The share of energy generated from coal fell more sharply during the coronavirus pandemic than that of any other energy source, according to a new report on Monday that analyzed the demand for coal in some of the biggest emitters of gases the world’s greenhouse effect.
The move away from coal-fired power has had a significant impact on global carbon dioxide emissions, which heat the planet, the researchers said, and could lead to an acceleration of global change towards renewable energy.
The report, led by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany and published Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change, analyzed electricity emissions and demand in the United States, Europe and India.
Ottmar Edenhofer, director and chief economist at the Potsdam Institute and author of the study, said the findings were surprising because natural gas has traditionally had the highest operating costs of all energy sources, so gas-fired plants are generally the first to taken offline when demand for energy drops. The sharp drop in gas prices during the pandemic, however, seems to have changed this calculation, making coal energy more expensive than gas energy.
Coal releases more carbon dioxide than any other form of power generation, so even the relatively small decreases in demand that have caused the shutdown of coal plants have resulted in substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Burning coal to generate energy also pollutes the air, releasing toxins that have been linked to heart and lung problems and some neurological disorders.
In some regions studied, a 20% reduction in energy demand compared to monthly averages in 2019 corresponded to decreases in carbon dioxide emissions of up to 50%. Falls in emissions in terms of coal demand were most pronounced in Germany, Spain and Great Britain.
The trend towards abandoning coal may outlast the pandemic, the report said. That’s because plants that use renewable energy, such as wind or solar, are expensive to build. Once completed, however, there is no need to purchase fuel to operate them.
According to a separate study by Ember Climate, a London-based energy research organization, global wind and solar energy capacity increased last year despite the pandemic. This, combined with relatively low operating costs, means that when energy demand recovers, a greater share of total energy is likely to come from low emissions or renewable sources.
The authors of the Potsdam report noted, however, that so-called brown recovery plans that expand coal energy are still a possibility. This is of particular concern in parts of Southeast Asia, where energy demand is increasing rapidly, but high interest rates can lead to high costs for renewable energy projects.
“We are not saying that we anticipate that coal will be phased out,” said Edenhofer. “What we are saying is that this is now a splendid opportunity and it would be nice if energy and finance ministers around the world were to take advantage of the situation.”
Katrin Ganswindt, who works on energy and finance campaigns for the German environmental NGO Urgewald, noted that market forces could lead some countries to a brown energy recovery. She noted that in China, appetite for new coal plants is waning, prompting Chinese coal companies to pursue new coal projects in neighboring countries.
“The consideration is always, in the end, financial,” said Ganswindt. “It is less risky to do what you know instead of changing it, because the risk of climate change still seems so unreal or so far away.”