Eradicated Coal Paper

ERADICATING THE COAL INDUSTRY
Eradicating the Coal Industry
Written By: Andrew Breiter-Wu
Addressed to: Professor Ryan Raffety
Course: MGMT-290P; 503P
Date: December 10th, 2015

ERADICATING THE COAL INDUSTRY 1
Introduction:
The United States has the coal industry to thank for its current status as the most
“powerful nation in the world.” Coal has fueled industrialization of the late 1800s and
early 1900s, enabling the U.S to become one of the richest nations in the world and
providing the average U.S. citizen with a lifestyle that far outweighs any other nation on
earth. However, American prosperity has come at a great cost to the environment. Coal
and its prolific contribution to the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and the
increasing development of cleaner energy sources; It may be time to eradicate the coal
industry all together. The arguments as to why coal must be eradicated, how to
eradicate coal, and examples of how the U.S. can increase usage of cleaner energy
sources are included in this report.
Coal- Then and Now:
Coal has been used for heat since The Stone Age. According to Department of
Energy’s brief on the history of fossil fuels:” Archeologists have also found evidence that
the Romans in England used it during the second and third centuries (100-200 AD). “
(DOE.GOV).
Although, coal has been used for heat and fuel in societies for many thousands
of years, The Industrial Revolution marked a dramatic increase in the use of coal
worldwide. Coal provided the energy to run industry and electricity in most major cities
in the United States. In addition, it fueled the locomotive industry, a major mode of
transport of people and cargo in the early 20th century. Coal also fueled the electricity
for 90% of the country during that time, and still fuels 39% today.
Coal is plentiful in the United States. According to the U.S. Energy Information
Administration, “The United States is home to the largest estimated recoverable
reserves of coal in the world. In fact, we have enough estimated recoverable reserves
of coal to last more than 200 years, based on current production levels. Coal is
produced in 25 states spread across three major coal-producing regions. In 2013,

approximately 70% of production originated in five states: Wyoming, West Virginia,
Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.” (EIA).
If coal is so abundant why is coal usage declining in the United States?
Coal usage has been in decline for the past decade partly due to a greater
dependence on oil and a desire to use cleaner forms of energy. Coal, when burned,
emits sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, heavy metals, hydrogen chloride and carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere. All of the emissions from burning coal listed can be linked
to the dire state of our environment today. For example, carbon dioxide significantly
contributes to global warming and hydrogen chloride contributes to acid rain.
Coal usage is again declining in the U.S. due to the increasing demand by U.S.
citizens to use fuel sources that are less damaging to the environment. As Americans
become more aware of the negative effects of coal, the less popular coal becomes. In
2013, Coal represented 19 percent of energy consumed in the U.S. and was
responsible for 32% of all CO2 emissions for that year. These numbers are further
proof of how unsustainable coal is as a resource. “The U.S. Energy Information
Administration (EIA) released data showing that United States coal exports hit a record
126 million short tons in 2012, a 17 percent increase over the previous year. Overseas
shipments surpassed the previous high mark set in 1981 by 12 percent. The United
States clearly is using less coal: Domestic consumption fell by about 114 million tons, or
11 percent, largely due to a decline in the use of coal for electricity. However, U.S. coal
production fell just 7 percent. The United States, with the world's largest coal reserves,
continued to churn out the most carbon-intensive fuel, producing 1 billion tons of coal
from its mines in 2012.” (National Geographic).
Unfortunately, the United States coal industry has responded to the decline in
coal usage by exporting coal to Europe, Australia, China and India. By doing this, the
U.S. is contradicting its stance on global warming and climate change by fueling other
nations overdependence on coal for a profit.
Why Coal usage must be eradicated:
Coal must be eradicated from the current global energy market for a multitude of
important reasons. First of all, the combustion of coal pollutes particulate matter, sulfur

oxides, nitrogen oxides, lead and mercury, along with other toxic and medically
damaging by-products of coal combustion into the environment. The culmination of
these substances being released into the atmosphere puts public health at risk by
causing respiratory and neurological diseases throughout the entire world. Regardless
of the clear risks and issues involved with burning coal, according to the International
Energy Agency, “As of 2013, coal provided approximately 41% of the world’s electricity
needs. And at 29% of total world energy supply, coal is second only to oil, at 31%.”
(“IEA”, 2013). The majority of the infrastructure across the globe is centralized around
coal combustion to generate electricity. Within the United States, one third of the
greenhouse gas emissions come from coal fired power plants.
The true urgency to diverge from coal and other fossil fuels comes from the
greenhouse gases that are released during their combustion. The world is burning fossil
fuels at an unprecedented rate which is resulting in the unprecedented release of
greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. As the levels of greenhouse gases build up, the
rate of climate change is increasing across the globe. This creates a variety of
undesirable issues throughout the world. One issue is the exponential rise of sea levels
which could wipe out entire cities and countries that are vital to the global economy. It
could wipe out billions of dollars worth of real estate and cripple the investments of
thousands of people. By increasing the rate of climate change, more super storms /
natural disasters are killing thousands of people and destroying infrastructure across the
globe. From a global perspective, the ecosystems and habitats are being destroyed for
all species due to climate change, not just humans (“IEA”, 2013). It is truly an issue that
must be addressed and resolved as soon as possible. The biggest step towards
reducing the rate of climate change would be the complete eradication of coal.
We have almost eliminated distributed coal combustion to heat homes across the
United States but the biggest usage of coal comes from the electrical supply sector.
Coal generated electricity yields a high amount of electricity but has too many costly
environmental side effects. In the generation process, there are high amounts of water
required to cool the boilers, generators, and turbines. The hot water is generally
released into rivers and bodies of water. This creates algal blooms and removes all

oxygen out of the water. This kills the fish and destroyed the marine ecosystems. Also,
in coal generation, it is generally far away from the actual consumer which requires long
transmission lines to spread the electricity. This creates an inefficiency in the electrical
generation process and wastes the dirty energy that was produced. These two issues
along with the previously addressed greenhouse gas emissions are ultimately why coal
combustion must be completely eradicated for all uses.
Challenges of eradicating coal:
The major challenge behind eradicating coal is the monetary and political
influence of the coal industry worldwide, especially in the United States. Profit-focused
firms are directing the planet to a grim future. It is essential to combat these firms with
direct and immediate legislation that makes it no longer profitable or monetarily
beneficial to burn coal as an energy source. This is the only way in which coal can start
to be eradicated from the global energy markets (Rehbach & Samek, 2015). A global
agreement backed with a Green Fund needs to be globally agreed upon as soon as
possible. The hope is that the Paris Climate Conference results in a globally accepted
agreement to create a clear plan towards carbon neutrality followed by explicit actions
and deadlines that must be completed by every nation across the globe. This would be
a major component helping the eradication of coal.
How we can eradicate coal:
To reiterate, today’s fossil fuel industry, especially in the U.S. faces major
jeopardy. American policy makers and business leaders have become increasingly
conscious of the harmful effects of fossil fuels and the implications of these effects on
big business and society. In regards to coal specifically, major divestment is currently
occurring among major cities (e.g. New York, San Francisco, etc.). Additionally, the coal
industry has recently experienced a sizable decrease in profitability (Kaufman, 2015).
However, global consumption (especially in China) of coal is high and supply is
abundant. Although the coal industry does face hurdles, it still remains a lucrative
source of energy as long as energy policy does not interfere further. Nonetheless, the

environmental impacts of the continued use of coal are so disastrous that both
governmental intervention and big business divestment are imminent (Rehbach &
Samek, 2015). The only question apparent is in regards to the time in it will take for the
coal industry to become completely eradicated. To quicken this process, specific actions
must be taken by policy makers, business leaders, and society as a whole.
Policy makers must make major changes to energy policy in order to eradicate
the use of coal. Two key policy areas include enforcing limits on air pollution, specifically
C02, emissions and providing incentives for renewable energy utilization, to name a
few. Both areas ultimately support the strategic adoption of more renewable energy,
while limiting forms of non-renewable and harmful energy, such as coal. If emissions
standards became more strict (as standards in the U.S. are becoming more strict with
time) , many companies within the energy industry are forced to shut down coal plants.
With limits on emissions, companies are forced to adopt new costly emission-reduction
equipment or other expensive necessities to operate legally, which is often
uneconomical (Rehbach & Samek, 2015). As stated previously, an initial global
agreement backed with a Green Fund needs to be globally agreed upon as soon as
possible, which would also limit emissions. The Renewable Energy Production Incentive
program, or REPI, a U.S. federally-run program aimed at providing payments and tax
credits for businesses (based on their sustainable energy operations), is an ideal
example for this area in policy (“REPI”, 2015) . Giving businesses a reason to use
renewable energy resources not only assists in the eradication of coal, but aligns with a
business's need to maximize profits. Ultimately, both restricting and providing incentives
for corporations in regards to their role in the environment is vital to the the phasing out
of coal. The scope and/or scale of these policies ultimately determines the speed at
which coal is eradicated.
Business leaders must make major decisions relating to corporate social
responsibility, political lobbying, and business strategy to assist in the eradication of
coal. In regards to corporate social responsibility, business leaders stand to benefit
immensely through the decreased use of coal in their operations. Given the current day

social/political environment, a corporation’s choice to be “environmentally friendly’, and
market itself in that way, has major implications for its product’s or service's
brand/reputation. As for political lobbying, business leaders must choose to lobby for the
previously mentioned changes in energy policy. Corporations who utilize coal, and coal
energy companies themselves, potentially experience major profit declines as energy
policy becomes more strict (Rehbach & Samek, 2015). Decisions to lobby for more
lenient policies allows corporations to continue with their operations as they always
have. While there are major downsides to lobbying for stricter energy laws, this is
ultimately what will need to happen in order to eradicate coal. Those lobbying for more
lenient policies are fighting a losing battle, so lobbying in the opposite direction will
ultimately again improve corporation's’ brand/reputation and their ability to innovate
processes/products/services before competitors do. In regards to business strategy,
corporations that utilize coal in their operations must be willing to seek different forms of
renewable energy, such as nuclear, wind, or solar energy. Coal energy companies
themselves, many on their way to bankruptcy, must begin the transition to alternative
forms of energy (Kaufman, 2015). Businesses making these strategic changes will likely
yield greater profit maximization in the long-term, in addition to the benefit of increased
corporate social responsibility.
Society as a whole must exercise their right to vote on energy policy, be
increasingly aware of energy issues, and choose to support corporations who do not
utilize coal. If more U.S. citizen voted in favor of stricter emission standards and
renewable utilization incentive policies, the process to eradicate coal would quicken.
Increasing awareness of energy issues would improve the citizens’ willingness to vote in
this way, in addition to increasing activism for environmentally friendly policies.
Increasing awareness can be implemented by non-profit, or non-governmental
organizations, utilization of social media, and for-profit social responsibility campaigns,
to name a few ways. Consumers’ choice to support corporations (especially power
companies) who do not utilize coal and/or lobby for minimal use of coal is another major
way that society can work to eradicate coal. If a corporation’s profit decline correlates
with how much coal it uses, that corporation would be obligated to minimize its use of

coal, or go bankrupt. This is perhaps one of the most powerful ways society can be
active in the eradication of coal. This type of activism, along with increased awareness
and voting, shows that society as a whole has just as much weight in the issue as do
policy makers and business leaders.
The actions of policymakers, business leaders, and society are not mutually
exclusive. These three groups are interdependent upon one another, as actions of one
group directly affect another. Therefore, the three must work together to ultimately
eradicate the coal industry. If the groups can cooperate to find common ground, in
addition to taking the strategic actions listed above, coal has a much higher chance of
being eradicated.
The Pros and Cons of Eradicating Coal:
Coal is the most polluting of all fossil fuels. Burning coal is the largest single
source of climate changing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the world. More
specifically, coal burning is responsible for one-third of all our CO2 pollution.
Furthermore, it is considered to be the most polluting way to generate electricity
accounting for over 70 percent of the CO2 emissions from the power sector. Avoiding
climate change’s worst impact means that it is necessary to reduce the growth of CO2
emission significantly, which means that it is necessary to change the coal mining
industry.
The punch line of most arguments by supporters of coal is that it is cheap and
that most of the largest economies of the world have thrived on coal power. However,
this is not a correct statement because coal is not the cheapest form of energy. How an
energy source is defined as cheap or expensive varies. However, comparing coal to
energy sources, such as solar power and wind power it is possible to conclude that coal
mining cannot be considered as the cheapest source of energy. Additionally, whether or
not an energy source is cheap should not be the main argument regardless. The fact
that something is “cheaper” does not necessarily mean that i should be further pursued.
Instead, the future implications and long-term consequences should be taken into

consideration. This is highly relevant when it comes to the use of coal because it comes
with big consequences health wise, environmentally and economically in the long-term.
The Department of Health in Australia has agreed that “coal is a health hazard
from start to finish” with health costs running into $300 million annually together with
4,000 asthma cases per year (Pembina Institute, 2013). In India, according to the
Health and Environment Alliance, 80,000 to 115,000 premature deaths occurred
between 2011-2012 due to coal related pollution. These are examples of the coal
industry negative impact on population’s general health (Health and Environment
Alliance, 2013). However, the coal industry comes with environmental costs as well as a
health costs.
In terms of environmental costs, and to reiterate harmful effects listed in above
sections of the report, coal mining destroys ecosystems. It releases toxic levels of
minerals and gasses into water and air and exposes miners and those who live nearby
to coal dust and other toxins. Additionally, thousands of people die in mine collapses
around the world every year. CO2, coal combustion releases millions of tons of sulphur
dioxide and nitrogen oxides into the air, which creates acid rain and smog. Furthermore,
coal burning yields particulate matter pollution, which creates air pollution and
respiratory ailments, among other health problems. Another byproduct of burning coal is
mercury, which infiltrates the food chain and attacks the human nervous system. Young
children and babies, whose nervous system are still developing, are especially
vulnerable.
Burning coal creates millions of tons of waste products that contain toxic levels of
heavy metals and minerals. These mostly end up in landfill sites or impoundments, and
pose a threat to the environment as well as the general public’s health. The harmful
effects of coal can simply not be reiterated enough to emphasize the need to eradicate
it.
Economic Impact of the Eradication of Coal
A world without coal is hard to conceptualize because coal has fueled the growth
of many nations and continues to fuel this growth. A world without coal would mean a

severe slowing of the world economy (Rehbach & Samek, 2015). Experts state that our
investment in renewables is to slow to catch up with the energy demands of today.
America wouldn’t be a world power if it wasn’t for coal and neither would China. Coal
eradication would also mean a loss of many jobs worldwide.
“Coal production also provides steady, high-wage jobs across America and for
the men and women who work in the coal fields within the twenty-six states where coal
is mined. Coal production also helps sustain jobs for those individuals who manufacture
the heavy equipment the coal industry depends on, those who provide both the steel
and high-tech components that goes into that equipment, those who generate coal-fired
electricity, and those who provide the sophisticated technical and engineering support
that is such an integral part of coal mining today. According to a study by
PricewaterhouseCoopers, based on U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis data, America’s
domestic coal mining industry was responsible for 154,000 direct jobs and over 400,000
indirect jobs in 2008.” (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2015). This may be too many jobs for
the American economy to withstand.
25 percent of Germany’s energy comes from renewable energy sources.
However they have experience higher prices and periodic blackouts as a result. While
renewable energy resources aren’t quite economically viable enough to replace the
productivity of coal, the negative effects of coal far outweigh this.
Conclusion
The world cannot sustain the current use of coal worldwide. There needs to be
an aggressive intervention to eradicate the use of coal worldwide in order to slow or
reverse global warming. However, this will not happen without a universal ideological
shift from capitalist growth mandates and policies that promote consistent growth and
expansion. The global economy needs in order to slow down current tragic trajectory.
Coal combustion has fast-tracked our current society to extinction. Ending our
dependence on coal is vital to the long-term health our planet.

References
Coal in the American Economy - Truth About Surface Mining. (2015). Retrieved
December 10, 2015, from
http://truthaboutsurfacemining.com/Impacts/Pages/CoalAmericanEconomy.aspx
DOE - Fossil Energy: Introduction to Coal Technology. (n.d.). Retrieved December 10,
2015, from http://www.fossil.energy.gov/education/energylessons/coal/index.html
Grose PUBLISHED Sun Mar 17 19:12:00 EDT 2013, T. (n.d.). As U.S. Cleans Its
Energy Mix, It Ships Coal Problems Abroad. Retrieved December 10, 2015, from
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/03/130315-us-coal-exports/
Kaufman, A. (2015, December 2). The beginning of the end of the fossil fuel industry.
Retrieved December 9, 2015, from http://www.msn.com/en-
us/money/markets/the-beginning-of-the-end-of-the-fossil-fuel-industry/ar-
AAfWiVM?li=BBnb7Kv
New report shows health and climate impacts from coal power cost Alberta millions.
(2013, March 26). Retrieved December 10, 2015, from
http://www.pembina.org/media-release/2425
Rehbach, S., & Samek, R. (2015, November 15). Downsizing the US coal industry.
Retrieved December 9th, 2015 from McKinsey & Company Metals & Mining
Practice.
Renewable Energy Production Incentives. (2015, November 2). Retrieved December 9,
2015, from
http://www3.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/wastemin/minimize/energyrec/rpsinc.htm
U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis.
(2015). Retrieved December 9, 2015, from http://www.eia.gov/coal/

Appendix
Exhibit 1

Eradicated Coal Paper

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (18)

Destacado

Destacado (10)

Similar a Eradicated Coal Paper

Similar a Eradicated Coal Paper (20)

Eradicated Coal Paper