China's pleasant climate surprise
Start with China, the world's biggest emitter by far of greenhouse gases: 27% of the entire world's emissions, and more than twice that of the second-biggest emitter, the United States.
In fact, it's more than all the emissions of all the other developed countries combined. Bad China.
But wait. China is now installing wind and solar power at an unprecedented rate. It has just reached 1000 gigawatts of solar power, and the pace is still picking up: 93gW went on line in May alone. Beijing's official target was to reach peak emissions before 2030 and then start heading back down, but it may actually have peaked last year.
China also leads the world in newly installed wind power, new nuclear plants under construction, electric vehicle production (half the vehicles made in China are EVs) and in the all-important field of battery storage, which is essential for stable, reliable power if your electrical grid is eventually going to be fossil-fuel-free.
Not only that, but it's making a profit from it. Volume production and technical innovations have brought the price of solar panels down so low that it's exporting them in huge quantities even to developing countries.
They simply beat all forms of fossil fuel on price: 90% of all new power capacity installed worldwide last year was renewable.
Some countries are ahead of the game. Brazil, for example, already gets 88% of its energy from renewables (mostly hydro), but increasingly from solar as well. England, the first country to burn coal for industry and transport, closed down its last coal-fired plant last year.
But for most countries, the great shift to clean energy only began in the past two years.
There is, of course, the problem of the US, where Donald Trump is trying to go back to the 20th-century heyday of fossil fuels. (In May the Department of Energy even ordered a coal-fired plant in Michigan not to be retired as the owners had planned.)
But the free market still more or less rules in the US, and fossil fuels just cost too much.
Commercial enterprises have to make a profit, and they are often answerable to shareholders for their investment decisions. That is why solar power and battery storage alone are expected to make up over 80% of new energy capacity in the US this year.
The US will lag further and further behind, but it will mostly follow the energy trend at a distance.
Coal, gas and oil together account for about 75% of overall greenhouse gas emissions, so the fact that most other countries in the world are switching to cheaper renewable energy so fast is reason for rejoicing. We are being given a reprieve from the worst consequences of our carelessness with the planet, and we should use the time wisely.
First, a few harsh realities. The average global temperature has been far higher than the models predicted for the past two years: well over 1.5°C above the pre-industrial average, compared with the predicted +1.2°C. If that continues, we will hit the "never exceed" level of +2.0°C within 10 years. If we're lucky, we won't get there until about 2040.
But realistically, we will get there at some point. There's already too much carbon dioxide in the air, and too much more will be put there before our emissions fall steeply enough to make a real difference.
That's a great deal more heat than is in the atmosphere now, which at the very least means bigger storms and forest fires, worse floods and droughts, more extreme temperatures both high and low.
But it also means that we may cross one or several tipping points that will make things much worse.
We are walking through a minefield, and the mines are the "tipping points" that will be activated when the planet reaches certain levels of heat.
We don't know exactly what those levels are, but some could be just ahead, while most others would be tripped between +2.0°C and +3.0°C. And we do know that once we have set them going, we can't turn them off again.
The tipping points can probably even cascade, one setting off another and delivering us rapidly to levels of heat that would be catastrophic, so our highest priority must be not to cross them. That means holding the heat down, even if we have to do it artificially.
We can cut our emissions faster than we thought possible, but we also need to use that time to develop geoengineering techniques that will let us cool the planet directly.
Those techniques seem feasible in theory and not even very expensive (as planetary interventions go), but there's a lot of work to do before they are ready.
