Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Coal mining will outlast green hysterics

By Jeremy Gilling, John Muscat and Rolly Smallacombe - posted Tuesday, 29 May 2007


More than 361 coal-fired power stations have been built by the Chinese since 2002, and 65,000 megawatts (MW) worth of new facilities are under construction. A further 100 stations are planned. About one coal-burning plant is being added to China’s supply capacity per week. Although China mined 2.2 billion tonnes of thermal coal last year, imports have had to rise from two million tonnes in 2001 to 31 million in 2006. The forecast is 36 million this year and 50 million by 2012.

Nor have other countries called a halt. The US has added 27,000 MW of coal-fired capacity since 2002 and plans to develop another 37,700 MW by 2012. In the meantime, Kyoto-signing Europe added 25,000 MW over the last five years and plans an extra 13,000 MW by 2012. And India has projects adding up to 38,000 MW. Overall, 37 countries have plans to build more coal-fired plants, says Piper. By 2012, the world will have 7,500 coal-fired stations in 79 countries.

In short, coal powers 40 per cent of the world’s electricity production and the International Energy Agency projects demand to double by 2030.

Advertisement

Will any of this change if we pull the plug? Not much.

Recently, the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) published a wide-ranging study, The Future of Coal. The study points out that “in contrast to oil and natural gas, coal resources are widely distributed around the world”, and “coal reserves are spread between developed and developing countries”. One fundamental conclusion: “we believe that coal use will increase under any foreseeable scenario because it is cheap and abundant”.

While we are the leading coal exporter, moreover, according to US Department of Energy estimates we only have 8 per cent of the world’s reserves. The largest reserves are concentrated in the United States with 26 per cent and the Former Soviet Union with 23 per cent, followed by China (12 per cent), Germany (7 per cent), South Africa (5 per cent), Poland (2 per cent) and many other countries with smaller shares. Clearly, there are ample substitutes should we pull out.

What can be done? Despite reports that John Howard is negotiating an APEC linked regional emissions trading scheme, the Chinese Government, for one, won’t kick the coal habit any time soon. The Communist Party’s hold on power depends on continuing growth at breakneck speed.

As China specialist David Lambton pointed out in an article republished by the AFR (from Foreign Affairs), “Beijing’s priority is sustained, rapid growth, because growth is fundamental to the regime’s legitimacy - and most everything else”. Hence, last month’s National Climate Change Assessment Report, a document released by China’s top economic planning body, rejected “absolute and compulsory” caps on the country’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Nevertheless, the MIT study expresses confidence that “carbon capture sequestration (CCS) is the critical enabling technology that would reduce [carbon dioxide] emissions significantly while also allowing coal to meet the world’s pressing energy needs”. The study estimates that a carbon emission price of $30 (US) per tonne would make CCS cost competitive. The crucial problem is whether the world’s major emitters can be persuaded to implement such an impost, and what form it should take. If, as we have argued, global emissions trading proves to be a pipedream, the only alternative is some type of international agreement - a sort of supersized AP6 - mandating co-operation in the development, dissemination and application of technological improvements.

Advertisement

For such an agreement to emerge, coal suppliers need to be backed by democratically accountable governments, prosperous wealth generating economies and technically skilled populations. In other words, by countries like Australia.

Now there’s an alternative perspective for you. If we want to have a real, as opposed to just a symbolic, impact on stabilising atmospheric carbon, we should think about expanding, rather than contracting, our share of the world’s coal supply.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All

First published in The New City in May 2007.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

25 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Authors

Jeremy Gilling is a co-editor, along with John Muscat, of The New City, a web journal of urban and political affairs.

John Muscat is a co-editor, along with Jeremy Gilling, of The New City, a web journal of urban and political affairs.

Rolly Smallacombe is a co-editor, along with Jeremy Gilling and John Muscat, of The New City, a web journal of urban and political affairs.

Other articles by these Authors

All articles by Jeremy Gilling
All articles by John Muscat
All articles by Rolly Smallacombe

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 25 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy