Why Is Big Coal Pretending to Be the Savior of the Developing World?

October 22, 2014 |

This story first appeared [3] at EcoWatch.com
There is a growing drumbeat being played by the coal [4] industry around the ide
a that their product will save developing African and Asian regions that are depri
ved of a reliable energy source or what is known in policy circles as energy pov
erty.
But I would say these countries deserve something much better than the old, dirt
y energy that we in North America no longer want.
New global marketing campaigns like Advanced Energy For Life [5], which is sponsor
ed by Peabody Energy, the world s largest private-sector coal company, have projec
ted the fantasy of clean coal as the solution for energy poverty [6]. If the devel
oped West with its environmental and health standards would simply get out of th
e way, Africa and Asia could coal-fire their way to economic prosperity.
The timing is uncanny for this burst of random benevolence on the part the coal
industry. After all, the idea of energy poverty is not new, and neither is coal.
Or could it be that as coal is becoming less favorable in places like the U.S.,
where strict new environmental and health concerns have all but halted any new d
omestic growth, these companies are looking to hawk their clean coal product in ne
w markets.
Call me cynical, but I would say this poor-need-coal concept is a Hail Mary atte
mpt by a dying industry to find the few last markets for a product that nobody s
eems to want anymore. Markets susceptible to being convinced by sophisticated ma
rketing techniques that coal is somehow clean.
First, let s get one thing
d burning coal remains one
lattens mountains, poisons
causes severe respiratory

straight, there is no such thing as clean coal. Mining an

of the most destructive of all human activities. It f
rivers and drinking water supplies, pollutes the air,
illnesses, and is over-heating our planet.

The phrase clean coal is no more than a clever bit of marketing an advertising sloga
n that cannot honestly define any physical thing. Industry definitions of clean c
oal shift whenever its strategically expedient/convenient.
Big coal continues to hail the promise of carbon capture and storage (CCS) remembe
r all the commercials during the 2008 Presidential election? Carbon capture, we
were told, would soon be commercially viable. Except we never reach that horizon.
High profile CCS projects like FutureGen [7] continue to struggle, with more tha
n 11 years of promises, hundreds of millions of taxpayers dollars spent, and sti
ll not a spade in the ground.
And then there is the copycat clean coal carbon capture and storage project GreenG
en in China [8], which is supported in part by none other than Peabody Energy, t
he same company behind the Advanced Energy for Life campaign.
So if coal has been, for all intents and purposes, essentially banned in the U.S
., for environment, health and climate concerns [9]. Why is it seen as a solutio
n for other nations in Africa and Asia? Especially when there are cheaper, clean
er, more high tech 21st Century options.
Just as cell phone technology has helped the developing world leapfrog landline

telecoms and their costly infrastructure, advanced renewables [10] like distribu
ted solar and wind can help the world s poor electrify, skipping the the centraliz
ed coal-utilities entirely.
The coal industry predictably argues that renewables are still too expensive, an
d that we have a moral obligation to provide low cost fossil fuels (read: coal) to l
ift the developing world out of energy poverty. However, commercially viable car
bon capture and storage, and advanced coal gasification remain elusive pipe drea
ms that will likely be prohibitively expensive if they ever prove to be a workab
le solution.
None other than the International Energy Agency (IEA), the traditionally conserv
ative Paris-based organization, recently argued that coal is not the best option
for Africa and developing Asia.
In its latest Solar Roadmap report [11], published in September, the IEA made a
strong case for solar as the best path out of energy poverty.
The rapid cost decrease of photovoltaic modules and systems in the last few years
has opened new perspectives for using solar energy as a major source of electri
city in the coming years and decades, said IEA Executive Director Maria van der H
oeven, introducing the report.
The report showed how, by 2030, 500 million people with no current access to ele
ctricity could enjoy light in their homes with solar photovoltaics, describing t
he considerable merits of both on-grid and off-grid solar.
Provided financing options for the considerable upfront costs of solar, the IEA
argues that photovoltaics are already competitive with fossil fuel alternatives.
Compared to coal with carbon capture and advanced coal gasification, solar photo
voltaics, solar thermal, wind, and other advanced renewables are already a barga
in.
Ultimately, it shouldn t be for the coal companies or western think tanks to decid
e what s best for Africa and developing Asia.
In India, a country with both extreme energy poverty and massive coal deposits,
the recently elected Prime Minister Narendra Modi has announced a goal of delive
ring electricity [12] to all Indian citizens by 2020. Modi s plan for delivering p
ower to the roughly 300 million that currently live without: mostly solar.
Last year, at a climate and development conference in Ethiopia, delegates from t
hroughout Africa met to discuss economic growth in the face of climate change an
d energy poverty. One main conclusion from their summary report speaks volumes:
There is no question of a choice between economic growth and environmental protec
tion. The green economy is about achieving green growth while at the same time p
rotecting our environment [13].
Over the past 200 years or so, the Western world has learned so much about what
works and what doesn t when it comes to powering a sustainable economy and planet.
Developing nations in Africa and Asia don t need to learn those lessons all over
again.