The beauty of the Denniston Plateau. Photo: Forest & Bird

Conservation Minister Nick Smith’s announcement today that he’ll grant Australian mining company Bathurst access to mine part of the Denniston Plateau is a sign that the Government has learnt nothing from Solid Energy’s financial debacle, says Jeanette Fitzsimons of Coal Action Network Aotearoa.

Ms Fitzsimons is a member of the Coal Action Network Aotearoa’s national organising group, and has also worked with the West Coast Environment Network on its Supreme Court case arguing that climate change must be taken into account in consents on coal mining.

The financially strapped Bathurst, which announced this week that it’s dropping 20 staff currently working on a major part of its income stream, the Cascade mine, and pulling its drill rigs out of the Denniston Plateau to keep it “cash positive”.

“The Government appears hell-bent on backing yet another financially precarious coal company. It has changed the law retrospectively to give itself the power to allow access for mining, contrary to the requirements of the Conservation Act.

“Why allow this struggling company to rip the heart out of our precious conservation estate and wreck the climate?  This is not what the people want and it will be opposed all the way, from in the courts to on the land.

“Why back coal, a sunset industry, when we could be getting ahead of the clean energy curve? All around the world investors are getting out of coal because they know 80% of it can never be burned if we are to stay within a safe level of climate change.

“Papers released by Treasury this week show that Solid Energy advised the Government in 2010 to mine as much as possible, as fast as possible, before the world sees the light and moves to renewable energy.  It appears to me that the Government has wholeheartedly embraced Solid’s plan to destroy as much of the climate as possible before they are stopped,” said Fitzsimons.

Welcome to our May newsletter.

Here at CANA we have been talking a lot about “life beyond coal”, and what the alternatives are for coal mining communities in New Zealand. This was one of the main topics of discussion at a recent event hosted by Canterbury Coal Action – see below for a report on this wonderful evening. It is time that all New Zealanders became part of this conversation, as communities in the coal mining area of Appalachia are now doing. They are looking to Wales as a model, as the Welsh coalfields were mostly shut down in the 1980’s, so communities there have already faced the question of how to reinvent themselves as natural resources are depleted. Another great example is Kayenta, Arizona, where they are working to replace coal with green jobs. These overseas examples can provide ideas and inspiration for us here in Aotearoa as we work together to create our own future beyond coal.

To see this dream realised, we must keep challenging every new coal development. Hence a myriad of groups are collaborating to oppose Fonterra’s proposed mine at Mangatawhiri – more on that in this newsletter! Also this month Forest and Bird have announced that they will appeal the Environment Court’s decision on Bathurst’s proposal to mine the Denniston Plateau. Read on to be brought up to speed on this, thanks to Jeanette.

To get involved in any of these campaigns, or to get connected to a local coal action group in your area, do drop us an email at coalactionnetwork@gmail.com .

Please also let us know if you have any upcoming events you want us to list in the next newsletter – due in June.

In solidarity,

Tarsh Turner

1. Solid Energy
2. Denniston Update
3. Fonterra’s proposed mine at Mangatawhiri
4. Canterbury Coal Action event
5. Climate Denier in NZ
6. Bill McKibben’s “Do The Math” tour
7. International and science roundup

1.  Solid Energy gets tough on the workers it still has left

Solid Energy is still up to its old tricks; that is, when times get tough – take it out on the workers! Many contractors have left Stockton. Shifts have changed. The old 10 hour shifts have been changed to 12 hours, and workers have had to adopt a 7 day on 7 day off shift. Half of those are nights, in various combinations. So a lot of workers have left because they can’t do the nights.

Management want to change the shifts again to 5 days on, 2 off – staggered, and again, half the ‘days’ have to be nights. This will eliminate the FIFO (fly in, fly out – or in Stockton’s case it is often drive in, drive out) workers who live out of the area – as it will not be worth going away for 2 days. Workers are being told that if they can commit to this they will be guaranteed six years of work.

It was not the workers’ fault that Solid Energy got into its financial mess, but workers were the first to get squeezed when times got tough. Threats of job losses at Stockton if they did not accept a shift change last year, while Don Elder was still earning his $1.3 million, have been borne out. Not only that, Solid Energy is using a strategy well known among unscrupulous employers – that is, using a change in conditions of employment to cut down staff numbers instead of going by the fair and equitable method of ‘management of change’.

