A few days ago I added a comment on Open Mic about the BBC’s reporting of a Global Electricity Review 2023 produced by Ember:

Ember’s roots go back to 2008, when Baroness Bryony Worthington saw the desperate need to shine a light on the malfunctioning EU carbon market.

Founded as Sandbag Climate Campaign to achieve real action on climate change, we set up the ‘Destroy Carbon’ campaign to enable the public to buy and remove surplus carbon allowances from the EU Emissions Trading System. However, we soon realised that huge surpluses were not something that could be solved by individuals, but needed policy change. We saw an opportunity in the vast amount of data that the carbon market was collecting from 11,000 power stations and factories across Europe. We quickly transitioned into data-driven policy advocacy to address these systemic issues. We helped achieve real policy reform that took the EU carbon price from €2 to €30, which has meaningfully reduced emissions in the power sector and is beginning to have an impact on industry too. (We even won a world record!)

The BBC report describes Ember as “energy analysts”, which is possibly a fair description, but as the above quote confirms, they are much more than that. They are a campaigning organisation with an agenda. There is nothing wrong in that, of course, but perhaps some extra background information would be useful to enable readers of the BBC’s article to put Ember’s report in an appropriate context. And this is the context:

To avoid catastrophic climate change, OECD countries need a coal power phase-out by 2030, and the rest of the world soon after. We’re going to work flat out to make that happen – and without an expansion in false solutions such as fossil gas or unsustainable biomass.

I repeat: they are more – much more – than simply “energy analysts”. Their website tells us that:

Ember is 1 of 8 climate charities selected to receive donations from The Crowd, a charity that harnesses the power of collective action to fight against climate change.

We also learn that it is funded by many of the usual suspects – Climate Giving; the Sunrise Project; Thirty Percy; the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation; WWF; Quadrature Climate Foundation; Environmental Defense Fund; Climate-KIC; and the European Climate Foundation.

On balance therefore, I really think the BBC should have made it clear that the report on which it was commenting was prepared by a campaigning organisation (funded by other campaigning organisations) whose objective is to fight against climate change by driving a shift in the sources of energy worldwide. I am not saying that Ember’s report doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously, but the background to its preparation should be fully understood, and such understanding is not achieved by simply describing Ember as “energy analysts”, with the possible implication that they are objective and disinterested energy analysts.

And so to the report itself. Nothing that the BBC reported about it is inaccurate – all statistics are faithfully taken from the Ember report or the summary appearing on its website (the report itself runs to 163 pages and requires a download to view it). However, the BBC report focuses on the positive spin and doesn’t mention some other less positive (that is from the point of climate worriers) information contained within the report.

For instance, while mentioning that coal generation of electricity increased by 1.1% in 2022, there is no mention of the fact that “2022 saw the lowest number of coal plant closures in seven years, as countries look to maintain back-up capacity…”.

There are challenges a-plenty to the brave new world of electricity generated by renewables:

…more attention to efficiency is needed to avoid runaway growth in electricity demand. Urgent work is needed on ensuring wind and solar can be integrated into the grid: planning permissions, grid connections, grid flexibility and market design.

So few words, so many issues (so lightly touched on), none of them mentioned in the BBC report. And, as demand for electricity grows globally, it’s all very well reporting on large percentage increases in renewable sources of generation, but large percentages of a small number are still a small number. Evidently, fossil fuels are still responsible for most of the heavy lifting with regard to electricity generation:

As of 2021, about three-quarters of power sector emissions were from coal, and almost a quarter from gas.

Much of the report is really about projections and what needs to be done, while whistling in the dark to keep spirits up. The scale of the challenge is clearly set out:

By 2030, wind and solar need to have increased to 41% of global electricity generation, up from 10% in 2021. Coal generation needs to fall by 54% and gas generation by 24%. At the same time, electricity demand will rise dramatically, by an average of 3.7% per year from 2021 to 2030, as electrification picks up pace.

