With an energy cost crisis now striking Europe and to a lesser extent the U.S., some cracks have begun to appear in the “net zero” utopian dreams being pursued almost universally by Western politicians. Nevertheless, at this writing, the rapid elimination of use of fossil fuels, supposedly to fight “climate change,” remains official government policy throughout Europe, at the federal level in the U.S., in most blue American states, and as well in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Here in the U.S., although President Biden has ordered some temporary measures like release of some oil from the nation’s strategic reserves, the full federal bureaucracy remains under orders from the top to force reduction in production and use of fossil fuels in every way it can devise. Meanwhile, states like New York and California have rapidly approaching legal deadlines for shuttering all fossil fuel power plants, prohibiting all automobiles other than electric ones, banning natural gas for heating and cooking, and otherwise quickly upending the last century of energy progress that has made our lives affordable and enjoyable.
We are supposed to believe that the official fossil fuel suppression policies will stop “climate change” and “save the planet” through the mechanism of rapid aggregate reductions of emissions of CO2 and other “greenhouse gases.” The rescue of the planet’s climate will make worthwhile our sacrifices in the form of higher energy prices, increased taxes to support subsidies to renewable energy, and restrictions on lifestyle.
But in fact, that narrative is all so much hogwash. In the West, twenty plus years and trillions of dollars of subsidies for “green energy” schemes have achieved only some marginal reductions in the share of final energy consumption derived from fossil fuels. Meanwhile, in the rest of the world, fossil fuel usage continues to soar. Leading the way is China, which has used the last two years of Covid distraction to have its emissions leapfrog to new records. In the overall picture, the Western obsession with decreasing emissions, despite enormous costs, does not have any impact that is even noticeable.
Two recently-issued reports paint the picture of a real world of ever-increasing fossil fuel use and CO2 emissions (although there was a minor Covid-induced downward blip in 2020). In March, the UN’s International Energy Agency (IEA) issued its annual Global Energy Review: CO2 Emissions in 2021. Also, the Global Warming Policy Foundation has released its Briefing Paper 58 titled “China’s Energy Dream,” written by Patricia Adams. (Full disclosure: I am the President of the American Friends of the GWPF.). Both reports underscore the complete absurdity of the ongoing green energy foolishness of the West.
Start with the IEA. While it must pain them greatly as the good UN functionaries they are, the IEA gives us the straight information on the ongoing rise of world CO2 emissions, despite the strenuous efforts of the Western nations to reverse the trend:
Global CO2 emissions from energy combustion and industrial processes rebounded in 2021 to reach their highest ever annual level. A 6% increase from 2020 pushed emissions to 36.3 gigatonnes (Gt). . . . Emissions increased by almost 2.1 Gt from 2020 levels. This puts 2021 above 2010 as the largest ever year-on-year increase in energy-related CO2 emissions in absolute terms. The rebound in 2021 more than reversed the pandemic-induced decline in emissions of 1.9 Gt experienced in 2020. CO2 emissions in 2021 rose to around 180 megatonnes (Mt) above the pre-pandemic level of 2019.
Here is the IEA’s chart of world emissions since 1900:
To summarize the chart, the Western obsession with “green energy” and “renewables” since about 2000 has gone along with a 50% increase in annual world CO2 emissions, from 24.3 Gt in 2000 to 36.3 Gt in 2021.
So what is driving the recent rapid increase in world CO2 emissions? According to the IEA, it’s mainly China:
The rebound of global CO2 emissions above pre-pandemic levels has largely been driven by China. . . . China’s CO2 emissions increased by 750 Mt over the two-year period between 2019 and 2021. China was the only major economy to experience economic growth in both 2020 and 2021. The emissions increase in China more than offset the aggregate decline in the rest of the world of 570 Mt between 2019 and 2021. . . . With rapid GDP growth and additional electrification of energy services, electricity demand in China grew by 10% in 2021, faster than economic growth at 8.4%. The increase in demand of almost 700 TWh was the largest ever experienced in China. With demand growth outstripping the increase of low emissions supply, coal was called on to fill 56% of the rise in electricity demand.
