|

|
Anyone for coal?
|
Of the fossil fuels the worst in terms of emitting carbon dioxide into
the atmosphere is coal. So, why, if something has to be done to reduce
CO2 emissions (as most scientists in the field advise), are plans afoot
to reopen coal mines in Britain?
An article “Old King Coal makes comeback in Britain” (18 March) on
uk.reuters.com reported:
“Coal mining is making a comeback in Britain as the quest for secure
energy supplies chips away at environmental objections and record high
prices for the raw material make pits economically viable”.
As the price rises it becomes profitable to exploit more difficult coal
seams despite it costing more to work them. Already “two moth-balled
deep mines reopened recently, two more were under review and a third
working mine was recruiting experienced staff to develop a new seam”.
Capitalist firms are influenced in their choice of fuel by a short-term
consideration such as the going market price. Governments can take a
longer view, but not that long, a couple of decades at most. In Britain
energy policy has been driven by changes in the relative prices of
coal, oil and gas. Up to the 1960s coal was massively predominant.
Then, when oil became relatively cheaper, the 1964 Wilson Labour
government decided to run down the coal industry. Following the
Arab-Israel War in 1973, which led to the closing of the Suez Canal,
the price of oil soared and Tony Benn, as the Minister of Technology at
the time, was able to be appear as the miners’ friend by keeping open
pits previously earmarked for closure. It also put the NUM in a
position to win two national strikes.
From the 1980s cheap gas from the North Sea became available. The
Thatcher government decided to practically close down the coal
industry, taking on and breaking the NUM in the process. Even so, there
is still a small coal industry in Britain producing 17 million tonnes a
year: a further 43 million tonnes are imported.
To combat global warming the government wants to reduce reliance on
burning fossil fuels and increase the use of renewable sources of
electricity such as wind power. But renewable energy will only take off
if it becomes cheaper than fossil fuels (and nuclear power). Currently
it isn’t.
The theory is that as oil runs out its price will rise, making
renewable sources relatively cheaper. The trouble is that it also makes
it profitable to exploit previously marginal sources of oil such as tar
sands and oil under the deep sea. And it makes it profitable to exploit
marginal sources of coal.
Even if oil does run out, coal won’t. According to the Reuters report,
“Experts tend to agree that, with estimated global reserves for 300
years, coal is not going to go away because it is relatively cheap to
extract, to burn and readily available despite the dilemma that it is
also the most polluting fuel”.
Actually, it’s more readily available in some places than others - in
the US and China for instance - and they are not likely to give up the
competitive advantage this access to a cheap source of energy gives
them. Which is why they have resisted international arrangements
such as Kyoto which seek to make coal-burning relatively more
expensive. But even coal-importing countries like Britain are not going
to refuse to use coal if it’s cheaper, as can be seen by the
government’s recent decision to authorise the building of a new
coal-fired power station.
To do otherwise would be commercial madness. Energy enters into the
cost of most products, so to choose a more expensive source would
be to make your country’s goods less competitive on world markets.
That no government will do. Under capitalism renewable sources will
only be adopted on a wide scale when the price becomes right. But how
long will that take? In the meantime coal will continue to be burned.
|
|