The recent shift in the United States from coal to natural gas as a primary feedstock for the production of electric power has reduced the intensity of sectoral carbon dioxide emissions, but—due to gaps in monitoring—its downstream pollution-related effects have been less well understood. Here, I analyse old units that have been taken offline and new units that have come online to empirically link technology switches to observed aerosol and ozone changes and subsequent impacts on human health, crop yields and regional climate. Between 2005 and 2016 in the continental United States, decommissioning of a coal-fired unit was associated with reduced nearby pollution concentrations and subsequent reductions in mortality and increases in crop yield. In total during this period, the shutdown of coal-fired units saved an estimated 26,610 (5%–95% confidence intervals (CI), 2,725–49,680) lives and 570 million (249–878 million) bushels of corn, soybeans and wheat in their immediate vicinities; these estimates increase when pollution transport-related spillovers are included. Changes in primary and secondary aerosol burdens also altered regional atmospheric reflectivity, raising the average top of atmosphere instantaneous radiative forcing by 0.50 W m−2. Although there are considerable benefits of decommissioning older coal-fired units, the newer natural gas and coal-fired units that have supplanted them are not entirely benign.
PESD associate director Mark Thurber recently spoke with Stanford Energy about the findings of his recent book on why the world continues to burn so much coal despite its major contribution to air pollution and climate change. Read more
On September 17, PESD Associate Director Mark Thurber spoke at the University of British Columbia (UBC) in Vancouver, BC about findings from his new book Coal (available on Amazon).
Coal burning is the largest single contributor to anthropogenic climate change, and it's also responsible for a host of regional and local impacts including serious air pollution. The challenge is that many developing countries still lean on coal as the cheapest and most accessible fuel for rapidly scaling their energy sectors. Coal also provides, directly and indirectly, sorely-needed livelihoods for millions of people around the world.
Along with UBC professors Kathryn Harrison and Philippe Le Billon, Thurber considered the challenge of transitioning away from coal in a way that avoids leaving displaced coal workers behind. He urged the audience to be "climate hawks" instead of "renewables hawks," prioritizing greenhouse gas emissions reductions over our favorite technological solutions, and to be "livelihoods hawks" instead of "green livelihoods hawks," recognizing that jobs of any kind are of paramount importance to those without them.
Hero Image
PESD Associate Director Mark Thurber speaks at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, BC about findings from his new book Coal.
On June 17, Program on Energy and Sustainable Development (PESD) Associate Director Mark Thurber talked with Nikos Tsafos from CSIS (Center for Strategic & International Studies) on the CSIS Energy 360° podcast. During the podcast, Thurber discussed his new book, Coal, and the geopolitics and economics of continued coal use in energy versus the needs and concerns at the local, national, and global levels.
Energy 360° examines the energy landscape from the intersection of policy, markets, technologies, and geopolitics. With commentary from leading energy and CSIS experts, the podcast provides context and perspective on the most critical issues shaping energy today and is hosted by the CSIS Energy and National Security Program.
Hero Image
Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS)
Program on Energy and Sustainable Development (PESD) Associate Director Mark Thurber was a panelist at the 2019 Energy Security Workshop in Washington, D.C., where he spoke about why LNG (liquefied natural gas) struggles to compete with coal. The event took place on May 29th and was jointly hosted by the National Bureau of Asian Research and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
The competitive disadvantage for LNG is twofold. First, LNG is almost always more expensive than coal. Second, the LNG value chain is more difficult to stitch together. The high cost of LNG infrastructure -- which includes liquefaction plants, LNG tankers, and regasification facilities at the receiving end -- means it will only be built if there is a creditworthy end-use customer willing to pay high prices for gas over a long period of time. But potential customers, for their part, are unlikely to build out gas-using applications until they are certain that gas will reliably be available. This value chain coordination problem is especially severe in countries with limited existing infrastructure for gas transportation and use.
The net result, Thurber concluded, is that LNG will struggle to gain ground against coal, especially for use in the power sector, until countries more explicitly factor environmental factors (where gas has a significant advantage over coal) into their energy markets. (Thurber discusses these and other challenges in replacing coal in his new book, Coal, which is available at https://www.amazon.com/Coal-Resources-Mark-C-Thurber/dp/1509514015)
Hero Image
Program on Energy and Sustainable Development (PESD) Associate Director Mark Thurber speaks about the competition between LNG (liquefied natural gas) and coal at the Energy Security Workshop in Washington, D.C. on May 29, 2019.
In no other developed country is the role of coal in the energy mix more hotly debated than in Germany. The country has been a leader in renewable energy development, but it also continues to mine and burn substantial quantities of coal, which has thus far blunted its efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Germany hopes to phase out all coal use by 2038, though this target is made more challenging by its concurrent effort to phase out nuclear energy.
Program on Energy and Sustainable Development (PESD) Associate Director Mark Thurber marked the European launch of his new book COAL with talks at two German universities. On April 8, Dr. Thurber joined a panel of distinguished experts in a public seminar at EWI (Institute of Energy Economics) at the University of Cologne, where the topic was the possibility of phasing out coal in Germany and elsewhere. On April 9, at the University of Mannheim, Thurber was the speaker for the first joint seminar hosted by ZEW and the Mannheim Institute for Sustainable Energy Studies. Before we can move beyond coal, Thurber told these audiences, we first need to understand and address the enduring sources of coal's appeal, including its low cost (at least when full environmental costs are not taken into account) and perceived value for energy security and reliability (whether this perception is accurate or not).
Program on Energy and Sustainable Development (PESD) Associate Director Mark Thurber introduces his new book "Coal" and participates in a seminar hosted by ZEW and the Mannheim Institute fo Sustainable Energy Studies on April 9, 2019.
PESD Associate Director Mark Thurber introduces his new book "Coal" and participates in a seminar hosted by ZEW and the Mannheim Institute for Sustainable Energy Studies on April 9, 2019. Photo credit: Julia Glashauser, ZEW
Hero Image
Program on Energy and Sustainable Development (PESD) Associate Director Mark Thurber speaks at a public seminar at EWI (Institute of Energy Economics) at the University of Cologne on April 8, 2019.
Hanna Decker, Institute of Energy Economics (EWI), University of Cologne
In a shack that now sits below sea level, a mother in Bangladesh struggles to grow vegetables in soil inundated by salt water. In Malawi, a toddler joins thousands of other children perishing from drought-induced malnutrition. And in China, more than one million people died from air pollution in 2012 alone.
Around the world, climate change is already having an effect on human health.
In a recent paper, Katherine Burke and Michele Barry from the Stanford Center for Innovation in Global Health, along with former Wellesley College President Diana Walsh, described climate change as “the ultimate global health crisis.” They offered recommendations to the new United States president to address the urgently arising health risks associated with climate change.
Bangladeshi children make their way through flood waters.
The authors, along with Stanford researchers Marshall Burke, Eran Bendavid and Amy Pickering who also study climate change, are concerned by how little has been done to mitigate its effects on health.
There is still time to ease — though not eliminate — the worst effects on health, but as the average global temperature continues to creep upward, time appears to be running short.
“I think we are at a critical point right now in terms of mitigating the effects of climate change on health,” said Amy Pickering, a research engineer at the Woods Institute for the Environment. “And I don’t think that’s a priority of the new administration at all.”
Health effects of climate change
Even in countries like the United States that are well-equipped to adapt to climate change, health impacts will be significant.
“Extremes of temperature have a very observable direct effect,” said Eran Bendavid, an assistant professor of medicine and Stanford Health Policy core faculty member.
“We see mortality rates increase when temperatures are very low, and especially when they are very high.”
Bendavid also has seen air pollutants cause respiratory problems in people from Beijing to Los Angeles to villages in Sub-Saharan Africa.
“Hotter temperatures make it such that particulate matter and dust and pollutants stick around longer,” he said.
In addition to respiratory issues, air pollution can have long-term cognitive effects. A study in Chile found that children who are exposed to high amounts of air pollution in utero score lower on math tests by the fourth grade.
“I think we’re only starting to understand the true costs of dirty air,” said Marshall Burke. “Even short-term exposure to low levels can have life-long effects.”
Low-income countries like Bangladesh already suffer widespread, direct health effects from rising sea levels. Salt water flooding has crept through homes and crops, threatening food sources and drinking water for millions of people.
“I think that flooding is one of the most pressing issues in low-income and densely populated countries,” said Pickering. “There’s no infrastructure there to handle it.”
Standing water left over from flooding is also a breeding ground for diseases like cholera, diarrhea and mosquito-borne illnesses, all of which are likely to become more prevalent as the planet warms.