Ms. Adams’s report for the GWPF outlines the acceleration of China’s development of its fossil fuel resources, particularly electric power plants fired by coal:
Beijing is not about to abandon coal, its most secure form of energy. In 2020, it accounted for 57 per cent of China’s total energy consumption. Last year, its 38.4 gigawatts of new coal-fired power stations was more than three times the new capacity built in the rest of the world. Another 247 gigawatts is being planned or developed, with more to follow. Last year, Chinese provinces granted construction approval to 47 gigawatts of coal power projects, more than three times the capacity permitted in 2019.
Observing China’s ongoing development of its fossil fuel infrastructure, Ms. Adams remarks that China has no intention of weakening itself by adopting goals of CO2 emissions reductions:
The pursuit of CO2 reductions within China would serve neither the goal of preserving Communist rule nor becoming the world’s foremost superpower by 2049. To China’s leadership, it is a no-brainer. Carbon dioxide reductions only make sense for those it wishes to harm and supplant.
In my experience, they skirt emission controls in China when they can get away with it. The dirtiest emissions that I’ve ever seen were in Wuhan where the coal fired power plant and steel mill(s) were in the same vicinity.
You left out to keep it’s economy afloat going forward for the next decade or two Russia is going to be dumping cheap oil and gas on the market to anyone who will buy. The two most likely markets are China and India.
India is in an acute coal shortage right now
https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/other/indias-march-electricity-shortage-worst-since-coal-crisis-in-october/ar-AAVIcPP
It doesn’t matter what the rest of the world does that is the cold hard facts.
Germany is kaput, they fooled the world into thinking they ran on wind and solar unicorns. https://thesaker.is/rublegas-the-worlds-new-resource-based-reserve-currency/
By the time we were in grade school, we knew enough to keep doing things
the same way that worked before. If we did something differently & it didn’t
work, we’d go back to the way that worked. This is all the West must do to
solve their energy “crisis”- or is it a mental breakdown, given that the solution
is so simple but their ability to see it/want to do it so difficult?
Thirty to forty years ago, the grid & it’s business model worked well, as it had
for many decades. You used the traditional reliable power sources & only
charged a nominal rate for normal usage. As a customer used more, you
charged more per kwh. So at peak energy demand that usually occurred on
very hot days & very cold nights, utilities made a lot more money which kept
their businesses healthy. It was also effective social justice in action as the
low users paid less per kwh & the big users paid more.
The green system not only can’t produce the same amount of reliable energy
& what is produced costs 2x-3x more. So now everybody’s paying through
the nose for an inferior product that may not even work. The Greens seem
totally clueless that their plan failed but yet they stick with it. Because the
solution is so easy, it almost makes you wonder if this isn’t just a plan to
destroy the West. Xi & Vlad are probably laughing all the way to the bank!!!
Good summary of what has been obvious now for years. China and India will never play ‘green’. The more the West tries to go ‘green’, the greater the Chinese chokehold on rare earths and other key minerals like cobalt and lithium.
Given the massive annual spending on ‘climate science’ and its horde of beholden academics, there is a lot of momentum to continue the insanity. AR6 is the current ‘best’ example. And in addition to the renewable nutty goals in CA and NY, last week WA mandated all new cars registered in the state be electric by 2030. Guess they won’t be driving much new stuff after that.
Given the financially incentivized warmunist momentum, it is going to take some real serious crackups to get things reversed, since the continued failure of ALL predictions has not yet made much impact. There are conceptually two kinds:
Rud, China currently holds the cards with Rare Earths for windmill field magnets. But that is only at present costs. They are cheap because a production plant in China is an excavated pit in a deposit, into which strong sulphuric acid is dumped. They then can pump from the pit into a ‘plant’ where REE hydroxide or carbonate can be precipitated. This is feed for separating into individual REE elements or compounds.
Canada has very large resources of REE minerals. I worked on one deposit in Quebec, about 10yrs ago developing a new processing methods for concentrating the minerals and a patented hydrometallurgical pprocess for separating the individual metals. 180 million tonnes of ore was drilled containing 1.5% REO (oxide basis).
There is a chain of these large carbonate intrusions (carbonatites) across southern Quebec continuing across a ⅓ of northern Ontario – so far only partially explored. The City of Montreal (Mount Royal) is built on one of these.
China is cleaning up their act and prices have moved upwards reflecting this.
China currently supplies 95% of all Light and Heavy REEs. Does Canada have an industry able to supply these materials and if not how long would it take to become a serious competitor to China? Or would the standards that would inevitably be required in Canada preclude them from ever challenging China’s predominance?
I don’t know, Dave. Would Trudeau ever allow it, even if they could? On the one hand, mine for the RE’s for renewables. It is alleged to be “Green.” On the other hand, it’s dirty and if it’s done in China, no one has to pay any attention and can ignore it and pretend renewables are green.
They can be mined safely, I presume? But, even if they can, it will be far more expensive than the cheap, dirty way China does it so, it will be difficult to be cost competitive with them.
What I do know for sure is that Trudeau would never do anything that would get him kicked out of the Kool Kids Club of world leaders even though it means leading their populations to ruin and destruction. Tough call.
The really dumb thing to me is Canada trying to keep the globe from warming. If anyone could benefit from and use a bit of warming, it’s Canada!
Sorry, Dave, for the late reply which you will probably miss. Canada’s rare earth resources are huge and technological developments, particularly by Canadians, have been reducing costs considerably. My hydromet patent didn’t generate funding for further development because of Chinese production below any reasonable cost when you consider environmental and human health costs ignored by China (large acreages of farm land have been poisoned by dumping of waste sludge, down slope and in rivers).
My work, which ended 10yrs ago, was to exploit the variable magnetic susceptibilities of the individual rare earth compounds and the different oxidation states of the same rare earth elements to separate individuals. This would be done on precipitating particles in a water solution descending in a column. This physical separation would replace a number of ugly, expensive organic chemicals employed in the standard process. Since, a process called electrophoresis used mainly in separating proteins has been adapted (apparently inspired by my process).
Another idea of mine was to skip the mineral concentration step and go to direct extraction from crushed ore. The high value of many of the rare earths (for wind turbines: Nd at $65,000/MT and Dy at $400,000/MT) made this possible. You had to use a lot more cheap sulphuric acid, and handle more material, but the higher recovery from the ore made it a good trade off.
My assessment is that when China cleans up its act and seeks to stop depleting their resources at overly cheap prices, and environmentalists start to be concerned, Canada will become a major producer of high quality rare earths. They are getting close at current prices through innovation.
Yup Rud. The West is rushing headlong in a degenerate Cultural and Economic Self-Euthanasia cycle.
The greens are seemingly incapable of learning from experience. What I actually think is that they have goals other than actually producing power economically.
Having everyone else in mud huts would seem to be their intent.
‘The greens are seemingly incapable of learning from experience.’
As are some of our RINO politicians. Sort of like a present tense version of the Bourbons, who were famously described by Talleyrand as having “…learned nothing and forgotten nothing”.
Tom, I’d like a 2-story 3-bedroom oceanside mud hut on stilts please.
Regards,
Bob
Ocean views will be reserved for the elites. The rest of us poor plebs will have to take what we can get from what’s left!
They laugh because they are in on the scam. They will install some PV panels and wind turbines for show only …… I even read where they are not maintained to operational specs. The more renewables the rest of the world installs the more their economy grows from selling the required material to those countries and providing the manufacturing that is no longer possible in those countries. A win-win for them.
Absolutely.
They’re taking the proverbial
The solar farms certainly will need to be carefully maintained, but not for the purpose of making electrkery…
From businessinsider
Precisely.
The Chinese Communists laugh behind their hands, for they are MAKING LOTS OF MONEY off the solar and wind and electric vehicle scams.
(whisper: and get a two-fer by enervating their powerful enemy’s* economy which makes the CCP chortle with glee)
Yes. They (the CCP) are our enemy.
But, but, but China leads the world in “green” energy, it must be true, I heard it on the BBC!!!!!
Yes, of course.
“China is leading the world by the nose over the cliff edge of green energy….” Yep – I think I’m definitely getting better at translating Green Blobese!
Is that like I heard it on CNN?
