Red China: Climate Change Leader (/SARC)

Guest sarcasm by David Middleton

Some recent headlines:

Figure 1. Carbon dioxide emissions US (green), Red China (red), World (black). Data from 2019 BP Statistical Review of World Energy.

Red China is the world leader in fossil fuel imports

Nov 1, 2019
China Soaring Past Japan In Liquefied Natural Gas Imports

Jude Clemente Contributor
I cover oil, gas, power, LNG markets, linking to human development.

China will soon surpass Japan as the world’s largest importer of liquefied natural gas (LNG), quickly becoming the most vital way of trading the world’s go-to fuel.

In 2018, China became the world’s largest gas importer (for total piped supply and LNG), and its ascent to the top LNG spot is happening much faster than previously predicted.

This all makes perfect sense.

Japan is a fully developed country with low incremental energy needs, has a declining population, and retains a nuclear restart program that lowers the need for LNG.

Japan’s LNG imports are expected to drop by at least 12% over the next three years alone.

In contrast, with gas accounting for just 6-8% of the energy that it uses, China has a gasification program to lower an over-dependence on coal and clear dangerously polluted skies with cleaner natural gas.

Using gas instead of coal for home heating is national necessity.

Driven by a continued urbanization that is giving people more money and more access to gas, China’s gas demand could almost double to 550 billion cubic meters (Bcm) by 2030.


Looking forward, excess supply has put Asian LNG prices at 10-year lows, so China’s demand could ultimately be even higher than expected.

Indeed, it often goes underestimated how such low prices are locking in more usage and making other sources like wind and solar power less competitive with gas.

Figure 2. “China now accounts for around 20% of the world’s LNG import market, versus 5% a decade ago. DATA SOURCE: BP; JTC”

Oct 17, 2019
China Is The World’s Largest Oil & Gas Importer

Jude Clemente Contributor
I cover oil, gas, power, LNG markets, linking to human development.

Everybody knows that China has been leading the world in new oil and natural gas demand, except for last year when the U.S. did it. But, what is not so commonly known is that China is now the largest oil and natural gas importer.

This is a really big deal for other consumers: oil and gas supply over 60% of the world’s energy. China has 1.4 billion people, a government obsessed with economic growth, energy usage that accounts for 25% of the world’s total, and an ever-extending global reach that has procuring energy supplies at its core, namely oil and gas in any area, any country at any time. Oil and gas constitute a rising 30% of China’s total energy demand.

For Chinese leadership, this continuous need to rely more on outside help to get the energy to grow the economy is ultimately problematic. All one has to do is see The Great Wall itself to know that China has enhanced self-sufficiency has a foundation of its 5,000 year-old civilization.

This helps explain why China is highly active in heavily oil- and gas-resourced Africa, the Middle East, Canada, and South America. As we unrealistically debate “the end” of oil and gas, the Chinese know that these fuels will remain indispensable for decades to come. Just like Vladimir Putin and OPEC, the Chinese know that our unrealism works greatly to their advantage, as U.S. and global demand continue to mount.




China’s 2019 coal imports set to rise more than 10%: analysts

BEIJING/MELBOURNE (Reuters) – China, the world’s top coal buyer, is on track to boost imports of the fuel by more than 10% this year, traders and analysts said on Tuesday, countering earlier expectations that shipments would be capped by Beijing at the same level as 2018.

China’s coal imports have already surged 9.5% in the first nine months of 2019 to 250.57 million tonnes, customs data shows, and at least 18.84 million tonnes of seaborne coal are due to arrive this month, according to vessel-tracking and port data compiled by Refinitiv.

With China typically bringing in about 7 million tonnes more a month on trucks and trains from Mongolia and Russia, total volumes are likely to reach 276 million tonnes well before the end of the year.

Last year’s total was 281.23 million tonnes.

“Signs are emerging of a modest recovery in coal import volumes into China, which has led to recent market speculation that the Chinese government may allow a relatively modest uplift in annual imports to around 300 million tonnes,” said Whitehaven Coal Ltd, Australia’s largest independent coal producer, in a note on Tuesday.



Red China also leads the world in fossil fuel consumption.

Fossil Fuel Consumption (Million tonnes of oil equivalent, MTOE) – 2019 BP Statistical Review of World Energy

Fossil Fuel Consumption (2018)  MTOE  Cumulative %
1 China     2,791 23.8%
2 US     1,939 40.3%
3 India        741 46.6%
4 Russian Federation        631 52.0%
5 Japan        399 55.4%
6 Iran        282 57.8%
7 South Korea        265 60.0%
8 Saudi Arabia        259 62.2%
9 Germany        256 64.4%
10 Canada        224 66.3%

“As we unrealistically debate ‘the end’ of oil and gas, the Chinese know that these fuels will remain indispensable for decades to come.”

Red China also recognizes that coal “will remain indispensable for decades to come.”

Figure 3. 2018 primary energy consumption (million tonnes of oil equivalent). Data from 2019 BP Statistical Review of World Energy.

Divestment from fossil fuels would literally be a divestment from energy…

Figure 4. 2018 primary energy consumption (million tonnes of oil equivalent), with fossil fuels combined. Data from 2019 BP Statistical Review of World Energy.

Now that I think of it…

Red China truly is the Climate Change Leader… They’re leading the world in fossil fuel consumption, getting credit for fighting the AGW myth and schooling our elites… “As we unrealistically debate ‘the end’ of oil and gas, the Chinese know that these fuels will remain indispensable for decades to come.”

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Carl Friis-Hansen
November 6, 2019 6:30 am

What does renewables consist of?
Looking at the charts in the article, I assume:
wind, solar, geothermal, bio.
If for example geothermal is a large part, then it looks like wind and solar could contribute less impression vise.

B d Clark
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
November 6, 2019 8:04 am

Renewables today in the UK amount too around 1GW out of 41.59GWs demand because theres little wind
And very little solar output,earlier in the afternoon the OCGT gas generators were in operation these types of generators are only used in power emergency situations. (Its off now) coal is at nearly 5Gw. It’s the first really cool day in the south of England. It should be interesting to see how they cope next week let alone January, the readings above are true for the time of this post.

Reply to  B d Clark
November 6, 2019 12:51 pm

There is the huge amount of virgin timber Drax burns that’s counted as a renewable as well

B d Clark
Reply to  Adamsson
November 6, 2019 1:34 pm

At the moment of writing this UK bio mass fuel is contributing 2.37Gw for a total in demand of some 37Gw

Virgin wood is a ambiguous term drax burns processed timber pellets obtained from offcuts overgrowth thinning ect, from Europe and the USA, thus providing a market for wood that would otherwise be left to rot

Reply to  B d Clark
November 6, 2019 5:53 pm

I think there was some mention that the pellets could also be made from grasslands in Africa, as it was cheaper to employ lots of manual labour Africans to harvest the grass. Given grass grows quite a bit faster I would have thought it would have been a more “renewable” resource.

B d Clark
Reply to  Voltron
November 6, 2019 6:16 pm

Well I’m sure this could be a whole subject thread of it’s own, I have + and – thoughts on this,depending on rain fall you could probably get 3 cuts a year ,are we talking farm land or open wild grass land, first thoughts how much grass would you need to equal the density of timber, I’m not sure how much labour you would need,we in the UK export a lot of second hand tractors to Africa amongst other places,eg cambridge auctions plus machinery its relatively cheap to buy 70s 80s hay making dont need huge tractors to drive 70s kit.would the harvesting of grass impact on feeding stock,would burning grass pellets help save trees given the density question. I’m sure theres a lot more + and -s to think of, ?

Reply to  B d Clark
November 6, 2019 6:53 pm


Nor are the forests that supplies the trees, “virgin”. They are not even “old growth”.
They’ve been timbered repeatedly over 200 years.

B d Clark
Reply to  ATheoK
November 6, 2019 8:20 pm

Agreed back at ya, commercial forestry is at its 3rd harvest at best in the UK while fairly large and protected through felling licences and their conditions, USA forests are vast they replant ,their species type is more varied they build more with timber and of course generate a vast amount of waste which is used a bio fuel

The politics wrapped around the green movement is complicated which I dont want to get into right now.

Reply to  B d Clark
November 6, 2019 11:36 pm

Very well, but does it really make sense to ship manufactured wood pellets across the Atlantic in oil powered ships, rather than just burn the coal that’s practically in your backyard?

B d Clark
Reply to  JimG
November 7, 2019 2:02 am

I believe I should have a choice I dont, we import coal from Europe which makes little sense

Reply to  B d Clark
November 7, 2019 3:47 am

after 8 days of savage winds all over SA/ Vic
Id guess our wind outputs were zero
and not sure how the pv farms went in the hail in the riverland
hope they got trashed ,personally

B d Clark
Reply to  ozspeaksup
November 7, 2019 5:11 am

Agreed, renewables are not consistent,I’m a fan of bio fuel but it could never take the place of fossil fuels,and as we are seeing renewables unless under ideal conditions can not be relied upon.

