Coal Is The Answer, Not The Problem

Ian Lavery MP, first elected in 2010, writes:

Coal's the answer, not the problem. As I'm a former coalface worker and a proud member of the National Union of Miners you might retort: "He would say that, wouldn't he?" if I were to emphasise the importance of deep-mined coal production as part of the UK energy mix. But let me present a few facts about UK coal production and consumption.

In 2010, the country's market demand for coal - that is to say what the country burned that year - was 54.1 million tons. During that period only 18.4m tons was produced here, with an approximate 50-50 split between the open-cast and deep-mine sectors. These figures show that the country needs to import huge quantities of coal to meet demand. Coal imports have easily exceeded indigenous production since 2003. Demand for coal is very significant and with electricity consumption set to increase over the next two decades it's very likely that coal consumption will increase proportionately.

This is almost certainly the case globally. China is looking to increase its coal consumption from around 3.5 billion tons to 7bn tons and most other coal producing nations are expanding their production levels. The demand for coal is mostly required to supply coal-fired power stations. These accounted for 41.5m tons of the 2010 total, with 6.6m tons used in coke ovens, 1.7m tons in industry and 0.8m tons for domestic use. Coal-fired electricity generated 28 per cent of the UK's electricity in 2010, as compared with 47 per cent generated by gas. But at times of peak demand during the winter months coal generation has occasionally supplied over 50 per cent of the total.

Relying on imported coal for our power does raise issues over security of supply. Just under half our imported coal comes from Russia (9.6m tons) while other major consignments land on our shores from Colombia, the US, Australia, South Africa and Canada. Coal's key advantage over other fuels is its flexibility. It is suggested that existing coal power plants, which normally operate with low load factors, could be the lowest cost and least capital-intensive route to providing back-up flexible generation in a low-carbon mix. During the cold spell in December 2010 we were running 24 gigawatts of coal generation, leaving just under 5GW in reserve. And coal plant closures by 2016 are already due to knock out 8GW of capacity, with further closures a real risk.

We are an island built on coal, with over 300 years of coal reserves beneath our feet. We have the technology, the workforce and the required demand to secure future production needs. But despite this robust case for UK coal the industry has a massive task ahead to escape complete annihilation. Government plans aim to force coal out of the energy mix entirely. The recently published draft Energy Bill is supposed to move to a secure, more efficient low-carbon energy system in a cost-efficient way, which will of course be extremely challenging.

The Bill, published in May, rarely mentions coal in its 306 pages. Hardly encouraging to potential investors. Indeed, the Bill - which has raised concerns from energy experts across the political spectrum - puts the entire coal industry under threat. The Bill would implement Electricity Market Reforms, which have four key elements all of which are anti-coal. They are not necessarily anti-fossil fuel, however - gas gets a clear-cut advantage because of the emissions performance standard (EPS), which is set at 450 grams of CO2 per kilowatt-hour, with coal standards being roughly double that.

The EPS as proposed increases the attraction of investment in unabated gas power plants at the expense of lower carbon alternatives (wind, nuclear or carbon capture and storage) and enhances the possibility of a second "dash for gas." The EPS rate is one of the four key planks of the reforms. It also contains other elements, such as "feed-in tariffs with contracts for difference" which sponsor more expensive methods of energy generation and a carbon price floor, which will see UK-based entities pay a carbon price of £16 per ton of CO2, rising to £30 by 2020. These proposals will have a severe impact on coal burning over the next decade and stack up heavily against a sustained indigenous UK coal industry.

The TUC clean-coal task group has carried out some very positive and detailed work which is outlined in its document A Roadmap for Coal. The group clearly outlines the need for coal to play its part in the energy mix, stating unequivocally that it must be burned cleanly and must be associated with carbon capture and storage (CCS). CCS allows fossil fuels to remain part of a decarbonised energy mix - and this itself could attract much interest. Political foot-dragging must cease and action must be taken to follow up on this without further delay. The government committed itself to £1 billion in investment in CCS in the 2010 spending review. After the first CCS project at Longannet was abandoned ministers reiterated their investment commitment in the March 2011 Budget and committed to provide public funding for a further three CCS demonstration plants.

In April 2012 the government launched a "roadmap for CCS development," from which I understand there are at least 13 strong expressions of interest in the field. Early approval of the four demonstration plants is crucial if we are to maintain a viable coal industry. But ultimately waiting for private investors is a mug's game. I've never changed my opinion that the coal industry should never have been privatised. In fact there is increasing evidence that all of the public utilities privatised by successive governments should be renationalised.

The economy has flatlined, the country is in a double-dip recession made in Downing Street and national borrowing is on the increase anyway - indeed the government constantly reminds us of the low interests available. Is this not the very time to take advantage of that? To develop deep mines with CCS technologies on site, employ thousands of construction workers and miners and take thousands off benefits and into work? Giving thousands of young people proper, skilled apprenticeships? Securing the country's energy needs and at the same time controlling energy prices and stripping the big six energy firms of their stranglehold on the market - taking millions out of fuel poverty?

We've no time to lose.

At the Durham Miners’ Gala, Ed Miliband told one hundred thousand people, plus the television cameras, that he was going to reopen the mines. Tories should rejoice, and back him to the hilt.

Like the coal on which this island very largely stands, nuclear power is absolutely vital to defending our sovereignty, not least by keeping us out of wars that ought not to concern us, while cementing the Union and while securing the high-wage, high-skilled, high-status male employment that is the economic basis of paternal authority in the family and in the wider community. Nuclear-generated electricity would be so cheap that it might not even need to be metered. But there is absolutely no need for the price to be paid in increased electricity bills in the short term. China will be using the coal ash from her coal-fired power stations to provide the uranium necessary for her nuclear power stations. There is a reason why some countries last and some do not. China has been China for five thousand years.

This perfectly beautiful programme has been developed in partnership with Canada, the source of much of our uranium, which we also obtain largely from Namibia, and from Australia when the government is not made up of the ecomaniacs who have, alas, taken over the Australian Labor Party and disenfranchised its natural supporters. Who says that Commonwealth ties no longer matter? The ruling faction of the ALP is as anti-monarchist as it is hostile to the proper jobs and the energy security that nuclear power provides. That makes sense. Apparently, British coal is too high-quality to deliver uranium. Just as well that we have the Commonwealth, then.

But the right sort of coal is abundant in Spain, Germany and Poland. Good luck to them. And good luck to the Japanese, who are looking into extracting uranium from seawater. Yes, seawater. Have we any of that? Yes, we have. Reverse privatisation. Renounce climate change hysteria. And restore the proper jobs that ground proper communities, the economic basis of paternal authority, the national sovereignty that is energy independence and public ownership, the binding of the Union that is public ownership, the Commonwealth ties on which our uranium supply depends, and the freedom to stay out of wars over other people’s oil or gas. All guaranteed by the State, since that is what it is for.

Our society needs to reassert paternal authority, and thus require paternal responsibility. That authority and responsibility require an economic basis such as only the State can ever guarantee, and such as only the State can very often deliver. And that basis is high-wage, high-skilled, high-status employment. All aspects of public policy must take account of this urgent social and cultural need. Not least, that includes energy policy: the energy sources to be preferred by the State are those providing the high-wage, high-skilled, high-status jobs that secure the economic basis of paternal authority in the family and in the wider community. Nuclear power. And coal, not dole.