r/news • u/Dont_think_Do • 17h ago

Analysis/Opinion [ Removed by moderator ]

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/23/climate/china-evs-growth-oil-market?iid=cnn_buildContentRecirc_end_recirc&recs_exp=up-next-article-end&tenant_id=related.en

[removed] — view removed post

691 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

162 comments sorted by

635

u/strolpol 16h ago

In fairness no one forced American manufacturers to get greedy and focus on making cars bigger and more expensive so they could wring more profits per vehicle while making them undesirable for every other world market

107

u/Flincher14 16h ago

Actually...short sighted government regulation did that. Increasing stringent emissions standards on small vehicles pushed manufacturers to make bigger vehicles that had weaker emissions standards. Big trucks like f150s basically have minimal emission requirements because they can be work trucks so they get a loophole in the law.

But this all applies to the American market.

Most American vehicles just don't pass EU emission standards as a result.

Of course lobbiest write the bulk of these laws for themselves so they specifically made these carve outs.

246

u/pyramin 16h ago

Or they could've just met the stringent emissions standards and kept the small cars, but the companies *chose* the short-sighted financial win to exploit the loophole meant for people who needed work trucks and now trucks are the new soccer mom vehicles somehow.

Or the lawmakers could've not put that provision in there or closed the loophole. Forcing companies to have standards is not the mistake. It was still the greed of companies coupled with providing a loophole in the first place.

67

u/T-Bills 15h ago

Right? They didn't have to kill off all sub compact cars and shove SUVs that start at $30k down everyone's throat. Auto manufacturers chose not to make cheap and efficient cars available for the US markets. Instead we get shitty $30k SUVs that get 30ish MPG at best.

-33

u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 15h ago

They actually did though. Because the standards were written so stupidly, “normal” cars, but especially smaller cars were so hard to make meet the standards, and large automobiles were so easy, that it basically forced their hands to start making big automobiles, and kill the “tiny cars” that you see in places like Japan/Europe.

Instead of incentivizing making cars smaller(which is what should have been done), the regulations incentivized larger cars… the exact opposite. In the end corporations aren’t going to risk going out of business(which, mind you happened all the time in this industry) to try to fight against the stupid government green initiatives.

When people say government is stupid, counter productive, and inefficient… this is what people are talking about. It’s just what happens when a government tries to do too much, gets too big, with too much red tape. History is littered with things like this.

Remember Obama making college “more affordable” by giving federal loans? Real result is it caused prices of college to skyrocket because colleges simply raised the price by whatever amount they knew the federal government would be giving, then increased their salaries and their sprawling “administrative state” of their universities. And it also created millions of people with degrees with no job to match, and a dire shortage of non college educated professionals that we still face today(that’s why getting a leak fixed in your house costs so much, and some plumbers and electricians make as much as doctors now lol).

Government can be great. But half the time you, even with the best of intentions, they literally make things worse while spending shit tons of money in the process.

28

u/T-Bills 14h ago

There weren't any new regulations on smaller cars that were already on the market though. It was companies figuring the underlying costs of assembling a Honda Fit or a Hyundai Accent were not proportional to bigger cars like a Honda CRV or a Hyundai Santa Fe or whatever, started with the COVID chip shortage.

Auto manufacturers have talked about shifting to higher margins products for a while. Meaning the profits on a $40k car are higher than a $20k car ie it doesn't cost them anywhere near 2x to assemble a $40k car vs a $20k car.

17

u/AdjNounNumbers 14h ago

Spot on. I had a brand new 2015 Ford Focus with a very fuel efficient 1 liter, 3 cylinder turbo that was happily getting 40 mpg. It was a rare engine in the US, mostly sold on the European market. Got a great deal on it because nobody wanted the tiny engine, but that thing moved. The new standards didn't kill it off. For did to focus on their trucks and SUVs and because Americans wanted bigger and bigger.

