Greens Forgive China their Coal Plants

Smog hangs over a construction site in Weifang city, Shandong province, Oct 16. 2015. Air quality went down in many parts of China since Oct 15 and most cities are shrounded by haze. [Photo/IC]
The Center for American Progress, a well connected green left wing Washington Think Tank, has written an article full of glowing praise for China’s high efficiency coal plants, and the contribution those plants are making towards reducing global CO2 emissions.

Everything You Think You Know About Coal in China Is Wrong

By Melanie Hart, Luke Bassett, and Blaine Johnson Posted on May 15, 2017, 12:01 am

See also: “Research Note on U.S. and Chinese Coal-Fired Power Data” by Melanie Hart, Luke Bassett, and Blaine Johnson

China’s energy markets send mixed signals about the nation’s policy intentions and emissions trajectory. Renewable energy analysts tend to focus on China’s massive renewable expansion and view the nation as a global clean energy leader; coal proponents and climate skeptics are more likely to focus on the number of coal plants in China—both in operation and under construction—and claim its climate rhetoric is more flash than substance.

In December 2016, the Center for American Progress brought a group of energy experts to China to find out what is really happening. We visited multiple coal facilities—including a coal-to-liquids plant—and went nearly 200 meters down one of China’s largest coal mines to interview engineers, plant managers, and local government officials working at the front lines of coal in China.

We found that the nation’s coal sector is undergoing a massive transformation that extends from the mines to the power plants, from Ordos to Shanghai. China is indeed going green. The nation is on track to overdeliver on the emissions reduction commitments it put forward under the Paris climate agreement, and making coal cleaner is an integral part of the process.

China is greening its coal fleet

Beijing is stuck between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, China cannot eradicate coal-fired power from its energy mix overnight. China has not yet figured out how to develop its own natural gas supplies—which are more difficult to access and therefore more expensive than those in the United States—and renewable energy expansion takes time. On the other hand, Chinese citizens are demanding cleaner air, and they want immediate improvements. Air quality is now a political priority for the Chinese Communist Party on par with economic growth and corruption. This means that China cannot continue to run the same high-pollution coal plants that were considered acceptable decades ago. Beijing’s solution is to move full speed ahead with renewables while simultaneously investing in what may become the most efficient, least polluting coal fleet the world has ever seen.

Not all coal-fired power is created equal. Emissions and efficiency—the latter being the amount of coal consumed per unit of power produced, which also affects emissions—vary dramatically based on the type of coal and coal-burning technology used. What many U.S. analyses of China’s coal sector overlook is the fact that Beijing has been steadily shutting down the nation’s older, low-efficiency, and high-emissions plants to replace them with new, lower-emitting coal plants that are more efficient that anything operating in the United States.

Read More: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2017/05/15/432141/everything-think-know-coal-china-wrong/

The Center for American Progress was founded by John Podesta in 2003, the same John Podesta who later went on to run Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Podesta has been associated with the Clintons since at least the mid 90s.

I find it fascinating that such a well connected left wing organisation has made such an effort to sing the praises of Chinese coal.

The argument that China has no choice other than to use coal for the time being, because they don’t have access to easily recoverable gas like the USA does, is utter nonsense. Even if China does have more difficulty accessing gas than the USA, if China really wanted to cut CO2 emissions, they could simply expand their already substantial zero emissions nuclear fleet.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

191 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 17, 2017 2:02 pm

Everyone overlooks another impediment to China developing their NG resources. Chinese drilling rigs are all in South Dakota.

hunter
May 17, 2017 2:55 pm

Clinton, Inc.: the best cover ups money can buy.

KC
May 17, 2017 3:49 pm

They went nearly 200 meters down a coal mine! Good heavens, what intrepid journos they are. I’m sure they will be talking about their hands-on-real-life investigative experience for many years to come, as if traveling nearly 200 meters down a coal mine were a substitute for real investigation. How nice of them to come back and report the rosy news to the rest of the world about how ‘green’ Chinese coal will be … some day.

edward nalton
May 17, 2017 3:51 pm

To Nicholas:Do you know what happened to Peabody Inc. in the USA. i seem to recall that they were into super critical coal,or did the Obana admin.shut him down.