By comparison the UK consumes between 30 and 40GW, almost none from coal.
https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
The Chinese are adding about that every year, from coal. All the same the green idiots think the most important thing is for the UK to reduce its emissions…. China, well, not so much…
Another brilliant piece from the Contrarian. Thanks!
China’s FGOALS climate model does not show much warming. It currently runs 2C cooler than the EU and UK models and eventually reaches a tad over 14C on average. China does not have a climate problem. The EU MIROC model already has global surface temperature at 16C.
So the respective governments are listening to their climate scientists (or the climate scientists are doing what their respective governments want)
As someone pointed out in the comments on that Contrarian article, China isn’t just building coal plants. They are also building more nuclear capacity than the rest of the world combined.
I think China believes in reducing CO2 emissions, but they believe in doing it smart and on their own schedule. Those nuclear plants are going to eventually take over for their coal fleet. 30 or 40 years from now, China is going to have an electric grid that resembles France, and will lead the world in ‘clean’ energy as all of their nuclear plants come online. In the meantime, they’ll do what they have to do to expand their grid and provide energy security. If that means burning copious amounts of coal, then so be it.
“Two recently-issued reports paint the picture of a real world of ever-increasing fossil fuel use and CO2 emissions (although there was a minor Covid-induced downward blip in 2020). “
That is a drop in the calculated human released amount.
The planets atmosphere didn’t notice.
Thanks, Pat. Early on, I heard that CO2 had dropped but, later, they revised it and said CO2 had, indeed, risen during the lockdown. Does anyone have actual figures?
And
“ China’s CO2 emissions increased by 750 Mt over the two-year period between 2019 and 2021”
750MT just happens to be the total emissions of Canada
So If we had all moved away or died January 1 2019, there would be no measurable difference in CO2 emissions.
Says it all, Justin
I was confused by the title of the article. I just drove through West Texas. So many windmills you couldn’t even count them. Every one on the north side of the highway was not turning at all. The south sides one were. So it was windy enough. And the North side had 10 times more windmills. Sitting there idly.
I dont care how much they can produce. If they aren’t ‘on’ ( as some way someone must have not let them rotate) . Then they aren’t producing electricity.
In order to supply reliable electricity to everyone, the grid operators will often have to shut down some generation when too much is being produced. Nuclear can hardly budge at all, coal takes quite a while to change output natural gas is reasonably controlled, but the easiest is wind. They simply ‘feather’ the ‘propellors’. Wind turbines sometimes can be paid more for NOT making power than they get for providing it.
Not entirely true, demand forecasting must always consider a credible contingency. As such depending on a number of factors including wind forecasts, it may simply present too much risk to allow a certain amount of highly intermittent renewables onto the network from a grid reliability perspective. For every bit of renewable generation bidding into the market for a given period, you must have some spinning base load reserve on hand should the wind conditions suddenly change. Gas turbines are a great tool for providing this ‘cover’.
The scenario you suggested of shutting down generation because there is ‘too much’ would be a breach of market rules and make the grid unstable. It is a scenario in which a lot of time, effort and research is exerted to avoid at all costs.
So why are they not turning?
Re “the “net zero” utopian dreams being pursued almost universally by Western politicians” in the USA that is mostly just Democrats and not all of them. Half universally?
Trump called climate change a “hoax” in the speech he gave yesterday at his political rally in Michigan (tens of thousands in attendance).
I wish some reporter would go around to all the Republican politicians and ask them if they agree with Trump that climate change is a hoax. I would love to see and hear their answers. Put them on the spot!
Finally. About time. Yes, let’s hope others will grow a pair and state the obvious. While they’re at it, they (and Trump) may wish to append the statement that Warmer Is Better. Which is also obvious.
It would, also, put them on the record. When we don’t have or can’t afford electricity and LNG, we need to know who to blame, besides knowing who not to vote for, of course.
As China annually adds more coal fired electricity generation than the UK consumes in total, someone in the political world must be asking, why is the UK beggaring itself by only pushing for renewable energy supply?
The past ten days here in the UK, has been yet another reminder of how unreliable wind and solar power is.
With that immediate evidence staring them in the face and the world’s annual report card on CO2/energy clear for all to see, why are our politicians ignoring the truth?
Just this week, the fracking ban that has prevented onshore gas extraction expansion, was being questioned, due to the Ukraine/Russia conflict, that is making gas supply tight in Europe.
The politicians response, was not to immediately open up gas exploration and progress the well developed fracking systems. Oh no. That would give the UK decades of domestic secure gas supply from the Bowland shale. No. What they have done is order an inquiry into the actual impact tremors or ‘earthquakes’ as they prefer to call them, will cause local residents in Lancashire and elsewhere.
That investigation will take years to report and nothing will be done to increase UK extraction of fossil fuels because some authority somewhere has decreed no new fossil fuel extraction sites should be licenced.
That same unknown authority is instructing the whole of the Western World to adopt the same ban fossil fuel extraction policy.
The obvious question is why, and a secondary question is who are these authority figures that can instruct Western governments to act in such destructive unison?
If anyone knows the answers please let us know?
https://www.woodmac.com/news/opinion/wind-power-to-play-a-key-role-in-achieving-chinas-carbon-neutral-goal
“China will reach a cumulative grid-connected wind capacity of 689 gigawatts (GW) by the end of 2030, accounting for 67% of global share.”
“According to the International Energy Agency, China is one of the countries with the largest solar capacity in the world. Specifically, they have installed a total of 253 GW solar capacity at the end of 2020 compared with the European Union, having 151 GW.”
https://www.solarfeeds.com/mag/solar-power-statistics-in-china-2021
The above stats are also true, no matter what (inexplicable) roll out of coal china pursues.
The Chicoms are rolling out coal because that’s the smart thing for them to do. Obviously, solar is not enough for them.
Now go back and keep reading the IEA reoprt and it states
“However, additional wind capacity will slow in 2022, according to the IEA”
“Even if China reached its carbon peak in 2030, he said, thermal power
generation would still make up 60 per cent of national capacity.”
Want to bet me going forward that those numbers are stupidly optimistic?
.
Now you seem to overly worried about Climate Change so they have an app and book for that … more reading there less posting here 🙂
https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/04/04/feeling-anxious-about-climate-change-after-the-ipcc-report-here-s-what-you-can-do-to-help
Full disclosure
https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-briefing-31-march-2022-impact-of-coal-push-no-new-overseas-coal-power-projects-analysis-on-energy-plans
On China 2030 and 2060 plans they agree
“China’s 30/60 targets cannot be achieved without technological
breakthroughs, especially those technologies that are currently not
economically feasible and can only make a difference when applied on
large scales.”
“China will reach a cumulative grid-connected wind capacity of 689 gigawatts (GW) by the end of 2030, accounting for 67% of global share.”
It is very odd Griff that you approve of these bird killing contraptions in large numbers when there are no credible feasibility studies that conclude that they can be a viable alternative to fossil fuels and nuclear. Somehow, I don’t think nuclear (which can displace coal and natural gas for electricity generation) threaten bird life to anywhere near the degree that wind turbines do — if nuclear does at all.
You Griff are as phony as they get if you claim to care about the planet on one hand while supporting large numbers of massive bird chopping wind turbine farms on the other. Your hypocrisy (among other things) which you openly put on display here all but destroys your credibility.
KILL WIND TURBINES, NOT AVIAN WILDLIFE.
“…and otherwise quickly upending the last century of energy progress that has made our lives affordable and enjoyable.” article
Isn’t that the entire intention of the greenbeaners? Send us back into the hovels from which we emerged – something like that?
I’ve said this before, but will say it again: carbon-based resources are essentially finite and take very, very long periods of sequestering their sources (e.t., plants turned into coal) to be useful. So nuclear energy is really more practical, partly because so-called “renewables” are not reliable, no matter how much the greenbeaners and ecohippies want to eliminate it. Eventually (and not in my lifetime, either), some sort of compromise should be reached if people want heat, electrcity, and clean water resources to be permanent. And no, the lithium-powered stuff isn’t the answer, in my view.
We;ve had nuclear power in the USA for decades, far more reliable than wind and solar sources ever have been. So what is the REAL problem other than the ecohippies and greenbeaners having tantrums over it?
