Taking on Big Coal: Hansen's holy war

Coal is turning out to be one of those political litmus-test issues for those worried about climate change. And as usual, the country is polarized. The Iowa Utilities Board is the on the side of angels. Holding the fort with Satan are Arkansas and Indiana, among others. It splits on predictable party lines when it comes to presidential politics, too. But leading the fight against coal isn't a White House hopeful. It's someone who's supposed to stay out of politics. None other than NASA climate guru James Hansen.

First, some context. Iowa recently rejected an application to build a coal-fired power plant after NASA climatologist Jim Hansen explained to the Utilities Board how such installations are responsible for much of the warming that constitutes climate change. It was widely described as the first climate-related rejection of a coal-fired plant.

Hansen's testimony was compelling -- more about that later -- but the poor guy can't be everywhere, and it would seem we could use some Hansen clones if other states are to get the message. Since the Iowa decision, Arkansas's public service commission gave the (not so) green light to Southwestern Electric Power Co.'s proposed $1.3 billion coal plant, although "it must also obtain permits from Louisiana and Texas, as well as from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers."

And in Indiana, Duke Energy got approval that state's regulators for a $2 billion coal-fired plant. That one is allegedly "capture ready." But that's kind of like buying a TV that's HD-ready with no idea how or when an HD receiver will be available.

Here in North Carolina, Duke recently got the almost-go-ahead for a new coal plant in the county just east of mine. All that's left in that regulatory process is an air permit. Hansen is trying to spread the word about the evils of coal here, too.

The bottom line about coal (in addition to the devastating effects of open-pit mining to the surface biosphere), is that burning it to produce power is the biggest culprit when it comes to the greenhouse-gas emissions responsible for gobal temperature rise. According to Hansen, "Increased fossil fuel CO2 in the air today, compared to the pre-industrial atmosphere, is due 50% to coal, 35% to oil and 15% to gas."

So important is coal's contribution, says Hansen, that we could pretty much afford to let the oil and gas producers such all their reserves dry, and we still wouldn't exceed the "dangerous" level of 450 parts per million of atmospheric CO2 (the current level is 380-385, depending on how you're counting), but coal will put us over the top for sure unless we cut back fast and hard.

It's here that Hansen strays into the realm of policy. In his Iowa testimony, he lays out what we have to do with (to) the coal industry: kill it within 20 years,

(1) a moratorium in developed countries on construction of new coal-fired power plants until the
technology is ready for carbon-capture and sequestration,

(2) a similar subsequent moratorium in developing countries,

(3) a phase-out over the next several decades of existing old-technology coal plants, with replacement by coal-fired plants that capture and sequester the CO2, energy efficiencies, renewable energies, or other sources of energy that do not emit CO2

Given the fact that most anyone with a brain understands that carbon capture and sequestration is 10-15 years away from being ready for prime time, Hansen's plans amounts to fairly lengthy ban on coal plants, which now supply most of the electricity in the U.S. But that's not all. Hansen has come up with a manifesto of sorts for those seeking the support of environmentalists concerned with climate change. He notes that

Candidates for office have begun to make note of the climate issue and utter fuzzy words in support of the planet and the environment. However, actions proposed are, in most cases, ineffectual, not incorporating the two essential needs for stabilizing climate: phase-out of dirty coal and a gradually rising price on carbon emissions.

And then suggests that anyone who is serious about doing something about global warming should incorporate the following three-point plan into their campaign platform, in the form of a "Declaration of Stewardship for the Earth and all Creation."

1. The coal moratorium.
2. A price on carbon emissions (likely in the form of a cap and trade system).
3. A complete reversal of market forces on utilties, which would be rewarded for efficiency, not produce sold.

All of which makes complete sense. From a Vulcan's point of view. The first point is obvious, and if Iowa is any indication, we are probably headed in that direction. The second is also probably inevitable. But the third? Well, there's a reason why no presidential hopeful has taken Hansen's pledge. It's called capitalism.

Too bad, really. Maybe Hansen should be running for president. He's says he's an Independent, though.

Regardless of his political ambitions or lackthereof, Hansen is becoming a remarkable public speaker. Without resorting to any disingenuous "framing" techniques and polished graphics, his presentations are easy to follow, respectful, non-partisan, and absolutely gripping. His Iowa testimony is not only a good primer on the science behind coal, but it covers most of the essentials on climate change, too, giving Al Gore a run for his money. It's lengthy, but worth an hour of your time. It's full of simple explanations of the difference between forcings and feedbacks, thermal inertia, sea levels and great litle phrases like

The chief implication is that humans have taken control of global climate.