Last year, China generated 834 terawatt-hours of solar power.

Which is more than the G7 countries generated, and more than the US and EU combined. In fact the only country group that generates more solar power than China is the OECD, all 38 countries of it.

Data: @ember-energy.org

Source: https://bsky.app/profile/nathanielbullard.com/post/3lsbbsg6ohk2j

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    And China is continuing to increase market share on goods like electronics and vehicles, by choice.

    The USA has the highest GDP in the world and has a CO2 per GDP of 0.26 to Chinas 0.44. Are you saying China is just pretending to be green and the USA is a beacon of hope for the environment? Rhetorical Question, Farley.

    • nednobbins@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It’s a better measure but not a perfect one. The big problem with the US-China GDP comparison is that the US has much more of a service economy while China has a much more manufacturing based economy.

      Manufacturing pollutes much more than services do but services don’t exist without the manufacturing.

      That’s why I was saying a better measure would be pollution per GNP. That would cut out services and basically just count manufacturing output. That would make sense because it’s the biggest source of pollution and it’s the source you can do the most about (ie there’s a lot of room to make many parts of the manufacturing chain cleaner).

      Nobody is as green as their marketing suggests and China is no exception. China is making huge investments in green tech and there’s still a long way to go.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I am not comparing them with USD, the user who brought up GDP did because their source specifies it.

        • AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          You’re right, you’re referring to the original source, which is supposedly already in PPP dollars, so I deleted my previous comment. Thanks for the correction. Regardless, that data is 2011, so it’s kinda useless to me because that’s before the energy transition of China.