Global Warming: The Global Coal Renaissance

  “stringently considered, then, our only natural birthright is a right to die. No other right has ever been allocated to anyone except as a fabrication”          

          The early 2000’s began an era where technology and fossil fuels seemed promising in the near-future. Coal fired plants are a main fraction of fossil fuel. In discussions of the relationship between energy and the environment, one controversial issue has been carbon-dioxide emissions from coal power plants. On the one hand, poor and developing countries argue that it helps them climb out of poverty. On the other hand, Brad Plumer, a senior editor at Vox Media, Inc. contends, “if coal continues to be the world’s leading source of electricity, we’ll cook the planet” (2). My own view is that coal energy should not be stopped as the planet and mankind has always been coming into an end.

           Over the past 15 years, there has been some major energy changes, especially in coal-plants. Brad Plumer argues that various countries, not just the United States, need to limit their coal-powered economy. Plumer states that coal, “The dirtiest of all fossil fuels has once provided more than half of America’s electricity” (1). Basically, Plumer is saying that coal consumption was on the rise despite all the environmental policies limiting its use. According to BP’s Statistical Review of Energy, since the 1990’s, coal has been rising and not just in developing countries like India, or all of Asia for that matter, but also in developed countries like the United States. However, the use has decreased by 39 percent and the global coal use has leveled off due to countless campaigns from the Sierra Club that attempts to promote cheaper natural gas instead. Moreover, according to Fatih Birol, the chief economist of the International Energy Agency (IEA), “the world’s fossil fuel companies risk wasting billions of dollars of investment by not taking global action to fight climate change seriously” (1). In other words, Fatih Birol believes that if companies miss out on clean energy investments, they are on the road for a lost income. Ultimately, what is at stake here is the planet’s future. The chance of continuing reliance on fossil fuel coal as an energy source and not investing in clean energy, like solar or wind power, carries a much greater threat of increasing the temperature by 2 ?C or even 3 ?C globally.

"mankind stands in the most critical moment of Earth’s history: choosing its future"

           “The Tao of Liberation,” a 2009 book by Mark Hathaway and Leonardo Boff covers how mankind stands in the most critical moment of Earth’s history: choosing its future. Humanity has broken through barriers technologically and economically like never before. All of which relies on Earth’s natural wealth: oil, gas, coal, etc. As humanity evolves, they continue to rely on Earth’s wealth without thinking about sustaining life itself. Mark Hathaway and Leonardo Boff claim that nations only care about their growing needs in economic, political and military fields without caring about the “cost” of that globalization. In their view, “we are witnessing the exhaustion of the Earth’s ‘sources’: our world is entering a period of ‘drawdown’ in which humanity devours the Earth’s common wealth faster than it can be replenished” (Boff and Hathaway 3). Their point is that if humans keep depending on Earth as a source for life, there will not be any life left. This relates directly back to the coal issue presented above. Nations are using more of the fossil fuels and in turn they are destroying the planet. They are raising its temperature and killing forests and animals. In a report by CoalSwarm, the Sierra Club and Greenspace announced that 1,500 new coal pants are being built and in order to stay under the 2 ?C, less than one-third of the planned coal plants are built. Even then, with all the current coal plants and other oil and gas plants, it would be extraordinarily difficult. In other words, it would take a miracle to stay under the 2 ?C global warming threshold. Staying under the 2 ?C mark is important because if broken through, the sea would increase by 16 feet in New York City. The chance of expanding economically and politically carries the threat that Earth might not sustain that great amount of heat, therefore, ending life.

           A philosophy that stands against the human interference in Earth’s natural world is deep ecology. Philosopher Arne N?ss demonstrates the deep ecological movement and he argues that is has multiple definitions. N?ss states, “the phrase “deep ecological movement”…one should not expect too much from definitions of movements; think in terms like “conservatism,” “liberalism,” or the “feminist movement” ” (404). In other words, N?ss believes the deep ecological movement does not follow one meaning, but a series of proposed interpretations from different people. However, N?ss provides a certain “guideline” in which deep ecologists or supporters of the movement accept. The eight points sum up to: (4) a smaller human population in which (1) human and non-human life should be preserved on Earth as (2) each diverse lifeform has value within which (3) humans have no right in removing. Also, (5) since human interference is increasing with the non-human world, (6) new ideological policies should be present in which (7) the change in life quality would rule rather than the “standard of living.” Finally, (8) those who believe and go by these points have “an obligation directly or indirectly to try to implement the necessary changes” (N?ss 405).

           N?ss moves on to introduce shallow ecological ideas against the deep ecological ones. Overall, shallow ecology is concerned with the humans and “limiting pollution.” N?ss observes that shallow ecologists would try to use technology or different resources to “limit” the pollution. According to N?ss, “shallow approach: technology seeks to purify the air and water and to spread pollution more evenly…polluting industries are preferably exported to developing countries” (407). N?ss’s point is that when shallow ecologists attempt to solve the coal pollution, they would use technology, which would require more coal, and try to decrease pollution rather than eliminate it completely (short range solution). Basically, sustain or expand the economical field with “some” pollution. In contrast, N?ss claims that deep ecology would look at the pollution as affecting Earth in general, not just humans, but every human and non-human creature. N?ss himself writes, “deep approach: pollution is evaluated fro, a biosphere point of view, not focusing exclusively on its effects on human health, but rather on life a whole” (407). N?ss is insisting that deep ecologists focus on the long term solution, a 100 years from now, and not just on keeping humans healthy, but keeping animals, plants, and the planet as a whole “healthy.”         

           Coal energy has undeniable benefits as well as significant health risks. When it comes to the issue of whether we should rely on coal or not to limit global warming, I disagree that we should even try. Neither deep nor shallow ecology would make any difference because it is basically impossible to stop the damage that has already been done. Moreover, as Zapffe and Ligotti claim, we are born conscious that we are going to die, so we try to limit that consciousness in various ways. Therefore, the balance between coal use and the environment is not necessary for us to try to achieve. Only two possibilities are present: 1. Stop the use of fossil fuels and watch the planet die slowly as the economy plummets or 2. Keep using fossil fuels and grow a rich economy where everyone is happy as they live their final years. Like Boff and Hathaway have stated, the choice is up to us. Mankind will to decide Earth’s future.

References:

Carrington, Damian. "Fossil Fuel Firms Risk Wasting Billions by Ignoring Climate Change, Says IEA; Energy Companies Are making a 'strategic Mistake' and Could Waste Billions of Dollars of Investment by Thinking They Are Immune to Climate Policy, Says IEA Chief Economist Fatih Birol." The Guardian. The Guardian, 09 July 2015. Web. 17 Apr. 2016.

Hathaway, Mark, and Leonardo Boff. The Tao of Liberation: Exploring the Ecology of Transformation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2009. Indiana University Northwest. Web.

Hunziker, Robert. "Climate Genocide." Counter Punch. Counterpunch.org, 6 Mar. 2015. Web.

Ligotti, Thomas. The Conspiracy against the Human Race: A Contrivance of Horror. New York: Hippocampus, 2010. Indiana University Northwest. Web.

N?ss, Arne. "The Deep Ecological Movement: Some Philosophical Aspects." Indiana University Northwest. Web.

Plumer, Brad. "Hundreds of Coal Plants Are Still Being Planned Worldwide — Enough to Cook the Planet." Vox. Vox, 05 Apr. 2016. Web.

Plumer, Brad. "The Global Coal Renaissance Has Been the Most Important Climate Story of the Last Decade." Vox. Vox, 07 July 2015. Web.

Plumer, Brad. "The Math on Stopping Climate Change Looks Increasingly Brutal." Vox. Vox, 19 Oct. 2015. Web.

Zapffe, Peter Wessel. "The Last Messiah." Indiana University Northwest. 1933. Web.