Some thoughts on China and Coal

There has lately been some discussion of a proposed giant terminal in Washington State for the exporting of coal (originating in Wyoming and Montana) to China. The Governor, predictably, is all for it, environmentalists are predictably against it.

The latter bring up many points, most of which I am not qualified to comment on. One that is interesting, though, is the accusation that in approving the terminal, the relevant authorities failed to take into account the effects it would have on the global climate. Basically, this makes sense – burning coal is bad, this project would make the burning of coal easier, thus it shouldn’t move forward. But I think its more complex than that. I’ll note right here that their other objections may well be right – I’m concerned only with the idea that we shouldn’t be exporting coal to China.

George Will has written repeatedly about coal consumption in China. His argument seems to be setting up the conclusion that since China will still burn fossil fuels, we shouldn’t bother reducing our own emissions. While I don’t agree with this conclusion, he has a point – even if we stop using fossil fuels entirely in the US, as long as we are buying our products from China, we are party to the CO2 emissions that China is producing. (Okay, that’s not really his point, but it follows logically from his arguments).

So my question is – if we are still buying Chinese products, who are we to not sell them the coal to make them? Ideally, we wouldn’t be buying everything from China, but lo, we are. Moreover, not selling coal to China won’t stop them from burning coal. They’ll just burn their own; the reason they want ours is that their coal is higher in sulfur, and in many cases hard to get from the coal mines to the power plants where it’s needed. And it is the consequences of them burning their own that makes selling them our coal not only value neutral, but in my opinion very important. Chinese coal costs in lives- at least five thousand Chinese miners a year die in coal mines. High sulfur coal, which constitutes most Chinese reserves, is hell on people’s health – look at what happened when the Soviet Union decided to take the “whatever burns” approach towards choosing what coal to use. Burning high sulfur coal in China, with its huge population densities, limited ability to scrub coal emissions, and huge demand for fuel, is a crime against the millions of Chinese who suffer respiratory ailments because of where they live and against Chinese rivers and lakes that suffer from incredible levels of acid rain.

Like I said, the opponents of this coal terminal may be right, it may be a raw deal for the county and there may be environmental effects that haven’t been explored. But as far as its effect on China goes, I think that exporting coal to them has to be seen as a victory for both the environment and human standards of life.

If you appreciate an independent voice holding Montana politicians accountable and informing voters, and you can throw a few dollars a month our way, we would certainly appreciate it.

Subscribe to our posts

About the author

The Polish Wolf


Click here to post a comment

Please enter an e-mail address

  • What do you think happens to Montana when you take that stuff out of the ground?

    Read numerous industry sources on mining and fracking and oil and gas and all of it will collectively tell you that even they admit they can't do it without serious impact. Their honest assessment is full of qualifiers.

    Why should we be tools of China? Why should we condone poor choices?

    Maybe we should sell them crack, too – they can them make us more stuff.

    • I didn't argue it wasn't bad for our environment, nor did I claim to know enough about the specifics to know whether this particular terminal is a good idea. My argument is this – an appeal to the global environment is meaningless. The same amount of coal is burned whether its mined in China or here. The difference is the amount of sulfur released, the methods used to get at it, and the number of people who die from it. On all counts, mining in the US wins.

      What you are essentially arguing is, better do it there than here. Which is a fine argument as long as you assume our environment is worth more than theirs, and that it is worth thousands of deaths from burning high-sulfur coal to keep our landscapes intact (and indeed that is only true if you assume that the increase in mining in the US will force us to open new lands to mining). I don't believe that – call me unpatriotic. The only way to slow coal burning in China is to stop buying as much stuff. If you'd like to float the idea of a sales tax on everything based on how much energy it takes to make it, I'll vote for it, but don't expect much support. Until then, I'd prefer they burn low-sulfur coal mined in a relatively humane way.

  • Hey! Quick question that’s completely off topic. Do you know how to make your site mobile friendly? My web site looks weird when viewing from my iphone4. I’m trying to find a theme or plugin that might be able to fix this problem. If you have any suggestions, please share. With thanks!

  • This is a good subject to talk about. Usually when I find stuff like this I stumble it. I don’t think this would be the best to submit though. I will be sure to submit something else though.

Latest PostCast

Support Our Work!

Subscribe Via E-mail


Which Democratic Candidate for Governor Do You Support Today?

Send this to a friend