Last year, China generated 834 terawatt-hours of solar power.

Which is more than the G7 countries generated, and more than the US and EU combined. In fact the only country group that generates more solar power than China is the OECD, all 38 countries of it.

Data: @ember-energy.org

Source: https://bsky.app/profile/nathanielbullard.com/post/3lsbbsg6ohk2j

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Nice I love seeing China Greenwashing get reposted. Remember that China is 3x the size of the EU so them having 3x the solar power is a stupid comparison. China also continues to increase coal generation by more than renewables. China is only %27 renewables while the EU is 47%. China is 17% of the world and almost 40% of the emissions.

    OECD countries are actually working on emission reduction instead of china which continue to increase emissions with absolute no signs of stopping. They have missed every single renewable target and goal they’re set. But dont worry im sure they will stop building more coal plants in 2030, im sure it wont be to late by then.

    • ikt@aussie.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      13 minutes ago

      China also continues to increase coal generation by more than renewables.

      I don’t believe this:

      https://ember-energy.org/countries-and-regions/china/

      In 2024, China approved 66.7GW of new coal-fired capacity, started construction on 94.5GW of coal power projects

      Even if you add these 2 together and pretend they were finished the same year it’s not even close to:

      China’s renewable energy sector made remarkable progress in 2024, adding 356 gigawatts (GW) of wind and solar capacity

      https://theasialive.com/chinas-energy-production-coal-and-renewables-locked-in-competition-amid-clean-energy-boom/2025/02/14/

      They have missed every single renewable target and goal they’re set.

      I don’t believe this is true either unless you are referring to some other targets?

      In 2020, China set a goal to install at least 1,200 gigawatts (GW) of solar and wind power by 2030. By the end of 2024, China had already surpassed this target, reaching this milestone 6 years ahead of schedule. This was made possible by aggressive investments, government policies, and a surge in solar and wind installations.

      China’s solar capacity grew by an incredible 45.2% in 2024, adding 277 GW. Wind capacity also saw a strong increase of 18%, with an additional 80 GW installed. Overall, total power generation capacity rose by 14.6% in 2024, driven mainly by renewables.

      https://carboncredits.com/chinas-renewable-energy-boom-a-record-breaking-shift-or-still-chained-to-coal/

      China is only %27 renewables while the EU is 47%.

      Don’t worry, just like everything else I’m sure that will flip in the future

      Europe has plenty of money apparently to suddenly:

      NATO leaders on Wednesday confirmed their commitment to more than double defence spending by 2035 banding words like “crucial”, “momentous” and “quantum leap”

      https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/06/25/defence-spend-to-5-of-gdp-ukraine-russia-the-key-takeaways-from-the-nato-summit

      Just why does it take an emergency to make some proper progress:

      Global energy storage owner-operator BW ESS and Spanish energy storage developer Ibersun say a new joint venture is intended to build eight four-hour battery projects across the country, with a combined capacity of 2.2 GW, 8.8 GWh.

      https://reneweconomy.com.au/no-time-to-waste-huge-big-battery-plans-unveiled-for-spain-as-accusations-traded-over-blackout/

      Where will the batteries be made I wonder?

      On top of this energy prices in the EU are ridiculous and for some reason they still can’t get off the gas, which leads to an unreal point of France giving more money to Russia for gas than in aid to Ukraine, so they have high energy prices and they’re funding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and their companies and manufacturing are leaving them… to go to China…

      https://aussie.zone/comment/17361559

      But I appreciate your scepticism (I gave your post an upvote because China does sometimes get a little bit too much credit), they are the worlds top producer of CO2 by FAR but I do want to address

      Greenwashing

      This is something I’ve wanted for a while:

      It requires EU importers to pay a levy corresponding to the embedded carbon emissions in 303 emission-intensive products

      https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/what-to-expect-from-the-eu-carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism_719d2ff9-en.html

      I’ve long disliked that places like the EU and the rest of the west can export their dirty manufacturing over to China where companies take advantage of lax or no environmental regulations, it’s a false economy and makes the west look a whole lot greener and cleaner than it would if we were manufacturing what we used back at home

      China has Apple by the balls’: How the rising superpower captured the tech giant

      https://www.smh.com.au/national/china-has-apple-by-the-balls-how-the-rising-superpower-captured-the-tech-giant-20250609-p5m5z1.html

      edit: boy I sure do love to procrastinate and talk about energy and co2 instead of studying :|

    • mattreb@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      tbh I’m surprised that you even got upvotes, didn’t went that well for me with a similar answer on another post…

    • Fizz@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 hours ago

      While everyone else is paying the costs that come with environmental regulation china is exploiting it and getting celebrated for it. Its insane what a few dollars can do to change peoples minds on a topic.

    • Mihies@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Yep, solar is awesome when you have coal and gas power plants, not so much when you have nuclear ones.

      • FishFace@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Solar and nuclear work just fine together. Nuclear is expensive (and most cost effective if kept running all the time, rather than switched on and off) but it reduces the cost of solar (lower proportion of solar means you don’t need as much storage) and hedges against bad weather.

            • Mihies@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Yes, of course I’ve meant it in a positive way - a way to replace coal and gas. But solar is not just positive, they are problematic when you couple them with nuclear for the simple reasons that solar is not reliable and you can’t throttle nuclear - they are like big ships, they require a lot of time to steer. Furthermore solar energy low price causes problems for nuclear higher prices. Which wouldn’t be a problem if solar was reliable and continuous (long winter nights much?). But it’s not, but you still need a reliable energy source. And so on. The pro solar panel crowd don’t understand many of these implications and go with simple “idiotic” and downvotes.

  • Geobloke@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Yeah I tracked it back to that, but couldn’t find the graph shown and had no knowledge of the ember.

    Having said that, I’m all for the green revolution and would love to see it go harder. As a petrol head the idea of guilt free fuel is like a holy grail

  • Geobloke@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Cool if true, but the source seemed to be bluesky soooo it’s a big gain of salt

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      It’s great that they are creating that much. They have the largest incentive too, the U.S. second. The G7 they refer to (U.S. U.K. Japan Germany France Italy Canada) used a total of ~7 PWh of electricity in 2023. China used ~9 PWh.

      Hopefully the G7 starts catching up. Chinas form of government puts their long term expendetures into play when figuring out where to invest as they have a monetary stake in how much it costs to produce the electricity.

      In countries like the U.S. we see companies who have large investments in oil, coal, and such trying to manipulate the transition because they didn’t have the investments already in place with alternative energy sources. The U.S. government has no money “invested” per say, so long term they don’t care that it costs more during the transition as those profits are made by the companies. The old oil tycoons will milk every penny under the attitude “I got mine.”. Then they’ll die, and we will hope some companies have transitions in place that bring low cost efficient renewable systems long term

    • Cris@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Yeah I think by “source” they just mean they’re just giving credit to the bsky post they got the graph from, the data seems to be from a green energy transition thinktank. No idea if you’d put more stock in ember-energy.org/, so make of that what you will 🤷‍♂️

      From the website:

      Data into action

      Open data and intelligent policy analysis to unlock a clean, electrified energy future

      • Geobloke@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Yeah, that’s where I ended up and didn’t know what to do with them. I guess I trust them as much as any unknown internet source

    • ikt@aussie.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      🤔 it was made into fancy graphs by the guy on Bluesky but the data was from ember-energy.org who are well known for supplying renewable stats

  • allywilson@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I’m curious how much of it they consumed though. I read recently the UK keeps on paying Wind farms (for example) to NOT supply the grid as they don’t need it at certain times, and it wasn’t going into batteries for later either. Just generated and…gone?