Everything, all life on the planet and all natural and human systems run on energy. It is the nature of our universe. No energy – no anything – a total void. Yet Western developed national leaders and radical environmentalists are telling us all to go on an energy diet which is equivalent to asking us all to live less and die sooner, based on the mythical CO2-destroys-climate theories that have no objective evidentiary support in the real world (climate models, by definition are not the real world). We might foolishly go along with this scam if it weren’t for the fact the majority of the world (i.e. all other nations) are not on board with the scam and will keep doing what makes sense economically and socially to sustain and enrich their own societies. If we do anything different it is a sign of collective suicidal intent and a call for significant self reflection and more rational thought, less make believe.
You have to applaud the brilliance of the USA (and subserviently following U.K.) in the way they have designed foreign policy toward China and Russia with a view to gaining wholehearted support of both countries in the world’s epic struggle against the peril of climate change.
What is this brilliant policy that the USA have rolled out in order to get the Russians and Chinese on-side on climate? It’s basically – treat them as subhuman vermin and obstruct and punish absolutely everything that either country ever does.
It’s a masterclass in how to win friends and influence people. And it’s bearing fruit now for all to see.
China recognizes reality: Modern economies can only be powered by fossil fuels and nuclear power base load production. Hydrogen (as an industrial by-product) is viable as well. China has immense coal and uranium reserves. That’s why they’re building 440+ new coal units over the next three years and 150 nuclear plants as well.
Complementing these power plants are massive EV production powered by coal and nukes. This will give China energy independence by slashing petro imports.
Russia will top off energy needs with secure overland routes. All smaart moves. Which is why the Sino-Russian alliance with Iran- India and the BRICS will bury the lunatics in the West.
China have a modular design of coal power station that can be upgraded to nuclear.
There is no significant production of hydrogen as an industrial by-product. The more you know about hydrogen they more you are aware that it is uneconomic as a fuel. But I agree about the lunatics in the west.
“Which is why the Sino-Russian alliance with Iran- India and the BRICS will bury the lunatics in the West.”
It sounds like wishful thinking to me.
Let’s call this alliance the “Axis of Evil”. The Axis of Evil countries are murderous bastards. We don’t want murderous bastards to win.
I believe it is actually 168 nuclear power plants. The 150 nuke announcement was in addition to already planned builds.
I’d also point out that the nuke (and solar PV and wind) buildout isn’t necessarily for emissions purposes. It is because China is the largest oil importer in the world, and likely the largest energy importer in the years to come. Nukes will reduce this energy import dependency.
Of course they are laughing. They’re following that sage advice: Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
In Biden’s case, it may not be a mistake, it might just be actions he takes to avoid blackmail from the Chicoms. “Joe, they say, we need a little favor from you. Remember all those millions of dollars we gave to you and your son? Of course, you do.”
Joe’s decisions seem to favor the Chicoms. Joe is doing away with tarriffs established by Trump, and is trying to cut back on the number of U.S. Navy ships the U.S. has in service, at a time when the Chicoms are trying to dominate the Pacific Ocean, among other favors to the Chicoms.
The United States has a president it can’t trust. The decisions he makes may be for his own benefit, not for the benefit of the American people.
Yet another sadly typical screed of wildly dishonest half truth misinformation carried by WUWT.
The part that these pathetic charlatans didn’t tell you is that China leads the world, by far, in renewable green energy investment. This article mentions that China added 38 GW of coal fired plants last year. What they dishonestly forgot to include was that China added 48 GW of wind power and 53 GW of solar power, a 60% increase since 2020.
In fact, China is investing more than twice as much into green energy than any other nation, and 35% of all green energy investment in the entire world is in China.
But these ridiculously dishonest hucksters here at WUWT want to pretend that this level of investment … and investment growth … somehow constitutes “laughing at green energy foolishness”.
Wildly dishonest doesn’t even begin to properly describe WUWT. And judging from the comments to this article, far too many readers blindly fell hook, line, and sinker for this steaming pile of WUWT half truth disinformation.
Reference: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-the-top-10-countries-by-energy-transition-investment/
To China’s leadership, it is a no-brainer. Carbon dioxide reductions only make sense for those it wishes to harm and supplant.
Ms Adams
Do not judge others by yourself.