An idea that is circulating widely in opinions about Europe’s green transition is that „it’s useless for us to switch to clean energy, energy efficiency, pollution elimination etc., because the main greenhouse gas emitter, China, is not doing the same and we lose competitiveness compared to it.”
In other words, let’s give up because it’s pointless.
A thesis not only oddly close to Russia's propagandist theses, the one country that has the most to lose if Europe goes greener, but also spread by its army of trolls. It has taken root even in the minds of the more educated, albeit insufficiently informed.
In short, the thesis is false. Without being an advocacy for China, a dictatorial regime with major problems and questionable practices, including regarding aspects of the green transition, the most populous state in the world is moving towards the green transition, even at speed. Not out of generosity, but out of interest.
Some information supporting this statement, but also discussing the hypothesis that Europe and America are "suckers" because, it is said, they are transitioning to a greener society (again, at the expense of the economy) while China is benefiting:
- Historically, America and Europe have "benefited," emitting much more greenhouse gases than China
For clarification, while China is the "leader" today in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, both in total and per capita, America and Europe have historically produced much more. This is also because the Chinese state was much further behind in terms of industrial development.
And since these actions do not take place AT THE MOMENT, but cumulatively, some over decades and even centuries, it turns out that THE MAJORITY OF THE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ARE PRODUCED BY AMERICA AND EUROPE.
This DOES NOT mean that we should accept China to do exactly what we did, simply because it would be a disaster for the planet, but the discussion about "benefiting" should be balanced.
- ESSENTIAL: China has a MASSIVE green economy transition program
China aims to become a net-zero carbon economy by 2060, unlike the European Union, which has this target set for 2050. However, at the current rate, China would reach net-zero by 2055.
Additionally, it aims to start reducing total emissions "no later than 2030," although encouraging signs give hope that this could happen much sooner. For example, the second quarter of 2024 saw a 1% decrease in CO2 emissions.
It is true that in the years before China set records in coal-fired power plant production, but 2024 brought the lowest number of approvals for new ones since the '60s. It would be a mistake to believe that China is on the path to becoming a "green paradise," but also a mistake to neglect its efforts.
- The main motivation for Beijing to go green is not to protect the planet, but STRATEGIC AUTONOMY
China is caught in what is called the "Malacca Dilemma." 80% of the oil that supplies it passes through the Strait of Malacca. 60% of goods. A strait that can be militarily closed by both the US and India in a major conflict or the invasion of Taiwan.
Now, if it wants to be the superpower it aims to be, China cannot afford this strategic vulnerability. It is true that it is looking for other options, such as hydrocarbons from Russia and Central Asia or corridors to bypass the strait, but that is a different kind of strategic dependence.
Xi Jinping's regime prefers to have its own energy, for which it does not depend on anyone. And green energy is abundant and at hand. It's not primarily about saving the planet, it's about power.
Furthermore, it should be noted that when a country wants to become a global leader, it's not good to be the largest emitter of greenhouse gases on Earth.
Diplomacy is complex, and when a state carries a stigma, it reduces its chances. It doesn't look good for the most vulnerable states facing climate change in the Pacific Ocean, Indian Ocean, and Africa. Exactly where China has significantly expanded its influence and military bases in recent decades.
- China not only has not neglected the green transition, but it dominates several sectors
From rare minerals to the production of photovoltaic panels, from batteries to its electric cars produced at a staggering - and worrying - rate compared to the rest of the planet. It holds 90% of the photovoltaic panel market, 70% of the lithium battery market, and 65% of the wind turbine market.
For China, the green transition offers a very good economic opportunity, but also a political tool.
And let's not think that these are just for export.
- China's advance in renewable energy is remarkable
In May 2024, China recorded a true record regarding the decrease in the share of coal in electricity production (only 53%) and the increase in renewable energy to 44%.
While the percentages may vary, it is still a historic record; fossil energy has never generated so little electricity, especially since we come from levels of 70% for coal in the years before.
It is estimated that from 2026, only solar energy (without wind) will produce more than coal. Then, over 80% of the new installed energy capacities are from the renewable energy sector. In 2020, it committed to installing 1,200 gigawatts of renewable energy by 2030. It is well ahead. It will reach the target in a few months, by 2025.
In fact, China produced more renewable energy in just the first half of 2024 than the ENTIRE energy production - regardless of sources - of another industrial giant, the UK, throughout the whole of 2023.
Want something even more impressive? Two-thirds of the photovoltaic farms or wind farms under construction worldwide are in China.
- "We replace one dependency with another by importing Russian gas with solar panels, electric cars, and other elements necessary for the climate transition."
It's like saying, pardon the bold strokes, that you're replacing a dependency on alcohol with one on apple juice.
Firstly, you're replacing energy sources that produce greenhouse gases and pollution affecting people's lives with ones that do not.
Secondly, you're no longer financing a militaristic and criminal regime that is destroying Ukraine. Thirdly, the "dependency" on materials from China is not quite the same kind of dependency.
What happens if Russia cuts off gas or manipulates its price as it has done since 2021? Big problems, right from day one.
What happens if China stops selling us solar panels and electric cars? Practically nothing in the short term. We don't freeze, prices don't skyrocket. We'll get them elsewhere or make them ourselves. No, it's not the same thing. Not to mention that the Chinese state wouldn't want to lose the EU market soon through a serious trade war.
It's not comfortable, it's true, for China to dominate these markets, but it's not a tragedy, especially since China's rise in the green sector has significantly lowered prices globally.
- Europe is pushing China to become greener
Despite the rhetoric about how we, Europeans, are fools and can't do anything about the polluting and greenhouse gas-producing Chinese, the Union is actually taking action. Since 2023, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism has been in place. From 2026, this mechanism will impose taxes on products from China (and beyond).
Moreover, recently, Europe has introduced more than substantial taxes on electric vehicles produced in China that threaten European manufacturers.
Also, a series of increasingly complex European directives introduce environmental obligations - direct or de facto - for suppliers outside the EU, many of whom are from China. In other words, if you want to sell parts or components in Europe, it's becoming increasingly difficult to do so while harming the environment.
PS - We won't delve into discussions about how, supposedly, the green transition would lead to "loss of competitiveness," it's a kind of urban legend totally contrary to logic. Examples of very advanced countries in terms of green transition, but whose economies are growing rapidly, should speak for themselves. Starting with Spain, one of the most advanced in the green direction and also the leader in economic growth among all advanced economies.
We also won't discuss the fact that even if China emits greenhouse gases without doing anything about it, it would still deserve our attention because 300,000 Europeans (and 25,000 Romanians) die annually due to pollution (which is not the same as greenhouse gases, although in the vast majority of cases, they come from the same sources).
But the data should make it clear that the narrative about how "we are going green while China is taking advantage of us and not doing the same" is false.