China Burns More Coal than the Rest of the World !

[ronwagn + 6,290]

https://yearbook.enerdata.net/coal-lignite/coal-world-consumption-data.html

China burns more coal than the rest of the world combined, so should be shamed into switching to cleaner fuel sources. Why aren't they? What can we do about it? We need to harp on this through the United Nations. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Watching the Chinese news last night with my wife, there was a set where they were touting the wonders of their coal industry. Amazing number of pieces of Cat heavy equipment and in the control room much of the control functions were in English (that’s American English DT...)!

The UN is a toothless, useless organization anymore, wouldn’t count on them to organize a car wash!

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

12 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

The UN is a toothless, useless organization anymore

Agreed, but IMO is an arm of the UN and that bunker fuel (MARPOL) mandate spread like wildfire when no one thought it would. I'm far from an expert on it but everything I read says that while the Flag states (read Liberia) have the only teeth to mandate a change, it was a Port state, specifically China, which brought about the change, mainly by going into polluted ports and measuring ambient air pollution after a big freighter came in. China has these Teapot utility plants that burn coal . . . and there are apparently thousands of them, all over China. Their coal is of the poorest quality. Surely--SURELY!--they will eventually switch to cheap LNG. I have two friends in the shipping business and they sit solemnly when anyone brings up the maritime pollution, but I continue to marvel at those huge numbers they threw up in that piece in Barron's. I'm as confused as I can get about the issue, because I think it was you, Douglas, who pointed out that volcanos could be tweaked and bring about a sulfur spew to cool the earth. Anyway, coal is bad, NG is good, and vehicle gasoline could get a heck of a lot cleaner. I would like for someone to add up the carbon footprint of the top thousand private jet travelers in the world. I think it would be huge. Years ago, a dedicated environmentalist was trying to sell me a tiny property in Aspen, which I should have bought. It was Thanksgiving, about 1991. He had already told me about the new fireplace "burn" regulations. But then he took me up above the airport and showed me the row of private jets flying into and out of this mountaintop cul-de-sac. There were 57 of them. He named some of the owners. Most were liberal, tree-hugging movie stars. Every time I bring up a carbon tax on this site, I get beat over the head. In a perfect world you could have a carbon tax for frivolous activities and avoid one for the rest. But . . .

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Understood and agree. The problem arises when you decide to tax ‘frivolous’ activities and who decides what those are.

Yes, Hollywood morons flying on their private jets or sailing around the world is frivolous while a trip to the grocery store is not. What about a trip to the movies or to go golfing? If you have two vehicles, is one frivolous? 
 

The ‘common sense’ factor should come into play. For that to happen we’d need a definitive consensus from the scientific community as to what the REAL climate issues are AND what can realistically be done about those issues. Since money doesn’t grow on trees, we’d have to figure out what issues to address NOW to get the biggest bang for the buck.

Sadly, the chances of this happening are slim to none due to the extreme polarization on the issues.

[markslawson + 1,042]

23 hours ago, ronwagn said:

China burns more coal than the rest of the world combined, so should be shamed into switching to cleaner fuel sources.

The most ridiculous part of the whole story is that the Chinese have been lauded by green activists as taking a lead in fighting emissions - this is when they SAY they will do something, or when they point out, perhaps correctly, that China is keeping to the Paris agreement, which is never any problem as their pledge allows them to emit as much as they want.. After coming out with such total nonsense, green activists then wonder why they are not being taking seriously.. 

 

[Marcin + 519]

On 11/6/2019 at 12:48 AM, ronwagn said:

China burns more coal than the rest of the world combined, so should be shamed into switching to cleaner fuel sources. Why aren't they? What can we do about it? We need to harp on this through the United Nations. 

Old news as this is the fact since 2011. Back then in 2012 I asked myself simple question, What is the alternative ?

In November 2019 the answer is still the same: There is no alternative available.

There is no 1900 million tons a year of oil or natural gas equivalent to substitute for this consumption.

It is 40 million bbl/d.

I am not a petroleum engineer so I do not know, but I think with over 100 USD/bbl price it is probably technically achievable in 20 years ?

And Ron because I am perceived as anti-American at this forum I will dare to say sth anti-American. In 20 years when shale is gone there would be a similar story: "China burns 30%, India and US 15% each of global coal, what we can do about it?" Answer will be the same as today.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

My point is to show that the worldwide globalist climate change scam is really interested in supporting its goals, not in making the difference where it is needed, in Asia. I have never seen an article pointing out that China consumes more coal than the rest of the world combined. I thought that India was close to them in consumption. The mainstream media seems to exist to deceive the people, rather than to enlighten them. 

There is plenty of natural gas to greatly reduce China's burning of coal. Oil is not the answer. China has had a lot of good press on renewables and supposed decreases in coal use, but their coal use is actually increasing and their renewable use is negligible. 

Edited November 7, 2019 by ronwagn

[Boat + 1,315]

Did you know China coal peaked in 2013 in spite of their GDP growth of over 6% per year? That’s a tremendous amount of new energy to source. Become well read instead of well spoken and then spout captain obvious facts.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

48 minutes ago, Boat said:

Did you know China coal peaked in 2013 in spite of their GDP growth of over 6% per year? That’s a tremendous amount of new energy to source. Become well read instead of well spoken and then spout captain obvious facts.

You are wrong on both points Boat. China using more coal than all the rest of the world and is still INCREASING its use of coal.It is YOU who needs to become well read, at least on this topic you are uninformed. China has increased coal use for the last three years. You need to read my source material that prompted this topic. https://yearbook.enerdata.net/coal-lignite/coal-world-consumption-data.html

Edited November 7, 2019 by ronwagn

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 11/5/2019 at 8:31 PM, Douglas Buckland said:

Watching the Chinese news last night with my wife, there was a set where they were touting the wonders of their coal industry. Amazing number of pieces of Cat heavy equipment and in the control room much of the control functions were in English (that’s American English DT...)!

The UN is a toothless, useless organization anymore, wouldn’t count on them to organize a car wash!

I agree, but propaganda (means true or untrue information distribution} is a tool that we do not use enough and thus we are losing the information war around the world. A lot of it has to do with the leftists who control our media, even including our government supported media. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

53 minutes ago, Boat said:

Did you know China coal peaked in 2013 in spite of their GDP growth of over 6% per year? That’s a tremendous amount of new energy to source. Become well read instead of well spoken and then spout captain obvious facts.

Chinese coal use has increased over the last three years, and they supply the statistics. Where is the progress?

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 11/5/2019 at 8:56 PM, Gerry Maddoux said:

Agreed, but IMO is an arm of the UN and that bunker fuel (MARPOL) mandate spread like wildfire when no one thought it would. I'm far from an expert on it but everything I read says that while the Flag states (read Liberia) have the only teeth to mandate a change, it was a Port state, specifically China, which brought about the change, mainly by going into polluted ports and measuring ambient air pollution after a big freighter came in. China has these Teapot utility plants that burn coal . . . and there are apparently thousands of them, all over China. Their coal is of the poorest quality. Surely--SURELY!--they will eventually switch to cheap LNG. I have two friends in the shipping business and they sit solemnly when anyone brings up the maritime pollution, but I continue to marvel at those huge numbers they threw up in that piece in Barron's. I'm as confused as I can get about the issue, because I think it was you, Douglas, who pointed out that volcanos could be tweaked and bring about a sulfur spew to cool the earth. Anyway, coal is bad, NG is good, and vehicle gasoline could get a heck of a lot cleaner. I would like for someone to add up the carbon footprint of the top thousand private jet travelers in the world. I think it would be huge. Years ago, a dedicated environmentalist was trying to sell me a tiny property in Aspen, which I should have bought. It was Thanksgiving, about 1991. He had already told me about the new fireplace "burn" regulations. But then he took me up above the airport and showed me the row of private jets flying into and out of this mountaintop cul-de-sac. There were 57 of them. He named some of the owners. Most were liberal, tree-hugging movie stars. Every time I bring up a carbon tax on this site, I get beat over the head. In a perfect world you could have a carbon tax for frivolous activities and avoid one for the rest. But . . .

