Updated August 26, 2010

• Executive Summary
• U.S. Production and Resources
• U.S. Consumption
• Coal Plant Statistics
• Emissions
• Environmental Issues
• U.S. Coal Imports and Exports
• International

Executive Summary

The United Sates is a global leader in coal, both in production and reserves. Environmental issues and a push toward natural gas and wind power plants in recent years have limited new coal-fired generating units, but new coal plant construction is still progressing. The Energy Information Administration and other forecasters predict increases in coal-fired generating capacity in the U.S. to meet growing electricity demand and the emergence of a coal-to-liquids industry. U.S. coal exports while down this year are still higher than most of this decade, indicating that U.S. coal is important to the global market, as well as to the domestic market, and that other countries, particularly under- developed countries, are investing in coal-fired technology.

U.S. Coal Production and Resource Statistics

• In 2009, coal production totaled 1.07 billion short tons [1]. By 2035, the Energy Information Administration projects coal production to total 1.285 billion short tons, an increase of 20 percent[2].

• The largest coal producing State is Wyoming with 467.64 million short tons produced in 2008. Over half the states in the U.S. (26 States) produce coal. The coal is transported by truck, train, and barge to consumption areas[3].

• The demonstrated reserve base of coal in the U.S. totaled 488 billion short tons as of January 1, 2009, the most in the world. At current consumption levels of one billion short tons, the U.S. has 488 years of coal. See the international section below for other countries with large coal reserves [4].

U.S. Coal Consumption Statistics

• In 2009, coal consumption totaled 1.00 billion short tons, of which 93.6 percent was used for electricity production, 6.1 percent in the industrial sector, and 0.3 percent in the residential and commercial sectors [5]. By 2035, the Energy Information Administration projects coal consumption to increase to 1.319 billion short tons, of which 90 percent would be used for electricity generation, 5 percent for coal-to-liquids production, 5 percent in the industrial sector, and 0.2 percent in the residential and commercial sectors [6]. In 2009, coal represented 20.9 percent of total U.S. supply; in 2035, it is projected to represent 21.9 percent of the total.

• In 2009, 45 percent of U.S. electricity was generated by coal-fired power plants. EIA predicts that coal-fired generation will supply 44 percent of the electricity in 2035. Generation from coal-fired units is expected to increase by over300 billion kilowatt hours (16 percent) by 2035– the largest increase of any generating fuel due to its low capital and fuel costs relative to other generating technologies, and its high capacity factors and availability [7].

U.S. Coal Plant Statistics

• As of the end of 2009, the U.S. had 314.4 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity, which is 31 percent of the total generating capacity in the United States. During the past two decades, little new coal-fired capacity has been added due to the addition of over 260 gigawatts of natural gas-fired combined cycle and turbine units and more recently wind turbines. However, according to Energy Information Administration, 944 megawatts of coal-fired capacity came on line in 2008, 3,034 megawatts came on line in 2009, and 2,310 megawatts through the first 6 months of 2010[8]. The EIA projects that 26 gigawatts of new coal-fired power plants will be built between 2008 and 2035 to meet increased electricity demand [9].

• The Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) reported that 8 new coal units became operational in 2009, with a total capacity of 3,218 megawatts. As of January 2010, they report that 22 coal-fired plants were under construction (13,755 megawatts), 1 was near construction (320 megawatts), 8 were permitted (3,280 megawatts), and 46 were announced (26,233 megawatts) for a total of 43,588 megawatts. A plant near construction has obtained approval and received the majority of its permits, has begun site preparation, and is contracting for vendors and Engineering, Procurement and Construction contractors. A plant in the permitted phase has two or more permits approved or fuel or power contracts have been negotiated. A plant in the announced phase is in the early stages of development and maybe filing for permits. While plants under and near construction are likely to come on line, NETL warns that regulatory uncertainty and industry cost increases are impacting development decisions for all projects. For example, their year 2002 report of announcements reflected a schedule of over 36,000 megawatts to be installed by 2007, but only 12 percent (about 4,500 megawatts) were actually achieved [10].

• The U.S. has a coal-to-natural gas plant in Beulah, North Dakota. The Great Plains Gasification Plant converts lignite coal to pipeline quality synthetic natural gas. The Synfuels plant began operating in 1984 and produces about 53 billion cubic feet of natural gas annually, consuming over 6 million tons of coal each year [11].