2. Update on Denniston

The Environment Court has issued an interim decision granting consent for Bathurst (calling itself Buller Coal) to mine at Denniston, subject to stronger conditions. We don’t know what conditions it has in mind. Opponents are refusing to negotiate on conditions as there are no conditions that would make it OK to destroy this exceptional area of beauty and biodiversity, or to continue adding to climate change.

Meanwhile Forest & Bird have appealed to the High Court on a legal issue in the decision. The announcement led to Bathurst’s share value dropping to 27 cents. Bathurst shares slump after appeal news

Forest and Bird subsequently added a second appeal against this decision on separate grounds, causing a further drop in Bathurst’s share price: http://www.forestandbird.org.nz/what-we-do/publications/media-release/denniston-plateau-appeal-heads-high-court

We are still waiting for the decision of the Supreme Court on whether climate change can be taken into account when considering an application for resource consent for a mine. If the decision is favourable the Environment Court will have to reconvene and hear climate change evidence on the Denniston mine.

So there are several more steps to go before the company can mine, and before we put out a call for your physical support to stop this craziness. Meanwhile, the question for Bathurst’s shareholders is: how low are you willing to go?

3. Fonterra’s proposed mine at Mangatawhiri

Submissions closed just before Easter on this proposal for a 120,000 tonnes/year open cast mine on farmland right beside SH2 at Mangatawhiri south of Auckland. Vigorous work by Auckland Coal Action ensured the council officer receiving submissions was moved to describe them as “pouring in”. As well as many locals and Aucklanders, submissions were received from national bodies such as Greenpeace, Ora Taiao, CANA, ACA, Green Party, and also the local Dilworth School.

Some concerns are health effects of dust from coal mining; the liberal use of water to control it, depriving other users if there is a drought as at present; increased heavy traffic; noise from mining machinery; and effects on groundwater. The big one of course is climate change, and submissions have made that point, currently outside the scope of the hearing, in case the Supreme Court finds in our favour, that climate change is a legitimate issue to argue in coal mine consents.

Wood suppliers confirm that there is enough waste wood from forestry operations in the region to supply Fonterra’s three local dairy factories. You cannot just drop wood into a coal boiler but over time these boilers can be modified.  We are asking for a planned transition from coal to wood, but Fonterra is heading the other way, having just rejected cost-effective wood as a fuel for their giant new factory at Darfield.

On Easter Monday thousands of returning holiday makers from Coromadel and Tauranga were made aware of the issue as they queued or crawled along the highway, by large banners hung over the overbridge and along the side of the road. We were greeted by constant toots and thumbs up of support, with relatively few expressing disapproval. For pictures and commentary see www.aucklandcoalaction.org

4. Canterbury Coal Action event

On Saturday 6^th April, whilst the national organising group was in Christchurch, CANA and Canterbury Coal Action held an evening of networking and sharing campaign experiences with friends and supporters.

Jen Miller, Canterbury and West Coast Field Officer from Forest and Bird shared the good news that F&B were appealing the recent Environment Court decision on Denniston. http://www.forestandbird.org.nz/what-we-do/publications/media-release/more-court-action-ahead-in-bid-save-denniston-plateau

Eugenie Sage, local Green Party MP spoke about the proposed changes to the RMA. She pointed out that these changes would lead to a reduction in the opportunity for communities to have any say in future mining consent applications with an increased expectation in favour of development. http://www.greens.org.nz/rma.

Jeanette Fitzsimmons and Kristin Gillies spoke about CANA’s history and recent developments including the sudden demise of Solid Energy’s Southland lignite plans. CANA’s future plans were alluded to, including the need to prevent any new coal mining expansion, such as for powering dairy plants.  The use of dirty coal certainly goes against the clean green image that our dairy industry likes to portray to overseas markets.

Rachel Eyre encouraged Canterbury CANA supporters to get active through Canterbury Coal Action and described the past year’s activities of the local group. The group has been involved in highlighting coal and climate change impacts at 350.org events, the Keep Our Assets march, the Frack Free Concert and the Bimblebox Film evening. Check out our blog at: http://canterburycoalaction.blogspot.co.nz/ and our new Facebook page.

The evening concluded with local CANA supporters and members of the Canterbury and the national organising group of CANA sharing experiences and relaxing over a glass of wine and roasted chestnuts.

Thanks to all for making the evening such a success.

Rachel Eyre
Canterbury Coal Action
Christchurch

5. Climate Denier in NZ

Many of you will have noticed climate science denier Lord Christopher Monckton’s tour of NZ.  He has been promoted by Federated Farmers, by the Otago Chamber of Commerce, and other organizations who are still basking in the false sense of conviction that climate change isn’t real and, if it is, we’re not causing it.  (Federated Farmers at a national level subsequently distanced themselves from the Monckton visit, but they sponsored him in Marlborough.  See http://www.fedfarm.org.nz/publications/media-releases/article.asp?id=637)

One of the best interviews of Monckton was by Michele Hewitson at the NZ Herald, whom he walked out on.  Gareth Renowden of Hot Topic followed him closely and called him out regularly on his made-up science.  There’s also been some quite hilarious outings by the Flat Earth Society who have been reaching out to Monckton to join forces (apparently they both believe there’s a global scientific and governmental conspiracy and think that joining forces would be good for all).  If you’re on Facebook, follow their exploits here.

Monckton has bullied his way right down the country, threatening newspapers, scientists, universities, and pretty much anybody who dared to question his utter lack of climate science qualifications and ridiculous theories on how, for example, Agenda 21 will lead to “UN-run concentration camps.”  The extraordinary thing is that so many media have taken him seriously.

6.  Bill McKibben’s “Do the Maths” tour. 

350.org founder and writer Bill McKibben will be in NZ in June for his “Do The Maths” tour. Watch the trailer for his upcoming film of his recent tour of the US, due out May 14. The “maths” McKibben’s talking about is the amount of carbon dioxide we can afford to put into the atmosphere, compared with the amount of reserves held by big oil and coal companies.  They don’t add up.  McKibben’s a fantastic speaker and it’ll be a great evening.  For background reading, check out his piece in Rolling Stone.  Bill McKibben will speak in Auckland on 11 June, Dunedin 12 June (venue TBC) and Wellington on 13June.  Tickets here.  Coal Action Network will have a stall at all the events, so make sure you say come and say hi – and get your friends to sign up.

7.International and science roundup

Unburnable Carbon:  London’s Carbon Tracker Initiative bases its calculations on the same “Maths” that McKibben’s talking about.  Its new report, out last month, reveals that fossil fuel reserves already far exceed the carbon budget to avoid global warming of 2°C, but in spite of this, spent $674 billion last year to find and develop new potentially stranded assets.  Read more here.  The Carbon Tracker then went on to look specifically at the carbon assets contained in Australian coal. The reserves held by Australian coal companies alone are equivalent to 25 per cent of the global carbon budget for coal to 2050.

Global Temps warmest in 1400 years: A groundbreaking new study published in Nature Geoscience shows that global temperatures between 1970 and 2000 were the warmest in 1,400 years. This timing correlates directly with a spike in carbon emissions since the 70’s and broadly confirms findings repeatedly reported by an overwhelming majority of climate scientists for the last 30 years: climate change is happening, it is human caused and without action to address it billions will fall victim to it.

C02 levels about to reach scary milestone All eyes are on the atmospheric C02 measuring station at Mauna Loa, in Hawaii, the station that is widely accepted as measuring the most accurate levels of C02 in the atmosphere.  C02 levels are about to reach an average of 400ppm, the highest levels of C02 in the atmosphere since the Pliocene period, between 3.2 million and 5 million years ago. Given that even 350ppm cannot be guaranteed to be “safe” and save us from climate change, this is an ominous milestone we’re about to reach. Read about it in The Guardian, Inside Climate News and a great blog in Carbon Brief on what scientists think about it.

Angry Summer Australia had a summer of scary records and drought is continuing there in some parts, according to the Bureau of Meteorology’s latest April summary.

New Climate Science: There are so many studies coming out confirming climate change and its fast approach, that Skeptical Science wrote a piece summing up three of them in the one hit.

Eminent climate scientist Dr James Hansen has retired from his job at NASA to work on climate activism full time.  This is a great interview in Rolling Stone magazine.

Finally…  Good news IS possible:  This tiny community  in Australia won its fight against Rio Tinto to stop the expansion of a mining project.

Get your tickets now!  Bill McKibben’s DO THE MATHS tour is coming to New Zealand

One of the world’s most respected speakers and activists on climate change, award winning author and journalist, leader of the Keystone XL pipeline protests in the US – Bill McKibben – is bringing his Do The Maths talk to New Zealand in June.