While the shape of the path ahead is broadly clear, it is interesting to note the adjustments made by the IEA when updating the NZE scenario from 2021 to 2022. The scenario remains largely the same except for a much larger forecasted fall in gas power from 2021 to 2030 (previously 5%, now 24%), and a smaller fall in coal power (previously 71% fall, now a 54% fall). This change likely reflects the slower progress in 2022 on coal phaseout, but also a newfound possibility that gas power could begin its phasedown this decade. Regardless, either version reflects the need for rapid declines in all fossil fuel power.

Even the happy headline statistics include very real issues and problems for the narrative:

2022 beat 2020 as the cleanest ever year, as emissions intensity reached a record low of 436 gCO2/kWh. Wind and solar reached a record 12% of global electricity generation, but they still weren’t built fast enough to meet all of the world’s increasing need for electricity. Consequently, coal and other fossils met the remaining gap, driving up emissions to a new record high.

Talk of tipping-points and of “clean” electricity generation forging ahead sound a bit lame when we are told (enthusiastically, as though this represents massive progress): “Over sixty countries now generate more than 10% of their electricity from wind and solar.” Forgive me for being underwhelmed.

While energy demand fell in Europe in 2022 (for obvious reasons which the Ember report acknowledges, principally high prices), the situation is problematic elsewhere. Electricity demand grew by 2.5% in 2022, and 93% of that growth was driven by just three economies (who by happy coincidence – or perhaps not – are three of the worlds biggest greenhouse gas emitters), namely China (54% of the growth); USA (21%); and India (18%).

A rather inconvenient truth surrounds the fact that these countries are driving up demand for electricity worldwide. For while globally 80% of new electricity demand was met by wind and solar, in those three countries, responsible for most of the demand growth, solar and wind performed less well – in China, they met just 69% of the demand growth; in the USA they met just 68%; and in India they supplied a catastrophically low 23% of demand growth. Of course, as we know, rather unhelpfully for the narrative, India is relying ever more heavily on coal.

Globally, coal use increased by 1.1%, though of course we are talking only about coal use for electricity generation (admittedly that probably represents most of the increase in demand for it). Tucked nonchalantly away is the statistic that other fossil fuel (seemingly oil) generation rose by 11% in 2022. And while coal use fell by 7.8% in the USA it rose in China (by 1.5%); in India (by 7.2%); in Japan (3.1%); and in the EU (by 6.4%). As electricity generated by gas fell by 0.2% globally in 2022, it rose by 7.3% in the USA, this largely explaining the fall in coal use in that country. Middle Eastern countries don’t seem to be too keen to co-operate in providing information at all:

Other fossil fuels–mainly oil– increased by 86 TWh, where there were some instances of gas-to-oil switching (although this datapoint is a little tentative, because of poor reporting by Middle Eastern countries which have the majority of oil generation).

For all the hype, then, in both the Ember report and the BBC’s summary of it, the reality is this:

Overall, fossil generation rose by 183 TWh (+1.1%) in 2022, setting a new record. As a result, power sector CO2 emissions rose by 160 million tonnes (+1.3%) reaching a record high of 12,431 mtCO2. Emissions intensity is heading in the right direction, but absolute emissions are not yet falling. This means that the power sector is not yet seeing the emissions cuts needed for net zero, as emissions should be falling by an average 7.6% annually this decade.

Don’t lose sight of the fact that all figures quoted here relate to the global sources of electricity generation, and don’t talk about – for instance – fossil fuel use in transport, home heating etc.

And developing countries (and/or those reliant on fossil fuels to generate wealth) don’t seem to be fully signed up to the agenda. Again we are told that:

The Middle East stands out as the only region that is still at the start of its journey, with poor data transparency that also makes it difficult to estimate changes in 2022.

