There Was Some Good News on Green Energy in 2025 (msn.com) 40
Yes, greenhouse gas emissions kept rising in 2025, writes Bloomberg (alternate URL here). And the pledges of various governments to lower greenhouse gases "are nowhere near where they need to be to avoid catastrophic climate change..."
But in 2025, "there were silver linings too." The world is decarbonizing faster than was expected 10 years ago and investment into the clean energy transition, including everything from wind and solar to batteries and grids, is expected to have reached a new record of $2.2 trillion globally in 2025, according to research by the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, a London nonprofit. "Is this enough to keep us safe? No it clearly isn't," said Gareth Redmond-King, international lead at the ECIU. "Is it remarkable progress compared to where we were headed? Clearly it is...." Global investment in clean tech far outpaced what went into polluting industries. For every $1 funding fossil fuel projects, $2 went into clean power, according to the ECIU. For China, the EU, the U.S. and India, the four largest polluters, it was $2.60.
Funds flowing into renewable power set another record in the first half of this year and were up 10% compared to the same period in 2024, to $386 billion, according to the latest available research by BloombergNEF. Solar and wind grew fast enough to meet all new electricity demand globally in the first three quarters of 2025, according to UK-based energy think tank Ember. That means renewable capacity is set to hit a new record globally this year, with Ember forecasting an 11% increase from 2024. Over the last three years, renewable capacity grew by nearly 30% on average. That puts the world within reach of the goal set at COP 28 in Dubai in 2023 to triple clean power by 2030. China is leading the charge, with the world's largest polluter expected to have delivered 66% of new solar capacity, and 69% of new wind globally this year, according to Ember. Renewables also advanced in parts of Asia, Europe and South America.
The explosive power demand from artificial intelligence is also turning the tide on green technology investment, which had soured in recent years. For the first three quarters of this year, global clean tech investment, which was dominated by funding in next-generation nuclear reactors, renewables and other solutions that help power data centers, has already surpassed all of 2024. That marks the sector's first annual increase since the 2022 peak. And despite President Trump's rollback of climate policies, the S&P's main gauge tracking clean energy is up about 50% this year, outperforming most other stock indexes and even gold. That same enthusiasm has also helped channel more capital into developing and upgrading the power grid, a backbone of the global energy transition.
The article also notes that prices per kilowatt-hour of battery capacity "fell by 8% to a record $108 this year and they're expected to decline a further 3% next year, according to BloombergNEF."
And this year the International Court of Justice "determined that countries risk being in violation of international law if they don't work toward keeping global warming to the 1.5C threshold agreed on at the Paris climate conference in 2015."
But in 2025, "there were silver linings too." The world is decarbonizing faster than was expected 10 years ago and investment into the clean energy transition, including everything from wind and solar to batteries and grids, is expected to have reached a new record of $2.2 trillion globally in 2025, according to research by the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, a London nonprofit. "Is this enough to keep us safe? No it clearly isn't," said Gareth Redmond-King, international lead at the ECIU. "Is it remarkable progress compared to where we were headed? Clearly it is...." Global investment in clean tech far outpaced what went into polluting industries. For every $1 funding fossil fuel projects, $2 went into clean power, according to the ECIU. For China, the EU, the U.S. and India, the four largest polluters, it was $2.60.
Funds flowing into renewable power set another record in the first half of this year and were up 10% compared to the same period in 2024, to $386 billion, according to the latest available research by BloombergNEF. Solar and wind grew fast enough to meet all new electricity demand globally in the first three quarters of 2025, according to UK-based energy think tank Ember. That means renewable capacity is set to hit a new record globally this year, with Ember forecasting an 11% increase from 2024. Over the last three years, renewable capacity grew by nearly 30% on average. That puts the world within reach of the goal set at COP 28 in Dubai in 2023 to triple clean power by 2030. China is leading the charge, with the world's largest polluter expected to have delivered 66% of new solar capacity, and 69% of new wind globally this year, according to Ember. Renewables also advanced in parts of Asia, Europe and South America.
The explosive power demand from artificial intelligence is also turning the tide on green technology investment, which had soured in recent years. For the first three quarters of this year, global clean tech investment, which was dominated by funding in next-generation nuclear reactors, renewables and other solutions that help power data centers, has already surpassed all of 2024. That marks the sector's first annual increase since the 2022 peak. And despite President Trump's rollback of climate policies, the S&P's main gauge tracking clean energy is up about 50% this year, outperforming most other stock indexes and even gold. That same enthusiasm has also helped channel more capital into developing and upgrading the power grid, a backbone of the global energy transition.
The article also notes that prices per kilowatt-hour of battery capacity "fell by 8% to a record $108 this year and they're expected to decline a further 3% next year, according to BloombergNEF."
And this year the International Court of Justice "determined that countries risk being in violation of international law if they don't work toward keeping global warming to the 1.5C threshold agreed on at the Paris climate conference in 2015."
This is a joke, right? (Score:5, Insightful)
"countries risk being in violation of international law"?
We got Russia invading other countries, China blatantly ignoring the international law ocean boundaries, the US committing war crimes on ships in Venezuela waters without even declaring war, ...
Re: (Score:3)
The same exact tribunal also declared Russia in violation of international law when invading Ukraine. They can judge the 2 things, it's not light they're overwhelmed by the number of cases.
Potential war crimes in Venezuela would be dealt by the ICC, not the ICJ.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: This is a joke, right? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not "overwhelming the biosphere" that's the primary cause for concern, though. The primary concerns are human-centric: cities flooding or catching fire, crops not growing, hurricanes and tornadoes destroying infrastructure, people dying of heat exhaustion, etc. All of these things are problems already and will get worse the higher the CO2 concentration is allowed to get. Knowing that the total amount of carbon on Earth is finite doesn't help with that.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also not just human-centric. We are driving a mass-extinction event. Will life continue on Earth despite all this? For sure. There will be speciation, etc, etc. But the perspective of geological time is completely irrelevant to humanity's historical perspective, because our species will live in a denuded world for the next many tens or hundreds of thousands of years. Those of us who feel it are right to be ashamed of this act of biocide. It may not be permanent for the earth, but it is as good as perma
Re: (Score:2)
Those of us who feel it are right to be ashamed of this act of biocide. It may not be permanent for the earth, but it is as good as permanent for humanity.
You're not wrong, but I think the last few decades have demonstrated what peoples' de facto priorities are. Maybe after we've lost the great majority of biodiversity, we'll regret not having done more to prevent that loss, but for now the common mindset is "I want my goods and services today, and if there's any tradeoff at all between my day-to-day comfort and the natural world's long-term existence, then I'll take the former now and hope that the latter works itself out somehow". :(
Re: (Score:3)
"cannot overwhelm the biosphere as thats what was there prior"?
You mean prior to humans inhabiting the Earth.
"because there simply wont be any fossil fuel left to burn. Its a self-moderating issue."
Quite correct, once the Earth eliminates humans, then those issues go away.
Anymore insights, Einstein?
Re: (Score:2)
All fossils came from the biosphere, and were sequestered in the past. Therefore all the fossil fuels we can extract which return to the biosphere, cannot overwhelm the biosphere as thats what was there prior, and the world was ok at the time.
Yikes. Is that really the depth of your understanding on this topic? The mere fact that you can state something so obviously ill-conceived with such confidence speaks volumes. I feel like explaining to you how you're wrong, but I think that might fall on deaf ears. I think maybe a better exercise would be for you to try to reason out why I think you are wrong, then come up with a counterargument. I feel like my reasoning should be really, really obvious.
would be dealt by the ICC, not the ICJ. (Score:2)
The International Cricket Council ? I didn't know Venezuela played cricket
Re: (Score:3)
If a ruling would be made against a country, the wronged party could invoke an ICJ decision when using courts to challenge decisions at national level.
Re: This is a joke, right? (Score:1)
A language is a dialect with and army and a navy. The ICJ and ICC lack both. Their jabberings aren't even talk.
Re: (Score:2)
The amazing achievements of the application of this policy even in the past 25 years are a testament of its utility.
I can provide so many examples.
After the skillful application of gunboat diplomacy by the USA towards Iraq, it is now a democratic, peaceful and developed country. It has a great relationship with the US, American companies now dominate the oil business and successfully block the incursion of Chinese and Iranian interests.
The situation in Syria and Libya is very similar. After being bombed to
Re: (Score:2)
Nonsense. The ICC is a criminal tribunal, it convicts and imprisons criminals and does not need an army of its own to do it as it uses the police of its member countries. Wikipedia lists 73 indictments, of which 11 convictions, 14 acquittals, 7 currently in custody. A quick glance shows 4 names I recognize: Minister Ngaïssona convicted, President Duterte under custody; President Gbagbo acquitted, President Al-Bashir finally trialled in his own country. An excellent outcome as previous the ICC these tr
Re: This is a joke, right? (Score:1)
I am a citizen of the United States, which is not a party to this tribunal. But if I were a citizen of a country that is, would I get to elect the persons or bodies responsible for appointing the judges, supervising the prosecutors, or anything else resembling the platonic ideal of government only with the consent of the governed?
Here in the US, the elected president nominates federal judges and supervises the federal prosecutors, and the elected senate confirms them.
At the state level, some jurisdictions f
Re: (Score:2)
A language is a dialect with and army and a navy.
Is it? Was that sentence actually in a language?
Re: (Score:3)
Another take: You're complaining that a tribunal is judging people for stealing cookies, when they could judge people for murder. Well, they judge the cases that are brought to them, it's up to the police to bring in more people wanted for murder. Here the island countries at risk of disappearing brought the case to the ICJ that the big fish must comply with their compromise. The ICJ doesn't decide on its own what cases it judges! The ICC can, but they judge different things. ICJ = for countries suing each
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Law universities out of all aren't overwhelmed with pierced/blue-haired. The "international law" types apply to work in a Foreign Affairs Ministry/State Department.
Re: This is a joke, right? (Score:2)
Russia, countries, plural? How about your bestest butt buddy Israel invading and attacking FIVE countries?
Spare us your propaganda tonight you pointy-headed simpleton.
Re: (Score:3)
Russia has invaded other countries within the past year. Russian military jets invade air space and then claim it was an accident or outright lie about their position. They have spies that sabotage pipelines and communication networks.
Israel has not invaded 5 other countries, but has committed atrocities in Gaza. Netanyahu is a war criminal almost as evil as the Hamas. Both sides can be bastards, sometimes the devils fights among themselves.
I notice you did not deny my statements about America's criminal
Re: (Score:2)
Another take: we lack the imagination to understand properly that for humanity as a whole, and each of us individually who have more than a couple of decades of life left, there is *nothing* more important than climate change. It will be the overwhelming, dominant, existential issue that hangs over us like the sword of Damocles in the years ahead. We are in the foothills of the S-curve of its effects.
Re: (Score:2)
Not every country is a rogue nation, and not every one that is in some regards does violate all international law.
But I guess you are one of those yes/no "thinkers" that cannot see that the works actually is shades of grey.
Re: (Score:1)
Unfortunately no, not a joke.
There are plenty of such laws, being used often in destructive ways. Example : countries in Europe get sued (successfully) because they're unable to provide enough care for illegal immigrants. Several large energy ("oil") industries as well as countries also got convictions because of "not doing enough" to fight climate change.
AI will help! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
A bubble can't really "crash" since it floats in the air. They sometimes burst although. /s
Re:AI will help! (Score:4, Interesting)
When the AI bubble crashes, lots of those fossil fuel plants will be shuttered, significantly increasing the proportion of power coming from renewable sources!
