Tag Archives: Coal

Mumbai Families Struggle as Data Centers Increase City’s Coal Dependence

Posted on by
Reply

EEvery day, Kiran Kasbe navigates her rickshaw taxi amid the bustling Mahuls near her home on Mumbai’s eastern coast, where stalls brim with tomatoes, gourds, and eggplants, often enveloped in thick smog.

Earlier this year, doctors identified three tumors in her 54-year-old mother’s brain. The specific cause of her cancer remains unclear, yet those residing near coal-fired power plants have a significantly higher risk of developing such illnesses. A study indicates that Mahul’s residents live mere hundreds of meters from these plants.

The air quality in Mahul is notoriously poor; even with closed car windows, the pungent odor of oil and smoke seeps in.

“We are not the only ones suffering health issues here. Everything is covered in grime,” noted Kasbe, 36.

Last year, plans to shut down two coal-fired power plants operated by Indian firms Tata Group and Adani were announced as part of the government’s initiative to reduce emissions. However, by late 2023, these decisions were overturned after Tata claimed escalating electricity demand in Mumbai necessitated coal.

Neither firm responded to inquiries for comment.

Buildings blanketed in smog in Mumbai, India, January. Photo: Bloomberg/Getty Images

India’s electricity demand has surged in recent years, driven by economic growth and increased air conditioning needs due to severe heat exacerbated by climate change. However, a study by Source Material and The Guardian highlighted that a primary hindrance for cities in relying on fossil fuels is the insatiable energy demands of data centers.

Leaked documents also expose Amazon’s significant presence in Mumbai, where it stands as the largest data center operator globally.

In metropolitan areas served by Amazon, the organization has noted three “availability zones,” indicating one or more data centers. Leaked data from a year ago indicated that the company operates 16 machines in the city.

Bhaskar Chakravorty, an academic at Tufts University analyzing technology’s societal impacts, remarked that the surge in data centers is creating a tension between energy needs and climate goals as India evolves its economy into an artificial intelligence hub.

“I’m not surprised by the slow progression towards a greener transition, particularly as demands grow rapidly,” he said regarding the Indian government’s stance.

Amazon spokesperson Kylie Jonas asserted that Mumbai’s “emissions issue” cannot be attributed to Amazon.

“On the contrary, Amazon is among the largest corporate contributors to renewable energy in India, backing 53 solar and wind initiatives capable of generating over 4 million megawatt-hours of clean energy each year,” she stated. “Once operational, these investments will power more than 1.3 million Indian households annually.”

Amazon is establishing numerous data centers globally, vying with Microsoft, Google, and other entities for dominance in the burgeoning AI sector.

Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. office in Mumbai, India. Photo: Bloomberg/Getty Images

Amazon Employee Climate Justice representative Eliza Pan criticized the company for not acknowledging its role in perpetuating reliance on one of the most polluting energy sources.

“Amazon is leveraging this shiny concept called AI to distract from the reality of building a dirty energy empire,” she said.

Jonas refuted this assertion, stating, “Not only are we recognized as the most efficient data center operator, but we’ve also been the top corporate purchaser of renewable energy for five successive years, with over 600 projects globally.”

Amazon’s claims regarding green energy are contentious. The organization has been scrutinized for engaging in “creative accounting” by acquiring renewable energy certificates alongside direct green energy purchases, as noted by a member of Amazon Employees for Climate Justice.

“Everything is contaminated”

Kasbe operates her rickshaw in Mahul, a former fishing settlement that has transformed into a residence for tens of thousands who were displaced from slums across the city.

Kiran Kasbe’s mother. Photo: Provided by Sushmita

Kasbe and her mother relocated here in 2018 after their home in Vidyavihar’s outskirts faced demolition. She was in good health prior to the move, but her medical condition significantly worsened, culminating in a brain tumor diagnosis.

Gajanan Tandol, a local resident, shared that pollution-related diseases are prevalent. “There are numerous instances of skin and eye inflammation, cancer, asthma, and tuberculosis, yet we receive no government assistance,” he lamented.

Another community member, Santosh Jadhav, implored the government to relocate residents from Mahul.

“Everything is tainted. We’re exhausted from fighting for a decent existence,” he stated. “This is hell for us.”

Skip past newsletter promotions

hidden data center

Amazon, an e-commerce platform facilitating 13 million customer transactions daily, is investing billions into expanding its profitable cloud computing sector and enhancing its AI-assisted services, such as automated coding and translation, as per research from CapitalOne.