We also learn that Latin America’s wind and solar growth slowed in 2022, and that “Africa has slowed in the last few years”. How casually that rather negative information is thrown out. Euphemisms abound. Several countries are “at the start of their solar and wind journey: South Korea (5%), Pakistan (4%), Thailand (4%), the Philippines (2%), Singapore (2%), Bangladesh (1%) and Malaysia (1%). All Eurasian countries, except for Kazakhstan, have almost zero.” As for the Middle East (oh dear, them again):

In the Middle East, solar and wind have yet to establish themselves. Many countries have under 1% in the mix. This includes Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has published big plans for renewables, however with little demonstrable progress towards those so far.

Interestingly, for all the hype around wind and solar, we learn next that:

Despite their rapid growth and place in the future global power mix, the world’s largest sources of clean electricity are neither solar nor wind, at least not yet. Instead, hydro and nuclear are currently the largest clean sources, generating 15% and 9% of the world’s electricity respectively in 2022. Although the growth expectations for these technologies are smaller compared to solar and wind, they are not currently being expanded at the rate needed to limit global warming to 1.5C. Hence their slowdown could have big implications for the electricity transition.

That might be the understatement of the year, given the continuing hostility of many “Greens” to the use of nuclear power. The decline in nuclear as a “clean” (i.e. low greenhouse gas emitting) source of power was brought home all too evidently by recent developments in Germany. Apparently, nuclear’s share of global electricity generation has fallen from 17% in 2000 to 9% in 2022, while hydro’s share has fallen in the same period from 18% to 15%. And what of bioenergy, rather dubiously considered by some to be a “green” source of power generation? Its

growth is slowing, as significant climate risks in the technology are exposed, and many governments are losing faith in subsidising expensive internationally traded wood pellets. Unlike solar and wind, bioenergy also relies on an often expensive fuel, and so has not been able to mature away from subsidies.

So much comes back to China and India. There is optimistic talk about “clean” energy generation being able to meet China’s continuously growing demand but even so, solar and wind have been meeting only 69% of 2022’s demand growth. Given that 2022’s growth (perhaps having been slowed by covid) was “only” 4.4%, against a ten year average of 6% p.a., even Ember express concern:

If electricity demand rises back to that trend, then clean power isn’t so close.

And as for India:

In India, clean electricity growth is still a way off meeting all electricity demand growth. In 2022, electricity demand rose significantly (+124 TWh, +7.2%) as the economy bounced back after a slowdown in 2021 amid a second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic. India’s wind and solar rose only by 29 TWh, meeting 23% of the demand growth, while all clean sources rose by 47 TWh, providing 38%. Hence clean power played a relatively small role in slowing India’s rising fossil generation.

Predicting electricity demand growth is a contentious subject within India. The last ten years (2012-2022) have averaged 5.3% annual growth in electricity demand. India’s recent draft National Electricity Plan 14 (NEP14) assumes there will be 6.1% growth on average each year until financial year 2032. As solar and wind build rates increase to meet the government’s target of 450 GW by 2030, the additional solar and wind generation could meet annual demand growth of around 4-5% through to 2030. But if electricity demand grows faster, then coal generation will likely continue to grow.

And then it dawns that electrification of the economy, as demanded by net zero, implies a significant increase in demand for electricity:

It is not only rapidly developing economies that will see an increase in demand for electricity. As clean electrification takes off, and the energy system is rebuilt around clean electricity, mature economies will also have to grapple with how to meet rising demand with clean sources.

The share of electrification in the total final energy consumption is increasing. This is predicted to rise from 20% in 2021 to 27% by 2030 as electrification helps to decarbonize different sectors, especially transport and heating, as noted by the IEA. This will mean a notable increase in electricity demand. All economies will therefore need to ensure they are building enough clean power to both meet rising electricity demand and replace fossil fuels.

Coal again:

In late 2021, global leaders at COP26 agreed to ‘phase down’ unabated coal power.

