Month: June 2014

One of the least talked about aspects of the coal vs climate discussion is whether the continued use of coal is even an option for the future under any scenario.  US Geological survey data suggests that current coal supplies fall far short of the oft quoted “200 year supply”.

Leslie Glustrom sends this update to the “War on Coal”:

As the Environmental Protection Agency moves ahead with limits on carbon pollution from the nation’s coal plants, you’ll hear a lot of industry outrage about “Obama’s War on Coal.” Don’t believe it.
The truth is, the US coal industry is already in dire straits—and it is due primarily to geology—not politics.
Coal is a quintessential non-renewable substance; the easily accessible deposits have been mined over the last 150 years and the planet isn’t making any more on a time scale that matters to humans.

As a result, the US coal industry is in serious financial distress—right now—months, and likely years, before any EPA carbon regulations actually go into effect.
Importantly, even if the EPA were to be eliminated tomorrow (not something I advocate), the US coal industry would still likely be largely winding down in the next decade or so—the result of geology, not politics.

As the remaining coal has become more difficult and expensive to mine, coal prices to electric utilities have increased significantly over the last decade, but these price increases have not been enough to keep coal company profit margins healthy.

In addition, the large profit margins that were available for coal sales in China in recent years are no longer buoying the coal industry as China’s economy slows and China has made impressive commitments to developing its own wind and solar resources and strong opposition has mounted to exporting of US coal to Asian countries.

The truth about the US coal industry can be found by reading the coal company’s own financial statements filed as “10-K” reports annually with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) as well as quarterly “10-Q” reports, all available from the coal company’s websites.

Here are some facts you can learn from reviewing the current finances of the US coal companies:

Continue reading “Geology’s War on Coal”

Today’s news will be dominated by discussion of new carbon regulations proposed by the Obama administration.  My contribution is to summarize the most recent evidence for why those regs are needed today, if not 25 years ago.

Bud Ward at Yale Climate Connections:

It’s not often that a scientific research paper generates the kind of media attention and scientific community buzz that resulted from a recent study on the apparent inevitability of substantial Antarctic glacial melting.
The early May research headed by lead author Eric Rignot of NASA called attention to melting now under way in Antarctica that CBS News anchor Scott Pelley reported “cannot be stopped.”

“Scientists say the situation is almost certainly unstoppable,” NBC News Anchor Brian Mitchell reported.

Rignot cautioned that the research indicates “we’ve passed the point of no return … It’s just a matter of time before these glaciers disappear to the sea.” While he indicated that the full melt, at the current pace, might not occur for two centuries, he pointed too to evidence suggesting the likelihood of an accelerating pace.

“There’s probably nothing that can be done to stop this,” Rignot said.

“This is really happening,” lead NASA lead polar ice researcher Tom Wagner said. “This weak underbelly of Antarctica is in fact starting to float out into the sea, and there’s not a lot to hold it back.”

Continue reading “New Video: Meltwater Pulse 2B”

One more reason (besides appalling air quality and water shortages) China is moving toward renewables.

Ambrose Evans Pritchard in The Telegraph:

Here is a story to cheer us all up. Wuxi Suntech Power expects the cost of electricity from solar modules match to coal-powered stations in China as soon as 2016. If so, we are entering a dramatically different world.

The company’s chief executive, Eric Luo, told RenewEconomy that grid parity is at hand, even in competing with the cheapest and dirtiest form of fossil fuels.

“We are sure that by 2016 – or at the latest 2017 – the levellised cost of solar PV will be the same as coal-fired generation. It is going to completely transform the energy market in China,” he said.

Coal makes up 69pc of China’s energy supply. It is the biggest single cause of Airpocalypse, the suffocation of Chinese cities in perma-smog. The Communist Party is hell-bent on cutting reliance before the middle classes rise up in fury.

 

Continue reading “Solar Threatening Fossil Dominance in China – and the US”

Daily Climate:

Although recent rains have brought some relief, many parts of Brazil are in the grip of the most severe drought for years, and temperatures have been unusually high. In many areas, reservoirs at hydro plants – which produce about 70 percent of Brazil’s power – are at record lows.

Sao Paulo state in the southeast, where the World Cup’s opening game will be staged on June 12, is home to more than 43 million people and is the country’s economic powerhouse. But it has been experiencing its worst drought since rainfall records began in 1930.

In order to keep the lights on, the government of President Dilma Rousseff has been desperately upping energy supplies from thermal power stations. But fears persist that blackouts will hit during the World Cup.

Public anger

If that happens, it’s likely to add to the anger felt by many Brazilians about the billions of dollars being spent on facilities for the soccer tournament – and on staging the Olympics next year.

To ward of public discontent, the government has been forced to spend the equivalent of more than $5 billion to subsidize utilities replacing hydropower with more expensive oil, coal and natural gas.

Analysts say consumers will have to pay substantially more for their energy, although price hikes are likely to be delayed until after elections in October. The government has also dismissed the idea of power rationing – for now at least.