Many of the centers in Mumbai remain under the radar because they are leased rather than owned. Unlike in the U.S., where Amazon predominantly owns its facilities, it frequently rents entire data farms or server racks in centers shared with other companies elsewhere.

Xiaolei Ren, a computing scholar from the University of California, Riverside, remarked that shared “colocation” units lead to significantly higher energy consumption in data centers compared to wholly owned or fully leased operations.

“The majority of energy used in the data center sector is concentrated in colocation facilities,” he noted. “They are ubiquitous.”

Employees near the Amazon Prime brand in Mumbai, India, September. Photo: NurPhoto/Getty Images

Based on leaked information, Amazon’s colocation data center in Mumbai consumed 624,518 megawatt-hours of electricity in 2023, sufficient to power over 400,000 homes in India for an entire year.

India is on the verge of surpassing Japan and Australia, poised to become the second-largest consumer of data center power in the Asia-Pacific region. S&P predicts that by 2030, data centers will account for one-third of Mumbai’s energy consumption, according to Techno & Electric Engineering CEO Ankit Saraiya.

“Poison hell”

In a bid to keep up with power demand, the Maharashtra government has extended the operational duration of the Tata coal-fired power plant in Mahul by at least five years. Additionally, the closure of a 500-megawatt plant operated by Tata competitor Adani Group in the city’s north has been postponed.

When Tata requested an extension in its proposal to the State Energy Commission, it cited the rising energy demand from data centers as the primary justification. Adani projected that the anticipated surge in demand during the five years following the plant’s scheduled closure would come predominantly from data centers.

These power plants represent merely two of the numerous polluting sources within Mumbai’s Mahul district. The area also houses three oil refineries and 16 chemical facilities, as stated in a 2019 report by the Indian Center for Policy Research, which branded the locality a “toxic hell.”

The Tata power plant has been operational since 1984, and like many old power stations, it is subject to lenient emissions regulations, as noted by Raj Lal, chief air quality scientist at the World Emissions Network, who labeled it “one of the major contributors to air pollution in Mumbai.”

The Center for Energy and Clean Air Research noted that PM2.5 particles comprise nearly a third of the area’s pollution. PM2.5 particles are airborne and less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, which can lead to severe health issues when inhaled.

Smoke emanates from the chimney of Tata Power Company’s Trombay thermal facility in Mumbai, India, August 2017. Photo: Bloomberg/Getty Images

Shripad Dharmadhikari, founder of the environmental organization Manthan Adhyayan Kendra, stated that the toxic heavy metals in ash generated by the factories are likely to trigger “respiratory diseases, kidney ailments, skin issues, and heart problems.”

While Tata’s facilities continue operations, Mumbai’s power grid is buckling under the increasing demand. To mitigate potential power shortages, Amazon’s colocation data center in the city has invested in 41 backup diesel generators and is seeking permission for additional installations, according to the leaked documents.

A report from the Center for Science and Technology Policy (CSTEP) released in August identified diesel generators as a primary pollutant source in the locality.

Air quality expert Swagata Dey at CSTEP argued that the presence of data centers requiring continuous electricity, coupled with the backup diesel generators, “will inevitably exacerbate emissions,” advocating for legal requirements for data center operators to utilize pollution-free solar energy.

Particularly, the Amazon facility across Thane Creek from Mahul has 14 generators already installed, and one partner was granted permission to set up another 12 generators on-site earlier this year.

“Public health considerations must be central to decisions regarding data center locations and energy source selections,” stated Wren from the University of California, Riverside, co-author of a recent paper evaluating the public health consequences of diesel generators in U.S. data centers.

Sushmita notes that in India, surnames are not commonly used as they signify caste, reflecting a hierarchical and discriminatory social structure.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Transforming Retired Coal Plants into Green Energy Sources

Posted on by
Reply

Abandoned coal power plant at an abandoned Indiana Army Ammunition Factory

American Explorer/Shutterstock

Numerous decommissioned coal-fired power plants have the potential to become reliable backup or emergency energy sources for the grid, eliminating the dependence on fossil fuels. Instead, they can utilize thermal energy trapped in soil.

The idea involves accumulating a large mound of soil near the coal facility and embedding industrial heaters within it. During periods of low electricity demand, these devices transform inexpensive electricity into heat, storing it in the soil at around 600°C. When electricity demand peaks, the heat can be transferred from the soil through heated liquid pipes.