I don't think the data centers or AI systems will get shut down when the bubble bursts. The problem with the AI bubble -- much like it was with the railroad bubble -- isn't that what's being built isn't valuable, it's that it won't generate ROI fast enough to allow the people who borrowed money to build it to pay their bills. That will result in foreclosure and resale of the data centers at firesale prices, but the data centers won't cease operation. This is exactly what happened with the railroads. Most of the people who funded the buildout lost their shirts, but others swooped in, bought up the assets for pennies, and then made huge fortunes. The trains kept running through it all.
Re:AI will help! (Score:4, Interesting)
The railroads of the ages past survived because they were spread out, hard to use for anything else, didn't require all the expensive maintenance of a building and were costly to destroy in full.
The opposite is true of the "datacenters", especially those cobbled up from prefab modules as a direct consequence of the yuge short-term bubble "investment", as most new ones are. These will be a ripe target for quick repurposing because they are on large plots, accessible via public infrastructure and well-connected to public utilities, all of this a result of the datacenter gold rush to the bottom by the local governments.
So they will be razed pretty fast.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't reckon. What's right next to the data centres will be some nice greenfield land with access to the same infrastructure. It's often cheaper to build from scratch than modify an existing site.
Re: (Score:2)
It's often cheaper to build from scratch than modify an existing site.
Yeah, sure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think they will be quite valuable as AI data centers...
It is, of course, hard to see the future, but I kind of doubt that. For something to be valuable as an "AI data center" it will have to satisfy demand for such services. If there is the demand that would justify them, yeah, a modest bubble would pop with the accompanying price correction and that'll be the end of it.
The problem with the datacenter gold rush and the ginormous AI bubble is that it isn't a reflection of a demand for "AI services". It is based on a chase after "AGI", at least that's what I hear
Re: (Score:1)
AI won't crash though; even though 80% of it is bullshit. What will survive is marketing and profiling people, because that doesn't need really need any advanced capability other than being able to process an immense amount of data from legal and illegal sources. All the AI compute power will be put to this use and big corporations and governments will gladly pay for it, it's chickenfeed to their budgets.
Re: (Score:2)
It will not crash as in "going away completely". It will crash as in "most money invested will be lost".
Startling changes are afoot (Score:5, Insightful)
Across sub-Saharan Africa, there are millions of families installing a cheap panel and a battery in their homes, and thus having light at night, a way to charge their devices, and even the ability to run a fridge, for the first time ever. 9000+ mini-grids with community-scale solar and batteries are being rolled out, serving tens of millions more people, and this sector is expected to expand rapidly.
Just as sub-Saharan Africa largely skipped straight past landline installations and just used mobile phones instead, the same will happen here. National grids have never come close to serving national populations and have been wildly unreliable. The next stage of expansion is clearly also going to include large family deployments that support charging of battery vehicles -- from micromobility all the way up to cars and trucks. This is already happening but we are going to see explosive growth in two and three wheel transport, leading to oil demand destruction (fuel for two and three wheelers is a dominant fraction of current consumption in many African cities), rapid improvements in air quality and thus respiratory health, big cuts in balance-of-payments drains for national economies, stabilises household finances as daily unpredictable cash drains for fuel become stabilised amortised capex, massivley cuts risks and time spent by women and girls in particular eg for water collection, and further orients the continent as a whole away from the US and towards China as the enabler of all of this.
This is going to transform the region in ways we cannot fully grasp yet. No more kerosene heating at home means a rapid drop in respiratory conditions from indoor air pollution. Kids can study after dark, meaning better educational outcomes. Vaccine storage becomes much lower risk because small clinics have reliable power. Rural African communities can narrow the gap with urban.
We are on the cusp of some really profound changes for humanity, both for the better and worse, as climate costs and renewables & electrification accelerate.
Battery prices are falling, so ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It depends on what subsidies are available. It would already be cheaper than fossil if all fossil fuel subsidies were ended.
Re: (Score:2)
You can only answer that in a country-specific context, and it depends on the scale, too, eg domestic install vs strategic national deployment a la Dogger Bank. But it is possible to say that the UK's CfD strike prices have typically been well below the average gas price for many years.