Renewable energy offers a competitive advantage for any energy intensive activity --- like manufacturing or AI.

China gets it, the USA doesn't.

wolfhumble an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Good China numbers, but I’d still keep two things in mind.

China is moving very fast on clean power. But total energy is still very fossil-heavy, about 78%: 51.4% coal, about 26.9% other fossil fuels, calculated as the remaining share after coal and non-fossil, and 21.7% non-fossil in 2025, based on official Chinese figures.

The U.S. is about 82% fossil overall, so roughly comparable to China’s ~78%, just in a different way. Much less coal now, around 8%, but a lot of oil and gas: petroleum about 38%, natural gas about 36%, according to EIA’s 2024 summary.

For electricity, China was around 11% solar and 11% wind in 2025, according to China’s 2025 Statistical Communiqué. The U.S. was around 9% solar, including rooftop and other small-scale solar, and around 10% wind in 2025, according to EIA.

Nuclear is a major difference in the electricity mix: about 18% of U.S. electricity generation versus roughly 5% in China, based on EIA and China’s 2025 Statistical Communiqué.

And yes, EIA is not a typo for IEA EIA is the U.S. Energy Information Administration, whereas IEA is the International Energy Agency.

▲

cloche 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Even so, the article says it grew 8% YOY in the US. The best is to hope that this is an unstoppable trend so that even politicians won't be able to reverse it.

▲

adjejmxbdjdn 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Imagine how much faster it would be growing if the U.S. government wasn’t paying companies billions to not produce wind energy

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/23/climate/offshore-wind-gas...

or delaying standard approvals

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/04/climate/wind-solar-projec...

	▲	wat10000 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Or forcing unprofitable coal power plants to remain operating against their owners' wishes. https://www.energy.gov/documents/doe-order-no-202-26-19-scha...

▲

willio58 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s already irreversible, but it’s just disappointing to see how the U.S. administration has chosen to actively fight against it, while other countries like China are embracing reality.

It’s actually funny if you don’t think about it too hard. The U.S. president is trying to make us more reliant on fossil fuels, while starting a war in Iran that’s led to the global fossil fuel market to be negatively impacted, forcing most Americans to pay more for fossil fuels. Who could have seen that coming? We’re doing great!

▲

dnautics 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> the U.S. administration has chosen to actively fight against it

the biggest producer of renewables is Texas, by a longshot. and the state of california just created insane NEM laws that favor the pockets of pg&e (and are shit for the environment) and as a result solar home installations have cratered.

▲

ceejayoz 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> the biggest producer of renewables is Texas

That doesn't refute the point at all.

▲

dnautics 3 hours ago | parent [-]

no, but renewables do speak for themselves in dollars and cents, even if they dont have subsidy. now should petrochem subsidies end too? probably yes.

	▲	ceejayoz 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> renewables do speak for themselves in dollars and cents Yes. But administration opposition can change that math, as they have with the tariffs.

▲

toast0 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

From the CalISO graphs, there doesn't seem to be a shortage of solar power for most of the day. It doesn't seem reasonable to incentivise production in the same way as it was when that wasn't the case.

I think NEM 3.0 incentivises storage now? Which seems to be what the (California) grid is looking for.

▲

ZeroGravitas 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Texas barely scrapes into the top ten red states by percentage of wind and solar, despite its ideal geography.

	▲	2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

some-guy 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Both NEM 2.0 and 3.0 have serious issues, but for different reasons. NEM 2.0 was basically a early adopter's rich person's subsidy that heavily distorted the market, and NEM 3.0 does not have nearly enough subsidies to justify the cost unless you pay cash up front for a large system. (For the record, I am on NEM 3.0 and got such a system).

At the end of the day, the best case scenario is large scale renewable / battery storage to bring costs down as much as possible, and for those of us who want battery backup / solar can choose to invest in it, but it shouldn't be "the" solution.

▲

mrhottakes 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"No One Could Have Predicted This!" - Nation where this happens all the time

▲

jqpabc123 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Even so, the article says it grew 8% YOY in the US.

Versus 35% YOY in China.

China gets it, the USA doesn't.

The best is to hope that this is an unstoppable trend

The trend is the USA choosing politics over reality as China becomes unstoppable.

https://carboncredits.com/china-adds-power-7x-more-than-the-...

▲

ceejayoz 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Never underestimate the capacity of shitty people to shoot themselves and others in the foot.

▲

kieranmaine 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The USA get's it. Trump doesn't. Texas is a the leader in wind and solar in the US.

Compare generation stats for yesterday between 2021 and 2026 on the Texas grid (ERCOT)

* 2021 - https://www.gridstatus.io/live/ercot?date=2021-06-03

* 2026 - https://www.gridstatus.io/live/ercot?date=2026-06-03

Also, the Californian grid (CAISO) shows where everyone is headed with a huge deployment of batteries:

* 2021 - https://www.gridstatus.io/live/caiso?date=2021-06-03

* 2026 - https://www.gridstatus.io/live/caiso?date=2026-06-03

	▲	jimt1234 28 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Does the USA really get it? I'd like to believe that, but honestly, I hear a lot of hatin' on anything related to renewable or 'green' energy, not just from Trump.
	▲	yogthos 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		All of that combined is peanuts compared to what's happening in China. Not to mention that all the panels and most of the wind turbines are produced in China. It's not just a question of installing them, it's having the industry and technical know how to make them that really matters. https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/global-electricity-...

▲

SirFatty 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Spoken with such authority!

▲

ReptileMan 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Indeed. Steel mills, aluminum smelters and glass factories really adore the intermittent nature of renewables.

▲

ZeroGravitas 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Smelters in Australia are leaning on the fossil-friendly politicians to stop getting in the way of renewables because they can't compete with global prices unless they use renewables.

	▲	jqpabc123 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Unlike in the USA --- they obviously look beyond the rhetoric to grasp the fact that renewables help lower energy costs even if their industry doesn't fully depend on them.

▲

Danox 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Germany screwed themselves.

	▲	uecker an hour ago \| parent [-]
		The world screwed itself by not investing in renewables earlier. Germany paid a high price for being early, but we all should be thankful for Germany creating an economy of scale and bringing cost down. And while the extreme right wing propaganda claims that Germany is doomed because of the Energiewende for the last 20 years or so, it is somehow still the third largest economy.

▲

jqpabc123 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, that probably explains why US imports of steel and aluminum continue to grow, even with a 25% tariff.

US manufacturers and consumers just love the added cost --- aka, inflation.

https://www.steel.org/2026/03/steel-imports-up-4-6-in-januar...