The announcement by the ESB that two peat-fired power stations at Shannonbridge and Lanesborough are to close next year should have come as no surprise. There is a third at Edenderry, owned by Bord na Móna, and a closure announcement can be expected soon. Of all the fossil fuel sources for power generation, peat stations emit the most greenhouse gases per unit of electricity produced, more even than coal, and the costs of production were excessive, even aside from the carbon emissions factor. The two stations closing next year were commissioned as recently as the year 2000, Edenderry in 2004. There has been much comment about the job losses in the midlands, small at the stations themselves, but more substantial in turf production at Bord na Móna, but no questioning of the decisions to build these stranded assets so recently, at a cost in the hundreds of millions, at a time when there was little prospect that they would survive to the end of their physical lives. They were not built for sound commercial reasons and there has been yet another waste of public funds, ultimately paid for by electricity consumers in higher tariffs.

Impact

It is reasonable to be concerned about the loss of employment and the adequacy of transition arrangements for those likely to lose their jobs. But climate change was not exactly a secret when these stations were built, and there should be a full inquiry into the decisions that led to their construction. The coal station at Moneypoint, far bigger than these three combined, but with less employment impact since the coal is imported, is also up for the chop and will be gone by 2025, possibly sooner. It was commissioned in 1985, did not require hidden subsidies as did the turf stations and is coming to the end of its natural life anyway, so there are no embarrassing questions to be answered about the decision to construct it in the first place. There is one other high-emissions station, at Tarbert, which burns fuel oil. It is also an old station and will be phased out soon.

There will have to be some fossil fuel stations through the energy transition, since wind and solar are interruptible and weather-dependent. You cannot have a secure system without some ‘always-on’ stations. But these will be gas stations, where the per-unit carbon emissions are roughly half those of coal.

These three relatively new turf stations must now be written off prematurely and the decision to build was a costly mistake. Mistakes on this scale should be followed by inquiries and the allocation of blame, both to decision-making processes and to identified individuals, the better to learn lessons and avoid fresh mistakes.

Conflicts over closure dates for coal stations are likely to become widespread around Europe and between the EU and its trading partners, in the years ahead. Almost half of worldwide energy-related carbon emissions come from coal, mainly from power plants, but also from industrial use and the figures are still rising.

No real gain

In Europe, difficult decisions have been taken in most countries. New stations have not been built and governments, most recently in Germany and Spain, have agreed to close existing stations more rapidly than commercial considerations alone would dictate. These countries have substantial remaining coal reserves but have decided to leave them in the ground. The closure of a coal plant in Wales was announced two weeks ago and the United Kingdom, in or out of the EU, has committed to ending coal-fired generation. But the government of Poland recently announced a state subsidy for the construction of a large new coal station near Katowice, whose commissioning date should coincide roughly with the closure of Moneypoint, so there is no net gain. For the European Union, this policy is utterly incoherent and is bound to become a source of friction – some of the German plants scheduled for early closure are just a few hours drive from the new plant announced in Poland. The government of Bosnia, not an EU member but virtually an EU protectorate, is also committed to building new coal stations, since it has a coal-mining industry.

The future of coal without Europe

Outside Europe, where coal use has been declining quickly in recent decades, new stations are being constructed fast enough to offset the sacrifices in the EU. China and India rely heavily on coal and suffer the results in the form of low-level air pollution. But they export the consequences in the form of carbon emissions into the shared global atmosphere and future trade negotiations are bound to involve conditions about climate policy. Next year’s US election will see opponents of Trump question his support for coal and the issue dominated the recent election in Australia, where the pro-coal party won.

Be thankful Ireland has no coal.