While the government worries about power supplies, Brazil’s agriculture sector – which accounts for about 25 percent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product – is suffering potentially long-lasting drought damage.

Hilton Silveira Pinto is a climate researcher at the Center for Meteorological and Climate Research Applied to Agriculture at the University of Campinas. He told the Bloomberg news service: “This is a taste of what is to come in the future.”

Continue reading “World Cup Runneth Under. Way Under.”

Richmond Times Dispatch:

Two recent reports warning about the perils of global warming missed one major heat center: Northern Virginia, where the race for the 8th Congressional District is growing hotter every day. A crowded field of contenders hoping to replace retiring Rep. Jim Moran is turning into the Democratic version of a tea party beauty pageant as candidates compete for the title of Most Progressive.

Don Beyer, a former lieutenant governor of Virginia, has a problem: He’s white, male, straight, and (comparatively) older and richer. In the modern Democratic Party those are all liabilities. But Beyer might redeem himself among the party faithful with a new ad in which he calls for taxing carbon to help address climate change.

This isn’t meant to suggest Beyer’s position is a cynical ploy. To the contrary, it strikes us as a political hat trick: the happy — and all too rare — amalgam of conviction, smart campaign strategy and meritorious policy.

In a few days the Obama administration will propose new carbon-dioxide emissions regulations. Policy experts anticipate some combination of aggregate targets for carbon emissions and caps on emissions for each power plant in the country, with much of the implementation details handed off to the states. At this point no one can say for certain precisely what the rules will look like, but there’s no doubt they will be onerous, costly, filled with red tape, and difficult to comply with.

They also might be the only currently feasible approach to reducing carbon-dioxide emissions in the U.S. — a valid goal for anyone who accepts, as we do, the scientific consensus about humanity’s role in climate change.

“Feasible,” however, is not synonymous with “optimal.” From an economic perspective, command-and-control regulations are hugely inefficient ways to reduce the negative externalities associated with power generation. Beyer’s proposal — a carbon tax — makes far more sense.

How pricey that tax should be is open to considerable debate. But those who are indisposed to the Chicken Little alarmism embraced by many in the environmental movement think the social cost of CO2 pollution could reasonably be pegged at around $25 per ton. Congress could hold consumers harmless by offsetting the pass-through cost of such a tax with an income-tax reduction. The net result would be to encourage both carbon conservation and wealth creation.

Granted, a carbon tax would do little to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from major polluters such as China and India. But it would help level the energy playing field by requiring users of fossil fuels to internalize more of the costs such fuels impose.

In a less liberal district — such as Virginia’s 7th or 9th — proposing a carbon tax would be writing a political suicide note. Beyer, who is a man of principle, might do it anyway. It will enjoy a friendlier welcome in the 8th District, where we hope it inspires discussion — one that should continue long after the votes have been counted.

Those of you fortunate enough to catch the occasional guest posts here by D. R. Tucker, will be delighted to hear he has now scored a gig with the Washington Monthly. Well done and well deserved, starting with one of the best headlines of the season – wish I’d written it.

D.R. Tucker in Washington Monthly:

This morning, President Obama focused on his efforts to combat carbon-pollution in his weekly radio address, noting the importance of protecting the health and the climate of future generations.

Of course, emphasizing the need to think about the health of our children and grandchildren won’t diminish the derangement of climate-change deniers, who hate Al Gore more than they love their children and grandchildren. The whining of the wingnuts before the official release of Obama’s carbon-reduction guidelines for existing power plants reached new levels of silliness, as Dan Weiss notes:

 While the EPA’s proposal is not yet public, polluting interests have already started to attack it. The National Mining Association is broadcasting radio ads predicting huge rate increases, claims The Washington Post dismissed as “bogus” and “wholly unsupported.” The Chamber of Commerce joined in on the attacks as well: its Institute for 21st Century Energy issued a new report claiming there would be huge economic ramifications and job losses from the EPA’s unreleased rule. The EPA responded, saying “the Chamber’s report is nothing more than irresponsible speculation based on guesses of what our draft proposal will be.”

Legal Planet:

Here’s the backdrop for those who don’t know it.  In 1999, the International Center for Technology Assessment and a number of other non-profit organizations filed a petition with the Clinton EPA arguing that EPA should regulate greenhouse gases from automobiles under Section 202 of the Clean Air Act.   In 2003, after George W. Bush became President, EPA denied the  petition.  A coalition of states and environmental groups then challenged the denial of the petition in the case that resulted in the landmark decision Massachusetts v. EPA.  The Court held in Mass v. EPA that the agency erroneously denied the petition. The Court also ruled — and this is key — that greenhouse gases are an “air pollutant” as defined in the Clean Air Act and that EPA must decide whether, under Section 202 of the Act, greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare.   The Court’s ruling triggered a cascade of regulatory actions by EPA, all required by the Court’s substantive holdings.  Here’s a chronology.

Continue reading “D.R. Tucker: If You Like Your Planet, You Can Keep Your Planet”

Remember – anyone that tells you China’s fossil fuel growth will continue unabated is not recognizing some serious limiting factors. Water would be the big one.