However, fewer coal power plants were closed in 2022 than in any year since 2014. In China, only 0.1% of its coal fleet retired in 2022 (the same as in 2021). This followed power cuts in 2021, which led President Xi Jinping to announce in 2022 to “establish the new before demolishing the old”, pushing coal closures to the back of the political agenda. But China’s appetite for new coal also showed a revival. New coal power plants–announced, permitted, and under construction–accelerated dramatically in China in 2022, with new permits reaching the highest level since 2015, and 50 GW of coal power capacity started construction in China in 2022, a more than 50% increase from 2021. The coal power capacity starting construction in China was six times as large as that in all of the rest of the world combined. This meant the net rise in coal capacity (+2%) was bigger than the rise in coal generation (+1.5%); consequently, utilisation of China’s thermal power plants fell to 4379 hours in 2022, which was below 50% for the first time.

Like China, India also faced power cuts in 2021, which then continued into 2022. In India, the Central Electricity Authority asked that no coal power plants be closed until 2030, so India–like China–is also positioning itself to keep coal power plants open for now.

In the EU, old coal plants even reopened. There were 26 old coal units brought back on emergency standby in 2022 during this winter, as Russia cut off almost all pipeline gas into Europe. However, the average utilisation of the 26 units during the winter was just 18% and they added only 1% to Europe’s generation in 2022, and most of the plant reactivations were planned for one or two winters only. Commitments by European countries to phaseout coal are largely unimpacted.

…this trend may unnerve those hoping for rapid coal power plant closures…

Conclusion

The global electricity generation mix is still dominated by fossil fuels, which provided 61% of electricity generation in 2022. Coal accounted for 36% (10,186 TWh), fossil gas for 22% (6,336 TWh) and other fossils for 3% (850 TWh) of global generation. Hydro remained the largest clean electricity source at 15% (4,311 TWh), and nuclear the second largest source contributing just over 9%

(2,611 TWh). Wind and solar together reached a 12% share of global electricity (3,444 TWh), with wind at 7.6% (2,160 TWh) and solar at 4.5% (1,284 Twh). Bioenergy generated 2.4% (672 TWh) of global electricity, and other renewables 0.4%.

Also:

The world’s reliance on fossil power has declined only slightly in the past two decades, from 64% in 2000 to 61% in 2022. During that time, coal generation grew in absolute terms from 5,719 TWh in 2000 to 10,186 TWh in 2022, even while its share of generation dropped from 38% in 2000 to 36% in 2022. Gas generation has increased by four percentage points since 2000 to account for 22% of global electricity in 2022. Other fossil fuels fell from 7.8% of generation to 3% over the same period.

Ember is a campaigning organisation. It is my opinion that its 2023 review contains a lot of hype about wind and solar, and a lot of projections that are based on wishful thinking. A 3% decline in reliance globally on fossil fuel power over two decades suggests to me that we are nowhere near a “clean” energy tipping-point, and that the targets we are told we have to meet to limit global temperature increases to 1.5C beyond pre-industrial era temperatures remains a fantasy. Especially when one bears in mind that even on Ember’s figures (I have no reason to doubt them) electricity accounted for only around 20% of final energy consumption in 2021. As electrification of the world’s economies takes place, demand for electricity will increase significantly. By just how much is an open question, to which the latter part of the Ember report devotes much thought and ink, but that’s one for another day.

18 Comments

  4. The BBC says Ember are: “energy analysts”
    Ember says they are engaged in: “data-driven policy advocacy”

    I have to admit, with some embarrassment, that I now frequently scroll to the bottom of a paper to see who funded it before I begin to read it. Knowing who paid for them sometimes casts the findings in a different light.

    As clean electrification takes off, and the energy system is rebuilt around clean electricity, mature economies will also have to grapple with how to meet rising demand with clean sources.

    Ugh. The word “clean” is misused everywhere by the Net Zero enthusiasts. It’s like welcoming in a vampire because he takes his shoes off at the door.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Catweazle -Mine? Nothing – just the time spent reading the Ember report!