A generator linked to the turbine blades of a coal plant can convert this heat into supplemental energy. The heat transforms water into steam, turning the turbine blades to produce electricity. “Rather than burning coal to heat water for steam, we harness heat from the energy stored within the soil,” explains Ken Caldeira from Stanford University in California.

This type of energy storage is crucial in supporting renewable energy sources like wind and solar, which often generate power intermittently. Soil offers a more affordable, abundant, and accessible resource for long-term energy storage compared to alternatives like lithium batteries and hydrogen fuels.

“The most exciting aspect is the low cost of energy capacity, especially since it is significantly cheaper than other energy technologies,” states Alicia Wongel at Stanford University.

Nonetheless, this approach has its challenges. “In such systems, minimizing plumbing and electrical costs is crucial, yet can be difficult,” notes Andrew Maxson from the Electric Power Research Institute, a non-profit research organization based in California.

Most soil consists of naturally heat-resistant materials like silicon dioxide and aluminum oxide, which makes it “very resilient to heat,” says Austin Vernon from Standard Thermals in Oklahoma. His startup aims to commercialize this “thermal” technology, especially for repurposing retired coal power plants in conjunction with nearby solar and wind energy sources.

There are many retired coal facilities across the United States. Close to 300 coal-fired power plants were shut down between 2010 and 2019, and an additional 50 gigawatts of coal capacity is expected to reach retirement age by 2030. In the late 2000s, cheaper natural gas and renewable energy began to outcompete coal.

Christian Phong from the Rocky Mountain Institute, a research organization in Colorado, views the idea of repurposing defunct coal plants positively. “This provides an opportunity for local communities to engage in the clean energy transition, generating jobs and additional tax revenue while navigating the shift away from coal,” he remarks.

Topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

What Does Australia’s Vote Indicate for Climate Action in a Major Coal Economy?

Posted on by
Reply

Few voters have as much influence over climate change as Australians do.

In terms of per capita greenhouse gas emissions, only the US and Canada are close to Australia. The nation stands as one of the largest exporters of fossil fuels, significantly contributing to global warming by selling vast quantities of natural gas to Asian countries, alongside some of the most polluting fossil fuels.

As national elections approach this Saturday, polls indicate that climate change is not a primary concern for many voters. However, the leading candidates from the Labour Party and the Liberal Party hold starkly different views on climate and energy policies.

At the forefront is the reliance on aging coal plants, which dominate the country’s electricity generation.

“We’ve seen various approaches worldwide,” stated Andrew McIntosh, a professor of environmental law and policy at the Australian National University. “On one hand, there’s a push for expanding renewable energy, while on the other, a conservative coalition advocates for nuclear power.”

Both strategies aim to reduce emissions, according to McIntosh, though many remain puzzled by the nuclear initiative. Nuclear plants can take over a decade to build, while renewable energy solutions can be implemented in just a few months.

“We need to rely on coal for years to come,” he added.

In some ways, analysts compare the polarized situation in Australia to that in the US, where former President Donald J. Trump downplayed climate science, dismissing it as a scam. Matt McDonald, a political scientist specializing in climate matters at the University of Queensland, remarked:

However, instead of heightening Australians’ concerns about climate change, Trump’s criticisms “don’t seem to have generated significant international momentum to address the issue, effectively cooling tensions on both sides,” said Dr. McDonald.

If Australians are feeling pressure, it stems from surging household energy prices. According to Australian energy regulators, average energy costs have risen by approximately 60% over the last decade.

Anthony Albanese, the current Prime Minister and Labour Party leader, has committed to a relatively ambitious renewable energy target, aiming for over 80% generation by 2030.

“Yet,” Dr. MacDonald noted, “we still have a significant reliance on coal.”

Albanese’s main rival, Peter Dutton, heads a coalition that aims to increase domestic gas production for electricity generation. While gas is still a fossil fuel, it is far less polluting than coal. Dutton proposes requiring gas producers to sell portions of their output to Australian electricity grids while expediting approvals for new drilling projects.

Generally, both parties endorse gas development, with Australia being the second-largest gas exporter globally, following the US.

Polling indicates a competitive race, revealing that the Green Party and the so-called Teal Independents strongly advocate for robust climate policies and could play a crucial role in Congress. “If they maintain their current seats, they will be in a position to advocate more strongly for climate action, such as reducing coal exports,” Dr. McDonald said.

A significant question looming globally is whether Australia will host next year’s annual United Nations-sponsored Global Climate Conference, commonly known as COP. Australia is currently vying with Türkiye to secure this event, which comes with notable geopolitical significance and economic advantages, drawing tens of thousands of delegates.

