China sets national coal use target to tackle air pollution

Hey, how about some good news for a change? While it's true, China has gone through it's industrial revolution with gusto that is ..remarkable, to put it one way (cough cough), it seems they have a plan to move in the right direction going into the future. It also appears previous goals are being moved up.

In a notice posted on its official website (www.gov.cn), the Chinese government said it would also raise the share of non-fossil fuel energy to 13 percent by 2017.

Its previous target stood at 15 percent by 2020. It said it would also raise installed nuclear capacity to 50 gigawatts (GW) by 2017. Its previous target stood at 58 GW by 2020.

Source

How is that for some good news for a change? The nuclear is interesting, but then most of what is running in the world is old tech. China would be making state of the art, and perhaps it's worth seeing what that looks like before assuming it's a dead end. There are nuclear technologies they could use that default to a cold state.

reply to post by wrabbit2000

Wow, that is great news, they have pollution that makes everyone else look like the federation of planets.

They had some good plans over a decade ago to build pebble bed reactors that are much safer (helium circulant, carbon encased uranium flakes, etc.). Also known as Daniels piles, they were an early 50s design that we decided not to go with.

reply to post by greencmp


That's exactly the design I was thinking about when I said that above. I'd seen an article in Popular Mech or Science, I believe it was...many years ago. It was about Pebble Bed tech being tested at the facility in Idaho. It sounded just about as safe as anyone could ask for, given it's a working power source. I would love to see China pioneer it, since they seem real skilled at scale of production.

That would be a world changing thing if they put the effort into really making it viable. No one else will after Fuku, IMO. China will have to do the heavy work and get the tech perfected, tho.

reply to post by wrabbit2000

Dear wrabbit2000,

Your avatar says you're a guide. You've proven to be an immensely valuable one over and over. I know absolutely nothing about China's energy policy except that they pollute even more than we do, and they like coal.

As fascinating as the nuclear issue is, may I throw a few things at you from Wiki?

From 2004-2010 China had the following increases:
Population 3.3%
Energy production 44%
Energy Imports 272%
Electricity Production 92%
Co2 emission 54%

Their coal production + net imports were as follows:
2005 2179 Million Tons
2008 2761
2009 3085
2010 3319
2011 3753 A 72 % increase over 2005

The share of their electricity which came from coal looks like this:
2004 78%
2007 81%
2008 79%
2009 79%
2010 78%
www.ask.com...-year_Plan_2011-2015

From all of this, I have a hard time seeing a diminishing dependence on coal, or even a significant reduction in pollution. I may be cynical, but this reminds me a little of the Soviet 5-year plans.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by wrabbit2000


The 2017 target date coincides with all those Westinghouse Gen IV units they will have coming on line in the next 5 years as well as their other large hydro projects.

reply to post by wrabbit2000

That's exactly the design I was thinking about when I said that above. I'd seen an article in Popular Mech or Science, I believe it was...many years ago. It was about Pebble Bed tech being tested at the facility in Idaho. It sounded just about as safe as anyone could ask for, given it's a working power source. I would love to see China pioneer it, since they seem real skilled at scale of production.

That would be a world changing thing if they put the effort into really making it viable. No one else will after Fuku, IMO. China will have to do the heavy work and get the tech perfected, tho.

Yeah, they meet all the requirements except power output. In comparison, they don't produce as much energy as the rod designs.

They have some other interesting side applications too. They operate at a temperature that is conducive to high-temperature electrolysis so they could also be hydrogen (and oxygen) factories which is the missing link for energy transportation and storage. Since you would need a lot more of them anyway, I always envisioned them nearly as common as gas stations. That may not be realistic but I like to dream!

Another one to look into is thorium reactors. I like the liquid and gas fuel cycles because they also have the ability to remove fuel from the reactor while in operation (the pebbles can be popped out at the top in the PBR).

reply to post by wrabbit2000


I think that China is using their acquiered new wealth in a very responsible and thoughtful way. Many (rich) countries in the world should pay attention to the initiatives China is making for preserving nature and the wellfare of its citizens.

reply to post by charles1952


You make some very good points there. I've used some of the stats myself on how damning it is for China to be opening new coal plants at a regular rate and all over the place. They have sure loved their coal. There is a couple big differences between China and the Soviets. The Chinese have a track record of not just saying they'll do great things, then building a Potemkin village for everyone to come gawk at....but China actually goes out and does it.

In example, check out the 3 Gorges Dam. They didn't even see that as something shocking to accomplish. They needed power, got sick of flooding and death, so built a dam to fix it. ...the largest in history... That's China! Also, their Highway and Rail system. What was just a 3rd world joke 20 years ago, servicing an agrarian society as much as anything else? Well goodness... They have a network quickly coming to rival our own for size, complexity and effectiveness.

