On Monday, the UK marks the closure of its last working coal-fired power station, Ratcliffe-on-Soar, which has been in operation since 1968. With the closure of the 2,000 MW capacity power station, the history of coal use in the UK began with the opening of the first coal-fired power station in 1882. During that time, coal played a central role in the UK’s electricity system, providing more than 90 per cent of total electricity in some years.
However, a combination of factors, including the growth of natural gas power plants and renewable energy, pollution control, carbon pricing, and the government’s goal of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, suggests that coal will remain viable in the long term. has fallen into a decline.
From boom to recession
The importance of coal to the UK electricity grid cannot be overstated. In 1956 it provided over 90 per cent of Britain’s electricity. Total power generation continued to increase thereafter, reaching 212 terawatt-hours of production by 1980. And the construction of a new coal-fired power plant was being considered. Most recently in the late 2000s. According to the Carbon Brief organization, amazing timeline To reduce the amount of coal used in the UK, consideration was given to continuing to use coal while capturing carbon.
However, a number of factors are slowing the use of the fuel ahead of the UK’s climate change targets, some of which are similar to the situation in the US. At the time, the European Union, which included Britain, enacted new rules to deal with acid rain, which raised the cost of coal-fired power plants. Additionally, the development of oil and gas deposits in the North Sea has provided access to alternative fuels. Meanwhile, significant increases in efficiency and the relocation of some heavy industry overseas have significantly reduced British demand.
These changes affected the use of coal and also reduced employment in coal mining. The mining sector sometimes Important forces in British politicsHowever, the decline of coal reduced the number of people employed in the sector, reducing its political influence.
All of these were reducing coal use even before governments started taking aggressive steps to curb climate change. However, by 2005, the EU introduced a carbon trading system that imposes a cost on emissions. The UK government adopted a national emissions target by 2008, which has been maintained and strengthened by both Labor and Conservative governments since then. Until Rishi Sunakvoted to resign before changing Britain’s trajectory. What started as a pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2050 now requires the UK to reach net zero by that date.
These include: carbon price floor This will ensure that fossil fuel power plants pay enough emissions costs to facilitate the transition to renewable energy, even if the price in the EU’s carbon trading scheme is too low for it. And that change has been rapid, with total renewable energy generation nearly tripling in the decade since 2013. Growth of offshore wind power.
How to clean up the power sector
This trend was significant enough that the UK announced in 2015 that it would aim to phase out coal in 2025, despite the fact that the first coal-free electricity grid would be two years away. I did. But two years after that milestone, Britain was experiencing several weeks of: Coal-fired power plants were not operating.
It will be important that other countries follow the UK’s lead if we are to limit the worst effects of climate change. It is therefore worth considering how countries that have become relatively new to coal use can cope with such a rapid transition. There are some elements that are uniquely British that cannot be replicated everywhere. The first is that most of the coal infrastructure is very old, Ratcliffe-on-Soar dates from the 1960s and would have needed replacement anyway. Part of the reason coal holdings have aged is the local availability of relatively cheap natural gas, which may not be the case in other regions, making coal generation economically viable. is applying physical pressure.
Another important factor is that the continued decline in the number of people employed in coal-fired power generation has not put significant pressure on government policy. Despite the existence of a vocal group of climate change opponents in the UK, the issue has not been heavily politicized. Both the Labor and Conservative governments maintained a fact-based approach to climate change and set policy accordingly. Especially not in countries like the US and Australia.
However, other factors also apply to different countries. As the UK moves away from coal, renewable energy has become the cheapest way to generate electricity in many parts of the world. Coal is also the most polluting source of electricity, and there are good reasons for regulation that have little to do with climate. Forcing coal users to bear even a fraction of the externalized costs to human health and the environment would further reduce economics compared to alternatives.
Despite government inertia, if these latter factors can encourage a shift away from coal, they could have huge benefits in the fight to curb climate change. Britain’s New Labor government, partly inspired by the success of transitioning the electricity grid away from coal, Moved up the timeline Aim to decarbonize the power sector by 2030 (exceeding the previous Conservative government’s 2035 target).
