You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Lots of renewables, EVs, and ... coal.

The Chinese economy is back.
After a year dominated by COVID lockdowns, China earlier this week released economic statistics for the first quarter of 2023, reporting robust GDP growth of 4.5%. Given that China is the world’s number one greenhouse gas emitter — by far — what does this news mean for the climate?
Overall, China’s two long-time growth engines — exports and investment — seem to be moving in different directions while its long-desired third growth pillar — consumption — might finally be solidifying.
There are definitely climate bright spots in the data, but also a lot of coal. Let’s dig in.
Construction has been a major piece of China’s growth — and emissions — for decades. But developers have overbuilt — tens of millions of apartments remain vacant — and some are beginning to default. Local governments rely on revenue from developers to pay their own bills, and households have trillions of dollars tied up in speculative bets on real estate. It’s a deeply convoluted political economy mess that I call “China’s carbon triangle” — carbon because the vast amount of steel and cement that go into these buildings cause huge amounts of emissions. Right-sizing the sector could save up to a gigaton a year of CO2 emissions, equivalent to the combined emissions of Canada and Mexico.
The new quarterly data suggests this might be happening, but a big asterisk is needed. Real estate investment dropped almost 6% this quarter, and housing starts fell even faster — “diving 19.2 percent year on year.”
While this might lead one to expect that steel and cement — the key emissions sources of that construction — would be down as well, the data confounds. The reason here is that state fixed asset investments were up significantly (10%). So, despite the private sector remaining cautious in its investments (only up 0.6%), overall investment ticked up, leading to growth in steel and cement production (6% and 4% this quarter, respectively). Infrastructure, even if underutilized, at least provides more benefits to people than ghostly empty towers of apartments.
While they slipped in January and February, in March exports boomed, growing 14.8% year-on-year. It’s possible that this data point is just a blip – an artifact of last year’s Shanghai lockdown as economists expected exports to fall in March as well — but peering into the sectoral makeup of the export data points to some important emerging trends that seem unlikely to dissipate. Most notable in the positive direction are vehicles, specifically electric vehicles. Electronics — hit by U.S. policies — slumped though.
In the first quarter, China’s total vehicle production was down 5% to 6.26 million. By contrast, electric vehicle production grew 22.5% to 1.63 million, over 25% of the total. That’s compared to total U.S. sales in 2022 of only around 800,000 units. Fewer cars with EVs taking an increasingly bigger slice of the pie is key to decarbonizing the transportation sector. The export of inexpensive EVs (like BYD’s Seagull and the ludicrously cheap Changli) makes electrifying autos and transportation possible at a global scale today rather than in 2035.
It is generally acknowledged by both external observers and Chinese government officials that the country needs to move beyond its export and investment dependence. Household consumption is seen as the necessary growth driver of the future in China, but the transition has been difficult. The recent economic data suggests that perhaps the gears are finally turning in this direction. Retail sales jumped 10.6% in March and 5.8% for the quarter overall. There is again a base year effect given the Shanghai lockdown a year ago, but the high level of activity here is probably enough to keep the government from committing to additional stimulus.
While this is good news for China, it might not be good news for the planet. Contrary to expectations for the world’s biggest trader, most of Chinese emissions actually arise from domestic consumption. Trade-adjusted emissions statistics suggest that around 90% of China’s greenhouse gas emissions come from activities consumed in China.
The climate conversation has, for good reason, become dominated by the mantra electrify everything. With clean energy increasingly cheap, we can maintain or even expand energy consumption without emitting greenhouse gases and perhaps achieve abundance.
China has been a key part of this puzzle. Its massive expansion of wind and especially solar PV production has been critical to price declines in these types of renewables. Beyond production, China leads the world in renewable generating capacity, last year installing 87.4 GW of solar and 37.6 GW of wind.
But Beijing’s electricity news isn’t only green. China simultaneously dominated the world in 2022 in new coal power plants. China’s coal fleet is already the world’s largest at over 1,100 GW. That represents more than half of the world’s coal plants, and it’s adding more than the rest of the world combined.
That being said, what matters more than capacity is generation. How much electricity are these plants and facilities actually generating? In recent years, China’s coal plants haven’t been running at full tilt and are shifting to a role of backing-up renewables. In the first quarter, we see that both wind and solar generation continued their rapid growth: 18% and 12% respectively. Total electricity production is up just 2.4%, with thermal power — which is coal-dominated — increasing just 1.7%.
However, the quarterly data masks some interesting patterns in the monthly data. One difficulty with intermittent renewables is, of course, that the sun doesn’t always shine and, in this case the wind doesn’t always blow. And in China, the wind was blowing in January and February much more than it was in March. Wind generation grew in January and February by around 30% but then was flat in March.
More troubling news is in the March data. Last year, China faced droughts so severe that people could walk across the Yangtze. The lack of water meant that the dams which provide so much clean hydropower to the Chinese grid became inoperable, leading to power failures and ramped up coal generation. Unfortunately, we’re already seeing similar dynamics taking place. A major drought in southwest China led to hydropower dropping over 15% in March and more coal was burnt to make up the gap.
All in all it’s a mixed bag: Lots of electric vehicles, lots of renewables, but also lots of cement and lots of coal.
Sign up for our newsletter to receive Heatmap’s best articles directly in your inbox:
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The spinoff of Lawrence Livermore National Lab has a new 10-point plan to get onto the grid by the 2030s.
One of fusion energy’s newest startups, Inertia Enterprises, is betting that the fastest route to commercial fusion runs through one of the field’s oldest ideas. The company, which raised a $450 million Series A earlier this year, plans to build a power plant based on the laser-driven fusion system pioneered at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s — the only tech yet to have produced more energy from a fusion reaction than it took to initiate it. Now, Inertia has shared its commercialization roadmap exclusively with Heatmap, detailing the 10 near-term capabilities it must demonstrate before this landmark experiment can become a grid-scale power plant by the mid-2030s.
The roadmap offers a route from the national lab’s impressive but commercially impractical fusion demonstrations to an economical power plant capable of producing electricity for the grid. At its core are a set of milestones — mostly aimed at developing cheap, mass-manufacturable components — that Inertia says it must clear before those individual systems can be integrated into a working plant. This road is not necessarily linear, however, as various teams will likely be working on many of these goals simultaneously.
At least the physics of Inertia’s approach are already proven, the startup’s CEO Jeff Lawson told me, pointing to the fusion experiments at Lawrence Livermore’s National Ignition Facility as a proof-of-concept. The lab’s demonstration of net energy gain caps more than six decades and $30 billion (in 2026 dollars) of U.S. fusion research. The remaining challenges, he argued, are all engineering-related, requiring “elbow grease, hard work, and smart people” rather than breakthroughs in fusion science.
"It seems to us like a startup or a commercial company of any variety should be focused on commercializing a proven scientific result, as opposed to actually trying to demonstrate the basic science to begin with," Lawson told me. Basic science, he argues, is better left to national labs and universities, where researchers can pursue "unbounded problems" that don’t align with the expectations and timelines of venture-backed startups.
Indeed, no fusion startup has yet achieved scientific breakeven, the milestone Lawrence Livermore first hit in 2022, and has since repeated numerous times. But leading players such as Commonwealth Fusion Systems and Helion Energy maintain that it’s only a matter of time before they validate the physics behind their own reactor designs, which they claim will be highly cost-competitive.
Lawson, on the other hand, readily acknowledged that Lawrence Livermore’s tech is uneconomical in its current form. His bet is simply that the more predictable path to a commercial reactor is to drive down the cost of the lab’s validated fusion approach, known as inertial confinement. This system relies on high-powered lasers firing at a millimeter-scale pellet of fusion fuel, compressing it to extreme temperatures and pressures until the atoms fuse. Today, the National Ignition Facility makes each individual fusion target by hand, a workable solution given that it only uses about a dozen per year.
That production model, however, isn’t remotely plausible for a grid-scale power plant. Because each fusion reaction lasts just a fraction of a billionth of a second, a commercial facility must fire its lasers at a fresh target about 10 times per second to generate continuous electricity — requiring the production of hundreds of millions of targets each year.
Scaling production to roughly a million pellets per day and making them inexpensive enough for commercial operation without compromising the strength or precision required for fusion ignition is central to Inertia’s roadmap. That includes goals five, seven, eight and nine — industrializing the manufacturing of the carbon shells that hold the fusion fuel, making the thin films that hold those carbon shells both durable and cheap, scaling up and automating fusion target assembly, and speeding up how fast targets are filled with the requisite deuterium-tritium fuel.
The other central focus of the roadmap is the laser system, which will ultimately consist of 1,000 individual units operating in concert to compress and heat the fusion fuel. Key priorities include reducing the system’s cost (goal two), dramatically increasing its firing cadence (goal three), and bolstering its durability to withstand high-intensity operations (goal four). Goal six also complements these efforts, calling for the development of a control system capable of tracking moving fusion targets to precisely align each laser shot.
Goals one and 10 bookend the journey with some broader milestones. The first focuses on increasing the fusion target’s energy gain — the ratio of fusion energy produced to laser energy delivered — to more than 25 times ignition. Today, the National Ignition Facility’s best-performing laser shot has yielded a gain of just over four times what it took to start the reaction. Goal 10 then zooms out to the ultimate objective: integrating all these technologies into a commercially viable power plant that can deliver either electricity or industrial heat to end customers.
To reach that point, Inertia has embarked on an industrial engineering hiring spree, recruiting folks with experience taking complex hardware systems from prototype to mass production, “not unlike the processes that are used in the semiconductor or consumer electronics world,” Lawson explained. The company has been making progress on its component development goals since the beginning of the year, he told me, and expects to announce the successful demonstration of a few of these milestones in the coming months. Lawson ultimately expects Inertia to complete the core components of its laser and target manufacturing systems by the middle of next year.
The team will spend the next two to three years integrating these individual pieces into two fully operational subsystems, a prototype laser system and a target manufacturing line. Around 2030, the company will begin combining those subsystems into a first-of-a-kind fusion power plant, which will also serve as the proving ground for the target chamber, tritium fuel breeding system, and power conversion system that turns fusion heat into electricity. By the middle of the next decade, Inertia aims to be generating power from this first plant, setting the stage for the company to build and connect additional grid-scale commercial power plants.
There are plenty of engineering trade-offs that the company will have to solve for. Take the decision around how to size the target chamber, for example. “If you make it bigger, your walls have an easier time and survive longer, but it’s more expensive. If you make it smaller, your walls have a tougher time because they’re closer to all the heat and energy that the fusion reaction is creating, but now your power plant costs less to build.”
But to Lawson, this represents exactly the type of problem Inertia was built to solve: complex engineering issues that come to the fore once scientists have demonstrated the fundamental physics are sound. He thinks other fusion companies may someday reach this stage, as well — though he’s unwilling to hazard a guess on exactly what approach or startup is best positioned to do so.
“There have been generations of scientists who’ve made their predictions about fusion energy and gotten it wrong,” he told me. “I’m not going to pretend to be smarter than them. All I’m here to say is, just knowing that one did work, we can commercialize it.”