Debate over use of coal grows hot
The smoldering debate over whether coal has a future in a low-carbon world has flared up with new intensity in Warsaw, the site of last month’s annual United Nations negotiations toward a global climate treaty.
With world coal use growing at a staggering pace, top climate diplomats have used the global stage to take a much more aggressive stance against the coal industry. They are demanding that companies move quickly to leverage technology to capture and bury their planet-heating emissions or risk putting the world on a dangerous and irreversible path.
In a stern address to the World Coal Association on the sidelines of the summit, Christiana Figueres, head of the UN’s Climate Change Secretariat, made several demands of industry: leave “most existing reserves in the ground,” shut down the dirtiest coal-fired facilities and use carbon capture and storage (CCS) on “new plants, even the most efficient.”
Her bottom line is that world’s “carbon budget is half spent” at a time when the global expansion of coal is wiping out gains from clean energy. “The coal industry faces a business continuation risk that you can no longer afford to ignore,” Figueres said. That message has been echoed in one speech after another, and report after report, by a panoply of major international organizations and institutes with interests in energy and climate policy. The focus on coal power during the two-week talks is because of the industry’s enormous global warming contribution. And it reflects how worried climate advocates are about the future—with nearly 1,200 coal plants on the drawing boards, mainly in developing economies.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon declared at a news conference that coal and other fossil fuel industries “will have to make green and sustainable investment decisions that will keep them in business, and us within the bounds of 2 degrees Celsius,” the safe target at the heart of climate treaty deliberations. “They seem to be making a transition, but I have been urging them to make it faster,” he said.
The UN estimates that if nations stick to their current pledges for carbon reductions by 2020, emissions will overshoot the desired limit by about 18 percent. Recent reports project that the rise in average global temperatures could approach 4 degrees Celsius by century’s end. Given plans to plow billions into new coal plants, many experts see no way to limit warming to a safe level without CCS—an expensive technology that industry says hasn’t been proven to work on a commercial basis.
In the United States, the Obama administration has proposed regulations that would force any new coal plant to be fitted with CCS technology, an attempt to establish a role for coal in the carbon-constrained economy. But the coal industry and its allies in Congress are trying to block the regulations by arguing that CCS is “not commercially viable.”
The World Coal Association, the industry group addressed by Figueres, had scheduled its own meeting in Warsaw to argue that coal has a place in a world struggling to lower emissions—though not necessarily through CCS, at least not right away.
The group said it’s enough to build modern coal plants that are more efficient and cleaner-burning.
“If we were to raise the global average efficiency of coal plants from its current average of 33 percent up to 40 percent we could reduce global carbon emissions by more than 2 gigatons—that’s the equivalent of running the Kyoto Protocol three times over,” said Milton Catelin, head of the World Coal Association, in a speech responding to Figueres.
“Modern highly efficient plants are also a key step towards near zero emissions from coal because they can be built ready for the deployment of carbon capture and storage technology,” he said.