Top
Best
New

Posted by mrtksn 4 hours ago

Photos Capture the Breathtaking Scale of China's Wind and Solar Buildout(e360.yale.edu)
214 points | 142 comments
zipy124 1 hour ago|
It is incredible to see just how many big-oil talking points there are in this thread. From renewable energies resource costs, to their land use impact. I didn't realise just how effective their propaganda was in the tech space till reading this thread. That is not to say that these projects should be free of criticism, but anyone who believes these negatives are remotely close to the damage that fossil fuels are doing needs to re-evaluate their world view.
delta_p_delta_x 1 hour ago||
I was just about to make precisely the same comment. The fear, uncertainty, and doubt about renewables here is ridiculous, and I expected better. I suppose everyone watched too much Landman.

China is rocketing ahead in every domain possible, from resource and financial independence, to infrastructure in terms of high-speed rail, bridges, roads, advanced fission reactors and bleeding-edge fusion research. Heavy industry like mining and processing, chemicals, ship-building.

Let's not even get into semiconductors. I fully expect them to achieve parity with TSMC before 2030 and surpass them shortly after.

Meanwhile, Western countries will say 'clean coal' or have a million different stakeholders squabble about where and how to build nuke power plants.

samiv 1 minute ago|||
With China's huge resources both natural and human it's only expected that China will again reclaim its position as the leading country in science, technology, production and generally everything.

If you assume that .5% of population are "einsteins" then China has 7.5m einsteins who are now able to access universities and advance sciences whether it's AI or solar power or self driving cars.

There's no doubt about the fact that the future belongs to China.

andrewinardeer 42 minutes ago||||
Whoa boy. I caught Landman for the first time today because my partner was watching it.

Oil, cigarettes and alcohol were all clearly being pushed and promoted. Pretty sure it was episode four where a women rather matter-of-factly stated that one alcoholic beverage when pregnant was perfectly fine - inso much that it was good because it helped her body generate breast milk. Such a weird statement to shoe-horn into this soap opera.

Coupled with BBT chain smoking the coffin nails, the rampant shit-canning of renewables and incessant self promotion of how large and wonderful the fossil fuel industry is the money behind the show was as subtle as a sledgehammer.

Plus the sexual objectification of women in this show is ludicrous.

It's 2026. It seems everything old is new again.

Oh, and the

zzzeek 33 minutes ago||
never heard of this show, I wonder who produces it

oh Paramount

the ones that just decimated CBS News, put talentless propagandist Bari Weiss in charge, and censored a critical report on human rights abuses ordered by POTUS

all running on Oracle (tm)

spiderfarmer 58 minutes ago||||
The EU is moving towards 50% sustainable with lots of countries that at 60-75%, while the USA is at 25%.

Europe is also at least a decade ahead.

And since renewable + batteries is now cheaper than nuclear, we should spend our money and time wisely.

delta_p_delta_x 51 minutes ago||
> And since renewable + batteries is now cheaper than nuclear, we should spend our money and time wisely.

Eggs in one basket. Renewables are good, but it gets cloudy, it becomes night, it might not be windy. Nuclear will output power come rain or shine, and like I said, it's not like China isn't investing in advanced fission. They're throwing money at everything to see what sticks. They're working on SMRs, molten salt, thorium, and more.

hnmullany 8 minutes ago|||
It's two orders of magnitude difference between renewables and nuclear though. China commissioned about 3GW of nuclear and almost 300GW of solar last year.
raducu 20 minutes ago|||
> Eggs in one basket. Renewables are good, but it gets cloudy, night is a thing, it might not be windy

Also, we can't survive an asteroid crash/extinction event with solar.

Nuclear is transcedental. If we had practically unlimited fusion power, we could build underground, grow plants in aquaponics and aeroponics and ride it out in underground cities and farms.

kiba 57 minutes ago||||
I expect China to overbuild and the west to underbuild.
CuriouslyC 30 minutes ago|||
Overbuilding energy doesn't seem like a problem, if Jevon's paradox applies to ANYTHING, it applies to energy.
sneak 37 minutes ago||||
I know which error I’d prefer to be making.
jgalt212 53 minutes ago|||
You say that and OpenAI is signing compute deals in excess of 20X current revenues.
kiba 32 minutes ago||
Good point. Reality is more nuanced than simple overbuilding and underbuilding. Still, we aren't really still building enough housing and mass transit infrastructure.

That may hamper us more than anything else. If AI proves to be as beneficial as its proponents hyped, the economic gains will just mostly get soaked up by landowners. Even UBI won't save us, because it will just get absorbed by landowners. Ditto for renewable energy.

NedF 22 minutes ago|||
[dead]
Rover222 12 minutes ago|||
It's kind of bizarre to see the far right and far left circle to the same misguided big oil conclusions, although for different reasons. The right doesn't want their traditional oil/coal industries threatened. The left is kind of... just against the continued growth of technology/industry/humanity.
MarceliusK 30 minutes ago|||
Criticism is healthy. False equivalence isn't.
account42 36 minutes ago|||
It's incredibly how common it is these days to see valid criticism dismissed as "X talking points" or "Y dog whistle". I guess that's easier than providing an argument.
raverbashing 1 hour ago|||
Yeah while western boomers complain China builds
SirFatty 1 hour ago|||
And a talking point in the other direction is to refer to people as "boomers".
fuzzfactor 1 hour ago|||
In case you haven't noticed, it's the non-thinkers of all generations who willingly bury their head in the sand.

Most people don't normally think it's the boomers in particular unless their powers of observation are somewhat limited.

Which is understandable, you don't reach maturity overnight.

Edit: not my downvote btw

raverbashing 20 minutes ago||
I'm not disagreeing with you so much but

> Most people don't normally think it's the boomers in particular

Interesting because most of the critiques, especially to electric cars come from boomers. Also to Solar and Wind, the kind of silly criticism like "Why are we filling our barely-arable lands with Solar?!"

Now we'll watch how the European car manufacturers get swallowed by Chinese electrical manufacturers.

globular-toast 36 minutes ago||
Oh, what a weak argument: "you've just fallen for the propaganda".

You might notice comments simply arguing for less energy usage are buried at the bottom too. Have you considered whether you may have fallen for the "green" propaganda? It's so predictable after all.

Two wrongs don't make a right. We look back and curse our ancestors for their unbridled use of fossil fuels. Who is to say future generations won't look back and curse us for destroying all wilderness?

xipho 31 minutes ago|||
Ok, I'll bite. What if solar panels turn into breeding grounds with perfect environmental temperatures to create viruses that kill us all? Who is to say the sun won't blow up tomorrow? Why not enumerate all the things that might happen to distract? There is a nice quote going around re a weather scientists who gets asked annually what's it going to be like this year? He's tired, and notes "this year, and every year for the rest of your life is going to be the hottest ever." That's in large part to oil, full stop.
top_sigrid 13 minutes ago|||
Do you have ANY datapoints or arguments to underpin that renewables "destroy all wilderness". Or even more that they are worse than fossil fuels? This claim - especially in your harsh tone - could need at least some reason.
roxolotl 2 hours ago||
It genuinely makes me so sad to see the US not doing the same. Having grown up to the constant beat of “energy independence” as the core goal of a party it seemed obvious that the nearly limitless energy that rains down from the sky would be the answer. But instead we’ve kept choosing the option which requires devastating our, and other’s around the world, community. That’s not to exclude the harsh reality of mining for the minerals required to build these, nor the land use concerns. But it’s difficult to compare localized damage to war and globalized damage.
yeureka 2 hours ago||
I recently read, and recommend a book titled "Here Comes the Sun" by Bill McKibben. There's a passage where a calculation is made of the amount of minerals that have to be mined in order to build renewable energy to cover all current energy needs. This quantity is huge. However it is equivalent in mass to the amount of fossil fuels that are extracted every year. The major difference is that the equipment for renewable energy will last decades whereas the fossil fuels are burned and need to be dug up constantly, for ever.
thatsit 1 hour ago|||
Solar panels etc. will last decades and can and will be recycled afterwards. Further, most materials needed for renewable energy infrastructure (iron, lithium) are highly abundant on earth. Most of the suppliers work to use cheaper (=more abundant) materials in their products, replacing lithium with sodium in batteries and silver with copper in solar panels. Wind turbine blades are produced now using re-solvable resins.
jbl0ndie 24 minutes ago||||
Only there is no forever when you're talking about a finite resource, like fossil fuels.
addhochohoc 1 hour ago|||
But it creates enough cash to redirect all ire away to weakly lobbying industries, like aggrarian-sector or other weakly lobbied sectors like nuclear.
appointment 2 hours ago|||
> That’s not to exclude the harsh reality of mining for the minerals required to build these, nor the land use concerns.

This is Big Oil propaganda. The impact from this is massively less than the horrific damage caused by every part of the fossil fuel industry.

mrpopo 1 hour ago|||
Yep. It's not just oil rigs in the desert. Chevron in Ecuador destroyed the Amazonian rainforest. Oil pipelines and open pit mines destroying Canadian primordial forests. Probably tons of untold stories.
Rover222 10 minutes ago||||
Similar to the idea that electric cars are net worse for the environment because some of the materials used to make them. Worse than 20 years of burning gasoline in an ICE car? It's so ridiculous.
newyankee 53 minutes ago|||
especially when the most important total cost of ownership over life is considered
MarceliusK 28 minutes ago|||
The rhetoric around "energy independence" always sounded like it was pointing exactly toward renewables, and it's hard not to see the missed opportunity in hindsight
dzonga 1 hour ago|||
it seems us is fighting yesterday's war

wars / empires etc are built on mastering an energy source

the Brits on Coal

the US rose on Oil

China is rising on renewables

my worry is can renewables be quickly brought online to power industry / power hungry Data Centers etc at a reasonable cost

margalabargala 43 minutes ago|||
> my worry is can renewables be quickly brought online to power industry / power hungry Data Centers etc at a reasonable cost

I mean, clearly the answer is yes. The problem is political, not economic.

kiba 37 minutes ago|||
Everyone's rising on renewables. Renewable energy is just a victim of a heavily polarizing political atmosphere.
madeofpalk 2 hours ago|||
Its crazy that in 1999 "home solar" was a fancy, new millennium idea, and now we're still barely any closer.

Honestly, I think building regulations should mandate solar energy for homes.

MandieD 9 minutes ago|||
Seeing fewer rooftop solar installations when I visit my home state (Texas) than I see in the one I live in (Bavaria) is a trip. Yes, I know that electricity is far cheaper there than here, but as much electricity as air conditioning eats, and as big as those roofs are (panels are cheap; it's the system that's expensive), it should balance out.

Anecdotally, a ton of solar has gone up in the last four years here in Germany, both rooftop and, increasingly, in what were likely canola fields for biodiesel along highways - at first driven by Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the need to reduce natural gas consumption, but now by how absolutely cheap those panels are. Too bad they're not being made here...

My favorite installation so far: a large field in SW Germany, with the panels high enough for cattle to wander and grass to grow under them. The cattle were almost all under those panels, munching away - it was a hot day.

geraltofrivia 1 hour ago||||
My 65yo parents installed Solar panels on the roof of their house in a Tier 2 city in the poor parts of India. So did pretty much most of their neighbours.

So i would have to disagree. We are significantly far ahead from the initial “idea”.

realo 1 hour ago||
Maybe his "we" is more USA-centric than your "we".

It happens all the time...

madeofpalk 1 hour ago||
My "We" is Australia and UK-centric.

People have home solar, but it's hardly widespread. It's still a "fancy" thing to have.

alias_neo 11 minutes ago|||
In the UK, it's expensive, and it's not the technology, it's everything else. I don't see how that can improve unless the installation costs come down, and I don't know how that could/would happen.

I had solar installed last year, at the end of the summer, it cost roughly £14,000 for a system that can produce 6.51kWp and with 12kWh of battery storage (about 10kWh usable).