Host countries typically influence the ambition levels of negotiations, and Prime Minister Albanese’s administration has been lobbying for international support for Australia’s bid for over a year. “If they are elected, it’s unlikely to happen under the coalition government,” Dr. McDonald concluded.

Source: www.nytimes.com

What Does the Australian Election Outcome Mean for Climate Policy in a Major Coal Economy?

Posted on by
Reply

Few voters can impact climate change as significantly as Australians.

In terms of per capita greenhouse gas emissions, only the US and Canada closely approach Australia. The nation stands as one of the largest exporters of fossil fuels contributing to global warming, notably sending vast quantities of natural gas to Asian countries alongside some of the most polluting fossil fuels.

As the country prepares for national elections on Saturday, polls indicate that climate change is not a primary concern for many voters. However, the leading candidates from the Labour Party and the Free State Union present starkly different approaches to climate and energy policy.

Central to the discussion is the dependence on the aging coal plants that generate electricity for the country.

“We’ve witnessed a lot of global experiences,” noted Andrew McIntosh, professor of environmental law and policy at Australian National University. “One perspective emphasizes workforce requirements and the need for increasing renewables, while the alternative espouses a conservative coalition favoring nuclear energy.”

Both strategies could lead to reduced emissions, according to McIntosh, though many are puzzled by the nuclear program. Constructing nuclear power plants can take over a decade, whereas renewable energy sources can be implemented within months.

“We need to rely on coal for the foreseeable future,” he added.

In some ways, analysts reflect a polarized debate akin to that in the US, where former President Donald J. Trump dismissed climate science and branded efforts to clean energy as a hoax. Matt McDonald, a political scientist specializing in climate issues at the University of Queensland, stated:

“However, rather than making Australians more apprehensive about climate change, Trump’s rhetoric has not gained significant traction internationally, effectively cooling the debates on both sides,” remarked Dr. McDonald.

For Australians feeling the pressure, it largely stems from rising energy costs for households. Australian energy regulators report that average energy prices have surged by approximately 60% over the past decade.

Incumbent Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who leads the Labour Party, has proposed an ambitious target for renewable energy, aiming for over 80% generation by 2030.

“But,” Dr. McDonald pointed out, “we have substantial coal reserves as well.”

Albanese’s main rival, Peter Dutton, at the helm of a liberal coalition, advocates for increased domestic gas production to support electricity generation. While gas is a fossil fuel, it is considerably less polluting than coal. Dutton proposes that gas producers be mandated to supply a portion of their output to Australian power grids, while also expediting the approval process for new drilling projects.

Generally, both parties are proponents of gas development, with Australia being the world’s second-largest gas exporter after the US.

With polls indicating a tight race, the Green Party and the so-called Teal Independents, both strong advocates for robust climate policies, could potentially influence Congress significantly. “If they retain their seats, they’ll be poised to push harder on climate initiatives—like decreasing coal exports,” Dr. McDonald noted.

An additional point of contention globally is whether Australia will be the host for the upcoming United Nations-sponsored Global Climate Conference next year, commonly referred to as COP. Currently, Australia is vying with Türkiye for the hosting rights, an opportunity carrying geopolitical significance and economic advantages by welcoming tens of thousands of representatives.

Hosting nations often establish the dialogue tone for consultation ambitions, and Prime Minister Albanese’s government has been actively lobbying other countries for over a year to support Australia’s bid. “If the coalition wins, this opportunity will certainly vanish,” Dr. McDonald asserted.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump seeks to reverse the prolonged decline of the coal industry- a challenging task.

Posted on by
Reply

Last week, President Trump issued an executive order designed to revive the use of coal at power plants. This is a practice that has been steadily decreasing over more than a decade.

But as fossil fuels face several important hurdles, energy experts said. The power produced by coal plants cannot usually compete with cheaper and cleaner alternatives. And many coal-burning plants are simply too old and require extensive and expensive upgrades to continue running.

“It’s extremely difficult to reverse this trend,” said Dan Reicher, deputy energy secretary for the Clinton administration and Google’s Ease of Life and Energy Director. “There are a variety of forces at work that don’t portray a very bright future for coal.”

Coal plants, the US’s leading source of electricity, currently produce just 17% of the country’s electricity. The main reason is that another fossil fuel, natural gas, has become abundant and inexpensive due to the shale fracking boom that began in the early 2000s. The use of renewable energy sources like the wind and the sun is also growing significantly.

Natural gas currently provides around 38% of the US electricity, according to the Energy Information Agency. Renewable energy technologies such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power generation produce about 25%, while nuclear energy produces about 20%.

Some areas, like New England, will soon close their last coal power plants. California, the country’s most populous state, effectively uses no coal to generate electricity.

Coal is also under pressure because burning it will release greenhouse gases that can cause climate change and pollutants that harm people and nature. To avoid those concerns, Trump said, He waives certain air pollution restrictions For many coal plants.

In the Southeast and Midwest, many utilities continue to generate electricity from coal plants. Companies such as Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Duke Energy and the Tennessee Valley Department (the country’s largest government-run power provider) are one of the largest users of coal.

The state, which has a long history of coal mines, is still highly dependent on fuel. It includes West Virginia and Kentucky, which earned 85% of electricity from coal last year, according to the Energy Information Agency.

Trump oversaw the energy division Use emergency situations To operate unprofitable coal plants. The president said this is necessary to prevent blackouts. He tried a similar strategy in his first semester.

He also issued an order that eliminates regulations that “discriminate” coal production, opens new federal land for coal mining, and investigates whether coal combustion power plants can provide services to data centers used for artificial intelligence services such as chatbots.

Peabody, the largest coal producer in the United States, said in 2024 that the world used more coal than any other year in history.

“We believe that in order to support our country’s growing need for affordable and reliable energy, the US should stop resigning coal plants, use existing plants with higher utilization and reopen shuttered coal plants.”

Federal policies can play a role, but utilities, state legislators and regulators ultimately determine how much coal will burn at the power plant.

The Utility Trade Association’s Edison Electrical Institute, or EEI, said in a statement that the US needs more power sources but refused to support or oppose the use of coal.

“Electric demand is growing at the fastest pace in decades, and EEI member electric companies are using a diverse, domestic and balanced energy mix to meet this demand while keeping customer invoices as low as possible,” the Institute said.

Several large utilities, like Xcel Energy, are converting coal plants into solar farms to take advantage of the federal incentives created during the Biden administration. In Becker, Minnesota, for example, Xcel is building a large solar and battery installation to replace the Shelco coal power plant. The company is converting something else Coal plants in Colorado For natural gas.

Xcel spokesman Theo Keith said the utility is considering “understanding whether Trump’s orders could affect our business,” but in the meantime it will work to provide consumers with clean energy at a low cost.

Conservative lawmakers in some states, like Texas, have proposed legislation that requires more use of fossil fuels to ensure adequate power and meet the increased demand from data centers, electric vehicles and heat pumps. However, energy analysts expect that such measures will benefit natural gas, not coal, if they pass.

Environmental activists said efforts to revive coal were misguided. They point out that using more coal means that the use of more coal will result in higher electricity bills due to aging devices, increasing health problems and higher risk of power plant breakdowns.

“We’re turning decades of work here,” says Holly Bender, the Sierra Club’s Chief Program Officer, running a campaign called beyond coal to end its use of its fuel. “It’s clear that Trump is trying to put his fingers on the scale to keep coal open, but these are fragments of the infrastructure that are at the end of its useful life.”

Source: www.nytimes.com

Five key points from Trump’s strategy to revive the coal industry

Posted on by
Reply

The hard hat is back. So is coal that is “beautiful and beautiful.”

President Trump signed four executive orders on Tuesday to sought to bolster the country’s declining coal industry, including lifting mining restrictions and burning the dirtiest fossil fuels.

In addition to exempting air pollution restrictions and other coal regulations imposed by the Biden administration, Trump has directed the Justice Department to chase states like California, which aimed to tackle climate change by reducing the use of fossil fuels.

“I call it beautiful and clean coal. I tell people not to use the word ‘beautiful, clean’,” Trump said in the east room of the White House, surrounded by dozens of men wearing mainly stiff hats. “We are completely ending Joe Biden’s war on beautiful, clean coal.”

Here are five takeaways from Trump’s orders.

Trump has always loved coal miners as a masculine symbol.

At a White House ceremony on Tuesday, he repeatedly mentioned the Burley men who surrounded him, joking about whether the stage could handle their collective weight. He recalled that during the 2016 campaign against Hillary Clinton she was talking about Job Letrain for miners. “She was going to put them in the tech industry where you make little phones and things,” he said gestured at the hives and laughed.

Coal itself is a strong fossil fuel, he said. “A pound of pounds, coal is the single energy of the most reliable, durable, safe and powerful energy,” Trump said.

“It’s almost impossible to destroy,” he said. “You can drop a bomb on it and it will be there for you to use the next day.”

Coal releases more carbon dioxide when burned than any other fossil fuel, making it a major contributor to climate change. More mining and burning of coal adds to pollution that dangerously heats the planet, leading to more frequent and deadly heat waves, droughts, floods, sea level rise and faster melting of Greenland’s ice sheets, Trump said he hopes to win the US.

Scientists say that to avoid the most devastating effects of climate change, major economies like the United States must cut their emissions sharply, rather than increasing them.

Coal burning also releases other contaminants, including mercury and sulfur dioxide, which are associated with heart disease, respiratory problems and early death. Mining activities and coal ash from generated power plants pose environmental hazards.

No coal results were mentioned on Tuesday.

Regulations limiting the amount of contamination from coal-fired power plants have led to these plants operating more expensively and reduced industry profitability. But, as Trump said, “radical green” policy wasn’t the biggest reason for the decline in coal power over the past two decades. It was cheap natural gas by fracking.

In the mid-2000s, American excavators completed a method to unlock the enormous reserves of low-cost natural gas from Shalelock. The utility quickly realized that coal could be replaced with cheaper gas.

According to 2019 Survey At the RAND Journal of Economics, the energy market and low prices of natural gas account for almost all of the decline in coal plants’ profitability between 2005 and 2015, and as a result, retirements of hundreds of coal-fired power plants. “Environmental regulations had little impact on these outcomes,” the study found.

Trump says he wants to “drill, babe, drill” and lower gas prices.

“Did you notice that many law firms are signing up for Trump?” the president asked the crowd at a coal event Tuesday.

He was referring to the multi-million-dollar pro bono legal services some major law firms offered to the Trump administration after the president threatened to target him with executive orders.

One company covered by the executive order – Paul, Weiss – has promised concessions, including $40 million in pro bono work for a Trump-friendly cause, cutting deals with the White House. Three other companies – Milbank. Skadden, Arps;Wilky Far & Gallagher – Actively agreed to his deal with the White House.

On Tuesday, Trump indicated that these free legal services would be directed. It fights climate policy and supports the coal industry.

“We’ll use some of those companies to work with you on your leases and other things,” Trump told coal leaders.

Tuesday was a good day for the coal industry. Shares of mining company Peabody Energy rose 9%. Alliance Resource Partners led by billionaire coal tycoon Joseph W. Craft III, who led Trump’s fundraising during the presidential election, have risen nearly 5%.

But many experts are skeptical that Trump can do much to turn the coal outlook up. “Given the limitations on the use of emergency authorities and the symbolic nature of the order, we believe that Trump’s coal executive order is unlikely to have a significant impact on electricity and carbon markets,” wrote an analyst at Capstone, a research firm. They called the coal stock bumps on Tuesday a “overreaction.”

The average US coal plant is more than 50 years old, and it is often cheaper for utilities to generate electricity using a mix of gas, wind, solar and batteries. Analysts say these fundamentals are difficult to change.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump signs executive order targeting revitalization of US coal industry

Posted on by
Reply

President Trump signed a surge in executive orders on Tuesday aimed at expanding coal mining and burning in the United States to revive the struggling industry.

1 order Commanding federal agencies To abolish regulations that “discriminate” coal production, open new federal land for coal mining, and investigate whether coal combustion power plants can serve new AI data centers. Trump also said He will abandon certain air force pollution restrictions It was adopted by the Biden administration for dozens of coal plants at risk of closures.

In a move that could face legal challenges, Trump led the energy sector Develop the process To prevent unprofitable coal plants from shutting down to avoid power outages using electricity in emergencies. Trump proposed similar actions during his first term, but ultimately abandoned the idea after widespread opposition.

Dozens of miners are stuck in hard white White House hats, Trump said. He was also teaching The Department of Justice will identify and fight state and local climate policies that “let coal miners go out of business.” He added that future administrations will “assure” that they will not be able to adopt policies that are harmful to coal, but did not provide details.

“This is a very important day for me, because we are reclaiming an abandoned industry despite the fact that it is the best and certainly the best in terms of power, true power,” Trump said.

Over the past few weeks, Trump, energy secretary Chris Wright and interior secretary Doug Burgham have all been talking about the importance of coal. The two cabinet members sat in the front row at the White House ceremony. Members of Congress from Wyoming, Kentucky, West Virginia and other coal-producing states attended the White House ceremony.

