There is an overwhelming global scientific consensus that global warming is real, man-made and must be urgently addressed, As adjudged from the rhetoric at the disastrous Copenhagen (2009) and Cancun (2010) climate change summits, most world leaders acknowledge the problem. However in practice politicians are still largely committed to disastrous “business as usual” (BAU) policies. Nevertheless most politicians must appear to be “tackling climate change” while in reality playing a BAU game acceptable to huge fossil fuel interests.

One such false, phony, politically disingenuous approach has been the Carbon Trading-based Cap-and-Trade Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) approach. The ETS approach has been variously slammed as (a) empirically ineffective (despite ETS measures carbon dioxide, (CO2) pollution continues to increase remorselessly and indeed man-made global warming has been described by top economist Professor Sir Nicholas Stern as “the greatest market failure the world has seen”; (2) dangerously counterproductive (we are running out of time, CO2 emissions must cease by 2050 for the World and by 2020 for the US, and there is no point wasting time going down a route already demonstrated to be ineffective); and (3) utterly fraudulent ( the ETS approach has already engendered market manipulation fraud, involves selling licences to pollute that must ultimately be worthless, and fundamentally involves governments selling something they do not have the right to sell, specifically the “right” to pollute the one common atmosphere of all peoples). [1].

A further phony approach that is now being implemented on a massive scale around the world is a coal-to-gas transition on the basis that (1) gas burning for power typically yields half the carbon dioxide (CO2) pollution as coal burning per unit of electrical energy produced and (2) gas burning is associated with greatly lowered carbon particulates, sulphur dioxide (SO2), heavy metals and organics and an 80% reduction in carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen oxides (nitrous oxide, N2O, nitrogen dioxide, NO2, and nitric oxide. NO, these being collectively denoted as NOx). However, as set out below, the reality is that gas burning seriously threatens the Planet because (A) Humanity should be urgently decreasing and certainly not increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution; (B) Natural Gas (mainly methane, CH4) is not clean energy greenhouse gas (GHG)-wise; and (C) Pollutants from gas leakage and gas burning pose a chemical risk to residents, agriculture and the environment.

(A) Australia and the World should be decreasing and not increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution.

Both Dr James Lovelock FRS (Gaia hypothesis) and Professor Kevin Anderson ( Director, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of Manchester, UK) have recently estimated that fewer than 1 billion people will survive this century due to unaddressed, man-made global warming – noting that the world population is expected to reach 9.5 billion by 2050, these estimates translate to a climate genocide involving deaths of 10 billion people this century, this including 6 billion under-5 year old infants, 3 billion Muslims in a terminal Muslim Holocaust, 2 billion Indians, 1.3 billion non-Arab Africans, 0.5 billion Bengalis, 0.3 billion Pakistanis and 0.3 billion Bangladeshis. Already 16 million people (about 9.5 million of them under-5 year old infants) die avoidably every year due to deprivation and deprivation-exacerbated disease – and man-made global warming is already clearly worsening this global avoidable mortality holocaust. However 10 billion avoidable deaths due to global warming this century yields an average annual avoidable death rate of 100 million per year. [2].

Collective, national responsibility for this already commenced Climate Holocaust is in direct proportion to per capita national pollution of the atmosphere with greenhouse gases (GHGs). Indeed, fundamental to any international agreement on national rights to pollute our common atmosphere and oceans should be the belief that “all men are created equal”. However reality is otherwise: “annual per capita greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution” in units of “tonnes CO2-equivalent [CO2-e] per person per year” (2005-2008 data) is 0.9 (Bangladesh), 0.9 (Pakistan), 2.2 (India), less than 3 (many African and Island countries), 3.2 (the Developing World), 5.5 (China), 6.7 (the World), 11 (Europe), 16 (the Developed World), 27 (the US) and 30 (Australia; or 54 if Australia’s huge Exported CO2 pollution is included). [2].

However expansion of Australia’s exported GHG pollution is occurring through increasing black coal, liquid natural gas (LNG) and dried brown coal exports and increased pollution domestically through new fossil fuel power plants (coal and natural gas). Thus exports of brown coal from Victoria to Asia are expected to reach 20 million tonnes [Mt] per year (74 million tonnes CO2-e). [3].

If this is achieved by 2020 then Australia’s Domestic plus Exported GHG pollution in 2020 will be 1245 Mt + 74 Mt = 1319 Mt CO2-e = 149% of that in 2000. The Australia Federal Government’s derisory pledge of “5% off 2000 level by 2020” in actual reality seems likely to be about “150% of 2000 level by 2020”. [4].

Based on UN Population Division population projections, Australia’s 2020 annual per capita Domestic plus Exported GHG pollution is accordingly projected to reach 1319 Mt CO2-e / 23.4 million people = 56 tonnes CO2-e per person per year, 62 times that of Bangladesh, a densely populated country acutely threatened by inundation from mainly First World-imposed GHG pollution. [4].

Leading climate scientist Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber CBE (Director of Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research [PIK], Germany and variously associated with the University of Manchester, University of East Anglia and Oxford University) has estimated that for a 67% chance of avoiding a catastrophic 2 degree Centigrade temperature rise (the EU target; would you board a plane if it had a 33% chance of crashing?) the World has to cease CO2 emissions by 2050. “All man are created equal” means that all human beings must be allotted equal shares of CO2 pollution until 2050. This means that high per capita countries such as the US and Australia must reach zero CO2 emissions by 2020 while low per capita emitters (e.g. India and Burkina Faso) can increase their emissions until finally reaching zero emissions by 2050. [5].

It must be noted that other leading climate scientists have reached similar conclusions about the urgency of achieving zero emissions. Thus Dr Vicky Pope (Head of Climate Change Advice, UK Met Office Hadley Centre):

“Latest climate projections from the Met Office Hadley Centre show the possible range of temperature rises, depending on what action is taken to reduce Greenhouse gas emissions. Even with large and early cuts in emissions, the indications are that temperatures are likely to rise to around 2 °C above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century. If action is delayed or not quick enough, there is a large risk of much bigger increases in temperature, with some severe impacts. In a worst-case scenario, where no action is taken to check the rise in Greenhouse gas emissions, temperatures would most likely rise by more than 5 °C by the end of the century. This would lead to significant risks of severe and irreversible impacts. In the most optimistic scenario, action to reduce emissions would need to start in 2010 and reach a rapid and sustained rate of decline of 3 per cent every year. Even then there would still only be a 50-50 chance of keeping temperature rises below around 2°C. This contrasts sharply with current trends, where the world’s overall emissions are currently increasing at 1 per cent every year.” [6].

Similarly, Professor Kevin Anderson and Dr Alice Bows (Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK):

“According to the analysis conducted in this paper, stabilizing at 450 ppmv [carbon dioxide equivalent = CO2-e, atmospheric concentration measured in parts per million by volume] requires, at least, global energy related emissions to peak by 2015, rapidly decline at 6-8% per year between 2020 and 2040, and for full decarbonization sometime soon after 2050 …Unless economic growth can be reconciled with unprecedented rates of decarbonization (in excess of 6% per year), it is difficult to envisage anything other than a planned economic recession being compatible with stabilization at or below 650 ppmv CO2-e… Ultimately, the latest scientific understanding of climate change allied with current emissions trends and a commitment to “limiting average global temperature increases to below 4oC above pre-industrial levels”, demands a radical reframing of both the climate change agenda, and the economic characterization of contemporary society.” [7].

Dr James Hansen, (head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City, and an adjunct professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University) has concluded:

“After the ice has gone, would the Earth proceed to the Venus syndrome, a runaway greenhouse effect that would destroy all life on the planet, perhaps permanently? While that is difficult to say based on present information, I’ve come to conclude that if we burn all reserves of oil, gas , and coal, there is a substantial chance we will initiate the runaway greenhouse. If we also burn the tar sands and tar shale, I believe the Venus syndrome is a dead certainty”. [8].

However, achieving zero CO2 emissions is just the start. Many top climate scientists and biologists state that atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration (currently a damaging 392 ppm and increasing at about 2 ppm per annum) must be urgently reduced to about 300 ppm for a safe planet for all peoples and all species. [9].

At current CO2 pollution rates, in about 30 years the atmospheric CO2 concentration will reach 450 ppm, a level at which the Great Barrier Reef coral and indeed most coral around the World is doomed from the dual effects of warming and ocean acidification. [10].

The message from science is unequivocal. High per capita GHG polluter Australia is obliged top cease CO2 pollution by 2020. Accordingly any further expansion of Australian Domestic or Exported GHG pollution is absolutely contra-indicated.

A key part of achieving 100% cessation of CO2 pollution by 2020 is installation of 100% renewable energy. Professor Peter Seligman (bionic ear electrical engineer. University of Melbourne) has published a book, “Australian Sustainable Energy- By the Numbers”, setting out how Australia can get 100% renewable energy by 2030 at a cost $253 billion, his scheme involving a mix of wind, concentrated solar thermal and other technologies with hydrological energy storage for 24/7 baseload operation. [11].

An Australian engineering team called Beyond Zero Emissions has released its 5 year study on Zero Carbon Australia by 2020 (ZCA2020) Report) that shows how Australia can have 100% renewable energy by 2020 for $370 billion using renewable technologies of wind power and concentrated solar thermal with molten salts energy storage for 24/7, baseload operation. [12].

Professor Mark Jacobson of Stanford University, California, and Mark A. Delucchi of University of California Davis have produced a plan for 100% renewable energy plan for the whole world by 2020. [13].

Unfortunately the clear message from top scientists is being ignored because of the lobbying power of “business as usual” and fossil fuel vested interests. Dr James Hansen in answer to the question “Is there any real chance of averting the climate crisis?”, has stated: “Absolutely. It is possible – if we give politicians a cold, hard slap in the face. The fraudulence of the Copenhagen approach – “goals” for emission reductions, “offsets” that render ironclad goals almost meaningless, the ineffectual “cap-and-trade” mechanism – must be exposed. We must rebel against such politics as usual.” [14].

Gas (mainly methane) is not clean energy greenhouse gas (GHG)-wise.

The Australian Labor Government and the natural gas industry are utterly incorrect in their repeated assertion that “natural gas is clean energy”. However this untruth remains formally uncorrected and is now spreading through society, through media and even into the environment movement. [15].

The truth is otherwise – natural gas is dirty energy and on combustion is twice as carbon dioxide (CO2) polluting as brown coal on a weight basis. Further, in Victoria the carbon pollution currently ranges from 1.2-1.5 tonnes C/MWh for major brown coal plants and 0.6-0.9 tonnes C/MWh for major gas-fired plants – gas may be “clean-er” on this basis but is certainly not “clean”. [16].

However even the asserted “clean-er” status of gas as a fossil fuel is belied by the recent analysis by Professor Robert Howarth of Cornell University, New York, USA, who has concluded that : “A complete consideration of all emissions from using natural gas seems likely to make natural gas a far less attractive than oil and not significantly better than coal in terms of the consequences for global warming.” [17]

Natural gas (mostly methane, CH4) yields carbon dioxide (CO2) on combustion as does black coal (mostly Carbon, C) and brown coal (65% water, H2O).

The molecular weights of CH4 and CO2 are 16 and 44, respectively. The atomic weights of oxygen (O), carbon (C) and hydrogen (H) are 16, 12 and 1, respectively.

Burning 16 tonnes of CH4 yields 44 tonnes CO2 (i.e. burning 1 tonne of natural gas yields 2.8 tonnes CO2).

Burning 12 tonnes of C yields 44 tonnes of CO2 (i.e. burning 1 tonne of coal – assuming it to be 100% carbon – yields 3.7 tonnes of CO2).

Brown coal (that is burned to produce most of the electricity in Victoria, Australia) has a water (H2O) content of about 65% and thus burning 1 tonne of brown coal would yield 0.35 x 3.7 = 1.3 tonnes of CO2, or about 46% of that produced by burning 1 tonne of natural gas (2.8 tonnes of CO2).

Clearly, on a weight basis, burning natural gas (CH4) yields twice as much CO2 as burning brown coal. However proponents of gas burning assert that it is only 50% as polluting as black coal and only 30% as polluting as brown coal in terms of grams CO2 generated per million joules of energy.

Methane (CH4) has a molecular weight of 16 and carbon dioxide (CO2) has a molecular weight of 44.

When you burn CH4 you get CO2: CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2 H2O.

Accordingly burning 16 tonnes of CH4 yields 44 tonnes of CO2 and burning 100 tonnes of CH4 yields 100x 44/16 = 275 tonnes of CO2.

However if there is industrial leakage of CH4 (estimated to be at least 2.2% by the US EPA) then one must consider the greenhouse gas effect of the released methane (72 times worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas on a 20 year time scale).

Of our 100 tonnes of CH4, how much CH4 leakage (y tonnes) gives the same greenhouse effect (in CO2 equivalents or CO2-e) as burning the remaining CH4?

y tonnes CH4 x (72 tonnes CO2-e/tonne CH4) = (100-y) tonnes CH4 x (2.75 tonnes CO2-e/ tonne CH4).

72y tonnes CO2-e = (100-y) 2.75 tonnes CO2-e

72y = 275 – 2.75y

74.75y = 275

y = 275/74.75 = 3.68 i.e. a 3.7% leakage of CH4 yields that same greenhouse effect as burning the remaining CH4 (check: 3.68 tonnes leaked CH4 corresponds to 3.68 tonnes CH4 x 72 tonnes CO2-e/ tonne CH4 = 265 tonnes CO2-e . Burning the remaining 96.32 tonnes of CH4 corresponds to 96.32 tonnes CH4 x 2.75 tonnes CO2/tonne CH4 = 265 tonnes CO2). [18].

Recent re-assessment by the US EPA of US natural gas leakage has led to the estimate that “3.25 % of US natural gas production leaks into the atmosphere as methane gas”. [19].

There is no point spending billions of dollars replacing coal with natural gas and locking us into something essentially as bad as coal for decades more. Top climate scientists say that we must urgently reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration from the current damaging 392 parts per million (ppm) to a safe and sustainable 300 ppm for a safe and sustainable planet for all peoples and all species.

Pollutants from gas leakage and gas burning threaten residents, agriculture and the environment.

Natural gas is not necessarily cleaner than coal for power generation in terms of greenhouse gas pollution (see part (B) above). However the bottom line in any analysis of any social policy is avoidable human morbidity (sickness) and mortality (death). That fundamental consideration and other environmental impacts of gas burning heavily inform the following numbered concerns about the threat of gas burning to residents, agriculture and the environment. [20].

1. It can be proportionally estimated from Canadian and New Zealand epidemiological data that about10,000 Australians die annually from the effects of carbon burning pollutants, the breakdown being about 5,000 (coal and gas burning for electrical power), 2,000 ( vehicle exhaust) and 3,000 (other fossil fuel combustion excluding bush fires). Accordingly any increase in fossil fuel burning is contra-indicated. [21-26].

2. International comparisons of fossil fuel-based power pollution deaths can be made. “Annual coal-based electricity deaths” [“total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”] are 170,000 [283,000] (the World), 11,000 [13,000] (India), 47,000 [47,500] (China), 49,000 [72,000] (the US), 3,400 [6,900] (the UK), 4,900 [5,400] (Australia) and 2,700 [3,800](Canada) as compared to 110 [360] (heavily renewable-based New Zealand). These estimates of total fossil fuel-based deaths (i.e. from coal burning plus gas burning) are simply ball-park upper limits deriving from a crude assumption, in the absence of readily available data otherwise, of the same mortality from gas burning as from coal burning. In reality, since pollutants are much lower from gas burning (see #3 below) one expects deaths from gas burning for power to be lower than for coal burning. However while transition top gas burning might be expected to decrease mortality from fossil fuel burning for power, clearly gas burning will contribute to such mortality. A direct transition from coal burning to renewables is clearly highly desirable from the perspective of avoiding human and environmental impacts . [24-26].

3. Pollutants (pounds per Billion Btu of energy input) from gas, oil and coal burning are as follows: carbon dioxide (CO2) (117,000, 164,000, 208,000, respectively); carbon monoxide (CO) (40, 33, 208), nitrogen oxides (N2O, NO2 and NO i.e. NOx) (92, 448, 457); sulphur dioxide (SO2) (1, 1122, 2591); particulates (7, 84, 2744); and Mercury (0.000, 0.007, 0.016) i.e. deaths from gas burning for power may be expected to be lower than for coal burning. However CO pollution and NOx pollution from gas burning for power is about 20% of that from coal burning i.e. gas burning produces substantial quantities of dangerous pollutants. [27, 28]

4. In addition to methane and other aliphatic (non-aromatic) hydrocarbons, natural gas can contain toxic materials such as aromatic organics, notably those innately present or deriving from “fracking” mixtures used to help extract gas from fractured rocks or coal seams (e.g. benzene, toluene, ethylbenze and xylene), radon (and other radioactive materials), and organometallics (e.g. methylmercury , organoarsenic compounds and organolead compounds). Incomplete combustion and industrial leakage of natural gas (estimated by the US EPA to be at least 2.2% globally and recently assessed to be at least 3.3% in the US ; see section (B) above) will pollute the local environment with these toxic substances. Radon and other radioactive materials are mutagenic and carcinogenic. Aromatic organics are carcinogenic. Organometallics are fat soluble, leading to long-term storage in human fat tissue. Methylmercury is neurotoxic (e.g. as in Minamata syndrome). Organoarsenic and organolead compounds are variously toxic. Arsenic is toxic, teratogenic (yielding birth defects) and carcinogenic. [27].

5. Nitrous oxide (N2O), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and nitric oxide (NO) (collectively described as NOx) are major products from natural gas combustion. According to the US EPA: “NOx react with ammonia, moisture, and other compounds to form small particles. These small particles penetrate deeply into sensitive parts of the lungs and can cause or worsen respiratory disease, such as emphysema and bronchitis, and can aggravate existing heart disease, leading to increased hospital admissions and premature death.” [28, 29]..

6. According to the US EPA: “Ozone is formed when NOx and volatile organic compounds react in the presence of heat and sunlight. Children, the elderly, people with lung diseases such as asthma, and people who work or exercise outside are at risk for adverse effects from ozone. These include reduction in lung function and increased respiratory symptoms as well as respiratory-related emergency department visits, hospital admissions, and possibly premature deaths.” [29].

7. Nitrogen oxides can seriously injure vegetation, bleaching or killing plant tissue, causing leaf fall and reducing growth rate. Ozone pollution damages photosynthesis by plants. NOx air pollution contributes to acidifying nitrate deposition (with fish kills and reduction in plant growth), causes excess soil nitrification in ecosystems (with damage to vegetation, loss of biodiversity, increased GHG pollution) and is regarded not just a s a threat to agriculture and forestry but also to as a major threat to national parks and wilderness areas . [30, 31].

8. Gas burning-based power generation at a circa 1000 MW level in an urban environment can have very serious health consequences. Thus the City of Sydney (New South Wales, Australia) has pledged to install more than 100 trigeneration gas-burning turbines which burn gas to generate electricity and then capture the exhaust to heat and cool buildings as necessary. NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change has slammed this proposal saying that emissions from just 10MW of “co-generation” (a similar engine that heats but doesn’t cool buildings) could exceed health limits and that 200 MW generation would certainly do so: “On an hourly basis 330MW of gas-fired co-generation [the amount envisioned] could emit up to 660kg per hour of NOx; this is more NOx than the combined emissions from the Shell and Caltex oil refineries in Sydney…As a result there is little ‘headroom’ available to accommodate uncontrolled emissions from cogeneration without causing local health impacts.” The National Environment Protection Council sets a limit of 0.03 parts per million (ppm) for allowed levels of NOx release average over a year. By way of example, the current proposal for 1,000 MW gas-fired power plant to be built 1.5 kilometres from the Lockyer Valley town of Gatton (Queensland, Australia) is contra-indicated on the basis of NOx pollution health effects on the nearby community. [32, 33].

9. A further threat from gas fired power generation comers from the generation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. A study of pollution from a 70-year-old natural gas-fired power station in Canada stated:

“This paper presents the results of a risk assessment study made using CalTOX, a multimedia, multiple pathway risk assessment model. The case study is based on the Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) soil contamination resulting from the activities of a natural gas power station over a period of 70 years. It describes model characteristics and input parameters such as physico-chemical properties, landscape description, and human exposure factors. Model simulations and risk estimations corresponding to different remedial scenarios in an industrial zone are also presented. These estimations were based on soil contamination by 16 PAHs in the root-zone and vadose-zone layer. Results show that adult exposure (workers) to contaminated soil will lead to a potential health risk of carcinogenic effects, and to no potential risk of non-carcinogenic effects. On the other hand, the addition of 10 cm of clean soil over the contaminated soil (mitigated scenario) decreases the lifetime cancer risk to an acceptable level. The sensitivity analysis showed that the half-life of benzo[a]pyrene in the root-zone soil is the most sensitive parameter and that it contributes significantly to the variability of the cancer risk estimation. [34].”

10. A final major argument derives from cause and effect and the sources of the methane to be used. Australia and America are currently undergoing a gas exploitation boom that flies in the face of what top climate scientists are telling us. The film Gasland presents a deeply upsetting portrait of the devastation across America by the “frackers” involved in recovery of gas from fractured rocks and coal seams. In Australia, in addition to conventional offshore and on on-shore gas exploitation, there is a rapidly advancing coal seam gas industry involving “fracking” that has generated protest from both environmentalists and farmers. Whether the gas used in a gas-fired power station is on-shore- or off-shore-derived it is part of the total resource and accordingly no consequences of any gas extraction (e.g. environmental pollution as set out in “Gasland”) can be ignored. [35].

In summary, objections to the transition from coal burning-based power to gas burning-based power are that (A) Humanity should be urgently decreasing CO2 pollution to 300 ppm from the current dangerous 392 ppm and certainly should not be increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution (all fossil fuels must be kept in the ground if we are to save the Planet) ; (B) Natural Gas (mainly methane) is not clean energy, methane is 72 times worse than CO2 as a GHG on a 20 year time scale and, depending upon the rate of methane leakage, natural gas burning can be as dirty as coal burning greenhouse gas-wise; and (C) Pollutants from gas leakage and gas burning pose a chemical risk to residents, agriculture and the environment. Please use this article as a resource and tell everyone you can why we must oppose transition to gas-fired power.

Last week, during the Clinton Global Initiative, Al Gore encouraged young people to use civil disobedience to stop the construction of CO2 emitting coal plants.

“If you’re a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration.”

Countries around the world are investing money into new coal plants while ignoring their obvious threat to our climate and environment. For example, about 28 coal plants are under construction while 20 other projects “have permits or are near the start of construction” in USA alone. None of these coal plants have any carbon capture or sequestration. In fact there is not a single commercial-scale project that does this anywhere in the world. And probably there will never be any at all.

Al Gore most likely found it safe to urge for civil disobedience after the “landmark global warming trial” in UK two weeks ago. Either way, having a politician like Al Gore encouraging people to take direct non-violent action against CO2 emitting coal plants really show us how deep into trouble we are when it comes to climate change.

But then I have to ask myself. Why just young people Al Gore? And wouldn’t it send a powerful message around the world if you yourself took part in these actions?

Top British climate scientist Professor James Lovelock FRS has warned that over 6 billion people will die this century due to unaddressed climate change. Already 16 million people die avoidably in the world each year due to deprivation and deprivation-exacerbated disease (see: “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” (G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2007). It is already clear from declining agricultural production due to drought and massive storm surge disasters in India, Bangladesh, Burma and the US that global warming is already impacting on global avoidable mortality.

Greenhouse gas pollution – mostly due to carbon dioxide (CO2) from fossil fuel burning – is driving global warming and attendant species extinctions, droughts, sea level rise, decreased agricultural production and increased human death. However a major reality that is generally ignored is the death toll associated with pollutants other than CO2 generated by fossil fuel burning, notably carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, particulates, volatile organic components, nitrogen oxides and heavy metals such as mercury. As outlined below an upper limit of about 0.3 million people die avoidably each year in the world due to the effects of toxic pollutants from fossil fuel burning.

The Ministry of Energy of Ontario, Canada, commissioned a report into “true cost” of coal-fired power plants i.e. the “true cost” taking into account the environmental cost and the human impact in terms of mortality (deaths) and morbidity (illness) (see: “Cost Benefit Analysis: Replacing Ontario’s Coal-Fired Electricity Generation” (PDF) by DSS Management Consultants Inc. and RWDI Air Inc., for the Ontario Ministry of Energy, April, 2005, 93 pages). The report found that the “true cost” of coal-based electricity was 4-5 times the “market price” depending upon whether one valued a human life at $4 million or $5 million.

Of crucial importance to analysis of human deaths from coal-based electricity generation, the Canadian report found that 668 Ontarians die due to 27 TWh (27 trillion Watt hours) of electricity generation (for a summary see: http://evworld.com).

Canada and Ontario in particular have excellent medical services that are readily accessed by all members of society. Further, the population density in Ontario is much lower than in other countries (indeed even continental Australia most of the coal-fired power stations and most of the population are confined to relatively densely populated coastal regions). Accordingly, estimates of “annual coal-based electricity deaths” in other countries based on the Ontario ratio of 668 avoidable deaths per annum /27 TWh = 24.7 deaths per TWh are likely to be UNDER-estimates.

Coal, gas and oil burning all produce toxic agents such as carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, particulates, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, volatile organic components and heavy metals, notably mercury (Hg) (see: http://dar.csiro.au/…/urbanpollution.html). Sulphur (S) content varies and mercury (Hg) pollution from combusted petroleum and natural gas is about 10 times less than that which derives from coal (66 Mg/y in the US); however this estimate was based on Hg from US fuel oil of 1,500 kg/y whereas the US EPA estimates Hg from fuel oil at 10,000 kg/y (10 Mg/y: http://www.epa.gov/…/.pdf).

We will initially ASSUME for arithmetic simplicity and “ball-park estimation” that the oil, gas and coal combustibles used to generate electricity are equally dirty in terms of toxic products and deadly impact – and then go back to assess coal-specific electricity generation using available data on the percentage of fossil–fuel-based electricity generation due to coal burning.

For authoritative information on energy usage we can refer to the US Energy Information Administration (US EIA) that reports official energy statistics from the US Government covering the last quarter century. For all US EIA International data see: http://eia.doe.gov/international and for US EIA data on 2005 thermal electricity production, see http://eia.doe.gov/…/electricitygeneration.html.

The Ontario Ministry of Energy study indicated 668 deaths /27 TWh of coal-based electricity generation = 24.7 deaths/TWh. Using this figure we can estimate annual deaths from fossil fuel-based electricity generation (assuming equality in toxicity of coal, oil and gas burning and other factors such as medical services, population density and environmental protection services). Since Canada has excellent, publicly-accessible medical services, low population density and good environmental protection our estimate for other countries will be under-estimated – however the assumption that coal-burning is no more toxic than the burning of other fossil fuels may lead to over-estimation of the death toll.

Before providing these mortality estimates for all major fossil fuel-burning nations, it is useful to compare the estimates of annual deaths from fossil fuel-based electricity generation (“annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”) with those from coal-based electricity generation (”annual coal-based electricity deaths”) for several key countries. Thus “annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths” for the US, the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand are 71,877, 6,854, 5,394, 3,760 and 355, respectively (2005). These estimates are compared with estimates for “annual coal-based electricity deaths” for these countries.

The US “annual coal-based electricity deaths” have been estimated at 30,000 [2002]: “Coal-burning air pollution harms human heath in several different ways. Tiny particles of sulfur and nitrogen from coal burners lodge deep in our lungs, causing as many as 30,000 premature deaths per year, according to the most up-to-date study by EPA consultant Abt Associates“. According to Janet Larsen of The Earth Policy Institute it is 25,100 [2004]: “By moving beyond coal, the United States could avoid a legacy of smog-filled skies, acid rain, polluted waterways, contaminated fish, and scarred landscapes. This could each year save some 25,000 lives, reduce respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses, avert potential neurological damage for 630,000 babies, and erase a health care bill of over $160 billion”.

49% of US electricity of 4,065 TWh is from coal i.e. 1,991 TWh (2006: Sources: Wikipedia and EIA) indicating 49,153 [2006] ”annual coal-based electricity deaths” as compared to 71,887 “total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”.

The UK produced 409 TWh of electricity in 2005 of which 33.6% was coal-based i.e. 137.4 TWh, this corresponding to 137.4 TWh x 668/27 TWh = 3,399 [2005] “annual coal-based electricity deaths” as compared to 6,854 “total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”.

Australia produced 255 TWh of electricity in 2006 of which 92% was from fossil fuels and 77% was from burning black or brown coal, this yielding an estimate of 0.77 x 255 TWh x 668/27 TWh = 4,858[2006] ”annual coal-based electricity deaths” as compared to 0.77 x 5,394/0.92 = 4,515 [2005] ”annual coal-based electricity deaths” (see above) and total ”annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths” of 5,395 (2005; see above).

Canada produced 567 TWh of electricity in 2003 of which 28% was from fossil fuels and 19% was from coal burning i.e.107.7 TWh and we can calculate 107.7 TWh x 668/27 TWh = 2,665 [2003] ”annual coal-based electricity deaths” as compared to 0.19 x 3,760/0.28= 2,551 [2005] ”annual coal-based electricity deaths” and 3,760 [2005] “total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”.

New Zealand produced 41.6 TWh of electricity in 2005. In 2004, 73% of the total input into electricity generation was from renewable resources(predominantly hydro), 16% was from gas and 11% was from coal i.e. 4.6TWh (2005) corresponding to 114 [2005] “annual coal-based electricity deaths” as compared to 355 “total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”.

It is useful to compare the above figures from the “Anglo” countries with those for the World and the major non-European Developing countries China and India using data from the US Energy Information Administration, the World Coal Institute and the Pew Centre on Climate Change (see: http://pewclimate.org/…/coalfacts.cfm). Thus the “total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths” for India, China and the World can be estimated to be 13,319, 47,477 and 282, 945, respectively. In India 69% of electricity is from coal i.e. 456.5 TWh/y corresponding to 11, 276 “annual coal-based electricity deaths”. In China about 80% of electricity is from coal, corresponding to 1,898 TWh/y and 46,868 “annual coal-based electricity deaths”. For the World as a whole coal provides 40% of the total electricity i.e. 6,940 TWh/y and corresponding to 171,418 “annual coal-based electricity deaths”.

The World is not responding to warnings from top climate scientists such as NASA’s Dr James Hansen and his colleagues who are calling for a “negative CO2 emissions” policy to reduce atmospheric CO2 to a safe level of no more than 350 ppm from the current already dangerous level of 385 ppm (see: http://arxiv.org/…/.pdf and http://mwcnews.net/…/23119/42/). The warnings of such eminent scientists are obfuscated by self-interested climate scepticism, especially from the leading per capita CO2 polluters, the US and Australia.

However the above analysis shows that there is a horrendous reality ALREADY of about 170,000 deaths annually throughout the world from the effects of coal-based electricity generation and as many as 0.3 million deaths annually from pollutants from fossil fuel-based electricity generation in general – a huge death toll that cannot be ignored. Please tell everyone you can.

Dr Gideon Polya published some 130 works in a 4 decade scientific career, most recently a huge pharmacological reference text “Biochemical Targets of Plant Bioactive Compounds” (CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, New York & London, 2003). He has just published “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” (G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2007: http://mwcnews.net and http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com);
see also his contribution “Australian complicity in Iraq mass mortality” in “Lies, Deep Fries & Statistics” (edited by Robyn Williams, ABC Books, Sydney, 2007). He is currently preparing a revised and updated version of his 1998 book “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History” as biofuel-, globalization- and climate-driven global food price increases threaten a possibly 100-fold greater famine catastrophe than the man-made famine in British-ruled India that killed 6-7 million Indians in the “forgotten” World War 2 Bengal Famine (see recent BBC broadcast involving Dr Polya, Economics Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen and others).

Today activists from Climate Camp stopped a train carrying coal to Britain’s biggest coal-power station. Armed with a banderol with the text “Leave it in the ground” the activists started to shovel down the coal to the ground.

The protestors had food and water with them so they could be “able to remain on board for several days.”

“We are ready to stay here for as long as Gordon Brown and the government keep burning polluting fuel in these power stations,” said one of the protesters before clipping climbing ropes to the train’s wheels and the bridge girders. Although flimsy, the web would risk damage to the train or bridge if any attempt was made to drive off.”

Activist Ben Tennyson said:

“We’ve stopped this train to prevent it delivering a thousand tonnes of coal to be burned at Drax and then released into the atmosphere. If we’re serious about fighting climate change we have to leave this dirty fuel in the ground and invest in clean, renewable energy sources instead.”

When this post is written the activists still remains on the “hijacked” train. For more updated news check out BBC News and the Guardian (Both sites have video!).

Green Blog wishes these activists the best of luck! This also reminds us about a quote from Al Gore: “I can’t understand why there aren’t rings of young people blocking bulldozers and preventing them from constructing coal-fired power stations.”

Of all the duties and responsibilities entrusted to me as governor, none is greater than my obligation to protect the health and well-being of the people of Kansas.

Stephanie Cole, a Sierra Club spokeswoman, said that this…

…sends a message that Kansas is willing to be part of the solution, rather than part of the problem.

Roderick L. Bremby, Secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) added that he believes…

…it would be irresponsible to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our environment and health if we do nothing.

The coal plants would, according to Sunflower (the owners), emit 11 million tons of carbon dioxide a year.

Learn more:
- Kansas Governor Vetoes Bill to Allow Coal-Fired Plants
- Kansas Rejects Massive Sunflower Coal-Fired Power Plant