The actual problem here is about coal related CO2 emissions. While China pumped up its power generation from coal by ~50% over the last 10 years, those emissions were reported flat..
The problem goes back to the year 2014 when it became obvious China burned way more coal than previously reported. The CCP reaction was then to release Liu et al 2015 in Nature, claiming it was no problem cause Chinese coal held far less carbon, that is 40% less. And that figure was based on the claim that 49.9% vs 71.3% (effective carbon share) was 40% less. 24 scientists plus Nature's peer review agreed on that. However.. 49.9/71.3 = 0.7!!!
I read a little trying to understand what Schaffer was talking about. The carbon content of coal ranges from widely with the source, from as much as 86-97% by weight in anthracites to as little as 25-35% in lignites. If you quantify coal by BTU's, the amount of CO2 emitted/BTU varies modestly (depending on water content?). In the early years of China's engagement on CO2 emissions - the baseline years from which changes in CO2 emissions are reported, there is/was uncertainty about the coals burned an therefore the amount of CO2 emitted.
"Changing carbon content of Chinese coal and implications for emissions of CO2" (Six authors affiliated with Harvard; one with second affiliation with a Chinese University.)
Abstract: The changing carbon content of coal consumed in China between 2002 and 2012 is quantified using information from the power sector. The carbon content decreased by 7.7% over this interval, the decrease particularly pronounced between 2007 and 2009. Inferences with respect to the changing carbon content of coal and the oxidation rate for its consumption, combined with the recent information on coal use in China, are employed to evaluate the trend in emissions of CO2. Emissions are estimated to have increased by 158% between 2002 and 2012, from 3.9 Gt y-1 to 9.2 Gt y-1. Our estimated emissions for 2005 are notably consistent with data reported by China in its “Second National Communication” to the UN (NDRC, 2012) and significantly higher than the estimation published recently in Nature. The difference is attributed, among other factors, to the assumption of a constant carbon content of coal in the latter study. The results indicate that CO2 emissions of China in 2005 reported by Second National Communication are more reliable to serve as the baseline for China's future carbon commitments (e.g. those in Paris Agreement of the UNFCCC). Discrepancies between national and provincial statistics on coal production and consumption are investigated and attributed primarily to anomalous reporting on interprovincial trade in four heavily industrialized provinces.
Selected text: "Estimates of Chinese historical and current CO2 emissions indicate wide disparities. A study by Liu et al. (2015b) argued that China's official Second National Communication (SNC) to the UNFCCC (NDRC, 2012) overestimated China's CO2 emissions by 12% in 2005, the critical base year for measuring China's carbon-intensity commitments. These conclusions drew high-profile coverage in international news media (Buckley, 2015; McGrath, 2015). Emission estimates from other prominent organizations differ, including reports from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) (Boden et al., 2017), the PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (Olivier et al., 2016), and the Global Carbon Project (GCP, 2017). The differences result from either or both of the two major factors involved in these estimates: “activity” levels, referring to all major uses of fossil fuels, and emission factors, which translate activity into levels of emitted CO2. Reflecting China's heavy dependence on coal, the former is a function mainly of the quantity of coal consumed; the latter depends on the quality of this coal, identified most notably by its carbon content. The default values of emission factors range from 25.8tC/TJ for bituminous coal to 27.6tC/TJ for lignite according to IPCC."
"Liu et al. (2015a) provided the first quantitative analysis of temporal changes in the quality of coal consumed in China's electric power sector from 1990 to 2010, expressed in terms of heating values and based on a combination of measurements for 2010 by the Ministry of Environmental Protection and temporal changes in the coal data reported from national energy statistics. They argued for a “remarkable” decline in the quality of coal consumed in the Chinese power sector between 2007 and 2010, inviting a more comprehensive analysis of the changing carbon content of coal used in the Chinese economy."
"As indicated in Fig. 4, the analysis reveals a significant decline in the trend for the carbon content for coal employed in the power sector between 2002 and 2012."
Unfortunately, only part of the full text is available online and the citations to Liu 2015a and 2015b are not given online. One is likely this Nature commentary available outside the usual paywall here.
Fantastic! Reminds me of
https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/how-not-to-be-fooled-by-viral-charts
https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/how-not-to-be-fooled-by-viral-charts-563
The actual problem here is about coal related CO2 emissions. While China pumped up its power generation from coal by ~50% over the last 10 years, those emissions were reported flat..
Do you have a reference or link for that? At some stage I might dig into it.
The EIA and of ourworldindata both give numbers on coal usage and CO2 emissions from it. OWI has somewhat lower CO2 intensity than EIA.
https://www.eia.gov/international/data/world
The problem goes back to the year 2014 when it became obvious China burned way more coal than previously reported. The CCP reaction was then to release Liu et al 2015 in Nature, claiming it was no problem cause Chinese coal held far less carbon, that is 40% less. And that figure was based on the claim that 49.9% vs 71.3% (effective carbon share) was 40% less. 24 scientists plus Nature's peer review agreed on that. However.. 49.9/71.3 = 0.7!!!
PS. happy new year!
I read a little trying to understand what Schaffer was talking about. The carbon content of coal ranges from widely with the source, from as much as 86-97% by weight in anthracites to as little as 25-35% in lignites. If you quantify coal by BTU's, the amount of CO2 emitted/BTU varies modestly (depending on water content?). In the early years of China's engagement on CO2 emissions - the baseline years from which changes in CO2 emissions are reported, there is/was uncertainty about the coals burned an therefore the amount of CO2 emitted.
"Changing carbon content of Chinese coal and implications for emissions of CO2" (Six authors affiliated with Harvard; one with second affiliation with a Chinese University.)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652618314690
Abstract: The changing carbon content of coal consumed in China between 2002 and 2012 is quantified using information from the power sector. The carbon content decreased by 7.7% over this interval, the decrease particularly pronounced between 2007 and 2009. Inferences with respect to the changing carbon content of coal and the oxidation rate for its consumption, combined with the recent information on coal use in China, are employed to evaluate the trend in emissions of CO2. Emissions are estimated to have increased by 158% between 2002 and 2012, from 3.9 Gt y-1 to 9.2 Gt y-1. Our estimated emissions for 2005 are notably consistent with data reported by China in its “Second National Communication” to the UN (NDRC, 2012) and significantly higher than the estimation published recently in Nature. The difference is attributed, among other factors, to the assumption of a constant carbon content of coal in the latter study. The results indicate that CO2 emissions of China in 2005 reported by Second National Communication are more reliable to serve as the baseline for China's future carbon commitments (e.g. those in Paris Agreement of the UNFCCC). Discrepancies between national and provincial statistics on coal production and consumption are investigated and attributed primarily to anomalous reporting on interprovincial trade in four heavily industrialized provinces.
Selected text: "Estimates of Chinese historical and current CO2 emissions indicate wide disparities. A study by Liu et al. (2015b) argued that China's official Second National Communication (SNC) to the UNFCCC (NDRC, 2012) overestimated China's CO2 emissions by 12% in 2005, the critical base year for measuring China's carbon-intensity commitments. These conclusions drew high-profile coverage in international news media (Buckley, 2015; McGrath, 2015). Emission estimates from other prominent organizations differ, including reports from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) (Boden et al., 2017), the PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (Olivier et al., 2016), and the Global Carbon Project (GCP, 2017). The differences result from either or both of the two major factors involved in these estimates: “activity” levels, referring to all major uses of fossil fuels, and emission factors, which translate activity into levels of emitted CO2. Reflecting China's heavy dependence on coal, the former is a function mainly of the quantity of coal consumed; the latter depends on the quality of this coal, identified most notably by its carbon content. The default values of emission factors range from 25.8tC/TJ for bituminous coal to 27.6tC/TJ for lignite according to IPCC."
"Liu et al. (2015a) provided the first quantitative analysis of temporal changes in the quality of coal consumed in China's electric power sector from 1990 to 2010, expressed in terms of heating values and based on a combination of measurements for 2010 by the Ministry of Environmental Protection and temporal changes in the coal data reported from national energy statistics. They argued for a “remarkable” decline in the quality of coal consumed in the Chinese power sector between 2007 and 2010, inviting a more comprehensive analysis of the changing carbon content of coal used in the Chinese economy."
"As indicated in Fig. 4, the analysis reveals a significant decline in the trend for the carbon content for coal employed in the power sector between 2002 and 2012."
Unfortunately, only part of the full text is available online and the citations to Liu 2015a and 2015b are not given online. One is likely this Nature commentary available outside the usual paywall here.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Zhu-Liu-10/publication/278791374_Steps_to_China's_carbon_peak/links/55875d3208aef58c03a035b7/Steps-to-Chinas-carbon-peak.pdf
The second is likely this associated technical Nature paper: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3487g4mj
(I'm vastly more interested in the origin of COVID.)