The problem is the old slippery slope. Allow one tax and it just grows and grows. Sales taxes started out as minimal and have become very steep. 

[remake it + 288]

1 hour ago, ronwagn said:

You are wrong on both points Boat. China using more coal than all the rest of the world and is still INCREASING its use of coal.It is YOU who needs to become well read, at least on this topic you are uninformed. China has increased coal use for the last three years. You need to read my source material that prompted this topic. https://yearbook.enerdata.net/coal-lignite/coal-world-consumption-data.html

@Boat was correct in that China has used less coal annually since 2013, and you are incorrect in that it is on a downward trend, while China has an actual plan to reach it's Paris Agreement commitments and this seems to be something folk here do not realize.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

19 minutes ago, remake it said:

@Boat was correct in that China has used less coal annually since 2013, and you are incorrect in that it is on a downward trend, while China has an actual plan to reach it's Paris Agreement commitments and this seems to be something folk here do not realize.

Look at my graph and tell me that again. They went up the last two years and may be up again this year.  

Edited November 7, 2019 by ronwagn

[Marcin + 519]

Chinese coal consumption peaked in 2013, and is still near this peak level of around 1.9 billion tons of oil equivalent. But beneath this flat number usage of coal is becoming more efficient. More coal is used in electricity generation where there is no base load alternative in China, coal based generation peaked in 2018 at 4732 TWh.

China used the same amount of coal in 2011 and 2018, but its electricity output meanwhile increased from 4700 TWh to 7100 Twh. So everything you have heard about China is true: it is both the largest CO2 emitter by great marging and the best success story of each and every type of renewables.

It could be mindbogling as our civilization is dealing for the first time with such phenomenon. That is if you like to research China numberwise the first acronim you get to know is: ROW (rest of the world). In many industrial output and resources usage statistics there is ofthen major graph: China and ROW comparisons.

[Boat + 1,315]

https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/11107-China-s-coal-consumption-on-the-rise

 

I went and found a chart for you Ron. I hope you look at it. I will agree China and for that matter India still burn a lot of coal But do not discount their efforts with hydro, nuclear and renewables. Besides the fact they are still a developing country with huge peasant populations who are just discovering toilets.

As far as I have seen this trend will continue. Not because of the Paris Accord but because pollution is life threatening, disruptive and expensive. Something Trump has yet to figure out.

[remake it + 288]

5 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Look at my graph and tell me that again. They went up the last two years and may be up again this year.  

 

5 hours ago, remake it said:

@Boat was correct in that China has used less coal annually since 2013

Yes, 2017 and 2018 have shown small increases, but the expected trend from the IEA is for further declines, which, are in part driven by China's coal consumption cap plan:

"Through the coal cap, the share of coal in energy consumption will decrease from the current 66% to below 58% by 2020"

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

China chooses to be a ‘developing’ country when it suits their agenda. A case in point is the Paris Agreement. They do not have to play by the same rules as a ‘developed’ country for several years. On the other hand, they like to tout their military technology at every opportunity. If you are a land of peasants, perhaps you should spend that money on increasing the standard of living of your peasants?

Edited November 8, 2019 by Douglas Buckland

[remake it + 288]

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

China chooses to be a ‘developing’ country when it suits their agenda. A case in point is the Paris Agreement. They do not have to play by the same rules as a ‘developed’ country for several years. On the other hand, they like to tout their military technology at every opportunity. If you are a land of peasants, perhaps you should spend that money on increasing the standard of living of your peasants?

You might have made a comment reflecting greater ignorance, but that last one was right up there, especially seeing that no country in the world has achieved for its population what China has achieved in such a short time-frame.

[Marcin + 519]

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

China chooses to be a ‘developing’ country when it suits their agenda. A case in point is the Paris Agreement. They do not have to play by the same rules as a ‘developed’ country for several years. On the other hand, they like to tout their military technology at every opportunity. If you are a land of peasants, perhaps you should spend that money on increasing the standard of living of your peasants?

Yes, you are right. China & India increased CO2 emissions a lot, and no energy friendly policies in developed countries could make for this increase. Kyoto protocol and Paris Agreement was more to increase global environmental awareness & show that politicians care because voters demanded this, PR stunt. They wanted China & India on board to keep legitimacy of both agreements. I think Trump's decision to leave agreement was not wise and impulsive. Trump should do what Bush Jr and Obama did: a lot of PR and no substance. I remember US even not ratified Kyoto protocol. By leaving Paris Agrement Trump lost lots of voters and donations. This pseudo greens driving in their 6 liter guzzlers, living in 5000 feet houses etc. need some feed for their hypocrisy. Plus are rich and influential. And US did more to decrease CO2 emissions than any developed country, maybe accidently because natural gas is dirt cheap but did it. And Trump should discount this move and spin it as his eco friendly but business conscious policies. Another great story to win 2 term. And achieved without any effort. Paris Agreement would accept any US offer even sth that was already done in the past to have US on board.

Edited November 8, 2019 by Marcin
spelling

[Marcin + 519]

personally I liked Kyoto protocol, working at the moment in global business consulting company, good money was earned on many relatively small projects.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Whatever votes Trump may have lost in the psuedo-environmental cap, he will more than make up from the common sense camp that does not want government throwing our tax dollars away on questionable science while China gets a pass.

[Boat + 1,315]

https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/11107-China-s-coal-consumption-on-the-rise

 

I went and found a chart for you Ron. I hope you look at it. I will agree China and for that matter India still burn a lot of coal But do not discount their efforts with hydro, nuclear and renewables. Besides the fact they are still a developing country with huge peasant populations who are just discovering toilets.

As far as I have seen this trend will continue. Not because of the Paris Accord but because pollution is life threatening, disruptive and expensive. Something Trump has yet to figure out.

 

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/05/china-is-a-renewable-energy-champion-but-its-time-for-a-new-approach/

Here is another chart showing China’s billions spent on alternative energy compared to other countries. This is what a 5 min google can uncover instead of typical China bashing. Notice 15 years ago very few dollars were spent on cleaner energy. In the last 3 years of the chart shows China spending over 100 billion per year, far eclipsing any other country. 
So is China still a dirty pollution country and the worlds worst pollution emitter? Yes. But have they made efforts to clean up their act over the last 10 years in a huge way? Yes.

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

15 hours ago, Boat said:

https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/11107-China-s-coal-consumption-on-the-rise

 

I went and found a chart for you Ron. I hope you look at it. I will agree China and for that matter India still burn a lot of coal But do not discount their efforts with hydro, nuclear and renewables. Besides the fact they are still a developing country with huge peasant populations who are just discovering toilets.

As far as I have seen this trend will continue. Not because of the Paris Accord but because pollution is life threatening, disruptive and expensive. Something Trump has yet to figure out.

That is a fair article. My main point was intended to be that China gets a lot of undeserved credit while their pollution problems have only improved slightly. Their credit is because they went along with the globalist inspired Paris Climate Accord which is unrealistic rubbish designed to draw billions from advanced countries. America is trashed even though we have the cleanest air of any large advanced country and have made more progress. Our progress is due to using more natural gas, and that fact is rarely brought out in the media. 

See Air Pollution Worldwide (Real Air Pollution, Not CO2). https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NwglGIAHP9lCTGgmUxz7sD5l1qUQqN3o0IwwXsqAb1U/edit

[ronwagn + 6,290]

14 hours ago, remake it said:

 

Yes, 2017 and 2018 have shown small increases, but the expected trend from the IEA is for further declines, which, are in part driven by China's coal consumption cap plan:

"Through the coal cap, the share of coal in energy consumption will decrease from the current 66% to below 58% by 2020"

 

That is a paltry amount compared to what they should be doing for their suffering population. See Worldwide Air Pollution https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NwglGIAHP9lCTGgmUxz7sD5l1qUQqN3o0IwwXsqAb1U/edit