Thread by @jgkoomey

Setting a coal phase-out date (2030 or sooner for developed countries) is the most important single step most nations can take on climate. Of course it's not the only necessary step, but it's a big one.

https://twitter.com/KetanJ0/status/1395258045165342723

This is another example of a critically important constraint on the supply side (it's not just about reducing demand).

Green, Fergus, and Richard Denniss. 2018. "Cutting with both arms of the scissors: the economic and political case for restrictive supply-side climate policies." Climatic Change. 2018/03/12. [doi.org/10.1007/s10584…]

Asheim, G. B., T. Fæhn, K. Nyborg, M. Greaker, C. Hagem, B. Harstad, M. O. Hoel, D. Lund, and K. E. Rosendahl. 2019. "The case for a supply-side climate treaty." Science. vol. 365, no. 6451. pp. 325. [science.sciencemag.org/content/365/64…]

Newell, Peter, and Andrew Simms. 2019. "Towards a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty." Climate Policy. pp. 1-12. [doi.org/10.1080/146930…]

Early coal retirements are getting more attention: Bodnar, Paul, et al.. 2020. How to retire early: Making accelerated coal phaseout feasible and just. Old Snowmass, CO: Rocky Mountain Institute. [rmi.org/wp-content/upl…]

The economics of coal retirement are clear. In direct cost terms, RUNNING coal in most places costs more now than building new wind and solar with 4 hours of storage, and is far more expensive than energy efficiency. And the cost of those alternatives continues to fall rapidly.

More importantly, coal is uneconomic FOR SOCIETY when you count all its social costs, and that's been true for a very long time.

This 2011 economic analysis found that coal and oil fired electricity in the US delivered negative value added because of its pollution costs.

Muller, Nicholas Z., Robert Mendelsohn, and William Nordhaus. 2011. "Environmental Accounting for Pollution in the United States Economy." American Economic Review vol. 101, no. 5. August. pp. 1649–1675. [aeaweb.org/articles.php?d…]

More details (and higher social cost estimates) here: Epstein, et al. 2011. "Full cost accounting for the life cycle of coal." Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. vol. 1219, no. 1. February 17. pp. 73-98. [dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749…]

As our understanding of coal's pollution costs has improved, the assessments of the social costs of coal combustion have increased substantially.

Roberts, David. @drvolts 2020. Air pollution is much worse than we thought: Ditching fossil fuels would pay for itself through clean air alone. Vox, 2020. [vox.com/energy-and-env…]

For those fighting to close coal plants, focusing on the social costs is key, in my view. Coal is uneconomic FOR SOCIETY, full stop. Understanding the direct cost picture is important also, of course, because coal is increasingly uneconomic even in direct cost terms.

The coal industry can talk all it wants about jobs at risk from plant closures, but the simple truth is that every kWh of generated from coal COSTS SOCIETY MONEY and KILLS PEOPLE. It is an archaic and dangerous industry and it should be shut down as quickly as we can do it.