Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Podcast

The Big Reveal in China’s New Five-Year Plan

Rob checks in with Lauri Myllyvirta, an expert on China’s clean energy economy, on the country’s emissions goals and how the Iran War factors in.

Chinese pollution.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The new draft of China’s five year plan is here, and the news isn’t all good for climate advocates. Although China vows to expand its gigantic “clean energy bases” in the plan, it has actually walked back some of its biggest climate goals since 2021. The new plan also contains a mysterious — and politically convenient — change to one of its most important emissions estimates.

On this episode of Shift Key, Rob is joined by Lauri Myllyvirta, the lead analyst and co-founder of the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air and one of the world’s top experts on Chinese emissions outside China. Rob and Lauri discuss whether China is creating a new kind of energy hegemony, what really drives the country’s energy strategy, and how the new war in Iran could affect its plans.

Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap News.

Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, or wherever you get your podcasts.

You can also add the show’s RSS feed to your podcast app to follow us directly.

Here is an excerpt from their conversation:

Robinson Meyer: Let’s get into this question about the Chinese emissions target. So China, I think, has a reputation internationally for always meeting its emission targets, and for setting emissions targets that it can hit. And when it’s sometimes conservative in its targets, there’s a sense that, okay, well, it is being conservative, but that’s because it’s very focused on setting targets that it can hit. But it sounds like in the run up to this report, it became clear that China was not going to hit its 2030 target under the Paris Agreement. And so, as you write, it basically revised its own accounting metric. Can you just describe what happened there and how it was able to change its accounting midstream, basically?

Lauri Myllyvirta: I’ll start with what is known. China has been reporting on reductions in carbon intensity. Carbon intensity is the amount of CO2 per unit of GDP. And so if emissions stay flat, GDP goes up by 5%, carbon intensity falls by a bit less than 5% in a year.

Meyer: My understanding — and maybe this is wrong — is that up until 2030, the bulk of its emissions targets under the Paris Agreement, its nationally determined contributions, are phrased in the terms of carbon intensity, not in the terms of like, here’s what our national emissions target is going to be. They were primarily talking about, our big target is reducing the carbon intensity of our economy, rather than hitting some kind of tons per year goal that the U.S. and Europe and a lot of other countries adopted.

Myllyvirta: For sure. So for 2020 and 2030, China has had a few different targets, but the one that is most closely related to emissions — and in that sense, the cornerstone target — is carbon intensity. And so until 2020, China was overachieving that target. But then during the COVID and Zero COVID period, China went through a period of very energy-intensive and carbon-intensive growth with the service industries and other less energy-intensive industries were obviously not doing great. So that meant that carbon intensity started falling much more slowly. CO2 emissions grew faster during that period, at least according to the numbers that China had reported.

So they had been reporting carbon intensity reductions every year. And if you take the numbers from 2021 to 2025, they add up to a reduction of about 12% in China’s carbon intensity over that five-year period. And the target was 18% — that’s what they needed to get on track to, or stay on track to the 2030 carbon intensity target, and so that means that if you have a shortfall of six percentage points during these five years, then the target for the next five years becomes very demanding.

But so then along comes this new five-year plan, and it says that we achieved a reduction of 17.7% instead of the 12-point-something percent. So that is a huge revision. If you rephrase that in emission terms, it means that earlier China had said that their emissions over this five year period had increased about 13% in absolute terms. And now they say the increase was only 6%. So half of the emission growth disappeared. So this is what we know for a fact. The less clear part is what is this revision based on?

You can find a full transcript of the episode here.

Mentioned:

Previously on Shift Key: Have China’s Emissions Already Peaked?

China’s 15th Five-Year Plan — Implications for climate and energy transition, by Lauri Myllyvirta and Belinda Schäpe

China Can’t Decide If It Wants to Be the World’s First ‘Electrostate’

This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by …

Accelerate your clean energy career with Yale’s online certificate programs. Explore the 10-month Financing and Deploying Clean Energy program or the 5-month Clean and Equitable Energy Development program. Use referral code HeatMap26 and get your application in by the priority deadline for $500 off tuition to one of Yale’s online certificate programs in clean energy. Learn more at cbey.yale.edu/online-learning-opportunities.

Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe to access Heatmap’s expert analysis of energy, climate change, and sustainability, including coverage of our regular survey research. Save $57 on an annual subscription, just $156 $99/year.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
A matchbook and a truck.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The United States has more roads than you could possibly imagine. Eighty-three percent of the land in the Lower 48 lies within one kilometer of a road; if you’re seeking isolation, the furthest you can get away from one is likely only about 25 miles, in a far-flung corner of Yellowstone National Park.

The Trump administration wants to build even more. Earlier this week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture filed to rescind the nearly quarter-century-old Roadless Area Conservation Rule, which protects about 45 million acres of pristine national forest lands from the construction of — and dissection by — new permanent roads. The USDA’s given reason? That new roads will provide the access forest managers and fire practitioners need to better prevent wildfires in the nation’s most remote locations.

Keep reading...Show less
Energy

Scoop: Trump to Permit Largest-Ever Gas Project in Just 7 Months

The facility will power OpenAI’s 10-gigawatt data center in Pike County, Ohio.

Donald Trump and rubber stamps.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images, Library of Congress

The Trump administration aims to complete its environmental review of what would be the biggest fossil fuel power project in the country in just a few months, Heatmap has learned.

This news follows Monday’s announcement from OpenAI that it intends to lease a new 10-gigawatt data center under development in Pike County, Ohio, financed by a mixture of money from a SoftBank subsidiary and the chip company Nvidia. This AI hyperscale facility — known as the PORTS-Pike project — is expected to draw power from the largest gas power facility ever built in the United States, a 9.2-gigawatt facility sited on federal lands that would be built and owned by the Energy Department.

Keep reading...Show less
Spotlight

Data Center Moratoria Are ‘Unconstitutional,’ Lawsuits Claim

A new front opens in the data center wars.

An anti-data-center sign.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

A series of lawsuits filed in federal court asks a big question – are data center moratoria constitutional?

In early August, data center developer DC Blox sued the city of Nashville in federal court to overturn a zoning moratorium stopping them from building a hyperscale facility adjacent to the city zoo. “The Data Center Moratorium, moreover, is a targeted attack against DC BLOX, in violation of federal constitutional protections,” the suit argued, claiming that it defied the corporation’s due process and equal protection rights.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow