Welcome to Carbon Brief’s China Briefing.
China Briefing handpicks and explains the most important climate and energy stories from China over the past fortnight. Subscribe for free here.
Key developments
China fails to submit 2035 climate pledge
MISSED DEADLINE: China, along with 181 other countries, missed the deadline to submit its next “nationally determined contribution” (NDC), a key climate pledge to the UN that “acts as an accountability measure to ensure countries are taking climate change seriously”, Agence France-Presse reported. It added that, according to unnamed analysts, China is “expected to release its much-anticipated NDC in the second half of 2025”. Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun said China will follow its “own path, approach and pace to fulfil the ‘dual-carbon’ targets to which it has committed”, in comments covered by industry newspaper China Energy Net. According to the outlet, he added that the country has “always been a doer and an activist in addressing climate change” and will submit its NDC “at the proper time”.
WAIT AND SEE: According to the Guardian, China and other countries would prefer “putting off the publication of [NDCs]” until the early disruption caused by the second Trump administration subsides. In a statement, Yao Zhe, global policy advisor at Greenpeace East Asia, said that “China’s submission will happen later this year”, adding that China must set “ambitious” goals that “include both a strong commitment to renewables and clear measures to move away from coal”. Li Shuo, director of the Asia Society Policy Institute’s China climate hub, told Eco-Business that China’s desire to wait and see how the US will “reshape” global political and economic orders is “natural”, adding that “the hope is that more time will lead to better quality”. China was not alone in missing the NDC deadline, with countries accounting for 83% of global emissions falling short, according to Carbon Brief analysis.
-
Sign up to Carbon Brief’s free “China Briefing” email newsletter. All you need to know about the latest developments relating to China and climate change. Sent to your inbox every Thursday.
OIL ‘SLOWDOWN’: Elsewhere, a new report by the International Energy Agency (IEA) and covered by Bloomberg found that “China’s use of the three most important fuel products – gasoline, jet/kerosene and gasoil – declined slightly to 8.1m barrels a day in 2024”, marking an “unprecedented” slowdown. The outlet said the shift, attributed by the IEA to the uptake of electric vehicles and economic changes, could drive a plateau in the country’s overall oil demand this decade.
Clean-energy technology’s economic contribution rises
GROWTH DRIVER: Clean-energy technologies contributed 13.6tn yuan ($1.9tn) to the Chinese economy in 2024, comprising more than 10% of GDP for the first time, new research for Carbon Brief has found. Much of the rise was driven by the value of goods and services, which grew 21% compared to 2023, as opposed to investment, which was up 7% year-on-year, the analysis added.
‘NEW THREE’ LEAD: The “new three” industries accounted for most of this growth. Electric vehicles and vehicle batteries “were the largest contributors to China’s clean-energy economy in 2024”, comprising almost 40% of its value. The next largest category was solar power, which generated 2.8tn yuan ($390bn).
GAINING IMPORTANCE: Clean-energy technologies contributed more to the economy in 2024 than real-estate sales (9.6tn yuan, $1.3tn) and agriculture (9.1tn yuan, $1.3tn), the analysis said. It added that China’s investment in clean energy alone is “close to the global total [investment] put into fossil fuels in 2024”. Investment is set to grow in 2025, due in part to a “race to complete” large-scale projects before the end of the five-year plan period (2021-2025). The importance of clean energy to supporting economic growth now “creates incentives for policymakers to ensure the economic health of the sector”, the analysis added.
Wang Yi’s European tour
STRATEGIC DIALOGUE: Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi met with UK prime minister Keir Starmer in his first official visit to the country in a decade, Reuters said, adding that the two “discussed strengthening cooperation in dealing with climate change, artificial intelligence and clean energy”. Wang also held talks with his UK counterpart David Lammy, English-language state broadcaster CGTN said, in which the two foreign ministers “emphasised the importance of advancing the full and effective implementation of the Paris Agreement and supporting both countries’ green transitions”.
WARM WELCOME?: Bloomberg covered development of China’s “impending listing of an inaugural sovereign green bond in London”, quoting Nneka Chike-Obi, head of Asia-Pacific ESG ratings and research at Sustainable Fitch, saying the move would allow China “to get…feedback from international investors” during roadshows and deliver assurances about its climate plans. China has released a “framework” for its green sovereign bonds, the Communist party-affiliated People’s Daily announced, adding the document will be used as the “basis for issuing Chinese green sovereign bonds overseas”. Meanwhile, the UK’s security services are reviewing whether “Chinese technology such as solar panels or industrial batteries could pose potential future security threats”, the Financial Times reported.
SECURITY TALKS: Wang also travelled to Germany, where he said at the Munich Security Conference that China has “acted earnestly on the Paris Agreement”, adding countries “should tackle common challenges in solidarity, rather than resort to bloc confrontation”, according to a transcript published by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. State news agency Xinhua reported that climate change was also raised in Wang’s meetings with representatives of the EU, France and Germany on the sidelines of the conference.
MEDIA VOICES: Meanwhile, Chinese media issued a number of editorials and commentaries emphasising the need for China-Europe cooperation. One editorial in state-run newspaper China Daily noted “it is good to see both [the UK and China] oppose decoupling and…promote a nondiscriminatory and open business environment”. Another China Daily editorial said “collaboration on climate change…has borne fruit through joint initiatives such as the China-EU Partnership on Climate Change”. Meanwhile, the state-supporting news outlet Global Times published an editorial arguing “there are broad common interests between China and the EU in maintaining a multilateral framework” to address issues such as climate change. The Global Times also published a commentary under the byline “GT Voice” arguing that there is a “pressing need for the rest of the world, particularly China and the EU, to strengthen cooperation on green development”.
New energy storage plan
STORAGE STRENGTH: China issued a plan to strengthen its energy storage sector, aiming to develop more “leading” manufacturers, improve “innovation” and increase the sector’s “overall competitiveness” by 2027, Xinhua reported. The policy will also “support research into emerging technologies”, such as alternative battery compositions, compressed air and hydrogen energy storage, the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post said. Chinese news outlet Jiemian said the policy nevertheless warned against “blind investment and disorderly development”. Critical minerals were also covered, according to Reuters, with the government pledging to “strengthen support for exploring domestic mineral resources including lithium, cobalt and nickel” and “strengthen foreign investment and cooperation” towards overseas mineral exploration.
TIGHTENING CONTROL: Meanwhile, China also issued draft regulations which, if approved, would “tighten [its] control” over its rare-earth resources, Reuters reported, such as through “quotas for mining, smelting and separating” the minerals. Another Reuters investigation found that at least one Chinese company is following a draft proposal by the commerce ministry to restrict exports of certain technologies used to process lithium. The development, according to the Financial Times, is part of a broader move to “keep critical knowhow within [China’s] borders as trade tensions with the US and Europe escalate”, adding that the country has also “made it more difficult for some engineers and equipment to leave the country”. Environment NGO Transport & Environment has warned that Europe must develop a “regulatory framework for knowledge sharing” or else risk becoming “an assembly plant” for Chinese battery makers, another Financial Times report said. Elsewhere, the People’s Daily said China’s wind turbine exports rose 70% year-on-year in 2024, with solar and lithium battery exports showing a “strong performance”.
Spotlight
How China’s renewable pricing reforms will affect its climate goals
China’s solar and windfarms would no longer be guaranteed sales at a fixed price linked to coal benchmarks, under a new policy released by the central government.
Under the new “sustainable new energy pricing mechanism”, new wind and solar schemes would be paid a fixed price determined at auction.
In this issue, Carbon Brief examines how the new guidelines will affect China’s energy transition.
More ‘market-oriented’
From 2026, China has announced that the price of electricity generated from solar and wind schemes will be determined according to competitive auctions.
This will replace the existing fixed rates solar and wind received for their power, which was pegged to benchmarks for coal-fired power, with the new mechanism likely making prices for renewables much cheaper than coal.
The new system resembles the two-way “contract for difference” (CfD) mechanism used in the UK and elsewhere.
This setup would allow developers to have “reasonable and stable expectations” for revenue, supporting a “healthy” industry and China’s energy transition, a government Q&A said.
Despite some reporting to the contrary, the move does not constitute a rollback of subsidies for renewables. Grid operators have paid wind and solar power the same price as for coal-fired power since 2021.
The policy also cancels mandatory energy storage requirements for new wind and solar projects, which will significantly impact demand for energy storage.
Bringing prices up to date
The change to the rules has been attributed to the sharp reduction in the cost of building new solar and windfarms.
“The coal-fired grid benchmark rate was last updated in 2017 and actually has no relationship to the generation cost of renewables,” David Fishman, senior manager at energy consultancy Lantau Group, told Carbon Brief, adding it was effectively “arbitrary”.
The government Q&A argued that renewable energy schemes operating on a fixed tariff “cannot fully reflect market supply and demand” and do not “fairly [distribute] responsibility for power system flexibility”.
No pain, no gain
The exact impact that this will have on renewable developers will depend on the implementing rules adopted by local governments, according to Lauri Myllyvirta, lead analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air.
In the short-term, these companies will be hit by the loss of the guaranteed demand and the need to adapt to low prices and fierce competition, Fishman told Carbon Brief.
Companies will also need to develop stronger marketing and sales capabilities, and focus on “high-efficiency” and “large-capacity” technologies, said Wang Jihong, senior counsel at law firm Zhong Lun.
This may impact China’s growing distributed solar and wind sector. Distributed projects are much more likely to be run by smaller companies who may not have the resources to adapt to the new mechanism, according to Fishman, which could cause opportunities for distributed energy to “dry up”.
At the same time, the new policy may also force renewable energy power companies to innovate – both in terms of technology, and of business models and management practices, Dr Muyi Yang, senior energy analyst for Asia at the thinktank Ember, told Carbon Brief.
Stronger in the long-term?
The new pricing system may nevertheless give wind and solar the advantage in the long-term. Reform of the power market has long been seen as crucial to increasing uptake of renewables.
Myllyvirta wrote that wind and solar, as the “most affordable” sources of power, should be able to “hold their own in competition if the rules are set right”.
Yang told Carbon Brief that the pressure of being subjected to the market could make low-carbon energy “more competitive” and “help reduce inefficient investment”, which will be a “critical factor for the long-term transition of China’s energy sector”.
But local governments would need to take steps to maintain investor confidence in the face of low prices, Fishman said. For example, significantly raising provincial renewable consumption targets could provide a strong demand signal, showing wind and solar developers that there is still a “way to make money” through increased volume.
If the government “gets the numbers just a little bit wrong”, he added, the amount of new wind and solar being added to the grid “will drop off a cliff”.
At the same time, coal-fired power plants are continuing to receive policy and financial support, in the form of guaranteed demand from long-term contracts and compensation to keep excess capacity online.
China has ramped up construction of new coal plants, with almost 100 gigawatts of new capacity expected to come online in the next few years.
If coal plants are not also exposed to competition, Myllyvirta argued, then renewables may be “crowded out from the power market”.
Fishman was more sanguine, telling Carbon Brief that the new policy may give coal plants “a little bit of a boost” in the short-term, but that China’s carbon peaking goal sets a hard deadline for reducing their role in the power system.
He added that the real competition for coal plants are other coal plants, as only the “newest, the most efficient [and] the super-critical” plants will have a future as China moves towards carbon neutrality.
A full-length version of the article is available on the Carbon Brief website.
Watch, read, listen
FARMERS PROTEST: Current affairs news outlet Sixth Tone looked at how China is reversing its “zero-tolerance stance on crop burning” in the face of backlash from farmers.
PROSPECTS FOR DIPLOMACY: Laurence Tubiana, head of the European Climate Foundation [which funds Carbon Brief] and one of the architects of the Paris Agreement, gave a lecture at the University of Oxford on her outlook for climate diplomacy and China’s role within it.
CLIMATE NATIONALISM: Environmental Politics Journal interviewed the authors of a new study on how China uses “populist narratives” in propaganda to “mitigate the political costs” of its climate policies.
HYDROPOWER HISTORY: The New Books in Environmental Studies podcast discussed the history of hydropower development in China in the early-to-mid 1900s.
Captured
China began building 94.5 gigawatts (GW) of new coal-power capacity and resumed 3.3GW of suspended projects in 2024, according to new research by energy thinktanks the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) and Global Energy Monitor (GEM) covered by Carbon Brief. This burst, spurred on mostly by investments from the coal mining industry, marks the highest level of new construction in the past 10 years, the report added.
New science
Elderly vulnerability to temperature-related mortality risks in China
Science Advances
Intensity and duration are the most important factors to consider when assessing the impact of extreme heat on mortality risk in elderly people in China, a new study found. The authors assessed survey data of more than 27,000 “elderly Chinese citizens”, collected between 2005-2018, to determine the links between extreme heat, temperature variability and mortality risk. The authors said their paper “highlights the compound effects of rising temperatures for elderly populations”.
npj Climate and Atmospheric Science
A new study found that afforestation in China, in line with the government’s afforestation plan, would cool the land surface by 0.21C in the day and cause nighttime heating of 0.05C. The authors used models to simulate how afforestation would affect land surface temperature in China over the coming decades. They found that under the mid-warming SSP2 scenario, afforestation will cause “significant cooling” between 2041 and 2060 – especially in winter. According to the study, the cooling would offset 3.7% of the projected increase in land surface temperature due to global warming on average, and “even overcompensates” for global warming in southwest China.
China Briefing is compiled by Wanyuan Song and Anika Patel. It is edited by Wanyuan Song and Dr Simon Evans. Please send tips and feedback to china@carbonbrief.org
The post China Briefing 20 February 2025: Missed climate deadline; Clean-tech’s economic contribution; New renewables pricing system appeared first on Carbon Brief.
A new independent study by Dr Harvey Mpoto Bombaka (Centro Universitário de Brasília) and Dr Ben Tippet (King’s College London), commissioned by Greenpeace International, reveals that current International Seabed Authority revenue-sharing proposals would return virtually nothing to developing countries — despite the requirement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) that deep sea mining must benefit humankind as a whole.