    Seriously, though, I think the data presentation by Ember is interesting. My gripe with it is the conclusions they draw – if I were concerned about climate change and believed passionately (as they seem to) that we need to make a rapid transition to renewable energy, I would find the statistics to be profoundly depressing. The obvious conclusion to be drawn, it seems to me, is that fossil fuels aren’t being phased out at all, global energy demand is growing (not surprising as global populations grow and developing countries develop), renewables can’t fill that growth in demand, so fossil fuel use (and with it emissions) will increase. Yet their spin (readily taken up by the BBC) is that renewables are about to sweep all before them.

    Yet, as Ron Clutz shows (thank you, Ron) from the IEA data, the situation seems to be even less positive than Ember suggests. This is possibly because Ember’s statistics don’t cover the whole world. I may have missed it in the Ember report, but I couldn’t see who was excluded from the report and why. The reality remains that solar and wind are still generating just 2% of global energy needs (Ember’s report might suggest 2.4%: i.e. 12% wind and solar electricity generation, with electricity representing 20% of global energy use). After decades of propaganda, £$trillions spent on renewables, they still supply only 2% or 2.4% (take your pick) of global energy. The project is doomed to failure.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Jit, I do the same. It might be trite, it might be lazy, it might be inaccurate, but I adhere firmly to the belief that he who pays the piper calls the tune. After all, the Guardian says it’s true about any research funded by “Big Oil”, so why wouldn’t it hold true in the opposite direction?

    Liked by 1 person

  7. The author of the report is Malgorzata Wiatros-Motyka, Ember’s ‘Senior Electricity Analyst’. On 12 April I sent her this email:

    Good evening Maggie (if I may),

    You say in your website that ‘China’s electricity sector has been in the throes of a clean revolution over the past few years, with an almost ten-fold growth in wind, solar and hydro generation. This has resulted in a roughly 18% reduction in the share of coal generation, from 78% in 2000 to 64% in 2021.’

    That sounds impressive. But, given that China’s CO2 emissions have increased by 237% over the same period, substantially because of a massive increase in coal-fired electricity generation, isn’t it rather misleading? Data: https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/report_2022?vis=tot#emissions_table

    Best wishes

    Robin Guenier

    The above extract can be found at Ember’s website – Home / Countries & regions / China. It goes on to say:

    China’s clean power revolution has been relatively quick when compared with other major coal-dependent Asian developing economies, where the share of coal power has been either rising (Indonesia and Viet Nam) or stagnant (Japan).

    Delve further and you find that Ember acknowledges that unfortunate truth about China and coal – it obviously hopes most readers won’t look beyond the highly misleading initial statements. That’s typical of Ember’s whole approach. I regard it as inexcusably dishonest.

    If I get a reply, I’ll report here.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Mark – you should have a podcast to show your thinking/relevant quotes.
    ps – I know – not worth the effort.

    Like

  9. “China’s economy rebounds faster than expected after Covid reopening
    First quarter growth rate was higher than forecast by analysts as the country’s retail sector performed better than expected”

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/18/chinas-economy-rebounds-faster-than-expected-after-covid-reopening

    China’s economy rebounded faster than expected, surpassing growth estimates for the first quarter of the year, after the country relaxed its onerous Covid-19 restrictions and consumer spending surged.

    The world’s second largest economy grew at a rate of 4.5% compared with the same quarter a year earlier, according to the National Bureau of Statistics. The pace of increase was the fastest in a year and beat the 4% rise forecast by analysts polled by Reuters.

    China’s consumer economy showed signs of resurgence, with retail sales rising 10.6% in March, representing the biggest jump in almost two years and more than double the forecast rate. During the same month, industrial production also rose 3.9% compared with a year earlier, a five-month high.

    “The speed of the recovery has exceeded even our relatively upbeat expectations,” said Julian Evans-Pritchard, head of China economics at Capital Economics, adding that full-year growth could reach 6%, exceeding the government’s official target of about 5%.

    “With consumer confidence on the mend and credit growth accelerating, there is still scope for a further pickup in activity over the coming months,” he said.

    Growth could reach 6%, eh? Oh dear – remember what the Ember report said?

