Nip Impressions logo
Fri, Mar 29, 2024 08:39
Visitor
Home
Click here for Pulp & Paper Radio International
Subscription Central
Must reads for pulp and paper industry professionals
Search
My Profile
Login
Logout
Management Side
Keeping Energy Buried in the Coal, Coal Ground

The cold, cold ground has figured largely in the titles of two popular songs, by Tom Waits and Hank Williams Jr., and a novel by Adrian McKinty. Now climatologists are saying that major shares of the world's energy sources--especially coal--must remain domiciled in the cold, cold ground for there to be any chance of not over-warming Planet Earth.

Scientists and many policymakers (those who were not card-carrying members of the Flat Earth Society) had generally agreed by the turn of the 21st century that global warning was upon us. Their deliberations were widely published by early 2015. Approaching disasters were foreseen if warming remained unchecked and was not held to less than 2°C (3.6°F) above the average global temperature of preindustrial times. If not, glaciers and ice caps would melt and rising sea levels would inundate low-lying coastal areas, including many cities and towns. To have any chance of staying under this temperature increase cap, huge amounts of carbon dioxide emissions would have to be avoided.

The unabated burning of fossil fuels is simply incompatible with such avoidance. Studies strongly indicated that, globally, a third of oil reserves, half of gas reserves and more than 80% of known coal reserves would have to remain unused from 2010 to 2150 to meet the target of coming in under a 2°C average temperature increase. The overwhelming majority of coal reserves in China, Russia and the USA, plus some 260 billion barrels of Middle Eastern Oil--amounting to the entire reserves of Saudi Arabia--must be left in the ground. Many, if not most, fuel providers and energy generators thought and said that such stringent cutbacks could never be realized because the world is too energy-hungry.

Now some climatologists are saying that the outlook is worse than they thought and will make control targets harder to reach. Now, they say, 88% of the world's known coal reserves, 52% of gas and 35% of oil must be left untouched to contain global warming. In this scenario, Russia and the US can burn just 5% of their coal reserves and Europe just over 10% of its underground stocks. China will have to keep 77% of its coal reserves in the ground. Some large developing nations, such as India, where hundreds of millions of people have few options other than to use fossil fuels, pose particular challenges.

Scientists at the University of Michigan have found what they describe as serious flaws in the coal-derived energy studies of the past decade. They find that most of the economic analyses of carbon capture and storage (CCS) have severely underestimated the technique's costs and overestimated its efficiency. CCS involves extracting carbon out of the flue gases of coal-fired plants, compressing it and injecting it into storage deep underground. Their analysis puts the cost of CCS higher than any previous studies--higher than wind and comparable to solar power.

Coal-fired power plants produce nearly a third of the world's electricity. They also emit more than half of the world's energy-sector CO², the primary driver of warming. Steve Skerlos, a U of M professor, said, "Every major technological, economic and policy study published in the last decade on how to meet the internationally determined target of 80 percent greenhouse gas reduction by 2050 has relied on the large-scale deployment of carbon capture and sequestration." Beyond a one-time energy penalty these plants pay because they have to burn more coal to power devices that capture carbon, the researchers say the disadvantage becomes compounded until fuel costs leap up to four times today's accepted estimates.

"The conclusion is that renewables will be a cheaper alternative to reducing carbon emissions from coal, at least in the United States and likely globally," said Skerlos. "To us, this means that policymakers need to stop wasting time hoping for technological silver bullets to sustain the status quo in the electric sector and quickly accelerate the transition from coal to renewables, or possibly, natural gas power plants with CCS."

According to Industrial Info Resources, at least 13 coal-fired US power plans are scheduled for shut down in 2016. In total, these plants generate more than 5,500 megaWatts of electricity--enough to power 5.5 million homes. The industry is under siege by the US Clean Power Plan, while consumers and activists are pressuring utilities to close aging coal-fired plants. One report says that with funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign has helped shut down more than 220 coal facilities over the past five years.

The US Energy Information Administration estimates that 900 million short tons of coal were mined in 2015, a drop from about 1 billion in 2014. That is the lowest volume since 1986. The widespread shift to natural gas by electric power plants has resulted in widespread layoffs and bankruptcies at mining companies. The shift to gas has been greatly encouraged by the drop in the average daily spot price for natural gas at the benchmark Henry Hub, which fell to $2.61 million Btus last year, down 40% from 2014.

Then drop in demand for coal has hit hardest in the US Appalachian region, where production dropped 40% below the annual average from 2010 through 2014. And the US coal industry did not get any help from export markets either, as exports to the UK, Italy and China fell by more than 50%, pushing the US total exports of coal down by about 21% last year.

There is some push-back from friends of coal, such as politicians from coal-producing states and trade groups. The American Coal Council says, "Suggestions to leave fossil fuels in the ground are not aligned with the reality of the world's growing energy needs. Fossil fuels will continue to be utilized because they are available, accessible, scalable, and reliable. An estimated 1,200,000 megaWatts of coal-fueled generation are planned or under construction globally." The council continues, "The key to global emissions reductions...lies in continuing to develop and deploy technologies for lowering emissions. The American Coal Council calls on the U.S. administration and other global leaders to use the Paris Accord as the foundation to support advanced high efficiency, low emissions technologies for coal power plants and to accelerate the development of carbon capture and storage technology."

Some energy producers are turning to renewable sources. The Washington Post reports this month, "Wind and solar power appear set for a record-breaking year in 2016 as a clean-energy construction boom gathers momentum in spite of a global glut of cheap fossil fuels. Orders for 2016 solar and wind installations are up sharply, from the United States to China to the developing countries of Africa and Latin America. In December, wind energy in the United States passed the 70-gigaWatt threshold, with 50,000 spinning turbines producing enough power to light up 19 million homes."

While others are considering alternatives, at least one electric power company is already in the solar power business. Fort Wayne-based Indiana Michigan Power reported that its first solar power generating station is operating and will power the equivalent of 350 homes per year. This milestone follows groundbreakings for three more solar facilities scheduled to begin operating by year's end. The four facilities could generate up to 15 megaWatts annually, enough to power 2,000 homes. As we observed recently, somewhere in these columns, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."


Printer-friendly format

 




Related Articles:


Powered by Bondware
News Publishing Software

The browser you are using is outdated!

You may not be getting all you can out of your browsing experience
and may be open to security risks!

Consider upgrading to the latest version of your browser or choose on below: