Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by matthewdgreen 718 days ago
Except that China is on pace to exceed 2023 deployment in 2024. They've already installed 45.7GW in the first quarter. You're drawing a lot of inferences from a phrase in one article. They're also installing massive amounts of grid-stabilizing storage: 35.3GW in just Q1 of this year, which exceeds the 22.7GW they installed in all of 2023.

You seem to be comforted by the idea that China isn't actually deploying renewables at the rate they are. It's a strange thing to be comforted by; in any case, I don't think it's a particularly good idea to become attached to.

1 comments

> You seem to be comforted by the idea that China isn't actually deploying renewables at the rate they are

No, I'm concerned that for all the amount of renewables they're deploying, almost none of it is getting connected to the grid and the amount of fossil fuel usage is unaffected by all this solar capacity they've installed. I'd love it if solar actually helped us get the grid to net 0 by 2050. The problem is that right now we're way off track to achieve that goal.

According to https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinas-battery-storage-ca..., China's expected to install less storage in 2024 not 2023:

> Growth in China's battery storage capacity could slow down in 2024, according to an industry association, as energy storage struggles with low profitability.

Confusingly other sources claim that they installed 10 GW in 2023 so it seems like for all of this concrete reliable numbers may be hard to obtain. Anyway, the point still stands - battery + renewables remains a pricing challenge vs fission and renewables alone cannot supplant the equivalent amount of fossil fuels in the grid due to how complex the grid is & gris are fundamentally not designed for intermittent sources like renewables & the more you install the more unstable & expensive it gets trying to stabilize it.

Thus my concern remains that solar has failed to demonstrate a power to actually displace fossil fuels within the grid reliably at scale whereas nuclear has a demonstrated track record of doing so consistently. I worry that deinvesting in nuclear in favor of renewables is going to continue to pour good money after bad and thus result in a prolonged decarbonization plan. It'll be the irony of ironies when we'll end up buying Chinese nuclear reactors so that we can actually decarbonize our grid.