China Locks In Renewables While Trump's United States Clings To Coal

Looking for a nation-building project that builds a lower-carbon future? China's grid strategy displaces fossil fuels and pulls investment toward renewables. Trump's forces utilities back to coal.

Sep 14, 2025

This edition of The Energy Mix Weekender brings us more sharp thinking from climate futurist, strategist, and author Michael Barnard.

This week, Prime Minister Mark Carney unveiled a first list of “nation-building” projects that included new liquefied natural gas infrastructure and a big bet on an unproven, new nuclear technology, while pundits kept up pressure for a new oil pipeline. All despite a looming glut in global gas markets and a “flashing red warning light” for future oil demand.

Barnard traces another path that more and more of the world is embracing—and would help Canada establish distance and independence from a southern neighbour that seems increasingly determined to attack our sovereignty. As former MP Charlie Angus writes on Substack today, “this is not the time to make nice”.

Barnard’s post originally appeared on CleanTechnica in late August.

China’s coal consumption dropped by about 2.6% in the first six months of 2025 while electricity demand rose roughly 5% compared with the same period in 2024. That means China added solar and wind capacity fast enough to cover new demand and then some

In the United States, in sharp contrast, coal-fired electricity jumped 14% in the same span. Coal-fired generation rose to the highest level since 2022 in many regions.

China’s clean energy buildout is about more than panels and wind turbines. It includes new transmission lines, storage, grid upgrades, and planning that prevents waste. That kind of infrastructure shapes behaviour because once it is built, it guides investment and operation. When you string High-Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) lines across vast provinces you force your economy into solar, wind, and hydro. If you tie all that clean energy into storage and smart grids, your room for coal shrinks.

China Displaces Fossil-Generated Electricity

China’s record deployments of renewables in 2025 are not just expanding capacity, they are actively displacing fossil generation and the pollution that comes with it. The 92 GW of solar installed in May alone pushed total solar capacity past 1 TW, a level no other country is close to.

That scale means new electricity demand can be met without firing up additional coal plants, and in many cases existing fossil units are being run less often or shut down altogether. Every gigawatt of clean generation that feeds the grid trims coal burn, lowers sulphur dioxide and particulate emissions, and cuts CO2 output. The result is a visible reduction in air pollution across major industrial regions and a measurable decline in national emissions, showing how infrastructure choices directly reshape both climate outcomes and public health.

In the United States the opposite is happening. Coal plants that should be retired are staying online. Companies that can run on coal or gas are choosing coal because gas is costly. That reinforces the case for keeping coal plants alive and for doggedly holding on to the old system. Once you keep that plant alive, you delay the cost signals that would push toward renewables. Every hour you burn coal that should not be burning, you lock in that path a bit more.

Policy choices matter. China is pushing power sector transformation through central planning. It can build clean infrastructure quickly. The United States is moving backward with executive orders that extend the life of aging coal plants, lift barriers to coal mining, and give regulatory breaks to coal operators. That opens a political door to keep care for coal instead of care for investment in cleaner alternatives.

Economics vs. Ideology

Behind the policies are economics and ideology. Solar and wind have dropped in cost for years. Batteries are cheaper. In China, that means cheap renewables can compete and win.

In the United States, political choices tilt the scale back toward coal, even if markets say otherwise. That tension between economic reality and political preference defines energy choices in 2025 more than ever before.

The cost of coal never totally disappeared. When gas prices jumped to an average of about $3.53 per million Btu compared with $2.15 last year, utilities switched back. That shift left coal-fired output up 14% and fossil fuel generation up 1% overall in power. Clean energy output did rise 3% thanks to 34% more solar generation. But coal’s rebound erased years of progress.

All of this has long-term implications for emissions. U.S. power sector emissions rose sharply in early 2025, pushing global emissions up even while China cut them. China offset about 60 million tonnes of emissions, while the U.S. added millions of tonnes in the first quarter alone. That gap tells a story of two systems.

China’s infrastructure trajectory means its emissions path will keep tilting down, even if it keeps building a little coal capacity for backup. The system it is building makes clean power a default choice. The United States is setting up infrastructure lock-in for fossil fuel generation that holds power switched toward coal. That choice weighs on long-term emissions because infrastructure lives longer than policy cycles.

Bad Infrastructure Choices Drive Health Impacts, Climate Pollution

The health and environmental consequences of coal’s trajectory in China and the United States are stark. As China cuts coal use, it reduces fine particulate pollution that drives respiratory illness, lowers sulphur dioxide emissions that cause acid rain, and trims carbon dioxide output that fuels climate change. The improvements are visible in cleaner skies and measurable drops in premature deaths linked to air pollution.

In the U.S., the coal rebound reverses those gains, with more mercury, particulates, and greenhouse gases released into the air. That choice burdens public health, increases medical costs, and deepens the climate footprint, showing how infrastructure decisions echo far beyond the power sector.

At some point, grids make their own logic. You build capacity and operators use it. They fix it. They send more power through it. They bond with it. The more clean grid you put in the ground, the harder you pull the system into cleaner choices. The more you keep old coal plants alive, the more you preserve the option to use coal when problems emerge.

Energy transitions are made of paths chosen and infrastructure built. You might say infrastructure is the architecture of emissions. Build one type and you get one kind of future. Build another and you get a different one. Today, China is architecting a low-carbon energy system. The United States is investing in a fossil fuel version. That choice matters not just for the next year, but for the next decade.

When the grid asks what fuel you have built for, you’d better answer with a plan for the future, not the past.