The UK government is facing accusations of hypocrisy and sending the wrong signal to the industry after it decided to give the green light to a new coking coal mine in the UK Cumbria.
read: Cumbria mines approve ‘an appalling decision’
Experts have also questioned investing in “1850s technology” to supply coal for steelmaking as the industry looks to switch to cleaner technologies.
Plans for Whitehaven Edge CumbriaThe project, which won government approval after a series of delays, is expected to mine nearly 2.8 million tonnes of coal a year to make steel, rather than generate electricity.
incomprehensible
Environmentalists have warned it would generate around 400,000 tonnes of emissions a year, and the claims are hypocritical after Britain’s efforts on the international stage to urge the world to ditch coal. They want to see investment in green jobs.
Scientists and engineers point to warnings from British Steel that they will not be able to use the coal because of its sulfur content, meaning most of it will be exported.
There are also many programs around the world, including in Europe, that are investing in new alternatives to coal to make steel to reduce emissions.
Sir David King, former government chief scientist and chair of the independent climate crisis advisory group, called the decision an “incomprehensible act of self-harm”.
“Globally, there should be no new coal, oil or gas recycling business,” he said.
Incorrect
“This action by a leading advanced economy sets a completely wrong example for the rest of the world.
“Our only real form of impact on the world’s climate crisis is seriously abandoned by this action.”
Sam Fankhauser, from Oxford University’s Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, said: “There is a big difference between short-term increases in fossil fuel use in response to the energy crisis and new long-term investments in coal mines.
“Unless the carbon associated with mining can be captured and stored, the jobs it creates will be short-lived.”
He said the decision also sent the “completely wrong message” that the UK had pledged to cut emissions to “net zero” by 2050 to fight climate change.
dirty
“In the eyes of low-income countries, this looks hypocritical, and we have repeatedly criticized their own fossil fuel ambitions.”
Professor Stuart Haszeldine, from the School of Earth Sciences at the University of Edinburgh, said: “In Cumbria Are investing in 1850s technology and not looking forward to the low carbon local energy future of the 2030s.
“We studied Cumbria Coal, which obviously has a very high sulfur content, which neither of the British steelmakers want.
“Steelmaking in Europe is rapidly transitioning to using hydrogen, rather than coal.
“Most, perhaps all, of this coking coal will be exported outside of Europe to escape environmental restrictions on its use. The UK will become a global supplier of dirty fuel.”
Confusing
Nick Molho, executive director of the Aldersgate Group, an alliance of business, academia and civil society supporting a sustainable economy, said the decision was “deeply disappointing from an industrial strategy, market signaling, environmental and diplomatic perspective”.
He said: “Several steelmakers in the UK and globally are now developing plans to move away from coal and instead produce green steel through cleaner technologies such as electric arc furnaces powered by renewable energy or direct reduction via hydrogen.
“These are the technologies and globally relevant supply chains that the UK should be looking to to gain a competitive advantage and that can create new and stable jobs across the country in the long term.”
The move comes a year after the UK government launched a campaign to encourage businesses and investors to accelerate emissions reductions, he added.
“The approval of a new open pit coal mine in the UK one year later sends a very confusing signal to the business and investment community, and is totally at odds with the government’s quest to reduce risk and accelerate the flow of investment towards low carbon technologies to reach net zero emissions,” he warned.
the author
Emily Beament is PA Environmental Correspondent.