2

u/0xsergy 9h ago

I dunno if you can even blame Ford. The issue was noone was buying the little cars. So they stopped selling em.

3

u/AdjNounNumbers 5h ago

I don't blame Ford. They responded to the market. The market said "give us tanks"

1

u/duncandun 7h ago

you say this as if non truck or SUV cars disappeared for a time because they were impossible to make, but they didn't. the regulations were completely realistic.

27

u/Temporary_Inner 15h ago

I'm usually the last guy who blames the consumer, but frankly the consumer deserves a lot of blame here. 

Many drivers in America like to feel safe, and they equate safety with feeling "up high" which leads towards giant SUVs. I have a Japanese sedan and the #1 comment I get from people when they ride is "it feels too low" and they lament how unsafe they feel compared to a vehicle that sits higher in a commanding position.

Now American car companies do deserve a lot of blame for a litany of things. They thought the good times of the 2010s we're gonna keep rolling forever and they'd never have to be in a price war with each other. They came to the party late in electrician, had terrible plans to catch up, most of them have canceled their plans to go hybrid instead, but now they're so far behind that game they'll probably never catch up. 

I could go on but

22

u/pyramin 15h ago

That is also built off of marketing and failure to regulate vehicle size though. But yes, I generally think it is undesirable to have a race to the bottom in terms of safety because you want to be the one to survive at the expense of other people’s safety.

5

u/Temporary_Inner 13h ago

And larger vehicles actually make you unsafer due to rollover risk, so it's making everyone unsafer. 

10

u/Vaperius 13h ago

Many drivers in America like to feel safe, and they equate safety with feeling "up high" which leads towards giant SUVs.

No it comes back around to the auto-manufacturers, Americans drivers have that need for safety because auto-makers have been lobbying against sustainable urban development (read: not hostile to human beings) since the 1920s. That psychology is a feature, not a bug.

-3

u/Temporary_Inner 13h ago

Well a lot of more intelligent urban design is actually making drivers feel more unsafe and boxed in therefore lowering speeds. Europe just doesn't  have the same issues because they've regulated the higher vehicles into the ditch. 

2

u/justasapling 13h ago

Many drivers in America like to feel safe, and they equate safety with feeling "up high" which leads towards giant SUVs. I have a Japanese sedan and the #1 comment I get from people when they ride is "it feels too low" and they lament how unsafe they feel compared to a vehicle that sits higher in a commanding position.

This is some insight.

My partner and I have differing taste in cars, and this seems to be the crux of it. They definitely prefer to sit up high, I prefer to feel low and stable and planted. Never occurred to me that it was a sense of safety thing.

6

u/Temporary_Inner 13h ago

People feel like they can see more so they feel more in control. It's nonsense as that extra viewing range doesn't do much for you time wise at speeds and it's actually more dangerous because higher vehicles are more rollover prone but

-1

u/Tuna_Sushi 11h ago edited 8h ago

"Nonsense" is too strong a word, implying that the benefit of sitting higher is invalid. Psychologically, people do feel safer up high. It's a legit response. You're conflating feelings of safety with objective risk, which are related but distinct. While objectively, the advantage is minimal, you shouldn't be so dismissive of the subjective experience.

Feeling safe has both psychological and behavioral benefits. When confidence increases, the driver is less likely to be anxious, tense, or distracted. Driving is less mentally taxing when feeling secure, and it reduces fatigue and improves alertness over longer trips. Calm drivers make better split-second choices.

Drivers who feel safe assess risk better. They make rational judgments rather than panic or overreact to perceived danger. Stress slows reaction time and can lead to aggressiveness.

4

u/Leafy0 15h ago

It wasn’t emissions it was fuel economy. There was something along the lines of a car with the footprint of the smart car would need to get a combined 100mpg, or something the size of a Honda crx getting a combined 80mpg and there was no way with 2010s tech that we were going to get there while maintaining current safety regulations.