• Get your tickets now at maths.350.org/nz
• Join the Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/162766327216411/
• Download the flyer
  

After the massive success of the Do the Maths Tour, which sold out shows in every corner of the United States last year, 350 Aotearoa is bringing Bill McKibben to New Zealand for 3 big nights.

• Auckland – Tuesday, 11 June, Epsom Girls Grammar School Hall, 7-8.30pm
• Dunedin – Wednesday, 12 June, venue tbc
• Wellington – Thursday, 13 June, The Embassy Theatre, 7-8.30pm

Live video links are being organised in several other centres – details available soon.  For more information, or to offer to host a link in your area, email ashlee@350.org.nz

This is definitely not your typical lecture. Bill will be laying out the simple (but startling) maths on climate change – and calling on New Zealanders to join the global movement to change them.

A climate change maths lesson that might just change the world.

The maths are simple: we can burn less than 565 more gigatons of carbon dioxide and stay below 2°C of warming — anything more than that risks catastrophe for life on earth. The problem? Fossil fuel companies have 2,795 gigatons in their reserves, five times the safe amount. And they’re planning to burn it all — unless we do the maths to change our future.

Details and tickets are available at maths.350.org/nz .  If you have questions or want to volunteer to help, email ashlee@350.org.nz.

About Bill McKibben

Bill McKibben, a well-known environmental author and activist, is the founder of 350.org, an international climate change campaign, which is named for the maximum safe level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, 350 parts per million.

When he’s not busy organising, Bill is a writer on the climate crisis and other environmental issues. His 1989 book The End of Nature was the first book to warn the general public about the threat of global warming. Bill is a contributor to The New York Times, The Atlantic Monthly, Harper’s, Orion Magazine, Mother Jones, The New York Review of Books, Granta, Rolling Stone, and Outside. He is a board member and contributor to Grist Magazine. He has been awarded Guggenheim and Lyndhurst Fellowships, and won the Lannan Prize for nonfiction writing. He is currently a Scholar in Residence at Middlebury College and lives in Ripton, Vermont with his wife, author Sue Halpern, and daughter Sophie.

Bill McKibben’s New Zealand visit is being organised by 350 Aotearoa, and supported by many partner organisations.  You can check them out at www.350.org.nz or email them at 350@350.org.nz.

If you haven’t donated yet, and want to help by regularly donating money to CANA, here’s our Kiwibank bank account number:

Coal Action Network

38-9011-0484435-00

Thanks once again for your help!

Coal is the most concentrated source of carbon dioxide and the biggest threat to the climate through accelerated global warming. Leading climate scientist James Hansen of NASA and Columbia University says that if we are to stabilise climate at a safe level the world needs to phase out coal burning to zero by 2030.

This is supported by analysis by Carbontracker and others that 80% of the known reserves of coal must be left in the ground forever if we are to limit warming to two degrees.

Coal Action Network Aotearoa (CANA) is committed to opposing all new coal mines in order to meet that target. However, 60% of Solid Energy’s coal production in NZ is for steel making, mainly for export, and the company says that “there is no way of making new steel without coal”.

If this is true, principled climate campaigners must either stop opposing new coking coal mines on climate change grounds, (Happy Valley, Denniston Escarpment, Mt William, Pike River) or propose a world with no new steel. (There are of course strong biodiversity reasons for opposing some of these mines but it is a different argument.)

Fortunately Solid Energy’s claim is not true.

Why is coal used to make iron and steel?

Firstly coal is converted to lump coke in a coking oven. A particular rank of coal, known as “coking coal”, is required to make the preferred quality of coke.

Then raw iron is made by reducing (removing the oxygen from) iron ore (iron oxide) by reacting it at high temperature with coke in a blast furnace. About half of the carbon in the coke combines with the oxygen from the iron ore to make CO2. The rest of the coke is burned in a blast of air in the blast furnace to provide the required high temperature; making more CO2. The resulting pig iron typically contains 2.5-4.5% carbon, making it relatively brittle and unsuitable for most uses.

Steel is made in a subsequent process as an alloy of iron and carbon (along with some other elements). Around 1% of the carbon from the coke remains in the raw iron to provide the source of that carbon. So coal (as coke) is a reducing agent, a source of energy to drive the process and a source of carbon to incorporate in the steel. Alternative processes need to meet all three functions. This is why you have to do more than just substitute a different energy source.

In New Zealand, the coking coal occurs on the west coast of the south island. The bitumen in the coal binds it into lumps in a coke oven. Coking coal is higher in carbon content than cheaper coals and lignite which are used in power stations and industrial boilers.

New Zealand’s Glenbrook Steel plant uses a different process. It is a unique design, developed to use NZ iron sands and sub-bituminous coal from Huntly.

What quantities are we talking about, globally and in NZ?

World steel production is over a billion tonnes per year (tpy) and uses about 1.4 billion tonnes of coal – roughly a quarter of all coal mined, and 12% of all hard coal. The carbon content of mined coking coal is around 77%, so global steel production consumes about one billion tonnes of carbon.

The Glenbrook plant (now owned by Bluescope) makes 600-650,000 tpy steel and uses 750,000 tpy Huntly coal plus 1,000 GWh electricity and some Natural Gas, supplying 90% of NZ’s needs. It also recycles steel.

Can we make steel with less coal?

For a start, we could recycle much more than we do.

Steel can theoretically be recycled indefinitely, with the remelting and alloying process ensuring its quality. That requires energy, but much less than to make new steel, and it needs no new source of carbon so is generally produced in electric arc furnaces. The current global rate of steel recycling is 30%, helping keep carbon emissions from pushing ever higher. Obviously there are limits to what can be collected for reuse but it should be possible to raise it to 80%, and would be if there was a sufficient price on carbon. Failure to price environmental damage leads to massive waste because collecting material for reuse is “just not worth it”.

The Direct Reduced Iron (DRI) process makes raw iron with inputs only of electricity and natural gas. India produces some 68MT/y by this method. If the electricity is renewable and the gas used is biogas from waste, this approach could be made sustainable. However DRI is often alloyed with scrap steel in the steel making step, so to add DRI to recycled steel complicates lifecycle analysis.

There are various processes that reduce the coal needed for a tonne of steel. The University of NSW has developed a polymer injection technology where some of the carbon and energy come from used car tyres, with 1 million car tyres substituting for 15,000 tonnes of coal. (1) This is useful while there are large quantities of used car tyres but is not a long term solution. Alternatively, the Hisarna process uses coal directly rather than making coke, reducing coal input by around 20%. (1)

The steel industry worldwide is putting serious effort into finding ways of reducing carbon emissions from steel making – within the current economic framework. But we are looking for something that could replace coal altogether.

Is it technically possibly to make steel without coal?

The obvious answer is that it must be, as early iron and steel production used wood-derived charcoal instead of coal-derived. However the scale of today’s industry is vastly bigger than two hundred years ago.

Electrolysis has been shown to be capable of coal-free steel production but the technology is said to require another 20 years of development before full commercialisation. (1) However, this is roughly the time it will take under Hansen’s scenario to phase out coal directly, making it a possible option for the future.

Charcoal made from wood or other biomass can provide the reducing function, a source of energy and the minor carbon component in steel; with further heat obtained from electricity or natural gas (or biogas). However, even the small quantities of iron and steel made a couple of centuries ago, along with the heavy demands of ship building, had a serious impact on Europe’s forests. The scale of steel demand is now many times greater, so the real question is about scale and sustainability. Climate change cannot be considered in isolation from land use, food production, and forestry policy.

Is there enough wood or other biomass, and where would it come from?

Wood could be grown in plantations for use in the steel industry, just as it is now grown for timber. But land is a limited resource and is also needed for food and buildings and for the protection of wild nature and other species. There have been various attempts to calculate how much land you would have to devote permanently to rotational wood harvest for each tonne of steel to be made annually. The estimates vary between two and seven hectares per annual tonne, depending on species, climate, soil and process efficiency. Clearly the world is not going to devote 2-7 billion hectares (13%-50% of the global land area) – or even a small fraction of that – to steel making, and nor should it.

However, all existing forestry operations have residues of woody material of low commercial value. As well as prunings and thinnings, harvesting residues like branches, bark and damaged logs average at least half the tree. Woody waste from crops – such as coconut shells and husks, corn stover, grain stalks – can be added to this.

Figures from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (2) estimate annual waste from commonly cultivated crops is in the region 25-176 exajoules (Ej – 1018 joules). Parikka (3) estimates annual waste biomass from all sources is around 64 Ej and compares this with total global energy use from all sources for all purposes of 440 Ej. For comparison, global coal use for steel making is around 22 Ej. (5)

Carbonscape, a NZ firm which has developed new very efficient technologies using microwaves to process wood waste into charcoal, calculate that with their process it would take 1.6BT biomass globally to replace all the coal currently used in iron and steel making. That is around 3% of the 50 B tpy of world annual biomass productivity. Carbonscape is not yet in commercial production but has produced test batches of charcoal to secure an order for 9,000 tonnes from NZ Steel.

While these numbers are far from precise they do indicate that far more waste biomass than needed is available. Of course, not all waste can be easily recovered; some of it will be too far from steel mills to justify the transport energy and cost; some of it already has alternative uses; and the green leaf and twig waste (a small proportion of the forestry total and probably more of the crop waste total) should remain on site to return nutrients to the soil.

However, the most important question is whether the forestry and other biomass operations on which steel making might piggy-back, should all continue.

Are the forestry operations that produce the residues themselves sustainable?

Brazil produces some 23-36 million m3 of biological charcoal each year to make iron and steel. Some of it is from planted woodlots on a 7 year rotation but most is from old growth forests. There is a major international campaign to stop this logging of old growth forests to supply the steel industry.

Much logging in tropical countries is actually illegal as well as unsustainable and the world’s old forests are diminishing fast, along with the wildlife and indigenous communities they sustain. We cannot both campaign against cutting forests unsustainably, and rely on residues from this practice to fuel our steel mills.

If a plantation forest is managed well, using its residues for energy and carbon is a big environmental plus. But how is the steel maker (supposing they even care) to tell the difference between charcoal from sustainably managed forests, and that from illegal and unsustainable cuts? It seems impossible.

Yet there is already a world wide system in place to do just that for timber, paper and packaging.

The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification system operates in 80 countries and five continents. It certifies that a product comes from a forest that is legally harvested and well managed with regard to environmental protection, wildlife conservation, and safe and fair working conditions. It also outlaws genetically engineered trees, citing risks of increased flammability, invasiveness and contamination of native forests with engineered traits.

Forests may be planted or well managed natural forests where high wildlife densities and populations of animals like great apes and tigers, are retained.

Globally 165 million ha of forest are certified, and this number is growing fast. The system includes chain of custody certificates in 105 countries so a product can be tracked through the value chain. NZ has 1.4 million ha under certification. Currently the system is not applied to residues but there is no reason why it should not be and there is some reference in the literature to extending it to residues for biofuels.

A similar area of forest is certified under the parallel certification system, PEFC. The two systems are gradually converging.

Is the wood residue in the right place?

Handling, drying and transport are major costs to recovering wood residues for use. However, if it is planned right the forestry industry already has much of the equipment needed on the site, and removing waste can be a bonus for an industry which otherwise has to work around it or burn it.

There are many different logging practices, some of which make it much easier to recover the residues. Practices such as taking the whole logs to a skid site, cutting and stacking at the time of logging, and the use of mobile chippers can reduce costs. Carbonscape says their micro-wave charcoal technology lends itself to small scale units for decentralised processing in the forest. A NZ wood fuel supplier says the energy required to haul a truckload of dry chip regionally is equal to only about 4% of the payload.

Some residues will of course be on steep inaccessible slopes, in areas too remote from steel mills. It is beyond the scope of this paper to estimate how much of the globally available wood residue might be harvested for making charcoal.

Other advantages of wood over coal

A wood-based process is much cleaner, with no sulphur or mercury emissions, low oxides of nitrogen, no toxic coal mine tailings, less ash which is not a toxic waste, less slag to dispose of, and less lime needed because charcoal is basic rather than acidic. It is claimed there are fewer industrial accidents than with underground coal mining.

Because of these side benefits, the Norwegian ferro-silicon industry is willing to pay twice as much for wood charcoal as for coal (per unit fixed carbon) for smelting.

What are the big obstacles?

Leaving aside the biggest issue, which is total lack of political will or interest in climate change as a problem, there are two issues which need to be addressed.

The first is scale, as it is for all sustainability questions. The capacity of the atmosphere to absorb carbon is not the only limited resource. Constantly growing steel production within an infinitely expanding economy will very soon run up against limits of land and water to produce biomass. These limits are not an argument to continue using coal – itself a limited resource – as to do so will change the climate and destroy many other resources. Steel making can continue in a sustainable society without coal, but on a limited scale.

The second is price. As long as coal pays nothing for its contribution to climate change, sustainable alternatives will be more expensive. (Under NZ’s ETS, coal mining for export pays nothing for its carbon emissions, either here or in China, India, or Japan, our main markets.)

A serious price on carbon without loopholes, preferably internationally co-ordinated, is necessary and urgent if steel making is to move away from coal. Necessary – but not sufficient. If a price on carbon is all that occurs the world’s forests will be raped to supply the steel industry. So controls on forestry are needed too. A requirement that all steel fuel come from FSC certified forests or sustainable agriculture would do it.

How much steel do we really need?

In a sustainable society steel use, like everything else, will be moderated. The first and easiest step is to cut out waste. When the rate of building new infrastructure stabilises and we are not constantly building more bridges and high rise short-lived buildings, demand for steel will drop. Design for durability and repair will play a part. There are also materials that can substitute.

Steel framework in up to 6 storied buildings can be replaced with pre-stressed laminated timber, a process developed at Canterbury University. They then become a store of carbon rather than a source of emissions. (However, a small amount of steel is used in a strengthening rod and end caps).

What do we need, to create a sustainable steel future?

First, a substantial price on carbon. That will help drive the wood based technologies and recycling. A recent Otago University thesis estimates that even $50/tonne would be enough to drive all technically feasible boiler fuel substitutions of wood for coal. (4)

Second, we need good resource studies and mapping of the wood residue resource, along with improved harvesting techniques and equipment. Scion is doing some of the former.

Third, we need to expand the FSC and make certified residues mandatory in this country. There are moves towards that overseas.

Once these are done we need a national strategy on the priority use of wood residues. Transport fuels, boiler fuel and smelting fuel are all likely to compete for the available wood and allowing the market to sort out what we use here and for what, and what we export, risks very perverse outcomes. (For example exporting charcoal might be more profitable but if it leaves us without transport fuel at home could cripple our economy.) It is inexcusable that no government has embarked on this work, or even plans to.

Most of all though, we need a change of mindset, where climate change is recognised as serious enough to change our way of doing things, and to learn to prosper within the limits of the biosphere.

Conclusion

This brief survey has not attempted to quantify the amount of steel needed to run a stable society, nor the quantity that could be made sustainably without coal, nor the quantity of wood residues that are available, easily harvestable and close enough to steel production sites, though some ballpark indications have been given. Work on refining this is urgent.

However we can conclude that it is quite feasible to make steel without coal and in some places it is already being done.

If wood or other biomass residues are used instead of coal, the main limiting factor is the quantity of residue from sustainably managed forests or cropping. Ultimately the limiting factor is land and land use competition. The FSC certification process could be used to ensure that wood residues are sustainable. Although the quantity is limited, it is large.

The current world production of steel, let alone its constant expansion, is not sustainable, but in a stable state economy a mix of substitution, much greater recycling and the use of biomass residues instead of coal can enable steel production to continue.

A sufficient price on carbon is essential, along with further quantification of the availability of wood residues and the development of more efficient technologies to enable this.

Most of all we need a change of political will to prioritise action on climate change and end the mad rush for growth at all costs so that these options are pursued.

What is clear however, is that there is no case for soft-pedalling our demand that no new coal mines be opened.

References

1. Croezen, H and Korteland, M, A long term view of CO2 efficient manufacturing in the European region CE Delft 2010

2. http://news.mongabay.com/bioenergy/2006/07/crop-residues-how-much-biomass-energy.html

3. http://www.joensuu.fi/metsatdk/viefor/data/material/071129113157Global_biomass_fuel_resources.pdf

4. Deller, Nic, Replacing NZ’s Coal Consumption with Energy from Wood Residues: a feasibility study B App Sci dissertation, EMAN 490 Otago University 2012

5. World Coal Association Coal and Steel Statistics 2012

But it hasn’t gone entirely. Other companies are sniffing around Southland’s lignite report, and as a recent Southland Times report indicates, Solid Energy and their technology partner GTL Energy are continuing their efforts to get the small lignite briquetting plant off the ground.

