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
 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
18. In relation to economic performance
Wed Sep 25, 2013, 10:42 AM
Sep 2013

Last edited Wed Sep 25, 2013, 11:59 AM - Edit history (2)

According to the Word Bank, China's economic growth in 2012 was 7.8%, for a GDP in constant $2005 dollars. This was down from a high of 14% in 2007. The average growth over the last decade has been about 10%.

They realized about $1650 of GDP per toe, a value that has been constant since 2009.

Let's assume the following:

  1. China's economic growth will average 7% pa over the next 6 years;
  2. that the energy productivity remains constant at $1650/toe;
  3. their build-out of renewables is as shown in the above graph, rising from 250 mtoe today to 600 mtoe in 2018; and
  4. Each marginal mtoe of renewables avoids 2 mtoe of carbon energy consumption.
Under these assumptions, in 2018 China's carbon-sourced energy consumption would have risen by 27% over today's value. This of course represents the same increase in CO2 output, from 9.2 GT today to 11.7 GT in 2018.

Looking out to 2025, with the same assumptions about growth in GDP and renewables, and the same marginal substitution rate of 1:2, we get this outcome:

GDP has more than doubled, from $4.5 trillion to almost $11 trillion in constant 2005 US dollars.
Renewable energy consumption has increased by a factor of 7, from 250 mtoe today to 1800 mtoe in 2018.
Carbon energy consumption has increased by 31%, to 3250 mtoe.
CO2 production has increased to about 12 GT/year.

Based on this, my bet is that we will not see China reduce their carbon emissions until after 2030, when the reductions will begin from a level much higher than today.

By that point, atmospheric CO2 levels will probably be breaking through 430 ppmv and still climbing.

It's not a pretty picture, and doesn't make me feel confident in the slightest. A lot depends on how close to reality the assumptions turn out to be. They could just as easily be wrong on either the optimistic or the pessimistic side.

Do you believe China will be able to do better than that?

Recommendations

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

Could you let me know what MToE means, please? OnlinePoker Sep 2013 #1
Million tonnes if oil Equivalent happyslug Sep 2013 #2
your list left off uranium quadrature Sep 2013 #16
Ask Wikipedia, where I obtain the list, I did include that cite happyslug Sep 2013 #21
Sure GliderGuider Sep 2013 #3
Equivelent to a million tons of oil. FBaggins Sep 2013 #4
Yes, I built the graphs myself, using the BP data which I've now linked in the OP. GliderGuider Sep 2013 #5
You left out the renewable discussion kristopher Sep 2013 #6
Just telling the current story. GliderGuider Sep 2013 #7
Hi kristopher, have a question for you, ... CRH Sep 2013 #8
According to BP, in 2012 China used a total of 2735.2 mtoe of primary energy GliderGuider Sep 2013 #10
Thanks Glider, I did some crude bashing of numbers myself, ... CRH Sep 2013 #12
The capacity factor of PV is variable, but 15% seems reasonable GliderGuider Sep 2013 #15
To make it more simple, ... CRH Sep 2013 #9
So how big a deal is 40 GW ... CRH Sep 2013 #11
Where are you wrong? Just about everywhere because you are looking in the wrong place and kristopher Sep 2013 #14
As you say, GliderGuider Sep 2013 #17
In relation to economic performance GliderGuider Sep 2013 #18
Reasons that outlook will probably change: cprise Sep 2013 #22
I like optimists: Their tears taste so nice after maturing for a couple of years. Nihil Sep 2013 #23
I was just pointing out the difference in mindset. n/t cprise Sep 2013 #24
Does a difference in mindset matter if the actions are the same? GliderGuider Sep 2013 #25
Give them a chance cprise Sep 2013 #26
Wait, what??? NickB79 Sep 2013 #27
It makes a lot of sense cprise Sep 2013 #28
Why do you insist on making false presentations of data? kristopher Sep 2013 #19
:-) GliderGuider Sep 2013 #20
Speaking of rate of build-out GliderGuider Sep 2013 #13
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Chinese consumption of co...»Reply #18