Can we have a fact based discussion?
Should Bangladesh go ahead with the coal-powered plant in Rampal? I struggled with the question for many months before I could put together a coherent line of thought and argument. My stance as an environmental economist is to weigh the costs, including environmental, social, and political against the benefits of building a power plant which will be vital for our future energy needs. And, as an environmental advocate, my heart was with the millions who have been asking the government to weigh once again the ecological, social, and environmental costs of the project.
There can be no denying that there is a potential for major environmental impact from a coal-powered plant of this magnitude, but there are mitigation and remediation options. The 1320-MW plant has multiple negatives, or "baggage" in everyday parlance, associated with it. These have been listed in the media, publicised by the opponents, and evaluated carefully by both sides. The three major ones are the ecological damage to the Sundarbans, the health cost for the population during construction and operation, and its contribution to global warming. Therefore, it is not surprising that this project has generated so much public discussion in Bangladesh as well as in the international forum allied with the global warming collaborative. Nonetheless, the construction of the power plant has progressed, albeit at a pace slower than expected and now it is projected to be completed by 2019. Amidst renewed concerns from all walks of life regarding the validity of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) done almost eight years ago and approved in 2013, the authorities need to seriously consider the impact of operating the project in light of advances in climate change science and damages caused by coal-fired power plants.
Will Rampal be considered for AL a feather on its cap or a dark spot on itsrecord? The question now hinges on several issues that are still up in the air. What is the source and quality of coal? Which technology will be used to minimise environmental impact? What type of equipment (turbines, boilers, and generators) are available?And what are the codified plans to mitigate any damage, enforce the rules and monitor all operations?
In 2013, the government indicated that the Rampal plant will burn "high-quality imported coal," and "emissions of carbon, sulfur, fly ash and several other sorts of air pollution will be kept at a minimum level to avoid having any adverse impact on the environment." It is an open question how and why the plant can "avoid" having any environmental impact, given the lack of enforcement in Bangladesh. It may be mentioned that the government is yet to set the criteria for permissible levels of carbon monoxide, lead, sulfur dioxide [SO2], nitrogen oxides [NO2], ground-level ozone (O3), and particulate matter [PM], the six common air pollutants.
It is well-known that modern clean technology in the coal-power domain is available, but they are expensive. Globally, the most commonly used technology is pulverised coal combustion (PC) in coal-fired power plants. Developments in the past decades in PC technology have primarily been in increasing plant thermal efficiencies by raising the steam pressure and temperature. Based on the differences in temperature and pressure, the technology is categorised into three tiers: subcritical, supercritical (SC) and ultrasupercritical (USC). The energy adviser to the Prime Minister said in September 2013 that Rampal "would be built using the latest ultrasupercritical technology, so it would not affect the environment of the Sundarbans". There are a number of benefits that USC generators can bring: lower emissions, higher efficiency, and lower operating cost down the road.
Based on existing plant data in the US, there is efficiency resulting from lower coal consumption per unit of power generated and reduced emissions for not "only CO2 but sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, PM-10 particulate, and fly ash". According to an Indian news source, The New Indian Express, Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL), which won the Rampal contract, "… was selected under an open international tender for constructing the 'ultra-super critical thermal plant' at Rampal". The operator of Rampal, Bangladesh-India Friendship Company, and the Government of Bangladesh will need to aggressively pursue the issue with BHEL, and choice of cleaner USC technology needs to be a high priority.
USC or not, there are some key environmental goals that must be met. The EIA report promises that the "impact on ecosystem will also be minimum due to adoption of different pollution abatement measures." Some of the facilities that will be built are "water treatment plant, sub-station,jetty, coal handling system and coal silo, and ash handling and disposal facilities". However, the proof is in the pudding. Likewise, another question on everyone's mind is: Does Bangladesh have the manpower and mechanism to ensure that all i's will be dotted and t's crossed? Unfortunately, there are indications that the project team has scaled back on some of the promises, and started back-pedalling on the quality of coal and generator technology. But, scepticism about the government should not prevent us from being vigilant.
Finally, it is to be noted that going forward, Bangladesh is in a tight spot. It needs low-cost energy, but not at the cost of environmental degradation. We can hope that we can emerge from this long battle and be in a win-win situation by fusing the twin goals to combat global warming and simultaneously embrace a sustainable approach to economic growth.
The writer is an economist who has worked on numerous Environmental Impact Assessment studies in the US and Bangladesh.
Comments