China at least has the excuse of being so incredibly huge that they actually need an "all of the above" strategy to meet energy requirements.

We're over here burning coal for little to no reason. We could replace those plants whenever we want. We just don't, because coal lobby.

Last I checked, China's been developing every energy source known to man (except O&G, because they don't have a domestic supply of O&G except in the contested waters of the SCS)...

China is the world leader in new nuclear development, new hydro development, solar panel manufacturing, wind turbine manufacturing, solar panel deployment, wind turbine deployment, electric vehicles, and carbon capture+storage.

Maybe if other economies would help pick up the slack? China's been firing on all cylinders towards green tech for decades, but it turns out that urbanizing and industrializing 1 billion people to a Western standard of living is really fucking energy-intensive. Meanwhile, everyone else is just sitting on their ass and watching.

Three times as much solar being built as coal is still great, especially for a developing economy. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

You don't have to ignore anything, China has an actual concrete plan for transition off fossil fuels. Initial stages still require coal to produce power to build out the infrastructure. A study in the second link found that China's use of coal is perfectly in line with the plan in the first link.

• https://www.visualcapitalist.com/chinas-energy-transition-in-5-charts/
• https://www.carbonbrief.org/chinas-2060-climate-pledge-is-largely-consistent-with-1-5c-goal-study-finds

You described the US in both scenarios.

What makes you think Americans will forego cheap energy if China and Russia don't?