What race? China started on this clean energy development twenty years ago. While the west was labelling China as a big polluter, China was racing down the green energy path. The west was distracted by its own narrative about China's pollution problem and didn't watch what China was doing about green energy. It is a bit too late to catch up now.
Clean or Green Energy is Russia propaganda. They got Germany to spend over 2 trillion Euros in country that had very little wind or solar. So watch out know what you are talking about.
Yes, but your forgetting it one the biggest burners of coal in world. Notice that China cannot use it's "Green Energy" for most it's cities. Geography is super important so if you live in Australia or the US State of Texas it idea to use "Green Energy". But if you live in Germany where they spent 2 trillion Euros on Green Energy and it only make up about 10% of their electrical energy then you in trouble.
Just about 10 yrs ago, China was in huge dilema between development and air polution and carben emissions. The fact is there's always a way out to solve problems by facing the criticising and focus on solving problems.
Agree. I was surprised to learn the Chinese people themselves, demanded the central govt address their old pollution problems, thus paving the way for a 'greener China'.
Or China doesn't actually make that significant advances, but manipulates the market in a neo-mercantilist manner that screws over folks that actually look at the relevant engineering without factoring in government intervention. Because China's steel and aluminum is cheaper because of clean energy, and not coal.
Yes, but even China cannot do "Green Energy". You need to have the geography for such things. So places like Australia is ideal for "Green Energy" or the US State of Texas. But not necessarily place like China or even Russia where it very cold and dark most of the year.
@@HellBot-gi5si China has lots of locations that are suitable for wind power or solar panel placements. They are not near cities though. China produces much of the world's supply of aluminum and steel, so they should be able to use it to build HVDC powerlines, in which they are a leader in. Is it being used for green energy or coal fired power plants? They are a leading producer in batteries, but it seems like they need to get the higher value from exporting these as EV's, rather than employing them domestically as grid scale storage to make use of green power.
@@maggiechan33 Shall take you to school Chinaman. Ok, school is in session. You have vast deserts in China; however, you can't use them. A major city must be within 500 miles of the point you generate your electricity that is the gold standards electric line transmition. So Egypt can use Solar because of the Nile river has cities on both sides surrounded by deserts.
10 years ago and before, US embassy in Beijing daily monitor the air pollution index. The figures were always a bit higher than the official Beijing figures. Sincerely we Chinese people should be grateful for US pressure to the CPC government to improve the situation and the CPC government succeeded without compromising the manufacturing industry growth. China is fortunate to have the best government in the world, the CPC government. China is also fortunate to have the best opposition party in the world, the USA which force the CPC government to excel and perform at at 200% capacity. Unfortunately for India which now boast to have the most polluted cities in the world - is ignored by the US. No monitoring, no media reporting.
While Western countries danbbled in clean energy and talked the talk, China buckled-down and walked the walk, developing and buiilding-out infrastructure. No they have "over-capacity" that requires trade protectionism? Let's facd to, China will develop markets in he global south while Western countries slow-walk it raking in tax dollars for it's over-priced equipment.
Not really. When you look at China most of their cities use coal fired electricity. Sorry but this just propaganda. You should know better. "Green Energy" is ideal when you have great geography. So you live in a windy and sunny area. That is the US State of Texas. But if you live in China or Germany where you don't have a lot wind and in the winter time the Sun is blocked out then you out of luck and you just have to use coal or ideally a natural gas electrical power plant.
China is where the world put most of its manufacturing base since about the last 1990s. So it should not come as a surprise that China is ahead on renewable energy as well many other industries like automotives. Furthermore, the global "west" will have to compete to stay ahead like any other nation has to. The west may complain the game is "rigged" but remember the west thought they were taking advantage of China when they moved their factories there and then received cheap completed goods back from China. The game is not always fair, and the west has played the game too well and now realizing the game moved on without them. But that's not to say the west cannot compete. I look forward to seeing what happens next. With the highest population (along with India), the energy transition _cannot_ happen without China. This much is certain.
Yeah, but. China produces more aluminum and steel than the rest of the world, despite not having advantages for producing those commodities. They also produce the most investment in real estate that no one lives in. They've grown enormously in economics, but their people are aged and poor. Human societies are complex, and far away from any sort of optimum. If anything, China suggests that the energy transition will occur in the next couple of hundred years as human populations decline, either through sub-replacement fertility or through violent upheaval. I'm happy that I'm old enough that the fall won't affect me too much.
So far ahead? China's still building coal power plants and is the number one customer and consumer of oil. Obviously not in a rush to transition to renewable, green energy. Meanwhile, in the U.S., the Inflation Reduction Act delivers hundreds of billions of dollars in funding for clean energy and the environment while creating hundreds of thousands of green jobs. The E.U.'s Net Zero Industry Act (NZIA) will boost domestic green tech production to producing 40% of its green tech equipment by 2030.
@@NafoDato You are the biased one, existing in your comfort bubble: -For green energy, China has spent 676B, US only 303B -China is decades ahead, which is why the US has placed tariffs on Chinese EV (102%) and solar panels.
@@NafoDato CubicPV Inc in Mass, pulled the plug on it's "new" solar wafer factory. EnelSpA in 2022 decided to build a factory for solar cells and modules, but construction for said factory still hasn't begun. San Antonio's Mission Solar Energy wanted to triple it's manufacturing capacity in 2024, but the company hasn't begun ordering and installing equipment to boost output.
Clean energy comes at an environmental cost either before it is made (raw material extraction such as toxic metals such as lead, Mercury, cadmium, rare earth metals, etc.), or after it is used (disposal of equipment such as used solar panels and turbine blades, toxic metals, etc.), or both.
@YukFou1 the point is, "clean energy" isn't clean like the marketing makes you believe. It is a rich country's way of getting expensive energy that pollutes the poorer countries where the raw materials are extracted and the old solar panels and turbine blades, etc., are disposed of.
As an engineer. There is no race, I've worked on renewable energy. It all comes down to money, if it can be done cheaper that's the way that it's done. Everything else is politically inspired and driven. Everyone wants renewable energy but no one wants to see the device in their backyard...
Some countries are quick to criticize the polluters but are quicker to put up tariffs against green energy. To protect the globe, countries need to remove the barriers instead just generating hot air.
Population needs to be in balance with jobs, resources, nature and the environment. Having a bigger population in any country than the country can support makes no sense. Access to food, water, shelter, energy and jobs should guide population levels. The worlds population is still expected to add another billion people to feed, clothe and produce pollution. Humans are crowding out all other species of plants and animals. Education and birth control are key to reducing poverty and hunger. Having a child that you can not provide for yourself is cruel and irresponsible. We need solutions not just sympathy. Endless population growth is not sustainable on a finite planet. Every country needs to "TRY" to be more self sufficient. When there are not enough resources to sustain a population something has to give. Countries need to focus on quality of life for their citizens and not just quantity of life for cheap labor. Why import fossil fuels when wind and solar energy can be produced locally and solar energy can power electric vehicles. We need solutions not just sympathy.
Iceland is a modest size city with uniquely beneficial hinterland. Sort of irrelevant to the world. Not even Greenland has managed to exploit their similar geography. Of course, Greenland is a modest sized town.
An economic boom in Africa could also weaken the migrant flows from there to Europe - if the African governments play along. So Africa could create incentives for Europe regarding investments or financial aid for green technologies if, in return, Africa will help Europe more with refugee flows. In principle, the 4 continents on the Atlantic should work closer together economically. This could also be a lighthouse project / kind of role model for good cooperation between poor and rich parts of the world. And economically it makes a lot of sense. They are neighbors after all.
Clean energy is mostly cheaper than fossil fuel, but adoption is slow because profit margins of fossil fuels are much higher- so adoption is being driven by capital rather than demand.
"Not fast enough.." - could after a while well mean "too late" 19:40 While Europe's air became cleaner, it became hotter in Europe. Aerosols reflect sunlight - thus cooling the atmosphere.
THE BEST ADVANTAGE OF THE CLEAN ENERGY is no more imports of oil and methane gas from Arab countries, Russia, Iran, USA, ... ALL COUNTRIES WILL PRODUCE THEIR ENERGY SO MORE MONEY in the pocket of countries and citizens. ❤❤❤
New homes need to adjust to the times. Home solar energy and battery storage are now more common. Electric vehicles are becoming more popular every year. Every garage should include a 220 volt outlet and electric vehicle charger. Every new home and business should install a rain water collection and storage system along with solar panels. Even in areas where rain is infrequent it is crazy to waste the little rain that does fall and waste it. We need to stop planting green lawns and switch to local native plantings around homes. It is crazy to plant lawns and build golf courses in dry desert areas. We waste too much water and electricity. the future is electric. Wind and solar energy along with electric vehicles are the future. Stop using fossil fuels. There is a climate crisis.
It's fantastic that this race is doing good for the humankind !!! The race of nuclear weapons on the other hand... Anyway, China is ahead, EU and USA are following, but India change idea and is full clean energy now.
Let's hope not. If we let the Greenies get away with eliminating fossil fuels we face a grim future of exorbitant electricity rates, energy rationing and massive rolling blackouts.
Rising speed to clean energy but ends up not clean energy at all because the process is muvh worsy and dirty than coal and oil. Its polluting in some areas
No. The next 10 to 20 years are critical to avoid the worst of climate change. Yet it takes 10 to 20 years to build a single nuclear power plant from conception to grid power on! New nuclear is also the most expensive form of energy to put on the grid. The only pipe dream here is commercial nuclear power. Less than 1% of the world's land surface in current generation photovoltaics is enough to power all the world's grids. There is enough offshore wind to power the world several times over. How is this possible? Our sun is 99.9% the mass of the solar system and it delivers a mind boggling 173,000-terawatts continuous to the Earth. Or 1000W per square meter peak at ground level and it's always peak somewhere on Earth. All the combined fossil & fissile fuels on Earth would literally amount to a bucket in an ocean compared to the sun. Nuclear fan boys need to get down on their knees every morning and pray to the clean *fusion* power we get for free from the sky. The only thing that nuclear does well is keep expensive highly trained workers employed. Every dollar spent on commercial nuclear during this critical phase actually _delays_ the global energy transition. Fossil fuel strategist would do well to promote nuclear now as the delay only earns them more profit.
The only pipe dream here is commercial nuclear power. Less than 1% of the world's land surface in current generation photovoltaics is enough to power all the world's grids. There is enough offshore wind to power the world several times over. How is this possible? Our sun is 99.9% the mass of the solar system and it delivers a mind boggling 173,000-terawatts continuous to the Earth. Or 1000W per square meter peak at ground level and it's always peak somewhere on Earth. All the combined fossil & fissile fuels on Earth would literally amount to a bucket in an ocean compared to the sun. Nuclear fan boys need to get down on their knees every morning and pray to the clean *fusion* power we get for free from the sky. The only thing that nuclear does well is keep expensive highly trained workers employed. Every dollar spent on commercial nuclear during this critical phase actually _delays_ the global energy transition. Fossil fuel strategist would do well to promote nuclear now as the delay only earns them more profit.
The only pipe dream here is commercial nuclear power. Less than 1% of the world's land surface in current generation photovoltaics is enough to power all the world's grids. There is enough offshore wind to power the world several times over. How is this possible? Our sun is 99.9% the mass of the solar system and it delivers a mind boggling 173,000-terawatts continuous to the Earth. Or 1000W per square meter peak at ground level and it's always peak somewhere on Earth. All the combined fossil & fissile fuels on Earth would literally amount to a bucket in an ocean compared to the sun. Nuclear fan boys need to get down on their knees every morning and pray to the clean *fusion* power we get for free from the sky. The only thing that nuclear does well is keep expensive highly trained workers employed. Every dollar spent on commercial nuclear during this critical phase actually _delays_ the global energy transition. Fossil fuel strategist would do well to promote nuclear now as the delay only earns them more profit.
The only pipe dream here is commercial nuclear power. Less than 1% of the world's land surface in current generation photovoltaics is enough to power all the world's grids. There is enough offshore wind to power the world several times over. How is this possible? Our sun is 99.9% the mass of the solar system and it delivers a mind boggling 173,000-terawatts continuous to the Earth. Or 1000W per square meter peak at ground level and it's always peak somewhere on Earth. All the combined fossil & fissile fuels on Earth would literally amount to a bucket in an ocean compared to the sun. Nuclear fan boys need to get down on their knees every morning and pray to the clean *fusion* power we get for free from the sky. The only thing that nuclear does well is keep expensive highly trained workers employed. Every dollar spent on commercial nuclear during this critical phase actually _delays_ the global energy transition. Fossil fuel strategist would do well to promote nuclear now as the delay only earns them more profit.
@@beyondfossil lmao. even your god gretta is on record that there is no climate crisis. your knowledge of outdated tech is passable but no one is talking candu reactors for the last 30 yrs
China already won by a country mile, which kind of is a good thing for the world really, since the way they produce things it just drops the overall cost of all green products signifiantly for consumers (ex. EVs, batteries, solar panels). Unless you live in the USA I guess lol, since they just raised tarriffs on all those products EVs 100%, 50% solar panels, 50% on semiconductors. The hipocracy is amusing, on one hand all these 1st world countries say we need to get to net positive on carbon emissions on the other hand you make the products why more expensive to buy, as a Canadian really Canada doesn't do this. Clean energy companies aren't just going to pop up in the US like you think they are because of this.
Some times human worry and think too much, make use of AI and Robot to build environment, heavy products, cleaning and products and foods fabrication why not, money is not a problem if authority are not greedy from ownership
I can assure you the ecological loss from the massive over consumption of raw resources in order to sustain capitalism's demand for perpetual growth is doing a damned sight more damage to bird populations than wind turbines thrown up in effort to slow the damage we are doing to our climate on behalf of capitalism via turning those perpetually growing raw resources into perpetually growing goods and services in order to realize capitalism's demand for perpetual growth of profits at 3% global average per year which = a doubling in consumption of energy and materials every 33yrs post circa 1750 to date.
There's a thing called technology and human innovation that prevents this. An example is real time bird migration tracking which can be used to stop individual turbines as the birds pass by and start up again once the area is clear.
