The Yorkshire Coal Taskforce NEW! See below for report on Coal Seminar, 7 July 2004
The Yorkshire Coal Taskforce is a lobbying group campaigning to save the coal industry in Yorkshire. It is supported by local councils, local and European MP's
Several of the remaining deep mines are situated in Yorkshire, and make a valuable contribution to the economics of the region. They also provide high quality housecoal and power station fuel for the Aire Valley power stations (Drax, Eggborough, Ferrybridge).
Coal still produces the cheapest electricity, and coal-fired power stations can respond quickly to demand for electricity. Even better would be to build a purpose-designed clean coal power station, this would use the coal much more efficiently and produce electricity more cleanly. Such a power station could use gasification and carbon capture - more details on the "clean coal seminar" page.
For more information, please contact Roger Kojan at Wakefield
Back to coal industry page Below - summary from Coal Seminar, 7 July 2004; another seminar held 8 July 05
 |
 |
| Ian outside Houses of Parliament | Pam with some old stuff |
“What
Future for Britain’s Energy Industries?”
(Seminar,
Wednesday, 7 July 2004, 3.30 pm, the Boothroyd Room, Portcullis House)
Mick
Clapham, MP, chaired the meeting (which was attended by coalfield MPs and
representatives of mining unions, including Ian Sewell and Pamela Ross on behalf
of the Yorkshire Coal Staffs branch of the GMB).
He said the new Energy Act, third reading on Tuesday, would be part of
future legislation, based on the February 2003 white paper, that had gaps in it
which have been translated into the energy bill.
Jim
Skea, Director of the Policy Studies Institute, also Director of the Institute
for UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC). Following
privatisation of the energy industries, the level of research declined.
UKERC would be a collaboration between different institutions.
He outlined changes, declining UK oil and gas production, the UK would
cease to be self sufficient in gas 2006, oil 2009.
Nuclear contribution would go down unless nothing was done, but the PM
asked that to be left open. Coal
was “embattled”, continuing challenges included the Large Combustion Plant
Directive (LCPD), EU trading schemes would make it difficult environment for
coal.
Long
term vision, 60% carbon reduction could mean a large scale deployment of
renewables, maybe at domestic level, perhaps a new role for nuclear.
But also needed radical improvements in energy efficiency.
Very long term, looking at hydrogen economy, but the US were using coal
in their vision. In the short term,
fossil fuel would be with us for a long time. Challenges for finance for
renewable sources, major efforts to step up energy efficiency.
He spoke of the contribution of energy industries to economic activity
and regeneration. The longer term
perspective could include coal “in situ” gasification, advanced combustion
technology, carbon capture and storage. Keeping
the nuclear option open, we would never design another plant ourselves, but need
to maintain the skills base to maintain and operate.
Logistics
couldn’t be ignored, nuclear waste, gas and oil decommissioning in North Sea,
Energy efficiency, research would be an important area.
UKERC remit was research rather than development and demonstration
activity, towards a sustainable energy programme, covering carbon capture and
storage, keeping nuclear open. More
info on www.ukerc.ac.uk
Ian
Brinkley, Chief Economist, TUC – felt energy policy had fallen down the agenda a
bit, don’t currently have an energy policy.
He spoke of the impact of privatisation on the coal industry.
It was now a shadow of itself, if we had learned anything, that we
shouldn’t throw away the reserves we have already, must keep the coal industry
for secure supply for the future. The
impact on research and development, a lot of the crucial work done on clean coal
had been hit. It was not the core
business of private firms to do this, nobody was responsible for keeping the
lights on.
What
sort of strategic structure do we need to put in place to maintain security and
diversity of supply? By 2020,
importing a large percentage of gas, in energy terms that was tomorrow.
Decisions now impact on 20 years’ time.
We have to be part of the solution to global warming.
In his view coal and nuclear were parked in the “too difficult to deal
with now” box, renewables needed to be given an important role, but have been
grabbed on because no one objects to the policy on them.
He spoke of the trade union sustainable development and advisory
committee (TUSDAC).
The
EU scheme to handle emissions trading starts Jan 05, concern over steel, also
coal fired generation, they had brought together energy unions and put together
a case for ministers, that coal fired energy must be secured for the future.
He spoke of the huge potential of building clean coal power stations.
He paid tribute to the all party group, the scars from industries being
let run down stay a long time. It
was a lesson to learn, not to repeat that, think about the impact on the local
community, regional development agencies needed better funding.
Gerald
Wingrove, CEO, Drax
Largest
coal fired plant in UK, 10 m t, 10% of UK electricity, one unit built in 1976,
the other in 1984, last of the coal fired plants, 660 MW units.
The most efficient plant, producing the most electricity per tonne coal
used, the most electricity per tonne carbon emitted.
24 Tera Watt hours, very significant contribution, and rising from 18 TWh
a few years ago, total UK output is 330 TWh.
Drax
recently restructured, is here for the long term, 20 to 30 years.
UK power, energy types – 36% coal, similar amount gas, 23 % nuclear, a
good diversity, provides security of supply, responds to keep the grid
operating. The latest projections
show gas going up to 58%, a huge change; they show nuclear declining and coal,
but coal is a swing fuel and can respond to changes in the energy market.
Currently
2004 will be similar to 2003, the latest projections for coal are going up,
there’s an acceptance of a larger position for coal, but projections still
decline to 75 TWh for 2020. Coal has a poor image, “dirty”,
“inefficient”, old fashioned and inflexible, a lot of those are wrong. It’s key in our energy mix, it provides the swing capacity
to keep the lights on. It will be
coal fired plant that takes up if there’s a shortage of power.
Drax can add 600 MW of power in 10 seconds. Coal can pick up when nuclear
is off line. If the estimates going
forward are wrong, it would be coal plant that needed to be there to fill the
gap, taking it out of the mix is very dangerous for our security of supply.
Energy projections of gas going to 60% is quite a challenge as no new
plants have been built or started since 1998.
The reason is simple, the margin between the cost of gas and the price of
power for a plant to be built is unsustainable.
Renewables, wind power was intermittent and didn’t add to peak demand.
.
Legislation
affecting coal: UK coal, sulphur of 1.8%, with the environmental legislation,
plant needs FGD, no UK coal is burned without FGD. Current plant either those with FGD, and those without.
Most of those without will close by 2016, others may fit FGD.
It is important that legislation we look at addresses plant that has FGD.
The legislation, designed with the purpose of driving down electricity
production from coal, eg Drax 24 TWh last year, the amount of carbon will only
enable Drax to produce 17 TWh, other power plants are the same, not something we
can ignore, and it will have an impact on the level of production from coal
sector.
The
rail infrastructure: coal and the power sector are very dependent on the rail
sector, we need to maintain our rail freight capacity.
240 trains per week at peak capacity, 240,000 tonnes of coal to burn at
peak output in the winter, the rail structure needs to keep working, if that
isn’t maintained, it will have an immediate impact on Drax and other coal
fired plant.
We
need to be in Europe, talking to people, negotiating to ensure that a clean coal
industry survives. Drax burns
predominantly UK supplied coal, but looking at other things, trialling of
Petcoke to reduce costs, looking at importing coal to meet environmental
requirements. Co-firing, a very
efficient way of burning biomass with coal, there are limits on that, burning
biomass with coal shouldn’t be treated differently to other renewable sources.
If we are looking for a market solution, we shouldn’t be stopping the
most efficient use of subsidy. Manufactured
waste products is another option, but legislation suggests this is turning plant
into waste incinerators. Clean coal
technology, also supercritical boilers, increase efficiency, and get significant
CO2 reduction.
Steve
Fothergill, CCC
We
don’t want to throw away those coal reserves, now it’s UK produced coal
against imported. A big enough
market to absorb every tonne of coal by UK coal industry.
Left to the market, the remaining significant coal industry squeezed to
extinction by imported coal. Issue
of what government support would be available to the coal industry to bridge the
gap. Credit to the government, have
closed the gap, but not enough. Many
of us would like to see operating aid, have secured investment aid, but no more
than subsidised a few small scale projects.
Managed decline, not as a strategic resource for the whole country, it
will need public money to survive in short and medium term.
Context
Tony Blair putting forward yesterday, carbon emissions: Kyoto agreed for all the
developed countries, cut CO 5% based on 1990 levels by 2010.
The EU said “we will go further and cut by 8%”.
Britain said that was not enough and said 12.5% - they could say that
because the coal industry was closed, emissions already cut by 16%, sacrifices
have already been made. Other
countries emissions are going up, haven’t been able to meet their target of
8%. The miners have made a huge
sacrifice already, things that are available, not being used, eg super critical
boilers, they have been designed, but not used.
We need to keep access to the coal reserves, or we won’t have an
industry. Hatfield is a good case in point, do we lose access to the
reserves there?
Mick
Clapham said
we needed to get across to the DTI what could be done in a mixed energy economy,
and a framework for indigenous coal. He
asked to set up a meeting with the DTI to look at energy and the future of the
indigenous coal industry, and a separate meeting with the Treasury, what kind of
assistance is required to ensure a medium to long term future for indigenous
coal. Kevin Hughes would meet with
Richard Budge to explore the issue of Hatfield.
The group of mining MPs would talk to the Prime Minister, to ask for an
Energy Minister, not a minister with Energy as part of his portfolio.