Slashdot Mirror
China Leads in "Clean" Energy Investment
derekmead writes "According to a new study (PDF) from Pew Charitable Trusts, China was the world leader in clean energy investment in 2012. The U.S., meanwhile, saw its grip loosen on many of the clean energy technologies it developed.
According to the research, total clean energy investment totaled $269 billion worldwide last year, a decline from 2011's record high of $302 billion. However, clean energy investment in the Asia and Oceania markets grew by 16 percent to $101 billion. In terms of investment — which is an indicator that a country or region has offered compelling projects, struck a good regulatory balance, and has a strong economy — that makes Asia the epicenter of the global clean energy market.
The Pew researchers thus labeled the U.S. clean energy sector as 'underperforming,' largely for a trio of reasons. First, China's boom and manufacturing prowess has taken investment away from the U.S.. Second, the U.S. regulatory environment for clean energy is horrifically unstable (as is the regulatory environment as a whole) as politicians battle over budget rhetoric. Finally, the U.S. has failed to capitalize on its innovation prowess and develop its clean energy manufacturing sector to its full potential."
They do not count nuclear as clean, but including nuclear would only widen China's lead over everyone else (they almost have their first new AP1000 ready and are building lots more).
Clean energy is nothing but a scam invented by the liberals who hate America and want to destroy this country with fear mongering (ie global warming).
It is a good thing that our enemy (China) is outpacing us in this budget-wasting regard! /s.
America is a corporate-driven economy, which needs results this quarter and the next. Any strategy that last for longer than 5 years is just not worth the investment.
China is still partially a plan-driven economy, which does not need to have a result this quarter or the next. Pay back times can be longer.
It is incredibly painful to an economy to move away from short term gains to longer term. At first, you only pay, and nothing comes back yet. But after a couple of years, you start to gain from this. Nobody in the USA seems willing to take that first step.
China's energy needs -- in terms of year-over-year growth -- dwarf those of any other country. Their regulatory processes, for projects that the state deems necessary, can be incredibly streamlined. AND they've got money to spend. It's no surprise they're the hotspot for all kinds of energy investment -- clean and otherwise.
"It was a summer's tale: Just a boy, his Linux, and a head full of dreams..."
WTF What gives you the right to complain about China if you live in USA or EU . Christ you've been fucking up the planet for decades - no centuries, and now you have the gall to complain about China. Where was all the work you did to avoid it? Oh yes that's right into the pockets of "Global Corporations" global rapists more like......... Geez I though I'd heard it all!
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
actually per capita china is still doing pretty well
in 2008, china produced 5.3 tonnes per capita of CO2, whereas the US produced 18.5 tonnes per capita
if the US is telling china that it needs to clean up its act, it would definitely be a case of pot calling the kettle black
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita
Endangered species ... BAH! what have they ever done for us? You never see the painted snipe holding a placard "save the humans" now do you? [obligatory monty python non-quote]
Sadly your post is indicative of money vs environment and all too frequently money wins because not enough people give a flying fuck about the painted snipe ( or whatever )
Whilst it might not be surprising to you or me, many people argue that there's not worth being more green as a nation because the Chinese won't follow. When in actual fact the boot is on the other foot. China is leading and America is lagging behind.
And why would it be that it's not a "black eye" for the US? It's hardly the case that they are not spending money on creating ever more energy sources. It's just that not enough of them are green.
Does it really matter what he used to post it with? Everything's made in china nowdays, in case you haven't noticed.
Actually I bought a shirt this weekend and was astonished to see that it was made somewhere else. Could Chinese economic hegemony already be coming to an end? Is that one shirt the crack in the dam?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Only because they are by far the most populous country. You can only really judge based on per capita rates. China is 78th among countries with 5.3 metric tonnes CO2 per capita. The USA is 7th with 22.1.
When you look at consumption, the USA comes out even worse. America consumes more per person than any other country. There are around 200 countries in the world, and the USA alone consumes about 25% of the energy.
America is still the biggest offender in "fucking up the planet".
Does it really matter what he used to post it with? Everything's made in china nowdays, in case you haven't noticed.
I think his point was that an iPad (or any other tablet/phone) consumes a fraction of the energy of a PC when it's being used. Presumably also when it's manufactured.
