BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

The Clean Power Plan Ignores Clean Coal Success -- and Our Real Chance to Lead the World

Following
This article is more than 8 years old.

The demonstrated success of technology in the energy business means all energy sources must be allowed to compete in our goal to expand our economy, advance energy security, and improve the environment. The Obama administration's Clean Power Plan (CPP) not only downplays the critical role of coal but also the constant evolution of clean coal technology. But, coal has been the basis of electric power since its inception. Historically, coal has provided some 50% of U.S. electricity for measurable reasons:

  • "Energy Security:" at 265 billion tons, the U.S. has a leading 27% of the world’s coal, a 265-year supply in proven reserves alone. Even beyond how then-Senator Barack Obama put it in 2008, "we're the Saudi Arabia of coal," we actually have more energy in our vast coal reserves alone than Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Iran, and Russia have combined for oil.
  • Availability/Reliability: coal is our most widely distributed energy resource, found in 38 states. We have an immense network to deliver coal, and because coal can be stored on power generation site, it's readily available: coal is a baseload, 24/7 source that provided over 90% of incremental U.S. electricity during the very challenging Polar Vortex of 2014. To illustrate the reliability, coal in 2014 was just 28% of U.S. power generation capacity, but actually supplied 39% of electricity.
  • More Affordable: coal is our most affordable source of electricity, and providing 50% and more of electricity kept our prices low until 2005. Anti-coal policies have helped push coal’s share to around 35-38% since then, and the U.S. Electricity Price Index continues to break record highs. Residential rates reached a record high 12.5 cents/kWh in 2014, while poverty soared to nearly 50 million. The health benefits of more affordable energy from coal go conveniently ignored: disposable income is the leading indicator of our health.

Clean coal technology works. By reducing the amount of fuel for a given electricity output, higher efficiency for coal plants is among the most predictable, lowest cost methods of reducing all emissions including CO2. A 1% increase in efficiency equals a 2% reduction in such emissions such as CO2, NOx, SO2, and particulate matter. Highly efficient modern supercritical and ultra-supercritical coal plants emit almost 40% less CO2 than subcritical plants, according to the World Energy Council.

The overall thermal efficiency of some older, smaller units can be 30%, but new plants can now achieve overall thermal efficiencies in the 43-46% range, and efficiencies of 47-50% are achievable with currently developed materials. Raising the efficiency from 33% to 40% would deliver the equivalent environmental benefit, every year, of reducing India's CO2 emissions to zero. Since 1990 alone, the U.S. coal industry has invested $120 billion to reduce emissions, to very impressive results.

More U.S Coal-Based Electricity: Supporting More Americans, Higher Personal Incomes, and Fewer Emissions

Sources: JTC; EPA; EIA

As opposed to "leading the world," U.S. policies deliberately adverse to coal and advancing coal technologies have very negative unintended environmental consequences. New Source emission rules in President Obama's CPP make it nearly impossible to build a new coal plant without carbon capture and storage (CCS), an evolving technology but one that is not yet commercially viable.

In other words, the CPP is unfairly applying a technology standard that can't be met.

The International Energy Agency is quite clear: "CCS must be deployed to make deep cuts in CO2 emissions," and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports that the absence of CCS as a carbon mitigation tool would increase costs by nearly 140%. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology deems CCS a "critical enabling technology." And since captured carbon can be safely stored in the ground to make it easier to extract oil, we will continually be adding "utilization" to CCS, making it the more economical CCUS.

Developing nations constitute a rising 83% of the world's population. The largest of these countries are overwhelmingly "coal-based" and will be responsible for nearly all of the world's incremental coal use. China and India will make up about 80% of incremental coal demand based on their ongoing urbanization and modernization. Indeed, Non-OECD Asia consumes 65% of the world's coal, 5.3 billions tons a year. Coal in the region is 55% of all energy and nearly 70% of all electricity. Considering that Non-OECD Asia's economy is growing by a healthy 5-7% per year, coal demand can only substantially increase.

No matter what energy policies the U.S. adopts, the use of coal will continue to mount. The National Academy of Sciences documents the “Drivers for the renaissance of coal” (see here). More than 2,100 new coal plants are planned or are under construction worldwide. These plants will operate for 40 years and longer. Supporting state-of-the art technologies that improve their performance and reduce emissions is crucial.

Encouraging more supercritical and ultra-supercritical steam cycle technologies is the key first step along a pathway to near-zero emissions from coal with CCUS. Indeed, any anti-coal position in the U.S. continually works to undermine a variety of clean coal partnerships that we have with both China and India, coal-based economies that will constitute 70% of incremental CO2 emissions through 2040.

Supporting, not thwarting, the development of clean coal technology is our real chance to "lead the world."

Coal Expected to Overtake Oil as World’s Largest Energy Source by 2025

Source: Wood Mackenzie