中国的气候和能源政策呈现出一种悖论:在以惊人的速度发展清洁能源的同时,也未停下新建燃煤电厂的步伐。
仅在2023年,中国就新建了70吉瓦(GW)的煤电装机容量,比2019年增长了四倍,占当年全球新增煤电装机容量的95%。
煤电产能的激增引发了人们对中国二氧化碳(CO2)排放和气候目标能否实现,以及对未来出现搁浅资产风险的担忧。
由于光伏和风能发电量不稳定,中国政府将煤炭作为保障能源安全和满足快速增长的用电高峰的手段。
与此同时,中国的电力行业在成本、需求模式、监管和市场运作方面正在发生重大变化。我们的新研究表明,用于证明新煤炭产能合理性的传统经济计算方式可能已经过时。
我们使用一个简单的分析指标来评估能满足用电高峰需求的最经济方式是什么。结果表明,光伏加电池储能的组合可能是比新建煤电更具成本效益的选择。
中国电力格局发生了怎样的变化?
在过去十年里,可再生能源和电池储能的成本大幅下降,高峰时段的住宅和商业用电需求激增,电力交易市场获得了更大的吸引力。
与此同时,中国还宣布了“双碳”目标,即在2030年前实现碳达峰、2060年前实现碳中和。鉴于这些转型,建设更多未减排的煤电厂与中国的长期气候承诺相冲突,而且对满足用电需求对增长来说,可能不再是最具成本效益的选择。它还占用了清洁能源系统转型急需的资金。
替代指标如何评估成本?
我们的研究引入了一种替代指标,用于计算在满足不断增长的高峰用电需求的情况下,所需的最优成本投资。

这一指标,即“净容量成本”(net capacity cost),是满足用电高峰需求所需的基础设施投资的年化固定成本,减去该设施带给电力市场的收入,或其“系统价值”(system value)。 在该指标中,负数意味着这些投资将带来利润,而非支出。
为了探索在中国使用的情境,我们使用了一个简单的例子:在一个假定省份,高峰用电需求增加了1500兆瓦(MW)、全年需求增加了6570吉瓦时(GWh)。
然后,我们概述了满足高峰和全年能源需求的五种策略(情况),其涵盖了从严重依赖煤电到光伏和电池储能相结合的方式。
在不同的案例中,资源衡量的规模基于它们能够可靠地满足高峰供应需求和年度能源需求的程度。
- 情况1:新的煤炭发电能力可满足高峰和年度能源需求的所有增长。
- 情况2:光伏可满足70%的年度能源需求增长,煤炭可满足30%的年度能源需求增长;光伏可满足525兆瓦的高峰供应需求(由于光伏发电可能不在高峰期间,因此基于“容量可信度”进行折减),而煤电可提供剩余的975兆瓦。
- 情况3:光伏可满足所有年度能源需求增长;光伏和煤炭均可满足750兆瓦的高峰供应需求,同样通过容量可信度对光伏发电量进行折减。
- 情况4:光伏满足所有年度能源需求增长;光伏和电池均为高峰供电需求提供750兆瓦;电池提供调频储备(用于管理精确至分钟的供需差异的备用电源)。
- 情况5:光伏满足所有年度能源需求增长;广泛和电池均为高峰供电需求提供750兆瓦;电池提供能源套利(在价格或成本较低时充电,在价格或成本较高时放电)。
如下图所示,我们针对每种情况都计算了单个资源(煤、电池或光伏),以及整个系统每年获得1千瓦(kW)发电容量的年净成本,单位为人民币元。
表上半部分的资源净容量成本是指该资源的净成本(即年化固定成本减去该资源从提供能源和辅助服务,如调频,所获得的年收入)。正数表示电网运营商在增加或获取该资源时的净成本。
表下半部分的系统总净容量成本,是在每种情况下利用资源组合满足高峰需求增长的净成本。
我们用于计算系统净成本的权重是基于装机容量与高峰需求增长的比率。
不同能源组合满足用电需求的成本
| 情况 1 | 情况 2 | 情况 3 | 情况 4 | 情况 5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 资源净容量成本 (元/千瓦/年, 每千瓦装机容量) | |||||
| 煤炭 | 424 | 424 | 512 | ||
| 电池 | 248 | 781 | |||
| 光伏 | -128 | -128 | -128 | -128 | |
| 系统净容量成本 (元/千瓦/年, 每千瓦满足高峰用电需求且折减容量可信度后) | |||||
| 煤炭 | 471 | 306 | 236 | ||
| 电池 | 138 | 434 | |||
| 光伏 | -223 | -319 | -319 | -319 | |
| 总计 | 471 | 83 | -83 | -181 | 115 |
为了对这一简单分析进行压力测试,我们研究了不同来源的各种价格的敏感性。
由于中国的光伏价格已经很低,我们的敏感性分析主要集中在煤炭、电池和其他分析所需投入的价格上。
满足高峰用电需求最经济的方法是什么?
我们的结果表明,当电池储能提供调频储备时(情况4),光伏和储能的组合是满足高峰用电需求增长最具成本效益的选择。
在这种组合下,每获得1千瓦发电装机容量,电网运营商的成本为-181元(约-25美元或-20英镑)。
相比之下,新建煤电产能以满足高峰用电需求增长(情况1)是最昂贵的方案,每获得1千瓦装机容量的净容量成本为471元(约合65美元或52英镑)。
情况3,即大型煤电厂仅用作备用电源(几乎不发电),在中国可能出于政治原因而至少在短期内不可行。
另外两种情况(情况2和情况5)更具可比性,但鉴于自本分析报告发布以来,电池价格下降了30%以上,约为每瓦时(Wh)1元人民币(约合0.14美元或0.11英镑),因此情况5中的电池可能比情况2中的煤炭更具经济吸引力。
我们的解决方案如何助力中国实现气候目标?
我们的分析表明,为了应对不断变化的形势,在满足中国日益增长的能源需求的同时,实现其气候目标的近期战略是将电池储能纳入电力市场。
目前,中国政府允许包括电池在内的“新型储能”参与电力市场。然而,详细规定尚不明确,电池的参与可以更简单。
例如,电池储能不被允许提供“运转储备”,即为应对意外的供需误差所预留的发电量。如果允许电池储能提供运转储备,将增强其商业价值。
允许电池储能更多地参与市场将促进电池储能系统的持续创新和降低成本,同时为系统运营商提供宝贵的运营经验。
这种策略将与市场效益相符,并反映美国和欧洲近期的电力市场经验。
这也将有助于解决近期的产能和能源需求,因为电池和光伏发电通常比燃煤电厂的建设速度更快。
此外,它还有助于缓解未来新增燃煤发电与可再生能源之间的冲突。主要作为可再生能源发电备用电源的新建燃煤电厂要么很少运营,要么侵占了其他现有煤炭发电厂的运营时间和净收入,从而产生新搁浅资产的风险。
通过继续进行电力市场改革,也将促进对可再生能源发电和电力储存进行更有效的投资。
允许市场制定批发市场电价、允许可再生能源发电和电力储存参与批发市场,这可以提高其收入和利润。
此外,改革还将鼓励高效利用储能,这是我们的关键发现。储能可以为电力系统提供多种功能;批发电价有助于引导储能运营以最低的成本实现具有最高价值的功能。
中国国家能源局最近发出指令,要求将新型储能设施(非抽水蓄能)纳入电网调度运行,这是向我们概述的改革迈出的一步。
可能需要进一步确定适当的补偿机制,例如在某些省份对此类储能设施提供的所有服务进行容量补偿,以促进这些储能设施的可持续发展和并网。
最后,仅靠增加供应不太可能成为满足中国电力需求增长的最低成本方式。提高终端使用效率和“需求响应”也有助于降低供电的总体成本。
随着中国电力市场改革的不断深入,连接多个省份的区域市场设计,以及鼓励省份间资源共享的区域资源充裕性规划,也有助于以最具成本效益和最低碳的方式满足中国不断增长的用电量和高峰需求。
The post 嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠” appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Climate Change
“House of cards”: Verra used junk carbon credits to fix Shell’s offsetting scandal
Verra has used nearly a million “hot air” carbon credits to compensate for bogus offsets generated by rice-paddy projects backed by energy giant Shell in China, Climate Home News can reveal.