As an Aussie and an environmentalist, I consider coal to be evil and think that the less of that dirty black/brown crap we dig out of the ground the better. Plenty of ways to generate electricity (even baseload electricity) without using coal if people are willing to put in the investment.
I do not believe the government should be giving a single cent in money to the coal industry or to coal fired power stations (the exception being if the money is to be used to decommission said power stations)
I think that blaming someone for the actions of others merely because he lives in the same geographical area where those others lived and died is a bit of a stretch. However, I do think it's next to impossible to come up with any morally defensible position that doesn't start with assuming everyone has a right to an equal share of the planet's pollution carrying capacity. That's a problem for industrialized countries (and most especially some individuals within them), and it'd be politically impossible for their politicians to start there. So instead of it being about what's fair, it's always been about power, and it'll remain all about power unless technology can make the problem obsolete.
And let them have the well payed middle income families earning a living in factories and sending their children to school and buying all the products those factories produce. That will show them, let them have the American dream while the US has the eh... wait what?
There is this idea among some tea party idiots that you can cut half the economy and still have a healthy economy. That is like reasoning that since you do all your thinking with your head (well, non-tea party members do) you can cut of that useless gut bit at the bottom and be fine.
A normal working economy needs something to do for all layers of the work force. The supposed bright people are not capable nor willing to work for everyone else, so where are the people who are not leaders in their field going to work, and if they are not working, how are they going to pay for the products made by the 1% of workers?
The choice isn't between high paying and low paying. The choice is between low paying and non paying. If the west continues as it is doing now, soon we can't even afford to buy chinese made anymore.
Oh and Japan was once the dump ground for unwanted manufacturing too. Kiddies like Locater16 just don't understand anything. Not history, not economics or common sense.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Because unless massive layoffs is somehow going to be financially a good idea in 5 years time, just terrible from years 1-4, your assertion is complete bollocks.
Cutting R&D is also a big thing, which is good for short term (lower costs) but terrible for future viability (no products to sell).
See also the hostile takeover scenarios: take over the company on a large mark-up, gut the company to make money, sell the shell to make some more, company is now dead.
Solar can very much be baseload (in areas that get lots of sun at least) by using solar thermal generation. The heat from the sun is used to heat molten salt (or another good storage of heat) and then the stored heat is used to generate electricity when the sun isn't shining. There are already examples of this kind of solar power station operating in the real world generating grid electricity.
And solar thermal generation systems can cost a lot less than solar photovoltaic cells to build and run.
China is over-polluted right now
The air, the land, the water, all polluted
They have no other choice but to go clean
It is good that they go clean --- in that way at least they get to stay in China, or else, they might move to USA
Can you imagine 1.3 Billion Chinese moving to the US of A?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
it really IS our fault for the past emissions since we've had the benefits
The whole world has the benefits--the patents on the technologies developed in such an expansion have long expired, and the science and engineering knowledge from that period has freely spread around the world.
It's PPP GDP per ton of CO2 is not as good though.
The US produces $2,291 per ton of CO2, China produces $1,003 per ton of CO2 (international dollars used for dollar amounts).
China is actually near the bottom. The US is not that ideal either (we're basically the same as Canada). Countries like Norway and Sweden are about 2.5x more productive per ton of CO2 than the US.
Two points:
1) command economies are good at big stuff. Has anyone ever said otherwise?
2) Perhaps the main reason that clean energy isn't taking off in the US is because (at least for the moment) it's still largely a capitalistic society, and 'clean' energy is an entirely contrived, laterally-motivated concept (ie not driven by customer demand, but by tangential forces like a 'desire' for a clean environment contrived by the eco-lobby) whose existence relies almost entirely on government subsidy, regulatory 'sticks', and accounting sleight-of-hand?
Face it, as much as eco-nuts 'demand' we be cleaner, and legislators 'believe' we should be cleaner, Joe Public *generally* is uninterested in paying 2x the price for power if it comes from 'clean' sources. Maybe if Joe lived in 1870 London where everything was covered in soot, or something, he'd be motivated to change his habits. But the fact is, the environment in the USA hasn't reached the sort of obtrusive levels of pollution like Love Canal or the burning Hudson River that DID spark such motivations a generation ago.
Without motivation, consumers aren't typically really good at making 'commons' choices, because they're too consumed with affording things NOW to really be concerned about incremental impacts 20-50-100 years from now. No matter how much they're preached to.
