Humanity faces a defining choice: do we climb the green mountain of ecological health and community wellbeing, or the gold and silver mountain of endless economic growth that is destroying the foundations of life on Earth?
No country dramatises the conflict between these two competing choices more clearly than China. In elevating its Two Mountains Theory - that lucid waters and lush mountains are as valuable as mountains of gold and silver - China has done the world a paradoxical service. By naming the conflict explicitly, it reveals what most nations conceal: that they are trying to climb two mountains at once.
This two-part series explores the meaning and implications of China’s dilemma.
Part I examines the environmental paradox of China’s Two Mountains strategy: its leadership in renewables and ecological restoration alongside its continued promotion of coal.
Part II looks at the human and global consequences of the conflict and how they bear most heavily on the poor majority.
Together, these reflections underscore a simple truth: no climber can ascend two mountains at once. Humanity must choose.
The Origin of the Two Mountains Theory
In 2005, while serving as provincial party secretary of Zhejiang, Xi Jinping introduced what he called the Two Mountains Theory: lucid waters and lush green mountains are as valuable as mountains of gold and silver. At the time, it was Xi’s local call to temper economic development with environmental protection. When Xi rose to national power -becoming General Secretary of the Communist Party in 2012 and President of China in 2013 - he elevated the Two Mountains Theory to the level of national strategy.
The paradox is clear. China was the first nation to pledge itself to building an Ecological Civilisation. Yet it also continued its established commitment to growing its economy, including using coal as a significant energy source. By giving the contradiction a name [the Two Mountain Theory], China exposes the conflict and gives the world a mirror to view the conflict that every nation faces. Yet most try to obscure it with slogans of “green growth” or “sustainable development.”
Achievements that inspire
Whatever else one says about China, its achievements in ecological innovation are breathtaking in scale and speed. In 2023, China installed more than 217 gigawatts of new solar power capacity—over twice the combined annual additions of the United States and European Union. Reports for 2024 estimate China installed 329 gigawatts of new solar plus 79 gigawatts of wind.
This build-out reflects China’s immense scale. With a population of 1.4 billion people—more than double the combined populations of the US and EU—it faces enormous energy demand. Still, the speed of China’s renewable expansion shows what is technically and financially possible when policy aligns with ecological ambition.
China’s expansion of high-speed rail is equally impressive. Since the early 2000s, China has built more than 45,000 kilometres of high-speed rail—longer than the rest of the world’s networks combined. Trains traveling up to 350 km/h now connect nearly every major city, carrying hundreds of millions of passengers annually.
The achievement is unparalleled in modern history. By contrast, the US has yet to complete even a single true high-speed rail line. Europe’s networks are extensive, but still far smaller in scale. China’s population density and state-driven model give it unique advantages—but its success demonstrates that when a nation makes a clear commitment, massive infrastructure shifts are possible.
China also leads the world in electric mobility. Shenzhen became the first city to electrify its entire bus fleet - more than 16,000 vehicles - and then moved on to electrify taxis. Other cities quickly followed suit. Today, China operates more than half of the world’s electric buses.
Of course, buses alone cannot solve urban congestion, and car ownership continues to rise. But the pace of this transformation shows how quickly urban fleets can transition when backed by policy, subsidies and manufacturing capacity.
China has also undertaken ecological restoration at an unprecedented scale. Its Great Green Wall programme involves planting billions of trees to halt the spread of the Gobi Desert. On the Loess Plateau, decades of restoration have turned one of the world’s most degraded landscapes into fertile farmland, reducing soil erosion and improving rural livelihoods.
These projects have their own limits. Monoculture tree planting has sometimes failed. Ecological complexity is hard to replicate. Still, the scope of China’s efforts offers lessons for other regions facing desertification, from Africa’s Sahel region to India’s drylands.
China has also made urban resilience a priority. Through its “sponge city” programme, China is reimagining urban water management. Cities like Wuhan, Shanghai and Shenzhen are embedding wetlands, green roofs and permeable pavements to absorb rainwater, reduce flooding and disperse heat.
These experiments are not yet universal, and many cities still rely on traditional “grey infrastructure” like concrete drainage systems. But if scaled up effectively, sponge cities could become a global model for adapting to intensifying climate impacts.
Each of these accomplishments demonstrates the power of focused public investment and long-range planning. They also prove that rapid, large-scale transformation is possible.
Contradictions that alarm
Yet, China’s ecological ambition collides with another reality: its plans for continued economic expansion.
Coal addiction: despite its boom in renewable energy, China still generates more than half of its electricity from coal. Even as solar and wind expand, new coal plants continue to be approved. Each one locks in emissions for decades.
Industrial emissions: China is the world’s largest producer of steel and cement, two of the most carbon-intensive industries. They are the backbone of its infrastructure drive but exact steep ecological costs.
Mega-project disruptions: the celebrated Three Gorges Dam produces renewable electricity but displaced more than a million people and disrupted entire ecosystems. Other projects marketed as “green” carry similarly heavy environmental costs.
Governance gaps: environmental laws are tightening, but enforcement is often lax. Public participation is limited, and independent oversight remains weak.
For every inspiring green initiative there remains a countervailing commitment to fossil energy and industrial expansion. This is the Two Mountains paradox made visible.
Comparisons with others
China’s dilemma becomes well demonstrated in the EU and the US. While the EU leads the world in environmental regulation and citizen participation and has pioneered carbon pricing, it has been slow to build out the renewable infrastructure needed to meet its lofty goals. And in the US, we have world-class science, activism and technological innovation, yet fossil fuel interests have captured the politics, even more so under Donald Trump.
The Two Mountains Theory acknowledges the desire for both ecological health and economic expansion, even as it leaves unresolved the impossibility of achieving both. This may be China’s most important contribution to the world: not that it has solved the dilemma, but that it has made it visible. By holding up a mirror, China forces us all to see that the conflict is not uniquely Chinese - it is universal.
No climber can ascend two mountains at once. At some point, China—and all of us—must choose. For the sake of peace, for the wellbeing of the poor majority and for the survival of life itself, there will be no winners on a dead Earth. Humanity must climb the mountain of life.
Read part II here.
Saber mais:
Today’s Bloomberg Green explains what’s in the new legislation and what it means for Chinese climate policy going forward.
.jpg)
