中国四年能源建设狂飙，规模赶超美国全国电网
正文翻译
China’s Four-Year Energy Spree Has Eclipsed Entire US Power Grid
中国四年能源建设狂飙，规模赶超美国全国电网
中国四年能源建设狂飙，规模赶超美国全国电网
评论翻译
theassassintherapist
From the article:
Those are some crazy numbers
Edit: and to put that in perspective, the entirety of US added a pitiful 63GW in 2025, and that's with "battery storage" padding the numbers
来自文章内容：
这些数字简直离谱。
补充说明：直观对比一下就能看出差距 ——2025 年全美新增的装机量仅有可怜的 63 吉瓦，这还是靠 “电池储能” 的数据撑场面才得来的。
apxtree98
China is doing some of the things the US did back in the 1950 by enabling the next generation to prosper. Maybe this will be something helpful to society.
中国正在做一些美国20世纪50年代做过的事，助力下一代发展，或许这对社会有益。
SolarBum
The "plant seeds for a tree whose shade you'll never sit under" thing isn't really the American vibe. Ours is more, "Cut down a bunch of trees from a primary growth forest, haul them into some wealthy Boomer's yard and prop them up so he can sit in their shade for a while until they die and he has to go cut down a bunch more."
“前人栽树，后人乘凉”并非美国的氛围。我们更倾向于“从原始森林砍伐大量树木，运到有钱的婴儿潮一代的院子里立起来，让他在树荫下坐一阵子，直到树木枯死，再去砍更多树”。
onegumas
Thermal means here burning gas and coal. It is not a geothermal.
此处的“热能”指燃烧天然气和煤炭，并非地热。
Frognificent
It can also refer to burning biofuels, an area of interest that is rapidly developing in China. While still pumping CO2 and other undesirables into the atmosphere, it is marginally better and significantly less impactful than fossil.
它也可指燃烧生物燃料，这是中国正在快速发展的热门领域。尽管仍会向大气中排放二氧化碳和其他有害物质，但相比化石燃料，它略胜一筹，影响也小得多。
Mad-Mel
This graphic showing the contribution of each energy type in 2016 and 2025 is the one that got me. Solar went from nearly zilch to looking like it'll be providing more GW than coal+gas in the next few years. Solar+wind is already there at 1.8 TW vs. 1.5 TW.
这张展示2016年和2025年各类能源占比的图表让我印象深刻。太阳能从几乎为零，预计未来几年将提供比煤炭+天然气更多的千兆瓦电力。目前太阳能+风能已达1.8太瓦，而煤炭+天然气为1.5太瓦。
TheStuipidestAI
The US will not be able to compete in a modern marketplace if we can't get energy to all citizens cheaply and efficiently. This will have to include a combination of green energy and traditional power, as well as local power sources through SMRs and residential solar/wind.
如果无法为所有公民提供廉价高效的能源，美国将无法在现代市场中竞争。这必须包括绿色能源与传统能源的结合，以及通过小型模块化反应堆（SMRs）和住宅太阳能/风能实现的本地能源供应。
SouthHovercraft4150
Yeah access to cheap electricity is needed for startups to get off the ground. Not having as cheap of energy prices is a barrier to entry in the global market. Other countries will be more competitive even if their taxes are higher if their energy is significantly lower.
没错，初创企业起步需要获得廉价电力。能源价格不够低是进入全球市场的障碍。如果其他国家的能源价格显著更低，即使税率更高，它们也会更具竞争力。
zjin2020
There is the forecast that electricity demand would grow very fast till 2030. Thus if they don’t invest right now there will be a lot of blackouts 5 years down the line. Also, renewable energy becomes so cheap they need to invest in energy storage big time now to fully utilize that potential in a few years.
