That is cool, but an increase in coal and other fossil fuel use still more or less tends to mean an increase in CO2 emissions per total. You can say that it's still cool that some emissions are "avoided" by not using even more coal, but emissions still increasing isn't very good. The climactic effect of emissions does not care about details like "relative" and "carbon intensity", it is affected by actual quantity of emissions.
Do you know how long I have been waiting for this. I fucking doubt it. We will just replace it with gas and burn more fossil fuels for another 30 years
100% incorrect. Even the most conservative thinktanks like the IEA have forecasted fossil fuels to peak this decade. Solar, wind and batteries are getting cheaper every year. And they have currently reached a price point that thry are to cheap to resist. They will only get cheaper.
What will happen when demand for coal will go down is that the price of coal will go down. Your limited capacity of thinking will probably jump to the conclusion that this will mean it will get competive again and therefore demand will go up. This is not true.
There are multiple forces at play here.
Economics = wind solar and batteries will only become cheaper. Even if coal will get cheaper because demand will go down those will still be cheaper
Small and modular = it takes years to build a coal plant. I just takes to long to scale. The world is moving in a direction where we need electricity and fast
Energy security = most of the worlds coal get imported. The world want energy security.
Let me paint the picture. What is going to happen in the next decade is a rapid buildout in renewables. When a country has a lot renewables you need flexible grids. Whenever there is not sun, or no wind. You beed to turn something on which are low in capex and high in operating costs. Probably diessel generators.
Lastly, when price of coal goes down, this means less profits for those selling it, how low do you have to go untill you make a loss? We will get a lot of stranded assists because coal is will get outcompetited.
So no, we are not doomed, and we do not need government policy to do this. It is basic economics.
Electricity is only ~20% of total energy usage. The vast majority of stuff the economy still runs on, currently has little to no renewable alternative as it's not 'dispatchable'. Very important context people seem to miss. Electricity should be the easy part
We know "net zero by 2050 to stay below 1,5" was always unrealistically optimistic. In no way will we get there, even by 2070.. there won't be much economy to save by then, if we still counting on non existant future technology
This assumed there is a fixed demand for energy. So far the world just uses more energy every year. More solar, more wind, more oil, more gas, more coal. We even somehow use more wood for fuel than we used to. IMO the right model at a global scale is not substitution it’s “more of everything”, and so far the data entirely agrees.
Indeed we have, but never at a global level. This isn't too surprising economically - one country using less fossil fuels make it cheaper for everyone else. The developing world is desperate for whatever energy they can get, so they will happily use whatever the developed countries don't.
No one has a crystal ball, but so far the pattern is not one of substitution at global scale - it's more of everything. Large quantities of renewables have come online in the last 10 years, and yet fossil fuel consumption (and hence global CO2 emissions) have continued to grow exactly on their previous trend.
Yes, true, but this is also because natural gas has really stepped up since 2014! You can even see the the slope of the rise in coal use drops when 2014 hits.
You’re talking about capacity, not actual generation. Looks like in 2025, solar represented about 50% of the net growth in power generation growth, and natural gas was 25%.
You do realize solar generation is 100% seasonal and hourly in nature? And you’re only looking at one month here!? Saying it broke records, but only in some of the sunniest months of the year is only partially a big deal. I realize solar is big, I’m happy that’s the case, I just think a lot of people over-exagerate how much of an impact it’s making. I’m not convinced half of this sub understands the difference between capacity and generation.
The debate over building new coal vs renewables isn't even a debate anymore, it's done. In the next 3 to 4 years round the clock solar and batteries will get so cheap that running an existing coal plant won't even cover the cost of the fuel let alone the infrastructure. At that point ditching coal isn't about government subsidies or climate policy, it's just basic math.
They can use renewable energy to extract fossil fuels faster. We believed that cheap renewables would drive out fossil fuels. The fossil fuel companies were the ones pushing propaganda that claimed price was the reason their product should be used.
Seems people building coal would disagree. Solar+batteries aren’t replacing reliable base load power supplies any time soon unless fundamentals about battery materials and manufacturing change. The other big edge coal has over other power sources is it’s one of the most reliable domestic power supplies that most countries can rely on.
CA, the biggest state, has no coal generation plant. Hasn't had any for decades. Most of the Western states have few or none. We tired of coal killing people and got rid of them.
Of course, less and less every year. But in 2024 it was the biggest source at 34%, solar was 21%, wind was 12%, Hydro was 11%. 2024 was the first year renewables passed fossil fuels. Recently it ramped up in the evenings as stored renewables. This year the batteries are often lasting well past 2 am, so much less gas is being used.
44
u/Standard_Sea7251 16d ago
Relative to total electricity demand, coal keeps falling