Jaap Titulaer
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
November 7, 2019 1:02 am

In most countries (without geothermal or waterpower) you would have about 2-4% wind & solar, the rest would be in bio-‘renewables’: apart from (say) 0.01% in burning actual bio-mass waste (cuttings, compost, manure, etc.) this is non-renewable trees burned as fuel.

That’s not really renewable because each tree takes 20 to 30 years to grow back, yet burns in minutes.
It is also stupid because it produces more CO2 (20% to 25% more) than say coal or LNG.
That is without taking into account the reduction of CO2 sequestration by cutting down all those mature trees. A loose-loose situation.

And the coal plants that are refurbished to burn this are not sufficiently capable of preventing many of the by-products to be released (more actual pollution), despite being refurbished at a cost of BILLIONS!

Burning bio-mass other than actual bio-waste is such a very bad idea!
Purely a political ploy to be able to brag about colleagues from other countries.

November 6, 2019 6:39 am

OMG — COAL! And more COAL!

The griffinator is gonna have a heart attack…..

Reply to  beng135
November 6, 2019 7:11 am

You underestimate Griff. Here’s a previous comment he made.

Well the graphic is completely out of date: for example South Korea’s new president just moved his nation away from coal: India has cancelled 14GW of coal plant and said no more will be approved till 2022… China banned new coal in 29 regions… There is no sign of Japan’s new coal plant actually materialising… The plans for Africa include 130 between Ethiopia and the Congo… not very likely! for most of the world, solar is much cheaper than a new coal plant (it is already in India). This is coal ‘vapourware’ link

The thing is that experts and conspiracy theorists are always able to summon up facts to support their position. I look forward to Griff’s contribution on this story.

John Endicott
Reply to  commieBob
November 6, 2019 7:55 am

griff: ” South Korea’s new president just moved his nation away from coal”

Well, that comment was made a couple of years ago (mid-2017), let’s see how that worked out:


The South Korean government said the country’s coal-fired power generation hit a new high in 2017, helped by three thermal power plants that came online with combined generation capacity of 5.3 GW. The country also suspended operations at 11 of its 24 nuclear reactors, which meant coal generation supplied an even higher percentage of South Korea’s power, reaching 43.2%, up 3.6 percentage points from 2016.
Statistics released in late February by state-run Korea Electric Power Corp. (KEPCO) said South Korea’s coal-fired generation totaled 217,037 GWh from January through November 2017, exceeding the previous record of 213,803 GWh across the first 11 months of 2016


South Korea’s imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) are set to fall over the next five years after reaching record volumes in 2018, squeezed by the start-up of new long-planned nuclear and coal power plants

so not quite as dead as advertised. What griff always fails to realize is a politician saying something doesn’t automatically make that something happen. Yes, South Korea will eventually move away from coal (as long as LNG and Nuclear are cheaper) but they hadn’t at the time he made that comment, and two years later they still haven’t and won’t for many more years to come.

John Endicott
Reply to  commieBob
November 6, 2019 8:08 am

griff: has cancelled 14GW of coal plant and said no more will be approved till 2022

And like South Korea, what’s said and what their actions are tell different stories. While they may have canclled a single coal plant, they’ve been expanding their use of coal


the current government of India has been massively expanding the production of coal that provides more than half of India’s primary commercial energy. A recent report says that the government has raised India’s coal production by over 144 million tonnes (mt) in five years

not just their production has increased but so has their imports

According to a report, the coal imports of India increased by 5.1% to 189.9 million tonnes mt in the April-January period of the ongoing fiscal year

bottom line

Coal will remain the dominant energy source for the country for years to come

I could go on with China, Japan, and Africa. but the point is already made what griff wants to see with his cherry picked “facts” (that are often based on words, not deeds) and what the reality is are two different things.

John Endicott
Reply to  commieBob
November 6, 2019 8:22 am

Oh, one more comment about griff India comment
griff said ” no more will be approved till 2022″ what the actual story was is that India’s Central Electricity Authority determined that for the period of 2017 and 2022 they see no need for any *additional* power plants beyond the one already approved and under construction in short the currently approved new plants would provide more than enough power generation for the expected growth in power demand for that time period. It didn’t say “no more will be approved” it said no more are needed prior to 2022 and none are planned between 2022 and 2027 (with no mention of whether or not any would be needed/approved beyond then)

Reply to  John Endicott
November 6, 2019 1:13 pm

They couldn’t say it on the internet if it wasn’t true. But then you can always find someone on the net saying the opposite. Like how India will continue increasing coal use and CO2 emissions

John Endicott
Reply to  beng135
November 6, 2019 7:57 am

The griffinator is gonna have a heart attack…..

nah, he has an amazing capacity for ignoring inconvenient facts/reality that don’t fit his blinkered world view.

Reply to  John Endicott
November 6, 2019 8:48 am

You summed it up well.

I could go on with China, Japan, and Africa. but the point is already made what griff wants to see with his cherry picked “facts” (that are often based on words, not deeds) and what the reality is are two different things.

The alarmists are able to present us with a blizzard of facts. It takes work to debunk those facts one by one. There’s a rule that says it takes ten times the effort to debunk BS as it takes to generate it. (I can’t remember the name of the rule)

AGW is not Science
Reply to  commieBob
November 6, 2019 9:33 am

I think you need to put the word “facts” in quotations there.

John Endicott
Reply to  AGW is not Science
November 6, 2019 9:51 am

exactly right AGW is not Science.

Reply to  commieBob
November 6, 2019 2:53 pm

B*llsh*t Asymmetry Principle aka Brnadolini’s Law.
Alberto Brandolini 2013.
The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.”

Adam Gallon
November 6, 2019 6:56 am

Ah, but you have to quote total new build renewables, but divide the CO2 by head of population.

November 6, 2019 7:05 am

“Divestment from fossil fuels would literally be a divestment from energy…” Shamey, shamey, shame on you. Now, you know you can’t say those things because we’re all supposed to be divesting from oil, gas and coal. Naughty WUWT!!! Naughty, naughty!!! /sarc

I want to see the bird/bat choppers removed permanently from the landscape. They are an eyesore, as well as destructive of critters necessary to a healthy world. And ditto the solar furnaces: if I want fried/roasted plumage-bearing avian carcasses on my plate, I can get it at KFC.

November 6, 2019 7:13 am

Don’t forget India. Going to double energy consumption (mostly from coal) over next 20 years. Also, going to double carbon emissions. Sorry lefties, the US can’t do anything other than strangle itself.

Reply to  Adam
November 7, 2019 7:38 pm

Better forget India: with a only quarter of China’s CO2 emmisions it is more like Russia or the EU which you also don’t mention.

Ron Long
November 6, 2019 7:22 am

Good reporting, David. Let’s face it, China doesn’t give a damn what they say. The liberals will need to learn their intentions by the following part three: from the book “Traffickers” by W.E.B. Griffin, quoting Ron White: Some people learn by reading, some people learn by observation, and some people need to pee on the electric fence to learn for themselves.

Reply to  Ron Long
November 6, 2019 7:33 am

IIRC, the Myth Busters tried to replicate the “pee on the electric fence & get shocked” scenario & couldn’t do it w/simulated “pee”. I think they were able to get conduction, tho, by using a syringe that produced a completely solid, laminar stream of “pee”. Just FYI. 🙂

John Endicott
Reply to  beng135
November 6, 2019 7:59 am

Yes, but did they try it with real (ie not-simulated) pee?

Reply to  John Endicott
November 7, 2019 10:50 am

John, pretty sure it was Adam’s pee that was tested… 😉

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  beng135
November 6, 2019 8:11 am

EXTREME PAIN Peeing On An Electric Fence

For Adam in Myth Busters, I suppose not all people are peeing DC

Ron Long
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
November 6, 2019 8:45 am

That’s what I’m talking about! What a way to get your 15 minutes of fame.

Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
November 6, 2019 7:11 pm

That looks about right.

DC current, not a pathway through the heart; should be safe.
Lots of muscles, to contract, along the urinary tract through the legs to ground.

Anyone that’s worked around electric fences can warn about accidental contacts with the fences and participating as a ground contact.

Electric fences are made to keep furry critters, up to and over 1,000 pounds, contained. Works very well on much lighter, very conductive, humans.

John Endicott
Reply to  ATheoK
November 7, 2019 10:47 am

The thing to remember about electric fences are they’re designed to deter the animal from moving past them, they’re not designed to hurt or kill the animal. As such coming into contact with one, while unpleasant, is generally not all that harmful.

Reply to  beng135
November 6, 2019 8:31 am

Cowards! Why didn’t they try actually peeing on the fence themselves?!

Reply to  Ron Long
November 6, 2019 9:25 am

China has been playing the enviros in the US and Europe like a drum. All posturing and PR to have us make ourselves less competitive.

John Endicott
Reply to  Ron Long
November 6, 2019 9:55 am

Good reporting, David. Let’s face it, China doesn’t give a damn what they say.

Indeed, but they no idiots in the west (like our very own griff) will eat it up and believe every word of it, never stopping to see if what they say is matched by what they do. For too many in the west just saying it is virtuous while following the words with actions isn’t necessary.

John Endicott
November 6, 2019 7:23 am

Red China: Climate Change Leader

Ironically, that’s an accurate statement under the assumptions of the CAGW crowd, just not in the way they usually mean. If the alarmists are right and burning fossil fuels lead to dangerous climate change, than China has definitely taken the lead in burning fossil fuels and thus, according to the alarmists, causing dangerous climate change. Well done China on being Climate Change leader. 😉

November 6, 2019 7:29 am

The Chinese know how corrupt the IPCC is and how wrong its science has become as a result. They’re not stupid and also understand that the West’s unhealthy obsession with CO2 emissions is to their benefit. If you see your competition unnecessarily hurting their ability to win, would you intervene or encourage?

Alasdair Fairbairn
Reply to  co2isnotevil
November 6, 2019 9:50 am

Yes. The West talks the talk and the East walks the walk.

willem post
November 6, 2019 7:59 am

China has let its pollution problem get out of control.
The SUB-MICRON SOOT pollutants of coal plants are major contributors to world wide snow melting.

China spending more is just playing catch up.

China should be closing old coal plants, 25% efficient, with minimal pollution controls.
China should invest in ultra super critical coal plants, 44% efficient, with the latest pollution controls.

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  willem post
November 6, 2019 9:41 am

Who Has the World’s Most Efficient Coal Power Plant Fleet?

According to article, Japan has the most efficient coal plants.
Thereafter comes China.

So what you said China should do, is actually what they do. There may still remain some older polluting plants, but the intention is to close them as new capacity is build.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
November 6, 2019 11:28 am

That’s because they continue to build new coal plans. The US stopped that a decade ago as cheaper natural gas took over the economic equation here.

And we must support our very vital Japanese ally in the western Pacific, that is Japan with their energy needs. They need coal to remain economically strong now that they plan to finish-off their nuclear powered electricity generation fleet. LNG is also a good option for them. So we support Japan by sending them Wyoming and Montana coal, and LNG from US GoM ports, the best facilities and cleanest carbon energy in world. Coal would have to come via a US west coast port, the Millennium Terminal in Washington State.
Or we can just abandon Japan to China’s mercy and Sino-Imperialism across the sea lanes of the South and East China Seas…… I don’t think we’d like that outcome. Bernie might. AOC and her Islamic loving possee would for sure. It’d be an outcome far worse for the world than a few hundredths of a degree of warming.

November 6, 2019 8:11 am

If ye watch Steve Bannon’s latest movie, lookout for Reds under the Bed!
Even in the EU Brussels Confucian Institute chief was banned for 8 years because he refused to spy for Washington.

Guess which model over 160 countries are interested in?

Reply to  bonbon
November 6, 2019 2:15 pm

Bhutan..they have their Gross Happiness Index. But even Red China is bullying tiny Bhutan and they don’t want any ‘assistance’ from Red China. It is a real tragedy for Red China that they have an old guard Maoist as their new Emperor for life. That fascist is going to ruin China’s reputation right into the dirt! Xi is on track for war, which is what we really need to prepare for. Forget the silk road and be ready to contain Red China from their new brand of global fascism. This is equivalent to Japan/USA relations about 1933, on steroids.

November 6, 2019 10:04 am

It’s easy for China to show progress when they’re at the back of the line

November 6, 2019 10:06 am

“Now that I think of it… Red China truly is the Climate Change Leader… They’re leading the world in fossil fuel consumption, getting credit for fighting the AGW myth and schooling our elites” – LMAO because it’s true!

By the way China is also funding 1000+ coal new plants inside and outside its own borders.

November 6, 2019 11:02 am

“But…but per capita they emit less CO2 than the evil US.”

True, since they live in a communist country with a control economy most of their people live in poverty.

Reply to  Lancifer
November 6, 2019 1:21 pm

per capita is the biggest scam going….

no one increases a poison/toxin because they have more people

imagine allocating DTT, arsenic, etc based on how many people

Rudolf Huber
November 6, 2019 1:57 pm

I like that summary – the red Ponzi is one of the major problems afflicting the international system. If you are afraid of Climate Change, this is the most valuable target. But I fear that our climate heroes prefer to go after those that will treat them nicely while they are being pests. The red Ponzi won’t be courteous.

Smart Rock
November 6, 2019 3:35 pm

You have to hand it to China. Guzzling fossil fuels like a sailor on shore leave, and somehow convincing the writers of western media outlets that they are “leading the world in renewable energy”

November 9, 2019 6:41 am

It’s really funny how some comments refer to «lefties» (as the ones promoting the «climate change and global warming scare») and forget that China is a Communist country…

Verified by MonsterInsights