in 2045 we have the production capacity, installation manpower and space to do so.
But you start out in a pretty shortsighted way alread: Sure, bu
Re: (Score:2)
I see your comment, and I know that the same error was made several times. There are numerous articles from the last couple of decades, where people point out that the exponential growth of Solar is unsustainable. Here we are in 2025, and the growth still is exponential (and has been since 1992). You have to bring up really good arguments why it should be slowing down anytime soon.
And no, I don't require every city to plaster its roofs with Solar. I just want to point out how much people underestimate the
Re: (Score:2)
CO2 doesn't cause smog. Just because CO2 emissions are down doesn't mean other emissions such as particulates and nitrogen oxides aren't getting worse at the same time.
Re: Hmmmmmmm.... (Score:2)
Air pollution has improved significantly, too.
China's solar PV roll-out forecast to slow (Score:2)
Unfortunately China's solar PV roll-out is is forecast to dramatically slow (and is already doing-so) due to elimination of a guaranteed buy-price for solar PV electricity on the Chinese grid about 6 months ago. Fortunately the PV already installed will keep generating for 20+ years, so that's not all bad, and PV module prices have already fallen on the world market as a result. PV+Battery combos will hopefully ramp up in the next few years in response to the policy change. Also hopefully China's massive
Re: (Score:2)
You'd better link to that forecast otherwise its a social media conspiracy theory
Re: One of the few advantages of a repressive regi (Score:2)
Bernie is not authoritarian.
Re: One of the few advantages of a repressive regi (Score:2)
You seriously need to examine your biases. Your description bears little resemblance to actual life in China. I suggest you have been lied to, and perhaps you'll find out it is something different if you were to go there and spend some time.