About 80% of EU and German, virtually all Polish coal plants non-compliant with new EU 2021 air pollution regulations
Apart from being the largest source of CO2 emissions, coal combustion is also a major threat to public health globally. About 82% of EU, 80% German and virtually all Polish coal power plants do not comply with a new EU regulation on industry air pollution emissions standards that they need to meet by 2021.
Scientific analysis by Climate Analytics of the energy system changes for the EU to meet the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C warming limit show that an EU coal phase out is needed by 2030. Already nine member states – Austria, Denmark, France, Finland, Italy, Portugal, Sweden, the Netherlands and United Kingdom—accounting for 26% of EU coal capacity have announced phase out dates for coal ahead of 2030. Germany and Poland accounting for about 30% and 20% of EU coal capacity respectively, have yet to announce phase out dates.
Apart from being the largest source of CO2 emissions, coal combustion is also a major threat to public health globally. Pollution from coal plants is responsible for about 23,000 premature death in the EU every year. New EU air pollution standards that come into force in 2021 are aimed reducing pollution from this power source substantially.
About 82% of EU, 80% German and virtually all Polish coal power plants do not comply with a new EU regulation on industry air pollution emissions standards that they need to meet by 2021.
The costs for upgrading these coal power plant to meet the new air pollution regulations could be between 8-14.5 billion € for the EU – 2.4-4.3 billion € for Poland and 0.7-1.2 billion € for Germany. In addition, operating costs of these plants with more effective filters would also increase.
Given the clear need to reduce CO2 emissions from coal to almost zero by 2030 within the EU, the most economically efficient means of reducing EU air pollution, and saving lives, will be to rapidly close coal plants, and replace the power produced with renewables and cleaner technology. A coal phase out would come with multiple benefits for economy, climate and public health.
- In July 2017, the European Commission adopted new, “Best Available Technique (BAT),” standards for Large Combustion Plants , which includes coal plants. By 2021, all EU coal-fired power plants need to meet these new standards, issued by the Commission in accordance with the Industrial Emissions Directive . Right now, 82% of EU installations exceed the new 2021 standards . The combined cost to upgrade them amounts to 7.9 -14.5 EUR billion. Operation costs of these plants would also increase.
- For Germany, which accounts for about 30% of the EU coal fleet, around 80% of the coal fleet expected to be still operating in 2021 would not comply with the emissions standards under the new regulations. The total costs of upgrading these would amount to 0.7-1.2 billion €. Operation costs of these plants would also increase.
- The EU’s 2030 Paris Agreement target represents only a slight increase in the rate of climate action compared to the preceding quarter-century. Neither the historical—nor the projected—rate of emissions reduction will allow the EU to meet its 2050 goal of decreasing total GHG emissions by 80–95% below 1990 levels, which was itself set several years prior to the adoption of the Paris Agreement .
- Coal power plants are responsible for around 18% of EU emissions . To be compatible with the Paris Agreement’s temperature increase limit, this needs to be reduced to close to zero by 2030 . Right now, Austria, Denmark, France, Finland, Italy, Portugal, Sweden, the Netherlands and United Kingdom—accounting for 26% of EU coal capacity—have set phase-out goals that would achieve this. The two largest coal emitters, Germany and Poland, accounting for close to half of EU coal capacity, have yet to address this issue.
- Emissions performance standards, and air quality regulations can contribute to coal phase-out. Emissions from coal-fired power plants lead to about 23,000 fatalities annually in the EU . Germany´s coal fleet alone accounted for over 4000 premature deaths in 2013 . Even though the modernisation of the some of the oldest installations would reduce this number, in many cases it is too expensive  and energy companies may be better off to close their power plants instead of retrofitting them .
- Closing these plants would be a classic win-win outcome, as they are “low-hanging fruit” to achieve emissions reductions and their closure would result in society being better off in terms air pollution and health while capital that would otherwise go to fossil-fuel intensive industries can be profitably reinvested in secure long term renewable capacity .
Tripling renewables by 2030: interpreting the global goal at the regional level
At COP28, governments agreed to triple global renewable capacity by 2030. This report breaks down what a 1.5ºC-aligned renewables rollout would look like at the regional level and calculate the associated investment needs.
Submission to the Australian Treasury consultation on the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax
As the gas industry in Australia has grown exponentially, the profit taxes it pays to the government have proportionally plummeted, presenting an opportunity to change this regime. Here, we respond to the Australian Government Treasury consultation on the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) – anti-avoidance provisions and clarifying treatment of ‘exploration’ and Mining, Quarrying or Prospecting Rights.
Unabated: the Carbon Capture and Storage 86 billion tonne carbon bomb aimed at derailing a fossil phase-out
The climate talks at COP28 have centred around the need for a fossil fuel phase-out. Our analysis quantifies the risk posed by restricting a phase-out commitment to only ‘unabated’ fossil fuels.
No change to warming as fossil fuel endgame brings focus onto false solutions
The CAT's annual warming estimate has risen by 0.1˚C to 2.5˚C. The estimate is largely influenced by weak existing targets rather than shifts triggered by updated Nationally Determined Contributions.
When will global greenhouse gas emissions peak?
The IPCC says peaking before 2025 is a critical step to keep the 1.5°C limit within reach. With emissions set to rise in 2023, this leaves limited time to act. To assess if we can meet this milestone, we look at when global emissions might peak, as well as what we can do to get there in time.
Wind and solar benchmarks for a 1.5°C world
This report presents a detailed methodology for determining the amount of wind and solar capacity that is required for a country to align with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C temperature goal. While the focus of the report is the method, it includes illustrative benchmarks for Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Germany, South Africa.
A 1.5°C future is possible: getting fossil fuels out of the Philippine power sector
The Philippines is also one of the fastest-growing developing countries: poverty is in decline, access to energy is rising and, with that, demand for energy services. However, fossil fuels still dominate the energy system, accounting for 78% of power generation in 2022. This report sets out what the Philippines government needs to do to get the country’s power sector onto a 1.5˚C compatible emissions pathway, replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy.
Production Gap Report 2023
Governments, in aggregate, still plan to produce more than double the amount of fossil fuels in 2030 than would be consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C. The persistence of the global production gap puts a well-managed and equitable energy transition at risk.
Emissions impossible: Unpacking CSIRO GISERA Beetaloo Middle Arm fossil gas emissions estimates
This report provides an independent evaluation of the CSIRO and GISERA assessments of the potential greenhouse gas emissions that would result from the exploitation of the Beetaloo fossil shale gas reserves.
Adjusting 1.5°C climate change mitigation pathways in light of adverse new information
This study uses an integrated assessment model to explore how 1.5°C pathways could adjust in light of new adverse information, such as a reduced 1.5°C carbon budget, or slower-than-expected low-carbon technology deployment.