The Fort Worth Press - Can carbon credits help close coal plants?

USD -
AED 3.673042
AFN 67.503991
ALL 94.250403
AMD 389.764479
ANG 1.803631
AOA 913.000367
ARS 1003.850089
AUD 1.537516
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.70397
BAM 1.878951
BBD 2.020559
BDT 119.587668
BGN 1.87774
BHD 0.37683
BIF 2895
BMD 1
BND 1.348865
BOB 6.915269
BRL 5.801041
BSD 1.000769
BTN 84.471911
BWP 13.672019
BYN 3.275129
BYR 19600
BZD 2.017245
CAD 1.39845
CDF 2871.000362
CHF 0.893615
CLF 0.035758
CLP 986.680396
CNY 7.243041
CNH 7.25914
COP 4420.25
CRC 509.751177
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 106.303894
CZK 24.326204
DJF 177.720393
DKK 7.157904
DOP 60.450393
DZD 134.27504
EGP 49.650175
ERN 15
ETB 123.010392
EUR 0.95985
FJD 2.27595
FKP 0.789317
GBP 0.798085
GEL 2.740391
GGP 0.789317
GHS 15.803856
GIP 0.789317
GMD 71.000355
GNF 8631.000355
GTQ 7.725046
GYD 209.369911
HKD 7.783855
HNL 25.230388
HRK 7.133259
HTG 131.367086
HUF 395.010388
IDR 15943.55
ILS 3.70796
IMP 0.789317
INR 84.43625
IQD 1310.5
IRR 42075.000352
ISK 139.680386
JEP 0.789317
JMD 159.42934
JOD 0.709104
JPY 154.76904
KES 129.503801
KGS 86.503799
KHR 4051.00035
KMF 472.503794
KPW 899.999621
KRW 1404.510383
KWD 0.30785
KYD 0.834002
KZT 499.690168
LAK 21960.000349
LBP 89600.000349
LKR 291.267173
LRD 180.000348
LSL 18.130381
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 4.885039
MAD 10.074504
MDL 18.253698
MGA 4670.000347
MKD 59.076288
MMK 3247.960992
MNT 3397.999946
MOP 8.023845
MRU 39.905039
MUR 46.850378
MVR 15.460378
MWK 1735.000345
MXN 20.427165
MYR 4.468039
MZN 63.910377
NAD 18.130377
NGN 1696.703725
NIO 36.750377
NOK 11.06835
NPR 135.155518
NZD 1.714149
OMR 0.385003
PAB 1.000793
PEN 3.794039
PGK 4.02575
PHP 58.939038
PKR 277.803701
PLN 4.163902
PYG 7812.469978
QAR 3.640504
RON 4.776604
RSD 112.339038
RUB 104.308748
RWF 1370
SAR 3.754663
SBD 8.383555
SCR 14.282217
SDG 601.503676
SEK 11.040175
SGD 1.346504
SHP 0.789317
SLE 22.730371
SLL 20969.504736
SOS 571.503662
SRD 35.494038
STD 20697.981008
SVC 8.756761
SYP 2512.529858
SZL 18.130369
THB 34.470369
TJS 10.658046
TMT 3.5
TND 3.180504
TOP 2.342104
TRY 34.572825
TTD 6.797003
TWD 32.583504
TZS 2660.000335
UAH 41.401274
UGX 3697.761553
UYU 42.558915
UZS 12830.000334
VES 46.55914
VND 25419
VUV 118.722009
WST 2.791591
XAF 630.19767
XAG 0.031938
XAU 0.000369
XCD 2.70255
XDR 0.761283
XOF 624.503595
XPF 114.875037
YER 249.925037
ZAR 18.105415
ZMK 9001.203587
ZMW 27.645705
ZWL 321.999592
  • SCS

    0.2300

    13.27

    +1.73%

  • RIO

    -0.2200

    62.35

    -0.35%

  • CMSC

    0.0320

    24.672

    +0.13%

  • BCC

    3.4200

    143.78

    +2.38%

  • RBGPF

    59.2400

    59.24

    +100%

  • BCE

    0.0900

    26.77

    +0.34%

  • CMSD

    0.0150

    24.46

    +0.06%

  • NGG

    1.0296

    63.11

    +1.63%

  • BTI

    0.4000

    37.38

    +1.07%

  • GSK

    0.2600

    33.96

    +0.77%

  • JRI

    -0.0200

    13.21

    -0.15%

  • AZN

    1.3700

    65.63

    +2.09%

  • RELX

    0.9900

    46.75

    +2.12%

  • BP

    0.2000

    29.72

    +0.67%

  • RYCEF

    -0.0100

    6.79

    -0.15%

  • VOD

    0.1323

    8.73

    +1.52%

Can carbon credits help close coal plants?
Can carbon credits help close coal plants? / Photo: © AFP

Can carbon credits help close coal plants?

A few dozen kilometres from the Philippine capital Manila sits a coal plant that some hope could be a model for how developing countries can quit the polluting fossil fuel.

Text size:

An alliance led by The Rockefeller Foundation, a philanthropic group, plans to help close the plant 10 years early, avoiding millions of tons of emissions and monetising them as carbon credits.

The idea is "pretty simple", said Joseph Curtin, managing director of Rockefeller's power and climate team.

"What if the coal asset owner could, instead of selling this carbon-intensive energy to the grid, they could sell the avoided carbon emissions," he told AFP.

Carbon credits essentially allow a polluter to "offset" their emissions by paying for "avoided" emissions elsewhere.

They have been issued on everything from electric buses to protected forests, though investigations have found many projects overstating or improperly calculating avoided emissions.

Coal is the largest source of man-made carbon dioxide emissions, according to the International Energy Agency.

And while some developed countries have phased it out, it remains a cheap, reliable resource for rapidly developing economies facing growing energy demand.

Countries including Indonesia and South Africa have been offered billions of dollars in financing to shutter coal plants early, but with little success so far.

"There's not one coal plant, of all the 4,500 in emerging markets and developing countries, that has been shut down and replaced with clean power," said Curtin.

- Carbon credit problems -

The problem is complex.

Coal employs millions of people directly and indirectly, as well as offering affordable and reliable baseload power.

Government and industry heavyweights are often invested in coal, and in Asia especially plants tend to be young, meaning years of lost income if they close early.

Renewable energy is now often cheaper than coal, but many plants are protected from competition by long-term contracts.

"There simply is no economically viable off-ramp for these asset owners, and that's why we have zero retirements," said Curtin.

Enter the Coal to Clean Credit Initiative (CCCI).

It aims to cover both the cost of closing coal plants and converting them to renewable output, including wind and solar, by generating carbon credits.

And it has a test case: the South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation (SLTEC).

It was scheduled to operate until at least 2040, but under the CCCI it would close a decade earlier, avoiding up to 19 million tons of CO2 emissions, according to Rockefeller.

Coal-fired operations would be replaced with a mix of renewable generation and battery storage, with workers and the local community compensated.

The Monetary Authority of Singapore -- which supports the initiative -- is keen on credits, and there is private sector interest too, Curtin said.

The idea has faced criticism however, particularly after revelations about problems with other carbon credit projects.

A recurring issue involves "additionality" -- proving that emissions would not have been avoided anyway, even without the carbon credit programme.

This has dogged many forest protection schemes, where developers have failed to show that tracts were at real risk of being chopped down.

Elsewhere, trees that were supposed to be protected have been felled even after credits were sold on protecting them.

- 'Realistic and pragmatic' -

As renewables become cheaper, critics argue market forces might force coal plant closures even with carbon credits.

"It's hard to know what are the forces pushing for and against coal phaseout today," said Gilles Dufrasne from the Carbon Market Watch think tank.

"These forces, economic and political, can change quite significantly over time," he told AFP.

Credits risk becoming a way to "reward investors who have ploughed their money into a highly polluting and often doomed technology," Dufrasne warned.

Other analyses caution that countries could "double count" reduced emissions from coal closures -- including them in their national calculations, even though they have been sold to offset emissions elsewhere.

Curtin acknowledges the criticisms, and says CCCI's methodology is designed to address them.

Only coal projects that are solvent, covered by long-term agreements, and connected to the grid are eligible.

Participating companies must have "no new coal" policies, and closures must involve conversion to renewables, with replacement energy output and provisions to support workers and communities.

"We spent a long time developing what we think is a very, very robust and fairly bulletproof methodology," he said.

It is being reviewed by Verra, a leading credit verifier that has been criticised for oversight failures in the past.

Curtin is sanguine, and says deals for credits priced in the "tens of dollars" could be signed by mid-2025.

"If we want decision makers to have a financially viable off-ramp... we just have to be realistic and pragmatic about that," he said.

"And if anyone's got a better idea, please let us know, because we're looking for new ways of approaching this problem all the time."

T.Harrison--TFWP