"Coal makes us sick." This famous quote from none other than U.S. Democratic leader Harry Reid, can not be entirely accurate, but that captures the mood of many environmentalists.
The key message is that the use of coal for power generation should downplay, greener, cleaner sources should be used instead. But with much of the world capacity of power generation from coal, and the prospects of significant reductions in the use of coal?
Does the use of coal is reduced in favor of cleaner alternative or renewable?
The answer, in short, is "no"
According to the New York Times, the world can expect a greater use of coal much more-by the year 2050.
Why?
The answer can also be administered in a single word. "China"
Power generation in China depends heavily on coal, and that dependence will not change in the foreseeable future, in fact, increase it. China's economic growth is and will continue, fueled by burning coal, and the outlook for coal use increased substantially. China continues to build coal-fired power plants generating at an astounding rate, currently commissioning a new coal power plant almost every week.
Not all countries are increasing the use of coal for power generation. Europe and the U.S. are decreasing their reliance on coal in favor of renewable energy. The problem for advocates of clean energy is that the use of coal in China will double in the next 40 years. No matter how fast other countries to adopt alternative energy sources and renewable, the continued growth of coal-fired power plants in China swamp efforts to reduce reliance on coal in other parts of the world.
Since everyone believes that China will increase its use of coal due to lower cost of coal compared with other sources of power generation, is there a solution to the problem of emissions of greenhouse gases increased dramatically, which inevitably will result of China's policy? Maybe.
If the carbon dioxide that is generated can be removed and trapped by the exhaust gases from power plants instead of allowing it into the atmosphere, mitigating the problem of greenhouse gases would be possible.
That is why carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology may be the only hope to keep emissions under control. Of course, carbon capture and sequestration also adds cost. Research efforts are underway around the world to demonstrate CCS technology is practical and more economical, but even the best methods to add the cost of at least $ 30-50 per tonne of CO2 emitted, increasing the cost of power generation by 30%.
Perhaps the most striking aspect of energy policy in China is not willing to do the work to develop cost-effective CCS technology itself. The country's leaders are on record as saying that the world must pay to develop this technology and then offer to China. With the fastest growing economy on earth, there is no reason that China should not assume their responsibilities to develop CCS. Either that, or develop alternatives to coal.