Did Putin’s war on Ukraine and the ensuing energy crisis lead to a retreat from the energy transition in Europe? Did Russian aggression expose the vanity of green ideology? Was a war what we needed to relearn the “basic math” that modern societies cannot do without some combination of fossil fuels and nuclear? This was the contention of pieces in
One of the best Tooze commentaries. Yes, authoritarian regimes can maneuver policy more quickly and powerfully than democracies, for better or worse. Even when employed for the good, China's resource allocations are behind the curve in a most worrisome fashion, and the rest of us are mostly sidelined by our preoccupation with present concerns and political stalemates. We did not evolve to be concerned with survival of the species, rather the reproduction of ourselves. Sublimation of those drives has its limits, and we are constantly coming up against them...
To put the following in perspective let us start with the generally agreed fact that China’s GDP in current dollar terms is roughly the same size as that of the EU and considerably smaller than that of the US.
How meaningful is China's GDP in dollar terms? Are the solar panels and windmills installed in China bought and paid in dollars? With de-dollarization of critical energy and materials supply chains, soon enough not even the energy (almost exclusively from fossil fuels) or materials (extracted using energy from fossil fuels) that go into them will be paid by USD. Looking at PPP, Chinese economy is already quite bigger than US:
Solid analysis based on PPP premises also explains why Russia's economy is not anywhere near the much predicted collapse:
I lived...and now that it's open again...will live again in China. Folks on this side of the pond need to go there and see. Let all the snipers and ideologues argue the reasons cuz I don't care. People here need to go there and see it. Then, once they are sobered up by the realities of China, maybe there can be a realistic discussion.
Where do you suppose the electric power to run all those EVs and heat pumps will come from? And the copper, rare earths, concrete, steel, and other basic inputs required to build several times the capacity in the hope that at least some of it will be working when you need it, like at night or in a low-wind heat wave?
California, the US's furthest-green state, had to ask people last summer not to charge their EVs to avoid (more) rolling blackouts. I agree with the contention that fission nuclear ought to be a high priority, because (a) we know how to do it; (b) it is dispatchable and 24/7 available; (c) it takes little arable land and has something like a 97% capacity factor; and (d) such hazard as exists only bothers the species that wants the power, as the rebound of wildlife in the vicinity of Chernobyl after all the pesky humans were scared away clearly shows, so there is a certain karmic balance to be had.
Once again, as always, the "elite" that force citizens into EVs at the expense of their freedom of movement are not at all impacted by their choosing economic winners and losers. A not small number of DC 'quick chargers' are at any point in time not working. EV range...as noted by the OEMs...seldom is achieved (simply using the heater in cold weather can slash as much as 30% off of range). Don't get me wrong; EVs certainly have applications where they're a useful alternative...provided their high cost, despite taxpayer subsidies, is doable for the user.
The likes of John Kerry travel around the world in private jets, to luxury resorts to virtue signal, driven around in ICE powered SUVs (I wonder why these so called 'climate' conferences are never held in, say, Allentown PA, or the Ruhr Valley, or Liverpool? Or, better yet, via teleconference? I thought these folks loved technology). "Elites" still live in fear of Jane Fonda and Michael Douglas tut-tutting them about nuclear power, the cleanest, and today safest, energy source there is. So we force thousands of acres to house windmills that kill birds and on occasion catch fire, scam homeowners into installing solar panels on the roof, and tell them how cheap and clean EVs are (they're neither). Then, the governor of California, as has been noted, tells EV owners not to charge their prized possessions due to lack of grid capacity. How about a hearty 'you first!!' to these self important blowhards?
Adam, isn’t the fact of the much larger Chinese investment in clean energy (per capita in GDP terms) largely a result of China having much bigger energy growth needs?
Quite the blizzard of data. Since any bobble-head can nod mindlessly in agreement, thereby, contributing nothing to any process of discovery, I'll just throw-up/out one thing I found ponderable early on: "Renewable investment surged to record levels. In solar Europe is now installing twice its previous record set a decade ago." The sentence followed a brief admission/recognition that coal use in Europe did spike when the shrapnel started flying (i.e., when it was perceived the current System was existentially threatened). Obviously, I won't be the only one questioning the energy used to create the products made under the heading of "renewable investment." Nor will I be alone in wondering what exactly Macron and Xi's "business" minions signed ( in relative secrecy?) a few spews-cycles ago. I have little better chance of separating out Truth from the white-out of 'information' blowing about the feeds these daze than anybody else at the retail-level. So, I've been told many times now that China and the largest 'democracy' are burning coal and building new coal furnaces at "record" setting paces. I suppose, if I didn't have complete faith in my navy to dominate and protect my energy supply lines, and I were planning for war against an adversary with 'relatively' safe O&G supply lines, and I only had an abundance of coal, I guess I'd be building coal plants as fast as I could too. ... And on and on it goes from just one ponderable sentence! Thanks.
I love the phrase 'the narcissism of small differences'. It says so much about the posturing that goes on in official and academic circles. The phrase aptly defines the distinction without a difference.
Its seems to be ongoing theme that the EU is widely misunderstood in the US circles -some at least- for whatever reasons, but what to do about it?