So here's the graph of just electricity. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-prod-source-stacked?country=~CHN

Same story. Hard to discern a slow down.

There is currently 484 GW of coal planned or under construction in China, 1810 of wind and solar, about 43 of nuclear, 154 natural gas. That makes 1810 of wind and solar to 781 fossil fuel + nuclear. However, the capacity factor of wind and solar is around 30% while for the others 85% or higher, so there is actually more production to come from other sources than from wind and solar.

This begs the question - if wind and solar are the cheapest, why are they building so much fossil fuel and nuclear? Answer - because it isn't the cheapest once you take system costs, capacity utilisation and reliability into account.

Graham,

Thanks for posting the electricity-only chart, it makes the trend even clearer. Coal is flatlining, hydro and nuclear are steady, and wind and solar have been climbing like a rocket for over a decade.

Your “capacity factor” line is sleight of hand.

Wind and solar are variable, yes, but they’re far faster and cheaper to deploy, and China is adding them at several times the scale of any other source. That’s exactly how you transition off high-capacity-factor fossil fuels: you build the clean fleet until it dwarfs the dirty one.

And “if they’re the cheapest, why build fossil and nuclear?”

Because no modern grid bets everything on one source. Reliability and diversification aren’t proof renewables don’t work, they’re why you plan the phase-out instead of tripping the breaker on day one.

The chart does indeed back the “same story,” just not the one you're thinking of.

Graham,
In your first response you used the term "lie".

ttbn refers to (I assume) me as the O.P., as a liar but does not articulate where the lies are.

Now that you have stated "That makes 1810 of wind and solar to 781 fossil fuel + nuclear." Convenient that you have included nuclear in with thermal generation. I would like to know what the lie is.

Did I lie? Well no, I used direct quotes form a source.
Did the source lie? I doubt it and you have not challenged their data collection method or their data directly. I then used a different source that showed similar data.

You now seem to agree with the CEF claim that "Even as China continues to build new thermal capacity, the average utilisation rate fell."

So the matter of what is the lie and who is who is the liar remain unanswered. That's pretty strong terminology and needs to backed up with very compelling evidence - even on a site where most of us use aliases.

No honest person with common sense believes that wind and solar is cheap. The notion that it is represents a bigger lie than the climate "emergency" itself. Net Zero is dog of an idea anywhere now except Australia, where it is not realised that emissions are still rising in the rest of the world, and Australia's buggering up of its own economy is not going to change anything.

In the meantime, Communist China is thriving because of the Australian political class's stupidity, and the Left's increasing intent on making CCP our master.

End of story. End of Australia coming shortly.

ttbn,

Wind and solar are indeed the cheapest new sources of electricity in most of the world, including China and Australia.

Lazard’s latest report puts new utility-scale solar at $24-$96/MWh and wind at $24-$75/MWh, compared to new coal at $66-$152/MWh and gas at $39-$101/MWh, and that’s before factoring in carbon pricing or health costs from pollution.

http://www.lazard.com/research-insights/levelized-cost-of-energyplus-lcoeplus
http://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2023

The claim that “Net Zero is dead” is contradicted by actual deployment data:

- China added over 217 GW of wind and solar in 2023 alone (more than the entire installed solar capacity of the United States.)

- Global renewable capacity additions grew 50% in 2023 (the fastest growth rate in two decades.)

- The IEA projects renewables will account for over 90% of new global power capacity through 2028. IEA Renewables 2023

http://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2023

As for “emissions still rising,” yes, globally they are, but the biggest driver is coal in developing economies, which is precisely why the scale and speed of China’s renewables build-out matters. Every GW of clean capacity added now is a GW not burning fossil fuels for decades.

So, if your argument is that wind and solar are “not cheap” and “not working,” please provide your figures, your methodology, and your sources. Because the world’s leading energy agencies, market analysts, and deployment data all say otherwise.

Over to you...

http://j.gifs.com/vb20nr.gif

Once again the foolishness of Australian voters can't be ignored.

They know that their electricity bills are soaring, but they still re-elected the lying bastards who said renewable energy was the cheapest; senses partly dulled by the idea that governments would continue giving them back their own money in cost of living relief payments - that will last how long with a socialist mob flinging other people's money around, willy nilly?

Even the #metoo Liberals baulk at the cost of Australian electricity.

If John O'Grady wrote ‘They're a Weird Mob’ on behalf of the fictional Italian immigrant Nino Culotta now instead of 1957, he would probably call it ‘They're a Stupid Mob’.