• While there are no coal-to-liquids plants currently in the U.S., the technology exists, was used widely during World War II by Germany, and is currently producing petroleum products from coal in South Africa. The Energy Information Administration projects that coal-to-liquids production in the U.S. will begin by 2012 and by 2035, it will produce 240,000 barrels per day of petroleum products, consuming 31 million short tons of coal [12].

Emissions and regulations

• Combustion of coal produces pollutants such as sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx), particulate matter, and carbon monoxide. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) instituted a cap and trade program that requires power plants to meet certain targets for SO2 and NOx emissions. As a result, emissions of sulfur dioxide from coal-fired electricity generation declined from 14.5 million metrict tons in 1989 to 8.4 million metric tons in 2007, a reduction of 42 percent. On a per kilowatt basis, SO2 emissions from coal-fired plants declined from .05 metric tons in 1989 to .03 metric tons in 2007. NOx emissions from coal-fired generators declined from 7.3 million metric tons in 1989, to 2.9 million metric tons in 2007, a reduction of 61 percent. On a per kilowatt basis, NOx emissions from coal-fired power plants declined from .024 metric tons to .009 metric tons. Power plant owners mainly complied with the CAAA by using lower sulfur coal or by adding desulfurization and selective catalytic reduction equipment to their units. Both the lower sulfur coal and the technology to remove SO2 and NOx were available to the power companies when the CAAA became law [13].

• The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) was set up to further limit SO2 emissions in 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia to 3.6 million tons beginning in 2010 and 2.5 million tons in 2015, and NOx emissions to 1.5 million tons in 2009 and 1.3 million tons in 2015 . The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on July 11, 2008, issued a decision that struck down CAIR’s emission allowance trading program, holding that unrestricted trading might result in no emission reductions in an upwind state, thereby preventing EPA from fulfilling its responsibility under the Clean Air Act (CAA) to prohibit sources in one state from contributing to nonattainment in another state . However, on December 23, 2008, the Court of Appeals ruled that CAIR remain in effect while EPA makes the appropriate modifications to address the objections [14].
• The EPA is working on its air transport rule that would reduce emissions in 31 states and the District of Columbia. By 2014, sulfur dioxide emissions would be reduced by 71 percent over 2005 levels, and nitrogen oxide emissions would be reduced by 52 percent. See http://epa.gov/airtransport/

• The Clean Air Mercury Rule was set up to limit mercury emissions to 38 tons in 2010 and 15 tons in 2018. To reduce mercury, power companies can change their fuels, change the dispatch or the configuration of their units, or add mercury specific controls, such as selective catalytic reduction equipment or activated carbon injection systems. The Clean Air Mercury Rule was vacated on February 8, 2008, because the court found that mercury is a toxic air pollutant which must be regulated under different provisions of the Clean Air Act, generally requiring the use of the best available control technology (BACT) . However, some states have implemented regulations on generating capacity of certain levels [15].

• Carbon dioxide emissions in 2009 totaled 5404 million metric tons of CO2, of which coal represented 35 percent. The majority of carbon dioxide emissions from coal (95 percent) were emitted from coal-fired electric generators [16].

• U.S. CO2 emissions are expected to total 6,320 million metric tons of CO2 in 2035, of which coal is expected to represent 38 percent, with 92 percent of coal’s share coming from coal-fired electric generators [17].

• Carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants could be controlled in the future when carbon, capture and sequestration (CCS) technology becomes commercially viable. CCS technology captures CO2 emissions at their point of production and injects them in geological formations in the earth. In 2003, the U. S. Government and private industry began funding the FutureGen project to control carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants. The Federal Government withdrew its support early in 2008 for a restructured project where Government funds would be used for the CCS portion of the plant only [18]. The American Recovery and reinvestment Act provided $3.4 billion for research and development of fossil technologies, a portion of which is to be used to fund projects that capture and sequester greenhouse gases [19].Carbon capture and sequestration technology is expected to add about $1 billion to the cost of a new plant and increase power plant efficiency losses [20]. The Energy Information Administration assumes that a plant can be retrofitted at a cost of $900 to $1300 per kilowatt, with 90 percent of the carbon removed, a capacity derate of 30 percent, and reduced efficiency of 43 percent [21].
• Congress has had various proposals for a cap and trade bill to limit greenhouse gas emissions, but to date only the House of Representatives has passed their version of the bill. In the mean time, the EPA is looking at proposals to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Under the “tailoring” rule finalized in May, the largest new industrial facilities and plants that significantly increase their greenhouse gas emissions will need New Source Review (NSR) permits effective January 2011. The requirement will be extended to other facilities over time through other rulemakings [22].