有预测称，到2030年电力需求将快速增长。因此，如果现在不进行投资，5年后将会出现大量停电情况。此外，可再生能源已变得非常廉价，现在需要大力投资储能领域，以便在几年后充分利用其潜力。
rod_zero
And just wait for 40 some reactors they are building to come online. The west needs to invest in nuclear yesterday.
再等等他们正在建设的40多座反应堆并网发电吧。西方早就该投资核能了。
Igennem
This gets cited a lot but misunderstands how the grid works. Coal is backup capacity for wind and solar because those sources are intermittent. The new coal plants are designed to be efficient, low utilization, and fire up quickly.
这一点被频繁引用，但却误解了电网的工作原理。煤炭是风能和太阳能的备用容量，因为这些能源具有间歇性。新建的燃煤电厂设计得效率高、利用率低且启动迅速。
dcdttu
Great analogy.
这个比喻很贴切。
Override9636
I initially thought geothermal too, so it's a helpful distinction.
我一开始也以为是地热，所以这个区分很有帮助。
sakredfire
What’s the current state of the electricity mix overall?
目前整体的电力结构状况如何？
MadMcCabe
Right, but what if we only make new power for AI data centers instead! Wouldn't that be grand?
没错，但如果我们只给人工智能数据中心建造新电力设施呢！那岂不是很棒？讽刺
siraliases
I was told the free market would solve all problems. Can america not simply just wait for the markets
有人告诉我自由市场能解决所有问题。美国就不能单纯等着市场发挥作用吗？
stopICE2027
big difference between the state grid in China that maintains a 100% generation buffer over what's needed and america's heavily marketized power market where the buffer is only 15%.
中国国家电网维持着100%的发电备用容量，而美国高度市场化的电力市场备用容量仅为15%，这两者存在很大差异。
siraliases
Sounds like state power is better then market power idk
听起来国家调控比市场调控更好，不确定是不是这样。
ovirt001
Administrations don't magically change private companies' energy policy. Contrary to popular belief Trump cannot force companies to use coal (keeping plants open just means they'll sit idle).
政府不会神奇地改变私营企业的能源政策。与普遍看法相反，特朗普无法强迫企业使用煤炭（让电厂继续运营只会意味着它们会闲置）。
Cappyc00l
Yes, but he can tax/tariff renewable imports.
没错，但他可以对可再生能源进口产品征税/加征关税。
kawag
Luckily the US has a huge number of structural advantages to ensure it remains globally competitive, such as a tight network of allied nations. Oh, wait a minute—
幸运的是，美国拥有众多结构性优势以确保其在全球的竞争力，比如紧密的盟国网络。哦，等一下——
PandaBlueDance
It really has more to do with having a strategic goal over many decades and the industrial might to implement it, not subject to the whims of every election cycle or focus on generating shareholder values in the short term.
这实际上更多地与拥有数十年的战略目标和实施该目标的工业实力有关，而不受每届选举周期的突发奇想影响，也不聚焦于短期创造股东价值。
Xuande
They're not really communist though, are they? In the sense of all property and the means of production being publicly owned.
不过他们并不是真正的共产主义国家，对吧？从所有财产和生产资料归公有的意义上来说。
MC_Gengar
They are. Kind of. The modern People's Republic of China is heavily driven by Dengist thought as opposed to the Maoist thought which guided its earlier days. Dengist theory on economy is based heavily off of Lenin's NEP which itself was a precursor to a market socialist system wherein the means of production are socialized but operate within the frxwork of a market.
算是吧。现代中华人民共和国主要受邓小平理论指导，而非早期主导的毛泽东思想。邓小平的经济理论很大程度上以列宁的新经济政策（NEP）为基础，新经济政策本身是市场社会主义制度的前身，在这种制度下，生产资料社会化但在市场框架内运作。
Xuande 100%
agree with you that no system is purely ____-ism. The US has always exercised a form of state control and influence on the free market and China has always had some form of private ownership of property, even during the height of the revolution.
我完全同意没有任何制度是纯粹的某种“主义”。美国一直对自由市场实施某种形式的国家调控和影响，而中国即使在革命最激烈的时期，也一直存在某种形式的财产私有制。
baked_in
The theory is that capitalism is being wielded as a tool by China. Kind of a tiger-by-the-tail situation, I suppose. It's managed by the state, and it seems like the state doesn't fuck around where enforcement is concerned.
有一种观点认为，资本主义正被中国用作一种工具。我想这有点像“骑虎难下”的局面。它由国家管理，而且看起来国家在执法方面毫不含糊。
theassassintherapist
True. There's another article this week about 50 Chinese EV vehicle companies that will soon be closed due to competitions or consolidated.
确实。本周还有另一篇文章称，有50家中国电动汽车公司将因竞争或整合而很快倒闭。
Aerhyce
Well kinda, but also kinda not that inefficient? Chinese state strategy is to give out massive funding and incentives to basically anyone and everyone looking to enter a given industry (such as EVs), and then basically let them fight it out, with those rising to the top absorbing the "losers".
嗯，某种程度上是，但也不算那么低效？中国的国家战略是向几乎所有想要进入特定行业（如电动汽车）的人提供大量资金和激励措施，然后基本上让他们竞争，优胜者吸收“失败者”。
goddamnit666a
Is that not what the US does? State funded capitalism i.e private sector socialism?
美国不也是这么做的吗？国家资助的资本主义，也就是私营部门的社会主义？
baked_in
It's the other way around in capitalist countries, where the state is a tool wielded by the capitalist class.
在资本主义国家则恰恰相反，国家是资产阶级挥舞的工具。
Aerhyce
Does the US actually encourage the creation of tons of startups in the targeted industries, or do they just fund the giants that are already in the market?
美国真的会鼓励在目标行业创建大量初创企业，还是只资助市场上已有的巨头？
goddamnit666a
I recall Obama throwing a ton of money at the solar industry (that one company failed and it became a minor scandal), and there are a great many of other industries that receive startup funding in the form of SBIRs.
我记得奥巴马向太阳能行业投入了大量资金（有一家公司倒闭了，还引发了一个小丑闻），而且还有很多其他行业通过小企业创新研究计划（SBIRs）获得初创资金。
nucleartime
IIRC the Chinese central government sets KPIs for local governments to get whatever agenda they have at the time done. This gets the local bureaucrats more inclined to grease the wheels when it comes to red tape. They also just have more stable long term planning, so they get to properly build/plan out supporting infrastructure and industries.
据我所知，中国中央政府会为地方政府设定关键绩效指标（KPIs），以完成当时的各项议程。这使得地方官员在处理繁文缛节时更倾向于提供便利。他们还有更稳定的长期规划，因此能够妥善建设/规划配套基础设施和产业。
guamisc
Outside of Obama's green energy initiative we don't really do that kind of thing in the US anymore though. We're regressing and it sucks.
不过除了奥巴马的绿色能源计划外，我们美国现在不再做那种事了。我们正在倒退，这太糟糕了。
Pls-No-Bully
They are absolutely communist. Their long term goal is a communist society, which is not achievable yet. Marx and Lenin understood you need to use capitalism to build up the productive forces as a stepping stone to achieve socialism and then Communism, which is exactly the gameplan that China is sticking to.
他们绝对是共产主义国家。他们的长期目标是实现共产主义社会，这目前还无法实现。马克思和列宁明白，需要利用资本主义来发展生产力，将其作为实现社会主义进而实现共产主义的垫脚石，这正是中国坚持的战略。
Formal_Economist7342
You bring up PPP and you get an instant reactionary wave of fragile americans telling you how its the stupidest measure in existence. Energy, stem grads, manufacturing capacity and the list goes on. Then its goal post moving, demographic collapse, all the data is a lie. Its quite sad, shrug.
你一提到购买力平价（PPP），就会立刻引发一群敏感的美国人的反对，他们说这是最愚蠢的衡量标准。能源、理工科毕业生、制造能力等等，清单还在继续。然后他们就会转移目标，说人口崩溃、所有数据都是假的。挺可悲的，耸耸肩。
zkesstopher
China is winning. Is this America first?
中国正在胜出。这就是“美国优先”吗？
ColbyAndrew
He has to due us first so he can sell us off at a cheaper price. It’s the art of the deal.
他必须先贬低我们的价值，这样才能以更低的价格把我们卖掉。这就是交易的艺术。
AverageJoe-707
China making the US look like backward thinking fools. Burn baby burn is the completely wrong approach.
中国让美国看起来像思想落后的傻瓜。“燃烧吧，宝贝，燃烧吧”是完全错误的做法。
DukeLukeivi
Look like?
只是看起来像？
ColbyAndrew
We don’t need China to make us look bad. We can do dumb all on our own.
我们不需要中国来让我们出丑。我们自己就能做蠢事。
porterbot
Their achievements are remarkable.
他们的成就令人瞩目。
Soft-Skirt
Inexpensive electricity, clean water and affordable housing are the keys to a modern civilisation. Ideally the utilities should be close to zero cost to an individual, that way the basics of life are covered and we should see improvements in mental health.
廉价的电力、干净的水和经济适用房是现代文明的关键。理想情况下，这些公用事业对个人来说应该近乎零成本，这样基本生活需求就能得到保障，人们的心理健康也应该会有所改善。
Old_and_moldy
Sure would love to see that nuclear number higher and that thermal number lower. They built a record number of coal plants.
真希望核能的占比能更高，热能的占比能更低。他们建造的燃煤电厂数量创下了纪录。
pantiesdrawer
Coal is required so that people don't die while they continued building everything else.
煤炭是必需的，这样人们在继续建设其他所有设施时才不会丧命。
Separate-Park8184
Meanwhile trump is trying to get rid of solar and windmills only because his oil buddies want more profits.
与此同时，特朗普正试图取消太阳能和风能项目，仅仅因为他的石油大亨朋友们想要更多利润。
From the article:
Those are some crazy numbers
Edit: and to put that in perspective, the entirety of US added a pitiful 63GW in 2025, and that's with "battery storage" padding the numbers
来自文章内容：
这些数字简直离谱。
补充说明：直观对比一下就能看出差距 ——2025 年全美新增的装机量仅有可怜的 63 吉瓦，这还是靠 “电池储能” 的数据撑场面才得来的。
apxtree98
China is doing some of the things the US did back in the 1950 by enabling the next generation to prosper. Maybe this will be something helpful to society.
中国正在做一些美国20世纪50年代做过的事，助力下一代发展，或许这对社会有益。
SolarBum
The "plant seeds for a tree whose shade you'll never sit under" thing isn't really the American vibe. Ours is more, "Cut down a bunch of trees from a primary growth forest, haul them into some wealthy Boomer's yard and prop them up so he can sit in their shade for a while until they die and he has to go cut down a bunch more."
“前人栽树，后人乘凉”并非美国的氛围。我们更倾向于“从原始森林砍伐大量树木，运到有钱的婴儿潮一代的院子里立起来，让他在树荫下坐一阵子，直到树木枯死，再去砍更多树”。
onegumas
Thermal means here burning gas and coal. It is not a geothermal.
此处的“热能”指燃烧天然气和煤炭，并非地热。
Frognificent
It can also refer to burning biofuels, an area of interest that is rapidly developing in China. While still pumping CO2 and other undesirables into the atmosphere, it is marginally better and significantly less impactful than fossil.
它也可指燃烧生物燃料，这是中国正在快速发展的热门领域。尽管仍会向大气中排放二氧化碳和其他有害物质，但相比化石燃料，它略胜一筹，影响也小得多。
Mad-Mel
This graphic showing the contribution of each energy type in 2016 and 2025 is the one that got me. Solar went from nearly zilch to looking like it'll be providing more GW than coal+gas in the next few years. Solar+wind is already there at 1.8 TW vs. 1.5 TW.
