Obama Declares War on Coal June 2nd

[classical_hero]

I'm unclear what you even think you're arguing here. It has certainly reduced electricity emissions and emissions intensity (against a pre-existing backdrop of declining electircity use, a decline which is driven heavily by the expansion of solar panel installations):

As for declining *prices*, the drivers of rising electricity prices are mostly driven by investment in networks (something greater solar power penetration ameliorates the need for by shaving off peak demand), but guess which is the one state which has experienced declining *energy* costs in recent years?

If you guessed South Australia, the nation's leader in non-hydroelectric renewable (ie wind) power, you were correct:

You means SA with the most expensive Electricity price where many manufacturing jobs are leaving the state as a result? The State that is living off our GST receipts along with Tasmania. Every time areas deal with renewables as a sizeable chunk of electricity, the price goes up. Don't forget we voted out the government that gave us the Carbon tax ASAP an that is why I predicted the same will happen in America. Such folly could very well bring down the German economy.

 

[Kaitzilla]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ctricity-prices/story-e6frgd0x-1226830886617#

No end in sight to soaring electricity prices

As the number of closures in the manufacturing and minerals-processing sector grows, it is worth reflecting on how and why the repeated warnings from these sectors about the debilitating impact of steadily higher energy costs were ignored.

Less than a decade ago, Australia enjoyed the lowest energy costs in the developed world. It was an intrinsic part of our comparative advantage as a trading nation. But today that advantage has largely gone.

As a result of the carbon tax, the renewable energy target and a range of other energy policy interventions at the federal and state government level, Australia has some of the highest electricity costs in the developed world.

Household electricity prices have increased by more than 110 per cent in the past five years, and are projected to increase another 7 per cent in 2014-15.

Australian businesses - which account for 70 per cent of total electricity use in Australia - have experienced an almost 80 per cent increase in prices since 2009 and there are more rises on the way.

The causes are not hard to find.

The carbon tax accounted for 16 per cent of the electricity bill for a typical large industrial user in NSW in 2012-13.

In 2013-14, the carbon tax added an estimated $6.4 billion to the nation’s tax bill.

That’s equivalent to a 10 per cent increase in company tax revenue in one year.

Defenders of the carbon tax often point to schemes such as the Californian emissions trading scheme as examples of comparable effort by other nations.

But we should not forget that Australia’s carbon tax raised the same amount of tax in its first six weeks as the Californian scheme is projected to raise in its first two years.

Official estimates suggest that the RET will generate a transfer of $20bn from householders and industrial users by 2020.

We have turned an economic strength into a weakness and are beginning to feel the consequences. Across the Pacific, by contrast, the US has turned a weakness into a strength and is seeing its manufacturing sector expand rather than contract.

Meanwhile, in the EU, which Australia mistakenly adopted as a model for its energy policy, the de-industrialisation is accelerating.

It is not too late to change direction.

How similar is what the EPA is proposing to what Australia did?

I really don't want to see electricity prices rise 110%

 

[Old Hippy]

We have turned an economic strength into a weakness and are beginning to feel the consequences. Across the Pacific, by contrast, the US has turned a weakness into a strength and is seeing its manufacturing sector expand rather than contract.

Meanwhile, in the EU, which Australia mistakenly adopted as a model for its energy policy, the de-industrialisation is accelerating.
It is not too late to change direction.

that has little to do with electricity prices, more to do with Australian companies going to china and Australians buying Chinese made products

 

[Cutlass]

 

[El_Machinae]

How similar is what the EPA is proposing to what Australia did?

Might be a very different scenario. The carbon tax with rebate is a whole different kettle of fish than a diminishment of cheap coal availability. Luckily, given how much coal the USA exports, the calculi will be very different. That said, both systems tap market forces in order to encourage alternative energy sources. So, that's a plus.

I really don't want to see electricity prices rise 110%

The only real way to do this is to help create alternatives. Even efficiency cannot stop a price rise, all efficiency can do is allow us to get the same bang for the buck: so individuals end up not actually paying more if their consumption goes down.

 

[Arwon]

You means SA with the most expensive Electricity price where many manufacturing jobs are leaving the state as a result? The State that is living off our GST receipts along with Tasmania. Every time areas deal with renewables as a sizeable chunk of electricity, the price goes up. Don't forget we voted out the government that gave us the Carbon tax ASAP an that is why I predicted the same will happen in America. Such folly could very well bring down the German economy.

You have no clue what you're talking about.

Prices have risen everywhere in Australia for reasons almost entirely unrelated to energy costs, and South Australia is they only place where wholesale energy costs have declined. The rest of this is barely related and incoherent drivel.

 

[Arwon]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ctricity-prices/story-e6frgd0x-1226830886617#




How similar is what the EPA is proposing to what Australia did?

I really don't want to see electricity prices rise 110%

Australian electricity prices have been rising for reasons mostly unrelated to carbon pricing. It's the *network charges* share that's really been skyrocketing. That's driven by a combination of genuine need due to rising peak demand from air conditioners, delayed network investment all coming at once, and also regulatory overestimates of network needs because nobody saw Australian electricity use flattening and declining in recent years until it happened.

Also the newspaper you have quoted are notorious liars in this topic. That paragraph you bolded about the causes is a demonstrable lie by a self serving mining lobby group representative.

 

[Arwon]

that has little to do with electricity prices, more to do with Australian companies going to china and Australians buying Chinese made products

Yeah shocking that some shill from the Minerals Council would make stuff up hey. Surely 20 years of declining manufacturing is the fault of renewable energy installed in the last five! Surely electricity prices, a 1% share of costs of production, are sending car manufacturers away!

(And surely high exchange rates driven by mining exports aren't impacting manufacturing at all!)

I guess being honest and saying "I think we shouldn't do anything about climate change or it isn't real, and we're fine continuing to have almost the dirtiest electricity in the world, dirtier than China, forever" isn't an appealing argument to make in public.

look at this sook flail about

 

[Arwon]

Imma post some graphs now

1. From the Australian Energy Market Commission (they make the rules for the electricity network):

Carbon price? Not a huge impact.

2. LRET and SRES are the Renewable Energy Target (ie Renewable Energy Certificates, a tradeable good created during the John Howard government to create the Mandatory Renewable Energy Target. Electricity retailers must hand over Renewable Energy Certificates to the regulator, equal to a set percentage of their sales. This creates a market where they can either generate or purchase said certificates)

Renewable schemes? Again not that big a deal. Even the state Feed-In Tarrifs (FITs) aren't adding a whole cent to costs.

By contrast, distribution pushed prices up 2 cents last year alone:

3. Here's SA specifically:

Big rises recently? Again, networks. But also notice the higher-than-average wholesale energy costs? That's coming down now thanks to wind. Previously it was all gas and coal and during high demand times they could get pretty much whatever they wanted (huge spot price peaks). Now the wind generators have cut that down, and they've also led to Alinta reducing its coal plant output to October to April. Wind is actually bringing down wholesale energy costs, which is partly or entirely compensating for rising network costs.

4. A look at international comparisons (from here):

Again, look at our bloody network costs. Specifically, look how they've boomed. Look also at the change rates in countries with high renewable penetration like Denmark and Spain and Germany. Compare them to countries reliant on fossil fuels like South Korea, Thailand, Poland. Look at Spain's energy costs having come down due to renewables. Look at rising energy costs in some other countries. The choice isn't "prices go up with renewables" or "prices stay down with fossil fuels" because gas and coal prices have pushed up energy costs for countries reliant on them anyway.

Australia's black coal generators have so far been able to operate with long term protected supply contracts that date back to before privatisation. As those contracts are renegotiated, they're now having to compete with international demand like everyone else, pushing coal prices up. As more gas export hubs are built in Australia, what will happen to gas supply costs for Australian electricity? They'll double, conservatively.

Get ready, without substantial investment in renewables, for Australian electricity costs to start rising due to energy costs, on top of our high network costs.

 

[Kaitzilla]

I can't match a post of such quality.

Network costs.
That is power lines and the other things to move the electricity from the power stations to houses/businesses right?

Weird that Australia is paying network costs that equal the average USA electricity price.
Power use is going down every year too according to Classical_Hero's graph.
Must be building a whole new power grid for that kind of money.

Carbon tax looks like it is just extra, not the main increase ya.


*************************
More EPA in the USA news:
They have a new and rather short 376 page report on some of the effects of their proposed carbon policy.

Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Proposed Carbon Pollution Guidelines for Existing Power Plants and Emission Standards for Modified and Reconstructed Power Plants

Click if you want to read the .pdf file
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/regdata/RIAs/111dproposalRIAfinal0602.pdf

 

[Farm Boy]

Land in the area is cheap, and it is often within a day's drive of multiple major population centers. The region could potentially have use as a logistics hub?

Logistics needs more than simply cheap labor and land. It needs efficient and robust transportation hubs. The hills and forests of West Virginia aren't exactly an area my mind zeroes in on as an excellent place to put down straight roads, efficient lock and dam, airports, and low grade rail lines.

This isn't a big enough issue to matter to the election. Coal miners no longer have national political power.

And we're back to the root cause of the base political divide. And why, exactly, the animosity is so bitter and so vile. The majority can vote in both NIMBY and NIYBY without all that much consideration for the most effected. That very lack of consideration and feeling of powerlessness breeds hatred.

It's frustrating. We could've been spending the last 22 years prepping these folks for the fact that coal is going away. But, I betcha vastly more effort was spent edumacating them about how it was 'stupid' to be weaning off of coal.

They're kinda screwed either way. But on a high point, so long as they get poor enough again, and so long as we don't restrict long rifles too much, we'll make sure to maintain our national strategic reserve of squirrel hunters to tap for military sniper recruitment.

 

[classical_hero]

http://www.smh.com.au/business/agl-flags-hit-on-carbon-tax-removal-20140717-ztzbo.html

Energy utility AGL has warned the removal of the carbon tax will cut heavily into its profit for fiscal 2015, although ongoing operational gains from other parts of the group are expected to offset the impact.

In total, AGL has flagged as much as $200 million in hits to the pretax profit outlook for the year to June, 2015, with the carbon tax accounting for the bulk of this.

Removing the tax will slice $186 million off the pretax profit for the new financial year, with $100 million of this stemming from the impact of the loss of subsidies for the heavy level of carbon pollution of the Loy Yang A power station in Victoria.

The balance of $86 million reflects the expected impact of the decline in wholesale electricity prices on earnings which will stem from the removal of the tax on the balance of the group's generation portfolio, it said.

Other power generators in Victoria which use brown coal, such as EnergyAustralia and International Power, are also likely to be hit by the removal of the subsidy to offset the carbon tax that they benefited from, although as foreign owned entities they are not subject to local reporting requirements.

"With overseas shareholders, there's not a lot we can say, but you'd expect we'd also take a hit," said one executive with a Victorian generator, but declined to be named.

AGL shares were sold off on the news, closing down 5 per cent at $14.91.

I thought those companies would benefit from the carbon tax repeal, because it would have placed a burden on them, but for some reason they got subsidised for polluting and these are the worst of the worst. Just shows how stupid the tax was since it rewarded some "polluters".

http://www.agl.com.au/about-agl/media-centre/article-list/2014/july/fy14-underlying-profit-and-fy15-outlook-update

 

[bhsup]

What I don't get about this declaration is that Obama was Mr. Clean Coal back when he was running for the job. He loved coal then, but then I guess that was for the votes.

 

[danjuno]

This discussion has been a long time coming. I lived in West Virginia for almost my entire childhood and I am disgusted at the situation. Coal Mining employed 125,000 people in ~1960, now it employs only 30,000. Yet Big Coal STILL rules the state with an iron fist. They own all the politicians on both sides of the aisle, you literally cannot tell the difference when Republicans and Democrats lay out their campaign platforms. It's painfully sad to watch Republicans brag about how revolutionary it will be when reactionary pro-King Coal Republicans replace reactionary Pro-King Coal Democrats as they seem set to do this mid-term.

Teenagers are lead to believe that they can drop out of high school and get a 50k-a-year job without a high school diploma. When they discover otherwise, big-coal pols make sure they blame environmentalists and alternative energy instead of the people who sold them the pie-in-the-sky job offers to begin with.

Other major industries are not allowed in, otherwise they would compete for land and the ears of local politicians. They claim that they are the only industry capable of employing locals and that they do everything they can to help the environment, then they turn around and replace underground mines that employ 300 men and do nothing to the mountaintop above, and replace them with strip mines that employ 10 people and destroy the mountains in the geological/ecological equivalent of a smash and grab.

Most people out in the coalfields get their water from wells rather than utilities. The strip mines poison the streams, giving people a medical encyclopedia's worth of diseases. "Freedom Industries" and other companies have already been discussed on this board. Long time residents know this is nothing new.

Most locals have been brainwashed to believe that coal will never die, that it is the only thing that keeps West Virginia from falling off the face of the Earth. They whinge about how America would fall apart if it weren't for coal, yet coal's share of the market is shrinking with every day that passes, losing out to more efficient nonrenewable sources like Natural Gas as well as alternative energy like Wind and Solar. I know how humiliating it is to be pitied, but I can't view these people with any other feeling. They've been indoctrinated for so many generations they know of no other way of life besides coal mining.

This will end either of two ways: News industries will break Big Coal's monopoly on the state economy and the competing influences help people break out of the indoctrination cycle (The Eastern Panhandle is already like this because it was never big on coal to begin with and is slowly progressing in the same direction as NoVa), or the Coal runs out and the companies leave the state in a condition that makes Somalia look like the Nordic Countries and search for that nasty rock elsewhere.

On an emotional level, I want to believe it's the former, but I have no evidence so far to contradict it being the latter.

 

[Arwon]

I can't match a post of such quality.

Network costs.
That is power lines and the other things to move the electricity from the power stations to houses/businesses right?

Weird that Australia is paying network costs that equal the average USA electricity price.
Power use is going down every year too according to Classical_Hero's graph.
Must be building a whole new power grid for that kind of money.

Yeah it's been a bit of a perfect storm of different things. Regulatory failure, excessively high reliability standards, a genuine need to make major upgrades to neglected and aging infrastructure, and unforseen dropping demand.

People are calling it deliberate price gouging by the public and private network companies, but it wasn't really that deliberate or sinister.

 

[Arwon]

http://www.smh.com.au/business/agl-flags-hit-on-carbon-tax-removal-20140717-ztzbo.html
I thought those companies would benefit from the carbon tax repeal, because it would have placed a burden on them, but for some reason they got subsidised for polluting and these are the worst of the worst. Just shows how stupid the tax was since it rewarded some "polluters".

http://www.agl.com.au/about-agl/med...y14-underlying-profit-and-fy15-outlook-update

Blame Labor for that. Or more specifically that dinosaur Martin Ferguson.

The free permit allocation was indeed too generous to Victorian brown coal, and the carbon price was probably too low to impact it in a market where black coal power is more precariously placed and in a state with limited wind power exposure. We probably needed something closer to the Nordic price.

So the Greens in negotiations added a capacity shutdown auction to the package. The government was supposed to tender bids to pay directly for the shutdown of 2000 MW of coal generation (about Hazelwood and a third I think). That way we'd still get coal power reductions and decarbonisation in Victoria quickly.

But then Ferguson renegged and abandoned that plan altogether. The slimy lying bastard.

 

[El_Machinae]

What I don't get about this declaration is that Obama was Mr. Clean Coal back when he was running for the job. He loved coal then, but then I guess that was for the votes.

I'm pretty sure there's been pretty good funding for clean coal during his admin, the market just never seemed to grab it. It was certainly on ARPA-E's radar.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

What I don't get about this declaration is that Obama was Mr. Clean Coal back when he was running for the job. He loved coal then, but then I guess that was for the votes.

Clean coal is a long slow process that only really becomes viable if you outright kill dirty coal. If you kill dirty coal the actual coal becomes cheap as dirt and finding clean ways to burn it is worth the effort. This is a reason the coal mining interests should have been behind clean coal all along instead of being tucked in the pocket of the existing coal burners.

Miners and burners are always pursuing opposite objectives, and it has always amazed me that no one could get this across to the coal miners. Miners benefit from expensive coal, burners benefit from cheap coal. There is no understanding how they wound up on the same side.

 

[Kaitzilla]

It's about time someone declared war on coal!

This thread is now 1 year older and deserves an update!

It appears... that I was wrong


It isn't Obama that is going to war on coal, but environmental activists according to this very very long article.
http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2015/05/inside-war-on-coal-000002

The war on coal is not just political rhetoric, or a paranoid fantasy concocted by rapacious polluters. It’s real and it’s relentless. Over the past five years, it has killed a coal-fired power plant every 10 days. It has quietly transformed the U.S. electric grid and the global climate debate.

The industry and its supporters use “war on coal” as shorthand for a ferocious assault by a hostile White House, but the real war on coal is not primarily an Obama war, or even a Washington war. It’s a guerrilla war. The front lines are not at the Environmental Protection Agency or the Supreme Court. If you want to see how the fossil fuel that once powered most of the country is being battered by enemy forces, you have to watch state and local hearings where utility commissions and other obscure governing bodies debate individual coal plants. You probably won’t find much drama. You’ll definitely find lawyers from the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign, the boots on the ground in the war on coal.

Beyond Coal is the most extensive, expensive and effective campaign in the Club’s 123-year history, and maybe the history of the environmental movement. It’s gone largely unnoticed amid the furor over the Keystone pipeline and President Barack Obama’s efforts to regulate carbon, but it’s helped retire more than one third of America’s coal plants since its launch in 2010, one dull hearing at a time. With a vast war chest donated by Michael Bloomberg, unlikely allies from the business world, and a strategy that relies more on economics than ecology, its team of nearly 200 litigators and organizers has won battles in the Midwestern and Appalachian coal belts, in the reddest of red states, in almost every state that burns coal.

“They’re sophisticated, they’re very active, and they’re better funded than we are,” says Mike Duncan, a former Republican National Committee chairman who now heads the industry-backed American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. “I don’t like what they’re doing; we’re losing a lot of coal in this country. But they do show up.”

1/3rd of our coal dead in 5 years!
GAH!

I'd link some more, but it is mostly a few thousands words of chronicling "victory" after "victory".

 

[Cutlass]

1/3rd of our coal dead in 5 years!
GAH!

I'd link some more, but it is mostly a few thousands words of chronicling "victory" after "victory".

Why do you think that's bad? There's nothing bad about it all. It's all in the best interest of everyone except the coal industry itself.