Karen
May 17, 2017 3:51 pm

Anything for a pal.

Karen
May 17, 2017 3:52 pm

They went nearly 200 meters down a coal mine! Good heavens, what intrepid journos they are. I’m sure they will be talking about their hands-on-real-life investigative experience for many years to come, as if traveling nearly 200 meters down a coal mine were a substitute for real investigation. How nice of them to come back and report the rosy news to the rest of the world about how ‘green’ Chinese coal will be … some day.

TPG
Reply to  Karen
May 19, 2017 10:41 am

“working in a coal mine,
goin on down down,
working in a coal mine ,
oops about to slip down”.

Karen
Reply to  TPG
May 19, 2017 7:28 pm

🙂

MikeM
May 17, 2017 4:42 pm

This is not surprising at all when you consider the main goal of green groups is to impose their vision of a socialist centrally-controlled command economy on the world, not actually ‘save the world from global warming, er, climate change’.

May 17, 2017 5:38 pm

This article, like many, uses a photo that confuses the human-caused-CO2-climate issue. The photo shows a very hazy city, in the context of a discussion about “emissions” that cause climate change humans should worry about.
Why does such manipulative juxtaposition of imagery and words continue. It seems underhanded.comment image?raw=1

Bryan A
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
May 17, 2017 9:49 pm

No one said it was the CO2 that was causing it. It is that Old Clean Cole that China is bragging about

The coal consumption per kilometer in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region is 30 times the world’s average, which is the primary driving factor of PM2.5 and haze,” said Xiangwan Du, deputy director of China’s National Advisory Committee for Energy Policy. In 2015, the region consumed 400 million metric tons of coal, according to a book published last year by the China Energy Research Society

Good thing it’s not Dirty Coal

Chris Hanley
Reply to  Bryan A
May 17, 2017 11:19 pm

The article above at one point says “… [China] is on track to overdeliver on the emissions reduction commitments it put forward under the Paris climate agreement, and making coal cleaner is an integral part of the process …” then further on “… Chinese citizens are demanding cleaner air, and they want immediate improvements …”.
The problem here is equivocation viz. ‘the use of ambiguous language to conceal the truth’ (Oxford).
Now Melanie Luke and Blaine may be as thick as two short planks but generally the tactic is used by rent seekers deliberately to confuse the public.

Dreadnought
May 17, 2017 5:48 pm

Besides which, it’s well known that the Chinese turn their scrubbers off when no one’s looking in order to save a few quid. There’s not much wrong with burning coal, as long you filter out the nasties.

Nashville
May 17, 2017 6:00 pm

and went nearly 200 meters down one of China’s largest coal mines to interview engineers, plant managers, and local government officials working at the front lines of coal in China.
Why did they have to go so far underground just to conduct an interview?

GREG in Houston
May 17, 2017 6:55 pm

If China had a market-driven energy economy then they would have plenty of domestically produced natural gas.

May 17, 2017 8:26 pm

Coal combustion with treated flue gas has been well understood since the war. CO2 helps the plants grow.Why can’t the greenies grasp these concepts?? If we needed the smoke instead of the CO2 ,we would really have a problem!!!!

willhaas
May 17, 2017 9:39 pm

Because the use of fossil fuels might have some effect on our climate, everyone on earth must immediately stop making use of any goods or services that involve the use of fossil fuels in any way. That goes for everyone including those the live in China. For example, the manufacture and transport of your computer involved the use of fossil fuels. Trun it off now and leave it off and never make use of it again.

Griff
Reply to  willhaas
May 18, 2017 1:40 am

no one has suggested an immediate shut down…
Rather a phased transition to renewables, with an emphasis on shutting down the highest CO2 producing fossil fuel, coal.
Look at the EU target: 80% renewable electricity by 2050. Hardly overnight.

