Michael Bloomberg unveiled a $500 million “Beyond Carbon” marketing campaign on Friday, aimed toward closing each U.S. coal-fired power plant by 2030 and halting the development of any new natural gas plants.
The new marketing campaign will direct its funding towards environmental teams’ lobbying efforts in state legislatures, metropolis councils and public utility commissions, in addition to to elect native politicians with pro-clean energy insurance policies, a Bloomberg spokesperson informed The New York Times. The marketing campaign expects to spend the $500 million within the subsequent three years, though that time-frame may very well be prolonged, the spokesperson stated.
The marketing campaign’s objectives exceed even essentially the most aggressive clear energy and zero-carbon mandates set by states comparable to Hawaii, California, New York and a growing roster of others. But it’s unclear how the push will in the end have an effect on both the coal business’s accelerating decline, or the present plans in a lot of the nation to depend on natural gas-fired electrical energy for many years to come.
The unprecedented degree of funding is required to handle the worldwide climate disaster that President Donald Trump has denied exists and a gridlocked Congress has failed to handle, Bloomberg stated Friday on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduation the place he outlined the marketing campaign.
The billionaire businessman, philanthropist and former mayor of New York City additionally decried clean-energy and carbon-reduction plans that depend on assembly their objectives a long time sooner or later, as do most state packages introduced to date. “Politicians keep making promises about climate change mitigation by the year 2050 — hypocritically, after they’re long gone, and no one can hold them accountable,” Bloomberg said.
Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Sierra Club have been engaged on closing coal plants throughout the nation because the 2011 founding of the Beyond Coal marketing campaign. Since then, the group has tallied 289 coal power plants which have shut down or introduced plans to close forward of schedule, greater than half the nation’s whole. The shift away from coal comes within the face of low-cost natural-gas-fired power, rising operational and environmental compliance prices, and in some states, competitors from low-cost renewable energy.
Of these coal plants, 51 have introduced their retirement plans because the 2016 election, “regardless of all the bluster from the White House,” Bloomberg famous. The Trump administration has publicly backed the coal business, and has tried to use the Department of Energy’s authority to push federal regulators to present out-of-market funds to struggling coal and nuclear plants, together with these owned by bankrupt FirstEnergy Solutions.
In April, Pacific Northwest and Rocky Mountain utility PacifiCorp for the first time outlined plans that would name for coal plants in Wyoming to be retired forward of schedule, to get replaced by numerous combos of new natural-gas plants, renewables and energy storage. Xcel Energy, which operates the biggest utilities in Colorado and Minnesota, has outlined a plan to reach zero-carbon electricity by 2050, forward of strikes towards related mandates in each states.
The proposal to halt any new natural-gas-fired power plants is probably going to be met with some incredulity in areas the place they’re anticipated to be the first alternative for retiring coal and nuclear technology. Still, Bloomberg defended the thought on the MIT graduation, saying it’s crucial not solely to lower carbon emissions, however to keep away from investing in technology that might be supplanted by clear energy: “By the time they’re constructed, they’re going to be old-fashioned as a result of renewable might be cheaper.”
Whether or not that assertion is true will depend on many elements, in fact. Wood Mackenzie Power & Renewables has been monitoring the rise of renewable energy accompanied by energy storage — largely lithium-ion batteries at multi-megawatt scale — as a substitute to natural-gas-fired power plants. Data reveals these newer applied sciences have gotten more and more aggressive.
Ever-falling costs for solar and wind-plus-storage contracts, continued value declines for solar PV and lithium-ion batteries, and the accompanying skill for battery-based tasks to obtain longer hourly durations, might put an growing portion of the U.S. marketplace for peaker capability within reach for these renewable-battery combos, in accordance to Ravi Manghani, WoodMac’s head of energy analysis.
States wealthy in low-cost renewables comparable to California, Arizona and Texas are seemingly to be the primary to see the economics pencil out, the analysis notes. California has already rejected a few natural-gas plant contracts in favor of fresh choices like energy storage and renewables.
But the identical pressures are additionally beginning to make themselves felt in components of the nation which have historically been pleasant to fossil fuels. In Indiana, utility Vectren noticed its plan to substitute a baseload coal plant with a new natural-gas plant blocked by state regulators in April, on the grounds that the plan “foreclosed consideration of combinations of smaller resources that might have offered greater resource diversity, flexibility and cost efficiencies.”