Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Coal  (Read 268569 times)

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Coal
« Reply #1250 on: February 25, 2019, 02:44:54 PM »
Glencore, the world's biggest thermal coal producer and exporter, is capping output
Quote
• Glencore says it will not grow its capacity to produce coal beyond current levels around 150 million tons per yer.
• The company will instead focus on increasing production of commodities used in electric vehicles and other low-carbon technologies.
• Analysts say the move will tighten supplies and boost prices, allowing Glencore to keep money flowing from its coal segment even as it caps output.

Commodities giant Glencore on Wednesday said it will cap the amount of coal it produces each year, part of a broader plan to align its business with the global effort to prevent climate change.

Glencore is the world’s largest exporter of thermal coal, the kind burned in power plants and a major contributor to planet-warming carbon emissions. The multinational miner on Wednesday said it will broadly limit its capacity to produce coal to current levels, or about 150 million tons per year.

The company instead plans to put capital to work churning out more copper, cobalt, nickel, vanadium and zinc, commodities that are used in electric vehicle batteries and other technologies that underpin the shift to a cleaner energy and transportation future. ...
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/20/glencore-the-worlds-biggest-thermal-coal-exporter-is-capping-output.html

Cross-posted in Cars thread.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4469
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 141
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1251 on: February 28, 2019, 12:04:04 AM »
Coal company faked mine air quality data:

" Armstrong officials removed dust testing devices early in the miners’ shifts and placed the devices in less dusty or “clean air”; that during a testing period, officials replaced miners who ran the most dust-causing machines with miners who were not wearing the dust testing devices, so that the company would pass the tests; that Armstrong officials fabricated and submitted dust sampling test results on days the mine was shut down or otherwise not in operation; that officials ordered that testing devices be run in “clean air,” before and after shifts, to skew the test results toward passing ..."

https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdky/pr/one-most-senior-level-former-coal-company-officials-ky-charged-defrauding-regulators

sidd

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1252 on: February 28, 2019, 09:15:36 PM »
Coal company faked mine air quality data:

" Armstrong officials removed dust testing devices early in the miners’ shifts and placed the devices in less dusty or “clean air”; that during a testing period, officials replaced miners who ran the most dust-causing machines with miners who were not wearing the dust testing devices, so that the company would pass the tests; that Armstrong officials fabricated and submitted dust sampling test results on days the mine was shut down or otherwise not in operation; that officials ordered that testing devices be run in “clean air,” before and after shifts, to skew the test results toward passing ..."

https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdky/pr/one-most-senior-level-former-coal-company-officials-ky-charged-defrauding-regulators

sidd

This is not just defrauding regulators, its knowingly increasing the incidence of lung damage to the miners. Should be a criminal case brought against those involved with long prison sentences to get the message across.

kassy

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 217
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Coal
« Reply #1253 on: March 04, 2019, 11:45:37 AM »
Coal Ash Contaminates Groundwater at 91% of U.S. Coal Plants, Tests Show

At a power plant in Memphis, Tennessee, coal ash waste that built up over decades has been leaching arsenic and other toxic substances into the groundwater.

The contamination, ranked as a top problem in a new national assessment of water testing at coal ash sites, is in a shallow aquifer for now. But below that lies a second aquifer that provides drinking water to more than 650,000 people, and there are concerns that the contamination could make its way into the deeper water supply the city relies on.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/04032019/coal-ash-groundwater-contamination-toxic-arsenic-memphis-texas-eip

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Coal
« Reply #1254 on: March 06, 2019, 05:57:40 PM »
Interesting article about the future for the coal industry in China:

https://www.rfa.org/english/commentaries/energy_watch/china-will-pay-high-costs-for-coal-shutdowns-03042019101118.html

Quote
In the latest study that may raise concerns about the consequences of coal power cutbacks, oil major BP said last month in its annual Energy Outlook report that the pace of growth in renewables, led by China, is unprecedented.

"Renewables will penetrate the energy system quicker than any other fuel ever," said BP's chief economist, Spencer Dale, as quoted by Reuters.

Last year, China's renewable power capacity including wind, solar, hydro, and biomass sources rose 12 percent to 728 gigawatts (GW). Non-fossil power accounted for 38.3 percent of total installed generating capacity, a gain of 1.7 percentage points from a year earlier, the National Energy Administration (NEA) said.

Preliminary data released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) tracked similar trends.

In its statistical communique for 2018, the NBS said that coal's share of total energy use fell to 59 percent, down 1.4 percentage points from 2017, although coal consumption rose 1 percent.

The share of "clean energy consumption," including natural gas, hydro, nuclear and wind power, rose 1.3 percentage points to 22.1 percent, the bureau said.

In coming decades, the shrinking share of coal in China's energy sourcing could be dramatic.

Under its main scenario, BP estimates that coal's share in the country's primary energy mix will plunge from 60 percent in 2017 to around 35 percent in 2040.

Quote
In an earlier study, Greenpeace blamed a wave of unnecessary coal power projects on the central government's decision in 2013 to transfer approval authority to China's provinces as a way to speed development by cutting red tape.

Push for coal-fired plants

Years later, much has changed in the development of renewable energy sources and the cost estimates of overcapacity, but little has changed in the push for more coal-fired plants.

As China's economic growth slows, the demand for electricity seems bound to weaken, magnifying the problem of excess coal plants. The shift from heavy industry to the less energy-intensive service sector may curb the role of coal even more.

But a study in September by the environmental research group CoalSwarm found that unneeded coal-fired generating projects with 259 GW of capacity remain under development despite central government efforts to stop them.

Quote
The extra capacity, which is nearly equal to that of all U.S. coal-fired plants, would increase China's coal generation total by 25 percent, the study said.

The new plants would also equal 13.6 percent of China's current total of installed capacity, according to the NEA figures released in January.

Starting in 2016, China's top planning agency, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), tried to head off the surplus projects. But the permitting restrictions left loopholes, like those for combined heat and power plants, which allowed many to go ahead.

Some industrial plants have also dodged restrictions by building coal-fired generators for their own electricity needs. The "captive" generators were unregulated until 2015, and many received clearance after operating illegally, CoalSwarm said.

The study, published at endcoal.org, said that the 259 GW of continuing coal projects are "wildly out of line" with commitments to control greenhouse gas emissions under the Paris climate accord. Cancelling the projects would save U.S. $210 billion (1.4 trillion yuan) in capital spending, the study said.

China's rate of growth for renewables and the declining coal share by 2040 are critical to the losses that can be expected from investment in the new plants, which could otherwise operate for 40 years or more.

Quote
If all the planned or partially-built plants were halted in 2021, the losses would reach nearly 4.5 trillion yuan (U.S. $655 billion at current rates). In 2036, the write- downs would still top 2.2 trillion yuan (U.S. $332 billion), the paper said.

Higher costs were estimated for closing all coal-fired plants, including those already operating. If the shutdowns took place in five years, the cost of stranded assets would reach 7.2 trillion yuan (U.S. $1 trillion). If the closures were delayed for 20 years, the losses would still total 3 trillion yuan (U.S. $456 billion), the analysis said.

In the five-year time frame, the losses would fall most heavily on the provinces and regions of Inner Mongolia, Shaanxi, Xinjiang, Shanxi, Guizhou and Jiangsu. But the costs would be major for the entire economy, ranging from 4.1 percent to 9.5 percent of China's GDP in 2015, the paper said.

The estimates give a glimpse of the costs that will have to be paid for continuing to build coal-fired power plants in an industry that already suffers from overcapacity.

But it also raises the question of who will pay when the time of reckoning eventually comes.

Investors in the projects at the provincial level would appear to have a primary risk and responsibility.

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Coal
« Reply #1255 on: March 07, 2019, 12:16:10 AM »
This story published in February 2019 summarizes the of global capital investors that no longer finance coal projects.

https://www.esi-africa.com/industry-sectors/finance-and-policy/global-financiers-fleeing-the-coal-sector-finds-report/

Quote
New research from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) reveals that over 100 major global financial institutions have introduced policies restricting coal funding.

Quote
The World Bank announced the first-ever restrictions in 2013, with the 100th announcement in December 2018 coming from the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) removing three country exceptions to its coal finance ban.

A further five policies have been announced since the beginning of 2019 with moves coming from Nedbank of South Africa, Barclays Bank UK, Export Development Canada, and Varma of Finland.

The latest move announced just last week was from Austria’s Vienna Insurance Group saying it will no longer insure new coal plants and mines.

Policies responding to climate change

Report author Tim Buckley, Director of Energy Finance Studies, IEEFA, says when globally significant investors act, global momentum increases.

“For environmental, reputational and financial reasons, thermal coal is a toxic asset for global investors increasingly announcing new and improved policies responding to climate change,” said Buckley.

The strong leadership of a few globally significant institutions five years ago is increasingly turning into capital flight by the many, with one new announcement every two weeks in recent years.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4735
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 638
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Coal
« Reply #1256 on: March 08, 2019, 11:55:22 AM »
Coal lobbyists like to say electricity generated from coal will keep flowing when renewables fail.

This article seems to do a good job on showing that coal generation fails in extreme weather - hot and cold.

So has another assumption bit the dust in the face of real data?

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/as-extreme-weather-forces-coal-to-falter-where-will-resilience-come-from#gs.00fdh6
As Extreme Weather Forces Coal to Falter, Where Will Resilience Come From?
From bitter cold in North America to historic heatwaves in Australia, coal simply won’t provide the grid resilience federal officials claim subsidies would provide.

Quote
January’s polar vortex renewed Trump administration calls to subsidize uneconomic coal-fired generation to improve grid resilience through on-hand fuel supplies, but reality is disproving this contention — coal is increasingly a grid liability during extreme weather.

The smarter way to secure a reliable grid that proves resilient against climate change impacts is through generation diversity, grid automation, distributed resources and interagency planning. This trend is already being realized by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), while remote California communities and Puerto Rico’s rebuilding grid move to test and scale clean, resilient solutions.

Coal crashes in extreme cold and extreme heat
Data from PJM Interconnection reported severe cold forced 7.3 to 7.7 gigawatts of coal generation (roughly 12 percent of the market’s total installed coal capacity, or enough to power 5 million homes) offline during January’s polar vortex. A total of 18 to 23 percent  of coal plants facing retirement, those most in need of subsidies, were forced offline — nearly double the PJM average forced outage rate of 7 to 10.6 percent during the same time. These forced outages slightly improved from the 2014 polar vortex, when nearly 14 gigawatts of PJM’s coal capacity (roughly 20 percent of PJM’s total coal capacity at the time) was forced offline due to cold-induced power plant equipment failures and frozen coal piles.

Coal’s brittle performance in extreme weather was also apparent at the other end of the spectrum in Australia’s recent historic heatwave. Temperatures exceeding 120° Fahrenheit forced up to 40 percent of the state of Victoria’s coal generation capacity offline, causing brownouts for thousands of homes, while wind and solar energy outperformed expected output.

Australian coal outages weren’t limited to its record heatwave. Coal-fired power plants broke down 135 different times nationwide during 2018, or once every 2.7 days, often due to extreme heat. “Coal-fired power is simply unreliable in the heat,” said Mark Ogge of The Australia Institute.

Solar, on the other hand, performed “the best of all energy sources” during the record-breaking Australian heatwave, according to the Australia Institute’s National Energy Emissions Audit for January. “Solar saved the day,” said Dr. Hugh Sadler, the report’s author.

Even the U.S. Department of Energy’s analytical staff found fuel security is not synonymous with resilience in 2017. DOE examined the role of baseload generation in resilience, and a leaked report found no threat to reliability from losing coal and nuclear generation based on recent reliability analyses from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, echoing similar findings from U.S. wholesale market operators.  More recently, a Rhodium Group analysis showed the grid’s wires, not its plants, were more vulnerable to climate impacts.

According to a recent study by Alison Silverstein, lead author of the DOE’s resilience report, customer strategies like real-time communication and automation, local generation for life-saving infrastructure, regional coordination, and better emergency preparedness make much more sense for improving resilience than focusing unrealistically on saving unreliable coal plants from bleak economics.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4469
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 141
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1257 on: March 08, 2019, 10:32:55 PM »
Hidden subsidies for coal plants:

"Some utilities appear to be finding a way to undermine the competitive market structure that would have lower cost resource operate more and higher cost resources operate less. Expensive coal plants—which are objectively not competitive—are being operated in such a way that costs consumers money, reduces flexibility, and exacerbates existing pollution problems."

"coal-fired power plants incurred $4.6 billion in market losses over the past 3 years or $1.5 billion dollars in market losses each year. Most of these “losses” were incurred by power plants owned by monopoly utilities and are not absorbed by the investors or owners"

"power plant operators can choose to ignore price signals, and the owner can “self-commit” or “self-schedule,” effectively bypassing the market’s role as the independent system operator."

"The idea that a power plant needs to bypass the market’s decision-making process and self-select (as opposed to market-select) is to presume that the markets are incapable of doing its job"

"Many coal-fired power plants enter into contracts for fuel which have “take-or-pay” provisions. Utilities claim this means there is effectively no cost to burning the fuel"

https://blog.ucsusa.org/joseph-daniel/the-coal-bailout-nobody-is-talking-about

sidd

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Coal
« Reply #1258 on: March 10, 2019, 06:54:24 PM »
Wyoming passes coal support bill in spate of Western action to save ailing plants
Quote
The energy proposals across the U.S. West illustrate how state lawmakers are responding to the market transition away from coal power in the face of inaction from the White House.

In Wyoming, the S.F. 159 would only allow utilities to recover the costs of building new power plants to replace retiring coal generators if they first make "a good faith effort" to sell the closing facilities. If a buyer can be found, the bill would direct utilities to purchase power from the plants back from the purchaser.

The bill comes after PacifiCorp, which owns Wyoming utility Rocky Mountain Power, said in December that 60% of its coal fleet is uneconomic, including plants in Wyoming.

In Montana, the so-called "save-Colstrip" bill would allow utility Northwestern Energy to buy a larger share of the newest unit of the Colstrip power plant for $1 and pass the costs onto its captive customers.
...
In New Mexico, coal developments come as part of a broad clean energy bill that would move the state's utilities to 80% renewables by 2040 and mandate that the remaining power come from zero-carbon sources.

The bill, Senate Bill 489, would allow utility Public Service of New Mexico to securitize the costs of closing its 847 MW San Juan plant, slated to come offline in 2022. That would allow PNM to issue AAA-rated bonds to recover stranded costs in the plant, which ratepayers would repay through bill surcharge. ...
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/wyoming-passes-coal-support-bill-in-spate-of-western-action-to-save-ailing/549753/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Coal
« Reply #1259 on: March 12, 2019, 01:43:26 PM »
A longer take on Germany’s news from January.

Germany to close all 84 of its coal-fired power plants, will rely primarily on renewable energy
Quote
Germany, one of the world’s biggest consumers of coal, will shut down all 84 of its coal-fired power plants over the next 19 years to meet its international commitments in the fight against climate change, a government commission said Saturday.

The announcement marked a significant shift for Europe’s largest country — a nation that had long been a leader on cutting CO2 emissions before turning into a laggard in recent years and badly missing its reduction targets. Coal plants account for 40% of Germany’s electricity, itself a reduction from recent years when coal dominated power production.
...
The decision to quit coal follows an earlier bold energy policy move by the German government, which decided to shut down all of its nuclear power plants by 2022 in the wake of Japan’s Fukushima disaster in 2011.
...
Included in the recommendations was that the phase-out target be reviewed every three years. Also, the final deadline could be moved forward, if possible, by three years to 2035.

The initial targets are considerable, calling for a quarter of the country’s coal-burning plants with a capacity of 12.5 gigawatts to be shut down by 2022. That means about 24 plants will be shut within the first three years. By 2030, Germany should have about eight coal-burning plants remaining, producing 17 gigawatts of electricity, the commission said.
https://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-germany-coal-power-20190126-story.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

b_lumenkraft

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 818
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 167
  • Likes Given: 1011
Re: Coal
« Reply #1260 on: March 12, 2019, 02:10:34 PM »
We choose to go green...We choose to go green in the upcoming decades and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are necessary.

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Coal
« Reply #1261 on: March 22, 2019, 12:23:18 AM »
The following news article states that three-quarters of the coal projects planned in Japan in 2015 have been cancelled:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/18/energy-analysts-forecast-the-end-of-coal-in-asia-as-japanese-investors-back-renewables

Quote
Major Japanese investors, including those most indebted to coal, are seeking to back large-scale renewables projects across Asia, marking a “monumental” shift that energy market analysts say is “the start of the end for thermal coal”.

At the same time, Japanese banks and trading houses are walking away from coal investments, selling out of Australian mines and scrapping plans to build coal-fired power.

Japan is Australia’s largest export customer for thermal coal. Of the proposed pipeline of coal power projects in Japan in 2015, figures from the Global Coal Plant tracker show three-quarters are now unlikely to proceed.

The most recent proposal likely to be shelved, a 1.3GW coal-fired power station in Akita, in Japan’s north-west coastal region, follows the cancellation of two others earlier this year. Sojitz Corporation this week announced further divestment from thermal coal, following Itochu announcing a coal exit last month, and Mitsui in November.

So where how will Japan get it's energy?

Quote
Sources in the Asian renewable and energy finance sectors say Japanese banks, trading houses and two prominent state-backed enterprises – the Japan Bank for International Cooperation and Japan International Cooperation Agency – have in recent months expressed their intention to invest more heavily in the renewables sector.

The increased interest in renewables comes, notably, from investors and companies with existing exposure to coal. Demand for electricity in Japan is declining, as the population declines. In that market, coal appears to be crowded out by additional capacity provided by nuclear restarts, solar and other renewables.

Other developers have their eyes on Akita, which is next to the Sea of Japan, as a site for offshore wind developments.

Across Japan, 13 offshore wind projects are undergoing environmental impact assessments, with the total investment opportunities worth up to 2 trillion yen (A$25bn), according to Mizuho Bank estimates published this week.

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4469
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 141
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1262 on: March 22, 2019, 04:54:24 AM »
"Japan is Australia’s largest export customer for thermal coal. Of the proposed pipeline of coal power projects in Japan in 2015, figures from the Global Coal Plant tracker show three-quarters are now unlikely to proceed."

Yeehaa. Adnani going downnnn.

sidd

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1263 on: March 23, 2019, 11:42:46 PM »
And Australia's other big customer is China, who they just pissed off royally over Huawei. The Aussies seem to be just as stupid as my wonderful Canadian government!

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1264 on: March 24, 2019, 09:06:00 PM »
The story of coal is a tale of two worlds with climate action policies and economic forces leading to closing coal power plants in some countries, while coal continues to play a part in securing access to affordable energy in others. - IEA

"One planet, two coal worlds. Since 2015, we have observed that coal’s shift to Asia, and the
emergence of two worlds – one with coal power generation and the other without it, would make it
difficult to build agreements on coal and emission reductions. This became more evident when the
United Kingdom and Canada launched the Powering Past Coal Alliance, which has been joined by
more than 20 countries, as well as states, provinces, municipalities and businesses, who have
committed to end unabated coal power generation by 2030. Today, coal used for power generation
in the countries that have joined the Alliance accounts for less than 2% of global coal consumption. In many other countries, however, the end of coal generation is not envisaged given the role that coal plays for securing access to affordable energy."

"The unmatched period of coal power generation growth in India is set to continue. Coal power generation in India has grown continuously since 1974. With the Indian economy expected to grow over 8% per year to 2023 and the electrification process continuing, power demand is forecast to rise by more than 5% per year over the period. The large-scale ongoing renewable expansion and the use of supercritical technology in new coal power plants will slow coal demand growth, which will grow by less than 4% per year through 2023, compared to over 6% on average per year in the past decade. Outside the power sector, economic growth and infrastructure development will increase coal consumption in steel and cement production.

South and Southeast Asia are the second engine of growth. Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh,
Philippines and Viet Nam combined have more than 800 million people, with an average annual
per capita electricity consumption of just over 800 kWh, one-seventh that of EU28. Increasing coal
power generation, supported by new coal plants under construction, will be the main driver of coal
demand growth in those countries. In other countries with higher per capita electricity use, like
Malaysia and the United Arab Emirates, new coal plants are largely due to energy mix diversification policies. Southeast Asia has the fastest growth in coal demand at over 5% per year through 2023, although India, with almost 150 Mtce of additional demand, supports the largest absolute growth."

"India, Korea, and above all, China hold the key. The future of coal imports remains tied to South and Southeast Asia. For India, where the progress observed in coal production and transportation will not be not sufficient to reduce imports, we have revised our forecast for thermal imports upward. Growth is also expected in Korea, Viet Nam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Pakistan and others. By contrast, imports to Europe decline over time. Overall, the market depends on China, whose sheer size and changing policies give it a unique potential to swing imports from one year to the other. Whereas the arbitrage between domestic and imported prices in coastal areas is relevant, policies (for instance import quotas, port caps, taxes, and quality tests) are also important.

Australia recovers its leadership in export markets, but Indonesia follows closely. In our forecast, Indonesian exports decline, pushed by increasing domestic demand and lower prices, leaving Australia as the largest exporter in the world. This could change if prices rise as Indonesian producers have a proven record to ramp up production whenever prices are attractive. We forecast increasing exports from the Russian Federation, which is ramping up export infrastructure and targeting the Asian markets. Our forecast for US coal exports has not changed much compared to 2017. Abundant cheap gas and renewable expansion will continue to squeeze domestic coal power generation, and exports will depend on prices prevailing in the international markets, as the United States remains a swing supplier."

https://webstore.iea.org/download/summary/2415?fileName=English-Coal-2018-ES.pdf

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1265 on: March 24, 2019, 09:16:54 PM »
China's coal consumption on the rise

China's economy growing too fast to provide a reduction in the absolute usage of coal, even though there is a relative decline versus other energy sources and per unit of GDP. The under 58% target for coal's share of energy in 2020 can be met with rising coal usage combined with continued economic growth.

"The new 2018 data also showed a 7.7% increase in electricity generation and a 8.5% increase in total electricity use. These are new highs since the economic slowdown started in 2012, and outstrip the year’s GDP growth of 6.6%."

"In 2018, coal accounted for 59% of China’s total energy consumption, 1.4 percentage points down on the previous year and the first time coal has accounted for less than 60% of primary energy. Clean energy, which in China includes natural gas alongside hydro, solar and wind, accounted for 22.1% of total energy consumption, up by 1.3 percentage points.

China is expected to reach its 13th Five Year Plan goal of reducing coal to under 58% of total energy consumption in 2020."

https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/11107-China-s-coal-consumption-on-the-rise

Juan C. García

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1137
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 282
  • Likes Given: 382
Re: Coal
« Reply #1266 on: March 26, 2019, 02:33:29 AM »
In blow to climate, coal plants emitted more than ever in 2018
Quote
Energy demand around the world grew by 2.3 percent over the past year, marking the most rapid increase in a decade, according to the report from the International Energy Agency. To meet that demand, largely fueled by a booming economy, countries turned to an array of sources, including renewables.
But nothing filled the void quite like fossil fuels, which satisfied nearly 70 percent of the skyrocketing electricity demand, according to the agency, which analyzes energy trends on behalf of 30 member countries, including the United States.
In particular, a fleet of relatively young coal plants located in Asia, with decades to go on their lifetimes, led the way toward a new record for emissions from coal fired power plants — exceeding 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide “for the first time," the agency said. In Asia, “average plants are only 12 years old, decades younger than their average economic lifetime of around 40 years,” the agency found.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/03/26/blow-climate-coal-plants-emitted-more-than-ever/?utm_term=.61fffb87e2b1
Which is the best answer to Sep-2012 ASI lost (compared to 1979-2000)?
50% [NSIDC Extent] or
73% [PIOMAS Volume]

Volume is harder to measure than extent, but 3-dimensional space is real, 2D's hide ~50% thickness gone.
-> IPCC/NSIDC trends [based on extent] underestimate the real speed of ASI lost.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Coal
« Reply #1267 on: March 29, 2019, 12:02:47 AM »
U.S.:  Idaho Utility Spurns Coal, Pledges 100 Percent 'Clean' Energy By 2045
Quote
Idaho Power plans to stop using coal energy and rely instead on hydroelectric, solar and wind resources, the utility says. The utility vows that 100 percent of energy will come from "clean" sources by 2045. Utility companies have made similar pledges in only a handful of states.

Idaho Power customers increasingly see clean energy that doesn't rely on carbon dioxide-producing fossil fuels as a priority, the company says.

"We believe this goal is attainable," Idaho Power President and CEO Darrel Anderson said in announcing the plan.

Idaho Power says it has already agreed to stop using two coal power plants by 2025 and that it's considering how to shut down its third and final coal plant.

"The company that serves over half-a-million customers calls the effort 'Clean Today, Cleaner Tomorrow,' " member station Boise State Public Radio reports. "Nearly 50 percent of the electricity the company currently generates comes from hydro power. About a fifth comes from coal."

As it announced the news, Idaho Power also said it has reached a deal to buy electricity from a 120-megawatt solar farm, which will be built south of Twin Falls. That facility is still in the planning phase, and the deal will require state regulators' approval. ...
https://www.npr.org/2019/03/27/707225124/idaho-utility-spurns-coal-pledges-100-percent-clean-energy-by-2045
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1268 on: April 01, 2019, 02:58:52 AM »
China boosts coal mining capacity despite climate pledges - Reuters

In 2018 added 194 million tonnes of coal mining capacity, to 3.53 billion tonnes capacity. This excludes 370 million tonnes under trial operation and another 1.03 billion tonnes under construction.

As imports are only 270 million tonnes per year, China could replace all imports and still grow overall coal usage - maybe to power the rapid growth in the numbers of EV's. Not good news for Australia, nor the planet.

Quote
China added 194 million tonnes of coal mining capacity in 2018, data from the energy bureau showed on Tuesday, despite vows to eliminate excess capacity in the sector and to reduce fossil fuel consumption.

Total coal mining capacity in the country was at 3.53 billion tonnes per year by the end of 2018, according to a statement from the National Energy Administration (NEA). That compares to 3.34 billion tonnes at the end of 2017.

The NEA said that excludes 1.03 billion tonnes per year of approved coal capacity currently under construction and 370 million tonnes per year under trial operation.

Additionally, the NEA has approved another seven coal mining projects with a combined capacity of 22.5 million tonnes per year since the beginning of 2019.

However, the total amount of coal mines in China declined to 3,373 in 2018 from 3,907 in 2017, the NEA said in the statement, as Beijing has been phasing out small and ineffective coal mines in eastern regions and expanding capacity in the west

The increasing coal capacity has stirred concerns it will undermine efforts to cut the share of coal in total energy use, and that China will be unable to keep its commitment of capping climate-warming carbon emissions by around 2030.

China produced 3.55 billion tonnes of coal in 2018, up 5.2 percent from a year ago, while generating 4.979 trillion kilowatt-hours of electricity from coal-fired power plants, up 6 percent from the 2017 level, data from the National Bureau of Statistics showed
.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-energy-coal/china-boosts-coal-mining-capacity-despite-climate-pledges-idUSKCN1R712Z

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Coal
« Reply #1269 on: April 02, 2019, 12:35:51 AM »
Australia:  QBE to curtail thermal coal risks by 2030
Quote
QBE, Australia’s largest coal insurer, will stop insuring new thermal coal mines, power plants and transport networks from July, and will shut down its thermal coal underwriting business by 2030.

In addition, over the weekend, the global insurer announced that it will withdraw all direct investment in companies that generate more than 30% of their revenue from thermal coal from July 1, and introduce a 0.5% limit on indirect investments through managed funds.

The decision will bring QBE in line with the international Unfriend Coal movement, which wants to make coal uninsurable. QBE joins 10 other insurance firms to abandon thermal coal, joining the likes of Allianz, Axa XL, Generali and Munich Re.

Over the past 18 months the company has come under increasing pressure from activist investors over its coal underwriting business.

QBE’s definition of a thermal coal company is one that receives more than 30% of its revenue from thermal coal, or a power company that uses coal to generate more than 30% of its energy. ...
https://insuranceasianews.com/qbe-to-curtail-thermal-coal-risks-by-2030/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Coal
« Reply #1270 on: April 02, 2019, 12:42:31 AM »
rboyd seems to emphasize the negative and overlook the good news on coal from around the world.  That's getting a lot harder to do, as the following article (from Forbes, not know as a bunch of bleeding heart liberals) demonstrates:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/03/28/report-new-coal-power-projects-are-in-decline-across-the-world-infographic/#7a35f0f36298

Quote
The number of coal-fired power plants under development across the world fell sharply for the third year in a row in 2018. According to a new report from the Global Energy Monitor, Greenpeace India and the Sierra Club, there was a 20% drop in newly commissioned coal power capacity since 2017, a 24% drop in pre-construction activity and a 39% fall in new construction starts. Since 2015, the number of newly-completed coal power plants fell 53% while the number of new construction starts plunged 84%.

Quote
The following infographic provides an overview of coal power's global decline with planned capacity in pre-construction status declining from 1,090 GW in 2015 to just 339 GW in 2018. The biggest drops were recorded in India and China. The latter had plans to construct 515 GW of new coal power capacity at the end of 2015 and that has now fallen to 70 GW, marking an 86% decline. The situation is similar in India where the pre-construction pipeline fell from 218 GW in 2015 to 36 GW last year - an 83% fall.

It isn't all good news in Asia, however, with new construction increasing 12% in China between 2017 and 2018. This is largely due to work resuming on 50 GW of coal power capacity which had been postponed by central government restrictions. When it comes to decommissioning old coal power plants, the United States led the way with retired capacity amounting to 17.6 GW - the second highest year for retirements after 2015 which saw 21 GW put out service. In total, 50.2 GW of new coal capacity was commissioned worldwide in 2018 while total retirements amounted to 31 GW. Even though the trends in pre-construction are overwhelmingly positive, the report warns that global climate goals cannot be met without a full halt in new coal plants and the retirement of existing ones.

Only 20GW of net additional capacity in coal generation was added world-wide last year.  It won't be very long (perhaps by 2020) when the generating capacity of new coal power plants installed is exceeded by the generating capacity of coal plants retired.  And the time when no new coal plants are built will probably be reached by 2025.  By the 2030s, most of the coal plants currently opeating will have been retired, unless someone can figure out an inexpensive way to capture the CO2 they emit and make something valuable out of it.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1271 on: April 02, 2019, 05:03:45 AM »
I wish that I could be more optimistic, but again and again when we dig beneath the "positive" headlines the underlying trend is very different. A big reason that the number of net new coal plants is declining is that India added a huge amount of capacity in the past few years, hence its low utilization rate (and therefore ability to burn a lot more coal with the current fleet). China also has a very low utilization rate.

When it comes to coal, what happens in China (over 50% of global coal usage) and India (over 11% of global coal usage) dwarfs everything else. The Rest of the World (14%) and Indonesia (2%) are also growing coal usage. So cuts in Europe and the USA (less than 9% of global coal usage) that hit the headlines get more than offset by the rest (Germany is only 2% and Poland 1% of global coal usage).

Much of the reduction in coal usage in the United States etc. is with natural gas, which is at least as bad as coal for climate change when the methane fugitive emissions and lack of climate cooling aerosols are taken into account.

Much, much more aggressive government action is required to move away from fossil fuels at the rate required.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2019, 05:10:59 AM by rboyd »

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Coal
« Reply #1272 on: April 03, 2019, 12:18:03 AM »
U.S.:   North Carolina orders Duke Energy to excavate all coal ash
Quote
The country’s largest electric company was ordered Monday to excavate coal ash from all of its North Carolina power plant sites, slashing the risk of toxic chemicals leaking into water supplies but potentially adding billions of dollars to the costs consumers pay.
...
The move means North Carolina joins Virginia and South Carolina in ordering its major electric utilities to move their coal ash out of unlined storage.

Monitoring data that U.S. electric utilities were required to report for the first time last year showed that of the 265 power plants reporting, nine out of 10 had contaminated groundwater with toxic substances at levels outstripping federal safety standards, Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project found. The advocacy groups ranked Duke Energy’s Allen power plant in Belmont the second-most contaminated in the county. ...
https://www.apnews.com/d8f3f4d6d07343ec8783f6ca144260be
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4469
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 141
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1273 on: April 03, 2019, 06:40:54 AM »
That's a really big bill, to move all that coal ash. I fear the utilities will bribe enuf people to get a rate increase outta the hides of their consumers.

sidd

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Coal
« Reply #1274 on: April 03, 2019, 02:36:20 PM »
That's a really big bill, to move all that coal ash. I fear the utilities will bribe enuf people to get a rate increase outta the hides of their consumers.

sidd

And just where will all that coal ash end up?  Farther away from the river, in “lined” storage?  That’s just kicking the can down the road:  in a decade or two the lining will fail (earlier than expected, because of extreme temperatures and precipitation caused by climate change) and the surrounding area and aquifers below it will be poisoned.  Sorry, kids!
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1275 on: April 03, 2019, 09:49:27 PM »
Coal in China may get additional support from the rapid growth of EV's, as this basically transfers energy usage from oil burnt in the cars to electricity - the majority of which is provided with coal burnt in electricity generating plants. The extra growth in electricity demand may end up burning more coal unless China rapidly accelerates its renewables growth.

With Chinese ICE cars having very high mpg versus North American cars, and the high percentage of coal in the electricity supply, the EV's won't affect the emissions trajectory very much without a decarbonizing of the electricity supply. The biggest benefit would be to reduce the growth in Chinese oil imports, which are highly at risk to interdiction or sanctions from the US, and replace that growth with domestic sourced electricity (coal or renewables). The Chinese are also building as many oil pipelines as possible to other countries to bypass the risky water-born traffic.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3385
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 149
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Coal
« Reply #1276 on: April 05, 2019, 10:15:08 PM »

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3385
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 149
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Coal
« Reply #1277 on: April 05, 2019, 10:17:39 PM »

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Coal
« Reply #1278 on: April 06, 2019, 12:05:12 AM »
In Colorado, state legislators are proposing financing mechanisms to retire coal plants well before their useful life ends and replace them with wind and solar power.

https://coloradosun.com/2019/02/26/house-bill-1037-colorado-coal-powerplants/

Quote
Across the U.S., coal plants continue to close under pressure of cheaper renewable and natural-gas generation. In 2018, a near-record year, 16 gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired capacity closed — the generating equivalent of almost 50 Comanche 1 units.

Quote
Another 4 GW of coal plants are forecast to close in 2019, according to the federal Energy Information Administration. On Feb. 19, Montana-Dakota Utilities said it was closing coal plants in Montana and North Dakota. The plants were “no longer cost competitive,” said Nicole Kivisto, the utility’s president.

Hansen’s bill would enable utilities looking to close power plants to use, with Colorado Public Utilities Commission approval, securitized bonds to pay for the closure and unrecovered capital cost of the units.

Because the bonds are backed, or secured, by customer revenues, they can command top credit ratings and therefore, lower interest rates. The difference between the existing repayment rate on the plant and the lower securitized bond creates a saving.

An analysis of how the bonding and impact fund would work was developed by Uday Varadarajan, a principal at the Rocky Mountain Institute, a non-profit energy think tank.

“For an asset retired 20 years before its scheduled retirement date, our analysis suggests that for every $100 million in unrecovered costs securitized, ratepayers can save roughly $35 million to $45 million … relative to business as usual,” Varadarajan said

On top of that, substituting cheaper wind and solar generation, which requires no fuel and has lower operating and maintenance costs, creates another saving, Varadarajan said.

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Coal
« Reply #1279 on: April 06, 2019, 12:17:17 AM »
The utility powering Detroit, MI is accelerating its plans to retire coal plants and is investing heavily in renewable energy to replace them.

https://www.energymanagertoday.com/dte-energy-coal-plant-retirements-0182070/

Quote
DTE Energy plans to retire two coal plants in Michigan in 2022, a year ahead of schedule. Besides steadily eliminating coal from its generation fleet, the Detroit-based energy company is investing $2 billion in renewables over the next five years.

The St. Clair Power Plant and the Trenton Channel Power Plant were initially supposed to be retired by 2023, but DTE moved up its carbon reduction commitment and accelerated the retirement plan. In addition, the River Rouge Power Plant will be retired in 2022. All three plants accounted for about a quarter of the electricity the utility produced in 2015.

Quote
Beyond the coal plant retirements, DTE wants to more than double its renewable energy production by 2024. Recently Ford and General Motors collaborated with DTE to procure wind power through the energy company’s MIGreenPower program aimed at helping businesses reach their sustainability goals by sourcing from wind and solar projects in the state.

DTE announced increased investments in energy efficiency and hydro energy storage. Although the company’s previous commitment was to reduce energy usage by 1.5% each year within their service area, that has increased to 1.75% — more than the state requires. This should help customers save more energy and money, DTE says.

Consumers Energy and DTE co-own Michigan’s Ludington pumped storage facility. An $800 million upgrade to the facility means protecting reliability because it functions like an enormous battery when renewable energy output drops. DTE says that project is on track to be completed next year.

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Coal
« Reply #1280 on: April 06, 2019, 12:41:54 AM »
This article from November 2018 explains why we're near peak coal consumption:

https://www.carbontracker.org/42-of-global-coal-power-plants-run-at-a-loss-finds-world-first-study/

Quote
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says at least 59% of coal power worldwide must be retired by 2030 to limit global warming to 1.5°C and many countries have set phase-out dates.

Powering down coal: Navigating the economic and financial risks in the last years of coal power and the portal are the result of a two-year modelling exercise. Carbon Tracker finds that:
•42% of global coal capacity is already unprofitable because of high fuel costs; by 2040 that could reach 72% as existing carbon pricing and air pollution regulations drive up costs while the price of onshore wind and solar power continues to fall; any future regulation would make coal power still more unprofitable;
•it costs more to run 35% of coal power plants than to build new renewable generation; by 2030 building new renewables will be cheaper than continuing to operate 96% of today’s existing and planned coal plants.
•China could save $389 billion by closing plants in line with the Paris Climate Agreement instead of pursuing business as usual plans; the EU could save $89 billion; the US could save $78 billion; and Russia could save $20 billion.

The article includes a table showing where renewables are already cheaper than coal and when they will be cheaper in other countries.


Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Coal
« Reply #1281 on: April 06, 2019, 01:00:04 AM »
Here's a website tracking coal plants under development.  While the list is still too high (there should be none) there's some good news on the website.

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/han-chen/questionable-future-overseas-coal-investments

Quote
Changes in Coal Investments in 2018

According to our analysis, in the latter half of 2018 the only major new coal project added to our pending list was the Power China International Energy Project in Limpopo, South Africa. President Ramaphosa agreed to the deal at the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) meeting held in Beijing in September 2018. The plan is to build a 4,600 MW plant over 6 years that will primarily power a Chinese-owned industrial park. Otherwise, while the 1200 MW Nghi Son 2 plant moved into financial close, others have remained stalled, or been put on hold. The Cirebon Phase 3 expansion, a 1000 MW project in Indonesia funded primarily by South Korean bank KEXIM, has not only been suspended, there are indications that it will be turned into a renewable energy project. An anonymous source within Korea Midland Power (KOMIPO) stated that this is because the Indonesian Government did not reflect the plant in its power supply and demand plan and that changes in the financial industry also played a role. The World Bank announced it was no longer considering the last coal project that was in its pipeline, the ContourGlobal coal project in Kosovo. Unfortunately, the company has turned to the United States’ Overseas Private Investment Corporation to try and secure funding for this project, even though OPIC’s Environmental and Social Policy Statement make it highly unlikely such a project could get funded, and it has been over 5 years since OPIC was involved with any coal projects.

In 2017, there was a high level of financing for coal projects. Our data through mid-2018 indicates that so far, there have been fewer coal projects publicly financed, but given the limited transparency of some of the financial institutions involved, there are potentially projects in 2018 (or earlier) which are not yet recorded in our database.

Bernard

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Coal
« Reply #1282 on: April 06, 2019, 01:40:05 AM »
If you dig into the data, it is hard not to be discouraged.

https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/coal.html

"World proved coal reserves are currently sufficient to meet 134 years of global production."
 >:(

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Coal
« Reply #1283 on: April 06, 2019, 03:17:52 PM »
U.S.:
Federal judge blocks potential path to viability for 2.3 GW Navajo coal plant
Quote
• On Sunday, an Arizona federal judge granted a motion to dismiss a lawsuit that sought to force a state water agency to buy coal-fired electricity.
• In a legal battle that began nearly a year ago, coal producer Peabody Energy, the Hopi Tribe and the labor union United Mine Workers of America tried to use the courts to pressure the Central Arizona Project (CAP) into returning as a potential buyer for the power of the plant in question, the Navajo Generating Station.
• The 2.3 GW coal plant is in danger of closing at the end of the year after difficulties to find a buyer for the plant's output. The plaintiffs have until April 19 to file an amended complaint.

Pressure from state policy to include more clean energy has complicated finding an extra buyer for the plant's output, further reducing the value of the asset to its current shareholders. Last fall, private equity firm Middle River Power dropped its bid to purchase the Arizona station, as regulators, utilities and legislators are increasingly choosing cheaper natural gas and renewables over baseload coal generation.

As another nail in the coffin of the largest coal-fired facility west of the Mississippi, the legislative branch of the Navajo Nation accepted a resolution on March 21 "to move the Navajo Nation beyond coal source revenues and forward to sustainable, renewable energy sources."
..
"Without a market-based transaction supported by the Navajo Nation to operate NGS after 2019, the Department will support decommissioning of the NGS facilities per the terms of the 2017 Extension Lease to minimize the impacts of a NGS closure," Molly Block, Interior spokesperson, told Utility Dive via email. ...
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/federal-judge-blocks-potential-path-to-viability-for-23-gw-navajo-coal-pla/551885/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Coal
« Reply #1284 on: April 06, 2019, 03:20:16 PM »
If you dig into the data, it is hard not to be discouraged.

https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/coal.html

"World proved coal reserves are currently sufficient to meet 134 years of global production."
 >:(

“The Stone Age did not end because they ran out of stones.”
 ;)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3385
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 149
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Coal
« Reply #1285 on: April 06, 2019, 07:40:56 PM »
In Colorado, state legislators are proposing financing mechanisms to retire coal plants well before their useful life ends and replace them with wind and solar power.

41 years ago, I proposed to my wife. There was no guarantee she would accept.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3385
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 149
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Coal
« Reply #1286 on: April 06, 2019, 07:52:13 PM »
The utility powering Detroit, MI is accelerating its plans to retire coal plants and is investing heavily in renewable energy to replace them.

DTE Energy plans to retire two coal plants in Michigan in 2022, a year ahead of schedule. Besides steadily eliminating coal from its generation fleet, the Detroit-based energy company is investing $2 billion in renewables over the next five years.

Emphasis mine...

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3385
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 149
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Coal
« Reply #1287 on: April 06, 2019, 08:01:03 PM »
This article from November 2018 explains why we're near peak coal consumption:

https://www.carbontracker.org/42-of-global-coal-power-plants-run-at-a-loss-finds-world-first-study/

Quote
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says at least 59% of coal power worldwide must be retired by 2030 to limit global warming to 1.5°C and many countries have set phase-out dates.

•China could save $389 billion by closing plants in line with the Paris Climate Agreement instead of pursuing business as usual plans; the EU could save $89 billion; the US could save $78 billion; and Russia could save $20 billion.

coulda, woulda, shoulda...

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3385
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 149
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Coal
« Reply #1288 on: April 06, 2019, 08:11:43 PM »
I realize I sound dismissive and flippant in my last three comments. Actually, everything Ken Feldman has posted is good news. It is simply that the only news that matters is the hard data around actual fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.

Is renewable generation of electricity growing rapidly? Absolutely!

Is this having a impact on the consumption of coal? Not quickly enough.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2019, 08:19:51 PM by Shared Humanity »

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3385
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 149
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Coal
« Reply #1289 on: April 06, 2019, 08:26:41 PM »
If we look at the above chart, how long will it take us to get back to the level of coal consumption that we had in 2002?

I'm not sure.

And is getting to this level sufficient to avoid catastrophic climate change?

Definitely not.

I will continue to read about all of the positive developments around energy here but the thing I will focus my undivided attention on is the results...fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1290 on: April 07, 2019, 12:15:42 AM »
China’s power industry calls for hundreds of new coal power plants by 2030

Looks like possible backsliding by China, what happens to this proposal will be very interesting.

Quote
The largest power producers in China have asked the government to allow for the development of between 300 and 500 new coal power plants by 2030 in a move that could single-handedly jeopardise global climate change targets.

It comes as coal-fired power capacity additions in 2018 slowed to their lowest rate since 2004, both in China and globally, though carbon emissions from the sector continued to rise, according to the International Energy Agency.

In its review of the government’s five-year-plan, China Electricity Council (CEC) – the influential industry body representing China’s power industry – recommended adopting a ‘cap’ for coal power capacity by 2030 — but the 1300GW limit proposed is 290GW higher than current capacity. The target is for the country’s coal-fired capacity to continue to grow until peaking in 2030.

The cap would enable China to build 2 large coal power stations a month for the next 12 years, and grow the country’s capacity by an amount nearly twice the size of Europe’s total coal capacity.

If this happens it could single-handedly end any chance of keeping global warming below 1.5C, and also conflicts with the 2C target, with even a conservative analysis of the goal requiring that China cut its coal capacity by roughly 200GW by 2030.

The Chinese government has not adopted the industry proposal, but it is under consideration.

https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2019/03/28/china-new-coal-plants-2030-climate/

Sleepy

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1164
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 121
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1291 on: April 07, 2019, 09:41:35 AM »
I will continue to read about all of the positive developments around energy here but the thing I will focus my undivided attention on is the results...fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.
That's a very wise approach SH.

Since we all know how 2018 ended (emissions wise), here's a nice and simple animation of our collective climate actions since 1965 by Robert Wilson:
https://twitter.com/countcarbon/status/1112430555021434882

Also noticeable are the disturbances caused by economic crises.

A well spent half an hour:
Just popped in to post this nice(?) podcast with Glen Peters (one of the lead authors in WG6-AR3-Ch3):
https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/energy-policy-now/hard-look-negative-emissions

And, the Fossil Age did not end because they ran out of fossil fuels. Neither did the Stone Age of course. We are using insanely much more stones and fossil fuels today.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1292 on: April 07, 2019, 08:23:50 PM »
Excellent Glen Peters podcast on negative emissions, thanks Sleepy. Looks like CCS will not die, as it is about the only way to reconcile fossil-fuel driven economic growth with the need to deal with climate change. Shame that it works more in the political discourse sense than in reality. Am looking forward to the expanding propaganda on "clean coal" and the "circular CO2 economy" /sarc.