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
May 18, 2017 7:02 am

As always, Griff actually believes that the politicians are telling him the truth.
As everyone knows, 5 year plans always work. Plans for 30 years off will likewise always come true.

Bryan A
Reply to  Griff
May 18, 2017 10:59 pm

And we can all see first hand what high percentages of renewable generation does for grid stability instability simply by watching events in South Australia

willhaas
Reply to  Griff
May 22, 2017 1:54 am

There are many good reasons to be conserving on the use of fossil fuels but climate change is not one of them. There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and plenty of scientific rational to support the idea that the climate sensivity of CO2 is zero. Mankind does have to eventually switch to alternate forms of energy before the fossil fuel runs but that may not be for hundreds of years. Rather then deploying expensive and inefficient technology more research is reequired before some of these alternate sources of energy are economical enough to deploy.

Biggg
May 18, 2017 5:57 am

The Chinese do install all the latest Air Pollution Devices on their new power plants. However all of them are installed with poor grade equipment and a bypass around the system. The systems are started up photos taken to show they are operating and then are bypassed making the equipment useless with no air pollution removed. How do I know this, I have helped build power plants in China and other countries.
However they are doing nothing on CO2 emissions. The plants are still belching the dreaded CO2 that is feared by those on the manmade climate change band wagon.

ferdberple
Reply to  Biggg
May 18, 2017 7:30 am

How do I know this
======
even our tour guide in china admitted this was true. the scrubbers are turned on for official visits, then turned off to save coal once the officials leave. the far east believes in Buddha, the mid east believes in Mohammed, the west believes in Christ, but the chinese believe in money.

Reply to  ferdberple
May 18, 2017 8:33 am

“but the chinese believe in money.”
And taking pictures of their food with cell phones.

Berényi Péter
May 18, 2017 7:14 am

Air quality is now a political priority for the Chinese Communist Party

Yep, Chinese Communist Party. Nuff said.
During 1929 the Soviet Communist Party made grain procurement a top political priority. By 1932 an inconvenient famine followed, claiming more than 6.5 million lives. That’s what political priorities are about in a communist system.

SocietalNorm
Reply to  Berényi Péter
May 20, 2017 9:15 am

The famine was quite convenient for Stalin.

Berényi Péter
Reply to  SocietalNorm
May 20, 2017 1:09 pm

Who knows what’s going to be convenient for the Chinese Communist Party?

ferdberple
May 18, 2017 7:23 am

2014 – ROC study finds china needs 500 new coal plants
2015 – china announces plans to build 1000 new coal plants
2016 – china cuts plans from 1000 to 500 new coal plans
2017 – press finds china has cut pollution in half.

ferdberple
May 18, 2017 7:36 am

2018 – world leader hail success of Paris Agreement in cutting chinese pollution.

May 18, 2017 8:14 am

“They still do that?
Banned in the UK for decades…”
Apparently many at WUWT love to comment on things they are not familiar with, oh the outrage and drama. It is so awful.
Lack of familiarity with nuke plants, coal plants, agricultural burning, and even wind farms is because they are in rural areas. Many live in dirty cesspools called cities and again apparently judge how bad the environment is based on limited knowledge. Unfortunately, it is large cities that elect politicians.
I can not think of more different places than the corner of China where I worked, the UK, and Eastern Washington State. The dry land wheat fields are in very sparsely populated areas. Because of the semi-arid climate, crop residues will not decay.
As others have mentioned, due to the short duration, it is not really a problem.
We also have a nuke plant, coal plant, and several wind farms to provide electricity to the city cesspools. There are also two mega landfills where garbage is barged from ‘green’ cities.
We have clean air, no crime, good schools, low taxes, great sailing, and few liberals.
Here is a link for ag burning: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/air/aginfo/agricultural_homepage.htm

Verified by MonsterInsights