Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
37. The source they use is EIA, which has historically underestimated China.
Sun Dec 18, 2011, 06:44 PM
Dec 2011

We can throw out their source and go directly to the EIA, however, kristopher has had a problem with the EIA in the past.

The EIA fully supports what I have said: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/

China's coal is going to explode: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/coal.cfm

Coal use in China's electricity sector increases from 28.7 quadrillion Btu in 2008 to 63.4 quadrillion Btu in 2035, at an average rate of 3.0 percent per year. In comparison, coal consumption in the U.S. electricity sector grows by 0.2 percent annually, from 20.5 quadrillion Btu in 2008 to 21.6 quadrillion Btu in 2035. At the end of 2008, China had an estimated 557 gigawatts of operating coal-fired capacity. To meet increasing demand for electricity that accompanies the relatively strong outlook for China's economic growth, the IEO2011 Reference case projects a need for 485 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity additions (net of retirements) from 2008 through 2035. The substantial amount of new capacity represents, on average, 18 gigawatts of new coal-fired capacity additions per year, which is a considerably slower rate of construction than occurred during the 5-year period ending in 2008, when coal-fired capacity additions averaged 55 gigawatts per year. Coal's share of total electricity generation in China declines from 80 percent in 2008 to 66 percent in 2035 (Figure 69), as generation from nuclear, renewables, and natural gas each grows more rapidly than generation from coal.


These are energy producers we should aspire toward.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

FYI, your formatting on DU3 seems to yield a different result kristopher Dec 2011 #1
Noted OKIsItJustMe Dec 2011 #2
Thanks, it's great. kristopher Dec 2011 #3
30 years ago who could have imagined... kristopher Dec 2011 #4
You do seem to run hot and cold on China, don't you? FBaggins Dec 2011 #5
No, I don't. kristopher Dec 2011 #8
You seem to have a creative memory. FBaggins Dec 2011 #9
And you are making things up out of whole cloth. kristopher Dec 2011 #11
They plan to have 400 GWe by 2050. joshcryer Dec 2011 #12
When was that "plan" announced? kristopher Dec 2011 #15
It's been on the table for a few years now, I think 2007? In any event... joshcryer Dec 2011 #20
What happens if by 2015 the price of solar generated electricity is far less than nuclear? kristopher Dec 2011 #23
Probably not. joshcryer Dec 2011 #28
What a chauvanistic, arrogant claim. kristopher Dec 2011 #32
Got any data to suggest otherwise? joshcryer Dec 2011 #34
I'm still having a hard time pscot Dec 2011 #6
I'll believe it when I see it Dead_Parrot Dec 2011 #7
30 years ago, who could've imagined 3.0C was actually a "reasonable" target? joshcryer Dec 2011 #10
Your meaning is...? kristopher Dec 2011 #13
The goalposts keep moving? joshcryer Dec 2011 #14
That is possible. kristopher Dec 2011 #16
Retiring plants are being retired for inefficiency, not to phase out coal. They will double coal... joshcryer Dec 2011 #18
How about some hard numbers from a reputable source? kristopher Dec 2011 #21
Here: joshcryer Dec 2011 #22
I'm looking for hard data to tell you and me what is happening in China kristopher Dec 2011 #24
WEO supports my claim. Let's see support for your claims. joshcryer Dec 2011 #26
BTW, I knew you'd shit on the sources rather than refute them. joshcryer Dec 2011 #27
What was I supposed to refute? kristopher Dec 2011 #31
You are claiming I am wrong or that my statements aren't supported. joshcryer Dec 2011 #33
It appears they have closed 71 GWe of old coal-fired plants since 2006 NickB79 Dec 2011 #25
Thanks but an associated note of caution kristopher Dec 2011 #29
Let's see your sources, please. joshcryer Dec 2011 #30
Thanks for the warning. I found the info through Google, so I wasn't familiar with the source. nt NickB79 Dec 2011 #35
The source they use is EIA, which has historically underestimated China. joshcryer Dec 2011 #37
No 100% guarantee... Bob Wallace Dec 2011 #17
Yes, the externalized costs of coal will be solved with geoengineering. joshcryer Dec 2011 #19
Russian fossil exports to China WEO 2011: joshcryer Dec 2011 #36
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»China keen on action in g...»Reply #37