Wind vs. Coal II
In Wind vs. Coal I, I gave readers some criticism of the Coal River Wind Project jobs report, as well as a response from the report author and a reply from a coal industry critic. Thanks to everyone who has so far contributed comments on that post, especially Bill Howley of the Power Line blog, foro some thoughts nobody has really brought up yet.
Just to continue this debate and discussion, I’m passing on this, from the CNN/Fortune Green Wombat blog:
Here’s a talking point in the green jobs debate: The wind industry now employs more people than coal mining in the United States.
Wind industry jobs jumped to 85,000 in 2008, a 70% increase from the previous year, according to a report released Tuesday from the American Wind Energy Association. In contrast, the coal industry mining employs about 81,000 workers. (Those figures are from a 2007 U.S. Department of Energy report but coal employment has remained steady in recent years though it’s down by nearly 50% since 1986.) Wind industry employment includes 13,000 manufacturing jobs concentrated in regions of the country hard hit by the deindustrialization of the past two decades.
Now, it’s pretty clear that this doesn’t come anywhere near to telling the whole story of the comparison. The wind industry figures include construction jobs and manufacturing jobs (folks who make and built the turbines). But that coal industry figure, while accurate as far as it goes, does not include spin-off jobs, vendors, etc. It certainly doesn’t include every person who manufacturers mining equipment. The West Virginia Coal Association claims that every coal mining job creates between five and eight other jobs in the local economy.
So what’s the real number here? How can we really compare these industries in terms of their economic impact? For that matter, what kind of comparison can we make about life-cycle environmental impact. If you include climate change impacts — which we obviously must — the deck is probably pretty firmly stacked against coal, at least until somebody figures out what to do about those pesky carbon dioxide emissions.
But these are the kinds of debates and discussions that West Virginia and the rest of coal country needs to be having.
I’m told that the Coal River Wind Project folks have worked up a legislative resolution that they hoped to have introduced next week at the West Virginia Legislature. The text of the resolution is online here.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if that happened the same day the Coal Association gets one of its legislative friends to introduce this resolution it’s worked up in support of mountaintop removal?
Let the debate begin!
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO.
Â
(By Senators )
Recognizing the importance of the coal mining industry in West Virginia and requesting West Virginia’s congressional delegation to support the coal industry.
Whereas, The Legislature works tirelessly to improve the quality of life for the citizens of the Mountain State; and
Whereas, West Virginia is one of only several states currently on course to have a budget surplus at the end of the current fiscal year; andWhereas, before the national economic turndown, severance tax collections from coal were at record levels contributing to a budget surplus at the state and county levels; and
Whereas, all fifty-five counties continue to receive a local share of coal severance dollars to support county, local and municipal budgets;
Whereas, important county programs including those for seniors and less fortunate funded by local coal severance dollars are secure and stable
Whereas, better planning and coordination of post mining development has left many usable sites for industrial, commercial and recreational purposes; and
Whereas, Coal mining has been, and continues to be, one of the primary industries responsible for the economic success of West Virginia and its citizens; and
Whereas, Thousands of West Virginians are employed, either directly or indirectly, by the coal mining industry which generates payrolls totaling over $2 billion; and
Whereas, Surface coal mining, including the practice of mountaintop removal, currently represents forty-two percent of the total coal production in West Virginia; and
Whereas, Surface mining currently accounts for the payment of millions of dollars in severance taxes, millions of dollars in income taxes, and millions of dollars in other related taxes paid to the State of West Virginia; and
Whereas, County governments and county school systems throughout the state rely on the taxes from coal companies and coal miners to fund many valuable programs, including public education, ambulance services and law enforcement; and
Whereas, The loss of any of West Virginia’s coal mines and the loss of any mining-related employment ultimately results in significant harm to all West Virginians; and
Whereas, The world market place for coal is severely competitive and supports only mining companies that are dependable, low cost sources of coal; and
Whereas, deliberations have ensued over making even greater improvements in post mine land development involving mountaintop mining and the Governor and the Legislature have responded to those concerns; and
Whereas, By SB 375, provides for master land use plans to be developed in all counties where surface mining takes place with greater focus provided by the Coalfield Economic Development Office on renewable and alternative fuel sources, highways and residential; and
Whereas, over the past decade, an unprecedented level of requirements and controls have been established for mountaintop mining operations by the Legislature and through judicial instruments resulting in higher miner safety and environmental accomplishment; and,Whereas, Actions and inactions by federal regulatory agencies which have had the effect of closing surface coal mines are more frequent and result in the loss of hundreds of mining and other jobs in West Virginia; and therefore, be it Resolved by the Legislature of West Virginia:
That the Legislature hereby recognizes the importance of the coal mining industry and encourages all federal and state agencies regulating the coal mining industry to demonstrate affirmative responsiveness by returning to fair and objective behavior, particularly in the issuance of mining permits and other regulation of the coal industry; and, be it
Further Resolved, That the Legislature supports the continued mining of coal in West Virginia, including surface mining by all methods recognized by state and federal law, and is prepared to cooperate with all federal agencies in an effort to resolve quickly any outstanding issues which are preventing the mining of coal and which are contributing to the loss of jobs in West Virginia; and, be it
Further Resolved, That the Legislature requests West Virginia’s congressional delegation to join in the efforts to support the coal industry in West Virginia and to make every effort possible to assist in securing the needed cooperation from federal agencies to allow the continuation of the mining of coal and to protect the jobs of coal miners and others who derive their employment from coal mining; and, be it
Further Resolved, That the Clerk of the Senate is hereby directed to forward a copy of this concurrent resolution to the President and Vice President of the United States, the Governor of West Virginia, members of the West Virginia’s congressional delegation to the United States Congress, and to the directors of each of the federal and state agencies that regulate the coal mining industry in West Virginia.
10 comments
I think both implementations of energy resources should be used because while wind is cleaner it depends on just that,the wind, while coal ,though not totally carbon neutral, is there,can be used defintely, and may in the near future be cleaned and become carbon neutral
“The West Virginia Coal Association claims that every coal mining job creates between five and eight other jobs in the local economy.”
In the third quarter of 2008, there were 8,944 jobs in Boone County (including both the public and private sectors). 3,864 of those were direct coal mining jobs (3,085 underground, 779 surface). Even if every single other job in Boone County existed purely because of coal mining, then this would mean that each coal mining job “created” only about two other jobs.
Maybe the coal association is claiming that each Boone County coal miner creates an additional 3-6 jobs in neighboring Kanawha or Lincoln Counties? Their definition of “local economy” seems suspiciously malleable at that point.
Why does it have to be WIND vs COAL ? Why cant it be WIND after COAL.
Also interesting to note that during 2008, those 3,085 Boone County underground miners produced 12,992,684 tons of coal, and those 779 Boone County surface miners produced 16,523,104 tons of coal. Matt Wasson said in his Gazette column that underground mines employ 1.5 times as many workers as surface mine — that may be true, when you look at overall numbers for the state of WV. However, the picture is different when you think on a per-ton basis. As you can see by the above numbers, in Boone County (top coal-producing county in West Virginia & subject of many allusions on this blog), underground mines actually require 5 times as many miners per ton of coal produced.
So, at least in the certainly finite number of instances where underground mining is able to recover the same seams that are now mined by MTR, it appears that the real opportunity cost in coal mining jobs of each ton produced by MTR is closer to 5-to-1, rather than 1.5-to-1.
Dear Watcher (and others),
Please click on the following link to find a summary of research and information I’ve gathered regarding your question of whether the proposed wind farm could be developed after the land is mined: http://www.coalriverwind.org/?page_id=153
It turns out that there are two major impediments to post-mine wind development being economically feasible - a diminishing of the wind resource due to the reduction of the ridge altitude, and an increase in development cost due to having to dig the holes for installing each wind turbine deeper (because of the disturbance of the bedrock from blasting).
On the first point, the end result is that you diminish the best wind resources and eliminate the viability of the less windy, yet still economically feasible (pre-mining) wind sites. In doing so, you substantially diminish the potential energy production, job creation and tax revenues that a wind farm that was developed on an unmined site could provide.
On the second point, in Gamesa Energy’s own words, converting solid bedrock into unconsolidated rubble “makes most (wind development) projects (on post-mined sites) economically prohibitive.”
Please take a look at the document linked above and lemme know if you have any questions.
Kind Regards,
Rory McIlmoil
Coal River Mountain Wind Project
Gamesa Energy, when they have presented to the Public Energy Authority and the WV Wind Working Group, mentioned that pre-mining wind construction requires an 8 foot hold for building the concrete turbine base, whereas constructing turbines on post-mine lands would require holes 30-40 feet deep, and that this change makes most projects “economically unfavorable,” due to the higher cost of having
to dig each hole deeper.
Also, any reduction in ridge altitude from strip-mining will result in a diminishing, to some degree, of the wind resource (wind speeds in Appalachia are weaker at lower altitudes), which means a diminishing of the number of turbines and total energy production, and thus a diminishing of the potential jobs and tax revenues that would be generated. It’s better to leave the mountain alone and build the wind farm, because those benefits could theoretically last forever, whereas the coal does not.
So, the combination of a diminished wind resource and the breaking of the bedrock both work against the viability of a potential wind development project, like on Coal River Mountain. Also, Gamesa noted at each of their presentations that by preserving the existing ridges for wind, you are reducing the future area needed for wind development (for, say, reaching a goal of 10% wind by 2020). See the slide below, the information was taken from their presentation slides. To explain more:
If you have a mountain with Class 4 to Class 7 winds, and can produce 328 MW of energy on that mountain over a span of about 32 linear miles of ridgeline, and then you destroy that mountain and reduce the wind resource to say Class 4 to Class 5 winds along 14 linear miles – you now need to expand that wind project across a greater amount of land in order to generate the 328 MW you could have generated on the intact mountain.
The following comes from Slide 6 of the attached presentation, titled “Challenges to Strip Mine Wind Constructionâ€:
Coal River Mountain: Impact of Proposed MTR on Wind Resources
(purple dots are the proposed turbine locations; shaded area is the proposed MTR mine boundaries)
WindLogics Model of Impact on Wind Resources from MTR for Cherry Pond Mtn
Rory, that’s a good analysis of wind vs coal for one particular site, but you can have wind and coal at different sites. Anyone investing capital in wind will want the highest ROI and those sites would be where the wind is the strongest (and consistent), revenues are high, and capital and operating costs are low. I doubt that Boone county has the best opportunity in WV. Where are the best sites?
Hey Casey,
That is actually a general analysis of the impact of strip-mining on wind resources. Gamesa Energy’s quotes do not refer to one site, but rather to the economic feasibility of developing wind on any post-mine land. The WindLogics study for Cherry Pond shows, generally, that by reducing the ridge altitude you diminish the wind resource. It is accepted that in most places, the higher you go, the better the wind. That’s why you dont see industrial-scale wind turbines closer to the ground. They are designed to catch winds at higher altitudes because they’re so much stronger.
There are likely to be a few locally strong wind resources in Boone County. You’re right next door to Raleigh County, and we have some good wind here. There was also a study done in 2002 for the WV Division of Energy showing that there are nearly 12,000 Megawatts of small-scale wind potential in the state. This is the type that you would construct for your home or business using smaller wind turbines. That is enough energy to cover nearly all of the electricity consumed by WV industry, businesses and residents combined. Its also the kind of energy that is best situated for western and southern WV counties.
I meant to say this. We can definitely have coal at one site and wind at another. The thing where I’m working though is that Coal River Mtn is situated between two massive MTR sites. So there is coal to the north, coal to the south, and even coal to the west. Meaning there should be wind on Coal River Mtn. However, I think that destroying any mountain results in the destruction of valuable resources - including the wind - that could be used to stimulate/feed other alternative forms of economic development that are more sustainable and have far less of a social and environmental impact than MTR does.
So we can have coal underground, wind on the ridges, and local markets selling locally produced goods.
Rory, thanks for info. I will start reading more about wind. One of my points is that investors will develop wind where the highest ROI is possible. I found a wind resource map below on slide #17
http://www.oakland.edu/energy/Wind/NREL_Wind_Power_Updated.pdf
Looks like it is a developing technology where generation costs are rapidly decreasing. I guess one problem for farms is the expense for transmission, especially where wind is not consistent and capacity factors are low.
I may have you wrong but I don’t think you really want deep coal mining and the burning of coal either, do you?
China has more coal generation than the U.S. and is on track to double <10 years. If the U.S. does not develop CO2 capture technology (i.e. Clean Coal) than there is no way that China, India, etc will ever retrofit their plants. Friends of the Earth ought to embrace this development.
Hey Casey,
Thanks for bringing up those points. I also responded to your comments on “Wind vs. Coal I” so please take the time to lemme know your thoughts there too.
As for your comments above, wind developers of course want to get the easiest and most profitable wind resources first. Due to advances in wind technology, as well as to the availability of subsidies such as the Production Tax Credit and Investment Tax Credit (coal industry still gets far more subsidies than wind or solar), wind companies are looking toward Central Appalachia more and more every year, even the coal producing areas. Gamesa Energy is already looking at developing a wind farm near the Virginia border in McDowell County. So, the EROI for wind must be high enough here for developers to be so interested.
Also, we’re seeing rising costs for coal-fired electricity. Due explicitly to the rising price for coal, AEP has requested a 43% increase in electricity rates in WV by 2011, and if that request is granted then WV residents will be paying 11.1 cents per kWh in only two years. That is higher than the average price for wind electricity, meaning that in the very near term, coal wont be the cheapest form of electricity available, and that comparatively, generation costs for wind are decreasing enough for wind to be more competitive than coal. Utilities in the State of Maryland are already offering wind electricity at a lower rate than coal right now.
As for the CCS comment, China is also the country that is most rapidly developing its renewable energy resources, such as wind, solar and hydro. So perhaps WE should be buying technology from THEM?? However, I prefer locally manufactured and owned sources of energy and job creation. As admitted by industry officials, and noted by the federal government, CCS technology will not even be viable on a commercial scale for another 10-15 years, which is far too long given the energy, economic and climate challenges we’re facing. The best option is to throw money into R&D for renewables and export those instead.
CCS is also highly inefficient. The capture and storage processes require a 20-40% increase in coal consumption just to power these processes alone. What would happen to the cost of electricity then, either here or abroad? How much extra waste from the processing and burning would have to be created? How much extra mining would have to occur?
And in regards to the mining, coal mining is already becoming more dangerous and destructive with each ton of coal produced. The data show that mine productivity for both underground and surface mines in WV is on a constant decline and has been since 2001. This means that underground mines are becoming more dangerous, and surface mines more destructive. And that trend will only continue.
So, given all this, and in response to your final comment, I am admittedly, unashamedly and personally against coal. So yes. I believe that coal imposes an unnecessarily high cost on society and the environment, and that the costs related to coal should be included in the price of our electricity. The US EPA estimates that 24,000 people die prematurely every year due to coal0related respiratory diseases. Then there’s black lung, mining accidents, water pollution, air pollution, the impact of smog on forests and health, the permanent destruction of forest and wildlife habitat, the increased severity of flooding, the impact of blasting on homes and psychological well-being, the contamination of groundwater and the subsequent cancers is causes…..these are all costs that should not be borne due to our energy “needs.” We are better than that and smarter than that, and so PERSONALLY, I believe coal is preventing us from being the great country and society that we could be. And yes, I recognize that coal is responsible for helping us to become the country we are, but its time is up, and its time for us to move forward.
Leave a Comment