“The Dirty Future of Coal” Essay

Below is an essay published in Parafiniuk, A. N., & Smith, Z. A. (2025). Energy resource conflict: Origins and global impact. Bloomsbury Academic & Professional.

by Laine Munir

Coal is the self-destructive energy source we just cannot seem to quit, despite the decades of research demonstrating its unsustainable environmental, health, social, and financial costs. In 2019, surface and underground coal extraction expanded, world consumption increased, and combustion still accounts for 40 percent of global CO2 emissions from energy use (Jakob et al. 2020).

Coal’s damaging effects begin before it is taken out of the ground. It causes biodiversity loss and environmental damage as forests are felled and mountains disfigured to clear surfaces. This land can never be returned to its exact prior ecological balance or used for planting crops. The mining process then releases numerous environmental toxins, including high amounts of mercury that can poison waterways, wildlife, and human populations. Both extracting and burning coal for use discharge carbon monoxide, carbon and sulfur dioxides, nitrogen oxides, lead, arsenic, and toxic heavy metals and soot that cause global warming and acid rain. Methane is particularly concerning because it is eighty-six times more potent than carbon dioxide at trapping heat over twenty years (Jackson et al. 2020). To keep global warming within 1.5 °C of pre-industrial levels, researchers argue that in most scenarios, there needs to be a complete cessation of coal use by 2050 (Dessler 2016, 72). The causal link between coal and climate change is clear.

Some argue that coal use may continue more sustainably with the increased use of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) systems. This process involves capturing carbon dioxide from industrial processes, such as fossil fuel power stations, and then storing it securely underground. However, CCS is an emerging technology that remains inefficient, especially when compared with cleaner forms of energy generation, and it is still unproven at the scale necessary to meaningfully address climate change. CCS also does not reduce other harmful pollutants produced in the fuel cycle of coal.

Meanwhile, coal continues to imperil public health. In addition to coal mines poisoning the land communities rely on, air pollution from coal-fired power plants causes asthma, cancer, heart and lung ailments, and neurological problems under certain conditions. A recent study indicates that the continuous inhalation of coal-related hazardous substances triggers cardiovascular disease, brain degeneration, DNA damage, and autoimmune and reproductive disorders (Gasparotto and Martinello 2020). Furthermore, coal mining and processing remain one of the most dangerous professions. In addition to continual exposure to these toxins, miners may endure underground gassings, incinerations, or explosions from three deadly gases (methane, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide) (Bradley 2020, 9). There is also the danger of cave-ins, floods, and falling rocks (Hamby 2020, 32). Although coal mining labor is highly regulated in the developed world, it is hugely unmonitored, and thus perilous, in the Global South.

There is less attention on the social conflicts arising from the coal industry. Grievances occur when communities are displaced from land to make way for extraction sites or left uncompensated for mining-related losses. Particularly in developing countries, coal mining is linked to environmental injustice, gender-based violence, and labor exploitation, including that of children (Cardoso 2015; Cock 2019). In India alone, an estimated 1/5 of all mineworkers are under the age of seventeen (Chandran 2016). As a whole, mining often has unequal gender outcomes, with women less likely than men to find employment opportunities or leadership positions in the sector (Buss et al. 2017).

Coal’s popularity persists despite the indications that it is increasingly more expensive than alternative forms of energy. Most of the world’s surface-level “easy” coal has been mined already, forcing extraction from deeper underground, which increases costs. There are now cheaper fuels, including natural gas, which is why 2019 was the first year in which renewables surpassed coal in energy production (Rowland 2020). There are no expectations that coal will fall out of favor any time soon, however.

It would seem that if the environmental and health impacts of coal were not enough to end its use, at least the supposed laissez-faire principles of energy pricing would. Yet, the question remains in the face of its economic inefficiency, “Why is coal so hard to quit?” Because, as Sengupta (2018) describes it, coal is a “powerful incumbent.” It exists underground in a finite amount and eager companies—backed by powerful governments and esurient banks—are in a rush to access it as soon as possible. National electricity grids were designed for it and coal plants help politicians to deliver cheap electricity to voters. The coal mining industry employs about eight million people globally and creates revenues of more than US$900 billion a year. Coal use is unlikely to decline in the immediate future, and reductions in the Global North are offset by growth in China, India, and other Asian countries, ensuring future demand (Sengupta 2018).

An international ban is the principal solution to the continued demand for coal in the face of its apparent harm. With any maneuvering room at all in law, policy, or regulation, those who profit from it will find a way to keep coal use ongoing at an unsustainable rate for the planet and people. The urgency of climate change, public health, and socioeconomic well-being call for a global embargo to be gradually rolled out over the next decade. It is crucial that the phase-out be fair and that the process dovetails with political realities. Law and policymakers must understand in more detail who “will be affected by a transition away from coal, how these societal groups can be effectively compensated, and how powerful vested interests can be counterbalanced” (Jakob et al. 2020). Despite the challenges leaders will face, to ignore the pressing need for a ban on coal would be environmentally and socially careless.

FURTHER READING AND REFERENCES

Bradley, M. 2020. Blood Runs Coal: The Yablonski Murders and the Battle for the United Mine Workers of America. New york: W. W. Norton.

Buss, D., B. A. Rutherford, J. Hinton, J. M. Stewart, J. Lebert, G. E. Côté, A. Sebina-Zziwa, R. Kibombo, and F. Kisekka. 2017. Gender and Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining in Central and East Africa: Barriers and Benefits. Montreal: McGill University and the Institute for the Study of International Development.

Cardoso, A. 2015. “Behind the Life Cycle of Coal: Socio-environmental Liabilities of Coal Mining in Cesar, Colombia.” Ecological Economics 120: 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecole con.2015.10.004.

Chandran, R. 2016. “Children Working in India’s Coal Mines Came as ‘Complete Shock’, Filmmaker Says.” Thomson Reuters Foundation, July 6. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://www. reuters.com/article/lifestyle/children-working-in-india-s-coal-mines-came-as-complete-shock- filmmaker-says-idUSKCN0ZM1Dy/

Cock, J. 2019. “Resistance to Coal Inequalities and the Possibilities of a Just Transition in South Africa.” Null 36, no. 6: 860–73. 10.1080/0376835X.2019.1660859.

Dessler, A. E. 2016. Introduction to Modern Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gasparotto, J., and K. Da Boit Martinello. 2020. “Coal as an Energy Source and Its Impacts on Human Health.” Energy Geoscience. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engeos.2020.07.003.

Hamby, M. 2020. Soul Full of Dust: A Fight for Breath and Justice in Appalachia. New york: Little, Brown.

Jackson, R. B., M. Saunois, P. Bousquet, J. G. Canadell, B. Poulter, A. R. Stavert, and A. Tsuruta. 2020. “Increasing Anthropogenic Methane Emissions Arise Equally from Agricultural and Fossil Fuel Sources.” Environmental Research Letters 15, no. 7: 071002.

Jakob, M., J. C. Steckel, F. Jotzo, B. K. Sovacool, L. Cornelsen, R. Chandra, O. Edenhofer, C. Holden, A. Löschel, and T. Nace. 2020. “The Future of Coal in a Carbon-constrained Climate.” Nature Climate Change 10, no. 8: 704–7.

Rowland, T. 2020. “Economics Wins the War on Coal.” Regulation 43: 72.
Sengupta, S. 2018. “The World Needs to Quit Coal: Why Is It So Hard? New York Times,

November 24. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/24/climate/coal-glo bal-warming.html.