China, Coal-Fired Power Plants, and Ecological Disaster

Here’s an article by Peter Lehner, Executive Director of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), who writes on the levels of air pollution in Beijing, which last week reached a level of 755–on a scale of 0 to 500 (the  scale on which our Environmental Protection Agency here in the U.S. rates anything over 300 as “hazardous.”)  The Internet is littered with vivid descriptions and photographs of the viscous brown haze that hung over the city (this taken from the BBC), the terrifying statistics of people of all ages who became acutely sick from the pollution, and of the dire predictions for a future in which China’s consumption of coal (currently half that of the entire planet) continues to grow unchecked.

Lehner suggests:

This could be China’s Cuyahoga moment: when an instance of pollution so severe, like the river that caught fire outside Cleveland in 1969, moves the people, and the government, to action. China has set soft targets for coal consumption in the past, but these are routinely, and overwhelmingly, exceeded. By setting a mandatory, enforceable cap on coal, China can make its air and water cleaner and its people healthier.

Good stuff, Peter.  I would go on to suggest an even loftier potential outcome – a world that sees past its history of national isolationism and begins to see the challenge here as one that embraces all of humankind.  Until we begin to see ourselves as “citizens of the world” and act accordingly, it’s hard to imagine a soft landing for our civilization vis-à-vis climate change, ocean acidification, the loss of biodiversity, water and food shortages, etc. 

Put another way, perhaps this is China’s Cuyahoga moment.  But I suggest we need “Earth’s Cuyahoga moment,” one which will cause huge populations to demand solutions to the rapidly unfolding disaster we face on a planetary scale.

 

 

 

 

Tagged with: , , , , , ,
6 comments on “China, Coal-Fired Power Plants, and Ecological Disaster
  1. Frank Eggers says:

    The Cuyahoga river caught fire several times in the late 19th century. At that time, oil refining was done mainly to produce kerosene for illumination (by replacing whale oil, it saved the whales) and lubricants. There was very little demand for the gasoline produced, so it was just dumped into the river. Hot coals from steamboats would occasionally ignite it.

    Probably in the late 19th century, air pollution in Pittsburgh was at least as bad as it is in Beijing. The health problems were recognized even then.

    China is building nuclear power plants to reduce the burning of fossil fuels and is also working on developing improved nuclear plants to improve safety and reduce nuclear waste.

    I have just ordered the book “Plentiful Energy” by Till. It supports breeder reactors using natural uranium, Na cooled I believe. Although I have strong reservations about that type of reactor, I feel that I should learn more about it. Perhaps a way has been found to make it acceptable but at the present time, I favor the liquid fluoride thorium reactor (LFTR) and to not believe that renewable systems can make a major contribution to the world’s power requirements.

    I just finished reading “Carbon-free and Nuclear-free” by Makhijani. He believes that renewables, coupled with improved efficiency, will do the job, but he is depending on power storage methods that seem unrealistic.

  2. Jayeshkumar says:

    We need those Massive Defoggers and Desmoggers (even at the cost of further energy expense), to clear such seasonal or unforeseen situational occurrences to reduce it’s danger to a Large urban population. Talking about Climate and global warming, I would suggest that those who are using coal should use nuclear energy, those who are using nuclear energy should go for Wind and Solar (and those using Wind and Solar already can actually proceed towards the -Oops- Jungles. ..for a perfectly Natural and ecological Life – Hey! why cant we wake-up with Daylight and Go to bed when it is dark, of course without adding the burden on this planet; for saving the precious energy and coal burning?). Back to the problem, I had suggested to experiment with Giant Fan (like aircraft engine) to see if it can be employed for clearing Stagnant Fog on Runways at airports that throws a lot of things out of gear, by using an out of service aircraft engine with cooling coils or kinds of Kitchen chimney filters at the front depending on if you are clearing Fog or Smog. Finally Anybody who understands World Economy (I was forced in to doing that), We could Stop printing more dollars that go towards increasing consumerism. ..and that is what China said few days earlier. (Effectively meaning that any and all new money should be towards fighting Climate conditions including Global warming or Economy be allowed to Fail. This is especially for those who are at 100bn and plotting to reach 500bn or 1tn purely as an Ego booster; That the Money has Lost it’s Power and No amount of Politics is going to restore it …but Sustainability of Ecology and Economy)

  3. Must need gas masks like in Soylent Green!

  4. Glenn Doty says:

    Craig,

    While the situation is horrible for the people of Beijing, it’s less horrible than for those people in rural Western China that have not benefited from industrialization. The reality is still there: this is a country that is pulling itself out of shocking poverty by harnessing fossil energy.

    They will not reverse their course on coal until far more economic growth has occurred.

    However, this may make them realize that it is in their best interest to enforce strict emissions regulations, which means that they may begin installing highly effective scrubbers in their smokestacks to remove most of the really bad stuff (SO2, NOX, mercaptins, halides, heavy metlides, etc…).

    The result of such a move would be an increase in the cost of coal-produced electricity, and a decrease in the efficiency of the coal power generation. This will serve to increase the use of coal, as it will take time and significant investment for renewables or nuclear power to close the gap created by the efficiency penalty, and it’s a rapidly moving target – as China’s energy demand is still increasing at a rate that those of us in the Western world still cannot truly comprehend.

    I think that it’s painfully obvious that it would be a great good for China to start using some serious exhaust scrubbers across-the-board for their coal plants, but that means more CO2. It’s a price worth paying, but there it is.