-Styopa
China is a wonderfully clean and healthy place, as long as you don't breathe.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
That's right. China's per capita coal consumption is far less than typical Westerners, so until the Chinese have wrecked the environment at least as much as you have, for at least as long as you have, and a good deal worse and longer for good measure, then you need to shut your stupid fat face.
You know that is illogical, right? Just because someone has done something wrong doesn't mean that they can't point out, complain, or attempt to stop another from doing the same thing. Even if they're still doing that same thing themselves it makes it no less wrong. It is hypocritical but the act is still wrong regardless of the source or history of the accuser.
What is sad is that you're not the only one who presumes such. I'd hope that more people could think logically but most of my hopes seem to expect too much of people.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
A capitalist economy partly guards against oversupply. However, oversupply has resulted directly from Chinese policies: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/business/global/glut-of-solar-panels-is-a-new-test-for-china.html
Now both American and Chinese solar companies are failing. Further private investment in this oversupplied economy seems unwise; there is a distaste for subsidizing failed business models in the US (at least where green tech is concerned). Perhaps university research is the best alternative investment.
The US is probably the only nation that has met the Koyoto Treaty goals, and that is without being a signatory!
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
If you consider "not from Texas" a race then I suppose the average level in racism in Texas as compared to the other 49 states might be considered legendary, otherwise not so much.
That group of bovine standing over there appears quite portentous. That's right it's an ominous cow herd.
Yes, but it wasn't anything the U.S. planned. It occurred for two main reasons: (1) the Great Recession, (2) discovery and use of massive natural gas. The first was a result of many factors, government was one is several ways, but the government didn't plan to tank the economy. The natural gas was mostly private companies that got really good at finding and exploiting new reserves...regardless of what it did to the environment or what the environmental impact of putting all those chemicals underground to frack the shale formations will be.
At always you should take with a pinch of salt what you read on Global Warming Denier sites such as Watts Up With That. As always it's hard to work out whether Watts is just misinformed or lying.
Watt points out that due to the global recession, the USA has lower emissons than 1997, the year of Kyoto. But the base year for reductions was 1990. And the USA hasn't managed that, even with the recession.
Secondly Germany and many countries of Eastern Europe had beaten their targets already by 2008. And are even further ahead now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol
How many more time do people have to show that the denier sites are wrong before you stop believing what they say?
By and large, Texas' legendary racism virtually ensures the Chinese will keep migrating to sunny Cali, NY/NJ, Seattle, Chicago, and the Capitol....like many Asian immigrants, they seem to prefer the Blue States
I take it your experience with Texas is limited to Hollywood documentaries, Texas politicians, Internet postings from Texans, and ten-gallon hat wearers at DFW?
FTFY
In the meantime businesses keep coming here, leaving your state with the takers leeching off of your taxes.
Yessir, that business-friendly climate really improves the quality of life over there
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
It depends what is meant by "fucking up the planet". Are you speaking purely of the environmental impact of economic growth?
Yes. Nearly all life on planet earth shares the same lack of concern for economics. It's a purely human fiction.
It is quite easy to argue that the quality of human life is improved by adding value to the global economy.
Human life isn't "the planet" in anyone's vocabulary. And you're only talking about the present human life at that. Future human life will be cursing the wasted resources and the pollution left by current generations.
1) Become the #1 polluter in the world, perpetuating global warming.
2) Become the largest Builder and Seller of inefficient Clean Energy products to the world.
3) PROFIT!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_photovoltaics_companies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wind_turbine_manufacturers
LOL!
Looks like Texans are the big leechers:
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-08-20/business/35270608_1_job-growth-rick-perry-public-sector-jobs
"Between December 2007 and [June 2011], private-sector employment in Texas declined by 0.6 percent while public-sector jobs increased by 6.4 percent, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. Overall, government employees account for about one-sixth of the workforce in Texas."
Pulling up by the bootstraps, my foot.
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
How does the 1/6 of the workforce compare to other states?
That brings up some even more interesting data.
California, the bastion of all that's evil socialism and big government, employs 2.4 million public sector workers. Out of a population of 38 million. That's 6.3% of the total population. Some other estimates count even fewer public employees.
Texas, on the other hand, has 16.66% of its population on the public payroll.
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.