Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Study reveals some of the hidden costs of coal

A new study from the National Academy of Sciences shows burning coal to produce electricity creates more than $62 billion per year in hidden costs, contrary to coal's reputation as a cheap fuel. The study, requested by Congress and conducted by the academy's National Resources Council, focused on deaths caused by air pollution from coal-fired power plants, Ken Ward Jr. reported in the Sunday Gazette-Mail of Charleston, W.Va. Authors say that their narrow focus probably underestimates other hidden costs of the nation's reliance on coal.

The report, "Hidden Costs of Electricity," says coal accounts for about half the nation's electricity, but nearly all of electricity's hidden costs. The authors say burning natural gas generates far less damage than coal, and life-cycle damages of wind power are minimal compared to coal. The $62 billion worth of external costs from burning coal in 2005 at 406 power plants amounted to 3 cents per kilowatt-hour of energy produced. The average price of U.S. electricity is 12 cents per kilowatt-hour.

The report found vast disparities in external costs created by individual power plants. "Half of the plants with the lowest damages together produced one-quarter of electricity, but accounted for just 12 percent of the damages," Ward writes. "On the other hand, the 10 percent of plants with the highest damages also produced one-quarter of the power, but accounted for 43 percent of the damages." The report estimates by 2030, hidden costs of coal will be reduced by 1.7 cents per kilowatt-hour due to expected pollution reductions.

The report did not consider other costs associated with coal production, such as the environmental impacts of mining and coal ash. "We didn't really quantify or monetize those anywhere," said Maureen L. Cropper, one of the study's panel members and professor of economics at the University of Maryland. "So, for example, if you take the waste from a scrubber and dump it in the Monongahela River, we didn't include that." (Read more)

No comments: