Coal Plant Archives - SolarBuzz Jamaica

Keep Commitment To Transition To Low-Carbon Economy, Urges UN Climate Change Office

August 26, 2016 Webmaster

The United Nations (UN) climate change secretariat has added its voice to concerns being raised about a proposal made by China’s Jiuquan Iron and Steel Company (JISCO) for the construction of a coal-fired plant in St Elizabeth.

The proposal was announced after JISCO completed a deal to acquire the Alpart alumina factory from Russian company, UC Rusal. The new Chinese owners plan to upgrade the plant with an aluminum smelter that would be powered by a 1,000-megawatt coal-fired plant.

Based on calculations provided by the CoalSwarm Global Plant Tracker, a 1,000 megawatt coal plant would produce 5.6-5.8 million tonnes of CO2 annually, increasing Jamaica’s emissions of CO2 by 79-82 per cent. Greenpeace campaigner Lauri Myllyvirta has said that the construction of the plant would violate the Paris Agreement signed under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Commenting on the possible impact of the proposed coal plant on Jamaica’s UNFCCC standing, Nick Nuttall, UNFCCC spokesperson, pointed out that Jamaica had submitted an ambitious national climate action plan to the UN aimed at achieving a nearly eight per cent emission reduction by 2030. He also argued that the action plan promised commitments of greater investment in greener sources of homegrown energy such as wind and solar power rather than increases in oft-imported fossil fuels.

He argued that economic growth and job creation were not antithetical to environmental protection.

“Many complex choices will be made by governments over the years and decades to come, including with regard to energy sources, but today, there is an ever clearer consensus that overcoming poverty and growing GDP, which are critical for developing countries, can go hand in hand with generating new kinds of high-tech jobs; creating healthier, less polluted societies and a transition to a low carbon economy …,” he said in an email response to The Gleaner.

Prime Minister Andrew Holness has said that the Government is committed to balancing its economic-growth aspirations with its environmental and international commitments.

Comments solicited from Jamaica’s mission to the UN and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were not forthcoming up to press time.

Gleaner

Climate Climate Change Environment Government News

Coal Plant Will Increase Jamaica’s CO2 Emission By 79-82 Per Cent – US Coal Expert

August 26, 2016 Webmaster

Director of the CoalSwarm Project Ted Nace has said that Jamaica will be unable to meet its target, of 7.8 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2030, should it go ahead with the commissioning of the proposed 1,000-megawatt (MW) coal-fired plant at the Alpart alumina plant which has recently been acquired by Chinese firm Jiuquan Iron and Steel Company Ltd. (JISCO).

Using the CoalSwarm Global Coal Plant Tracker, Nace shared calculations with The Gleaner, which show that a 1,000 coal plant would produce 5.6-5.8 million tonnes of CO2 annually.

Jamaica produced 7.1 million tonnes of CO2 in 2012.

“A coal plant would increase Jamaica’s emissions of CO2 by 79 per cent (for a “subcritical” plant) – 82 per cent (for a “supercritical” plant), assuming it were run at an 80 per cent capacity factor,” the coal expert said.

Pointing to the Paris country brief for Jamaica, which outlines Jamaica’s commitment under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Paris Agreement, Nace said, “such an increase would destroy any chance of meeting Jamaica’s commitment”.

VIOLATION OF AGREEMENT

Greenpeace campaigner Lauri Myllyvirta has argued that constructing the plant would violate the Paris Agreement.

“All signatories to the Paris agreement have accepted the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5-.2.0 degrees celsius. There is no more space for any new coal-fired power plants to be built under this goal, so in that sense the project does violate the basic aim of the agreement,” he said in an email response to The Gleaner.

According to the climate action plan, submitted to the UNFCCC by the Jamaican authorities, Jamaica has committed to a 7.8 per cent reduction in emissions by 2030 under its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC).

POSSIBILITY OF COAL SPILL

Jamaica signed the Paris Accords in April of this year but is yet to ratify the agreement.

“While the construction of a coal plant can produce a number of construction jobs in the short term, the number of long-term jobs is much lower, certain far lower than the number of jobs in the tourism sector,” Nace told The Gleaner.

According to the Nace, Jamaica could face the possibility of a coal spill given that coal terminals will have to be built to facilitate the importation of coal.

“Jamaica is not a major coal producer and as such coal would have to imported from a neighboring producer such as Colombia or the United States. This would mean construction of a coal terminal and the possibility of a coal spill,” he explained.

Gleaner

Climate Climate Change Electricity Environment Government News

‘Rethink Coal Plan’ – Environmentalists Decry Nain Plant Proposal, Gov’t Official Also Wary

August 5, 2016 Webmaster

Diana McCaulay

Jamaica will pay dearly in terms of the health of its people and the environment if the new owners of the Alpart bauxite facility in Nain, St Elizabeth, are allowed to build a proposed 1,000 megawatt coal-fired power plant, according to the Jamaica Environmental Trust (JET).

The organisation yesterday registered its strong opposition to the proposed energy source “due to the harm to human health and climate posed by coal-fired power plants”.

“Rethink this harmful project,” Diana McCaulay, JET’s chief executive officer, appealed to Prime Minister Andrew Holness, the portfolio minister for environmental issues.

She went on to argue some of the potential negative impacts of the various greenhouse gases discharged into the atmosphere by coal-fired plants, which are being phased out in developed countries.

“The pollutants from coal-fired plants that pose significant risks to human health are sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, mercury, and particulate matter. Sulphur dioxide is a trigger for asthma attacks and combines with water vapour to form acid rain, which will also affect crops and soil health in the farming parish of St Elizabeth and beyond,” JET said in a release.

“Nitrogen oxides are a precursor to smog and increase the likelihood of respiratory ailments such as wheezing, coughing, colds, flu, and bronchitis.”

JET continued: “Mercury is a neurotoxin associated with irreversible IQ deficits and neurobehavioral pathologies. Particulate matter, also called PM or soot, consists of microscopically small, solid particles or liquid droplets suspended in the air. The smaller the particles, the deeper they can penetrate into the respiratory system and the more hazardous they are. There is a robust association between daily rates of human mortality and levels of particulate matter even when levels are below air-quality guidelines. Emissions of these pollutants can be reduced with modern equipment, but this type of coal plant is not cheap to build and does not produce cheap electricity.”

Mining Minister Mike Henry recently announced the sale of the old Alpart plant to the China-based Jiuquan Iron & Steel (Group) Company Limited (JISCO).

He said JISCO would be investing US$2 billion to establish an industrial zone at Nain, employing more than 3,000 people.

It was announced that the industrial zone would comprise bauxite mines, an alumina refinery, a coal-fired power plant, a local electricity network, rolling wire mills, and a range of aluminium products, among other enterprises.

The Government’s consideration of coal-fired power generation is also a matter of concern for Clifford Mahlung, project administrator at the Climate Change Division in the Ministry of Economic Growth and Job Creation.

“There are other options out there I would have preferred, but they come at a cost,” he told The Gleaner yesterday.

“I’m figuring that is probably the most cost-effective way of achieving what they want from the plant. But, yes, the emissions are of concern, and so we hope that the impact will be minimised as much as possible so that we can be proud of that plant.”

However, yesterday, Energy Minister Dr Andrew Wheatley said no application had been made for construction of a coal-fired plant in St Elizabeth.

“There was no approval or anything like that done. They need to get their facts straight before they comment,” Wheatley told The Gleaner/Power 106 News Centre.

Mahlung explained that while construction and operation of a coal plant would not be a breach of climate-change conventions, it could fly in the face of Jamaica’s commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by the equivalent of 1.1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year by 2030.

While carbon capture and underground storage of the pollutants is an option, Jamaica does not have the technology, which would involve the use of large underground caves consistent with the size of the Green Grotto Caves in Discovery Bay, St Ann.

However, that does not seem a practical option in light of the country’s geological formation, which is mainly limestone, which is very porous.

“So it can’t keep the CO2 (carbon dioxide) underground … . Maybe they can find a way to capture that CO2 and transport it to somewhere else in the island. But all of this is at a cost to store it if that technology becomes possible, but these would add to the cost.”

christopher.serju@gleanerjm.com

The Gleaner