The 465W all-black panels (14 of them) I had installed are a little under £100 each to buy off-the-shelf, that accounts for 10% (£1400) of the cost of my system.

The batteries and inverter together another roughly £3.5k, so, about £9k of that cost was not for "solar and battery tech", a good chunk of it, somewhere around 40% of the total was labour, and the rest in scaffolding. Even if we allocate say another £1k to "hardware"; rails, wire, switchgear etc, that's still £8k easily.

Even if the hardware was free, £8-10k installation costs seems prohibitively expensive for the average UK household, unless you were totally wiping out your monthly bills and could pay it off over the lifetime of the system.

I suspect part of the issue in Australia is the same; I believe (perhaps incorrectly) you have a lot more sun down there so I'd expect the scale of (number of) installations to be higher.

geraltofrivia 1 hour ago||||
I guess at some level it is a matter of incentives. In their city, we have electricity 20-22 hours per day (used to be 12-18 when i was growing up) and we can’t rely on the state to provide us electricity consistently.

But also, due to infrastructure. Everyone who could afford it has had a battery and inverter in our homes since forever. Hooking up some solar panels to it is relatively straightforward.

I think there are also some state sponsored subsidies involved although I couldn’t tell you how much.

aembleton 1 hour ago|||
I would say 10% of the homes in my estate in Derbyshire have rooftop solar. We haven't gone for it yet because I still think the cost is too high. It might work out when electricity gets even more expensive.
danw1979 2 hours ago|||
Sorry to disagree, but we are not just closer, we’ve been there for a while.

You can go out and buy solar panels to cover your roof for a few thousand dollars/pounds/euros. You could definitely not do that in 1999.

expedition32 28 minutes ago|||
The US invented fracking.

Arguably the US is energy independent. It has Texas, Canada and Venezuela.

They never did discover any large oilfields in China despite decades of frantically searching for it.

mgaunard 2 hours ago|||
[flagged]
Kallikrates 2 hours ago||
The mountaintop panels add shade to those regions and actually reverse desertification, increases water retention and create useful agricultural land.
raincole 2 hours ago||
In 2025, > 90% of new energy capacity built in the US is from renewable [0]. So the US isn't building that much solar not because they're not building solar, but that the US has been generating and consuming so much energy per capita that there isn't that much incentive to increase energy capacity dramatically.

[0]: https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/clean-energy/us-new-win...

rozab 2 hours ago|||
These are new electric power plants. The US is still ramping up oil and gas production, and is now producing more than ever before. No signs of transitioning away from fossil fuels for transport, industry, export.

https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/fossil-fuels/chart-the-...

ZeroGravitas 56 minutes ago|||
The US has done well historically, roughly on par with China on per capita renewable rollout, slightly ahead of China between 2019-2023 but probably falling behind now.

China being so big and populous makes it hard to make simple comparisons.

edit: looked it up, US is still ahead of China as of 2024:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/renewable-electricity-per...

Bear in mind that pre 2000 is likely hydro, in the early years of solar and wind that confused matters if lumped in together but I think it's now obvious when the new tech kicks in.

raincole 33 minutes ago||
Not only that, but Chian actually also built quite a lot of coal capacity in the past five years [0]: https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/chinas... while the US has been retiring coal.

But no one talks about it because it doesn't provoke the only important narrative: "It's a shame that the US isn't doing that!"

ben_w 27 minutes ago||
> no one talks about it

People regularly talk about how much new coal capacity China has been building.

Quite often this is followed by "capacity, sure; they're not using all that capacity, those plants exist and are mostly not running", or some variation thereof. I've never bothered fact-checking the responses, but this conversation happens is most of the Chinese renewables discussions I've seen in the last few years.

hnmullany 2 minutes ago||
Coal generation production in China did decline in 2025 vs 2024 - but that was the first year for it to happen.
ollybee 2 hours ago||
China has also just launched a megawatt scale wind generator a the helium-lifted balloon, the S2000 , they have active thorium rector the TMSR-LF1 and GW/h Vandium flow battery. The scale , speed and breadth of what they are doing is incredible and I think missed my people
noosphr 2 hours ago||
Even the people who understand the scale don't understand the purpose.

The Chinese grid isn't renewable or non-renewable. It's built to keep the lights on for anything short of a thousand year catastrophe.

Their 2060 plan has enough non intermittent base load that they can run the whole country off it for a decade.

That half of your grid capacity is there 'just in case' is something no one in the west can wrap their head around. China building out massive solar and wind farms isn't because wind and solar are the future. It's because they can tick off their 30 year plan 25 years ahead of schedule and focus on the hard parts next.

movedx 1 hour ago|||
I feel like energy is the most critical aspect to any economy and military. It's the beginning of anything and everything you want to achieve.
siscia 37 minutes ago|||
What's the hard part?
noosphr 9 minutes ago||
Nuclear build out, wires and transformers.

China has been building 5% extra nuclear capacity every year for the last 30 years. On target for making up 24% of their energy mix in 2060.

mkl 1 hour ago||
That's GWh and vanadium flow. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium_redox_battery
ranguna 3 hours ago||
Technological, manufacturing and energy advancements aside (congrats China on those), the pictures look beautiful. Amazing work from the photographer.
etra0 1 hour ago|
Came here to appreciate the same. Not only it truly captures the scale, but does it in a great way.
CuriouslyC 16 minutes ago||
One neat thing is that solar/wind farms can be multi-use. You can position panels to provide shade and wind-break to provide micro-climates for plants and animals.
greggsy 3 hours ago||
Also worth checking out some of the mega projects on Open Infrastructure Maps like this one in central China.

https://openinframap.org/#9.12/36.0832/100.4215/A,B,L,P,S

hbarka 3 hours ago|
This planet-scale map of the global electricity network is incredible.
aembleton 58 minutes ago||
OpenStreetMap (the DB behind this map) is incredible. It has so much useful information inside it.
c-flow 3 hours ago||
Meanwhile, in London, UK, local council doesn't allow you to put anything on your rooftop that doesn't gel with the Victorian look..
walthamstow 2 hours ago||
It's a big town. You might want to specify which of the 33 boroughs this stupid policy exists in. There's no problem with solar where I live.
omnicognate 2 hours ago|||
Is your building listed or something? In most cases it doesn't require planning permission even in a conservation area, and some councils are actively installing them on council houses.
CalRobert 40 minutes ago|||
For more amusement, look to Limerick, in Ireland, whose council tried to mandate all new homes have chimney stacks.
raphaelj 3 hours ago|||
The UK is actually world leading in wind electricity generation (especially offshore). So it's not all bad.
sdoering 2 hours ago||
Not quite accurate anymore. The UK was indeed the world leader from 2008 until around 2021, but has since fallen to second place behind China. China now has over 41 GW installed (>50% of global capacity), while the UK sits at ~15 GW (~22%). [1][2]

Still impressive for a country of that size, but "world leading" is technically no longer correct.

[1] https://www.renewableuk.com/energypulse/blog/uk-wind-and-glo... [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1489147/uk-offshore-wind...

ps.: Per capita it's also not #1 — Denmark and the Netherlands both have higher offshore wind capacity per person.

lambdaone 36 minutes ago||
Power is quite literally power, in both the physical and political senses. The Chinese know this, and Europe is catching up fast. American private enterprise knows it too.

Battery storage isn't quite where it needs to be, yet, so there's still some need for fossil and nuclear power, but when it is, decommissioning the remaining fossil power system is a no-brainer, and those with the biggest existing solar and wind estates will benefit most, and fastest.

joejohnson 59 minutes ago||
Meanwhile the US is using its remaining carbon budget to bomb and burn in one last effort to expand its dying empire. Eventually this system will fall, and the west will realize they wasted all their energy (literally) on non-civilian hardware that needs massive amounts of cheap oil.
jbl0ndie 21 minutes ago|
That looks significantly more like a long-term energy strategy than grabbing oil from Venezuela and Greenland.
More comments...