Following on from our discussion of fossil fuels in the latest issue of PopSci magazine, a pair of Sydney Uni professors have looked more closely at the real benefits versus the drawbacks of the coal industry.
Dr Stuart Rosewarne from the Department of Political Economy, and Professor Linda Connor from the the Department of Anthropology, both argue in their article that when put up against the costs involved in running such an industry, both financially and environmentally, coal mining and burning doesn't produce appreciable benefits.
"Burning coal is the primary source of Australia’s apparently “cheap” energy. Paradoxically, while coal generates a lot of royalties for State governments and is the nation’s second largest export earner, the industry contributes only around 1.8 per cent to GDP," they write.
"This is compared to other industries such as financial and insurance services (9.6%), retail and wholesale trade (8.6%), construction (7.7%) and health care and social services (6%). It is a relatively insignificant employer, even where mining is concentrated. In the Hunter it employs only 6% of the region’s workforce."
They argue that the subsidies paid to industry, health costs, environmental clean up and the obvious long term climate impacts all add up to what is a rather steep bill for Australia.
Given the fact that, as we've looked at previously, our economy is going to centre more on services industries in the next few years, not to mention the direct impact climate change will have, and already is having, on coal-based power generation, it could be that the lifespan of the industry is even shorter than we think, and won't pay much of a dividend over that time.
The likes of natural gas provide a shorter term alternative, but coal seam gas, for instance, is still quite a contentious issue at the moment, coming with its own set of problems.
Check out our current issue of the magazine for a run down of the various energy options of the future, and how Australia is positioned to take advantage of them.