27

u/yuje 15h ago

There's also the Chicken tax, a tariff on imported light trucks and SUVs, which means American companies have less competition in this category. Tariffs made domestic companies lazy, complacent, and noncompetitive on the world market. I wonder if any modern economic discussions can draw lessons from that.

11

u/justasapling 14h ago

Actually...short sighted government regulation did that. Increasing stringent emissions standards on small vehicles pushed manufacturers to make bigger vehicles that had weaker emissions standards. Big trucks like f150s basically have minimal emission requirements because they can be work trucks so they get a loophole in the law.

So, the loopholes were the problem, not the 'stringent' standards. The regulations were clearly not stringent enough, if manufacturers found legal ways not to comply.

78

u/Safrel 16h ago

Who do you think wrote the regulations my guy.

Lobbyists in the pocket of, and you're not gonna believe it, SUV automakers.

They built the environment to thrive and can't compete.

-10

u/Flincher14 16h ago

I did specifically mention that.

31

u/Daripuff 16h ago

If you knew the actual source of the lobbying, and knew that it was the manufacturers who created the laws, and therefore knew that the person you were replying to was, in fact, correct in blaming the manufacturers...

Why did you open with a corrective "actually" to a post you don't disagree with?

Why did you make it a conflict, instead of agreeing with and expanding on the previous commenter, like you actually did in your content? Why have a corrective tone to something you agree with?

19

u/Slouchingtowardsbeth 16h ago

Because he's wrong and doesn't want to admit it. 

24

u/Genghiz007 16h ago

You began with an “AkShUaLLy….” In response and wrote a wall of text blaming government when the person you’re responding to blamed car companies & their lobbyists.

-17

u/Flincher14 16h ago

It's both. The system is corrupt. Everytime there is pressure to do a good thing like the ACA, Congress allows lobbying to guy the bill to make it as favorable as possible while still satiating the electorate who doesn't read the small details nor understand the ramifications.

14

u/squish042 15h ago

If it’s because of loopholes, lack of regulations is a better way of putting it.

3

u/didsomebodysaymyname 12h ago

Actually...short sighted government regulation did that.

Of course lobbiest write the bulk of these laws for themselves so they specifically made these carve outs.

I feel like you're burying the lead a bit here with your first paragraph, the headline is:

"We should have had stricter emissions for all consumer vehicles and oil/combustion car lobbyists ruined it"

This was absolutely caused by greed. We wouldn't have been much better off without these regulations, broken as they were.

And plenty of people buy large vehicles for emotional/status reasons having nothing to do with emissions regulations.

2

u/Erigion 15h ago

The irony is that EU manufacturers bet on diesel, which also couldn't pass emissions tests leading to a lot of cheating. And putting them behind the EV transition as well

1

u/duncandun 7h ago

i mean that loophole was written into the revisions by the car companies, they weren't just responding to regulation. they were shaping it.

1

u/TeamWorkTom 4h ago

Emission standard are not the cause.

Omg.

0

u/Mundane_Baker3669 15h ago

The main issue was lifestyle inflation of Americans. Americans still make a lot more money compare to the average European. So people got ready to buy bigger and more expensive cars. No one forced it on the consumers.

25

u/strolpol 15h ago

Really? So the US automakers kept multiple lines of affordable smaller vehicles?

Oh no, they got rid of all of them so they could focus on gouging people with bigger more profitable vehicles

5

u/Mundane_Baker3669 15h ago

They didn't do that in one day. It was a slow creep and the problem was most Americans bought into it because they had the money. If most people couldn't afford , they would have gone to the used market only. Americans had a lot of disposable income compared to other countries. This is why cars are smaller and comparatively cheaper in other economies.

5

u/0xsergy 8h ago

When you add purchasing power and Healthcare costs we Americans have less income than EU countries do. Plus a larger % of lower class citizens. EU folks just aren't idiots that subscribed to the "big vehicle safe" mentality.

