Forget about the nonsensical mantra about 2 degrees – we’re there already. We're already being cooked
This article cuts through the nonsense about “alternative” energy taking over the world and declining greenhouse emissions.
Civilisation
is a heat engine.
Hundreds of coal plants are still being planned worldwide — enough to cook the planet
Vox,
5
April, 2016
I've
written before about the global
coal renaissance — the
single biggest energy and climate story of the past 15 years. Since
2000, countries like China, India, Indonesia, and Vietnam have been
building coal-fired power plants at a torrid pace:
"(
Boom and Bust 2016)This chart shows net coal capacity added each year — that is, new plants built minus retirements of older plants.
Boom and Bust 2016)This chart shows net coal capacity added each year — that is, new plants built minus retirements of older plants.
The
coal boom has had undeniable benefits, helping poor countries climb
out of poverty. But it also has serious downsides: Carbon dioxide
emissions accelerated in
the 2000s, and if coal continues to be the world's leading source of
electricity, we'll cook
the planet.
So
the biggest, most important climate question for the next 15 years
is: How long will this global coal boom last? Or, put another way,
when will the
rise of clean energy finally stop coal's growth for good?
One
invaluable data source here is an annual report from three
environmental groups: CoalSwarm, the Sierra Club, and Greenpeace.
Each year, the authors document all the new coal plants that have
been announced, permitted, or are currently being built around the
world.
In
their 2016
"Boom and Bust" report, they find the equivalent of
1,500 new coal plants in the pipeline worldwide. That's a staggering
number. If even one-third of these plants get built and operate for
their full lifetime, we'll likely bust through the 2°C
global warming threshold that world leaders have promised to
stay below. Even 3°C could be tough to void.
But
there's a major asterisk here: It's not yet certain all these plants
will actually get completed. Since 2010, two-thirds of proposed
coal projects have gotten scrapped. China, which today accounts for
half the world's planned capacity, has
seen its coal appetite wane in the last few years and is
tacking toward cleaner energy sources. India is another big question
mark. So is Southeast Asia. Let's take a closer look.
Globally, there are enough coal plants planned to bust through the 2°C threshold
As
of January 2016, the report's authors found, there were nearly 338
gigawatts of coal power capacity under construction worldwide and
another 1,085 gigawatts of capacity in various phases of permitting
or planning. This is the equivalent of 1,500 large coal plants:
China,
India, Vietnam, Indonesia, and South Korea are leading the current
coal rush. Japanis
also contemplating dozens of new coal-burning units to
replace its nuclear fleet, which has been shuttered indefinitely
after Fukushima. But it's not just Asia. There are coal plants in the
works just about everywhere, save for the United States.
This
is a huge deal, environmentally. If we want decent odds of staying
below the 2°C global warming threshold, then humanity can
only emit another 765 gigatons of CO2 into the atmosphere,
give or take. (A gigaton is a billion tons.) We currently emit about
35 gigatons per year from existing infrastructure, so our "carbon
budget" is rapidly dwindling.
If
all the new coal plants now under construction were built and
operated for their full lifespans, they'd pump an extra 58 gigatons
of CO2 into the atmosphere. If all the additional planned/permitted
plants were built, that would emit another 186 gigatons of CO2. There
are a lot of variables at play here — since you also have to factor
in oil and gas infrastructure — but it looks extraordinarily
difficult to stay below 2°C if even one-third of these planned coal
plants get built.
(Note:
This is assuming all coal plants last their full lifespans, usually
40 years or more, and run at average capacity. It's entirely possible
that some plants could get retired early, though that would mean
billions in lost revenue. Alternatively, we could figure out how to
retrofit existing coal plants so as to capture
their CO2 emissions and store them underground, but that
technology is not yet widely commercialized.)
China accounts for half the planned coal plants — but could still cancel many of them
Now,
it's not yet guaranteed that all of these proposed coal plants will
get built. As the report's authors — Christine Shearer, Nicole
Ghio, Lauri Myllyvirta, Aiqun Yu, and Ted Nace — point out, two out
of every three proposed plants since 2010 have been canceled due to
economic headwinds, local opposition, or growing competition from
cleaner energy sources. The question is how many get scrapped going
forward.
Take
China, which currently has 193 gigawatts under construction and 515
gigawatts in various stages of planning — roughly half of the
proposed coal capacity worldwide:
(Global Coal Plant Tracker)
(Global Coal Plant Tracker)
As
I've reported before, there's a
reasonable argument that many of these proposed coal plants
are superfluous. China's coal consumption has shrunk the past two
years as its economy has slowed down, and the country is trying to
transition away from heavy industry. If China manages this high-wire
rebalancing act successfully, it's possible that future electricity
demand will be much lower — and can mostly be filled by aggressive
plans to expand nuclear, hydro, wind, and solar.
That's
the optimistic view, at least, and it's why some analysts think China
has either hit peak coal or will very soon. But with China, nothing
is ever simple.
Despite record-low utilization rates at existing plants, many of China's mining provinces are still pushing new coal plants as an economic development strategy.
The central government, for its part,has ordered a halt to some of these plants, but not all. Beijing also has to be mindful of rising unemployment in these areas.
Despite record-low utilization rates at existing plants, many of China's mining provinces are still pushing new coal plants as an economic development strategy.
The central government, for its part,has ordered a halt to some of these plants, but not all. Beijing also has to be mindful of rising unemployment in these areas.
So there's a fierce tug of war here, and the outcome is uncertain. China arguably doesn't need all of these coal plants, but it may end up building a sizable fraction regardless. If it does, that would make it harder to expand clean energy and push down CO2 emissions in the future.
India has major plans to expand coal capacity — but has run into serious obstacles
India
is another focal point. The country has 72 gigawatts of coal capacity
under construction and another 218 gigawatts in various planning
stages — more than any country save China:
India
has plenty of reasons to want more coal capacity. It hasn't yet gone
through the same rapid coal-driven industrialization that China did
in the 2000s. There are still more than 300 million people in the
country without electricity. And though the country is scaling up
clean energy to address climate change, this has limits. Wind and
solar, while growing fast, still have intermittency issues. And
nuclear power has
struggled to gain a foothold. That's why Prime Minister
Narendra Modi has
called for a near doubling of coal production by 2020.
Yet
this isn't a sure thing. India faces a slew of obstacles to expanding
coal capacity. Nearly 390 gigawatts worth of projects have already
been put on hold since 2010. The authors of the "Boom and Bust"
report break down some of the hurdles:
Barriers include financially strapped electricity distribution companies; the difficulty of ramping up mining of domestic coal; the high cost of coal imports relative to the constraints on the ability of India’s distribution companies to charge their customers for power; and grassroots opposition against new coal plants and mines.
Finally, given the inadequacies of India’s electrical grid, there is the fundamental question of whether building more coal plants is actually a feasible way to deliver power to the estimated 300 to 400 million people in India lacking access to electricity.
(There's more
detail in the report if you're curious. Or see the IEA's
special report on
India for a deep div.)
These
obstacles shouldn't be entirely comforting to climate hawks. Ideally,
what we'd want is for India to turn away from coal and toward cleaner
sources of energy because the latter is cheaper and presents a
plainly superior path for development.
But
the India story is more complicated than that. Many of the barriers
standing in the way of a national coal binge are things like economic
and regulatory dysfunction — barriers that many people would
rightly prefer to tear down. We don't want to pin the fate of the
planet onto hopes that India's rail infrastructure will
remain a hopeless mess forever.
Beyond
India, the report also delves into coal aspirations for all the other
regions of the world. The section on Southeast Asia is especially
noteworthy: demand seems robust, but there is growing local
opposition. Vietnam, for instance, is grappling with severe air
pollution, and the government has
recently ordered a halt to new coal construction while it
carries out a review.
Is the world facing a coal bubble?
(Kuni
Takahashi/Getty Images)Villagers
carry illegally scavenged coal from an open-cast coal mine in
Dhanbad, Jharkhand, India, on December 6, 2014.
One
striking aspect of the "Boom and Bust" report is its
argument that most of these planned coal plants are unneeded and
amount to a "capacity bubble" — in which investors risk
squandering $981 billion.
That's
certainly contentious. There are places like China where a major
expansion of coal capacity is arguably overkill and new plants may
prove money-losing white elephants. Likewise, Japan would no doubt be
better off restarting its nuclear fleet than massively
ramping up coal consumption. But the picture is murkier for
poorer countries like India.
Most
developing countries are building coal plants because they need
access to low-cost electricity to light up their homes, provide an
alternative to indoor
wood burning, bolster industry, and lift people out of poverty.
For all its downsides — including deadly air pollution — coal has
a proven track record of enabling economic growth. The only way
countries will turn away from coal is if cleaner alternatives become
available that can accomplish all those goals.
That's
the real challenge here. The report's authors argue that renewables
like solar and wind can bring electricity to the world's poor,
particularly in off-grid rural areas. In some cases, yes. But those
sources still have a ways to improve, and right now they can't
provide the sort of 24/7 power needed to run factories and heavy
industry — the path to development that every other rich country
has taken to date.
What's clear
is that the world desperately needs to deply low-cost viable
alternatives to coal if we want to halt global warming. In some
places, that may involve more natural gas, which has half the CO2
footprint of coal (though methane leaks are a concern). Elsewhere, it
will mean nuclear power. Or hydropower dams. Or wind plus solar plus
storage. Or perhaps someday we'll figure out carbon capture for
coal. (This Allam cycle technology may
prove useful.
MIT scientists have also proposed
a method for cutting CO2 from coal plants in half and
sequestering the waste.)
This
is the major energy task of the next two decades. If we can't stop
the global coal boom, then we better prepare for a serious rise in
temperatures.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.