So, we talk a lot about how important stopping the coal rush is to the climate (and of course the ecosystems and communities ravaged by the entire lifecycle of coal - from mining to burning). And it’s not just us talking about the importance of coal. There’s a post nearly every other day about the problems of coal from our friends at Grist, Al Gore is calling for direct action against it, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid even just said “There’s not a coal-fired plant in America that’s clean. They’re all dirty,”
But some new advertisements are about to pop in next week’s New Yorker, courtesy of the visionary organization Architecture 2030. They have some great comparisons on how so many other efforts to curb climate change are dwarfed by the problems of coal. While I’m a firm believer that we need all sorts of people taking all sorts of tactics on all sorts of issues - it’s vital that come together and make sure we keep coal where it belongs - in the ground.
One other neat factoid I put together:
These ~150 proposed coal plants will emit about 600 million tons of C02 every year. That’s about the same C02 emissions as adding 108 million new cars to our roads. That’s about same as nearly doubling the number of cars on our roads!
That doesn’t even count the 619 existing coal-fired power plants that we should start decomissioning if we are serious about curbing climate change.
-Matt
Subscribe by Email!
Subscribe by RSS!
Share on Facebook
One note of caution: The figures on this ad, in at least one instance, are wrong. The efforts of the Campus Climate Challenge are the equivalent of 40 coal plants, not 4. An order of magnitude difference. I tried to get methodology or figures from Architecture 2030 and they did not get back to me.
I am all for opposing new coal plants, but let us not minimize our efforts or their impact. Also, we have to be more accurate than our opposition, as they have the money and we have the truth.
Four plants (~2000 MW) can supply about 2000 large buildings with power (about the size of the UCSB Engineering II building). Richard has me curious how much power all the universities consume. I certainly agree that the numbers have to work if there is to be progress.
…and I am still amazed at the opposition to coal that has materialized. When I was in school (~20 years ago), the attitude was “Coal is supposed to be bad, it’s tradition.” Must sound strange to young folks today.
I think this ad makes a great point: that our forward progress can be eroded if we allow backsliding at the same time by constructing more coal plants. We need to both hold the line against new coal while also advancing other efforts.
Like Richard, I also tried to get methodologies for how they calculated these numbers, and I couldn’t get a response. Richard has a strong argument that at least one effort is minimized. But still, even if you assume their figures are right, I think the angle of this ad can be a bit depressing. Let’s look at it at another angle too: if and when we do stop the construction of all these new coal plants, the positive victories they describe in this add will also offset the emissions of at least 20 conventional coal-fired power plants. That’s a measurable step forward, and if, as Richard and I suspect, the benefits of some of these efforts are underestimated, we’re making even more progress.
Don’t let this ad depress you: let it steel your resolve to continue to fight for an effective moratorium on new coal plants while we continue progress on the leading edge! We’re moving forward and we’ve got to keep up those efforts while protecting the gains we’ve made!