They also have a motivation the Soviets never did. They can not only see their own air, regularly, they can't see very far through it...it's SO thick with pollution in so many areas. Talk about a pressing motivation to fix things by any means. The Olympics was almost a national disgrace for them...if they hadn't taken draconian measures to all but shut down areas of national industry for pollution control.

I have a strong feeling that in this case? They'll likely do exactly what they say they'll do...not because it looks good or they care what the world thinks...but because they have the ability to do it, and see the need.

reply to post by zatara

I think that China is using their acquiered new wealth in a very responsible and thoughtful way. Many (rich) countries in the world should pay attention to the initiatives China is making for preserving nature and the wellfare of its citizens.

Huh? You mean like building huge cities where no one lives? Censoring all communications and prohibiting any political opposition?

Yeah, really looking out for the little guy.

reply to post by greencmp


I think one thing about China is important to keep in mind. I'm not defending their communist system by any means, mind you..just noting reality as they have to deal with it.

I was amazed to see here recently...China is almost the same, sq kilometer for sq. kilometer, as the United States in size for land mass. Odd...as I'd always been led to believe they were bigger. Anyway.. Within that same land mass, they have 4x's the population. Literally, by the numbers. Whatever problems the US has ever experienced? China gets magnified 4 fold by numbers alone.

So.. I try and take that into some consideration when seeing how they do things. The move to anarchy for all and down with any and all Government, which some others are pushing these days is cute in a 'high school ideology' way...but catastrophic for death of innocent people in the real world. I think China is trying to keep a lid and peace to a nation so large and, honestly, so diverse, it takes a great deal of effort for them to manage that much.

reply to post by wrabbit2000

So.. I try and take that into some consideration when seeing how they do things. The move to anarchy for all and down with any and all Government, which some others are pushing these days is cute in a 'high school ideology' way...but catastrophic for death of innocent people in the real world. I think China is trying to keep a lid and peace to a nation so large and, honestly, so diverse, it takes a great deal of effort for them to manage that much.

Ah, I see, I have to remember that it is my responsibility to be very specific each and every time I express my dissatisfaction with government.

There is an old saying that I hope we can all agree with:

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

If you are to possess faith in any personality or institution you must dismiss that statement and it's implications.

I am not advocating anarchy and I do find that insulting. It really is no different than my saying that you must be a communist for praising China.

I am defending what I believe to be the best attempt to reconcile the best interests of the individual with the best interests of the collective, the Constitution of the United States of America and it's amendments which are ongoing.

The respect for individual liberty and private property and the minimization of government power are among the most important principals contained therein.

In fairness, I did believe many of the things you are alluding to many years ago when I was in high school.

reply to post by greencmp


Hmmm.... I'd just note, to avoid future problems or misunderstandings? I was replying to your point. Not to you personally. The difference is critical. I wasn't insulting you or running down your position to have that opinion. I am debating the point and position on it's own merits. Nothing personal at all here. In the rare event I open a note with someone's name? It's personal. Good or bad.. lol... That's rare though.. Never personal otherwise. So, I see I've been misunderstood and this really needed clarified on that.

China, and how I think they operate, isn't about looking out for the little guy. Were you around to have watched the Tienanmen Square Massacre? I was a bit young to have fully appreciated the impact of what we'd all seen happen, but it was something the school at the time took a special period out to look at and explain to everyone. It's not everyday you 'see' a Government outright murder hundreds or perhaps thousands of people. We'll never know how many left that square in bags, since they shut down all coverage right before they "cleared" the square. The noise heard and recorded from a distance outside left no real question as to what 'clearing' meant.

So, I have no illusions about China or Chinese compassion for it's citizens. The Chinese Communist Party has none. I think they have Empathy surgically removed before accepting their appointments and promotions within the CCP.

Still... It's a land of 1.4 BILLION people. Without strong rule? Oh good God...could you imagine Chomalia? Beijing as Mogadishu with a different language? China has had it's historic periods of very dark times to show there is nothing genetic inside their people to prevent a fall into the abyss of darkness again...exceptn State control. Bad bad solution perhaps? ...but when the whole world is falling apart? I'm quite happy to see ONE nation which isn't.

Someone has to be alive to help everyone else when this is all over and those still around, look for some. China, as it seems by how they run their ship, may end up being the major power standing if all this keeps running badly how it's been.

reply to post by wrabbit2000

I was doing some soul searching on the anarchism comment after your frank assessment.

I have found that when I am emotionally touched by an ideological question there is invariably an unresolved issue lurking in the background.

I happened to find a terribly germane article that asks that very question so I started a thread on the subject.

Who are the real anarchists?

Thanks for inspiring some self reevaluation.