The coal mine in Cumbria: why?
A new deep coal mine is set to be the first to open in the UK for 30 years, but does it undermine the UK’s position as a world leader in climate policy?
In the midst of lockdown, Communities Secretary Robert Jenrick issued a notice stating he would not overrule Cumbria Council’s decision to approve a planning application for a new coal mine. The mine will produce coking coal for the steel industry rather than thermal coal used in electricity production, but it will still produce 9 million tonnes of CO2 annually (equivalent to the CO2 emissions of 1 million Britons). The decision to green-light the scheme is particularly perplexing given the UK government’s own independent advisory committee, the Climate Change Committee, says all coking coal must be phased out by 2035. Yet, this new mine can stay open until 2049, a particularly convenient end date given the UK is legally bound to reach carbon neutrality by 2050.
Cumbria Council granted approval to West Cumbria Mining on the basis that the scheme did not contravene planning rules and would help diversify jobs. Jenrick could have had the power to veto the scheme, but he deemed it to be a “local” issue, with the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government releasing a statement saying:
“The general approach of the secretary of state is not to interfere with the decision-making process of local councils on planning matters. The government’s position is that these matters are generally best determined locally, by local councils that know their own area best, rather than by central government.”
This decision infuriated environmentalists, who argue that framing climate change as a “local” issue is farcical. When John Sauven, from Greenpeace, heard that approving the mine was considered a local decision he said: "Let's hope China doesn't take the same view - or the world will be toast."
The government and Cumbria Council are accused of short-sightedness and prioritising jobs over climate change; an argument they reject. The key point they emphasise is that this mine will produce coking coal, rather than thermal coal, which is due to be phased out by 2025. Coking coal is overwhelmingly used in steel production, and the UK is currently reliant upon imports from the U.S., Russia, and Australia. The argument, as put by Workington Tory MP Mark Jenkinson, is that "it's better for the environment to dig coking coal from Workington than from Wyoming, because it saves on emissions from transport. We can't let other countries pick up the tab for emissions on our behalf."
This is a valid point regarding imports from Australia (19 per cent of UK total), where transportation accounts for 48 per cent of total CO2 compared to 24 per cent for UK-produced coal. But the argument falls apart regarding imports from the U.S., where transport-associated CO2 emissions account for just 10 per cent of total emissions (45 per cent of imports), a similar result is likely for imports from Russia (33 per cent of imports) as they are predominantly transported by train.
The proposed annual extraction of 2.7 million tonnes is also higher than current imports, suggesting the UK will begin exports to Europe or will further increase its steel production. This goes against the call of environmentalists to transition towards a circular economy with far higher steel recycling rates (which uses less energy than creating virgin ore). The Cumbrian mine will also increase international supply, likely depressing coal prices and making it more economically attractive, likely leading to further global coal production rather than reducing it.
In August 2019, the government established the Clean Steel Fund, which aims to promote the development of alternative methods of steel production. But MPs still base their justification for the new mine based on the concern that the technology required to create virgin steel using non-coal methods such as hydrogen won’t be ready by 2035. However, the decision to address this concern by enhancing coking coal capacity rather than further investing in emerging technologies seems counterintuitive and such contradictions indicate a lack of joined-up thinking within government.
This all comes as the UK is preparing to host the G7 summit - where climate change is set to be a key talking point – not to mention the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow in November, the successor to the 2015 Paris conference.
Many fear the latest saga will undermine the UK’s ability to position itself as a climate leader, thus reducing its persuasive power in international discussions.
Tony Bosworth, a Friends of the Earth climate change campaigner said the decision “completely undermines the government’s credibility on the climate crisis – global leadership on the climate emergency means leaving coal in the ground, where it belongs.”
Labour's shadow Minister for Climate Change Matthew Pennycook said the move "makes a mockery of the government's claim to be a climate leader and won't provide the long-term job security Cumbrians deserve.”
We will have to wait and see to establish the long-term ramifications of these decisions, but in the short term it is likely to lead to increased scrutiny regarding other aspects of the UK’s climate policy.