In the European Family’s Quest to Ditch Coal, Greece Is the Problem Child
Apparently Greece is lagging behind the rest of Europe in its broad effort to phase out coal and lignite in favor of renewable energy and natural gas. As described in the article linked above, there are various reasons for this, but, predictably, they all revolve around cost. We’re talking about a country that is being put through what is often called “economic waterboarding,” i.e., being financially asphyxiated, only to receive a gulp of money/oxygen to ensure the victim doesn’t die and the process can be repeated as desired.
There is a larger point to be made here, however: we live on a planet with 200+ sovereign nations, each with a different capacity to clean up its grid-mix and transportation system. Each country has a different set of renewable resources, and, more importantly, each finds itself in a different financial position. If this civilization is to survive, it will eventually have to come to terms that rich nations need to shoulder more of the burden than poor nations in making the transition.
Of course, we’re a million miles away from having to make those kinds of decisions, as the richest nation in Earth’s history is refusing to participate at all. That’s reprehensible.
Craig,
Where do you find obscure blogs like Euractiv ?
Like many with a leftist perspective on economic policies, you believe endemic corruption and profligate behaviour are created by mysterious outside influences and not bad policies or irresponsible behaviour.
Greece’s economic woes are a problem of their own making. membership of the EU and a constant demand for other nations to pay for their irresponsible spending has led to ruin and living on handouts from their richer and more prudent northern neighbors.
While it’s true many nations can avoid using coal fired energy, these are usually small nations with little industrial development, or have access to large scale alternate power resources such as hydro/geo-thermal, natural gas or nuclear.
These nations usually don’t possess large domestic coal deposits and are increasingly dependent on imported natural gas.
Of the five largest global economies, all include coal as major source of industrial energy. The efforts of the German government to simultaneously end nuclear and coal generation have created high energy prices and a constriction in the economy.
The German economy is stalling and beginning to buckle under a combination of foolhardy policies, high energy prices, propping up the Euro and increasing competition from Asia, in particular the 10th largest economy, South Korea.
The rise of South Korea as a major industrial and economic power has been rapid and dynamic. 53% of South Korea’s energy generation is coal fired . Power costs are roughly half those of Germany (26.5% of South Korea’s generation is Nuclear and approx 20% liquefied natural gas).
Continuous investment in efficient energy production has allowed South Korea to equal the playing field with the once mighty German industrial colossus and compete successfully in industrial manufactured exports.
Even Taiwan is beating the Europeans, not due to low wages, but lower energy costs.
Taiwan’s energy consumption is heavily dependent on imported Coal. Taiwan has just re-opened, modernized and expand it’s largest coal-based thermal plant (the biggest in the world).
This plant incorporates cutting edge, Japanese designed, ultra efficient, low emission technology and Taiwan has established a fund to research and develop even greater clean(er) coal targets.
The US is not “the richest nation on earth (unless you count having the largest debt).
The ” Transition ” to which you so glibly allude, is not realistically feasible. That was obvious at the time of the Paris Agreement. Just presenting a wish list of aspirations with no practical explanation of how those aspirations are to be achieved, is futile.
Offering examples like New Zealand, Portugal, Iceland and Costa Rica as evidence of the validity of wind and solar is silly. (All the renewable records are due to Hydro/ geo-thermal, not wind or solar).
Paris was a completely useless talk fest of no practical value and time has already proven President Trump’s decision to distance the US from such a farce, correct.
But one energy rich nation exists that implemented your socialist style ideology, Venezuela ! There’s the living proof of the consequences resulting from your economic precepts.
Nor do you consider the inevitable rise in the price of natural gas.
Fracking and other technology rendered NG suddenly cheap and plentiful, however, increasing demand will soon outstrip supply. When that occurs, prices will start to rise and those dependent on NG will face economic repercussions. That’s why many nations are hedging their energy policies by retaining coal fired capacity and funding clean coal research and development.
Extolling the virtues of nations like Costa Rica as a Coal free economy, while failing to contrast with other similar nations creates a false illusion. Take a nation like Republic of China (Taiwan) with a heavy dependence of Coal.
Both Costa Rica and Taiwan are similar in size geographically. Taiwan has five times the population to support, and lacks Costa Rica’s good fortune in suitable hydro topography.
However, while Costa Rica’s GDP (ppp) is $90.157 billion and average per capita income of less than $10,000, Taiwan’s economy, with far less natural resources, achieves GDP (ppp) $1.177 trillion with a per capita income of over $50,000.
Taiwan, like most modern nations, provides all citizens with access to electricity while in Costa Rica less that 47% have access to grid electricity.
Even Portugal, an EU nation of 11 million, three times larger in area than Taiwan, and blessed with huge Hydro reserves, still only generates GDP (ppp)$328.252 billion with a
per capita of $31,965.
How do you expect the people of Taiwan to “transition” without unacceptable economic consequences ? Taiwan has invested in renewables, Taiwan was an early adopter of solar and Wind(including hydro to the maximum of the nation’s topography. However, renewable energy proved inadequate. Economically, Taiwan like South Korea and Japan, must export or perish !
That means access to economic and reliable industrial energy. For nations like these, energy is not a luxury, it’s crucial to survival.
For rising industrial nations like Thailand and Indonesia, natural gas and coal are essential to avoid poverty and political extremism.
That doesn’t even begin to explain how Africa will escape from the abysmal poverty and chaos most of the people of sub-Saharan Africa suffer.
Africa has vast untapped coal reserves. It’s not a question of “if” or “transition”, but how soon and by whom this resource will be utilized by over 1 billion Africans desperate for a better life.
It’s frightening to consider why European and American investors have been discouraged by Western government from providing the latest, low emission, high efficiency coal industry management to developing African nations.
Instead Chinese and Russian state owned or state subsidized companies are left to sell Coal technology to Africa. Sadly, this leaves the Africans once again exploited mercilessly, while the environment suffers from the sanctimony of Western ideologues.
It’s very little value in taking pride in tiny nations like Portugal etc, while the Chinese build a huge series of giant coal fired power stations with absolutely no regard for the environment in nations like Nigeria and Kenya.
Each of these nations will generate more emissions than are reduced in Europe or the US. These nations don’t have any real interest or time to worry about developing “renewables”.
Global demand for coal is not decreasing ! By 2025 demand for Coal will exceed 11 billion tonnes globally.
Nigeria, Kenya, Botswana, Zambia, Ghana, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Rwanda etc are all desperate for industrial grade electricity generation.
Last year I attended a high level energy conference in Kenya. The African statesmen and power brokers were polite and expressed enthusiastic interest in renewable energy (as long as it was provided for free) while reserving serious consideration for the Asian companies eager to sell coal/oil/gas fired power infrastructure to Africa.
“Bo-mass” in Africa means firewood, charcoal and agricultural wastes. In Kenya and nation of 51 million, up to 70% of Kenya’s final energy demand, 90% of rural household energy needs, is from charcoal and firewood.
In Africa charcoal use is prevalent. Charcoal production is highly pollutant and is inefficiently produced. Tradition earth kilns efficiency is only 5-10 % while more efficient brick kilns remain uncommon.
African Biomass production is sourced from closed forest, woodlands,bush, scrub, wooded grasslands,farms with natural vegetation and mixtures of native and exotic trees, industrial and fuel wood plantations, and residues from agricultural crops, wood-based industries and any sort of waste.
Of the nearly 3000 expensive European funded bio-digesters installed in Kenya over the last twenty-five years, 98% are a failure with more than 1400 disused. Of those still operating, all operate below capacity due to poor management, technical neglect, socio-cultural or economic problems.
This is equally true of most solar and wind projects.
Africa’s politicians and administrators, once away from the spotlight of the Western media, are quite candid in expressing their preference for large centrally controlled power generation to create jobs, break down tribalism, rapidly establish industrial progress and employment.
There is little or no faith in renewable power projects, and only lip service for the environment.
I came away convinced that if the environment is to benefit, we in the West must sell clean coal(er) technology to Africa or the Asians will sell coal infrastructure without any consideration for environmental objectives.
Graig, this is the real world, far, far divorced from your armchair in sunny, affluent Santa Barbara.
.