On the flip side, many regions of Sub-Saharan Africa — where clean water is already hard to access — are likely to experience severe droughts. The United Nations warned last year that more than 36 million people across southern and eastern Africa face hunger due to drought and record-high temperatures.
Residents may have to walk farther to find water, and local sources could become contaminated more easily. Pickering fears that losing access to nearby, clean water will make maintaining proper hygiene and growing nutritious foods a challenge.
Climate change will affect health in all sectors of society.
All of these effects and more can also damage mental health, said Katherine Burke and her colleagues in their paper. The aftermath of extreme weather events and the hardships of living in long-term drought or flood can cause anxiety, depression, grief and trauma.
Climate change will affect health in every sector of society, but as Katherine Burke and her colleagues said, “….climate disruption is inflicting the greatest suffering on those least responsible for causing it, least equipped to adapt, least able to resist the powerful forces of the status quo.
“If we fail to act now,” they said, “the survival of our species may hang in the balance.”
What can the new administration do to ease health effects?
If the Paris Agreement’s emissions standards are met, scientists predict that the world’s temperature will increase about 2.7 degrees Celsius – still significant but less hazardous than the 4-degree increase projected from current emissions.
The United States plays a critical role in the Paris Agreement. Apart from the significance of cutting its own emissions, failing to live up to its end of the bargain — as the Trump administration has suggested — could have a significant impact on the morale of the other countries involved.
“The reason that Paris is going to work is because we’re in this together,” said Marshall Burke. “If you don’t meet your target, you’re going to be publicly shamed.”
The Trump administration has also discussed repealing the Clean Power Plan, Obama-era legislation to decrease the use of coal, which has been shown to contribute to respiratory disease.
“Withdrawing from either of those will likely have negative short- and long-run health impacts, both in the U.S. and abroad,” said Marshall Burke.
Scott Pruitt, who was confirmed today as the head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), is expected to carry out Trump’s promise to dismantle environment regulations.
Despite the Trump administration’s apparent doubts about climate change, a few prominent Republicans do support addressing its effects.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the former chairman and CEO of Exxon Mobile, supports a carbon tax, which would create a financial incentive to turn to renewable energy sources. He also has expressed support for the Paris Agreement. It is possible that as secretary of state, Tillerson could help maintain U.S. obligations from the Paris Agreement, though it is far from certain whether he would choose to do so or how Trump would react.
More promising is a recent proposal from the Climate Leadership Council. Authored by eight leading Republicans — including two former secretaries of state, two former secretaries of the treasury and Rob Walton, Walmart’s former chairman of the board — the plan seeks to reduce emissions considerably through a carbon dividends plan.
Already an issue, malnutrition will increase with droughts in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Their proposal would gradually increase taxes on carbon emissions but would return the proceeds directly to the American people. Americans would receive a regular check with their portion of the proceeds, similar to receiving a social security check. According to the authors, 70 percent of Americans would come out ahead financially, keeping the tax from being a burden on low- and middle-income Americans while still incentivizing lower emissions.
“A tax on carbon is exactly what we need to provide the right incentives and induce the sort of technological and infrastructure change needed to reduce long-term emissions,” said Marshall Burke.
Pickering added, “This policy is a ray of hope for meaningful action on climate.”
It remains to be seen whether the new administration and congress would consider such a program.
What can academics do to help?
Meanwhile, academics can promote health by researching the effects of climate change and finding ways to adapt to them.
“I think it’s fascinating that there’s just so little data right now on how climate change is going to impact health,” said Pickering.
Studying the effects of warming on the world challenges traditional methods of research.
“You can’t create any sort of experiment,” said Bendavid. “There’s only one climate and one planet.”
The scholars agree that interdisciplinary study is a critical part of adapting to climate change and that more research is needed.
“If ever there was an issue worthy of a leader’s best effort, this is the moment, this is the issue,” said Katherine Burke and her colleagues. “Time is short, but it may not be too late to make all the difference.”
Program on Energy and Sustainable Development (PESD) Associate Director Mark Thurber introduces his new book "Coal" and participates in a seminar hosted by ZEW and the Mannheim Institute fo Sustainable Energy Studies on April 9, 2019.
Bangladeshi children make their way through flood waters.
Climate change will affect health in all sectors of society.
Already an issue, malnutrition will increase with droughts in Sub-Saharan Africa.