“Beautiful and beautiful coal,” Trump told the gathering. “Never use the word “coal” unless you place “clean, clean” before that. ”

Coal is the most polluted of all fossil fuels when burned; Approximately 40% of the world’s industrial carbon dioxide emissions a major factor in global warming. It releases other contaminants, including mercury and sulfur dioxide, associated with heart disease, respiratory problems, and early death. Coal ash from coal mining and generated power plants can also cause environmental issues.

Over the past 20 years, coal use has declined sharply in the US, with utilities switching to cheaper, cleaner power sources, such as natural gas, wind and solar. That transition has been the biggest reason for US emissions decline since 2005.

It is unclear how much Trump will reverse that decline. In 2011, the country generated almost half of its electricity from coal. Last year, it fell to just 15%. The utility has already closed hundreds of aged coal burning units, and has announced the retirement dates for about half of the remaining plants.

In recent years, growing interest in artificial intelligence and data centers has driven a surge in electricity demand, with the utility having decided that more than 50 coal combustion units will be open past the scheduled closing date, according to Electric Power from America, the industry’s trade group. And as the Trump administration moves, more plants could remain open longer or run more frequently as they loosen coal pollution restrictions, including regulations that apply to carbon and mercury.

“You know, we need to do AI. All this new technology is online,” Trump said Tuesday. “We need more than twice the energy and electricity we currently have.”

However, some analysts said there is unlikely a major coal revival.

“The main problem is that most of our coal plants are older, more expensive to operate, and no one is thinking about building new plants,” said Seth Feaster, a data analyst focusing on coal at the research firm, Energy Economics Analysis Institute. “It’s very difficult to change that trajectory.”

During his first term, Trump tried to prevent the closure of unprofitable coal plants using emergency powers normally reserved for fleeting crises such as natural disasters. But the idea has hit hard by oil and gas companies, grid operators and consumer groups. He said it would increase electricity bills and eventually retreated from the idea.

Ali Pescoe, director of the Harvard Law School’s Electricity Law Initiative, said the idea would likely lead to lawsuits if it was tested again today. “But there’s not much history of litigation here,” he said. “Usually these emergency orders last within 90 days.”

Ultimately, Trump struggled to fulfill his first term pledge to save the coal industry. His administration abolished numerous climate regulations, appointed coal lobbyists to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, 75 coal-fired power plants were closed, and the industry lost around 13,000 jobs during its presidency.

The decline of coal continued under President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who tried to completely move the country away from fossil fuels to combat climate change. Last year, his administration issued swept EPA rules that force all coal plants across the country to install expensive equipment to capture and fill carbon footprints or close by by 2039.

When he returned to the office this year, Trump ordered the EPA to repeal the rules. And Trump administration officials have repeatedly warned that closing coal plants will damage power sources. Unlike wind and solar energy, coal plants can run at any time of the day and are useful when electricity rises rapidly.

Some industry executives who run the country’s electric grid include some industry executives. I warned again The country could face the risk of power losses, especially when power companies are late in bringing new gas, wind and solar power plants online and adding battery storage and transmission lines.

“For decades, most people took electricity and coal for granted,” said Michelle Bradworth, chief executive of American power. “This complacency has led to early retirements in coal plants, weakening the electrical network and damaging federal and state policies that threaten national security.”

But coal opponents say maintaining aged plants online can exacerbate fatal air pollution and increase energy costs. Earlier this year, the PJM Interconnect, which oversees a large grid in the Mid-Atlantic, burned coal-burning power plants and the opening until 2029, leaving them open until 2029 to reduce the risk of retirement benefits. This move could ultimately cost the customers of the utility in the area Over $720 million.

“Coal plants are old, dirty, uncompetitive and unreliable,” said Kit Kennedy, power managing director for the Environmental Group’s Natural Resources Defense Council. “The Trump administration has been stuck in the past and is trying to make utility customers pay more for yesterday’s energy. Instead, they should do everything they can to build the power grid of the future.”

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump signs order to increase coal production in the United States.

Posted on by
Reply

President Donald Trump recently signed an executive order aimed at bolstering the declining coal industry in the country and imposing stricter regulations on coal mining, leasing, and export. The White House stated that this move is intended to address the energy demands of artificial intelligence data centers.

This action by the Trump administration is at odds with global efforts to reduce coal-fired electricity generation and curb harmful greenhouse gas emissions associated with climate change.