■ Gwynne Dyer is an independent London journalist.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Never mind the tariffs, NZ must prepare for the Chinese consumer rebound
Tourism has been a bigger problem. Chinese visitors to New Zealand remain well down on pre-Covid numbers, and it's not clear that this will be easy to turn around. Then, as we look forward, China will play an increasing role in driving the technology in our lives: think electric vehicles. Two leading international experts on China's economic outlook – Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Andrew Browne and ANZ China chief economist Raymond Yeung – attended Auckland's China Business Summit this month to unpick what's going on. Their conclusions offered some real hope for New Zealand businesses in the years ahead. First the bad news There's no question Chinese consumer sentiment is low and there is slowing economic growth. 'The number one issue dragging the Chinese sentiment down is the property market,' says ANZ's Yeung. 'We definitely need to see a recovery of the property market in order to see a sustainable recovery in sentiment and consumer spending because of the wealth effect.' The latest numbers show the property market is still dropping month on month, he says. A report from Goldman Sachs last month estimated prices have fallen 20% over the past four years and could decline another 10% before bottoming out in 2027. That matches ANZ's estimates. 'I believe it will be another 18 to 24 months of contraction of the property market,' Yeung says. 'That sounds bad. But that is a national strategy to turn the country from a property-led economy to a tech and renewable energy-led economy. 'There is a view from the top that China simply has to go through this transition,' he says. It's one of the features of the Chinese system that its leadership can look through often painful periods of transition and focus on bigger, longer-term goals. As Chinese Ambassador to New Zealand, Wang Xiaolong (also speaking at the summit) put it: 'No matter how turbulent the global landscape is, or will be, China remains unremittingly committed to development to deliver better lives for the Chinese people, in the historic process of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. 'There is a firm, unshakeable national consensus that has not changed and will not change.' Trade war showdown The ability to absorb more short-term economic pain is one of the big advantages China has in its current trade war showdown with the US, says Browne. 'I think it is important to know that Xi Jinping thinks he is winning! And he may not be wrong,' Browne says. 'Obviously, China has problems in its economy. We're in the third year of a real estate meltdown. Youth unemployment is high, it is crushing the dreams of an entire generation of college graduates and their families. 'Xi Jinping is enormously concerned about all of this but he is focused on a different prize,' Browne says. That prize is technology. China is laser-focused on developing a high-tech manufacturing industry to enable China to escape the American choke hold, he says. '[Xi] sees what he says are changes 'unseen in a century' ... meaning the rise of China and relative decline of the USA. 'This, from Xi's perspective, is China's moment to seize.' When it comes to tariffs and the trade war, both Yeung and Browne see China having the upper hand. Yeung believes it's likely the present US/China tariffs (currently sitting at 30%) will fade into insignificance in the coming years. ANZ China chief economist Raymond Yeung. 'I expect this tariff will be gone very soon,' he says. 'There is too much stakeholder interest.' Basically, the US needs China's rare earth metals, and China needs access to US semiconductor chip technology. Vietnam is the most highly vulnerable to US tariffs, with 8.3% of its GDP exposed to the US, Yeung says. 'For China it is just 3%. They can give it up, just let it go.' He notes that China is also currently suffering from deflation – something that helps mitigate any inflationary impact from tariffs. Browne isn't so convinced Trump will back down further on tariffs. However, he does believe the US got outplayed by China in the showdown earlier this year. 'Nobody knows how this is going to play out. We haven't seen this since the 1930s. So I still wouldn't rule out an inflationary surge.' We can't even exclude the 'possibility that Trump isn't stark raving mad', he says. We may see some positive outcomes emerge from the tariff policies. 'We've already seen a few. It has galvanised Germany, and it has galvanised Europe. It is possible Europe might get its act together and launch a unified capital market and start issuing bonds, and compete with the US and China. 'It's equally possible that the US could convince China to shift its economic model further to consumption.' Or, it could all end up relatively benign for the US economy. Trump might continue to reduce tariffs, and a combination with 'cutting taxes, slimming the government and cutting red tape may usher in a golden era for the US ... we don't know.' Another possible outcome is that the world economy 'bifurcates' around the US and China, and countries like New Zealand are caught in the middle, he warns. But regardless of what happens next, Trump has made the fundamental cardinal mistake in his second term of underestimating China, Browne says. '[Former US President Joe] Biden, whether you like him or not, had the measure of China, so when he wanted to put export controls on chip-making materials, his team worked very hard with governments in the Netherlands and Japan. 'At one point in the Biden administration, he decided to get rid of all of the cranes in all of the ports in the US because there were fears they'd be counting things like military equipment going in and out. 'Unfortunately for the US they don't make cranes anymore. The Japanese do so he put in place a technology transfer agreement with Japan. Biden understood the challenge.' The US is the world's financial superpower but China is the world's manufacturing superpower, Browne says. 'It now has an industrial base that is equal to the US, plus Germany, plus Japan, plus South Korea, and then some.' That gives China a critical advantage in all the technologies that are coming of age at the same time. That came to the fore during the recent trade negotiations, where Browne says US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant also underestimated China. 'He said, 'When China exports five times as much to the US as we export to them, we have all the cards'. 'He said the Chinese were 'playing with a pair of twos ... It turned out that when he turned the cards over that China had a couple of aces.' One of those aces was rare earths. 'China threatened to choke off the supply of rare earths to the US and in doing so would have closed down vast swathes of the manufacturing industry, the defence industry, the entire car industry.' The US attempted to retaliate, denying China exports for jet engines and threatening to close down China's civilian airline project. The tariff war morphed into a supply chain war that was far more serious, Browne says. 'It turns out the Chinese had played the US, and they completely caved. 'Trump brought the tariffs down from 145% to 30%. Still high but no longer prohibitive. That's where we are now. We have a truce.' Browne says he doesn't see Trump completely abandoning tariffs. 'We were warned about recession and inflation and we haven't seen that yet,' he says. 'Tariffs are raking record amounts of revenue for the US Government. In Trump's mind, this is a substitute for taxation.' It may be that the lack of negative consequences actually emboldens Trump. 'I would not count out that possibility, that he really does come through with the big tariffs he's promised on August 1.' Tech wars Technology is at the heart of US-China competition now, Browne says. 'A lot of people got the socialist market economy wrong,' he says. 'There was this idea that it would collapse under its own contradictions and an enormous amount of waste. 'And look, the waste in the Chinese system is spectacular but it is also spectacularly well co-ordinated.' It's a whole-of-nation approach, he says. 'Private/public partnerships, centralised R&D, centralised marketing and bottomless supplies of capital and this incredible winnowing process through dog-eat-dog capitalism in the marketplace. What emerges are these apex predators.' There's the rapid rise of car manufacturers like BYD and the big advances China is making in battery technology. But even in the media space, in the most highly censored economy in the world, China produced TikTok, which now has greater insight into the minds of young Americans than Meta, he says. 'They have a system for producing world-beating companies in sector after sector.' Tariffs are mostly a bad thing, Browne says. If they are well-targeted, however, they can sometimes do some good by protecting the industries that a country seeks to develop. 'The Biden administration identified semiconductors, clean tech, batteries and so on,' he says. 'When I talked to investors and asked, 'what are you interested in?' number one was the US. They were attracted by all of the money going into these sectors.' All of that is now being dismantled. 'The big beautiful tax bill doesn't just eliminate the subsidies and incentives in these areas, it actually penalises companies operating in these areas,' Browne says. The US is essentially handing the entire landscape over to China, he says. 'If you want to do your green transition now, whether you're in Africa or Latin America, you want Chinese technologies. And the United States will never catch up.' Can the US and China be friends? Browne says he's very sceptical that there is such a thing as a US-China grand bargain. 'I think the relationship is defined by a core tension. At a high level, there is an almost complete absence of trust,' he says. The idea China is a threat and must be treated as competition is one of the few areas of bipartisan political consensus in the US, he says. 'But these two economies are deeply enmeshed; they are joined at the hip. It creates all kinds of mind-bending paradoxes. 'The Chinese hypersonic Carrier Killer missile cannot find its target without high-end chips manufactured by TSMC in Taiwan, using US tech,' Browne says. 'By the same token, the American Patriot missile cannot defend against Chinese rockets without magnets that come from Chinese rare earth materials.' This is a relationship that is best described as 'weaponised interdependency', he says. Never mind the tariffs ... Yeung and Browne agree on a lot. But Browne still sees China as an exporting nation – as evidenced by its US$114 billion ($188.3b) trade surplus with the world. Yeung believes focusing on this can lead to a misunderstanding of what's really driving China's economic policy. He sees China as an importing nation, based on the fact 88% of its total GDP is domestic now. 'It's domestic growth that will drive China's development,' he says. Here in New Zealand we shouldn't pay too much attention to whether China hits 5.3% GDP or 5.1%, he says. 'If China is going to transition, it's not about how many percentage points of GDP, it is about the changes in lifestyle, the quality of life.' In order for New Zealand to make the most of the Chinese market we need to speed up our ability to adapt, he says. 'You really need to think about the Chinese speed. Maybe we talk about annual planning but even within one year the Chinese business cycle changes a lot.' New Zealand needs to be ready and to position itself for when Chinese consumer confidence eventually rebounds, he says. 'This tariff issue is not the core issue. 'I don't need to reiterate, this is a US$18 trillion economy. There is also US$36 trillion in household deposits sitting in bank accounts in China, ready to unlock and unleash. 'Once consumer sentiment comes back, that will be a massive wave of consumption power waiting for you guys to tap. 'Consumption is the future of China, supported by technological change. And China is going through this with or without the US.' Liam Dann is business editor-at-large for the New Zealand Herald. He is a senior writer and columnist, and also presents and produces videos and podcasts. He joined the Heraldin 2003.
Otago Daily Times
an hour ago
- Otago Daily Times
Putting my poor prediction record on the line
"I hope I am wrong. My gut tells me we [the US and China] will fight in 2025," wrote General Mike Minihan, head of US Air Mobility Command, in a private memo two years ago. There's still five months to go, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say he's wrong. Don't take my word for it, because my recent record in these matters is bad. I didn't think Russia's Vladimir Putin was crazy enough to invade Ukraine although I knew he was largely detached from reality, and I was wrong. For a long time I would not use the word "genocide" to describe what Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu was doing in Gaza, and I was wrong again. In my defence, I had not spent quality time with either man and I was reluctant to predict their actions based entirely on other people's estimates of their characters (especially since most of those people didn't know them personally either). I still felt compelled to weigh the pros and cons of the case, on the mistaken assumption facts had some influence on their decisions. The possibility of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is a far greater threat to the peace of the world (such as it is) than the relative sideshows in Ukraine and Israel/Palestine. Aircraft carriers and nuclear weapons on both sides. A few poorly planned displays of "determination" and the US is in a war with China — with the two Koreas and Japan not far behind. China's President Xi Jinping will never rule out using force to "recover" Taiwan, but the story he has set a 2027 deadline for that terrifying gamble is just a Washington think-tank special. He does harp on about it a lot though. Successive American administrations have practised strategic ambiguity (i.e., maybe the US would fight to defend Taiwan and maybe it wouldn't), and the fickle enthusiasms of Donald Trump muddy the waters even further. He is widely seen as a strategic coward (TACO), but he is sufficiently erratic that his response is really incalculable. As for Taiwan, President Lai Ching-te of the cautiously pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) serves up the usual word salad: "The message of history is clear. Today we share the same values and face similar challenges as many of the democracies that participated in the European war [1939-45]." Evasiveness as policy, so as not to rile China. Hou Yu-ih of Taiwan's largest opposition part, the Kuomintang (KMT), is even fuzzier: "The current status quo is that the Taiwan Strait is on the brink of war. So, to maintain close ties with the United States while also making peace with China is the solution to the problem." And although very few ordinary citizens want to be part of China, most people are not bothered by all this. Yes, Taiwan's military is a poorly trained, under-equipped shambles, but the public doesn't seem worried about a Chinese invasion. The United States is willing to sell Taiwan more and better weapons, but some parties don't want to spend the money. So I will risk my reputation as a soothsayer once again and assume both Xi Jinping and Lai Ching-te are rational men. In that case, it is unlikely either man will risk everything on one roll of the dice. Xi will not set the machinery in motion for a sea- and airborne invasion of Taiwan, and Lai will certainly not declare independence for Taiwan. No government of Taiwan, even back in the decades when the KMT (now reformed) was the tyrannical and maniacally anti-communist single ruling party, has ever seriously considered abandoning the sacred fiction that there is only one China including Taiwan. There is just a persistent non-violent dispute over which government is legitimate, Beijing or Taipei. As for Xi, who is effectively president-for-life, he faces no special deadline to claim his prize. "Reunification" is his legacy project, but he has just turned 72 and there's lots of time yet. And always before him is the nightmare example of Putin's three-day "special military operation" to bring Ukraine back under the rule of the Russian "motherland". Above all, there is Taiwan's "silicon shield". The island state manufactures 47% of the world's advanced semiconductor chips, including all of the most advanced ones. Even the United States is one generation behind, and so is China, despite its Deep Seek triumph in producing much cheaper high-performance AIs (on Nvidia chips made in Taiwan). Invade Taiwan and all that is gone. It might be irrational, but even the Trump administration might feel Taiwan is a treasure it must defend come what may. The game is not worth the candle, and Xi will not invade for at least three years. He probably never will. There! I said it! Now we wait and see. — Gwynne Dyer is an independent London journalist.
RNZ News
14 hours ago
- RNZ News
Australian Prime Minister says easing of curbs on US beef not prompted by Trump
By Sam McKeith , Reuters The review had been in the works for 10 years, Albanese said (file image). Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says a decision to ease rules on US beef imports was not prompted by US President Donald Trump. This week, Trump said the US would sell "so much" beef to Australia , after Canberra announced the relaxation of restrictions, potentially smoothing trade talks with Washington. In place since 2003, the curbs were due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy - or mad cow disease - which could kill cattle, as well as people who eat infected beef. When asked if the easing had anything to do with Trump, Albanese said: "No, this has been a process that has been there for 10 years, the review process." "This wasn't a political decision," Albanese said to Australian Broadcasting Corp television, adding that Trump had not raised the issue with him in a phone call. The comments come after US Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins called the easing a win for Trump. In April, Trump singled out the beef trade disparity with Australia, after Australia's beef exports to the US surged last year, reaching AU$4 billion (NZ$4.36b) amid a slump in US beef production. By contrast, Australia's agriculture minister said the rules were relaxed, after a "rigourous science and risk-based assessment" concluded US measures to monitor and control cattle movement were effectively managing biosecurity risks. News of Australia changing its policy was first reported by the Australian Financial Review . The report said Australia would use the easing of rules to argue its case for the US to wind back 50 percent tariffs on steel and aluminium, and Trump's threat to impose a 200 percent tariff on pharmaceuticals. The National Party - part of Australia's conservative opposition coalition - said "biosecurity should not be political" and called for an independent scientific panel to review the decision. A loosening of beef import rules is not expected to boost US shipments significantly, because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter, whose prices are much lower, according to analysts. Last year, Australia shipped almost 400,000 metric tons of beef worth US$2.9b (NZ$4.82b) to the United States, with just 269 tons of US product moving the other way. - Reuters
