China Seeks to Secure Future Energy Sources

An article in today’s New York Times focuses on the surge in the need by China to secure energy sources to power its growing economy as it continues rapid modernization. A telling statistic mentioned in the article is that in 2000 China consumed only half as much energy as the United States, and now it has surpassed US energy consumption.

A number of posters here have noted this week’s $400 billion 30-year agreement between China and Russia in which the Chinese will build infrastructure to import natural gas from Russia.

In addition to this deal, the Times article also mentions that China is rapidly expanding its own shale gas research and development program after seeing the rapid natural gas production in the United States based on new extraction technologies (i.e. fracking). China is also moving rapidly to secure oil through its own production and by making deals all over the globe (e.g. with Ecuador, Iraq and Nigeria)

With all these developments in conventional energy sources, what are we to make of the news we have been picking up of Industrial Heat making deals in China? Some say that if the Chinese government was aware of the potential of nickel-hydrogen energy, that they would not worry so much about making massive investments in conventional energy.

My thoughts on this are that at this point, while the potential of LENR seems to be very promising, that we are still in a very early preparation stage in the evolution of this field. The Chinese who Tom Darden has been meeting with have probably not yet seen an E-Cat plant in operation, and it could be considered very premature to make long term economic plans based only on promising test reports. It’s impossible to know at this point how much knowledge the leading planners of China’s economy have of LENR, and how seriously they are taking it. Also China’s energy agreements may have much to do with global geopolitical positioning in addition to economic needs.

  • mcloki

    Natural gas is also a feedstock for many industrial processes. Sign as many deals a possible.

  • Andrew

    Securing several energy sources is a good strategy for China. Power the manufacturing and recycling sectors with LENR for cheap material,labour and low energy overhead. Transportation can stay with oil… for now.

  • Ophelia Rump

    You cannot simply abandon the present for the future, or you will never live to arrive.

    • Omega Z

      Agreed, I’ve pointed this out several times.
      They may have a new Car that gets 100mpg in 5 years.
      That’s all well & fine, But, I need a new car today. What Shall I Do. Life doesn’t pause…

  • Alain Samoun

    It seems to me that China has the same problems than the other developed countries:

    – substantial inertia due to technical standards, organizational routines.
    – systemic features of energy supply prevent innovations from being implemented overnight.
    – political might of highly capital-intensive infrastructure of centralized distribution.

    In addition,it is a very political centralized country, that makes a potentially decentralized technology likes LENR difficult to implement in the psyche of the ruling class.

    • Job001

      It seems China has different corruption i.e. billing families for a bullet takes care of a sector we do not deal with effectively.

      Additionally China is top heavy on Engineering rather than political ignorance. China has done 13 five year plans, allowing for an impressive planning learning curve improvement.

      The US uses an obsolete non-free reactive market planning process.

      Think Alain, substantial differences are apparent and are not negligible. This is a tough economic ballgame, not some “hand waving same problems” magic!

      • Alain Samoun

        We are talking about the future of a new “world” society where energy will be decentralized,where consumers become producers of their energy. China,like the US and Europe is in a capitalist system,based on profit,where the energy is the backbone of this system.
        Of course,each country will have its specificity,size of the country and its population,its own history and type of the energy to convert,but I still see the same problems : Inertia,routines and economic interest of current infrastructures based on old type of energy gas,oil,coal and nuclear fission.

        • Job001

          It’s sweet you believe China is like the US or Europe.

          It’s a common bias to believe things will be normal, the same, linear, inertia, routine, history repeats, same ole, same ole, etc. It’s called “normalcy bias”. We don’t notice or observe differences when we subscribe to “normalcy”.

          Then the inevitable crash.

          • Omega Z

            Strange. Most people think China is very different from the West.

            They have corruption & divisions within their Government.
            They have major divisions within different regions of their country. Massive internal Debts only being maintained by the export markets & ecological destruction.
            Their Social Systems are extremely strained & in trouble. Pensions, medical, school funding to name a few.. An Aging population & a looming manpower shortage in the near future. This describes 95% of the World including China.

            They are resource poor with only a couple exceptions. Extremely dependent on primary metals & fossil fuels even if they stopped product exports. They require massive imports of food to feed their people. Pretty much like most of the world give or take a couple exceptions.

            • Job001

              Agreed except, they learned to successfully plan ahead by 13 five year plans, now named “guidelines”.

              These guidelines include a rapidly evolving environmental and energy infrastructure with growing renewables. This 4000+ year old country has evolved into a formidable economic power.

              Failure predictions given repeated recovery from adversity are likely unwise especially given renewable energy(non FF) growth. They now successfully do guidelines ahead, the west does not.

              The capital difference is debatable as to which gives higher capital returns ultimately. Currently 7% vs 2.5% growth.

              • Omega Z

                Note that most of their 5 year plans were, well not so mentionable.
                Only after they started mimicking the west did things go better.
                I am a little envious of their advantage.
                They can look to the West & what we have done & pick & choose what worked & avoid what didn’t.
                Note they also have a little more flexibility at the moment, tho they also have people within the party to answer to. More so all the time.

                • Job001

                  Precisely, bad laughable plans to good guidelines. That’s the learning curve.