antiterror13
Brigadier
I don't think so, as it performs much better than Japan ever did
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
I don't think so, as it performs much better than Japan ever did
Blackstone
Brigadier
What makes you say that? Do you have credible mining and extraction data from both entities?
antiterror13
Brigadier
1st ... Japan’s tests are being carried out on a ship, whereas China is using a floating platform
2nd ... The output of China reached 35,000 m3 a day while Japan only merely less than 1,000 m3 and Japan had stopped it because facing a lot of technical issues
or in reverse, have you got any credible mining and extraction method that shows China copy the technology from Japan ? ..
When I read the comments, it reminded me of the slogan "Good, Better, Best", and hack the rest (my own add-on). We all know that reverse engineering and borrowing of ideas have been going on since time immemorial. Examples: (1) The US obtained Rocket/Missile Technology from the Nazi Scientists who were spirited into America after WW II, and given all the support and incentives and "freedom from criminal (war) persecution". (2) The Japanese and later the Koreans did reverse engineering, and later used their own improved inventions of cars, electronics etc. The same goes for China. Some reverse engineering, several OWN invention etc. etc. continues world-wide. Many of us would also know that during the past 40+ years, many young Chinese have studied, and continue to study at Universities abroad including the US and Western countries, as well as a few small nations (not technology perhaps) including Singapore. Nothing wrong with that if there is something useful to learn. We know many students from Africa, Asia and the West are in China today to learn useful/interesting studies including the Arts, Business Concepts, Mandarin (as China is an economic power house) etc. Wise to learn from this Chinese Great Learning adage "A person can only criticise others if they themselves makes no mistakes. If they are not tolerant and just, they cannot ask others to be tolerant and forgiving".
antiterror13
Brigadier
China Great Wall Industry Corp lands Indonesian commercial satellite order
JAKARTA, Indonesia — China Great Wall Industry Corp. has clinched a contract with an Indonesian joint venture to build a replacement for a satellite that is running out of fuel early due to an underperformed Long March launch.
Palapa Satelit Nusantara Sejahtera, a joint venture of Indosat Ooredoo and Pasifik Satelit Nusantara (PSN), signed the contract for Palapa-N1, a high-throughput Ku-band satellite with 10 Gbps of capacity here May 17 with Beijing-based CGWIC, a subsidiary of China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation.
CGWIC also received a non-binding agreement for a second satellite with PSN — a Ka-band high-throughput satellite called PSN-7 that would deliver 100 Gbps of capacity through 104 spot beams covering Indonesia, the Philippines and other Southeast Asian countries.
Palapa-N1 is the second commercial satellite that CGWIC has won with an established satellite operator in less than a year’s time. In October 2016, Thaicom purchased a Ka-band high-throughput satellite from CGWIC, proving the company’s intention and ability to compete more aggressively on the commercial market. Both are based on the DFH-4 platform.
CGWIC, the only company with the Chinese government’s approval to do commercial satellite manufacturing and launch, has primarily done business with entirely new satellite operators. The United States’ International Traffic in and Arms Regulations, known as ITAR, restrict American satellites, and satellites with certain American components, from launching on Chinese rockets — a rule that has largely isolated China on the international market, often prompting CGWIC to bundle satellite orders with launches to avoid this problem altogether.
According to Sun Weide, charge d’affaires of the Chinese Embassy in Indonesia, China and Indonesia have strengthened space ties through cooperation agreements signed in 2013 and 2015.
“I believe the signing of this very important agreement today between CGWIC and PSNS will create new opportunities and make a good example for our mutually beneficial cooperation,” Sun Weide, charge d’affaires of the Chinese Embassy in Indonesia, said May 17 here immediately preceding the contract signing.
Additionally, Surya University in Banten, Indonesia, is building a telecommunications cubesat with assistance from PSN and CGWIC.
Palapa-N1 is a replacement for Palapa-D, an Indosat satellite that initially failed to reach geostationary transfer orbit because of a subpar Long March 3B launch in 2009. Thales Alenia Space, manufacturer of the Palapa-D satellite, used some of the fuel initially meant for station-keeping to instead raise the satellite to its proper orbit. The orbit-raising maneuver shortened the satellite’s expected lifespan to 11 years instead of the typical 15.
In a more expansive agreement than other deals, CGWIC is providing not only the satellite and a Long March 3B launch, but also the ground control system, insurance and financing support for Palapa-N1.
PSN’s constellation plans
With Palapa-N1 and PSN-7, PSN CEO Adi Rahman Adiwoso said the operator is planning to have a fleet of four satellites in orbit by 2021.
“We will invest close to $900 million within the next four years,” he said. “Today three satellites are fully funded, and we are working to fund the fourth one.”
PSN-7 HTS coverage map
PSN coverage map for the PSN-7 high-throughput satellite. Credit: SpaceNews.
The funded satellites are PSN-6, a C- and Ku-band satellite ordered from Space Systems Loral in 2014 that is scheduled to launch next year on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, the Palapa-N1 joint venture satellite, and the ageing Palapa-D. Adiwoso said PSN will seek to prolong the life of Palapa-D by moving it from 113 degrees east into a different orbit at 144 degrees east. Adiwoso said 70 percent of the capacity on PSN-6 is already sold.
These satellites, combined with the capacity of Indonesia’s other domestic operators, PT Telkom and Bank Rakyat Indonesia, will bring 150 Gbps of satellite capacity to the country, by Adiwoso’s estimate.
“I think 150 Gbps will bring the capabilities in Indonesia to reply to the demand growth,” he said. “There is still room for others to play in Indonesia, but I think we will start taking control like this
- See more at:
JAKARTA, Indonesia — China Great Wall Industry Corp. has clinched a contract with an Indonesian joint venture to build a replacement for a satellite that is running out of fuel early due to an underperformed Long March launch.
Palapa Satelit Nusantara Sejahtera, a joint venture of Indosat Ooredoo and Pasifik Satelit Nusantara (PSN), signed the contract for Palapa-N1, a high-throughput Ku-band satellite with 10 Gbps of capacity here May 17 with Beijing-based CGWIC, a subsidiary of China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation.
CGWIC also received a non-binding agreement for a second satellite with PSN — a Ka-band high-throughput satellite called PSN-7 that would deliver 100 Gbps of capacity through 104 spot beams covering Indonesia, the Philippines and other Southeast Asian countries.
Palapa-N1 is the second commercial satellite that CGWIC has won with an established satellite operator in less than a year’s time. In October 2016, Thaicom purchased a Ka-band high-throughput satellite from CGWIC, proving the company’s intention and ability to compete more aggressively on the commercial market. Both are based on the DFH-4 platform.
CGWIC, the only company with the Chinese government’s approval to do commercial satellite manufacturing and launch, has primarily done business with entirely new satellite operators. The United States’ International Traffic in and Arms Regulations, known as ITAR, restrict American satellites, and satellites with certain American components, from launching on Chinese rockets — a rule that has largely isolated China on the international market, often prompting CGWIC to bundle satellite orders with launches to avoid this problem altogether.
According to Sun Weide, charge d’affaires of the Chinese Embassy in Indonesia, China and Indonesia have strengthened space ties through cooperation agreements signed in 2013 and 2015.
“I believe the signing of this very important agreement today between CGWIC and PSNS will create new opportunities and make a good example for our mutually beneficial cooperation,” Sun Weide, charge d’affaires of the Chinese Embassy in Indonesia, said May 17 here immediately preceding the contract signing.
Additionally, Surya University in Banten, Indonesia, is building a telecommunications cubesat with assistance from PSN and CGWIC.
Palapa-N1 is a replacement for Palapa-D, an Indosat satellite that initially failed to reach geostationary transfer orbit because of a subpar Long March 3B launch in 2009. Thales Alenia Space, manufacturer of the Palapa-D satellite, used some of the fuel initially meant for station-keeping to instead raise the satellite to its proper orbit. The orbit-raising maneuver shortened the satellite’s expected lifespan to 11 years instead of the typical 15.
In a more expansive agreement than other deals, CGWIC is providing not only the satellite and a Long March 3B launch, but also the ground control system, insurance and financing support for Palapa-N1.
PSN’s constellation plans
With Palapa-N1 and PSN-7, PSN CEO Adi Rahman Adiwoso said the operator is planning to have a fleet of four satellites in orbit by 2021.
“We will invest close to $900 million within the next four years,” he said. “Today three satellites are fully funded, and we are working to fund the fourth one.”
PSN-7 HTS coverage map
PSN coverage map for the PSN-7 high-throughput satellite. Credit: SpaceNews.
The funded satellites are PSN-6, a C- and Ku-band satellite ordered from Space Systems Loral in 2014 that is scheduled to launch next year on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, the Palapa-N1 joint venture satellite, and the ageing Palapa-D. Adiwoso said PSN will seek to prolong the life of Palapa-D by moving it from 113 degrees east into a different orbit at 144 degrees east. Adiwoso said 70 percent of the capacity on PSN-6 is already sold.
These satellites, combined with the capacity of Indonesia’s other domestic operators, PT Telkom and Bank Rakyat Indonesia, will bring 150 Gbps of satellite capacity to the country, by Adiwoso’s estimate.
“I think 150 Gbps will bring the capabilities in Indonesia to reply to the demand growth,” he said. “There is still room for others to play in Indonesia, but I think we will start taking control like this
- See more at:
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
This energy source can potentially provide China with limitless energy but it is harmful to environment without proper safeguard. China has been researching this technology for a long time 23 years to be exact. @ Blackstone China is closer to commercially exploit this energy than Japan.See the number
After 23 years of research and development, China has managed to stably extract gas from methane hydrate, or "burning ice", in a deposit north of the South China Sea. This is in any case what the Chinese Ministry of Land Resources said in .
This experimental mining, under the direction of the China Geological Survey (CGS), an entity of the Chinese Ministry, is located in the maritime area known as Shenhu (狐 海域 海域), which is about 285 km South East Of Hong Kong.
The Shenhu maritime area, located in the North China Sea South.
According to the Chinese Communiqué, 120,000 cubic meters of "burning ice" were extracted from 10 to 17 May, an average of 16,000 cubic meters per day with a peak production of 35,000 cubic meters per day. day. Analysis of the extracted samples shows that the maximum methane content is close to 99.5%.
This is the new 43,000-tonne "Blue Whale 1" oil rig, delivered by the Yantai Raffles City Ocean Engineering yard in February this year, which carried out the operation and drilled up to 277 Meters beneath the seabed, located 1266 meters deep at the site, to reach the "burning ice" deposit.
Extraction of gas from burning ice on the Blue Whale 1 oil platform
It is China's first sustainable and controllable operation in the extraction of methane hydrate from clay loam-like marine deposits, which account for 90% of deposits in the world.
The success of this experiment allowed the Chinese engineers to validate the technologies developed and to accumulate the necessary experience for the commercial exploitations of the future.
Burning ice is considered to be a strategic resource in China's energy security policy - on the one hand by its physical value: 1 cubic meter of burning ice can release about 0.8 cubic meter of ice, Water and 164 cubic meters of natural gas, and on the other hand reserves about twice as much as all conventional fossil fuels combined.
The South China Sea contains the equivalent of 80 billion tons of ice oil that burns potentially exploitable, 4 times the reserves found under Chinese soil.
This enormous energy interest justifies an extensive research and development program launched in 1995. In 2007, the CGS conducted its first GMGS1 drilling mission in the Shenhu maritime area, followed by a second 6 years later.
The drilling ship of the German company Fugro
A sample taken from the GMGS3 mission.
The GMGS3 mission, carried out using a drilling ship from the German geotechnical company Fugro in 2015, . This discovery prompted Chinese scientists at the CGS to drill further at Shenhu in 2016, where all the samples contain burning ice, validating the site's interest and the experimental project this year .
The Chinese studies estimate that the methane hydrates of the Shenhu site are spread over an area of 128 km², with a quantity of reserves that exceeds 100 billion cubic meters.
During the 13th Five-Year Plan, the Chinese Ministry of Land Resources plans to complete the development of a series of new equipment and technologies for the drilling of submarine mineral deposits and also the pre-commercial ice Burns, expected by 2020.
Projects such as deep submersibles or have been funded and are currently under development. But the Chinese seem not to be satisfied with these deposits found near their home and already have eyes riveted elsewhere.
"There are abundant deposits of low-permeability silty hydrate (methane) in countries along the One Road (Maritime Silk Road) route, and many of them have already shown a strong need for New sources of energy, "said QIU Haijun, who is responsible for the burning of ice at Shenhu." With the technologies we now have, we can help them extract these deposits and solve their resource and energy problems. "
To be continued.
Henri K.
Share this article
After 23 years of research and development, China has managed to stably extract gas from methane hydrate, or "burning ice", in a deposit north of the South China Sea. This is in any case what the Chinese Ministry of Land Resources said in .
This experimental mining, under the direction of the China Geological Survey (CGS), an entity of the Chinese Ministry, is located in the maritime area known as Shenhu (狐 海域 海域), which is about 285 km South East Of Hong Kong.
The Shenhu maritime area, located in the North China Sea South.
According to the Chinese Communiqué, 120,000 cubic meters of "burning ice" were extracted from 10 to 17 May, an average of 16,000 cubic meters per day with a peak production of 35,000 cubic meters per day. day. Analysis of the extracted samples shows that the maximum methane content is close to 99.5%.
This is the new 43,000-tonne "Blue Whale 1" oil rig, delivered by the Yantai Raffles City Ocean Engineering yard in February this year, which carried out the operation and drilled up to 277 Meters beneath the seabed, located 1266 meters deep at the site, to reach the "burning ice" deposit.
Extraction of gas from burning ice on the Blue Whale 1 oil platform
It is China's first sustainable and controllable operation in the extraction of methane hydrate from clay loam-like marine deposits, which account for 90% of deposits in the world.
The success of this experiment allowed the Chinese engineers to validate the technologies developed and to accumulate the necessary experience for the commercial exploitations of the future.
Burning ice is considered to be a strategic resource in China's energy security policy - on the one hand by its physical value: 1 cubic meter of burning ice can release about 0.8 cubic meter of ice, Water and 164 cubic meters of natural gas, and on the other hand reserves about twice as much as all conventional fossil fuels combined.
The South China Sea contains the equivalent of 80 billion tons of ice oil that burns potentially exploitable, 4 times the reserves found under Chinese soil.
This enormous energy interest justifies an extensive research and development program launched in 1995. In 2007, the CGS conducted its first GMGS1 drilling mission in the Shenhu maritime area, followed by a second 6 years later.
The drilling ship of the German company Fugro
A sample taken from the GMGS3 mission.
The GMGS3 mission, carried out using a drilling ship from the German geotechnical company Fugro in 2015, . This discovery prompted Chinese scientists at the CGS to drill further at Shenhu in 2016, where all the samples contain burning ice, validating the site's interest and the experimental project this year .
The Chinese studies estimate that the methane hydrates of the Shenhu site are spread over an area of 128 km², with a quantity of reserves that exceeds 100 billion cubic meters.
During the 13th Five-Year Plan, the Chinese Ministry of Land Resources plans to complete the development of a series of new equipment and technologies for the drilling of submarine mineral deposits and also the pre-commercial ice Burns, expected by 2020.
Projects such as deep submersibles or have been funded and are currently under development. But the Chinese seem not to be satisfied with these deposits found near their home and already have eyes riveted elsewhere.
"There are abundant deposits of low-permeability silty hydrate (methane) in countries along the One Road (Maritime Silk Road) route, and many of them have already shown a strong need for New sources of energy, "said QIU Haijun, who is responsible for the burning of ice at Shenhu." With the technologies we now have, we can help them extract these deposits and solve their resource and energy problems. "
To be continued.
Henri K.
Share this article
Last edited:
Correction: Fugro is a Dutch company.
America second? Yes, and China’s lead is only growing
America second? Yes, and China’s lead is only growing
Charles Krupa/AP Photo
China’s Tsinghua University dethroned MIT (above) as the top engineering university in the world in 2015, according to US News and World Report’s annual rankings.
By Graham Allison May 22, 2017
In Boston, commencement season is a time to celebrate our world-leading universities, including engineering powerhouse MIT. But Bostonians might be shocked to learn that China’s Tsinghua University dethroned MIT as the top engineering university in the world in 2015, according to the closely-watched US News & World Report annual rankings. Tsinghua’s recent surge is not an isolated example. Everyone knows about China’s rise, but few have realized its magnitude or its consequences.
Among the top 10 schools of engineering, China and the United States now each have four. In STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), which provide the core competencies driving advances in the fastest-growing sectors of modern economies, China annually graduates four times as many students as the United States (1.3 million vs. 300,000). And in every year of the Obama administration, Chinese universities awarded more PhDs in STEM fields than American universities.
For Americans who grew up in a world in which USA meant “number one,” the idea that China could truly challenge the United States as a global educational leader seems impossible to imagine.
This is not the only reality Americans willfully ignore. In my national security course at Harvard, the lecture on China begins with a quiz. Students get a sheet with 25 indicators of economic performance. Their task is to estimate when China might overtake the United States as the top producer or market of automobiles, supercomputers, smartphones, and so on. Most are stunned to learn that China has already surpassed the United States on each of these metrics.
I then ask whether they believe that in their lifetime China will overtake the United States to become the largest economy in the world. In last year’s class of 60 students, about half bet they would live to see the United States become number two, while half disagreed.
When I show the class headlines from the 2014 IMF-World Bank meeting announcing that China had become the largest economy in the world, students react with a mix of dismay and disbelief. By 2016, China’s GDP was $21 trillion and America’s was $18.5 trillion, when measured by purchasing power parity (PPP), which both the CIA and IMF agree is the best yardstick for comparing national economies.
Students are not the only ones in the dark about China’s rise. Most of the press has similarly missed the big picture. The favorite story line in
the Western media about the Chinese economy is “slowdown.” The question few pause to ask is: slowing compared to whom? The American press’s favorite adjective to describe our economic performance has been “recovering.” But despite its “slowdown,” China today is growing three times as fast as the United States.
Never before has a nation risen so fast on so many dimensions. When Ronald Reagan became president in 1981, China’s economy was just 10 percent the size of America’s. By 2014, it had catapulted to 100 percent, and today it stands at 115 percent. If the US and Chinese economies continue their current growth trends, China’s economy will be 50 percent larger in 2023. By 2040, it will be three times larger.
A nation that did not appear in any of the international league tables in 1980 has vaulted into the top position. Yet in the face of what is arguably the most consequential geopolitical trend of our lifetime, Washington has mostly played a game of “let’s pretend.” Policy makers have repeatedly put forward strategies to “manage” China. The question we should ask candidly is whether China has been managing us.
President Trump’s claims that we have been “losing” to China reflect, in part, the reality of a shifting see-saw. A bigger, stronger China is challenging American interests in the South China Sea, taking our jobs, buying American companies, and replacing us as the primary trading partner of nations not only in its neighborhood, but also in Europe, where China recently unseated the United States as Germany’s largest trading partner.
Trump’s call to “Make America Great Again” struck a chord with voters. Number one is who we
are. But politically appealing slogans are not a solution for the dramatic resurgence of a 5,000-year old civilization with 1.4 billion people, led by a president whose own mission is the “Great Rejuvenation” of China — in other words, to “Make China Great Again.” To construct a grand strategy for the China challenge that protects vital US interests without catastrophic conflict, policy makers must begin by recognizing these uncomfortable but undeniable realities.
Graham Allison is the director of Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and the author of the forthcoming book “Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?”
America second? Yes, and China’s lead is only growing
Charles Krupa/AP Photo
China’s Tsinghua University dethroned MIT (above) as the top engineering university in the world in 2015, according to US News and World Report’s annual rankings.
By Graham Allison May 22, 2017
In Boston, commencement season is a time to celebrate our world-leading universities, including engineering powerhouse MIT. But Bostonians might be shocked to learn that China’s Tsinghua University dethroned MIT as the top engineering university in the world in 2015, according to the closely-watched US News & World Report annual rankings. Tsinghua’s recent surge is not an isolated example. Everyone knows about China’s rise, but few have realized its magnitude or its consequences.
Among the top 10 schools of engineering, China and the United States now each have four. In STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), which provide the core competencies driving advances in the fastest-growing sectors of modern economies, China annually graduates four times as many students as the United States (1.3 million vs. 300,000). And in every year of the Obama administration, Chinese universities awarded more PhDs in STEM fields than American universities.
For Americans who grew up in a world in which USA meant “number one,” the idea that China could truly challenge the United States as a global educational leader seems impossible to imagine.
This is not the only reality Americans willfully ignore. In my national security course at Harvard, the lecture on China begins with a quiz. Students get a sheet with 25 indicators of economic performance. Their task is to estimate when China might overtake the United States as the top producer or market of automobiles, supercomputers, smartphones, and so on. Most are stunned to learn that China has already surpassed the United States on each of these metrics.
I then ask whether they believe that in their lifetime China will overtake the United States to become the largest economy in the world. In last year’s class of 60 students, about half bet they would live to see the United States become number two, while half disagreed.
When I show the class headlines from the 2014 IMF-World Bank meeting announcing that China had become the largest economy in the world, students react with a mix of dismay and disbelief. By 2016, China’s GDP was $21 trillion and America’s was $18.5 trillion, when measured by purchasing power parity (PPP), which both the CIA and IMF agree is the best yardstick for comparing national economies.
Students are not the only ones in the dark about China’s rise. Most of the press has similarly missed the big picture. The favorite story line in
the Western media about the Chinese economy is “slowdown.” The question few pause to ask is: slowing compared to whom? The American press’s favorite adjective to describe our economic performance has been “recovering.” But despite its “slowdown,” China today is growing three times as fast as the United States.
Never before has a nation risen so fast on so many dimensions. When Ronald Reagan became president in 1981, China’s economy was just 10 percent the size of America’s. By 2014, it had catapulted to 100 percent, and today it stands at 115 percent. If the US and Chinese economies continue their current growth trends, China’s economy will be 50 percent larger in 2023. By 2040, it will be three times larger.
A nation that did not appear in any of the international league tables in 1980 has vaulted into the top position. Yet in the face of what is arguably the most consequential geopolitical trend of our lifetime, Washington has mostly played a game of “let’s pretend.” Policy makers have repeatedly put forward strategies to “manage” China. The question we should ask candidly is whether China has been managing us.
President Trump’s claims that we have been “losing” to China reflect, in part, the reality of a shifting see-saw. A bigger, stronger China is challenging American interests in the South China Sea, taking our jobs, buying American companies, and replacing us as the primary trading partner of nations not only in its neighborhood, but also in Europe, where China recently unseated the United States as Germany’s largest trading partner.
Trump’s call to “Make America Great Again” struck a chord with voters. Number one is who we
are. But politically appealing slogans are not a solution for the dramatic resurgence of a 5,000-year old civilization with 1.4 billion people, led by a president whose own mission is the “Great Rejuvenation” of China — in other words, to “Make China Great Again.” To construct a grand strategy for the China challenge that protects vital US interests without catastrophic conflict, policy makers must begin by recognizing these uncomfortable but undeniable realities.
Graham Allison is the director of Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and the author of the forthcoming book “Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?”
Blackstone
Brigadier
Even if Tsinghua dethroning MIT in Engineering subjects is actually true, there's still the question why China's Communist Party and Social elites send their children to US and other Western schools, instead of top PRC colleges. What's the untold story?
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Learn what others have to teach. Combine it with what you already know. Just because you are better does not mean that you cannot learn from those with less mastery than yourself. When Chinese engineers trained in Tsinghua work with Chinese engineers who graduated MIT, you get world-beating technology by no debatable margin as we see in the supercomputer race and most likely in many other areas too sensitive to reveal.
Besides, Tsinghua is hard. It's brutal. They make you push on like a slave building the Pyramids. Lots of kids can't (or don't want to) take it and need the more humanitarian approach offered in Western Universities even if they're not quite up to par with Tsinghua. Also, of the world's top 10 engineering universities, China has 4 and the US has 4. Do you know how many Chinese kids there are? They can't all fit in the 4 at home.
Last edited: