Coal-fired power station

This article is about the specifics of power stations which burn coal. For comparison with power stations which burn fuels such as natural gas, see fossil fuel power station. For information common to all power stations which convert heat into electricity, see thermal power station.

A coal-fired power station or coal power plant is a thermal power station which burns coal to generate electricity. Worldwide there are over 2,400 coal-fired power stations, totaling over 2,000 gigawatts capacity.^[1] They generate about a third of the world's electricity,^[2] but cause many illnesses and the most early deaths,^[3] mainly from air pollution.^[4][5]

Bełchatów Power Station in Bełchatów, Poland

Frimmersdorf Power Station in Grevenbroich, Germany

Coal-fired power station diagram

Share of electricity production from coal

A coal-fired power station is a type of fossil fuel power station. The coal is usually pulverized and then burned in a pulverized coal-fired boiler. The furnace heat converts boiler water to steam, which is then used to spin turbines that turn generators. Thus chemical energy stored in coal is converted successively into thermal energy, mechanical energy and, finally, electrical energy.

Coal-fired power stations emit over 10 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide each year,^[6] about one fifth of world greenhouse gas emissions, so are the single largest cause of climate change.^[7] More than half of all the coal-fired electricity in the world is generated in China.^[8] In 2020 the total number of plants started falling^[9][10] as they are being retired in Europe^[11] and America^[12] although still being built in Asia, almost all in China.^[13] Some remain profitable because costs to other people due to the health and environmental impact of the coal industry are not priced into the cost of generation,^[14][15] but there is the risk newer plants may become stranded assets.^[16] The UN Secretary General has said that OECD countries should stop generating electricity from coal by 2030, and the rest of the world by 2040.^[17] Vietnam is among the few coal-dependent fast developing countries that fully pledged to phase out unbated coal power by the 2040s or as soon as possible thereafter.^[18]

History

See also: Power station § History

 

Holborn Viaduct power station in London, the world's first public steam-driven coal power station, opened in 1882

The first coal-fired power stations were built in the late 19th century and used reciprocating engines to generate direct current. Steam turbines allowed much larger plants to be built in the early 20th century and alternating current was used to serve wider areas.

Transport and delivery of coal

 

Castle Gate Plant near Helper, Utah.

Coal is delivered by highway truck, rail, barge, collier ship or coal slurry pipeline. Generating stations are sometimes built next to a mine; especially one mining coal, such as lignite, which is not valuable enough to transport long-distance; so may receive coal by conveyor belt or massive diesel-electric-drive trucks. A large coal train called a "unit train" may be 2 km long, containing 130-140 cars with around 100 tonnes of coal in each one, for a total load of over 10,000 tonnes. A large plant under full load requires at least one coal delivery this size every day. Plants may get as many as three to five trains a day, especially in "peak season" during the hottest summer or coldest winter months (depending on local climate) when power consumption is high.

Modern unloaders use rotary dump devices, which eliminate problems with coal freezing in bottom dump cars. The unloader includes a train positioner arm that pulls the entire train to position each car over a coal hopper. The dumper clamps an individual car against a platform that swivels the car upside down to dump the coal. Swiveling couplers enable the entire operation to occur while the cars are still coupled together. Unloading a unit train takes about three hours.

Shorter trains may use railcars with an "air-dump", which relies on air pressure from the engine plus a "hot shoe" on each car. This "hot shoe" when it comes into contact with a "hot rail" at the unloading trestle, shoots an electric charge through the air dump apparatus and causes the doors on the bottom of the car to open, dumping the coal through the opening in the trestle. Unloading one of these trains takes anywhere from an hour to an hour and a half. Older unloaders may still use manually operated bottom-dump rail cars and a "shaker" attached to dump the coal.

A collier (cargo ship carrying coal) may hold 41,000 tonnes (40,000 long tons) of coal and takes several days to unload. Some colliers carry their own conveying equipment to unload their own bunkers; others depend on equipment at the plant. For transporting coal in calmer waters, such as rivers and lakes, flat-bottomed barges are often used. Barges are usually unpowered and must be moved by tugboats or towboats.

For start up or auxiliary purposes, the plant may use fuel oil as well. Fuel oil can be delivered to plants by pipeline, tanker, tank car or truck. Oil is stored in vertical cylindrical steel tanks with capacities as high as 14,000 cubic metres (90,000 bbl). The heavier no. 5 "bunker" and no. 6 fuels are typically steam-heated before pumping in cold climates.

Operation

See also: Thermal power station

 

Components of a coal-fired power station

As a type of thermal power station, a coal-fired power station converts chemical energy stored in coal successively into thermal energy, mechanical energy and, finally, electrical energy. The coal is usually pulverized and then burned in a pulverized coal-fired boiler. The heat from the burning pulverized coal converts boiler water to steam, which is then used to spin turbines that turn generators. Compared to a thermal power station burning other fuel types, coal specific fuel processing and ash disposal is required.

For units over about 200 MW capacity, redundancy of key components is provided by installing duplicates of the forced and induced draft fans, air preheaters, and fly ash collectors. On some units of about 60 MW, two boilers per unit may instead be provided. The hundred largest coal power stations range in size from 3,000MW to 6,700MW.

Fuel processing

Coal is prepared for use by crushing the rough coal to pieces less than 5 cm in size. The coal is then transported from the storage yard to in-plant storage silos by conveyor belts at rates up to 4,000 tonnes per hour.

In plants that burn pulverized coal, silos feed coal to pulverizers (coal mills) that take the larger 5 cm pieces, grind them to the consistency of talcum powder, sort them, and mix them with primary combustion air, which transports the coal to the boiler furnace and preheats the coal in order to drive off excess moisture content. A 500 MW_e plant may have six such pulverizers, five of which can supply coal to the furnace at 250 tonnes per hour under full load.

In plants that do not burn pulverized coal, the larger 5 cm pieces may be directly fed into the silos which then feed either mechanical distributors that drop the coal on a traveling grate or the cyclone burners, a specific kind of combustor that can efficiently burn larger pieces of fuel.

Boiler operation

Further information: Fluidized bed combustion and Circulating fluidized bed

Plants designed for lignite (brown coal) are used in locations as varied as Germany, Victoria, Australia, and North Dakota. Lignite is a much younger form of coal than black coal. It has a lower energy density than black coal and requires a much larger furnace for equivalent heat output. Such coals may contain up to 70% water and ash, yielding lower furnace temperatures and requiring larger induced-draft fans. The firing systems also differ from black coal and typically draw hot gas from the furnace-exit level and mix it with the incoming coal in fan-type mills that inject the pulverized coal and hot gas mixture into the boiler.

Ash disposal

The ash is often stored in ash ponds. Although the use of ash ponds in combination with air pollution controls (such as wet scrubbers) decreases the amount of airborne pollutants, the structures pose serious health risks for the surrounding environment.^[19] Power utility companies have often built the ponds without liners, especially in the United States, and therefore chemicals in the ash can leach into groundwater and surface waters.^[20]

Since the 1990s, power utilities in the U.S. have designed many of their new plants with dry ash handling systems. The dry ash is disposed in landfills, which typically include liners and groundwater monitoring systems.^[21] Dry ash may also be recycled into products such as concrete, structural fills for road construction and grout.^[22]

Fly ash collection

Main article: Fly ash

Fly ash is captured and removed from the flue gas by electrostatic precipitators or fabric bag filters (or sometimes both) located at the outlet of the furnace and before the induced draft fan. The fly ash is periodically removed from the collection hoppers below the precipitators or bag filters. Generally, the fly ash is pneumatically transported to storage silos and stored on site in ash ponds, or transported by trucks or railroad cars to landfills.

Bottom ash collection and disposal

Main article: Bottom ash

At the bottom of the furnace, there is a hopper for collection of bottom ash. This hopper is kept filled with water to quench the ash and clinkers falling down from the furnace. Arrangements are included to crush the clinkers and convey the crushed clinkers and bottom ash to on-site ash ponds, or off-site to landfills. Ash extractors are used to discharge ash from municipal solid waste–fired boilers.

Flexibility

Coal-fired power station animation

A well-designed energy policy, energy law and electricity market are critical for flexibility.^[23] Although technically the flexibility of some coal-fired power stations could be improved they are less able to provide dispatchable generation than most gas-fired power plants. The most important flexibility is low minimum load,^[24] however some flexibility improvements may be more expensive than renewable energy with batteries.^[25]

Coal power generation

2019 world electricity generation by source (total generation was 27 petawatt-hours)^[26][27]

  Coal (37%)

  Natural gas (24%)

  Hydro (16%)

  Nuclear (10%)

  Wind (5%)

  Solar (3%)

  Other (5%)

As of 2020^[update] two-thirds of coal burned is to generate electricity.^[10] In 2020 coal was the largest source of electricity at 34%.^[28] Over half coal generation in 2020 was in China.^[28] About 60% of electricity in China, India and Indonesia is from coal.^[2]

In 2020 worldwide 2059 GW of coal power was operational, 50 GW was commissioned, and 25 GW started construction (most of these three in China); and 38 GW retired (mostly USA and EU).^[29]

Efficiency

There are 4 main types of coal-fired power station in increasing order of efficiency are: subcritical, supercritical, ultra-supercritical and cogeneration (also called combined heat and power or CHP).^[30] Subcritical is the least efficient type, however recent innovations have allowed retrofits to older subcritical plants to meet or even exceed efficiency of supercritical plants.^[31]

Integrated gasification combined cycle design

Main article: Integrated gasification combined cycle

Integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) is a coal power generation technology that uses a high pressure gasifier to turn coal (or other carbon based fuels) into pressurized gas—synthesis gas (syngas). Converting the coal to gas enables the use of a combined cycle generator, typically achieving high efficiency. The IGCC process can also enable removal of some pollutants from the syngas prior to the power generation cycle. However, the technology is costly compared with conventional coal-fired power stations.

Carbon dioxide emissions

 

Greenhouse gases by energy source. Coal is the energy source with the most greenhouse gases.

See also: Fossil fuel power station § Carbon dioxide

As coal is mainly carbon, coal-fired power stations have a high carbon intensity. On average, coal power stations emit far more greenhouse gas per unit electricity generated compared with other energy sources (see also life-cycle greenhouse-gas emissions of energy sources). In 2018 coal burnt to generate electricity emitted over 10 Gt CO₂^[32] of the 34 Gt total from fuel combustion^[33] (the overall total greenhouse gas emissions for 2018 was 55 Gt CO₂e^[34]).

Mitigation

Phase out

See also: Coal phase out

 

The annual amount of coal plant capacity being retired increased into the mid-2010s.^[35] However, the rate of retirement has since stalled,^[35] and global coal phase-out is not yet compatible with the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement.^[36]

 

In parallel with retirement of some coal plant capacity, other coal plants are still being added, though the annual amount of added capacity has been declining since the 2010s.^[37]

From 2015 to 2020, although coal generation hardly fell in absolute terms, some of its market share was taken by wind and solar.^[28] In 2020 only China increased coal power generation, and globally it fell by 4%.^[28] The UN Secretary General has said that OECD countries should stop generating electricity from coal by 2030 and the rest of the world by 2040, otherwise limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, a target of the Paris Agreement, would be extremely difficult.^[17] Phasing out in Asia can be a financial challenge as plants there are relatively young:^[2] in China the co-benefits of closing a plant vary greatly depending on its location.^[38]

Ammonia co-firing

Ammonia has a high hydrogen density and is easy to handle. It can be used as storing carbon-free fuel in gas turbine power generation and help significantly reduce CO₂ emissions as a fuel.^[39] In Japan, the first major four-year test project was started in June 2021 to develop technology to enable co-firing a significant amount of ammonia at a large-scale commercial coal-fired plant.^[40][41] However low-carbon hydrogen and ammonia is in demand for sustainable shipping, which unlike electricity generation, has few other clean options.^[42]

Conversion

Some power stations are being converted to burn gas, biomass or waste,^[43] and conversion to thermal storage will be trialled in 2023.^[44]

Carbon capture

Retrofitting some existing coal-fired power stations with carbon capture and storage was being considered in China in 2020,^[45] but this is very expensive,^[10] reduces the energy output and for some plants is not technically feasible.^[46]

Pollution

Main article: Environmental impact of the coal industry

 

Coal power plant wastestreams

In some countries pollution is somewhat controlled by best available techniques, for example those in the EU^[47] through its Industrial Emissions Directive. In the United States, coal-fired plants are governed at the national level by several air pollution regulations, including the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) regulation,^[48] by effluent guidelines for water pollution,^[49] and by solid waste regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).^[50]

Coal-fired power stations continue to pollute in lightly regulated countries; such as the Western Balkans,^[51] India, Russia and South Africa;^[52] causing over a hundred thousand early deaths each year.^[4][53][54]

Local air pollution

Damage to health from particulates, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide occurs mainly in Asia and is often due to burning low quality coal, such as lignite, in plants lacking modern flue gas treatment.^[52] Early deaths due to air pollution have been estimated at 200 per GW-year, however they may be higher around power plants where scrubbers are not used or lower if they are far from cities.^[55]

Water pollution

Pollutants such as heavy metals leaching into ground water from unlined coal ash storage ponds or landfills pollute water, possibly for decades or centuries.^[56] Pollutant discharges from ash ponds to rivers (or other surface water bodies) typically include arsenic, lead, mercury, selenium, chromium, and cadmium.^[49]

Mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants can fall back onto the land and water in rain, and then be converted into methylmercury by bacteria.^[57] Through biomagnification, this mercury can then reach dangerously high levels in fish.^[58] More than half of atmospheric mercury comes from coal-fired power plants.^[59]

Coal-fired power plants also emit sulfur dioxide and nitrogen.^[60] These emissions lead to acid rain, which can restructure food webs and lead to the collapse of fish and invertebrate populations.^[60][61]

Mitigation of local pollution

Main article: Coal pollution mitigation

As of 2018^[update] local pollution in China, which has by far the most coal-fired power stations, is forecast to be reduced further in the 2020s and 2030s, especially if small and low efficiency plants are retired early.^[62]

Economics

Subsidies

Coal power plants tend to serve as base load technology, as they have high availability factors, and are relatively difficult and expensive to ramp up and down. As such, they perform poorly in real-time energy markets, where they are unable to respond to changes in the locational marginal price. In the United States, this has been especially true in light of the advent of cheap natural gas, which can serve as a fuel in dispatchable power plants that substitute the role of baseload on the grid.^[63]

In 2020 the coal industry was subsidized $US18 billion.^[2]

Finance

See also: Fossil fuel divestment

Coal financing is the financial support provided for coal-related projects, encompassing coal mining and coal-fired power stations.^[64] Its role in shaping the global energy landscape and its environmental and climate impacts have made it a subject of concern. The misalignment of coal financing with international climate objectives, particularly the Paris Agreement, has garnered attention.^[65]

The Paris Agreement aims to restrict global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius and ideally limit it to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Achieving these goals necessitates a substantial reduction in coal-related activities.^[66]

Studies, including finance-based accounting of coal emissions, have revealed a misalignment of coal financing with climate objectives.^[65] Major nations, such as China, Japan, and the U.S., have extended financial support to overseas coal power infrastructure.^[64][67] The largest backers are Chinese banks under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).^[68][64] This support has led to significant long-term climate and financial risks and harms the objectives of reducing CO2 emissions set by the Paris Agreement, of which China, the United States and Japan are signatories. A substantial portion of the associated CO₂ emissions is anticipated to occur after 2019.^[65]

Coal financing poses challenges to the global decarbonization of the power generation sector.^[67] As renewable energy technologies become cost-competitive, the economic viability of coal projects diminishes, making past fossil fuel investments less attractive.^[69] To address these concerns and align with climate goals, there is a growing call for stricter policies regarding overseas coal financing.^[64][65] Countries, including Japan and the U.S., have faced criticism for permitting the financing of certain coal projects. Strengthening the policies, potentially by banning public financing of coal projects entirely, would enhance their climate efforts and credibility. In addition, Enhanced transparency in disclosing financing details is crucial for evaluating their environmental impacts.^[65]

Capacity factors

In India capacity factors are below 60%.^[70] In 2020 coal-fired power stations in the United States had an overall capacity factor of 40%; that is, they operated at a little less than half of their cumulative nameplate capacity.^[71]

Stranded assets

If global warming is limited to well below 2 °C as specified in the Paris Agreement, coal plant stranded assets of over US$500 billion are forecast by 2050, mostly in China.^[72] In 2020 think tank Carbon Tracker estimated that 39% of coal-fired plants were already more expensive than new renewables and storage and that 73% would be by 2025.^[73] As of 2020^[update] about half of China's coal power companies are losing money and old and small power plants "have no hope of making profits".^[74] As of 2021^[update] India is keeping potential stranded assets operating by subsidizing them.^[75][76][77]

Politics

 

Greenpeace protesting against coal at the German Chancellery

In May 2021, the G7 committed to end support for coal-fired power stations within the year.^[78]

The energy policy of China regarding coal and coal in China are the most important factors regarding the future of coal-fired power stations, because the country has so many.^[79] According to one analysis local officials overinvested in coal-fired power in the mid-2010s because central government guaranteed operating hours and set a high wholesale electricity price.^[80]

In democracies coal power investment follows an environmental Kuznets curve.^[81] The energy policy of India about coal is an issue in the politics of India.^[82][83]

Protests

In the 21st century people have often protested against opencast mining, for example at Hambach Forest, Akbelen Forest and Ffos-y-fran;^[84][85] and at sites of proposed new plants, such as in Kenya^[86] and China.^[87]

See also

• Powering Past Coal Alliance
• Global Energy Monitor

References

1. "Too many new coal-fired plants planned for 1.5C climate goal, report concludes". the Guardian. 26 April 2022. Retrieved 26 December 2022.
2. Birol, Fatih; Malpass, David. "It's critical to tackle coal emissions – Analysis". International Energy Agency. Retrieved 9 October 2021.
3. "How safe is nuclear energy?". The Economist. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 26 December 2022.
4. Cropper, Maureen; Cui, Ryna; Guttikunda, Sarath; Hultman, Nate; Jawahar, Puja; Park, Yongjoon; Yao, Xinlu; Song, Xiao-Peng (2 February 2021). "The mortality impacts of current and planned coal-fired power plants in India". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 118 (5). Bibcode:2021PNAS..11817936C. doi:10.1073/pnas.2017936118. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 7865184. PMID 33495332.
5. "Killed by coal: Air pollution deaths in Jakarta 'may double' by 2030". The Jakarta Post. Retrieved 8 April 2022.
6. "CO2 emissions – Global Energy Review 2021 – Analysis". IEA. Retrieved 7 July 2021.
7. "It's critical to tackle coal emissions – Analysis". IEA. Retrieved 9 October 2021.
8. "China generated over half world's coal-fired power in 2020: study". Reuters. 28 March 2021. Retrieved 14 September 2021. China generated 53% of the world's total coal-fired power in 2020, nine percentage points more that five years earlier
9. Morton, Adam (3 August 2020). "More coal power generation closed than opened around the world this year, research finds". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 4 August 2020.
10. "The dirtiest fossil fuel is on the back foot". The Economist. 3 December 2020. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 12 December 2020.
11. Piven, Ben. "EU power sector emissions drop as coal collapses across Europe". Al Jazeera. Retrieved 21 March 2020.
12. Roberts, David (14 March 2020). "4 astonishing signs of coal's declining economic viability". Vox. Retrieved 21 March 2020.
13. "China pledges to stop building new coal energy plants abroad". BBC News. 22 September 2021. Retrieved 22 September 2021.
14. Borenstein, Severin; Bushnell, James B. (1 November 2022). "Do Two Electricity Pricing Wrongs Make a Right? Cost Recovery, Externalities, and Efficiency" (PDF). American Economic Journal: Economic Policy. 14 (4): 80–110. doi:10.1257/pol.20190758. Retrieved 11 November 2022.
15. Davis, Lucas (21 September 2020). "Time to Vote Out Coal". Energy Institute Blog. Retrieved 27 September 2020.
16. Harrabin, Roger (12 March 2020). "Coal power developers 'risk wasting billions'". BBC News.
17. "The dirtiest fossil fuel is on the back foot". The Economist. 3 December 2020. ISSN 0013-0613.
18. Do, Thang; Burke, Paul J (2023). "Phasing out coal power in a developing country context: Insights from Vietnam". Energy Policy. 176 (May 2023 113512): 113512. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113512. hdl:1885/286612. S2CID 257356936.
19. Erickson, Camille (7 October 2019). "Mixing water, Powder River Basin coal ash dangerous to human health, new research finds". Casper Star-Tribune. Casper, WY.
20. Brooke, Nelson (5 June 2019). "New Interactive Maps of Groundwater Pollution Reveal Threats Posed by Alabama Power Coal Ash Pits". Black Warrior Riverkeeper. Birmingham, AL.
21. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Washington, D.C. (21 June 2010)."Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Special Wastes; Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities; Proposed rule." Federal Register, 75 FR 35151
22. Scott, Allan N.; Thomas, Michael D. A. (January–February 2007). "Evaluation of Fly Ash From Co-Combustion of Coal and Petroleum Coke for Use in Concrete". ACI Materials Journal. Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute. 104 (1): 62–70. doi:10.14359/18496.
23. "Status of Power System Transformation 2018: Summary for Policy Makers". IEA Webstore. Retrieved 3 July 2019.
24. "Flexibility Toolbox". vgb.org. Retrieved 3 July 2019.
25. "Battery Power's Latest Plunge in Costs Threatens Coal, Gas". BloombergNEF. 26 March 2019. Retrieved 3 July 2019.
26. "Data & Statistics". International Energy Agency. Retrieved 25 November 2021.
27. "World gross electricity production by source, 2019 – Charts – Data & Statistics". International Energy Agency. Retrieved 25 November 2021.
28. "Global Electricity Review 2021 - Global Trends". Ember. 28 March 2021. from the original on 28 March 2021. Retrieved 7 July 2021.
29. "Boom and Bust 2021: TRACKING THE GLOBAL COAL PLANT PIPELINE" (PDF). Global Energy Monitor. (PDF) from the original on 6 April 2021.
30. "Coal". iea.org. Retrieved 5 July 2019.
31. Patel, Sonal (3 August 2020). "Xuzhou 3 Shows the Future of Subcritical Coal Power Is Sublime". POWER Magazine. Retrieved 4 August 2020.
32. . iea.org. Archived from the original on 12 August 2019. Retrieved 4 July 2019.
33. "BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2019" (PDF).
34. Environment, U. N. (19 November 2019). "Emissions Gap Report 2019". UNEP - UN Environment Programme. Retrieved 22 January 2020.
35. "Retired Coal-fired Power Capacity by Country / Global Coal Plant Tracker". Global Energy Monitor. 2023. from the original on 9 April 2023. — Global Energy Monitor's Summary of Tables ()
36. Shared attribution: Global Energy Monitor, CREA, E3G, Reclaim Finance, Sierra Club, SFOC, Kiko Network, CAN Europe, Bangladesh Groups, ACJCE, Chile Sustentable (5 April 2023). "Boom and Bust Coal / Tracking the Global Coal Plant Pipeline" (PDF). Global Energy Monitor. p. 3. (PDF) from the original on 7 April 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
37. "New Coal-fired Power Capacity by Country / Global Coal Plant Tracker". Global Energy Monitor. 2023. from the original on 19 March 2023. — Global Energy Monitor's Summary of Tables ()
38. Wang, Pu; Lin, Cheng-Kuan; Wang, Yi; Liu, Dachuan; Song, Dunjiang; Wu, Tong (29 November 2021). "Location-specific co-benefits of carbon emissions reduction from coal-fired power plants in China". Nature Communications. 12 (1): 6948. Bibcode:2021NatCo..12.6948W. doi:10.1038/s41467-021-27252-1. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC 8629986. PMID 34845194.
39. NAGATANI Genichiro; ISHII Hiroki; ITO Takamasa; OHNO Emi; OKUMA Yoshitomo (January 2021). "Development of Co-Firing Method of Pulverized Coal and Ammonia to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions" (PDF). IHI Corporation. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
40. Darrell Proctor (24 May 2020). "Project Will Burn Ammonia with Coal to Cut Emissions". Power Magazine. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
41. "JERA and IHI to Start a Demonstration Project Related to Ammonia Co-firing at a Large-Scale Commercial Coal-Fired Power Plant". JERA. 24 May 2020. Retrieved 13 November 2021.
42. "Japan Inc. ups its game in offshore wind power". IHS Markit. 28 September 2021. Retrieved 7 December 2021.
43. . SIMEC Atlantis Energy. 5 November 2018. Archived from the original on 7 May 2020. Retrieved 4 July 2019.
44. "Thermal blocks could convert coal-fired power stations to run fossil-fuel free". Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 7 September 2020.
45. (PDF) (Report). Energy Foundation China. December 2020. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 April 2021.
46. . ukccsrc.ac.uk. Archived from the original on 4 July 2019. Retrieved 4 July 2019.
47. Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/1442 of 31 July 2017 establishing best available techniques (BAT) conclusions, under Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, for large combustion plants (notified under document C(2017) 5225) (Text with EEA relevance. ), 17 August 2017, retrieved 5 July 2019
48. "Mercury and Air Toxics Standards". Washington, D.C.: United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 19 June 2019.
49. "Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent Guidelines—2015 Final Rule". EPA. 6 November 2019.
50. "Special Wastes". Hazardous Waste. EPA. 29 November 2018.
51. "Chronic coal pollution". Bankwatch. Prague: CEE Bankwatch Network. Retrieved 5 July 2019.
52. Schipper, Ori (18 February 2019). "The global impact of coal power". ETH Zurich.
53. "Death rates from energy production per TWh". Our World in Data. Retrieved 26 November 2021.
54. Vohra, Karn; Vodonos, Alina; Schwartz, Joel; Marais, Eloise A.; Sulprizio, Melissa P.; Mickley, Loretta J. (1 April 2021). "Global mortality from outdoor fine particle pollution generated by fossil fuel combustion: Results from GEOS-Chem". Environmental Research. 195: 110754. Bibcode:2021ER....195k0754V. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2021.110754. ISSN 0013-9351. PMID 33577774. S2CID 231909881.
55. Hausfather, Zeke (18 November 2016). "Coal in China: Estimating Deaths per GW-year". Berkeley Earth. Berkeley, CA. Retrieved 1 February 2020.
56. Milman, Oliver (4 March 2019). "Most US coal plants are contaminating groundwater with toxins, analysis finds". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077.
57. "Mercury Experiment to Assess Atmospheric Loading in Canada and the United States (METAALICUS)". IISD Experimental Lakes Area. 15 May 2015. Retrieved 7 July 2020.
58. "Researching Atmospheric Mercury and Freshwater Fish". IISD Experimental Lakes Area. 2 April 2016. Retrieved 7 July 2020.
59. "When a lake is better than a lab". Canadian Geographic. 8 August 2018. Retrieved 7 July 2020.
60. "Acid Rain". IISD Experimental Lakes Area. 4 April 2016. Retrieved 7 July 2020.
61. "IISD Experimental Lakes Area: The world's living freshwater laboratory". BioLab Business Magazine. 12 February 2020. Retrieved 7 July 2020.
62. Tong, Dan; Zhang, Qiang; Liu, Fei; Geng, Guannan; Zheng, Yixuan; Xue, Tao; Hong, Chaopeng; Wu, Ruili; Qin, Yu (6 November 2018). "Current Emissions and Future Mitigation Pathways of Coal-Fired Power Plants in China from 2010 to 2030". Environmental Science & Technology. 52 (21): 12905–12914. Bibcode:2018EnST...5212905T. doi:10.1021/acs.est.8b02919. ISSN 0013-936X. PMID 30249091. S2CID 206581545.
63. EIA. "More than 100 coal-fired plants have been replaced or converted to natural gas since 2011". Energy Information Administration. US Department of Energy. Retrieved 26 May 2021.
64. Manych, Niccolò; Steckel, Jan Christoph; Jakob, Michael (2021). "Finance-based accounting of coal emissions". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (4): 044028. Bibcode:2021ERL....16d4028M. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/abd972. S2CID 233704266.
65. Chen, Xu; Li, Zhongshu; Gallagher, Kevin P.; Mauzerall, Denise L. (15 October 2021). "Financing carbon lock-in in developing countries: Bilateral financing for power generation technologies from China, Japan, and the United States". Applied Energy. 300: 117318. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117318. ISSN 0306-2619.
66. "UN Chief: Phase Out of Coal Is Key Climate Priority". unfccc.int. 18 January 2022. Retrieved 3 November 2023.
67. Trencher, Gregory; Healy, Noel; Hasegawa, Koichi; Asuka, Jusen (1 September 2019). "Discursive resistance to phasing out coal-fired electricity: Narratives in Japan's coal regime". Energy Policy. 132: 782–796. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2019.06.020. ISSN 0301-4215. S2CID 198655858.
68. Crooks, Ed (30 June 2019). "The week in energy: China's coal-fired outreach". Financial Times. Retrieved 6 July 2019.
69. Creutzig, Felix; Agoston, Peter; Goldschmidt, Jan Christoph; Luderer, Gunnar; Nemet, Gregory; Pietzcker, Robert C. (25 August 2017). "The underestimated potential of solar energy to mitigate climate change". Nature Energy. 2 (9). doi:10.1038/nenergy.2017.140. ISSN 2058-7546.
70. "Boom and Bust 2021" (PDF). (PDF) from the original on 6 April 2021.
71. Electric Power Monthly (Report). US Department of Energy. September 2021.
72. Saygin, Deger; Rigter, Jasper; Caldecott, Ben; Wagner, Nicholas; Gielen, Dolf (31 May 2019). "Power sector asset stranding effects of climate policies". Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy. 14 (4): 99–124. doi:10.1080/15567249.2019.1618421. S2CID 191757913.
73. How to Retire Early: Making accelerated coal phaseout feasible and just (Report). Carbon Tracker. June 2020.
74. "The Path Ahead for China's Coal Power Industry". hellenicshippingnews.com. Retrieved 23 January 2020.
75. "There's no way out for India's stranded thermal power assets". Institute for Energy Economics & Financial Analysis. 29 March 2021. Retrieved 7 December 2021.
76. "Mapping India's Energy Subsidies 2021: Time for renewed support to clean energy". International Institute for Sustainable Development. Retrieved 7 December 2021.
77. "Power freebies show pitfalls of electoral politics". The Times of India. Retrieved 7 December 2021.
78. "G7 commits to end support for coal-fired power stations this year". euronews. 21 May 2021. Retrieved 23 July 2021.
79. David Culver, Lily Lee and Ben Westcott (29 September 2019). "China struggling to kick its coal habit despite Beijing's big climate pledges". CNN. Retrieved 20 October 2019.
80. Ren, Mengjia; Branstetter, Lee; Kovak, Brian; Armanios, Daniel; Yuan, Jiahai (16 March 2019). "China overinvested in coal power: Here's why". VoxEU.org. Retrieved 6 July 2019.
81. Urpelainen, Johannes; Zucker, Noah; Clark, Richard (11 April 2019). "Political Institutions and Pollution: Evidence from Coal-Fired Power Generation". Rochester, NY. SSRN 3370276. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
82. "Indigenous residents protest huge coal mine plan in India". Eco-Business. 9 October 2020. Retrieved 11 October 2020.
83. "Unleashing coal: inside India's plans to open up commercial coal mining". mining-technology.com. September 2020. Retrieved 11 October 2020.
84. Ch, Aruna; rasekar (26 September 2017). . Climate Tracker. Archived from the original on 15 May 2020. Retrieved 6 July 2019.
85. Matthew Robinson (23 June 2019). "Hundreds of climate protesters stage blockade in German coal mine". CNN. Retrieved 6 July 2019.
86. Leithead, Alastair (5 June 2019). "Row over Kenya World Heritage site coal plant". Retrieved 6 July 2019.
87. "Chinese protesters clash with police over power plant". The Guardian. 22 October 2012. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 10 September 2023.

External links

• Coal fired power plant Energy Education by the University of Calgary
• How a coal plant works video by the Tennessee Valley Authority
• How a coal plant works video by Ontario Power Generation
• Electricity from coal by the World Coal Association
• World's coal power plants mapped by Carbon Brief
• End Coal 1 May 2022 at the Wayback Machine by various environmental, social justice and health advocates
• Coal-fired power by the International Energy Agency
• by Carbon Tracker
• Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air