In a case described as “shocking” and “deeply alarming” by experts, the leading carbon registry replaced 960,000 credits issued for rice-field methane reduction activities that had been found to overstate emissions cuts with an equivalent number of junk credits from other failed Chinese rice projects, its records show.
“It’s frankly unbelievable that Verra considers it appropriate to compensate for hot air credits with other hot air credits,” said Jonathan Crook, policy lead at Carbon Market Watch. “To pretend this is a satisfactory resolution is both absurd and deeply alarming.”
Shell’s links to bogus offsets
Shell is linked to both sets of projects, which Verra ruled as no longer valid in August 2024 after detecting “unprecedented” failures in their implementation. Last year, an investigation by Climate Home News and Dialogue Earth cast serious doubt on whether any emissions-cutting activities were carried out on the ground at all.
In response to those findings, a Shell spokesperson said “the projects in question are not managed or operated by Shell”. But the oil and gas major was closely involved in 10 rice-farming programmes in China as their “authorised representative” and, as Climate Home News reported last year, partly relied on their worthless carbon offsets to market “carbon-neutral” liquefied natural gas (LNG).
Regulatory filings in the US show that Shell, acting as a broker, last year offered to potential buyers the same carbon credits that have now been used as partial compensation for the 10 projects.
For more than a year, Verra failed to replace nearly 2 million worthless credits issued by the 10 projects, after the Chinese developers stopped responding to the registry’s communications with them. Shell abandoned the programmes shortly after Verra ordered that the credits should be compensated.
The credits were primarily used by Shell to offset real greenhouse gas emissions created by its vast fossil fuel operations. Other users of the phantom rice-farming offsets include Chinese state-owned fossil fuel firm PetroChina, Singapore-based DBS Bank and UK energy supplier OVO Energy.
In early October this year, updates to Verra’s registry showed that 960,000 excess credits across the 10 projects had been replaced with an equivalent number of credits drawn from four separate rice-cultivation programmes that were also axed at the same time.
Those original credits had not been voided and technically remained available to the account holder, even though Verra scrapped the underlying programmes and unsuccessfully pursued their representatives for redress. The Chinese company behind the four projects failed to respond to Verra’s requests, leaving it unclear whether the credits will ever be replaced.
Verra’s rules in the spotlight
A Verra spokesperson told Climate Home News that the account holder, “which requested to remain anonymous”, asked the registry to cancel those credits and, subsequently, Verra decided to count them towards the compensation process for the other 10 sham projects.
While Climate Home News could not verify the identity of the account holder in question, Shell declared in public filings that, in 2024, it had marketed those 960,000 credits to potential buyers.
Verra said its rules allow any active credits to be used to cover excess issuance elsewhere, even if those credits themselves need to be replaced. Commenting on this specific case involving the sham rice-farming projects, the spokesperson added: “While the source projects have been rejected and must address their own over-issuance, the credits used here were valid at the time of cancellation.”
Grayson Badgley, a research scientist at climate solutions non-profit CarbonPlan, said this sort of logic might allow Verra to balance its credit ledger but does nothing to help the planet’s atmosphere. “This isn’t just about following the rules – it’s about making sure that the carbon market supports meaningful climate action,” he added.
Compensation orders piling up
Carbon market experts told Climate Home News the case raises serious questions about Verra’s ability to safeguard the integrity of its carbon credits at a critical time when a rapidly growing number of bogus offsets require compensation.
Over 10 million worthless credits produced by the discredited Kariba forest protection megaproject in Zimbabwe, and already used by corporations to back up their green claims, need to be replaced after Verra found the threat to the forest had been exaggerated in the project’s original forecast.
Zimbabwe forest carbon megaproject generated millions of junk credits
In a separate development, Verra is now also seeking the compensation of around 4.5 million credits issued by four vast tree-planting schemes in China. The registry axed the projects last Friday after a year-long review failed to confirm they had been approved by government authorities – a key requirement – and that official documentation had not been falsified.
Shell tied to failed tree-planting schemes
While a Chinese company was in charge of the projects’ implementation, official documents show that, for years, Shell had been directly involved as an “authorised representative”. This role, which the energy giant also held in the rice paddy schemes, gave the firm all the “applicable rights and responsibilities” in relation to the activities.
Shell exited all four tree-planting projects in December 2024, a month after Verra informed the firm it would start the investigation that ultimately led to their cancellation last week.
“We purchase and retire a range of Verra-certified credits and were disappointed to learn of the issues Verra identified with these projects and are looking at Verra to replace any credits that were issued under these projects,” a Shell spokesperson told Climate Home News.
For Carbon Market Watch’s Crook, Verra’s unwillingness to deal with “huge loopholes” is not only deeply troubling but also counterproductive as it undermines trust in the registry, while leaving it exposed to future misconduct by unscrupulous actors.
“Rather than take real accountability for this scandal, Verra seems intent on propping up a collapsing house of cards,” he added, referring to the compensation of rice-farming credits.
The post “House of cards”: Verra used junk carbon credits to fix Shell’s offsetting scandal appeared first on Climate Home News.
“House of cards”: Verra used junk carbon credits to fix Shell’s offsetting scandal
Climate Change
Global plastic reduction is the best gift this xmas
The holidays are here again. ‘Tis the season to hang out with (or just tolerate) family and friends, share (and maybe overindulge in) tasty meals, and enjoy festivities (or stay cozy and binge your comfort show). But no matter how you celebrate, the pressure to consume can be extreme.

Capitalism’s overconsumption machine can make us think that we need to buy everything during the holidays, but as corporations pump out 430 million tonnes of plastic globally, plastic doesn’t need to get the invite to the big holiday party this year. Dodging certain holiday offerings and embracing some new anti-consumption traditions can be small but mighty acts of resistance against capitalism.
Plastic is everywhere, and at this time of year it’s hiding in plain sight at your holiday gatherings. Plastic packaging is the most obvious major source of waste; however, a closer look at what many decorations and gifts are made of reveals all the other ways plastic creeps into our homes. It is in clothing, bags, bedding, childrens’ toys, holiday figurines, electronics, sports equipment, stuffed animals, cosmetics, kitchenware, furniture, the stir stick in your cocktail or mocktail — the list goes on.
Why does this matter? Because plastic pollutes air, water, nature and our bodies, across its entire lifecycle. And it’s causing widespread and devastating harm. Plastic isn’t only a waste and pollution issue, it has morphed into a grave public health concern. The more plastic the industry produces, the more we’re pressured to consume, and the more pollution people and the planet are exposed to.

5 Ways to reduce plastic waste and pollution during Christmas
The season of giving doesn’t have to be giving plastic disaster. We’re here to share 5 ways to beat those consumption blues.
1. Normalize ‘new-to-you’ over brand new gifts.
It’s never been easier to find pre-loved items in our communities. From thrift shops to antique stores, clothing swaps to flea markets, and numerous online platforms, most gift ideas you have can be found used with a bit of time and resourcefulness. Dodging big corps whenever possible isn’t only satisfying, it’s a win for your wallet and the planet. According to Earth Overshoot Day and its partners, by July 24th, 2025 humanity was using nature about 1.8 times faster than the Earth’s ecosystems are able to regenerate, so reducing demand for new materials is part of our collective consumption reduction equation. If you look at the plastic all around you today, it is set to have more than doubled in the next 25 years.
Any signal we can send to big plastic producers and consumer goods companies that plastic isn’t fantastic, can help incentivize them to choose alternatives, and show governments that we support real solutions to the plastic problem.

2. Choose your containers and cookware with care
It’s a lovely time of year for meals out and coffee dates but because non-toxic, reusable containers are not yet ubiquitous, bringing your own plastic-free containers whenever possible will reduce your plastic exposure and footprint. Plastic-lined coffee cups, “bioplastic” packaging and cutlery, and even take-out containers labeled as reusable, present an opportunity for contaminating our food and our bodies with microplastics and chemicals. Various kitchenware items in our homes also contain plastic. Large plastic spatulas and spoons, sieves and strainers, cutting boards, storage containers, sippy cups, electric kettles, blenders and Teflon or coated pans all can contain or are made from plastic. Scientists have begun to uncover how using these types of items contributes to our ingestion of microplastics and exposure to potentially toxic chemicals. There’s nothing festive about a charcuterie board seasoned with microplastics.
It’s not easy or affordable to do a full kitchen overhaul, but you can start by doing small changes like ditching plastic cutting boards, never heating plastic, and using stainless steel or cast iron instead of coated pots and pans. When hosting, remember reusable is best — ditch the single-use plates, cups, and cutlery and just use what you have on hand. Crowd source dishware when needed, that’s what friends are for.

3. Glitter isn’t glam, your inner sparkle is enough!
Who doesn’t want a little glitz at this time of year? So much of what is extra sparkly and shiny is a combination of plastic and metal, and it’s nothing but a beautiful nightmare. Glitter shows up in craft supplies, gift wrap, decorations, clothing, cosmetics, kids’ toys, costumes, party hats, and snow globes. Plastic glitter and sequins can easily shed into its surroundings, when clothing is being washed or crafts are being cleaned-up, it can shed down the drain, and when combined with paper or other materials, these products ruin recycling potential, sending them to landfill or incineration. And while some may claim to be biodegradable, it’s really not worth the potential pollution risk.

4. Resist the urge to purge
Out with the old and in with the new can be a useful mantra when letting go of negative vibes or questionable habits, but when it comes to “stuff”, we all need to resist the temptation to get the newer, trendier, or upgraded item. We live in an era where we’re being given mixed messages about simplifying our lives and our relationship with material things. We’re told to buy more, but also buy better. Wide leg jeans today, skinny jeans tomorrow. But purging in the name of decluttering isn’t an act for the planet. It can also overburden donation organizations. Unless the purge is paired with a commitment to minimalist living, chances are a lot of that stuff will eventually be replaced, increasing the resource burden. Buying a bunch of new stuff can result in a bunch more plastic produced, so try to ponder before you purge and consider what might be reused, refurbished, remanufactured, revived, refurnished, repurposed, remade, regifted, rotated out, rotated in, rearranged, reimagined, and/or relocated.

5. Cozy up with a petition to change the world.
Trying to dodge plastic can be exhausting. If you’re feeling overwhelmed, you’re not alone. We can only do so much in this broken plastic-obsessed system. Plastic producers and polluters need to be held accountable, and governments need to act faster to protect the health of people and the planet. The plastic crisis is a global problem demanding a global solution. We urgently need global governments to secure a strong UN Global Plastics Treaty that reduces global production and consumption, ends our reliance on problem plastics and chemicals, and accelerates a justice-centred transition to a reuse-based, zero waste future. Ensure your government doesn’t waste this once-in-a-generation opportunity to end the age of plastic. Sign our petition!
Climate Change
After Hurricane Katrina, a New Orleans Architect Turned to the Dutch to Learn to Live With Water
Before the storm, the city tried to engineer water out of sight. But, David Waggonner says, “you can’t live with water if you can’t see water.”
For years, David Waggonner designed courthouses and other public buildings at his architectural practice, Waggonner & Ball, in New Orleans. Then Hurricane Katrina struck in 2005, and Waggonner became convinced that New Orleans was getting something fundamentally wrong about its approach to flooding and water.
After Hurricane Katrina, a New Orleans Architect Turned to the Dutch to Learn to Live With Water
-
Climate Change4 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases4 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Why airlines are perfect targets for anti-greenwashing legal action
-
Renewable Energy5 months ago
US Grid Strain, Possible Allete Sale