In addition, sharemarket deadbeats Bathurst Resources, whom you’ll be hearing plenty more about this year – best known for their plans to despoil the beautiful and biodiverse Denniston Plateau in the pursuit of coal – are also seeking to expand their operations in Southland.

Every month, Coal Action Murihiku puts out a superb newsletter, edited by Jane Young who is also one of our CoalSwarm editors. You can read all the CAM newsletter on the Regions section of our website.

CAM’s April newsletter tackles both Bathurst and the briquetting plant. It’s a great read, and you can download the newsletter here.

Solid Energy’s financial woes will be alleviated somewhat with the news of a new development at its troubled Craig Road briquetting plant. The $29 million plant ran into unforeseen difficulties since its completion in June last year, and commissioning of the plant, which was intended to turn lignite into briquettes for local and export markets, has not been completed.

Solid Energy and their partner GTL Energy Ltd, which developed the briquetting technology, have formed another company, Liquid Energy Ltd. This new wholly owned NZ subsidiary will lease and run the plant for a one year period beginning 1 April, 2013, producing and distilling their “Mataura Malt” brand of Hokonui moonshine whiskey.

“Everything is still shiny and new” said Liquid Energy’s new CEO John Smith. “The plant is clean and ready to produce its first whiskey consignment. We have a promising market for the whiskey, unlike the market for briquettes, which has run into difficulties.”

“It has been a steep learning curve but we have been fortunate to draw on the expertise of the local Hokonui moonshine whiskey distillers’ fine tradition.” Smith said.

In a modern version of the traditional Scottish method, which uses water from peat bogs, Liquid Energy will use water from lignite beds. “Lignite is very close to peat in quality. We are so fortunate to already own vast resources of this fine natural water filter relatively undisturbed in the Mataura Valley.”

“Our venture will truly be a sustainable boost to the local economy” Smith said.
Solid Energy group manager of strategy and corporate affairs describes the turn of events as an exciting development

Money raised from whiskey sales will go towards covering the costs of ex CEO Don Elder’s gardening leave.
-Ends

Saturday 6th April
7.30-9.30pm
St Nicholas Church Hall
Corner of Frankleigh and Barrington Rd
Christchurch

This is the chance for Canterbury anti-coal activists to network with other local activists and with the CANA National Organising Group.

Drinks and nibbles provided

Please RSVP for catering purposes to canterburycoalaction@gmail.com by Thurs. 4th April.

We are grateful for your koha.

Where: Forest and Bird offices, 90 Ghuznee Street (enter at the corner of Ghuznee and Victoria Streets), Wellington. Please bring a plate of vegetarian finger food to share.

What: An information and organising meeting on the beautiful Denniston plateau, with speeches and discussion.

The beauty of the Denniston Plateau. Photo: Forest & Bird

Kevin Hackwell, Advocacy Manager at Forest and Bird, will speak on the ecological values and beauty of this remarkable place. (See http://www.forestandbird.org.nz/campaigns/save-the-denniston-plateau-ours-not-mine) He’ll be fresh back from a trip to the plateau so will share photos, as well as update us on Forest and Bird’s campaign to protect Denniston.

Tim Jones of Coal Action Network Aotearoa will speak on climate and coal, and the broader movement against new/expanded coal mines in Aotearoa.

Followed by discussion about how we can support the campaign here in Wellington. Denniston looks to be the big coal battle for 2013 (unless we win in Court, of course!) so please come along to get inspired, get informed, and get organising.

It’d be great to have lots of people at the meeting, so please invite friends and colleagues.

If you are late and need the door unlocked, please text Tim on 027 359 0293

PS The Wellington Keep the Coal in the Hole meetings grew out of the Wellington regional group gatherings at the keep the Coal in the Hole Summer festival, January 2012. We meet every two months to educate ourselves, share information, and organise events together. Please note mining CEOs and their PR staff are not welcome.

Submissions on the proposed mine are now open and close on Thursday 28 March. Please make a submission using this handy submission guide: http://aucklandcoalaction.org/2013/02/28/submissions-on-proposed-new-coal-mine-at-mangatangimangatawhiri/

Site of Fonterra’s proposed Mangatwahiri mine

Coal is Fonterra’s dirty little secret. You can find out more about that here: http://coalactionnetworkaotearoa.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/fonterras-dirty-secret/

Auckland Coal Action have also created an excellent leaflet about Fonterra’s plans, which is also available for you to download.