AT: Coal

Neg says we will turn to coal because they’re low price energies
Coal is dead, it isn’t coming back
Samantha Gross Wednesday, January 16, 2019
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/planetpolicy/2019/01/16/why-theres-no-bringing-coal-back/

During his campaign, President Trump promised to bring coal back. But is that even possible? In a new paper, Howard Gruenspecht, senior
energy
economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Energy Initiative, says that the answer is almost certainly “no .” In the
United States, more than 90 percent of coal use is in power generation. However, coal is experiencing fierce competition from low-priced

natural gas and ever-cheaper renewable power. Over the last decade, the United States has seen a 40 percent decline in

coal-fired generation, owing to lower coal plant utilization rates and plant retirements. Flat electricity demand compounds the challenge for coal. A
recovery in domestic coal demand is not likely. Inexpensive natural gas and renewable power are not going away. New coal-
fired generation capacity is much more expensive to build and more difficult to site and permit than natural gas or renewable
facilities. Uncertainty about the future of climate and environmental regulation adds to the challenge,

along with the potential that older coal plants will become obsolete and the potential need for
significant investments for them to remain operable . The current administration favors coal, but that policy may not continue in
future administrations. Displacing coal-fired power generation is a very cost-effective way to reduce U.S. energy-related greenhouse gas emissions, and thus could
be targeted by a future administration more concerned about climate. Despite these strong headwinds, the Trump administration is attempting a number of
strategies to aid the U.S. coal industry. It is important to distinguish steps that are largely symbolic from those that could significantly affect coal use. For example,
repeal of the Clean Power Plan is likely to have a minimal impact on future coal demand. Lifting a moratorium on coal leasing on federal lands, ending a review of
royalty rates, and expanded tax credits for carbon capture and sequestration are also unlikely to improve coal’s competitiveness. Other policies could have more
impact. The administration has explored several strategies to encourage coal plants to keep operating. For example, in September 2017, Secretary of Energy Rick
Perry proposed that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) adopt a Grid Resiliency Pricing Rule to guarantee that coal and nuclear plants that maintain a
90-day supply of fuel onsite could fully recover their costs along with a guaranteed return on equity. FERC unanimously rejected the rule, but the administration is
reportedly considering using authority under the Defense Production Act to achieve the same end. Using the Act in this way would be a significant departure from
past practice, and it is not clear how far the administration is willing to go to mandate coal generation on national security grounds .
The decline of the
U.S. coal industry is the result of market forces, not a policy “war on coal.” Export markets for U.S. coal also face
strong headwinds. Overseas sales by U.S. producers increased substantially in 2017, but are still below levels during 2011 through 2014. The United
States is a swing producer in the global coal market, called up on during price spikes for coal produced in China, Australia, and Indonesia. Demand for steam and
metallurgical coal (used in steel production) are both declining in Europe, and U.S. coal faces logistical disadvantages in supplying growing markets in Asia. The
decline of the U.S. coal industry is the result of market forces, not a policy “war on coal.” Any successful policy to revive the industry will be working against
economic headwinds, and thus difficult to maintain over the long term. Although coal mining and coal-fired electricity generation are small contributors to the
overall U.S. economy and employment, the decline of coal has had tragic consequences in certain communities. Working to ameliorate these impacts in affected
communities is likely to be a much more effective strategy than attempting to revive the coal industry with policy.

The coal industry is being forgotten as we move into a new age of renewable energy
Oliver Millman 19’ , 3-25-2019, ( environment reporter ) "'Coal is on the way out': study finds fossil
fuel now pricier than solar or wind," Guardian,
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/25/coal-more-expensive-wind-solar-us-energy-
study

Around three-quarters of US coal production is now more expensive than solar and wind energy in
providing electricity to American households, according to a new study. “Even without major policy shift we will
continue to see coal retire pretty rapidly,” said Mike O’Boyle, the co-author of the report for Energy Innovation, a renewables analysis
firm. “Our analysis shows that we can move a lot faster to replace coal with wind and solar. The fact that so much coal could be retired right now shows
we are off the pace.”

The study’s authors used public financial filings and data from the Energy Information Agency (EIA) to work out the cost of energy from
coal plants compared with wind and solar options within a 35-mile radius. They found that 211 gigawatts of current US coal capacity, 74% of the
coal fleet, is providing electricity that’s more expensive than wind or solar.By 2025
the picture becomes even clearer,
with nearly the entire US coal system out-competed on cost by wind and solar , even when factoring in
the construction of new wind turbines and solar panels. “We’ve seen we are at the ‘coal crossover’ point in many
parts of the country but this is actually more widespread than previously thought,” O’Boyle said. “There is a huge potential for wind and
solar to replace coal, while saving people money.”

Coal plants have suffered due to rising maintenance costs, including requirements to install pollution controls. Meanwhile, the cost of solar and
wind has plummeted as the technology has improved. Cheap
and abundant natural gas, as well as the growth of
renewables, has hit coal demand, with the EIA reporting in January that half of all US coalmines have
shut down over the past decade. “Coal is on its way out,” said Curtis Morgan, the chief executive of Vistra Energy, a major Texas-
based coal plant owner. “More and more plants are being retired.” Data released last week highlighted the rise of renewables, with
electricity generation from clean sources doubling since 2008. The bulk of renewable energy comes from hydro and wind, with solar playing a
more minor, albeit growing, role.

Renewables now account for around 17% of US electricity generation, with coal ’s share declining.
However, the power of coal’s incumbency, bolstered by a sympathetic Trump administration, means it isn’t on track to be eliminated
in the US as it is in the UK and Germany.Fossil fuels continue to receive staunch institutional support, too. A recent report released by a
coalition of environmental groups found that 33 global banks have provided $1.9tn in finance to coal, oil and gas companies since the 2015
Paris climate agreement.

In sobering figures released last week, the

EIA predicted that US carbon dioxide emissions from energy will
remain similar to current levels until 2050, with coal consumption dropping but then leveling off
beyond 2020. Such a scenario, disputed by other experts who argue the transition to renewables will be more rapid, would be compatible
with disastrous climate change, causing vast areas of the US coastline to be inundated, the spread of deadly heatwaves, growth of destructive
wildfires and food and water insecurity .The Trump administration has largely ignored scientists’ warnings over these dangers, instead
pushing ahead with an “energy dominance” mantra whereby enormous tracts of federal land and waters are opened up for oil and
gas drilling.

The Energy Innovation report, which suggests the “smooth shut down” of ageing coal plants, comes as states and territories start to rally
to California and Hawaii’s lead in committing to 100% renewable energy. Lawmakers in New Mexico recently decided to follow suit, with
Puerto Rico poised to vote on the issue this week as states and territories attempt to address climate change in lieu of the federal government.
“It would be better if we had a federal cohesive policy because not all states will take the initiative, ”
said O’Boyle. “In order to get an affordable, clean energy system we need both federal and state actors involved.”
 STOCK ISSUES
Inherency- Aff wins
Solvency-
1. NUQ – Fracking is facing production declines now, means jobs lost
Jerolmack 21 - Colin Jerolmack, 7-1-2021, "The fracking boom is over. Where did all the jobs go?," MIT
Technology Review, https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/07/01/1027822/fracking-boom-jobs-
industry/

What happened? As a Bloomberg report put it, “The numbers never added up.” Fracking has always been expensive;
extraordinarily generous fossil-fuel subsidies helped  hide the true cost. With new wells facing average
production declines of 60% in the first year, petroleum companies had to frantically drill more of them.
The entire model was premised on high oil and gas prices. But nationwide, the glut of gas (and, to a
lesser extent, oil) precipitated by the fracking boom depressed prices to their lowest levels since the
1990s. The result? Frackers pumped the brakes. A wave of consolidations and bankruptcies swept across
the sector. The stock prices of premier energy firms like Chesapeake Energy Corporation crashed (it declared bankruptcy in 2020). Some,
like Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, liquidated their shale gas holdings. Chevron announced in December 2019 that it would write down up to
$11 billion in shale gas assets. The
oil and gas industry shed more than 100,000 jobs last year, and a report by
Deloitte warned that about 70% of the jobs lost in 2020 may not come back this year—or ever. As of April,
the mining sector had the highest rate of unemployment in the country, at 15%. The petroleum industry has also taken a major reputational hit
for its role in warming the planet while peddling climate-change denialism. Methane
emissions associated with fracking are
so pervasive that many scientists now think substituting natural gas for coal won’t reduce greenhouse-
gas emissions. Shareholders are revolting; wealth managers are divesting.

--And production decline doesn’t mean we don’t need the plan. Fracking has faced
decline countless times, yet the industry persists. We need to guarantee fracking can’t
come back.
--Also, since people have lost their jobs already, it is more of a reason to pass the plan
now to give them jobs faster in the renewable energy sector – means you vote aff
We agree cheaper is better, but our environment and economy need renewable
energy.
Harms- people are being impacted negatively with health problems and
 ECON DA
Cross apply to both DAs-- Turn - Renewables reduces dependence on fossil fuels
Springer No Date - Nikki Springer, No Date, "Key Economic Benefits of Renewable Energy on Public
Lands," Yale Center for Business and the Environment, https://cbey.yale.edu/research/key-economic-
benefits-of-renewable-energy-on-public-lands. (Nikki Springer, PhD in Environmental Management). 

America’s federal public lands have been an important source of energy for over a century, along with providing other important resources and
amenities like clean air and water, recreation opportunities, and sustaining wildlands and wildlife habitat. Our
nation’s energy needs
continue to grow and evolve, and renewable energy generation on public lands has now also become a
contributor to a diverse and sustainable national energy portfolio. Renewable energy generation on
public lands makes important contributions to our economy. These projects represent billions of dollars
in capital investments and provide thousands of construction and operations and maintenance jobs.
Once online, the projects provide steady revenue to the U.S. Treasury as well as state and local governments. They also provide other
important local economic benefits, including for some rural communities with few other economic
opportunities. Renewable energy can also be part of a strategy to help communities currently
dependent on fossil fuel production diversify their economies. Solar, wind, and geothermal energy also
reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, which protects our clean air and water and helps address the
threat of climate change.
 Impact Calc
Magnitude, Timeframe, Probability