这张展示2016年和2025年各类能源占比的图表让我印象深刻。太阳能从几乎为零，预计未来几年将提供比煤炭+天然气更多的千兆瓦电力。目前太阳能+风能已达1.8太瓦，而煤炭+天然气为1.5太瓦。
TheStuipidestAI
The US will not be able to compete in a modern marketplace if we can't get energy to all citizens cheaply and efficiently. This will have to include a combination of green energy and traditional power, as well as local power sources through SMRs and residential solar/wind.
如果无法为所有公民提供廉价高效的能源，美国将无法在现代市场中竞争。这必须包括绿色能源与传统能源的结合，以及通过小型模块化反应堆（SMRs）和住宅太阳能/风能实现的本地能源供应。
SouthHovercraft4150
Yeah access to cheap electricity is needed for startups to get off the ground. Not having as cheap of energy prices is a barrier to entry in the global market. Other countries will be more competitive even if their taxes are higher if their energy is significantly lower.
没错，初创企业起步需要获得廉价电力。能源价格不够低是进入全球市场的障碍。如果其他国家的能源价格显著更低，即使税率更高，它们也会更具竞争力。
zjin2020
There is the forecast that electricity demand would grow very fast till 2030. Thus if they don’t invest right now there will be a lot of blackouts 5 years down the line. Also, renewable energy becomes so cheap they need to invest in energy storage big time now to fully utilize that potential in a few years.
有预测称，到2030年电力需求将快速增长。因此，如果现在不进行投资，5年后将会出现大量停电情况。此外，可再生能源已变得非常廉价，现在需要大力投资储能领域，以便在几年后充分利用其潜力。
rod_zero
And just wait for 40 some reactors they are building to come online. The west needs to invest in nuclear yesterday.
再等等他们正在建设的40多座反应堆并网发电吧。西方早就该投资核能了。
Igennem
This gets cited a lot but misunderstands how the grid works. Coal is backup capacity for wind and solar because those sources are intermittent. The new coal plants are designed to be efficient, low utilization, and fire up quickly.
这一点被频繁引用，但却误解了电网的工作原理。煤炭是风能和太阳能的备用容量，因为这些能源具有间歇性。新建的燃煤电厂设计得效率高、利用率低且启动迅速。
dcdttu
Great analogy.
这个比喻很贴切。
Override9636
I initially thought geothermal too, so it's a helpful distinction.
我一开始也以为是地热，所以这个区分很有帮助。
sakredfire
What’s the current state of the electricity mix overall?
目前整体的电力结构状况如何？
MadMcCabe
Right, but what if we only make new power for AI data centers instead! Wouldn't that be grand?
没错，但如果我们只给人工智能数据中心建造新电力设施呢！那岂不是很棒？讽刺
siraliases
I was told the free market would solve all problems. Can america not simply just wait for the markets
有人告诉我自由市场能解决所有问题。美国就不能单纯等着市场发挥作用吗？
stopICE2027
big difference between the state grid in China that maintains a 100% generation buffer over what's needed and america's heavily marketized power market where the buffer is only 15%.
中国国家电网维持着100%的发电备用容量，而美国高度市场化的电力市场备用容量仅为15%，这两者存在很大差异。
siraliases
Sounds like state power is better then market power idk
听起来国家调控比市场调控更好，不确定是不是这样。
ovirt001
Administrations don't magically change private companies' energy policy. Contrary to popular belief Trump cannot force companies to use coal (keeping plants open just means they'll sit idle).
政府不会神奇地改变私营企业的能源政策。与普遍看法相反，特朗普无法强迫企业使用煤炭（让电厂继续运营只会意味着它们会闲置）。
Cappyc00l
Yes, but he can tax/tariff renewable imports.
没错，但他可以对可再生能源进口产品征税/加征关税。
kawag
Luckily the US has a huge number of structural advantages to ensure it remains globally competitive, such as a tight network of allied nations. Oh, wait a minute—
幸运的是，美国拥有众多结构性优势以确保其在全球的竞争力，比如紧密的盟国网络。哦，等一下——
PandaBlueDance
It really has more to do with having a strategic goal over many decades and the industrial might to implement it, not subject to the whims of every election cycle or focus on generating shareholder values in the short term.
这实际上更多地与拥有数十年的战略目标和实施该目标的工业实力有关，而不受每届选举周期的突发奇想影响，也不聚焦于短期创造股东价值。
Xuande
They're not really communist though, are they? In the sense of all property and the means of production being publicly owned.
不过他们并不是真正的共产主义国家，对吧？从所有财产和生产资料归公有的意义上来说。
MC_Gengar
They are. Kind of. The modern People's Republic of China is heavily driven by Dengist thought as opposed to the Maoist thought which guided its earlier days. Dengist theory on economy is based heavily off of Lenin's NEP which itself was a precursor to a market socialist system wherein the means of production are socialized but operate within the frxwork of a market.
算是吧。现代中华人民共和国主要受邓小平理论指导，而非早期主导的毛泽东思想。邓小平的经济理论很大程度上以列宁的新经济政策（NEP）为基础，新经济政策本身是市场社会主义制度的前身，在这种制度下，生产资料社会化但在市场框架内运作。
Xuande 100%
agree with you that no system is purely ____-ism. The US has always exercised a form of state control and influence on the free market and China has always had some form of private ownership of property, even during the height of the revolution.
我完全同意没有任何制度是纯粹的某种“主义”。美国一直对自由市场实施某种形式的国家调控和影响，而中国即使在革命最激烈的时期，也一直存在某种形式的财产私有制。
baked_in
The theory is that capitalism is being wielded as a tool by China. Kind of a tiger-by-the-tail situation, I suppose. It's managed by the state, and it seems like the state doesn't fuck around where enforcement is concerned.
有一种观点认为，资本主义正被中国用作一种工具。我想这有点像“骑虎难下”的局面。它由国家管理，而且看起来国家在执法方面毫不含糊。
theassassintherapist
True. There's another article this week about 50 Chinese EV vehicle companies that will soon be closed due to competitions or consolidated.
确实。本周还有另一篇文章称，有50家中国电动汽车公司将因竞争或整合而很快倒闭。
Aerhyce
Well kinda, but also kinda not that inefficient? Chinese state strategy is to give out massive funding and incentives to basically anyone and everyone looking to enter a given industry (such as EVs), and then basically let them fight it out, with those rising to the top absorbing the "losers".
嗯，某种程度上是，但也不算那么低效？中国的国家战略是向几乎所有想要进入特定行业（如电动汽车）的人提供大量资金和激励措施，然后基本上让他们竞争，优胜者吸收“失败者”。
goddamnit666a
Is that not what the US does? State funded capitalism i.e private sector socialism?
美国不也是这么做的吗？国家资助的资本主义，也就是私营部门的社会主义？
baked_in
It's the other way around in capitalist countries, where the state is a tool wielded by the capitalist class.
在资本主义国家则恰恰相反，国家是资产阶级挥舞的工具。
Aerhyce
Does the US actually encourage the creation of tons of startups in the targeted industries, or do they just fund the giants that are already in the market?
美国真的会鼓励在目标行业创建大量初创企业，还是只资助市场上已有的巨头？
goddamnit666a
I recall Obama throwing a ton of money at the solar industry (that one company failed and it became a minor scandal), and there are a great many of other industries that receive startup funding in the form of SBIRs.