If I understand correctly there needs to be a massive-scale rollout of CCS (with coal, with bio-energy etc.) starting at the latest from 2030. Currently, there is no successful (i.e. commercially viable without supporting fossil fuel exploration that negates the climate benefits and capturing the vast majority of the CO2) CCS plant in operation.


Sleepy

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1164
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 121
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1293 on: April 08, 2019, 06:51:53 AM »
Since the world refutes the simple solution of reducing fossil fuel usage, RCP2.6 (and Paris) is dead. Unless someone can explain how to suck +40GT out of the atmosphere annually, starting now.

Adding fig 2.13 from AMAP2017:
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 124
Re: Coal
« Reply #1294 on: April 09, 2019, 07:52:22 PM »
New Wind and Solar Power Is Cheaper Than Existing Coal in Much of the U.S., Analysis Finds
Coal-fired power plants in the Southeast and Ohio Valley stand out. In all, 74% of coal plants cost more to run than building new wind or solar, analysts found.
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/25032019/coal-energy-costs-analysis-wind-solar-power-cheaper-ohio-valley-southeast-colorado
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1295 on: April 10, 2019, 09:52:31 PM »
New Wind and Solar Power Is Cheaper Than Existing Coal in Much of the U.S., Analysis Finds
Coal-fired power plants in the Southeast and Ohio Valley stand out. In all, 74% of coal plants cost more to run than building new wind or solar, analysts found.
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/25032019/coal-energy-costs-analysis-wind-solar-power-cheaper-ohio-valley-southeast-colorado

A quote from the article:

Quote
William Nelson, a co-author of the BloombergNEF report, says he is leery of comparing the costs of building new wind and solar to the costs of operating existing coal plants because a coal plant is capable of running around the clock, which makes it a different type of resource than wind and solar unless there is large-scale battery storage.

Any price needs to be adjusted for Quality of Service (QoS) characteristics, which will be a problem until very large scale batteries are available for the periods when wind and solar aren't providing much electricity (unless there is a lot of hydroelectricity available). We won't be there for a while, and that battery cost will have to be built into the price. A non-QoS adjusted price is simply misleading. In addition, there will be the non-depreciated cost of the coal plant to be written off. Probably not much of an issue in the US with its ageing fleet of coal plants, but could be quite an issue for other countries.

We are getting there just not at the pace that such overly-optimistic articles would have is believe.


rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1296 on: April 11, 2019, 07:25:51 PM »
Coal in India Adjusting to Transition - Brookings Institute

Quote
Coal provides about half of India’s commercial primary energy supply today and is the dominant fuel for power production in India. In 2014, Prime Minister Narendra Modi established ambitious goals for renewable energy (RE) development, aiming to quadruple its capacity by 2022. Despite expected growth in RE, we project that coal will remain the dominant fuel for electricity generation in India through 2030 and beyond, even though its share of generation will fall. Although coal will continue to dominate power supply, the coal industry in India faces significant challenges and upcoming change.

https://www.brookings.edu/research/coal-in-india/

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1297 on: April 11, 2019, 09:13:53 PM »
India Draft National Energy Policy

This is the 2017 draft, still awaiting cabinet approval.

In 2040: solar 14-18%/3-5% and wind 9-11%/2-3% of electricity generation/commercial energy usage; oil 25-27% and gas 8-9% of commercial energy usage; coal 44-50% of commercial energy usage. The share of fossil fuels falls to 78% in 2040 (from 81% in 2012), overall energy usage more than doubles - so oil and gas usage more than doubles in absolute terms, and coal nearly doubles.

Very depressing document, hopefully the actual outcome is a lot better than this. It does show the issue in a country with rapidly expanding energy usage (which will still be much lower per capita in India with respect to Europe and North America); increases in renewables are eaten up by growth in energy consumption rather than reducing fossil fuel usage. Even with a much faster rate of growth in renewables and electrification of transport, Indian emissions could be rising into 2040.

Quote
Energy mix
In an increased electricity share, while in the immediate run-up towards universal
coverage of electricity it may not be viable to tap rooftop solar for homes, but by
2040 it would have become the norm. The share of solar and wind is expected to be
14-18% and 9-11% in electricity, and 3-5% and 2-3% in the primary commercial
energy mix respectively. The advent of EVs will have helped curb a rise in share of
oil and environment friendly gas would substitute oil in many uses. However, the
share of oil and gas would have almost maintained their shares of 26% and 6.5% in
2015-16 to 25-27% and 8-9% in 2040, respectively. In spite of a more than three
times increase in gas consumption, owing to large increase in total energy, the
increase in gas would be less in percentage terms. While coal would have risen in
absolute terms (nearly double), but in relative terms, it would have reduced its
contribution from 58% in 2015 to 44-50% in 2040. The overall share of fossil
fuels would have come down from 81% in 2012 to 78% in ambitious pathway in
2040.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1298 on: April 12, 2019, 06:18:23 PM »
China's coal consumption to rise to 3.89 bln tonnes in 2019 - China National Coal Association President

I suppose that we can be thankful that it's only a very small rise (3.87 billion tonnes to 3.89 billion tonnes), but means Chinese emissions will increase again with more oil and natural gas being burned. I certainly hope that the rise is no worse than that.

Quote
China’s coal consumption is set to rise slighly to 3.89 billion tonnes in 2019 from 3.87 billion tonnes last year, the president of the China National Coal Association said

https://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFB9N20600M

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Coal
« Reply #1299 on: April 19, 2019, 07:38:18 PM »
Here's an article on the latest projects for coal power plant retirements in the US.

https://www.axios.com/renewables-are-pulling-ahead-in-formerly-coal-heavy-states-65546b59-c3f3-4ebb-b7b5-5a5a84dc4af9.html

Quote
Thanks to the declining costs of wind and solar energy, Idaho, Colorado, New Mexico and other states have made plans to retire old coal plants early — paving the way for deeper penetration of clean energy.

The big picture: At least 36 gigawatts (GW) of the country's 260 GW of existing coal generation are forecast to close by 2024, continuing the trend from last year's record 15 GW of coal retirements. These transitions are often moving ahead without political pressure and in states that lack renewable energy mandates.

Context: Coal plant retirements are likely to accelerate in the years ahead, even in the absence of federal climate policy efforts associated with a Renewable Portfolio Standard or the Green New Deal, according to a recent study from Energy Innovation.
•In 2018, 74% of the existing U.S. coal fleet was at risk, meaning plants could be replaced with new local wind or solar for less than their coal operational costs. By 2025, at-risk coal increases to 86% of the country's fleet.
•In 2018, 93 GW of existing U.S. coal capacity was substantially at risk from new wind and solar, meaning that building local renewables costs at least 25% less than existing coal operations. By 2025, substantially at-risk coal increases to 140 GW of the current 260 GW in operation.