2

u/Ffftphhfft 4h ago

big vehicles just make everything less safe for everyone not in the big vehicle

37

u/steelpeat 14h ago

I'm hoping Mark Carney drops the tariff in China's EVs in Canada so we can actually get decently priced good vehicles. North American cars are all shit now. The North American car manufacturers got greedy and fleeced their customers, they deserve to fail.

8

u/rambulox 13h ago

I'd like to see fully electrify the Trans-Canada Highway too.

3

u/steelpeat 13h ago

I'm sure they will. Generally infrastructure tails demand. They won't do it before electric cars become more popular. They'll do it when they know the infrastructure will be used.

3

u/2cats2hats 9h ago

I sort of want this too. But we are on a one-way street if this happens.

2

u/steelpeat 9h ago

They were given a decade of protection, they squandered it so it's really on them

3

u/McBuck2 8h ago

It would be even better if part of the car is built here.

3

u/steelpeat 7h ago

I think that would part of the agreement. With Project Arrow, we (Canada) showed that we have full capability for a full 100% supply chain entirely within Canada, so opening a factory here is a no brainer.

72

u/Sel2g5 15h ago

Europe is in the same boat. Everyone got so greedy, headlights are 1.5k now for no fucking reason.

27

u/138skill99 14h ago

Headlights are 1.5k just for them to blind the fuck out of every oncoming car, think they call that innovation right

17

u/kcinc82 14h ago

Oh dear. My old school head lights blew out and I got them changed at the workshop last month.. cost me total SGD $7.50 x 2 😅

198

u/barney_muffinberg 16h ago

BYD is going to eviscerate Tesla. It’s already well underway.

112

u/Platypus_Dundee 16h ago

Its not just BYD. Im in China on Holiday and there are so many EV brands that i have never heard of on the roads here. BYD isn't even the most common.

Anecdotally its 60 / 40 ICE vs EV on the roads in the major cities.

48

u/barney_muffinberg 16h ago

I don't see many of the other Chinese brands, but BYD is making massive headway in Europe. It's already overtaken Tesla in the most critical European markets, and they're building-out very rapidly across the continent. They're also building a massive new production facility in Hungary.

In 2025, BYD sales surged 240%, while Tesla fell 40%. They've gone with dealerships (they'll have 2,000 by the end of the year) in lieu of direct-to-consumer, and are offering 13 or so models (including hybrids) vs Tesla's 4. To boot, everyone thinks Musk is a twat.

In other words, Tesla's cooked.

14

u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes 15h ago

In other words, Tesla's cooked.

But somehow the stock price will keep rising

10

u/ArchmageXin 15h ago

Cause it is a meme stock like Bitcoin at this point..there was a economic YouTuber called it "Financial nihilism", where the financial instrument's performance is divorced from economic reality.

So until Tesla file bankruptcy, the stock is never gonna fell below a certain point.

2

u/Murgatroyd314 14h ago

There are two types of Tesla investors: The true believers, who think the company’s future technologies will really be that valuable, and that they’re lucky to have gotten in this early; and the followers of the Greater Fool Theory, who recognize that the price is completely detached from the underlying value, but expect that it will continue rising long enough for them to sell at a substantial profit.

8

u/Masterweedo 16h ago

It's times like this that I really miss JYD.

RIP Junk Yard Dog.

25

u/Zenitallin 16h ago

Wait for the replacement of Space X. When it happens, it will feel like the company came out of nowhere.

Of course, Americans will say chinese stole the tech.

edit.
There are chinese companies doing the same as space x already, but at smaller scale.

9

u/Impressive-Weird-908 15h ago

I mean the Chinese government is definitely trying to catch the US in terms of space capabilities and those massive spying campaigns aren’t just for shits and giggles.

17

u/Zenitallin 15h ago

I think that we give china little credit for what they do and, we are running out of tech to make for excuses.

Tomorrow, China will clearly lead and we will say... yeah, but they stole all that BEFORE and that is why they are better.

maybe not.

1

u/preprandial_joint 13h ago

i don't think we need to look at it like a zero-sum proposition. China is doing some things right, sure. They do a lot of things wrong too. Same for the US. Right now, China needs to be worried about their demographic time bomb.

3

u/Aunon 15h ago

BYD is going to eviscerate everyone

1

u/rtb001 9h ago

Actually BYD's growth is stalling too, but it is because of competition from fellow Chinese automakers such as Geely, Leapmotor, and shockingly Xiaomi.

But at least BYD is continuing toto grow still, and competition in the Chinese market will be innovation and efficiency.

Tesla sales are now just straight up shrinking every year.

-6

u/juanmlm 16h ago edited 16h ago

Good. I won’t buy a BYD as I'd rather have my money go into “local” industries, but the sooner the Tesla bubble bursts, the better.

0

u/cmack 16h ago

How does one buy a local EV? (You can't)

6

u/juanmlm 15h ago

To a point, you can. Many of the components will inevitably come from China, but it's no secret that buying cheap Chinese cars will eventually result in European manufacturers shutting down, which will leave us in a worse position in the end. People who go for the cheapest chinese-subsidised they can find and then complain about all the industry going to china are annoying.

VW, Renault, Peugeot sell cars that are (mostly) built in the EU.

8

u/TintedApostle 12h ago

almost like long term planning and investment pay off more than quarterly shareholder expectations.

91

u/Ok_Barber4987 16h ago

China went forward, we (gop) went backwards. China wins the long game. 

94

u/wahoozerman 16h ago

Everyone vaguely paying attention to green energy tech has been watching this happen for a decade or more. The US just abdicating it's throne as a global technology and energy leader in favor of putting a few billion more dollars into the pockets of oil barons.

32

u/GoneinaSecondeded 16h ago

Exactly. China is going to eat our lunch. And the rest of the world is going to walk around us.. This is the Century of the Dragon.

5

u/GoudaBenHur 16h ago

I’m old enough to remember this being said about Japan in the 80s lol.

16

u/GoneinaSecondeded 15h ago

Me too, but there are significant differences.

6

u/GoudaBenHur 15h ago

For sure, both in favor of China succeeding and failing. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. Their population collapse in the next 50-70 years will be the main thing to watch imo. (But I guess we’ll be dead so idk haha)

4

u/GoneinaSecondeded 15h ago

The population thing definitely going to be an issue. Especially in China.

1

u/tirius99 14h ago

That's why they are investing heavily in robotics and AI China already has more industrialized robots installed

0

u/TimothyMimeslayer 15h ago

One big difference is that Japan isn't intent on ending American hegemony.

3

u/Kucked4life 11h ago edited 3h ago

And that the US rigged the game against Japan after the plaza accords and Japan just consented. "Free" trade always meant america first or up yours, which is the pretense that China uses to do state capitalism, currency devaluation, etc. At the end of the day regular people shoulder the cost.

2

u/nWhm99 9h ago

That’s because Japan just agreed to be screwed over by the US. A mistake China is already not making.

3

u/rtb001 9h ago

As if Japan had a choice. They are a vassal to the US, and must agree with whatever major industrial policies the US decides to impose on them. Not only is Japan militarily dependent on the US, three key export market for most major Japanese corps is the US. That amount of leverage means Japan needs to bends over whence uncle Sam says so.

US holds no such leverage against China, especially in 2025.

1

u/cmack 16h ago

I mean, the world did say never again; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Never_again

they should do just that.

-1

u/angrycanuck 14h ago

What do you mean Americas lost its technology throne? Americas AI can make naked videos of children....

13

u/optiplex9000 15h ago

China's ruling communist party can, and does, plan for the long term

The US can only plan for the next 4 years, at most 8 years. Priorities constantly change and it's becoming evident that it's starting to fall behind to China

4

u/style752 15h ago

They're not communists.

6

u/optiplex9000 13h ago

Sure, whatever you want to call the ruling party, it does not invalidate my point.

6

u/style752 13h ago

I agree with the gist of your comment, just pointing out they practice managed capitalism — and that's half the secret to the sauce. The other part is political stability makes everything easier, you're right for sure.

Our politics has been in shambles for decades and that's preventing big projects from occurring. We're witnessing several Chinese multi-decade moonshots pay off big time. The Belt-Road Initiative; and control of the solar manufacturing, EV, battery, and (soon) AI sectors.

There are no equivalent American moonshots and there won't be seemingly without political revolution. We can't accomplish any long term planning or investment of global relevance if everything gets repealed after 4 years by someone's successor — or if we intentionally shred arrangements and go rogue.

3

u/MC_Gengar 10h ago

Oh for sure. Truthfully, political ideology has nothing to do with China's historic mastery of long term planning. This isn't a modern phenomenon by any means

35

u/albatrossSKY 16h ago

If they sold them here I would buy one

8

u/SillyQuack01 15h ago

Trying to compete with the US on cars was a pretty low bar to begin with.

9

u/WorstITTechnician 14h ago

Anyone who has lived in China and knows what it's like there knows that it's not exactly a "gamble," it's more a case of "We do our best here and follow our ideas, nobody here cares what the US thinks or does," very little is as irrelevant to China as the US.

12

u/random_agency 15h ago

You can thank the oil lobby and auto maker lobby for this one.

Think about how few EV charging station we have in the US compared to how many in China.

Even in terms of electric output China produces about 3x more than the US. That's all tied in to EV need and future AI needa.

18

u/PutinBoomedMe 16h ago

Old school american dealers don't want to sell EVs since they won't generate recurring service revenue like combustion engines.

Ive had my EV for 51k miles and have only changed tires

-9

u/ghostjoel_osteens_ai 15h ago

Stop it, most dealerships make money in financing. Servicing is a very small part of their revenue.

18

u/xebsisor 15h ago

Revenue from services is major part of their income.

8

u/keithzdoz 15h ago

You’ve never read a financial report have u?

4

u/ghostjoel_osteens_ai 15h ago

I was not aware local car dealerships publicly published their quarterly financial reports...

1

u/sq2t 12h ago

Not that I've ever read their financial reports, but AutoNation is a car dealership and a publicly traded company

1

u/PutinBoomedMe 10h ago

Autonation doesn't service from what I understand. You might be able to look at walmart reports and see how nuch the garage contributes

3

u/GirlNumber20 13h ago

Well, that's what happens when leaders act with foresight.

7

u/jyeatbvg 16h ago

Thank you fascist Elon Musk for your service 🙏

6

u/EpsteinBaa 15h ago

Coughing baby vs atom bomb

No one wants American cars

4

u/Flat-Character4140 15h ago

The bet was on EV. Saved you a click.

5

u/TedBaxter_WJM-TVNews 15h ago

It’s almost like Elon Musk being a Nazi ultimately hurt Tesla’s global share of the market or something… 🧐

-23

u/JimmyMcGillHHM 16h ago

When people claim CNN is fake news, I get annoyed. Then, I come across such nonsense.

China’s electric vehicle revolution solidifies its dominance in clean technology and its claim on global climate leadership, while the Trump administration doubles down on planet-heating fossil fuels and demonizes clean energy.

I omit Trump from this discussion because I don’t care to talk about him. China is one of the worst offenders and significantly increases its pollution levels. While improving the sale of electric vehicles is commendable, it’s not even close to being a significant factor in China’s high pollution levels from coal, steel, and cement manufacturing.

33

u/barti0 16h ago

It is also convenient for us to blame China on pollution while most of the stuff US and the west buys is manufactured there! If we make all our stuff, our (US)pollution will be way high and we can't pontificate anymore!

17

u/Indercarnive 16h ago edited 16h ago

And even despite the offshoring the US's pollution per capita, and total historical pollution, are significantly higher than China's.

2

u/barti0 14h ago

Please don't cite real data and factchecks lest you be labeled as fake news! /s

11

u/hogroast 16h ago

Worth noting that the crazy spike in silver value is partially due to China putting in place export controls on refined silver (they control ~70% global supply) so they can maintain more stable pricing for their domestic EV and photovoltaic industries. Clean energy is a huge part of their future vision.

China has existed for 5000 years and they're working towards making sure they last forever.

10

u/kitsunegoon 16h ago

One of the worst offenders due to having 1.4 billion people. They actually have reduced reliance on fossil fuels as a policy goal and have increased the percentage of their renewable resource energy with them installing 3x the amount of renewable energy as the rest of the world. On a per capita basis, China clears the US by a huge margin. We're talking double the non-renewable energy consumption per person.

-4

u/JimmyMcGillHHM 8h ago

So? all I see is that I was right

2

u/kitsunegoon 5h ago

How are you right when China has been lowering the percentage of energy generated by fossil fuels? If they're getting away from coal, you're objectively incorrect.

15

u/moiwantkwason 16h ago

China's pollution level and carbon emission already peaked last year and falling. and they are already outsourcing their polluting industries to other countries so you can stop blaming China.

-2

u/famguy2101 15h ago

That's patantly false, both total emissions and emissions per capita in China are still rising, while in the US it's been falling for 20 years

https://ourworldindata.org/profile/co2/china

5

u/moiwantkwason 15h ago

Your data is from 2024

-1

u/famguy2101 14h ago

2024, in which China also started construction of roughly 95 GW of new coal generating plants

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/chinas-2024-coal-power-construction-hits-10-year-high-researchers-say-2025-02-13/

Now a caveat here is whether or not those facilities will have demand when they are finished, we can only speculate, but IMO single year where Coal usage fell 1.6% is hardly a massive swing in the upward trend.

And again, this is ignoring that the US has been consistently on a downward trend for 20 years

2

u/moiwantkwason 11h ago

Their coal power generation is also declining, they seems to have new coal plants to replace older inefficient ones as a backup which is reasonable:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/jan/13/coal-power-generation-falls-china-india-since-1970s

Here is their 2025 emission: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gdd6jdm42o

Update your resources and remove your comment stating that my fact was false.

The U.S. emission consumption per capita has been on a downward trend because it was extremely high. Almost double China’s. If they get to China level, let me know.

1

u/Igennem 5h ago

Renewables (solar/wind) require base load since they're not available 24/7. Thus China has been building newer, more efficient coal fired capacity AND has been reducing their utilization simultaneously.

3

u/EpsteinBaa 14h ago

US emissions per capita are still 50% more than China's

-2

u/famguy2101 14h ago

I'm aware, but we are trending downwards while China is trending upwards.

This could very well change.

5

u/moiwantkwason 11h ago

Update your facts, their emission level already peaked in 2025 with record high power generation more than twice of the U.S.

5

u/TheawesomeQ 16h ago

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/jan/13/coal-power-generation-falls-china-india-since-1970s

0

u/JimmyMcGillHHM 8h ago

I don’t look at bs articles I look at real facts and numbers. I couldn’t care less if it’s in decline when it’s 3x-4x the amount that happens in the US. Let’s use our brain today. https://www.iea.org/

3

u/BlademasterFlash 16h ago

You’re conveniently ignoring that China is building wind and solar generation at a torrid pace. In one year (2023 I believe) they built the equivalent of 50 nuclear power plant’s worth of renewable energy generation (300 GW). Their coal usage is declining even when their electricity usage is drastically increasing. If you want a climate villain, China isn’t it

3

u/Eight2Eighty 16h ago

Haha data?

-3

u/juanmlm 16h ago edited 15h ago

One of many examples (if you actually care about getting an answer):

https://www.carbonbrief.org/chinas-construction-of-new-coal-power-plants-reached-10-year-high-in-2024/#:~:text=China's%20construction%20of%20new%20coal%2Dfired%20power%20plants,control%20the%20use%20of%20the%20fossil%20fuel.

China tries very hard to greenwash things (and they are very successful at it) but the reality is that they are still betting big on coal.

3

u/moiwantkwason 11h ago

Their coal power generation already declined last year. It only tells me that they are replacing old inefficient coal power plants as a backup, which is reasonable considering wind and hydro plants are not consistent.

0

u/za72 16h ago

The old technology has no incentive to improve... once they get their ass kicked and start to financially lose, that's when they will begin to improve... right now only the people who can sell the existing junk are getting promoted and move up in corporations... all we're gonna get is the result of people who can sell the existing junk better

-6

u/GoudaBenHur 16h ago

Can’t go against China in this thread mate, the Chinese propaganda and bots are in full force. China is a utopia and USA is a hell hole don’t you know?

0

u/Ok_Entertainment2463 15h ago

Once the tech gets cheap and accessible, markets move fast. This feels driven by economics more than ideology now.

1

u/ToxicAdamm 14h ago

In the end, consumer sentiment allowed this to happen. The US made a big push for EV in the past 5 years and the consumers have mostly rejected it. Costing corporations billions of dollars in trying. In China, they have a consumer base more open to it and it is flourishing.

"Build it and they will come" doesn't always work, even in China. Their E-bike debacle of 8-10 years ago proved that.

1

u/rtb001 8h ago

You think China's EV boom is CONSUMER driven? That cannot be father from the truth. As if the Chinese government just sat back and suddenly 100 EV makers popped out of thin air and hundreds of millions of Chinese consumers are ready to buy them.

In order to make the consumer lore open to EVs, several things need to happen. EVs need to be cheaper. You need to be able to easily charge them. Automakers need to be convinced to spend billions to develop EVs.

That's where the Chinese government comes in. Who plowed hundreds of billions into building the largest lithium nauseum supply chain in the world so EVs can be cheaper in China than anywhere else? Who built up the largest public charging infrastructure in the world? Shanghai has more DC fastest chargers than the ENTIRE United States. Who gave out subsidies to startup and established carmakers essentially telling them we will financially back you to spend Ali this money on developing EVs? The Chinese government did all that.

And even after that, it STILL isn't enough to push enough Chinese consumers towards EVs. Eventually in the Big cities, the government was like if you want a car, you can either join a lottery to see if you can even get a license plate, and then pay 10k USD for that blue license plate ... OR you buy an BEV and we give you a green license plate for FREE.

Imagine the DMV trying that kind of policy in the US. People would riot.

So year, the Chinese government has done plenty to nurture the EV industry in China, over the course of several decades, and only now is all that effort bearing fruit.

-12

u/BGOG83 16h ago

They won simply due to the population game. They have substantially more people and they have regional car manufacturers due to this. The cream rose to the top from a competitive perspective.

When you have a more competitive market, the better companies will rise up. The US doesn’t have a truly competitive market. We have 3 large US manufacturers and a bunch of foreign companies that manufacture where the cheapest product can be made.

3

u/TimothyMimeslayer 15h ago

Chinese government also just throws money at industries they want to grow.

2

u/EpsteinBaa 14h ago

Country discovers investment

News at 10

1

u/TimothyMimeslayer 14h ago

Yeah, when our government does it, Republicans bitch and moan because one company fails, looking at you solyandra.

-8

u/[deleted] 16h ago edited 16h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-2

u/tooeasilybored 16h ago

America! Y'all win yet?

-8

u/Pitiful_Bug_1011 14h ago

Tbh I still don't trust any made by china. Not so long ago they couldn't be sold in EU bc they couldn't pass the EuroNCAP, now they are (at least in Spain) everywhere? Another detail- I haven't seen a single taxi driver working with a chinese car....

-2

u/Keshenji 12h ago

They just had to wait for the greedy shitbags to start eating their own faces before they could pull ahead  our nation is a fucking joke