• JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes, but it might be difficult to get companies to invest if it’s seen as a transitional solution till energy storage gets up to par

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              They’re not really the market for China. The west accounts for only 20% of world’s population. BRICS has already surpassed G7 in terms of global GDP. China will be building infrastructure for most of the world going forward.

              • maynarkh@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                This is a weird point to make and a bit disingenious.

                On the one hand, G7 officially includes the whole of the EU, with the EU having a full seat at the table, and your source does not include it.

                On the other hand, it very lowkey mentions that it’s on PPP, and BRICS includes a bunch of countries with very low purchasing power.

                Finally, comparing BRICS to the G7 is weird, since there are a bunch of big economies in the world who are openly and thoroughly allied with G7 countries, like Australia.

                I mean it’s clear that BRICS is a major player in geopolitics, but claiming “BRICS has surpassed G7, it’s now the world leader” is just false.

                BTW here are the last published raw annual GDP figures from G7 and BRICS countries, in trillion USD, as of 2022 from the OECD:

                US: 25.5
                EU: 24.3
                JP: 5.8
                UK: 3.8
                CA: 2.1
                
                G7: 61.5
                
                CH: 30.1
                IN: 9.0
                RU: 4.4
                BR: 3.2
                SA: 1.0
                
                BRICS: 47.7
                
                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I mean it would be disingenuous not to use PPP since that would be completely meaningless. I’m also not sure what’s weird with comparing BRICS with G7, or what Australia has to do with any of that. Perhaps you’re not aware that China is a huge trading partner for Australia?

                  BRICS has absolutely passed G7 by every meaningful measure. It’s where majority of manufacturing and commodity production happens while much of G7 GDP comes from ephemeral things like the service industry.

              • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s the issue I’m taking about. US won’t let China build it’s infrastructure. Neither will may other countries due to the diplomatic issues that come with it. Since the design is controlled by the government, that seems like it would make licencing it to interested parties outside of China more difficult. No one wants strings attached, and using thorium reactors as a diplomatic weapon isn’t good for the adoption of the technology.

                • 133arc585
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Neither will may other countries due to the diplomatic issues that come with it.

                  The diplomatic issues that come with cooperating with China are pretty much only due to retaliation by the USA and the like. Without that retaliation, it’s not like it’s causing diplomatic issues with other nations (especially those other nations who are already cooperating with China). Which relates to “US won’t let China build it’s infrastructure”; they have no right to disallow them building infrastructure, and the only way they can prevent that is through strongarming and use of force, economic or physical. Telling other countries that they also can’t trade with country X because country X is working with China is just economic bullying.

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  US has absolutely no say regarding where China builds infrastructure. China is currently the major trading partner for vast majority of countries in the world, and US isn’t even a close second. And it’s pretty clearly that lots of countries actually do want Chinese technology as evidenced by the fact that China is building infrastructure across the globe.

                  • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yeah I’m not disagreeing. I just think that the technology would be more widely accepted and implemented if it didn’t come with strings attached