this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2026
465 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

88051 readers
3088 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jhogenbaum@leminal.space 70 points 1 day ago (2 children)

US coal is Largest contributor to THE RISE... But china coal is still 'by far' the largest overall contributor. They write titles kinda misleadingly dramatic.

[–] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 83 points 1 day ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

Leaving aside the importance of per capita, much of China's emissions is western emissions in a trench coat. And I'm not saying that as a China glazer.

[–] Redjard@reddthat.com 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You can pin power use to exported products, but how that electricity is generated is chinas state decision.
It's not like they did nothing but they could also be way more emission free than they are now.

[–] kestrel7_7@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago

They’ve been intentionally using coal to develop away from coal for decades. It’s been a long term strategic thing, using coal power plants to build solar panel factories, then shutting down the coal plants. Meanwhile the USA keeps using coal for fun basically, while being like “well the Chinese are using it too!”. It’s hard for me to see China as the villain here

[–] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Aren't they the number 1 in solar and new solar?

Sometimes I look at them and think, well at least they decided to do something about it.

[–] Slacking@sh.itjust.works 11 points 19 hours ago

If it wasn't for them, oil companies would have managed to stall EVs and keep them as luxury vehicles.

China isn't perfect but I can't see them as the problem when they spit out solar panels while the orange moron is literally paying billions to stop renewable projects.

[–] Ocelot79@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

Yes, China is using a lot of energy in general, and not just for its export-focused economy. The Chinese middle class is huge. They are top consumers of energy in both coal and renewables.

[–] athatet@lemmy.zip 41 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s says rise in the headline. Idk what your comment is supposed to be except for ‘china bad’ whataboutism.

[–] Jhogenbaum@leminal.space 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I was misled upon first reading and so I wrote this to help others by changing emphasis. Their pull quote strikes me as a misdirection.

[–] reptar@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I see what you are saying but I don't think it's a misdirect. I think it's the nature of fast reading. And I'm right there with you.

Or how about this - what should the headline have been?

I think it's pretty straightforward

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca -4 points 1 day ago (3 children)

US increased coal use. China did not. So change in global emissions is US's fault, because global change is based on sum of changes. Headline is fine.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)
[–] kestrel7_7@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

So one year of increase vs 9 years of decrease is still an overall decrease.

Also there’s a difference between China choosing to do something with their planned economy, vs. random wacky shit happening here in Freemarketstan

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

So one year of increase

You're moving the goalposts of this discussion. We're talking about 2025-2026 activities. From the OP article:

"According to the Energy Institute’s latest Statistical Review of World Energy, US coal consumption increased by 10% in 2025, compared to a 0.7% rise globally. "

vs 9 years of decrease is still an overall decrease.

...so that point is irrelevant to the current discussion.

Also there’s a difference between China choosing to do something with their planned economy, vs. random wacky shit happening here in Freemarketstan

In this context, no there isn't a difference. A net increase in coal usage is the only measure. Under that measure both the USA and China have increased domestic coal consumption for energy production.

Even if you want to try to play the "planned economy" card, I doubt in the 15th Five-Year Plan (2026–2030), which was formally approved at the National People's Congress in March 2026, did the concept of $100+Brent crude prices exist as a recorded target. China has been buying up cheap Urals oil from Russia's sanctioned shadow fleet of tankers for a couple years now increasing their strategic reserves (far higher than even the USA). Even those Urals shipments have largely curtained as its now open season for Ukrainian drones knocking out shadow fleet tankers by literally the dozen.

China is not sinning by increasing coal use any greater than the USA by just reacting to geopolitical market conditions and the need to continue to power its nation.

[–] reptar@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Looking at this again later, I think it's the embedded 'quote ' thing headlines like to do. Sometimes they're like 'Banana fiddlesticks', vet says protect against fleas

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Where did you learn that?