• 17 hours PDVSA Booted From Caribbean Terminal Over Unpaid Bills
  • 19 hours Russia Warns Ukraine Against Recovering Oil Off The Coast Of Crimea
  • 21 hours Syrian Rebels Relinquish Control Of Major Gas Field
  • 22 hours Schlumberger Warns Of Moderating Investment In North America
  • 23 hours Oil Prices Set For Weekly Loss As Profit Taking Trumps Mideast Tensions
  • 24 hours Energy Regulators Look To Guard Grid From Cyberattacks
  • 1 day Mexico Says OPEC Has Not Approached It For Deal Extension
  • 1 day New Video Game Targets Oil Infrastructure
  • 1 day Shell Restarts Bonny Light Exports
  • 1 day Russia’s Rosneft To Take Majority In Kurdish Oil Pipeline
  • 1 day Iraq Struggles To Replace Damaged Kirkuk Equipment As Output Falls
  • 2 days British Utility Companies Brace For Major Reforms
  • 2 days Montenegro A ‘Sweet Spot’ Of Untapped Oil, Gas In The Adriatic
  • 2 days Rosneft CEO: Rising U.S. Shale A Downside Risk To Oil Prices
  • 2 days Brazil Could Invite More Bids For Unsold Pre-Salt Oil Blocks
  • 2 days OPEC/Non-OPEC Seek Consensus On Deal Before Nov Summit
  • 2 days London Stock Exchange Boss Defends Push To Win Aramco IPO
  • 2 days Rosneft Signs $400M Deal With Kurdistan
  • 2 days Kinder Morgan Warns About Trans Mountain Delays
  • 2 days India, China, U.S., Complain Of Venezuelan Crude Oil Quality Issues
  • 3 days Kurdish Kirkuk-Ceyhan Crude Oil Flows Plunge To 225,000 Bpd
  • 3 days Russia, Saudis Team Up To Boost Fracking Tech
  • 3 days Conflicting News Spurs Doubt On Aramco IPO
  • 3 days Exxon Starts Production At New Refinery In Texas
  • 3 days Iraq Asks BP To Redevelop Kirkuk Oil Fields
  • 4 days Oil Prices Rise After U.S. API Reports Strong Crude Inventory Draw
  • 4 days Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 4 days China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 4 days UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 4 days Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 4 days VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 4 days Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 4 days Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
  • 4 days OPEC Oil Deal Compliance Falls To 86%
  • 5 days U.S. Oil Production To Increase in November As Rig Count Falls
  • 5 days Gazprom Neft Unhappy With OPEC-Russia Production Cut Deal
  • 5 days Disputed Venezuelan Vote Could Lead To More Sanctions, Clashes
  • 5 days EU Urges U.S. Congress To Protect Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 5 days Oil Rig Explosion In Louisiana Leaves 7 Injured, 1 Still Missing
  • 5 days Aramco Says No Plans To Shelve IPO
Alt Text

Rising Costs Slow The Growth Of Nuclear Power

High costs and public fears…

Alt Text

Russia’s Nuclear Sector Is Surging

With a long-standing nuclear tradition,…

Alt Text

New Tech Is Transforming Japan’s Energy Sector

The tech that built bitcoin…

Irina Slav

Irina Slav

Irina is a writer for the U.S.-based Divergente LLC consulting firm with over a decade of experience writing on the oil and gas industry.

More Info

Switching From Coal To Solar Could Save 50,000 Lives


Replacing coal-fired power plants with solar power installations could save as many as 51,999 lives every year, a study from the Michigan Technological University has found. This is the number of people who will in all likelihood not die of things such as asthma and congestive heart failure resulting from harmful emissions from coal-fired plants.

Coal currently accounts for 30 percent of the U.S. energy mix, according to the Energy Information Administration. In terms of consumption, however, coal only accounted for 15 percent, almost all of it going into power generation. The fossil fuel is quickly losing share to natural gas, but is still a solid contributor to CO2 and other pollutants emissions – solid enough, according to the study’s authors, Emily Prehoda and Joshua Pierce, to kill more than 50,000 people on an annual basis.

Switching from fossil fuels to renewables is at the core of sustainability efforts. It also comes at a price, which Prehoda and Pierce have estimated at a total of US$1.45 trillion. This is the cost of installing 755 GW of new solar power generation capacity. Over a 25-year period—the length of the warranty on PV modules—this translates into US$1.1 million per life saved. It may not sound like a lot if it’s your life, but it is, the authors note, comparable to the value of a human life as estimated in other studies.

What’s more, solar power does not just come with costs. The US$1.1-million cost estimate is based on the premise that electricity has no value, which is not the case in reality. Both coal and solar are sources of revenues as well as electricity. So, the authors also calculated how much the switch will cost per life saved based on the residential retail power price of solar electricity in a rural area, namely Houghton, Michigan. The figure came in at a negative US$4.65 million per life saved. In other words, the authors argue, replacing coal with solar power under this scenario will actually save money, a lot more money than it will cost.

Related: Trump Flirting With The Idea Of A Federal Gasoline Tax Increase

Could this study provide additional motivation for those driving the shift to renewable energy? It certainly could, even though such motivation may not actually be necessary: the U.S. coal industry is in a natural decline that will only accelerate in the coming years. One example of this is an analysis of the industry’s eventual demise and the reasons for it from the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, which suggests that the U.S. coal industry is not a victim of policy changes and regulations. Instead, its demise is chalked up to a natural and logical consequence of progress and the changes in energy consumption it brings with it.

Besides natural gas, solar power is one of the drivers of this demise, and its role will become even more important in the next couple of decades, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. The service has estimated that the share of coal in the U.S. energy mix will fall to 15 percent by 2040. While old coal-fired plants are closed, gas-powered generation capacity will expand by 22 percent and renewable capacity will jump by an impressive 169 percent.

Now, as Bloomberg notes, this goes against a forecast from the EIA, which sees coal’s share pretty stable, even rising slightly to 31 percent by 2040, based on the Trump administration’s plans to prop up the coal industry. Yet, the BNEF says, this does not reflect the “economic realities over the next two decades.” Or as Energy & Capital author Megan Dailey wrote, “Forget the Paris Agreement and all the drama surrounding it. The country’s renewable industry doesn’t need a global initiative to keep right on growing.” Indeed, the U.S. is the third biggest spender on renewable energy in the world, behind China and India. The more uneconomical coal becomes, thanks to cheap alternatives from the solar, wind and other renewables, the closer the U.S. will get to saving those 51,999 lives every year.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:

Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • NickSJ on June 19 2017 said:
    Another BS "study" designed to generate headlines like this one. More propaganda from the green religion.
  • KellyH on June 20 2017 said:
    First Solar works when the sun shines, wind works only when the wind blows 20 to 30 MPH, coal is at needed output 24/7. What part of the study addresses the 1000 s of diesel engines running when renewable don't operate at rated out put? May be New York city should just sit in the dark at those off peek renewable output hours.
  • aurelio on July 10 2017 said:
    Renewable energy tyrants will destroy thousands of jobs and reduce energy efficiency to "feel better" about themselves and brag of their moral superiority to their friends over cocktails.

    51,999 deaths could be prevented...a "solid enough" number according to the researchers...that represents 0,01% of the US population...a percentage so small it should serve as the basis for a complete overhaul of the economy...the brilliance of the left's reality-based logic.

    How will those wind farms and wind turbines provide energy to 300 million Americans with electric cars? I'm very intrigued as basic issues such as intermittent supply and battery storage and replacement plus maintenance costs suffice to cast doubt over the mass-scale implementation of these "highly reliable energy sources".

    Will common sense over reign supreme or have the ideologues won the war?
  • bill on August 11 2017 said:
    51,999 more Liberal Progressive Democrats per yer, burn the cola baby!!!!

Leave a comment

Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News