Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/05/china-invest-renewable-fuel-2020-energy?CMP=twt_gu

China will plough 2.5tn yuan (£292bn) into renewable power generation by 2020, the country’s energy agency has said, as the world’s largest energy market continues to shift away from dirty coal power towards cleaner fuels.

The investment will create more than 13m jobs in the sector, the National Energy Administration said in a blueprint document that lays out its plan to develop the nation’s energy sector during the five-year 2016 to 2020 period.

The NEA said installed renewable power capacity including wind, hydro, solar and nuclear power would contribute to about half of new electricity generation by 2020.

The agency did not disclose more details on where the funds, which equate to about £58bn each year, would be spent.

Still, the investment reflects Beijing’s continued focus on curbing the use of fossil fuels, which have fostered the country’s economic growth over the past decade, as it ramps up its war on pollution.

Last month, the National Development and Reform Commission, the country’s economic planner, said in its own five-year plan that solar power will receive 1tn yuan of spending, as the country seeks to boost capacity by five times. That is equivalent to about 1,000 major solar power plants, according to experts’ estimates.

The spending comes as the cost of building large-scale solar plants has dropped by as much as 40% since 2010. China became the world’s top solar generator last year.

“The government may exceed these targets because there are more investment opportunities in the sector as costs go down,” said Steven Han, renewable analyst with securities firm Shenyin Wanguo.

About 700bn yuan will go towards wind farms and 500bn to hydro power, with tidal and geothermal getting the rest, the NDRC said.

The NEA’s job creation forecast differs from the NDRC’s in December that said it expected an additional 3m jobs, bringing the total in the sector to 13m by 2020.

Concerns about the social and economic costs of China’s air pollution have increased as the northern parts of the country, including the capital Beijing, have battled a bout of hazardous smog.

Illustrating the scale of the challenge, the NEA repeated on Thursday that renewables will still only account for just 15% of overall energy consumption by 2020, equivalent to 580m tonnes of coal.

More than half of the nation’s installed power capacity will still be fuelled by coal over the same period.

.. welll

every little helps.

It all indeed helps.

Renewables, currently, aren't as efficient as we need them to be.

But, they can get to that stage with serious investment in them.

For very large countries with lots of open space, they're no doubt an appealing prospect.

For island nations such as the UK, with a ridiculous amount of coastline, hydro has serious appeal.

All provided they eventually prove cost efficient compared to current sources.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


All provided they eventually prove cost efficient compared to current sources.

Do they have to? Fossil fuels will run out eventually anyway, and renewable has the added bonus of not damaging the world.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


All provided they eventually prove cost efficient compared to current sources.

Do they have to? Fossil fuels will run out eventually anyway, and renewable has the added bonus of not damaging the world.

See, you think that'd convince a lot of people, but currently the only thing that sways people is money.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


All provided they eventually prove cost efficient compared to current sources.

Do they have to? Fossil fuels will run out eventually anyway, and renewable has the added bonus of not damaging the world.

See, you think that'd convince a lot of people, but currently the only thing that sways people is money.

Not necessarily... many just want to "stick it to the man" (regarding tax on energy consumtion) or sticking it to oil companies in general.

For me, I'm hoping these would be approved in the states soon:
https://www.tesla.com/powerwall
https://www.tesla.com/solar

If we're to adopt it before we've spunked all fossil fuels, it needs to be cost effective.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for moving to renewables. But for now, they're not as practical as they really need to be.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


All provided they eventually prove cost efficient compared to current sources.

Do they have to?

Short answer is yes, because as long as Fossil fuels continue to be more cost efficient with better energy potential, other energy alternatives will not gain the necessary market acceptance. Also, the process by which we transistion to other sources must be economically neutral as a worst case otherwise we risk political and social instability that could eventually lead to the outbreak of hostilities and the last time I checked war is never good for the environment.

 Ashiraya wrote:

Fossil fuels will run out eventually anyway......

Fossil fuels will run out, but forecasts, which historically have been way too pessimistic, show that we will not exhaust our current known and recoverable supplies for several generations. If recovery techniques continue to be improved (similar to the impact of fracking) and energy efficiency continue to improve (e.g. improved fuel efficiency in autos, generators, planes, ships, etc.), then the point at which we reach "peak oil" will continue to push further into the future.

 Ashiraya wrote:

......and renewable has the added bonus of not damaging the world.

It is false to think that "renewable" energy does not damage the world. Hydro electric projects to date have caused huge disruption to local ecosystems in addition to the dislocation of populations (e.g. three gorges dam) that in turn lead to more and wide spread environmental impact. Solar and wind have come under fire for the number of bird kills, including impact on endangered species and then there is the waste, CO2 emissions, and environmental destruction produced as part of the manufacturing and installation process to consider as well. Also the amount of land required for wind farms is significant and way out of proportion to the amount of land required by other energy sources, particularly fossil and nuclear powered. Land that maybe needed to maintain habitats, forests, or crop land.

It is also worth mentioning the batteries that are being used, such as in hybrid cars and those used store the energy captured by wind and solar systems. The mining, manufacturing and disposal burdens for those batteries and their impact the environment is certainly not benign.

In short, every solution has some environmental penalty associated with it.

As for China's announcement, given their horrible track record of even implementing modest pollution controls on their current fossil fuel powered power plants (which they could have done from the beginning but chose not to), the announcement strikes me more as an act of self aggrandizement and attempt to placate their citizens and international critics. I would be more impressed if China had also committed to retrofitting their existing power plants as this is really only meant to help meet additional demand and so is not going to improve emissions one bit.

 Lord of Deeds wrote:
... ....

It is also worth mentioning the batteries that are being used, such as in hybrid cars and those used store the energy captured by wind and solar systems. The mining, manufacturing and disposal burdens for those batteries and their impact the environment is certainly not benign.

In short, every solution has some environmental penalty associated with it. ...

I agree with you.

At the same time, as a Japanese friend of mine said after the Fukushima meltdown, "Are we all supposed to have to live like a caveman."

We have to choose the least bad options.

 whembly wrote:


For me, I'm hoping these would be approved in the states soon:
https://www.tesla.com/powerwall
https://www.tesla.com/solar

We do have problems with some people having it in their financial best interest not to approve it.

Soon as I can afford I will get these if approved.

UK has huge hydro potential.

China has to something. The Smog is getting worse and worse.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-38545649

A new team of environmental police will try to reduce hazardous levels of toxic smog engulfing Beijing, the city's acting mayor has said.
The police will look for local sources of air pollution, including open-air barbecues and dusty roads, Cai Qi says, according to Xinhua state news agency.
The mayor has also promised to reduce coal consumption by 30% this year.
Many residents have been forced to stay in their homes for days at a time to avoid breathing the poisonous air.
The public has been calling on the government to do more to address major sources of smog, including reducing China's reliance on coal-fired power plants, the primary source of electricity in the country.
Officials say unfavourable weather conditions in the capital have prevented pollutants from dispersing.

Open-air barbecues, garbage incineration, biomass burning, dust from roads - these acts of non-compliance with regulations are actually the result of lax supervision and weak law enforcement," Mr Cai was quoted by Xinhua as saying.
The city's only coal-fired power plant will be closed after the winter, when consumption increases for heating, Mr Cai added.
Another 300,000 high-polluting old vehicles will be phased out, Xinhua says. Polluting factories will be closed and some 2,000 others will be upgraded to meet higher pollution treatment standards.
Beijing authorities had earlier announced that they would begin installing air purifiers in some of the city's schools and kindergartens. They were already ordered to stop all outdoor activities.

Not sure the barbecues are a significant factor here --unless Adam Richman is visiting perhaps.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Do they have to? Fossil fuels will run out eventually anyway, and renewable has the added bonus of not damaging the world.

They don't have to be exactly as cheap as fossil fuels, but they can't be too expensive either. The price of energy is a pretty big driver of economic growth - when electricity is cheaper more industry is viable, is cheaper to move goods from factories to markets etc. Growth in turn means jobs. And so if the price of energy spikes to upset growth, you lose jobs and that's going to lead to all sorts of bad things.

In lots of places various kinds of renewables are getting to the "close enough" stage. They're not the exact same price per kwt, but they're close enough that other advantages, like the green tag and the shorter build payout time means they are used in place of traditional fossil fuels.

But we are still a long way from being able to do that across a whole economy. Probably a lot closer than many realise, but definitely still not there yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord of Deeds wrote:
Fossil fuels will run out, but forecasts, which historically have been way too pessimistic, show that we will not exhaust our current known and recoverable supplies for several generations. If recovery techniques continue to be improved (similar to the impact of fracking) and energy efficiency continue to improve (e.g. improved fuel efficiency in autos, generators, planes, ships, etc.), then the point at which we reach "peak oil" will continue to push further into the future.

Yep. Thing about any resource is that its own scarcity is the primary solution to new sources. When we reach the limits of current fields and techniques, rising demand pushes up the price, this makes other methods of extraction viable, and then in time as we master those methods the price of extraction by those methods drops, we fully exploit that source, then start pushing towards 'peak oil' again.

Solar and wind have come under fire for the number of bird kills

The bird kill thing has always been nonsense buried under absolute bs. Coal mining and burning kills approx 1000 times as many birds per kwt than the worst wind farm. The only reason coal isn't criticised for the birds it kills is because it does so many other horrible things to the environment.

Also the amount of land required for wind farms is significant and way out of proportion to the amount of land required by other energy sources, particularly fossil and nuclear powered. Land that maybe needed to maintain habitats, forests, or crop land.

One of the advantages of wind farming is its ability for multiple use. A well laid out wind farm will not interupt a farm beneath it. Solar has a similar option, where rooftops of houses and factories can have solar panels installed on them.

It is also worth mentioning the batteries that are being used, such as in hybrid cars and those used store the energy captured by wind and solar systems.

This is a fair complaint. We certainly have a long way to go with environmentally sustainable batteries. We might not ever get to a point where battery disposal is good for the environment, but there's a chance that we can increase battery life to the point where the negatives of disposal don't matter as much.

As for China's announcement, given their horrible track record of even implementing modest pollution controls on their current fossil fuel powered power plants (which they could have done from the beginning but chose not to), the announcement strikes me more as an act of self aggrandizement and attempt to placate their citizens and international critics.

Wha? China's record of developing solar production facilities is crazy impressive. They also have massive problems with air pollution. They're a weird country like that. But the horrible air in China's major cities does little to discredit their plans for increased solar production, when they already have impressive solar facilities in place and more in production.