China Wants More Coal

from NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

The Energy Institute, which took over the BP Energy Review, have sent out their latest newsletter:

One interesting piece of news comes from China:

China’s 15th Five-Year Plan (2026–2030) and later targets have called for, among other measures, the creation of around 100 million tonnes/year of coal production-capacity reserve (production+net imports-consumption) by 2030.

Over the past 25 years, China has also substantially increased coal production, with output more than tripling. China’s coal supply surplus (production-net imports-consumption) is already around 600 Mt/year, roughly six times the target. Domestic production already exceeds demand by around 120MT per annum.

China’s coal-fired power generation was historically the main driver of rising global carbon emissions. But now, China’s coal-fired power sector may be weakening. The country’s coal-fired power fleet lags in capacity factor (estimated at around 50%) compared with an estimated global average of around 57%, and coal-fired generation declined in 2025.

But coal remains strategically important beyond power generation, with China also pursuing the expansion of coal-to-gas, coal-to-liquids and coal-based chemical production.

This new coal economy is not meant as a replacement for renewables, but rather as a strategic security measure.

Coal-fired generation in the US increased last year, and the new administration is certainly supportive of coal, but despite this, the US is a net exporter of coal. India has more than tripled its domestic coal production since 2000 but remains a significant coal importer.

The simple truth is that China will remain heavily dependent on coal for many years to come. Ignore the misinformation about a “weakening coal power sector” – last year it dropped from 5836 to 5755 TWh, a drop in the ocean. Coal power still supplies 54% of China’s electricity.

The Chinese know that they cannot run their power grid on intermittent renewables alone, so coal will remain the major player.

Moreover coal still accounts for 57% of China’s primary energy, against just 6% for renewables.

And coal production in the country continues to grow year-by-year:

China’s determination to keep building coal surpluses is a pretty good indicator that they will keep on using it as well!

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
4.9 10 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
35 Comments
September 22, 2026 2:12 am

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-mix?tab=line&country=%7ECHN&mapSelect=%7ECHN&source=coal&metric=share_of_generation&frequency=annual

80% in 2007 to 54% now. That’s quite a drop

Story tip: (for WUWT’s opinion on a diesel ban?)

Republican senator is urging Trump to ban diesel exports as fuel prices soar
https://qz.com/grassley-trump-diesel-export-ban-prices-092126

leefor
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
September 22, 2026 2:55 am

Now read the bit about coal to gas, coal-to-liquids and coal-based chemical production.

Reply to  leefor
September 22, 2026 3:29 am

All of us should be doing all of those things.

Scissor
Reply to  leefor
September 22, 2026 4:02 am

More coal is needed to make more solar panels to end fossil fuels.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  leefor
September 22, 2026 7:55 am

“Coal investment has been rising steadily in the past six years dominated by China and growth in India. About 60% of investment in coal in 2026 will take place in China”

“Investment in steam coal is set to pass USD 100bn in 2026, nearly double the level of a decade ago”

IEA ‘World Energy Investment 2026’ (May 2026)

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Dave Andrews
September 22, 2026 7:57 am

Apologies. That reply was meant to be to MUR.

oeman50
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
September 22, 2026 3:34 am

And in spite of the change in percentage, the total amount of coal use continues to rise. Isn’t that interesting?

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
September 22, 2026 5:23 am

I suspect that Republican Senator is just playing to his constituents- and doesn’t really want to ban exporting diesel- he knows he can say it and it won’t happen- getting points from his constituents. If you understood economics, you’d know that when the price of something shoots up, more is produced. Or, you may actually know that but you expect it to happen instantly.

strativarius
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
September 22, 2026 5:34 am

What does ‘MyUsernameReloaded‘ really mean?

Could it be…

Remade sorely unmade…
Seedy melon marauder…
Anomaly deemed surer…
Easy lemonade murder…
Measured only remade…
etc
???

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
September 22, 2026 10:15 am

2656.70 TWh electricity generated from coal in 2007 to 5751.56 TWh now. That’s quite an increase.

Neil Pryke
September 22, 2026 2:14 am

Isn’t that the definition of avarice..?

The more you have, the more you need…

1saveenergy
Reply to  Neil Pryke
September 22, 2026 3:09 am

Not quite;

Avarice is defined as an excessive or insatiable desire for wealth or profit, often synonymous with greed.

The more you have, the more you need desire

Reply to  1saveenergy
September 22, 2026 5:25 am

I think it’s more about power. With lots of money, you realize you have lots of influence. Even more and you start to sense power- so might as well get more $$$ and have even more power.

1saveenergy
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
September 22, 2026 3:01 pm

You’re right, sadly, we see it in politics every day.

SxyxS
Reply to  Neil Pryke
September 22, 2026 4:11 am

It has always been the “problem” of energy production that the demand used to increase alongside the increase of efficiency.
This lowers the prize of products,increases the user-base and therefore demand for ressources and production.

So one can say that the need can never be satisfied – no matter how much there is, people will try to increase their living standard (so desire can be defined as root cause for all the “need”).
AGW may be a scheme to stop this tendency.

Reply to  SxyxS
September 22, 2026 4:17 am

If that was true energy usage per capita wouldn’t decline in developed nations.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-mix?tab=line&time=1983..latest&country=USA%7EOWID_EU27%7ECAN%7EAUS&source=total&metric=per_capita

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
September 22, 2026 4:32 am

MYR, Energy use per capita (GDP) as you use it is a deceptive metric. Energy use is a function of two main things.
First ‘per capita’ implying population growth, because energy is used for heating in temperate climes and cooking everywhere. As absolute population growth slows (per UN thanks to increasing per capita GDP, absolute energy consumption also declines.
Second, evolving composition of GDP. As the need for basic physical goods is met (people do not need a second washing machine), the GDP compositions shifts away from energy intensive industry toward things like better health care, better education, and IT.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
September 22, 2026 10:24 am

No, that’s primarily because developed countries have been dumb enough to export chunks of their industrial base, mainly to China.

Reply to  Neil Pryke
September 22, 2026 7:43 am

Isn’t that the definition of avarice..?

The more you have, the more you need…

Says the man who looked at normal text and thought, “Needs more drama. And more drama. Actually, both.”

Gregory Woods
September 22, 2026 3:16 am

Story Tip:

Fearing worst-ever El Niño, Newsom declares state of emergency in advance – Orange County Register

‘Fearing worst-ever El Niño, Newsom declares state of emergency in advanceThe looming El Niño event is already breaking records, and forecasters expect it to continue to strengthen, potentially becoming the strongest in recorded history.’
Really?

1saveenergy
Reply to  Gregory Woods
September 22, 2026 3:27 am

Isn’t there a village that could take Newsom as their resident idiot ??

Reply to  1saveenergy
September 22, 2026 4:33 am

Not even AOC’s Brooklyn ‘village’.

Reply to  Gregory Woods
September 22, 2026 5:30 am

Chile’s Atacama Desert BLOOMS After El Niño Rainfall | Rare ‘Flowering Desert’ Transforms Landscape

MarkW
Reply to  Gregory Woods
September 22, 2026 6:16 pm

The most recent long range forecasts I have seen have been predicting record breaking rainfall this winter in CA as the pineapple express gets wound up.

Ron Long
September 22, 2026 3:28 am

China is reported to have mostly low-quality coal, and needs imported high-quality coal to use in iron foundries. This high-quality coal, anthracite, was imported from Australia, but a conflict now has China buying some third hand from Australia and other producers. This burning of low-quality coal, like high sulfur and low heat content lignite and bituminous, leads to greater pollution as they don’t burn clean, they produce real pollution, not just CO2/plant food.

Mr.
Reply to  Ron Long
September 22, 2026 4:15 am

Exactly Ron.
There’s coal and there’s coal.

Just like there’s oils and there’s oils.
Transmission oil doesn’t doesn’t do a very good job at lubricating an ice engine, and motor oil doesn’t do a very good job as transmission oil.

1saveenergy
Reply to  Mr.
September 22, 2026 2:38 pm

Universal tractor oils like Super Universal Tractor Oil (SUTO) 10W-30 are designed to lubricate engines, transmissions, hydraulics, and wet brakes in agricultural tractors in harsh environments across a wide temperature range.

Mr.
Reply to  1saveenergy
September 22, 2026 5:06 pm

and then there’s synthetic oils too.
there’s oils and there’s oils.

Reply to  Ron Long
September 22, 2026 4:49 am

Coal comes in four basic grades, ignoring ash and sulfur impurities. The grades depend on degree of geologic ‘coalification’.
Highest, anthracite (most carbon, least organics). ‘Coking coal’, but was also preferred for steam ships (Titanic) and steam locomotives because most volumetrically compact energy source.
Next highest, bituminous—high grade ’steam coal’. Think West Virginia. Mostly now used up in many places.
Third highest, sub-bituminous. Most inexpensive for US and China power generation—Powder River basin is strip minable. Low sulfur, but about 7% ash and about 20% water by weight.
Lowest, lignite ‘brown coal’. Barely coalified above peat and usually >40% water content needing drying from waste combustion heat before combustion.

Bruce Cobb
September 22, 2026 4:21 am

Oh dear. Maybe at the upcoming Climate Pow-wow they should give China a good talking-to, and tell them to straighten up and fly right. Because The Planet isn’t going to just fix itself.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
September 22, 2026 5:32 am

And no doubt China will listen carefully and obey. 🙂

strativarius
September 22, 2026 5:09 am

This will undoubtedly cheer the heart of even the coldest (geddit?) climate alarmist. China? Doesn’t figure at all, Chris Packham lays it out…

1saveenergy
Reply to  strativarius
September 22, 2026 2:58 pm

I’ve watched it on youtube; it’s a well-choreographed litany of scaremongering tripe;
with the occasional bit of sense… like not building on floodplains, not dumping sewage, and not wasting drinking water.
After the film, they ‘have a (well-rehearsed) discussion’ between ‘experts’; NO Q&A, just discuss what you’ve seen with the person sitting next to you.
No way to dispute their ‘facts’.!

September 22, 2026 1:44 pm

From near the top of the above article:

“China’s 15th Five-Year Plan (2026–2030) and later targets have called for, among other measures, the creation of around 100 million tonnes/year of coal production-capacity reserve (production+net imports-consumption) by 2030.”

Just wondering how China reconciles this, and subsequent Five-Year plans going forward, with its signed agreement and commitment to the 2015 Paris Agreement, the so-called “legally binding international treaty” that required all signatories to establish Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to cut economy-wide net greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels.

Perhaps this explanation: “Ahhh, you didn’t notice but the fingers on my left hand, under the table, were crossed when I signed with my right hand . . . fooled you!”

Edward Katz
September 22, 2026 2:28 pm

Information like this is important in reminding supporters of renewable energy how far it is from coming close to supplanting not just coal but also fossil fuels in general. The Peak OIl/Coal/Nat Gas claim is nothing more than a green fantasy probably for another half century.