During the signing of the order, Trump emphasized the importance of coal, referring to it as “beautiful, clean coal.”

Coal is widely regarded as one of the dirtiest fossil fuels and a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. The burning of fossil fuels like coal releases carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, exacerbating global warming.

In addition to reopening certain coal plants and allowing coal leases on public land, the executive order instructs federal agencies to explore how coal-fired power plants can meet the increasing energy needs of artificial intelligence.


Workers at the John E. Amos power plant, which is a coal burning of American power fuel, in Winfield, W.Va., stand in the coal mine in 2018.Luke Sharrett/Bloomberg via Getty Images file

Recent government actions have rolled back environmental regulations, targeting pollution and emissions from power plants operated by oil and gas companies.

Over the past decade, the coal industry in the US has seen a decline, with coal contributing only about 16% of domestic electricity in 2023, down from 45% in 2010. The growing use of renewable energy sources such as solar and wind has also played a role in reducing the country’s reliance on coal.

Efforts to revive the coal industry run counter to the preferences of most Americans, with two-thirds supporting a transition away from fossil fuels like coal by 2050, according to a recent poll by Yale University.

Burning coal for electricity generation is not only environmentally harmful but also costlier than cleaner energy sources. According to estimates, coal-generated electricity can cost Americans three to four times more than wind or solar power.

Critics of Trump’s executive order, including former EPA administrator Gina McCarthy, argue that it will worsen climate change and harm public health. They advocate for a shift towards cleaner and safer energy alternatives.

As the demand for energy from artificial intelligence increases, there is a growing need for new energy resources. However, meeting this demand is expected to strain existing energy systems, prompting calls for increased investments to stay competitive internationally.

Goldman Sachs projects a 165% rise in global electricity demand over the next five years due to the expansion of AI data centers.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Coal plants ranked as the worst offenders in pursuit of environmental exemptions

Posted on by
Reply

The country’s most polluted coal burning power plant has called on President Trump to exempt it from stricter restrictions on dangerous air pollution after the administration recently invited businesses to apply for presidential pollution exemptions via email.

Aging Corstrip power plants in Corstrip, Montana release more harmful particulate matter contamination or soot than any other power plant in the country, the Environmental Protection Agency. The diagram is shown. The new rules adopted by the Biden administration in 2023 would have forced facilities to install new equipment because they lack modern pollution prevention, the country’s only coal plant.

The Colstrip Factory is currently applying for a two-year exemption from these rules, according to the Montana Legislature delegation that backed the request.

The new pollution standards “have at stake the economic viability of plants that will damage the local electrical grid if closed,” Sen. Steve Daines and other members of the delegation wrote in a letter sent Monday to EPA administrator Lee Zeldin. “Without the corstrip, consumers will bear a burden of higher energy costs and grid reliability, and their closure will hinder economic development in the region.”

Health experts pointed out that the letter does not address the health effects of fine contaminated particles. Many studies have shown that particles penetrate deep into the lungs and are small enough to enter the bloodstream, where they migrate to the heart and other organs, increasing mortality from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases.

A 2023 study showed that it emits coal-fired power plants, particularly fine particles containing sulfur dioxide. Related to higher mortality rates More than other types of pollution.

The contamination “can be extremely harmful, especially for young children with lung disease,” said Robert Merchant, a pulmonary surgeon at Billings, Mont. He said the delegation’s letters showed “complete indifference to health.”

Colstrip Plant’s stricter pollution rules exemption came after the EPA last month told businesses that they could apply for exemptions from key clean air rules by sending emails to agents. The EPA pointed to some of the Clean Air Act, which allows the president to temporarily exempt industrial facilities from the new rules if the technology necessary to meet these rules is not available, and if it is for national security.

The Trump administration has also announced its intention to roll back many of the rules completely. This could mean that plants like Corstrips ultimately do not need to meet new contamination standards.

The move was part of Zeldin’s broad efforts to guide energy and cars from its original role in environmental protection and regulation to make them more affordable.

Northwestern Energy Group and Talen Energy, which operate the factory along with other minority owners, did not immediately respond to comments.

The exemption granted by the Trump administration could face legal challenges from environmental groups. In creating the new rules, the Biden administration had identified already available technologies that would allow corstrip facilities to meet more stringent standards.

The Biden administration also estimated that new pollution prevention technology would cost much less for installations than the $500 million that the Corstrip factory said it would cost.

“These technologies are available,” said Amanda Levin, director of Policy Analysis for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group.

Source: www.nytimes.com