我记得奥巴马向太阳能行业投入了大量资金（有一家公司倒闭了，还引发了一个小丑闻），而且还有很多其他行业通过小企业创新研究计划（SBIRs）获得初创资金。
nucleartime
IIRC the Chinese central government sets KPIs for local governments to get whatever agenda they have at the time done. This gets the local bureaucrats more inclined to grease the wheels when it comes to red tape. They also just have more stable long term planning, so they get to properly build/plan out supporting infrastructure and industries.
据我所知，中国中央政府会为地方政府设定关键绩效指标（KPIs），以完成当时的各项议程。这使得地方官员在处理繁文缛节时更倾向于提供便利。他们还有更稳定的长期规划，因此能够妥善建设/规划配套基础设施和产业。
guamisc
Outside of Obama's green energy initiative we don't really do that kind of thing in the US anymore though. We're regressing and it sucks.
不过除了奥巴马的绿色能源计划外，我们美国现在不再做那种事了。我们正在倒退，这太糟糕了。
Pls-No-Bully
They are absolutely communist. Their long term goal is a communist society, which is not achievable yet. Marx and Lenin understood you need to use capitalism to build up the productive forces as a stepping stone to achieve socialism and then Communism, which is exactly the gameplan that China is sticking to.
他们绝对是共产主义国家。他们的长期目标是实现共产主义社会，这目前还无法实现。马克思和列宁明白，需要利用资本主义来发展生产力，将其作为实现社会主义进而实现共产主义的垫脚石，这正是中国坚持的战略。
Formal_Economist7342
You bring up PPP and you get an instant reactionary wave of fragile americans telling you how its the stupidest measure in existence. Energy, stem grads, manufacturing capacity and the list goes on. Then its goal post moving, demographic collapse, all the data is a lie. Its quite sad, shrug.
你一提到购买力平价（PPP），就会立刻引发一群敏感的美国人的反对，他们说这是最愚蠢的衡量标准。能源、理工科毕业生、制造能力等等，清单还在继续。然后他们就会转移目标，说人口崩溃、所有数据都是假的。挺可悲的，耸耸肩。
zkesstopher
China is winning. Is this America first?
中国正在胜出。这就是“美国优先”吗？
ColbyAndrew
He has to due us first so he can sell us off at a cheaper price. It’s the art of the deal.
他必须先贬低我们的价值，这样才能以更低的价格把我们卖掉。这就是交易的艺术。
AverageJoe-707
China making the US look like backward thinking fools. Burn baby burn is the completely wrong approach.
中国让美国看起来像思想落后的傻瓜。“燃烧吧，宝贝，燃烧吧”是完全错误的做法。
DukeLukeivi
Look like?
只是看起来像？
ColbyAndrew
We don’t need China to make us look bad. We can do dumb all on our own.
我们不需要中国来让我们出丑。我们自己就能做蠢事。
porterbot
Their achievements are remarkable.
他们的成就令人瞩目。
Soft-Skirt
Inexpensive electricity, clean water and affordable housing are the keys to a modern civilisation. Ideally the utilities should be close to zero cost to an individual, that way the basics of life are covered and we should see improvements in mental health.
廉价的电力、干净的水和经济适用房是现代文明的关键。理想情况下，这些公用事业对个人来说应该近乎零成本，这样基本生活需求就能得到保障，人们的心理健康也应该会有所改善。
Old_and_moldy
Sure would love to see that nuclear number higher and that thermal number lower. They built a record number of coal plants.
真希望核能的占比能更高，热能的占比能更低。他们建造的燃煤电厂数量创下了纪录。
pantiesdrawer
Coal is required so that people don't die while they continued building everything else.
煤炭是必需的，这样人们在继续建设其他所有设施时才不会丧命。
Separate-Park8184
Meanwhile trump is trying to get rid of solar and windmills only because his oil buddies want more profits.
与此同时，特朗普正试图取消太阳能和风能项目，仅仅因为他的石油大亨朋友们想要更多利润。
很赞 11
收藏