There is no question that the United States and China have now taken two completely different approaches to the energy crisis that plagues both nations (and frankly, the globe). Both nations are in the midst of a data center boom to power the future dreams of AI domination, however, the power crisis remains at the center of it all.

Electrification remains the robust infrastructure buildout of nations who wish to remain dominant superpowers, creating surplus where there currently is not. The United States tends to build out its centers in dry, waterless, humid areas such as Arizona -- mostly due to tax credits. China, on the other hand, does not have this issue with its centrally planned economy. 

As an article from Eletrek states:

"While others debate the merits of decentralized digital tokens, China is executing a multi-pronged strategy that treats electricity as the foundational strategic asset it has become."

It's not just enough to drain a nation's resources on AI or crypto generation, there must be abundance left over for a nation's population needs. Sustainability is paramount. As the United States has retreated from wind, solar, geothermal, and other low-cost power generation, China has doubled down on all of these, including nuclear.

As with all power distribution strategies, there must be fairness and reliability in the grid systems. The same Eletrek article goes on:

 China wields its control over the grid as a precision tool of industrial policy. China’s average electricity rate of $0.084/kWh is cheaper than most of the rest of the world, but its power lies not in the base price but in its strategic application. The government deploys a “Differential Electricity Pricing” policy: a “stick” that penalizes low-tech, high-consumption industries with higher rates, and a “carrot” that provides preferential pricing to incentivize strategic sectors.  

Not penalizing Chinese citizens for the overwhelming use of grid bandwidth for AI and other applications is a complete departure from how the United States approaches its grid fairness. Utility companies often pass the cost and drain of the old power generation technologies to residents while they often pay for the subsidies for big tech buildouts. 

The United States has also retreated from the electric vehicle world by ending federal subsidies, failing to invest in new battery technologies, and no strategy for a nationwide charging station buildout. This "all of the above" strategy will make any nation more robust, secure, and provide less-expensive energy for all. 

BYD has taken over the globe, especially in Asian, European, and Latin American markets while United States domestic manufactures such as GM and Ford have almost no serious footprint in this area.

China subsidizes EV makers such as BYD, Xiaomi, and others to create lower price point, higher range vehicles to appeal to the masses. It's up to the United States at this point to lead once again and reclaim an energy future that can put it back upon its superpower status once again.

As Rest of World puts it:

 Chinese EV models reach the market two to three years faster than non-Chinese brands, according to a 2024 report by New York-based consulting firm AlixPartners. Chinese EV firms typically take 20 months to develop a new car, compared with 40 months for Chinese legacy carmakers.  

It may be too late for the United States to catch up to what the rest of the world is doing in this sector (mainly China and India), but it can still be a power domestically if it were to be taken seriously as something more than a 'vanity project'.