On March 14, the U.S. "New York Times" published an article titled "China's Advantage in the Oil Crisis: Electric Vehicles and Renewable Energy," stating that "in this global oil crisis, only China can effectively cope with the risks."

New York Times report on this

The first photo in the article is quite interesting. The photo taken by the New York Times (below) is accompanied by a caption that reads: "Last year, China's demand for refined oil, gasoline, and diesel declined as more people chose electric vehicles."

The article's first sentence states: "As oil prices soared to $100 per barrel, countries are responding to the sudden impact of Middle Eastern fuel supply disruptions, and China has two obvious advantages in geopolitical competition. First, many new cars are powered by electricity. Second, most of this power comes from domestic energy sources."

The article notes that China has invested "tens of billions of dollars" in the fields of electric vehicles and renewable energy over the decades, and praised it, saying, "This long-term strategy is yielding significant results, while other countries are still dealing with oil market volatility. China has been committed to reducing its reliance on foreign energy by expanding domestic energy supplies and accelerating the development of alternative energy, including solar, wind, hydropower, and nuclear energy."

The New York Times is stating a fact. Since the beginning of last year, China has had two consecutive years of declining demand for refined oil, gasoline, and diesel. The article cites the statement of Michal Meidan, head of the China Energy Research at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, that "China's oil and gas consumption may have already peaked, and its ability to cope with energy supply disruptions has become stronger."

China's oil reserve base

Meidan emphasized to the New York Times, "Compared to other countries, China has some buffer and mitigation space, and supply disruptions and price increases will not significantly affect China's economic operations."

In contrast, the United States is currently in a contradictory and chaotic "energy logic."

Not only do Democrats and Republicans have irreconcilable policies on energy issues — for example, during Democratic administrations, they vigorously developed new energy and provided substantial subsidies for electric vehicles; while Republican administrations not only canceled various subsidies and funding for the new energy sector (including scientific research), but also increased investments in traditional energy.

Even the Trump administration itself had a very confused attitude toward global oil prices within a short period of one week recently.

First, to worry about further rising oil prices impacting U.S. prices, the U.S. required Israel not to attack Iran's energy storage facilities, relaxed exemptions for Indian oil imports from Russia, and even considered lifting sanctions on Russian oil;

But after Iran showed a "fight to the end" attitude, the U.S. found that oil prices began to rise again, so it not only personally bombed Iran's energy facilities recently, but also claimed that since the U.S. is a "oil-producing country," the rise in oil prices represents that the U.S. "has won again."

American gas station prices continue to rise

According to Reuters on March 11, the average retail price of gasoline across the U.S. has exceeded $3.50 per gallon, reaching the highest level since May 2024. Gasoline prices in California have risen significantly, with prices in some areas exceeding $5.42 per gallon, an increase of about 18% compared to a month ago.

It can be said that if the U.S. does not quickly end its military actions against Iran and open up the Strait of Hormuz, U.S. oil prices will inevitably significantly raise the inflation data — and the U.S. midterm elections are getting closer.

In contrast, the New York Times stated, "In recent years, China has rapidly shifted the world's largest car market from fuel-powered vehicles to electric vehicles faster than other major economies. In 2025, China's electric vehicle sales will exceed the total of the rest of the world."

By comparison, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, about 22% of new vehicles in the U.S. in 2025 will be hybrid or electric vehicles.

Interestingly, the New York Times simply and generally attributes the success of China's new energy policy (especially electric vehicles/new energy vehicles) to "subsidies."

However, at almost the same time, regardless of whether the Democrats or Republicans were in power (Trump's first term continued the subsidy policies of the Democratic administration), starting with the 2009 Energy Independence and Security Act (note), the U.S. has invested and subsidized over tens of billions of dollars in the fields of new energy and electric vehicles, which is almost equivalent to the total subsidies of all other countries in these fields worldwide.

Note: This act provides an astonishing $7,500 per vehicle for U.S. new energy vehicles.

For example, the Clean Energy provisions of the "IRA Act" allocated a total of $36.9 billion, the annual tax subsidies for renewable energy (2016–2022) amounted to $13 billion, the federal new energy and electric vehicle tax credits and subsidies totaled at least $10 billion, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act (ARRTA) Section 1603 (specifically targeting the new energy sector) allocated funds of $2.49 billion, among others.

American new energy truck brand Nikola declared bankruptcy last year

Yet, the effectiveness is clear — besides Tesla (whose success also relies on Chinese factors), few successful electric vehicle brands exist, such as the second-largest American electric vehicle brand Lucid, which has a very limited market size.

However, the New York Times acknowledges that China's advantage lies in its ability to "plan for the long term." It mentions that since the 2000s, China has recognized the risks of relying on a single source of energy. The article also specifically cites a summary from a domestic media in 2004: "Without exaggeration, whoever controls the Malacca Strait controls China's energy lifeline."

"To this end, China responded by establishing oil emergency reserves and investing in renewable energy. Today, among the major Asian economies, China is the least affected by interruptions in Middle East oil and gas supplies," concluded the New York Times.

Mattias Larsen, a senior policy researcher at the Grantham Institute at the London School of Economics, said that China "promotes renewable energy for energy security, as well as for economic growth. Energy security has always been on the agenda, and it has always been a core motivation."

Although China depends on imports for 75% of its oil, it has been building large strategic reserves. In the first two months of this year, when global oil prices were relatively "low," China's oil imports increased by 16%, and China's current oil reserves are nearly twice that of the U.S.

Certainly, this does not mean we have "completely escaped oil." For example, we still rely on natural gas imports from Russia and Iran for heating, and China's manufacturing also requires petrochemical products to produce key raw materials for the global supply chain, such as polyester fiber for clothing and rubber for tires.

But there is no denying that China is one of the few countries that can seize some opportunities in the "oil crisis." Foreign media, including the Wall Street Journal, generally expect that China's new energy industry, including new energy vehicles, will accelerate its expansion in the global market.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7616976917548122678/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author.