Environmental Issues

• It is becoming harder for new coal plants to get regulatory permits due mainly to their emissions of carbon dioxide and a poor financial environment due to escalating costst. The National Energy Technology Laboratory reports that of the over 36,000 megawatts announced in 2002 to be on-line by 2007, only 12 percent (4,500 megawatts) were actually built. Many of the plants were blocked by state governments or stuck in court challenges [23].

• Kansas is an example of a state blocked project to build a coal plant. In October 2007, a state environment official rejected Sunflower Electric Power’s permit to build two 700-megawatt, coal-fired generators on the basis of carbon dioxide emissions — the first such rejection in the U.S. The state legislature rescinded the decision with bills that would have allowed the plants to proceed. However, then Kansas’ Governor, Kathleen Sebelius, vetoed the legislation. And while this Kansas plant is a first, at least 16 other coal plants across the U.S. have been denied for other reasons, including investor uncertainty about future U.S. climate legislation as well as higher construction and labor costs [24]. Once Kansas Governor Sebelius became a cabinet secretary in the Obama Administration, the atmosphere turned more favorable. New Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson has worked a deal to allow one new coal-fired plant to be built in the state [25].

• Another plant in jeopardy is the proposed Longleaf plant in Georgia , which is tied up in litigation. The plant, proposed by LS Power and Dynegy, would have been the first coal-fired plant built in Georgia in over 20 years, in a state where coal is the primary fuel for electricity generation. In late June 2008, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Thelma Wyatt Cummings Moore overturned the decision by state regulators to issue the plant an air permit, saying state environmental officials failed to take the plant’s carbon dioxide emissions into consideration. In her decision, Moore said the plant would annually emit large amounts of air pollutants, including nine million tons of carbon dioxide. In November 2008, the plant owners appealed Judge Moore’s decision with the State Court of Appeals. In July 2009, the Court of Appeals overturned the previous decision, but left the plant’s permit invalid. In September 2009, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that they would not hear an appeal by the Sierra Club against the previous ruling. While the Sierra Club appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court to reconsider, the state Supreme Court held to their prior ruling. In April 2010, the state Environmental Protection Division issued two amendments to the permit, but failed to allow enough time for public comment. The plant is on hold while the state determines when they will provide the documents for comment.[26]

• Some U.S. banks are including “Carbon Principles” in their screening of coal-fired plant investments. Citigroup, J.P. Morgan, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America expect a federal greenhouse-gas-emissions cap in the next few years that are expected to make conventional coal-fired power plants riskier investments. These “Carbon Principles” push utilities to explore other alternatives to regular coal plants (e.g. natural gas), and urges them to build coal-fired power plants that are carbon capture and sequestration ready, although that technology is not yet commercially available [27]. Since then, other banks have joined the band wagon. Wells Fargo, for instance, issued its “2010 Environmentally Responsible Lending”, where only one project as of the first quarter of 2010 called for application of the carbon principles, but the bank also issued equator principles, dealing with project finance [28].

• Xcel Energy has plans to close two small Colorado coal-fired power plants (combined capacity of 229 megawatts) by 2012 and replace them with a 200 megawatt advanced solar plant. The plan will help Xcel meet Colorado’s renewable portfolio standard calling for 20 percent of the state’s electricity to come from renewable resources by 2020. It will also help Xcel comply with Gov. Bill Ritter’s 2007 mandate to cut utility-sector carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. By volunteering to shut down the two coal plants, Xcel becomes the first utility in the country to help meet greenhouse gas reduction goals through power plant closures. Xcel also has plans to build as much as 850 megawatts of wind energy within its service territory by 2015 [29]. In July 2010, Xcel started operating a hybrid solar-coal plant, using a parabolic-trough technology integrated with coal. This first-of-a-kind plant is expected to lower greenhouse gas emissions and provide other environmental benefits, but many feel its gains in this area will be minimal and thus are insufficient.[30]

• While the Bush Administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved the Desert Rock coal power plant in New Mexico, that same EPA withdrew its approval during the Obama Administration. The plant was to use supercritical coal technology and meet standards defined by the International Energy Agency for carbon capture and storage ready, allowing it to be retrofitted for future deployment of the technology when it becomes commercially available. The 1,500 megawatt plant was to be located near Farmington in northwestern New Mexico and serve parts of Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah, using Navajo Nation coal resources [31]. The permit was overturned by the EPA in April 2009, citing inadequate analysis of environmental issues and not using coal gasification combined cycle technology. But, the President of the Navajo Nation feels otherwise, citing that the EPA is holding the Navajo Nation accountable to higher standards than other parts of the United States [32]. In April 2010, the power plant owner indicated that the project was not dead, but it in no longer clear what fuel the owner is contemplating—fossil or renewable [33].

• Montana’s Crow Nation and Australian-American Energy Company (AECC) announced plans on August 8, 2008, to jointly construct a $7 billion coal-to-liquid (CTL) fuels plant in southeastern Montana. AAEC has completed its initial feasibility study for the project and will begin the environmental permitting process later this year, with construction expected to begin in 2012 and production to begin in 2016. The project is expected to use 38,000 tons of coal per day to produce 50,000 barrels of CTL fuel per day. Ultimately, plant production could be ramped up to reach 125,000 barrels per day. It is designed to capture carbon dioxide for geo-sequestration and supply to enhanced-oil recovery projects [34]. It will also provide 700 to 900 permanent jobs [35].

U.S. Coal Exports and Imports

• Coal exports in 2008 totaled 81.5 million short tons, the highest level in 11 years. In 2009, they dropped to 59.1 million short tons, 27.5 percent less than their 2008 level [36]. The average price of U.S. coal exports in 2009 was $101.44 per short ton, an increase of 3.8 percent from 2008 levels. Europe is the major market for metallurgical coal exports, accounting for 53 percent of U.S. metallurgical exports in 2009.The largest market for U.S. steam coal is Canada, who imported 8.2 million short tons in 2009, 38 percent of all U.S. steam coal exports, [37]. While a hefty decline in 2009, coal exports were still stronger than during most of this decade. The fairly strong export market can be attributed in part to continuing strong demand in Asia, particularly China and India, as well as a weak U.S. dollar, which makes American coal a better value to overseas buyers.

• Coal imports totaled 22.6 million short tons in 2009, 34 percent less than in 2008 and at a level not seen since the early part of the decade [38]. Colombia dominates the U.S. coal import market, accounting for over 75 percent of 2009 imports [39]. The U.S. imported 17.8 million short tons from Columbia, 32 percent less than in 2008.

• The EIA and other forecasters, however, project that U.S. coal exports will decline and that the U.S. will become a net importer of coal after 2025. EIA projects that coal exports will decline to 33 million short tons by 2035 and that coal imports will increase to 53 million short tons [40]. However, if coal-fired power plants in the U.S. are blocked by State and local governments for environmental reasons, U.S. coal will most likely be shipped abroad, reversing this forecast, and continuing the trend of the U.S. being a net exporter of coal.

International

• World coal consumption in 2008 was 7,238 million short tons. China consumed 2,830 million short tons and the U.S. consumed about 40 percent of China’s consumption at 1,122 million short tons. In 2007, coal represented 27 percent of global primary energy consumption [41].

• World production of coal in 2008 was 7,271 million short tons, with China producing the most at 2,848 million short tons, and U.S. producing 1,171 million short tons [42].

• In 2035, world consumption is expected to increase by 56 percent to 206 quadrillion Btu, with China increasing its consumption by 105 percent to 112 quadrillion Btu. The U.S. is expected to increase its consumption by 11 percent, reaching 25 quadrillion Btu in 2035. Coal is expected to represent 28 percent of total global primary consumption in 2035 [43].

• World recoverable coal reserves as of January 1, 2008, totaled 909 billion short tons. Recoverable reserves are those quantities of coal which geological and engineering information indicates with reasonable certainty can be extracted in the future under existing economic and operating conditions. Three countries represent 62 percent of the world’s coal reserves: the U.S. (29 percent), Russia (19 percent), and China (14 percent)[44].

• Worldwide CO2 emissions are expected to be 42 billion metric tons by 2035, up over 43 percent from its 29 billion metric ton level in 2007. Coal represented 42 percent of global CO2 emissions in 2007 and is expected to represent 46 percent in 2035 [45]. Countries in Asia are expanding coal capacity despite climate change issues. China is planning to build 500 coal plants over the next ten years, or about one plant every four days [46].India’s 8 percent economic growth rate is powered primarily by coal, and the country’s coal consumption is projected to increase by at least 400 percent by the year 2030, according to the government’s 2005 Integrated Energy Policy report. About 70 percent of India’s electricity comes from coal plants. Currently, India’s power supply is about 12 percent behind demand, resulting in frequent blackouts. India also has a shortage of coking coal for cement and steel manufacturing [47].

• As of the spring of 2010, Germany planned to build 26 new coal–fired plants because of the economic boost and jobs that it would provide, despite carbon emissions trading in Europe. However, the country, which is also heavily into wind and solar projects, is being besieged by an environmental movement similar to that in the United States [48].

• A small Canadian company is planning to build a coal-to-liquid petroleum fuels plant that will produce 40,000 barrels per day over 50 years starting in 2014. The project is expected to cost C$4.5 billion. Coal reserves in northwestern Alberta will be turned into diesel fuel and naphtha — a heavy oil product used for paving roads and for diluting bitumen from the oil sands— employing proven processes that have been in commercial use around the world for more than 30 years. The venture is expected to break even with oil prices at $50-$60 per barrel and generate returns at $80. The plans include the sale of carbon dioxide into the enhanced oil recovery market. More than 85 percent of CO2 produced by the project will be captured for sequestration in deep saline aquifers or in depleted oil or gas pools [49].

---

[1] Energy Information Administration (EIA), Monthly Energy Review, Table 6.1, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/pdf/pages/sec6_3.pdf.

[2] Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2010 (AEO), Table A15, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/aeoref_tab.html

[3] Energy Information Administration, Coal Production and Number of Mines by State and Mine Type, 2008-2007, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/acr/table1.html

[4] Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/reserves/reserves.html

[5] Energy Information Administration (EIA), Monthly Energy Review, Table 6.2, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/pdf/pages/sec6_4.pdf

[6] Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2010 (AEO), Tables 1 and 15, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/aeoref_tab.html

[7] Energy Information Administration (EIA), Annual Energy Review 2008, Table 8.4b, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/sec8_18.pdf , and EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2010 (AEO), Tables 8, 9, 16, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/aeoref_tab.html.

[8] Energy Information Administration (EIA), Annual Energy Review 2009, Table 8.11a, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/sec8_42.pdf, and Electric Power Monthly, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/ftproot/electricity/epm/02260904.pdf, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/ftproot/electricity/epm/02261003.pdf, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/ftproot/electricity/epm/02261008.pdf

[9] Energy Information Administration (EIA), Annual Energy Outlook 2010, Table 9, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/aeoref_tab.html.

[10] National Energy Technology Laboratory, Tracking New Coal-Fired Power Plants, January 8, 2010, http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/refshelf/ncp.pdf.

[11] U.S. Department of Energy, Fossil Energy, http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/gasification/gasificationpioneer.html and http://www.dakotagas.com/Gasification/index.html.

[12] Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2010, Tables A11 and A15, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/aeoref_tab.html .

[13] Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Review 2008, Tables 8.11a and 12.7a, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/contents.html.

[14] Energy Information Administration, Assumptions to the Annual Energy Outlook 2010, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/assumption/pdf/electricity.pdf

[15] Energy Information Administration, Assumptions to the Annual Energy Outlook 2010, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/assumption/pdf/electricity.pdf.

[16] Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review, Tables 12.1 and 12.6, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/environ.html

[17] Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2010, Table A18, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/aeoref_tab.html

[18] http://www.energy.gov/news/5912.htm, http://www.fossil.energy.gov/news/techlines/2008/08030-CO2_Capture_Projects_Selected.html.

[19] Energy Information Administration, Assumptions to the Annual Energy Outlook 2010, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/assumption/pdf/electricity.pdf

[20] COAL: Worldwide, dirty fuel not retiring anytime soon, Climate Wire, 08/06/2008, http://www.eenews.net/cw/2008/08/06/7.

[21] Energy Information Administration, Assumptions to the Annual Energy Outlook 2010, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/assumption/pdf/electricity.pdf

[22] New York Times, EPA Issues Final “Tailoring” Rule for Greenhouse Gas Emissions, May 13, 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/05/13/13greenwire-epa-issues-final-tailoring-rule-for-greenhouse-32021.html

[23] National Energy Technology Laboratory, Tracking New Coal-Fired Power Plants, January 8, 2010, http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/refshelf/ncp.pdf, and New York Times, Europe Turns Back to Coal, Raising Climate Fears, April 23, 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world/europe/23coal.html?scp=4&sq=coal%20power%20plants&st=cse .

[24] Coming in from the Coal, October 19, 2007, http://www.grist.org/news/2007/10/19/Kansas/index.html , and The Washington Post, Gristmill: What’s not the matter with Kansas, July 10, 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-yn/content/article/2008/07/15/AR2008071500930.html.

[25] http://www2.ljworld.com/news/kansas/energy/sunflower/

[26] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Longleaf

[27] Wall Street Journal, February 4, 2008, http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2008/02/04/wall-street-tells-big-coal-not-so-fast/?mod=WSJBlog , April 2, 2008, http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2008/04/02/bank-of-america-more-heat-on-coal/ and August, 13, 2008, http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2008/08/13/burning-cash-coal-friendly-banks-under-fire/

[28] Wells Fargo, 2010 Environmentally Responsible Lending, https://www.wellsfargo.com/downloads/pdf/about/csr/reports/environmental_lending_practices.pdf

[29] E&E News, August 21, 2008, http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2008/08/21/2

[30] http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/206083

[31] New York Times, New Mexico Power Plant Permitted, August 1, 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/01/us/01brfs-POWERPLANTPE_BRF.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin and Desert Energy Project Website, http://www.desertrockenergyproject.com/index.htm.

[32] The New Mexico Independent, EPA plugs the plug on Desert Rock coal-fired power plant, April 28, 2009, http://newmexicoindependent.com/26011/epa-pulls-the-plug-on-desert-rock-coal-fired-plant

[33] Greenwire, COAL: Extension granted for appeals of N.M. power-plant permit , August 22, 2008, http://www.eenews.net/Greenwire/2008/08/22/8 .

[34] The Navajo Times, Desert Rock not dead, April 15, 2010, http://www.navajotimes.com/news/2010/0410/040810desertrock.php

[35] National Mining Association, http://www.nma.org/newsroom/miningweek/miningweekarchive/pdf2008/mw081508.pdf

[36] http://manystarsctl.com/news060209.html

[37] Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review, Table 6.1, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/pdf/pages/sec6_3.pdf.

[38] Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. Coal Supply and Demand, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/special/exports_imports.html

[39] Energy Information Administration (EIA), Monthly Energy Review, Table 6.1, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/pdf/pages/sec6_3.pdf.

[40] Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. Coal Supply and Demand, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/special/exports_imports.html

[41] Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2010 (AEO), Table A15, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/aeoref_tab.html.

[42] Energy Information Administration, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/IEDIndex3.cfm?tid=1&pid=1&aid=242. Energy Information Administration, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/IEDIndex3.cfm?tid=1&pid=7&aid=1.

[43] Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2010 (IEO), Tables A2 and A7, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/pdf/ieorefcase.pdf.

[44] Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2010, Table 10, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/pdf/0484(2010).pdf

[45] Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2010, Tables A10 and A13, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/pdf/ieorefcase.pdf.

[46] China Building 500 Coal Plants, January 29, 2009, http://windfarms.wordpress.com/2009/01/29/china-building-500-coal-plants/

[47] ClimateWire, Coal: India: A roaring economy is hitched to a galloping addiction to coal, February 4, 2010, http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2010/02/04/archive/1?terms=coal+plants+in+india

[48] Motor City Times, 26 New Coal Power Plants in Germany, April 24, 2010, http://motorcitytimes.com/mct/2010/04/26-new-coal-power-plants-in-germany/

[49] Turning coal into liquid fuel, Gary Park, Petroleum News, August 3, 2008, www.petroleumnews.com.