Category Archives: Global Warming

EIA Is Damaging
 Its Analytical Reputation
 With Coal Forecasts

The pro-coal sentiments of the Trump administration are well known; unfortunately, that boosterism clearly is beginning to seep into the analytical work of the Energy Information Administration. In a late March Today in Energy piece on the EIA website, the organization reprinted three logic-defying graphics on coal’s future role in the U.S. electric generation sector (the three were originally published in EIA’s 2018 Annual Energy Outlook released in February).

The first, as EIA wrote, shows that there will be “virtually no [coal plant] retirements from 2030 through 2050.” Given the 50 gigawatts of capacity that have been shuttered just since 2011, and the 65 GW of additional capacity the administration expects will shut down through 2030, projections of zero further closures beyond that strain the bounds of believability. There is increasing support throughout the business community for a low-carbon future,  and growing numbers of utilities are coming forward with coal phase-out plans (see my earlier stories here and here). The trend is not to maintain that generation capacity, but to close it.

That flat-line projection also overlooks a key point about the age of the U.S. coal-fired generating fleet—a point that EIA itself made last year. The coal generation units in the United States are aging: According to EIA data, 88 percent of the nation’s coal capacity was built before 1990, meaning that in 2050 even the youngest plants would be 60 years old. More telling, EIA said, the coal generation fleet’s capacity-weighted age in 2017 was 39 years. Given that, projecting that there will be no retirements after 2030 simply borders on the ridiculous.

Compounding matters, EIA also projected in a leap of counter-intuititve logic, that as the coal fleet ages, its average capacity factor will climb back roughly to 70 percent—a level not seen since the mid-2000s when the plants were much younger (see the graphic below)—and then maintain that performance all the way through the end of the of its 2050 forecast period. There are two major problems with this projection. First, it ignores age-related deterioration that affects all older plants. Second, it doesn’t take into account the operational changes that have taken place in the utility sector in the past 10 years, notably the surge of new renewable generation resources that have no fuel costs and the shale boom that has pushed natural gas prices down and promises to keep them low for the foreseeable future.

The next graphic (which was taken from an April 2016 Today in Energy article) illustrates the operational changes that EIA’s current projection fails to incorporate. In 2005, coal plants by and large were operated as baseload facilities, running essentially 24/7 all year. Reflecting this, roughly 270 plants that year posted capacity factors of 70 percent or higher. By 2015, this had all changed and fewer than 100 plants recorded capacity factors that high. The system simply doesn’t operate in the same fashion as it did 10 years. Here, the surge of wind generation in the Midwest is a great example. The region’s wind resource tends to blow hardest in the overnight hours and since it has no fuel cost it is dispatched first, ahead of the coal plants that formerly would have provided that electricity.

It is also important to note that in 2005 when the coal fleet’s capacity factor was 67 percent (There is a discrepancy between the data in the two EIA graphics, but it doesn’t impact this analysis.), there were only approximately 100 units operating at less than a 40 percent level. By 2015, the number of plants at that level had climbed to almost 200.  Overcoming that drag on the overall fleet’s performance would be difficult, at best.

In short,  getting the system as a whole up to a 70 percent capacity factor is nothing more than a pipe dream. Conveniently, however, these truth-stretching assumptions allow EIA to, you guessed it, project that U.S. coal production will remain essentially flat, at roughly 750 million tons annually, all the way out to 2050 (see graphic below).

Unfortunately, wishing something so doesn’t make it so. Anyone looking for real analysis of what is going on in the coal industry is going to have to start looking elsewhere.

–Dennis Wamsted

 

Another Bad Week,
 Make That Month,
 For The Coal Industry

It’s been a bad week for the U.S. coal industry. On Monday, Michigan-based Consumers Energy announced that it planned to close all its remaining coal-fired generation by 2040; the company already had closed seven of its 12 coal plants in 2016. Then, on Tuesday, Vectren, an electric and gas utility serving parts of Indiana and Ohio, said it planned to retire three of its coal-fired plants and sell its ownership stake in a fourth by 2023; this from a company that just two years ago was dependent on coal for 90 percent of its generation.

But this week is hardly unique. Just last Friday, FirstEnergy said it was going to close or sell the 1,300 megawatt coal-fired Pleasants plant in West Virginia by Jan. 1, 2019 after being unable to convince federal regulators to approve a deal between two of the Akron, Ohio-based holding company’s subsidiaries that effectively would have moved the facility from the open market into rate base, forcing consumers to pay for the plant even if it was no longer economic.

Not to be forgotten, earlier this month, AEP announced plans to slash its carbon dioxide emissions 60 percent by 2030 and 80 percent by 2050 (based on a 2000 baseline, see my story here). And finally, on Jan. 30, PPL announced plans to reduce its CO2 emissions by 70 percent by 2050 (based on a 2010 baseline).

So, in reality, it’s been a bad month, and similar months are likely moving forward.

Continue reading Another Bad Week,
 Make That Month,
 For The Coal Industry

Trump Paris About-Face Likely To Hurt, Not Help Nuclear, Coal Sectors

President Trump, with his fossil fuel fantasists in tow, made it official Thursday, announcing that he would pull the United States from the Paris climate change accord in order to “make America great again.” The administration’s inability, as well as that of most of the Republican Party in general, to come to grips with climate change is sad, but that will have to wait for a future post. The issue at hand is the decision’s likely negative impact on the U.S.’ already-battered nuclear and coal industries.

For years the nuclear industry has been making the case that it was vital to the country’s climate change mitigation efforts because of its emissions-free generation profile. While accounting for just 20 percent of the nation’s annual electric generation, the industry noted ad infinitum, it was responsible for 60 percent of the carbon dioxide-free emissions (see chart below). In a carbon-constrained world, that would be a valuable attribute. But the Trump administration has now made it clear that it places no value on CO2-free generation sources.

That, in turn, could be a major problem for the industry, as the effort to secure nuclear subsidies—successful so far in Illinois and New York (although now tied up in court), still pending in Ohio, Connecticut and now Pennsylvania—has relied in large part on the sector’s glowing greenhouse gas attributes. In an interesting twist, just before the administration’s head-in-the-sand announcement, Chicago-based Exelon said it would close the 837-megawatt Three Mile Island nuclear reactor in late 2019 because the facility couldn’t compete in the PJM electricity market, which sprawls across 13 states and the District of Columbia. The company largely blamed the market’s structure, including its failure to reward the plant for its emissions-free generation, for its decision to shutter the plant.

Continue reading Trump Paris About-Face Likely To Hurt, Not Help Nuclear, Coal Sectors

Corporate Green Goals
 Playing A Key Role
 In Pushing Utilities
 Toward Renewables

The Trump administration’s budget proposal for the coming year threatens to do exactly what the president promised as a candidate: eviscerate federal funding for climate change programs. The Energy Department’s highly successful renewable energy office would be particularly hard hit, with the administration’s proposal calling for a roughly 70 percent cut in funding—from just over $2 billion currently to $639 million next year. While wrong-headed, the proposals won’t slow the nation’s renewable transition, which is now being powered, to a large extent, by the corporate sector.

This change, which I discussed here, was highlighted in an interview last month by Chris Beam, the new president of American Electric Power’s Appalachian Power subsidiary, which currently gets 60 percent of its electricity from not-so-clean coal. Speaking to editors and reporters at the Charleston Gazette-Mail, Beam said: “At the end of the day, West Virginia may not require us to be clean, but our customers are.”

And that is exactly what is happening across the country, corporate customers are forcing utilities to expand their renewable energy offerings, whether that is to keep existing customers or to attract new companies into their service territories. As Beam added, according to the Gazette-Mail’s Ken Ward Jr.: “So if we want to bring in those jobs, and those are good jobs,…they [corporate customers] have requirements now, and we have to be mindful of what our customers want.”

Continue reading Corporate Green Goals
 Playing A Key Role
 In Pushing Utilities
 Toward Renewables

King Coal Still Rules
 In Trump Team’s
 Alternate Reality

“You’re going back to work.”

With that rhetorical flourish, President Trump signed his much-ballyhooed and loftily-titled executive order “to create energy independence.”

The president’s words—directed to a group of coal miners at the signing ceremony—may have made for great TV (and the president certainly has a knack for that), but that’s about it. The coal mining jobs aren’t coming back, and anyone willing to take a factual look at the current trends in the U.S. electric power sector knows that.

The order, essentially the new administration’s effort  to undo any and all climate change-related plans put forward by the Obama administration (the Clean Power Plan in particular), is chock-full of assertions about the U.S. energy industry that are, at best, little more than wishful thinking. Let’s take a look.

Continue reading King Coal Still Rules
 In Trump Team’s
 Alternate Reality