Agreed. I actually think China might be able to lead on climate in a matter of decades even though they aren’t on a good trajectory. They don’t have to worry about anti-nuclear activists. Also, a dictatorship does have the benefit of not needing to wrangle so many people to make a decision like this.
This also means that they lack crucial self corrective capacity should something go wrong - their environmental track record is ugly, and that's just what is known.
Dictatorships can cover things up, and with something that has potentially global consequences like nuclear, it's better to have a transparent, cooperative collective decision, not a paranoid "yes or death" regime mandating that everything is fine.
I'm not advocating for dictatorships, I'm saying that the unilateral decision making authority can actually work out under the right conditions.
Yes, China's environmental track record is ugly, but China also tends to undercommit and overdeliver. If Xi Jinping's administration wants China to be overwhelmingly nuclear by 2050, it can probably get it done. Moreover, it's probably a good move for China--they'll be able to meet emissions targets while having abundant energy to cement their position as the world's manufacturer while the west is fucking around with unreliable renewable energy. Not only will Chinese goods be cheaper, but doing business with China will actually help western countries reduce their carbon footprints.
Our failure to appropriately invest in nuclear will accelerate China's rise to global dominance.