    Given that 2022’s growth (perhaps having been slowed by covid) was “only” 4.4%, against a ten year average of 6% p.a., even Ember express concern:

    If electricity demand rises back to that trend, then clean power isn’t so close.

    Like

  10. Mark; Thanks for that analysis. I admire your perseverence: the obvious slant of the report would have driven me to skip-read it at best. As you have shown, they are looking to burnish the performance of renewables in any way they can.
    If one had the time and inclination (and watching paint dry had lost its allure), fun could be had recasting their figures to put a positive spin on, say, coal’s prospects.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. I sent Malgorzata a reminder (see my comment on 17 April) today and got an immediate response. Here’s what she said:

    We reported facts for each country/ region included in the report in the same way.
    It is true that the share of coal went down. At the same time, China’s emissions went up which is also included in the report in various places – for example page 113.

    I encourage you to read the whole report.

    Here’s my reply:

    Thanks for the prompt response.

    I have read the whole report and noted the factual data about China. My extract however was, as I said, from your website (Home / Countries & regions / China). It’s a prominent comment – I suggest all that many readers would see.

    So my point stands: China has massively increased its emissions since 2000 (by 237%) and, despite coal’s percentage share having decreased, there was nonetheless a substantial increase in coal combustion for electricity generation. According to the China Energy Portal (https://chinaenergyportal.org/en/2021-electricity-other-energy-statistics-preliminary/), in 2021 ’thermal’ generation (mainly coal) was 67% of the total and the ‘new’ renewables (solar and wind), despite impressive growth, only 12%. I don’t see how these facts can possibly justify your claim that China’s electricity sector ‘has been in the throes of a clean revolution over the past few years’.

    Surely you must agree?

    Like

  12. Robin, re your comment of 24th April, I assume your follow-up to Malgorzata never received a reply?

    Meanwhile, Ember’s at it again:

    “Global carbon emissions from electric power may peak this year, report says
    Thinktank says rapid growth of wind and solar is near rate required if world is to hit 2030 target as part of 1.5C pathway”

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/global-carbon-emissions-electricity-peak-thinktank-report

    Carbon emissions from the global electricity sector may peak this year, after plateauing in the first half of 2023, because of a surge in wind and solar power, according to a climate thinktank.

    A new report on global electricity generation found that the growth of renewables was so rapid that it was close to the incredibly fast rate required if the world is to hit the tripling of capacity by the end of the decade that experts believe is necessary to stay on the 1.5C pathway.

    It also noted that there had been only a slight increase in emissions in the first six months of the year, compared with the same period a year before.

    The findings suggest the world may be close to reaching the peak of the global power sector’s carbon emissions, and they could soon even begin to fall in line with global climate targets.

    The report, by the climate thinktank Ember, compared electricity data from January to June 2023 to the same period last year, across 78 countries representing 92% of the world’s electricity demand.

    Malgorzata Wiatros-Motyka, Ember’s senior electricity analyst and the lead author of the report, said: “It’s still hanging in the balance if 2023 will see a fall in power-sector emissions.”

    “The world is teetering at the peak of power-sector emissions, and we now need to unleash the momentum for a rapid decline in fossil fuels by securing a global agreement to triple renewables capacity this decade,” she said….

    Despite all the hype, the reality is that fossil fuel use, and associated emissions, are still rising. The rate of rise may have slowed, but that’s because:

    Fossil fuels were also kept at bay by a global slowdown in the world’s growing demand for electricity, according to the report. It found that global electricity demand rose by 0.4% in the first half of 2023 compared with the same period last year, well below the 10-year average of 2.6% before that.

    To give the Guardian more credit than the BBC, the Guardian does manage to call Ember a “climate thinktank”, while the BBC calls them “energy analysts”.

    Like

  13. This is about a report by Carbon Brief, so I take it with a pinch of salt, but Ember also pitches in:

    “China’s carbon emissions set for structural decline from next year
    Emissions by world’s most polluting country could peak this year after surge in clean energy investments”

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/13/chinas-carbon-emissions-set-for-structural-decline-from-next-year

    China’s carbon emissions could peak this year before falling into a structural decline for the first time from next year after a record surge in clean energy investments, according to research.

