Coal-fired power generation in Thailand's energy future?
By Jon Fernquest[Introduction|Vocabulary|Article]
[Reading Questions|Answers]
 |
Today's editorials in the Bangkok Post discuss plans for Thailand's energy future.
With most of Asia depending on Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) for their energy needs, a sudden cut back in supply or a sharp hike in prices could put Thailand in a precarious economic position in the future.
Diversifying Thailand's fuel sources is a natural step in strengthening the country's energy security.
Meeting the country's energy needs with wind and solar power is not yet feasible.
Hydroelectric power using the rivers of other countries is plagued with problems as recent deaths of EGAT employees clearly show.
The traditional options of coal and nuclear power have long been controversial.
With every option being problematic, simply not choosing, simply not planning for the future, becomes the most likely option.
The mere mention of the word "coal" triggers protests, even though coal technologies have improved radically over the last decade and have become much more environmentally friendly.
Thailand has its own natural gas resources in the Gulf of Thailand, but production is projected to decline during the next decade.
A third of Thailand's natural gas is currently imported from Burma, but political problems there could easily put this supply in jeopardy.
Iran, the most promising and abundant future supplier of natural gas, is proving difficult to negotiate with, and given the volatile political climate of the Middle East and competition from other countries in Asia, Iran's LNG supply is no sure thing. (See Bangkok Post Op-Ed, September 12, 2007)
Today's article from the op-ed section looks at the future of coal as an energy option.
natural gas - a fuel in the form of a gas used for heating, cooking, and to generate electricity (power) in gas and steam turbines (See Wikipedia)
Liquified Natural Gas (PNG) - natural gas that has been converted to liquid form for easy transportation by ship or pipeline (See Wikipedia)
precarious - not in complete control of and might fail at any moment
diversifying - reducing risk by increase variety of sources used
feasible - can be achieved
problematic - has problems associated with it
energy security, energy supply security - measures taken to ensure that a country does not experience interruptions in their energy supply (which could harm the country)
put in jeopardy - create a risk of losing
volatile - frequently changing, suddenly and unpredictably
Reading Questions
Here are some questions to guide your reading (See answers at end):1. What indication is there that public opinion might be against building new coal-fired power generation plants?
2. Would a referendum be a more accurate indicator of public opinion about coal than protests? (Express opinion)
3. Should national interests override local interests in site location decisions? (Express opinion)
4. What does the public associate with coal-fired power generation?
5. What negative coal experience had a formative influence on Thai public opinion?
6. How has power generation from coal become more environmentally friendly in Thailand?
7. Have improvements in coal power generation technologies been accompanied by changes in public opinion?
8. What has the success rate been in building coal-fired power plants over the last decade?
9. Have past protests had any beneficial effects on the way coal-fired power plants are constructed?
10. Is the Thai public adequately informed about the costs and benefits of coal-fired power generation? Why or why not?
11. What technological goal will coal-fired power generation likely reach in the future?
Bangkok Post Article September 12, 2007
COMMENTARYConsider coal calmly
Boonsong Kositchotethana
|
We cannot really blame those Rayong residents who set up a road block to protest against the IRPC's plan, nor those who converged on the Samut Songkhram provincial administration organisation office to voice their grave concerns.
vigorous -
do not bode well for - indicate that future does not look good for
diversify - reducing risk by increase variety of sources used
IRPC Plc - Thai company that manufactures petrochemical and petroleum products, formerly known as Thai Petrochemical Industry (TPI), produces oil-related products such as fuel oil, lubricant and asphalt distributed through its own gas stations and brand, produces several petrochemical products such as Olefins, Aromatics, and HDPE, PP, ABS, SAN, EPS, PS and Polyol polymers
converged on - people gather at a place
grave - serious
Like the rest of the world, coal has a serious perception problem in Thailand, being synonymous with pollution that puts the public health and the environment at risk. For many Thais the disaster, centring around high sulphur dioxide emissions from the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand's lignite-fired Mae Moh power house in Lampang in the 1990s, is still very fresh in the mind. More than a decade has passed but the negative perception of the 2,400-MW power plant has persisted.
That is despite the fact that comprehensive air pollution mitigation measures, including the 7.1-billion-baht installation of flue gas desulphurisation units to the 10 generators at the plant which can absorb more than 90% of sulphur dioxide (SO2) derived from combustion before it goes into the air, have worked effectively.
|
Unfortunately, people in Lampang and elsewhere are still wary of anything to do with lignite or coal, in general.
perception problem - people perceive its impact incorrectly
synonymous with - has the same meaning as
lignite - brown coal used for steam-electric power generation, the lowest standard of coal, the most politically controversial type of coal because emissions are higher, not traded much in international markets (See Wikipedia)
fresh in the mind - remember easily
persisted - continued for a long time (without interruption)
mitigation - reduce bad effects of
combustion - burning something
wary of - worried about, anxious about
The subsequent and prolonged protests in Prachuap Khiri Khan that led to the demise of Union Power Development Co's 1,400 MW coal-fired scheme and Gulf Power Generation's 734-MW facility also fuelled by imported coal, worsened the image of coal-fired power plants. The hostility was so intense that the two projects were later forced to shift out of Prachuap Khiri Khan and switched to natural gas-fuelled power stations.
There has been only one new coal-fired power house which managed to come online since 1995: the 1,434-MW facility in Rayong belonging to BLCP, which successfully overcame opposition because it was able to restrict emissions to an acceptable level.
demise of - failure and end of
hostility - opposition and hatred of
come online - become operational (generating electricity)
BLCP - a power generation project in Rayong (See website, Greenpeace critique)
emissions - pollutants that enter the air (from the power plant)
The continued opposition to coal-fired power in this country clearly reflects the failure of energy planners and industry to educate the public of the necessity for Thailand to pursue other options including coal and nuclear, if it expects to meet growing energy demand.
It shows that government and industry officials are not doing enough to project a more accurate picture of coal, which is not necessarily as vicious in the environmental context as protesters and green activists think. Clean coal technologies have already achieved major advances in environmental performance, and new technologies are under development towards a "zero emissions" future. Instead of outright rejection, protesters should seek to tighten anti-pollution regulations for coal-fired power plants and ensure that pollution mitigation measures are strictly applied.
green activists - people working to bring about social change favorable to the environment
clean coal technologies - low polution energy generation from coal
outright rejection - reject completely (without possibility of changing to make more acceptable)
It is essential for Thailand to diversify its fuel sources for power generation; its 70% dependence on natural gas could threaten energy supply security and sufficiency. That percentage would balloon to as much as 90% if this country continues to rely heavily on natural gas and no new coal-fired power stations are constructed over the next 15 years.
In the period from 2007 to 2021, Thailand would need about 32,000 MW in additional generating capacity in order to meet its energy appetite, projected to grow at 5-6% a year, or an average of 1,400 MW a year. Thailand's most recent peak power demand registered on March 28, was at 21,896.4 MW.
The truth is Thailand does not have many energy options. Every option, from developing conventional or unconventional fossil fuel resources to finding renewal and other alternatives will need to be pursued.
But even those who do not like coal cannot get along without it. Coal is easy to find, easy to burn and available nearly everywhere at a competitive price to other conventional fossil fuels.
And any plan to address the future of energy in Thailand will have to include coal.
dependence on - need for survival, reliance on (no alternatives, not diversified)
energy supply security - measures taken to ensure that a country does not experience interruptions in their energy supply (which could harm the country)
balloon - suddenly and quickly get much larger (like a balloon being inflated with air)
peak power demand - when demand for electricity jumps to a level much higher than average for a period of time, this could happen durign a heatwave when everyone turns on their air conditioners (See Wikipedia)
pursued - make efforts to attain a goal
conventional - the usual, commonly accepted
fossil fuels - non-renewable oil and natural gas energy products obtained from dinosaur remains (fossils) in the ground
Boonsong Kositchotethana is Deputy Assignment Editor (Business), Bangkok Post.
Vocabulary (in discussion above)
Answer Key:
1. What indication is there that public opinion might be against building new coal-fired power generation plants?
Protests in the towns where they are to be built.
2. Would a referendum be a more accurate indicator of public opinion about coal than protests? (Express opinion)
3. Should national interests override local interests in site location decisions? (Express opinion)
4. What does the public associate with coal-fired power generation?
Pollution.
5. What negative coal experience had a formative influence on Thai public opinion?
Over a decade ago, Lampang's Mae Moh lignite mines and power plant run by EGAT, the largest coal-fired power plant in Southeast Asia, was plagued by high sulfur dioxide emissions and pollution.
6. How has power generation from coal become more environmentally friendly in Thailand?
Air pollution in Lampang dropped to a level that is much lower than Bangkok's (roughly 40% of Bangkok) after desulphurisation units were installed that can absorb more thatn 90% of the polluting sulphur dioxide before it enters the air.
7. Have improvements in coal power generation technologies been accompanied by changes in public opinion?
No.
8. What has the success rate been in building coal-fired power plants over the last decade?
Not good at all. Protests against two coal power plants forced a shift to natural gas power generation plants. Only one new plant BLCP in Rayong has managed to come online.
9. Have past protests had any beneficial effects on the way coal-fired power plants are constructed?
Yes, the only operational plant (BLCP) overcame opposition because it restricted emissions and pollution.
Although the article doesn't say so, it was probably protests that led to improvements in Lampang's Mae Moh plant, too.
10. Is the Thai public adequately informed about the costs and benefits of coal-fired power generation? Why or why not?
No, the public needs to be educated. Government and industry officials do not do enough to provide accurate information on costs and benefits.
11. What technological goal will coal-fired power generation likely reach in the future?
Zero emissions power generation.
