Environmental enemy - The Cost of Coal

1. IS ECONOMIC GROWTH bad for the environment? It is certainly fashionable in some quarters to argue that trade and capitalism are choking the planet to death. Yet, there is little evidence to back up such alarmism. On the contrary, there is reason to believe not only that growth can be compatible with environmentalism, but that it often bolsters it.

2. This is not, however, to say that there aren't any environmental problems to worry about. In particular, the needlessly unhealthy and inefficient way in which we use energy is the biggest source of environmental fouling. That is why it makes sense to start a slow shift away from today's filthy use of fossil fuels towards a cleaner, low-carbon future. There are three reasons for calling for such an energy revolution.

3. First, a switch to cleaner energy would make tackling other green concerns a lot easier. That is because dealing with many of these energy concerns, e.g. treating chemical waste, recycling aluminium or burning rubbish, is an energy-intensive task.

4. The second reason is that burning fossil fuels is having a massive effect on climate change. The most sensible way for governments to tackle this problem is to send a powerful signal that the world must move towards a low-carbon future. That would spur all sorts of innovations in clean energy.

5. The third reason is the most pressing of all: human health. In poor countries, where inefficient power stations, sooty coal boilers and bad ventilation are the norm, air pollution is one of the leading but preventable causes of death. It affects the rich world, too: from Athens to Beijing, multitudes are affected by the inhalation of fine carbon particles released by the combustion of fossil fuels.

6. Dethroning King Coal

The dream of cleaner energy will never be realised as long as the balance tips towards dirty technology. For a start, governments must stop subsidies and exemptions that actually encourage the consumption of fossil fuels.

7. Some of these subsidies, such as cash to the coal industry, are blatantly foolhardy. Others are less obvious, but no less damaging. There are currently coal plants using technology over 30 years old, yet they are exempt from the legislation which aims to reduce the harmful emissions they produce. Far from trying to close these plants down, in some cases certain measures have been announced giving these production facilities a new lease of life. This blame can be laid at the door of rich and poor countries alike; many developing countries subsidise electricity heavily in the name of helping poor people, but rich farmers and urban elites guzzle the largest share of cheap, fossil power.

8. A second recommendation is for the rich world to help poorer countries switch to cleaner energy. The International Energy Agency has estimated that there are 1.6 billion people in the world who are unable to use modern energy. They often walk many miles to fetch wood, or collect cow dung to use as fuel. As the poor world grows richer in the coming decades and builds thousands of power plants, many of these people will get electricity. However, many of these plants will burn coal in a dirty way. The rich world must be ready to pay for the poor to change to low-carbon energy. This should not be regarded as charity, but rather as a form of insurance against global warming.

9. The final and most crucial step is to start pricing energy properly. At the moment, the harm done to human health and the environment from burning fossil fuels is not reflected in the price of non-renewable fuels in most countries. There is no perfect way to do this, but one good idea is for governments to impose a tax based on carbon emissions. Such a tax could be introduced gradually, with the revenues raised returned as reductions in, say, labour tax. That would make it absolutely clear that the time has come to stop burning dirty fuels such as coal.

The dawning of the age of hydrogen

10. None of these changes kill off coal altogether. Rather, they would provide a much-needed boost to the development of low-carbon technologies. Naturally, renewable energy such as solar and wind power will get a boost. But so too would 'sequestration', an innovative way of using fossil fuels without releasing carbon into the air.

11. His is important for two reasons. For a start, there is so much cheap coal, distributed all over the world, that poor countries are bound to burn it. The second reason is that sequestration offers a fine stepping-stone to squeaky-clean hydrogen energy. Once the energy trapped in coal is unleashed and its carbon sequestered, energy laden hydrogen can be used directly in fuel cells. These nifty inventions can power a laptop, car or home without any harmful emissions at all.

12. It will take time to establish this hydrogen age, but there are promising signs. Within a few years, nearly every big car manufacturer plans to have fuel-cell cars on the road. Power plants using this technology are already trickling onto the market. Most big oil companies have active hydrogen and carbon-sequestration efforts under way. Even some green groups opposed to all fossil-fuel burning say they are willing to accept sequestration as a bridge to a renewable-based hydrogen future. But best of all, this approach offers even the staunchest defenders of coal a realistic long-term plan for tackling climate change.