    Emissions from the world’s most polluting country have rebounded this year after the Chinese government dropped its Covid restrictions in January, according to analysis undertaken for Carbon Brief.

    However, this rebound in fossil fuel demand emerged alongside a historic expansion of the country’s low-carbon energy sources, which was far in excess of policymakers’ targets and expectations….

    …The findings support forecasts from energy experts that emissions from global electricity generation could reach a peak this year before a peak in all energy emissions from next year.

    A report by climate thinktank Ember last month found that the growth of renewables was so rapid that it was close to the rate required for the world to triple its capacity by the end of the decade to meet climate targets.

    In recent weeks, the International Energy Agency added that emissions from all energy sources – including fossil fuels used for heating and fuels – could peak in 2025 before starting to decline in a historic turning point for the energy industry.

    Do they really believe this stuff? Plonked firmly in the middle of the Guardian article is a dose of hard reality:

    …this structural decline could come about despite the new wave of coal plant permitting and construction in the country,” Myllyvirta added.

    China had 136GW of coal power capacity already under construction at the end of June, with a further 99GW with planning permits. Another 25GW has been permitted since then, according to the research, which would breach a policy pledge made by the country’s president, Xi Jinping, to “strictly control new coal-fired power generation projects”.

    China has forecast that its coal power capacity will peak at 1,370GW in 2030, which would require either an immediate end to new coal power permits, or an accelerated shutdown of existing and planned coal plants, said Myllyvirta….

    There is little doubt that China is ploughing ahead with significant extra capacity for renewable energy, but it still represents a tiny proportion of its (massive) energy generation. It is able to do this because it still produces the bulk of its electricity from coal, and it is increasing its coal generation at a rate of knots too. This is all part of a plan to increase its energy security and capacity across the board. If the likes of Ember and Carbon Brief really believe that China is pivoting away from fossil fuels, then I suggest they are being played for fools.

    Like

  14. I expect the next group to be labelled “denier” will be called – “renewable energy denier”.
    only a matter of time, if not already happening.

    Like

  15. As for those claims about China’s declining carbon emissions, here’s another does of reality:

    “China Will Guarantee Financial Support for Coal-Fired Power Plants”

    https://www.powermag.com/china-will-guarantee-financial-support-for-coal-fired-power-plants/

    A government agency in China announced that operators of coal-fired power plants will receive guaranteed payments based on the installed capacity of their units, part of a program to ensure a stable power supply across the country.

    The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), in a notice published Nov. 10, said the program will commence on Jan. 1, 2024. China continues to expand its coal-fired power generation capacity even as it grows the world’s largest portfolio of renewable energy.

    The NDRC in its Friday notice said most of the country’s coal plants should be able to recover about 30% of their capital costs across the next two years thanks to the program. The notice said the payments will come from tariffs paid to coal-fired power generators by operators of the country’s power grids. The money will be collected from commercial and industrial electricity users through a surcharge….

    …Chinese officials have repeatedly said the country needs to expand its coal-fired power generation, at least for another few years, due to the variability of power output from renewables. Officials have cited concerns about drought, which limits hydropower output, along with the intermittent nature of solar and wind power.

    A report earlier this year from data organizations Global Energy Monitor and the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) said China permitted more coal-fired power plants in 2022 than it had since 2015, and permitted four times more units last year than it did in 2021.

    The report also said China had six times as many new plants under construction as the rest of the world combined, and on average permitted two new coal-fired power plants each week last year. CREA recently said China currently has 243 GW of coal-fired capacity permitted and under construction.

    Like

  16. More reality for some wishful thinkers to ponder:

    “China Pledged to ‘Strictly Control’ Coal. The Opposite Happened.”

    China Pledged to ‘Strictly Control’ Coal. The Opposite Happened.

