NBD Interview with Zheng Yongnian: Global New Energy Development Has Just Begun, Gaps Remain Enormous

Daily Economic News Reporter | Zhang Hong Daily Economic News Editor | Bi Luming

On March 22, the China Development High-Level Forum 2026 Annual Conference was held in Beijing.

Geopolitical conflicts are intensifying, bringing new challenges to global energy cooperation. At this critical point of accelerating restructuring of the global energy landscape, it is worth deep reflection on how to create and seize market opportunities in the new energy industry, and build a safe, resilient, and sustainable industrial ecosystem.

On-site, regarding issues such as energy structure, Zheng Yongnian, Dean of the School of Public Policy at The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen), discussed with a Daily Economic News (NBD) reporter.

(Zheng Yongnian answering questions from NBD, photo by Zhang Hong)

China’s energy layout is not only correct but also well-executed

NBD: How does current geopolitical conflict affect the reshaping of energy structures?

Zheng Yongnian: I believe China’s energy layout is not only correct but also well-executed.

First, we have successfully diversified traditional energy sources; second, we have also succeeded in developing new energy.

Previously, some conservative Americans denied climate change, doubted the existence of an energy crisis, and tried to curb China’s new energy industry development. I think, through the energy issues triggered by the Iran situation, China and European countries can find more consensus and cooperation momentum in the development path of new energy, further confirming the correctness of the new energy route. As Tesla CEO Elon Musk said, solar energy is inexhaustible; compared to solar energy, internal Earth energy is negligible. Humanity should seek energy from the sun rather than cling to traditional energy resources. China’s early development direction was extremely correct.

NBD: Where does China’s new energy technology stand globally?

Zheng Yongnian: In the field of new energy, China is definitely in the first tier. The Trump administration abandoned new energy and shifted to traditional energy partly because the U.S. found it difficult to compete with China in this field. Looking at the current industry landscape, traditional auto powerhouses like Germany are also shifting. Previously, countries like Germany, the U.S., and Japan relied on traditional energy vehicle industries to establish natural monopolies. Now, during the transition to new energy, they need to seek cooperation with Chinese companies like BYD.

Of course, we should not be complacent. Other countries are also actively deploying, for example, Japan is making progress in hydrogen energy and hybrid vehicles. Therefore, China must continue technological innovation. But at the current stage of development, China’s new energy industry has firmly secured its position in the global first tier.

NBD: Recently, some domestic companies confirmed that Tesla plans to purchase Chinese photovoltaic equipment. What do you think is the reason?

Zheng Yongnian: Because it’s inevitable.

First, China is a global leader in the photovoltaic industry. In fact, since the advent of the internet era, the global industrial landscape has gradually been dominated by China and the U.S. From the internet to emerging fields like artificial intelligence, technological development is mainly concentrated in these two countries, with others participating but having limited influence.

The reason the U.S. has faced obstacles in some areas lies in the large vested interest groups within the country. For years, the international community has been discussing the imbalance in the global economic structure, starting from 2007-2008, and this issue remains unresolved.

Why has it not been effectively addressed? Because the U.S. tends to blame other countries, while the real obstacle is domestic vested interests blocking reform.

This is why the rise of technological right-wing groups is significant. They represent the interests of emerging capital, advocating for accelerationism—a philosophy that promotes using technology to reconstruct society—to overcome domestic vested interests and promote industrial transformation. Compared to this, China is one of the few countries with institutional advantages and the capacity for self-revolution.

China has a comparative advantage in AI application implementation

Zheng Yongnian believes that as long as technology does not reach a peak, the economy will not peak.

NBD: Is the future of AI energy, top talent, or application?

Zheng Yongnian: These aspects need coordinated development. Ultimately, technology must be applied. Any technology that cannot be practically applied will eventually become a bubble. Recently, U.S. society has been discussing the risks of an AI bubble. On one hand, every industrial revolution has seen overinvestment at the beginning; on the other hand, the key is to promote the transformation of technology into practical applications.

The core of AI implementation lies in finding application scenarios, which is where China has an advantage. The U.S., on the other hand, lacks corresponding advantages in expanding application scenarios.

NBD: Is this advantage due to the large market?

Zheng Yongnian: China not only has a huge market but also a rich and diverse range of application scenarios. Because the U.S. has exited some manufacturing sectors, domestic application scenarios are lacking, and it can only seek external markets. In comparison, China can provide ample application scenarios for AI technology domestically.

Global new energy gap remains large

Discussing “countering involution,” Zheng Yongnian pointed out that, on one hand, China’s new energy industry indeed faces fierce internal competition, known as “involution.” But it’s important to distinguish the nature of “involution”: if it manifests as vicious price competition, it should be avoided; if it involves diligent innovation and technological breakthroughs, it is a positive sign.

From the perspective of the current energy crisis, the development of new energy worldwide is far from sufficient. Therefore, the key to “countering involution” is to promote capacity “going out” rationally and orderly. During this process, we should avoid a herd mentality. The government’s focus is not on healthy competition but on preventing a chaotic, all-out rush and scatter pattern of development.

NBD: You just mentioned that the gap in new energy is still large. How much do you think the current gap is?

Zheng Yongnian: Developing countries have huge demand for new energy, and supply in developed economies like Europe and the U.S. is also far from meeting actual needs. Although the concept of new energy was first proposed by Western countries, their current accusations of “overcapacity” in China are based on ideological bias and competitive disadvantages. From an objective demand perspective, global new energy development has just begun, and the gap remains enormous.

Cover image source: Zhu Yu