Instead, the analysis shows that the overwhelming economic value would flow to a handful of private corporations, primarily headquartered in the Global North.
Download the report:
Equity, Benefit-Sharing and Financial Architecture in the International Seabed Area
Executive Summary: Equity, Benefit-Sharing and Financial Architecture in the International Seabed Area
https://www.greenpeace.org.au/greenpeace-reports/equity-benefit-sharing-and-financial-architecture-in-the-international-seabed-area/
Climate Change
Pacific nations would be paid only thousands for deep sea mining, while mining companies set to make billions, new research reveals
SYDNEY/FIJI, Thursday 26 February 2026 — New independent research commissioned by Greenpeace International has revealed that Pacific Island states would receive mere thousands of dollars in payment from deep sea mining per year, placing the region as one of the most affected but worst-off beneficiaries in the world.
The research by legal professor Dr Harvey Mpoto Bombaka and development economist Dr Ben Tippet reveals that mechanisms proposed by the International Seabed Authority (ISA) for sharing any future revenues from deep sea mining would leave developing nations with meagre, token payments. Pacific Island nations would receive only USD $46,000 per year in the short term, then USD $241,000 per year in the medium term, averaging out to barely USD $382,000 per year for 28 years – an entire annual income for a nation that is less than some individual CEOs’ salaries. Mining companies would rake in over USD $13.5 billion per year, taking up to 98% of the revenues.
The analysis shows that under a scenario where six deep sea mining sites begin operating in the early 2030s, the revenues that states would actually receive are extraordinarily small. This is in contrast to the clear mandate of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which requires mining to be carried out for the benefit of humankind as a whole.[1] The real beneficiaries, the research shows, would be, yet again, a handful of corporations in the Global North.
Head of Pacific at Greenpeace Australia Pacific Shiva Gounden, said:
“What the Pacific is being promised amounts to little more than scraps. The people of the Pacific would sacrifice the most and receive the least if deep sea mining goes ahead. We are being asked to trade in our spiritual and cultural connection to our oceans, and risk our livelihoods and food sources, for almost nothing in return.
“The deep sea mining industry has manipulated the Pacific and has lied to our people for too long, promising prosperity and jobs that simply do not exist. The wealthy CEOs and deep sea mining companies will pocket the cash while the people of the Pacific see no material benefits. The Pacific will not benefit from deep sea mining, and our sacrifice is too big to allow it to go ahead. The Pacific Ocean is not a commodity, and it is not for sale.”
Using proposals submitted by the ISA’s Finance Committee between 2022 and 2025, the returns to states barely register in national accounts. After administrative costs, institutional expenses, and compensation funds are deducted, little, if anything, remains to distribute [3].
Author Dr Harvey Mpoto Bombaka of the Centro Universitário de Brasília said:
“What’s described as global benefit-sharing based on equity and intergenerational justice increasingly looks like a framework for managing scarcity that would deliver almost no real benefits to anyone other than the deep sea mining industry. The structural limitations of the proposed mechanism would offer little more than symbolic returns to the rest of the world, particularly developing countries lacking technological and financial capacity.”
The ISA will meet in March for its first session of the year. Currently, 40 countries back a moratorium or precautionary pause on deep sea mining.
Gounden added: “The deep sea belongs to all humankind, and our people take great pride in being the custodians of our Pacific Ocean. Protecting this with everything we have is not only fair and responsible but what we see as our ancestral duty. The only equitable path is to leave the minerals where they are and stop deep sea mining before it starts.
“The decision on the future of the ocean must be a process that centres the rights and voices of Pacific communities as the traditional custodians. Clearly, deep sea mining will not benefit the Pacific, and the only sensible way forward is a moratorium.”
—ENDS—
Notes
[1] A key condition for governments to permit deep sea mining to start in the international seabed is that it ‘be carried out for the benefit of mankind as a whole’, particularly developing nations, according to international law (Article 136-140, 148, 150, and 160(2)(g), the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea).
For more information or to arrange an interview, please contact Kimberley Bernard on +61407 581 404 or kbernard@greenpeace.org
Climate Change
North Carolina Regulators Nix $1.2 Billion Federal Proposal to Dredge Wilmington Harbor
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers failed to explain how it would mitigate environmental harms, including PFAS contamination.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can’t dredge 28 miles of the Wilmington Harbor as planned, after North Carolina environmental regulators determined the billion-dollar proposal would be inconsistent with the state’s coastal management policies.
North Carolina Regulators Nix $1.2 Billion Federal Proposal to Dredge Wilmington Harbor
Bravery Meets Tragedy: An Unending Story
Equity, Benefit-Sharing and Financial Architecture in the International Seabed Area
Pacific nations would be paid only thousands for deep sea mining, while mining companies set to make billions, new research reveals
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
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 Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 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