    And:

    https://www.livemint.com/industry/govt-plans-1-4-billion-tonne-coal-output-by-2027-11699882102710.html

    New Delhi: The Union coal ministry on Monday announced plans to increase India’s coal production to 1.404 billion tonne by 2027, with an eye to further boost it to 1.577 billion tonne by 2030.

    Current domestic production hovers around one billion tonne annually. This increase in output aims to ensure ample supply of domestic coal to India’s thermal power plants, which are essential for the country’s growing energy needs.

    The ministry also said that coal stocks at thermal power plants have been rising since 16 October, and stand at approximately 20 million tonne. Stocks at mines have hit 41.59 million tonne. Overall, including transit and captive mines, the stockpile has grown to 73.56 million tonne, up 12% from the previous year’s 65.56 million tonne.

    “…The coal supplied to domestic coal-based power plant is around 821 million tonne (MT) for the current year,” it said.

    The ministry is also preparing for an expected surge in coal demand, which is estimated to reach around 400 million tonne to support the additional 80 GW of thermal capacity projected by 2030. However, this figure may be adjusted based on future generation requirements and the contribution of renewable energy sources.

    To meet these production goals, the ministry is planning opening of new mines, expansion of existing mine capacities, and utilisation of captive and commercial mines.

    “The production plans for year 2027 and 2030 will far exceed the likely domestic requirement of thermal power plants in the country, including that for likely additional capacity,” the ministry said in a statement.

    It also said that coal, power, and railway ministries are working in close co-ordination, resulting in smooth coal supplies.

    The ministry’s statement comes against the backdrop of a robust 13.02% annual growth in coal production, outpacing an 8.99% growth in power generation from domestic coal-based plants. Demand for thermal power has seen a 20% increase over the last year….

    But one Cumbrian coal mine will destroy the climate, or something.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. “But one Cumbrian coal mine will destroy the climate” – madness abounds it seems.

    Like

  18. Mark: Malgorzata Wiatros-Motyka didn’t reply to my 24 April 2023 email (see above), but prompted by your reference to Ember on the UK Net Zero Policy thread, I just sent her this:

    China and the 1.5ºC target

    Dear Maggie

    I refer to our exchange in April of last year and see that Ember’s report on China has been amended and now includes a note on how power sector emissions have been growing substantially because of rising coal generation. I would still argue that this belies your opening statement that ‘China’s electricity sector has been in the throes of a clean revolution over the past few years’, but won’t press you further on that.

    But there’s one matter on which I would like your opinion. At the end of your report on China, you refer to changes that ‘will be essential for putting the world on a 1.5 degrees-aligned pathway’.

    But is 1.5ºC even possible? These facts suggest not:

    In its 2018 Special Report (1), the IPCC recommended that (to achieve the 1.5ºC target) global emissions should ‘decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030’. In 2010, global CO2 emissions were 34.2 gigatonnes (Gt) (2) , so that means they’ll have to come down to 18.8 Gt by 2030 to meet the target. But just four countries (China, the US, India and Russia) already emit 22.2 Gt (3) and, of these only one – the US – has indicated any intention of cutting its emissions (by 2.0 Gt over the next six years) (4); the others are almost certain to increase them. In other words, if the IPCC has got it right, the 1.5ºC target cannot possibly be achieved.

    Links:

    1. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm (Go to para C1)

    2. For the 2010 (fossil) CO2 global figure, download https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/booklet/EDGARv8.0_FT2022_GHG_booklet_2023_fossilCO2_only.xlsx (The global timeseries are at line 215.)

    3. https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/report_2023?vis=co2tot#emissions_table

    4. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/22/fact-sheet-president-biden-sets-2030-greenhouse-gas-pollution-reduction-target-aimed-at-creating-good-paying-union-jobs-and-securing-u-s-leadership-on-clean-energy-technologies

    I look forward to hearing from you.

    Best regards

    Robin Guenier

    I’ll let you know if I get a reply.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.