Article Contents
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.
The policy asks local governments to shift new wind and solar projects to a more market-based pricing system by the end of 2025.
Said local governments will determine the details of the proposed “sustainable new-energy pricing mechanism” (新能源可持续发展价格结算机制).
In broad terms, however, the idea is that new wind and solar schemes would be paid a fixed price determined at auction in a system that resembles the UK’s “contract for difference” mechanism.
上微信关注《碳简报》
The move is part of wider efforts to shift the operation of China’s giant electricity system towards more market-based signals, rather than administratively set prices.
It also reflects a growing need to manage the integration of renewables into the system, with record wind and solar capacity added last year creating “conflict” with coal power.
While existing projects would continue to be paid under the old system, new wind and solar schemes will face a more uncertain business outlook, analysts tell Carbon Brief.
However, they say that, in the long run and with the right implementation strategies, the new mechanism could make renewables more innovative and even more cost-effective for power consumers, compared to coal.
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. Under this type of mechanism, power generators are paid a fixed “strike price” for each unit of electricity they produce.
If market prices for power fall below this level, generators receive the difference as a top-up payment, but they must pay back the difference if prices rise above it instead.
This setup would allow developers to have “reasonable and stable expectations” for revenue, which will support a “healthy” industry and China’s energy transition, representatives of the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), China’s top economic planning body, and National Energy Agency (NEA) say in an official Q&A on the policy.
Despite some reporting to the contrary, the move does not constitute a rollback of subsidies for renewables, as grid operators have paid the same price for coal-fired power and wind and solar power since 2021.
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, prompting questions around whether renewable generators should be paid the same amount as infrastructure-heavy coal plants.
“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 the energy consultancy Lantau Group, tells Carbon Brief, adding the price was effectively “arbitrary”.
The NDRC and NEA Q&A argues 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”.
Fishman adds that the timing of the announcement may have been linked to the situation China experienced late last year, which saw unusually high curtailment of renewable energy at a time when analysts expected low-carbon power to cover new demand growth.
An analysis written in summer 2024 by Shi Jingli, a researcher from the NDRC-affiliated Energy Research Institute (ERI), argued that the UK’s CfD system “significantly reduced renewable energy tariffs and the government’s overall expenditure on renewable energy projects”, which also indicates that cost may be a driving factor behind the change.
Other changes
The new rules will only apply to projects developed from June 2025 onwards. They will apply to all sources of wind and solar power, from huge clean-energy “bases” to distributed generators such as solar rooftops.
In order to facilitate the increasingly market-based operation of the electricity system, the new notice encourages local governments to “improve spot market trading rules” and “accelerate” voluntary participation in day-ahead trading.
It also encourages the increased use of multi-year power purchase agreements (PPAs) and other forms of medium- and long-term contracts, among both renewable projects developed before the June 2025 cut-off date (called stock, 存量) and new schemes (called incremental, 增量).
Meanwhile, energy storage requirements for new wind and solar projects have been revoked, in a move that economic news outlet Jiemian says “will have a huge impact on the energy storage industry”.
The policy also notes that local authorities could consider implementing similar systems for biomass, geothermal and other power generators.
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 Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA).
In the short-term, these companies will be hit by the loss of the guaranteed demand and the need to adapt to the low prices and fierce competition of the new system, Fishman says.
Many projects initially slated for completion later in 2025 may be rushed through in order to be eligible to stay on the current system, resulting in a spike in added capacity in the second quarter of the year followed by a dip in the third quarter, he tells Carbon Brief.
Companies will also need to pivot to have stronger marketing and sales capabilities, says Wang Jihong, senior counsel at law firm Zhong Lun, as the policy encourages greater uptake of renewable energy through PPAs. In an article published by Lexology she advises companies to focus on “high-efficiency” and “large-capacity” technologies.
This may have an impact on China’s growing distributed solar and wind sectors.
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, says Dr Muyi Yang, senior energy analyst for Asia at the thinktank Ember.
Yang tells Carbon Brief:
“[The new regulations] will help shift the clean energy sector from ‘subsidy-dependency’ to being ‘innovation-driven’ and contributing to innovation-based growth – what is often referred to in China as ‘new quality productive forces’.”
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.
The new prices are expected to be much lower than the tariff for coal power. Myllyvirta writes 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”.
The cost of developing solar and wind power has halved over the past ten years, an expert tells 21st Century Business Herald.
Yang tells 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 says. 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 says, 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, according to recent research by CREA and Global Energy Monitor.
If they are not exposed to competition in the same way that wind and solar farms will be, Myllyvirta argues, then renewables may be “crowded out from the power market by inflexible coal plants”.
Fishman is more sanguine about the future role of coal, however. He tells 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 and means they will face “diminishing returns”.
He adds 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.
The post Explainer: How China’s renewable pricing reforms will affect its climate goals appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Explainer: How China’s renewable pricing reforms will affect its climate goals
Continue Reading
An older teaching about land acknowledgement
As I have come to understand the spirit and intention of land acknowledgement, I often return to fond memories of my grandmother and her words of wisdom. She taught that the health of the places we call home comes first, because the wellbeing of the people depends on it.
In her teaching, land acknowledgement began with the land. Long before it became a paragraph read at the start of a meeting, it was a way of recognizing a homeland: its waters, its species, its seasons, and the spirit that revealed whether the place was well.
Her teaching echoes a practice found across many Indigenous Nations. Haudenosaunee gatherings, for example, have long opened with the Ohén:ton Karihwatéhkwen, the Thanksgiving Address, often translated as “the words that come before all else.” The speaker greets and gives thanks to the people, the earth, the waters, the plants, the animals, the winds, the sun, the moon and the stars. Only after everything that sustains life has been acknowledged does the gathering turn to its own business.
That order changes what an acknowledgement is for. Its purpose was to share the story of a place with neighbours and to draw them into the work of tending it. People entered the story second, as the ones responsible for what had just been named.
Understood this way, an acknowledgement does more than open a meeting. It asks us to reconsider where we stand, and what we owe the ground beneath us.
Nations among nations
In her teaching, people are one nation among many. The salmon are a nation. So are the cedars, the bison, the medicine plants, and the pollinators. Each belongs to a place, carries its own responsibilities, and offers gifts no other nation can give.
This idea of kinship runs through many Indigenous philosophies. The phrase “all my relations,” heard in ceremonies and gatherings across Turtle Island, is a reminder that family extends beyond people to the animals, plants, waters and lands that make life possible. Some Indigenous languages carry the same understanding in their grammar, speaking of many plants, animals and natural forces as living beings rather than objects.
Sovereignty, understood through this relationship, is a kind of standing more than a form of control. Each nation belongs fully to its place and carries its share of that place’s life. No nation thrives alone, and none thrives by taking over the whole.
The land is also the source of instruction. Over generations, people watched how a river valley or a stretch of prairie kept itself well: who arrived when, who fed whom, and how much could be taken before the giving stopped. In my grandmother’s telling, those observations became instructions, and those instructions helped shape law and protocol. They guided when to harvest, where to camp, how to enter a neighbour’s territory, and what was owed in return.
Indigenous legal scholars today often describe this as law that comes from the land itself, learned by watching how living systems sustain one another. A plainer name for it is knowing how to live somewhere.
The host and the guest
One of the clearest teachings in this understanding of the world is the relationship between host and guest. My grandmother invited us to recognize that relationship in the lives of plants and animals.
A host prepares the place before anyone arrives. A beaver family dams a stream, and the pond becomes a home for fish, frogs, birds and plants. A fallen tree becomes a nurse log, feeding the next generation of seedlings as it returns to the soil.
A host offers first. A flowering plant sets out nectar. A berry bush ripens fruit. These provisions come in their own season, not whenever a visitor happens to want them.
A host also makes its presence known. Birdsong, scent and the marks left along a trail tell newcomers that a place is already inhabited. The visitor does not arrive in an empty world.
The guest has responsibilities too. A guest attends to the season and to what the place can offer. A guest does not assume that everything within reach is theirs to take. A guest leaves something that helps sustain the relationship.
A bee takes nectar and carries pollen. Read through this teaching, that exchange offers an image of visiting well: receiving a gift while helping the host continue its life.
Many Indigenous harvesting protocols carry the same ethic into daily practice: ask before taking, take only what is needed, offer thanks, and leave enough for others and for the plant or animal to recover.
None of this suggests that every relationship in nature is peaceful or generous. These are ways of seeing responsibilities that people can learn to carry.
Everyone is both
No being is only a host or only a guest.
A tree makes room for other life while depending on soil, water, sunlight, fungi, and relationships beyond itself. People, too, may welcome others into their homes while remaining dependent on the larger homeland that sustains them.
The distinction between host and guest is therefore about roles, not ranks. Everyone receives. Everyone has something to give.
The question is whether the exchange sustains the place.
A visitor who takes without restraint leaves less for those who come next. A host who neglects the place has less to offer. Both have responsibilities, and neither can fulfil them alone.
This is the heart of reciprocity, a principle found across Indigenous philosophies: relationships stay healthy when gifts move in both directions. The Haudenosaunee teaching of the seventh generation extends that exchange across time, asking that decisions made today leave the place well for those not yet born.
Mutual benefit begins here, with the recognition that different beings carry different gifts and obligations.
What people carry forward
My grandmother’s teaching connects these relationships to the ways people meet their neighbours.
The host prepares a place, offers food and rest, and explains where the visitor has arrived. The guest makes themselves known, explains why they have come, listens to the terms of the visit, and brings something in return. The gift may be material. It may also be labour, knowledge, news, or a commitment to help.
Nations around the Great Lakes carried this ethic into treaty. The Dish with One Spoon, an agreement among the Haudenosaunee, Anishinaabe and allied Nations, describes shared hunting grounds as a single dish. Everyone eats from it with one spoon, takes only what they need, leaves enough for others, and keeps the dish clean. The Two Row Wampum, between the Haudenosaunee and European newcomers, shows two vessels travelling side by side on the same river, each keeping its own ways and neither steering the other.
In this understanding, acknowledgement is more than naming the people associated with a territory. It is learning enough about a homeland to behave responsibly within it.
Whose home is this? What sustains it? What laws and agreements guide our presence? What can we receive, and what must we return?
These questions make acknowledgement a relationship rather than a recital.
They also make it diplomatic. A guest who recognizes the host’s homeland recognizes that they have entered a place with its own relationships and responsibilities. A host who welcomes the guest makes room for an encounter governed by those relationships.
Neither arrives without standing. Neither arrives without obligations.
Beginning with place
I write from the shores of the Bay of Quinte. Here, the teaching asks me to begin with the water, the shoreline, and the life they sustain. Before I describe myself, I must attend to where I am.
That does not make people or history less important. It places them within the homeland that gives them meaning. The people, their laws, their agreements, and their responsibilities all belong to the place.
In a time of longer fire seasons, troubled waters, and uncertainty about what the next season will bring, this teaching asks something difficult and useful of us: pay attention before you speak.
An acknowledgement cannot tell the story of a place if the speaker has stopped noticing it.
The land came first. Beginning there again means learning to name what sustains us, and accepting that what sustains us also asks something of us.
By Rye Karonhiowanen Barberstock
Photo by Andrik Langfield on Unsplash
The post The Land Came First appeared first on Indigenous Climate Hub.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels and cement are projected to fall by around 0.4% in 2026 to 38.2bn tonnes of CO2 (GtCO2), according to new figures from the Global Carbon Project.
This guest post is by:
- Dr Zeke Hausfather, Carbon Brief’s climate science contributor
- Prof Pierre Friedlingstein, chair of mathematical modelling of climate systems at the University of Exeter and part of the Global Carbon Project team.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels and cement are projected to fall by around 0.4% in 2026 to 38.2bn tonnes of CO2 (GtCO2), according to new figures from the Global Carbon Project.
The 21st edition of the annual “global carbon budget” report, published today, says that this small decline is largely due to a 1.9% drop in emissions from oil and the energy shock triggered by the Iran conflict and the closure of the strait of Hormuz.
Emissions from coal continue to increase slightly.
The Global Carbon Project’s projections for fossil fuel and cement CO2 emissions in 2026 are preliminary, with a range that spans a fall of -1.5% to a rise of +0.6%.
This means a small increase in emissions can not be ruled out.
Emissions from land-use change, such as deforestation, are projected to rise in 2026.
This is primarily driven by peat fires and forest degradation in south-east Asia and is linked to the development of a strong El Niño event this year.
As a result, total CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and land use are projected to reach a record high of 43.3GtCO2 in 2026 – marginally above 42.8GtCO2 in 2025.