Quantcast
Environmental News for a Healthier Planet and Life

Exposing the 'War on Coal' Charade

Energy

Media Matters for America

By Shauna Theel

Following the nomination of Gina McCarthy to head the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), conservative media are once again claiming that the Obama administration's U.S. EPA has waged a "war on coal." But that narrative ignores how natural gas has outcompeted coal, and why the long-overdue Clean Air Act regulations on coal are necessary in the first place. Here's what the public should know, as told in charts and graphics:

Low natural gas prices are behind the drop in coal power.

As this chart shows, the boom in shale natural gas production has led to a drop in the price of natural gas—in the free marketplace, many coal plants simply can't compete.

[Source: CO2 Scorecard based on EIA data, August 2012]

Clean Air Act regulations are long-overdue.

George H.W. Bush's EPA administrator acknowledged that the Obama administration inherited several court-mandated rules from previous administrations, calling them "grenades" that required action. For instance, this timeline put together by energy giant Dynegy shows that the Mercury and Air Toxics rule issued under the Obama administration underwent a "thorough and lengthy development process." The 1990 Clean Air Act amendments required that the EPA study mercury and other emissions. In 2005, the EPA issued its final rule for controlling mercury that the Bush administration's own lawyers reportedly said would "almost certainly be reversed" by the courts. After the courts indeed reversed it, the burden of complying with the requirement to regulate mercury fell to the Obama administration:

[Source: Dynegy via SEC, January 2013]

Coal has huge health impacts even after decades of regulation in the U.S.

In countries like China and India where coal is not as strictly regulated, coal pollution is extremely deadly. Meanwhile, in the U.S., harmful emissions have been significantly reduced, a fact that conservative media and the coal industry have used to tout coal's alleged cleanliness. But they often fail to mention that the industry only reduced its emissions after being required to by clean air standards, and that coal still has huge health impacts. The following chart details some of the known and quantifiable health impacts of pollution from coal plants:

[Source: Rocky Mountain Institute based on Clean Air Task Force data, 2010]

These health impacts have huge economic costs.

After studying 406 coal-fired power plants in the U.S., the National Academy of Sciences concluded in 2009 that they were causing approximately $62 billion in societal damages, not including their contribution to climate change. The vast majority of damages were related to adverse health effects, but the report found that coal plants also do harm to agriculture and outdoor recreation.

[Source: National Academy of Sciences, 2010]

But coal plants are not paying for these costs.

Two economists, including one who spoke at the right-wing Heartland Institute's conference on climate change, published a study in the prestigious American Economic Review finding that the gross external damages (GED), or the amount of external costs that an industry imposes on society through pollution and other harm, was higher for coal-fired power plants than for any other industry, and that these plants "are responsible for more than one-fourth of GED from the entire US economy." As the GED costs of the coal power industry were greater than the value it added to the economy, the study concluded that coal may actually be "underregulated"—and therefore only superficially "cheap."

[Source: American Economic Review study, chart created by Media Matters] 

And that's not even including the damage coal plants do to the climate.

That same study found that coal plants do an additional $15 billion in damage to the economy through carbon emissions that contribute to climate change, using a conservative calculation of the cost of carbon. Indeed the carbon emissions of lignite coal and black coal per kilowatt-hour produced are far more than the emissions of any other power source:

[Source: Josh Nelson based on OECD/NEA data, February 2010]

And worldwide, the huge amounts of coal reserves are poised to bust the carbon budget more than any other fossil fuel. There are already major projects underway to exploit these resources, rather than leaving them in the ground.

[Source: NPR based on World Resources Institute's Climate Analysis Indicators tool, December 2011]

The Obama administration has made significant investments to try to make coal "cleaner."

The following chart shows that the stimulus devoted far more funding for demonstration projects to Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), projects that would try to advance thus-far elusive "clean coal" by capturing its huge carbon emissions and burying them underground, than similar projects for solar energy. The Energy Innovation Tracker report that this chart came from called demonstration projects "crucial" because they are "often expensive and underfunded by the private sector," a phenomenon known as the "commercialization valley of death." In total the stimulus devoted $3.4 billion to CCS. That is less than it appropriated for renewable generation overall, but it is nevertheless a significant investment in technology that could enable coal power to be compatible with a low-carbon future—a far cry from waging a "war" on the energy source.

[Source: Energy Innovation Tracker report, March 2013]

Visit EcoWatch’s COAL page for more related news on this topic.

——–

Click here to tell Congress to Expedite Renewable Energy.

 

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

By Fino Menezes

Everyone adores dolphins. Intelligent, inquisitive and playful, these special creatures have captivated humans since the dawn of time. But dolphins didn't get to where they are by accident — they needed to develop some pretty amazing superpowers to cope with their environment.

Read More Show Less
Protesters face off against security during the Dakota Access Pipeline protests. ROBYN BECK / AFP / Getty Images

In just two weeks, three states have passed laws criminalizing protests against fossil fuel infrastructure.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
Donald Trump and Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, listen to White House coronavirus response coordinator Deborah Birx speak in the Rose Garden for the daily coronavirus briefing at the White House on March 29, 2020 in Washington, DC. Tasos Katopodis / Getty Images

President Donald Trump has bowed to the advice of public health experts and extended social distancing measures designed to slow the spread of the new coronavirus till at least April 30.

Read More Show Less
Pexels

By Charli Shield

At unsettling times like the coronavirus outbreak, it might feel like things are very much out of your control. Most routines have been thrown into disarray and the future, as far as the experts tell us, is far from certain.

Read More Show Less
Pie Ranch in San Mateo, California, is a highly diverse farm that has both organic and food justice certification. Katie Greaney

By Elizabeth Henderson

Farmworkers, farmers and their organizations around the country have been singing the same tune for years on the urgent need for immigration reform. That harmony turns to discord as soon as you get down to details on how to get it done, what to include and what compromises you are willing to make. Case in point: the Farm Workforce Modernization Act (H.R. 5038), which passed in the House of Representatives on Dec. 11, 2019, by a vote of 260-165. The Senate received the bill the next day and referred it to the Committee on the Judiciary, where it remains. Two hundred and fifty agriculture and labor groups signed on to the United Farm Workers' (UFW) call for support for H.R. 5038. UFW President Arturo Rodriguez rejoiced:

Read More Show Less