Caribbean Petroleum Update : March 2014 | Call: 1-876-927-1779 page

C A R I B B E A N E N E R G Y I N F O R M A T I O N S Y S T E M ( C E I S )

CARIBBEAN PETROLEUM UPDATE is a monthly Bulletin which highlights petroleum issues affecting or relevant to the Caribbean,

international developments that may affect the region’s way of life and movements in oil prices and retail prices for fuel regionally.

CARIBBEAN ENERGY INFORMATION SYSTEM (CEIS)

MARCH 2014 ISSUE

To access CEIS website

continued on page 2/

CONTACT US

Caribbean Energy Information System, Scientific Research Council,

Hope Gardens, Kingston 6, Jamaica 1-876-927-1779 (Telephone)

1-876-977-1840 (Fax) ceis@src-jamaica.org www.ceis-caribenergy.org

Coal is considered to be the dirtiest of all fossil fuels, yet it

generates nearly 40% of the world’s electricity. When com-

pared to the other fossil fuels it is the cheapest form, but its

contribution to carbon emissions is nothing far from costly.

The largest source of carbon emissions is coal fired plants.

This puts coal among the greatest threats facing climate

change. To curb global pollution to the levels needed to

minimize the risk of catastrophic global warming, we must end

our dependence on coal fired plants especially in major

contributing countries like the United States and China (the

largest consumer of coal in the world).

On the Caribbean scene, the Dominican Republic has plans in

the pipeline for the construction of two coal fired plants of

384.9MW each that will burn ‘clean’ pulverized coal.

Similarly, recent reports have surfaced highlighting the Jamai-

can government’s endorsement of using coal generated elec-

tricity to power it logistics hub that is to be constructed on

parts of the Goat Islands. Emphasis was placed on the utiliza-

tion of “clean coal” but is there such a product? Apart from the

obvious danger to climate change, coal poses a lot of health

problems. The by-products of coal include carcinogens that

can cause cancer, mercury, radioactive materials and obvious

externalities such as black smoke.

However, given the high cost of electricity, having a coal-

fired generating plant will provide lower electricity costs to the

logistics hub, but at what expense? Can the use of clean coal

be economical and environmentally practical?

Image Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

page 2 Call: 1-876-927-1779 | Caribbean Petroleum Update : March 2014

C A R I B B E A N E N E R G Y I N F O R M A T I O N S Y S T E M ( C E I S )

Reducing Harmful Emissions by Using Clean

Coal Technologies……….continued from page 1

In this issue of the Petroleum Update

we seek to explore clean coal

technologies and methods and associ-

ated costs that may arise as a conse-

quence.

Firstly, it is quite interesting to know

that there is “clean coal”. Coal is

usually associated with black smoke

and pollution. When the term clean

coal is used it is not the coal itself that

is clean, but it is the technology.

Clean coal technology includes a

variety of technologies to help reduce

harmful emissions and improve

efficiency of coal burning power plants.

Clean coal technology seeks to reduce

emissions of sulphur dioxide and

nitrogen oxide into the atmosphere.

Coal is mostly used in power genera-

tion and composed primarily of carbons

and hydrocarbons. Utility companies

and businesses with coal power plants

burn coal to make the steam that turns

turbines and generates electricity.

When coal is burnt carbon dioxide is

released into the atmosphere. Some

clean coal technologies purify the coal

before it burns; one such method is

called coal washing. This method

removes unwanted minerals by mixing

crushed coal with a liquid and allowing

the impurities to separate and settle.

Another method seeks to minimize

emissions of sulphur dioxide and par-

ticulates. Gas Desulfurization systems

remove sulfur dioxide, a major cause of

acid rain, by spraying flue gas with

limestone and water.

In addition to emitting sulphur dioxide,

coal fired plants also emit nitrogen

oxide. According to the United States

Environmental Protection Agency,

scientific evidence links short-term

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2 ) exposures

with adverse respiratory effects includ-

ing airway inflammation in healthy

people and increased respiratory

symptoms in people with asthma. In an

attempt to reduce emissions of

nitrogen oxide, power plants use what

is called Low Nitrogen Oxide (NOx)

burners to reduce the creation of

nitrogen oxides by restricting oxygen

and manipulating the combustion proc-

ess. Electrostatic precipitators remove

particulates by charging particles with

an electrical field and then capturing

them on collection plates.

An additional method used to mitigate

against the harmful emissions by coal

fired power plants is known as

Gasification. This method avoids burn-

ing coal altogether. The coal is com-

bined with steam and oxygen that

forces carbon molecules to separate.

With this combined method, the result

is what is called syngas which is a

mixture of carbon monoxide and hydro-

gen. This mixture is then cleaned and

burned in a gas turbine to make

electricity. The heat energy from the

gas turbine can also power a steam

turbine.

Clean coal technology seeks to reduce

harsh environmental effects by using

multiple technologies to clean coal and

contain its emissions, however one

cannot ignore the hard ‘coal’ facts that

coal fired plants are not suitable for a

renewable energy future despite these

clean coal technologies. Coal not only

contributes to the dangerous conse-

quence of climate change but people

Figure 1: An Overview of a Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle Process

(A Clean Coal Method)

Image Source:climatetechwiki.org

Caribbean Petroleum Update : March 2014 | Call: 1-876-927-1779 page 3

C A R I B B E A N E N E R G Y I N F O R M A T I O N S Y S T E M ( C E I S )

are becoming more knowledgeable about the health risks

that burning coal presents. In the short term coal does prove

economical; it is cheap and plentiful, however from an en-

vironmental standpoint it is detrimental. Additionally, in the

long term the economical health of a country may be com-

promised as a result of environmental deterioration caused

from burning coal.

With a renewed focus on a clean energy future and active

energy plans to achieve this, it maybe a step back into the

past if coal fired power plants were to be used to power the

logistics hub. The nature of the logistic hub would require

24 hour power in order to facilitate transport of goods and

services to and from ports in other countries. A more renew-

able approach should be sought for power generation for the

logistics hub. Although it may be impossible to power the

logistics hub totally by renewable sources of energy, priority

should be given to the maximum use of combined renewable

energy sources before considering coal as a primary option.

The amount of fuel used to generate electricity depends on

the efficiency or heat rate of generators used in power

plants and the heat content of the fuel. Using data from the

EIA, and accounting for power plant heat rate and heat con-

tent for coal and petroleum, assuming that the Logistics Hub

would need 100 MWh (for the purpose of simplification) of

electricity per year, therefore the hub would need 54.288

tonnes of coal each year. Using the average price of coal for

March 2014 of US$44.68, to import this amount of coal

would cost US$2425.62.

Similarly, to generate 100 MWh of energy using petroleum,

the hub would require 187.62 barrels of oil. At a rate of

US$100.76, this would cost US$18,904.59 to run the hub for

a year using oil.

Using this example shows that coal is the cheaper of the two

fuel sources highlighted. However, whilst coal might be

cheap and plentiful when compared to other fuels, if the

logistics hub is to be powered by ‘clean coal’ the product

would become expensive when compared to other fuels.

Using clean coal technologies involve scrubbing mechanism

that will have to be factored into the price of coal and the

increased amount of coal that would be needed as a result of

the application of clean technology. Additionally, the main-

tenance of the plant, cost of raw materials and associated

environmental and social costs would have to be taken into

consideration.

Conclusion

Based on the negative environmental impacts and the

numerous health risks the burning of coal poses, using coal

fired would not be an ideal alternative energy source for the

logistics hub. However, in the short term because coal is

plentiful and cheap it could be considered as a viable

alternative, but one should bear in mind that due to the

various processes that coal undergoes to minimize the level

of harmful emissions from burning, this could increase the

price of coal relative to other fuels such as natural gas and

so clean coal may not even become an option.

Table 1: Cost per unit of Coal and Petroleum Energy Sources as at March 2014

Image Source: www.ezwebsite.org

page 4 Call: 1-876-927-1779 | Caribbean Petroleum Update : March 2014

C A R I B B E A N E N E R G Y I N F O R M A T I O N S Y S T E M ( C E I S )

PP E T R O L E U ME T R O L E U M NN E W SE W S & H& H A P P E N I N G SA P P E N I N G S

Students Inspired by Sol Careers Showcase [...]...Read

more

Solar Powered Rankin Cycle Engine [...]...Read more

SSE Freezes Energy Prices Until 2016 In Sector’s Long-

est Ever Unconditional Price Promise [...]...Read more

Barbados government to discontinue public service vehi-

cles fuel subsidy [...]...Read more

Paulwell Finalising New Sale Strategy For 700MHz

Spectrum [...]...Read more

MaruEnergy JPSCO Cuts Share Capital [...]...Read more

Grand Welcome for Sol Petroleum Bahamas Limited

[...]...Read more

189 Apply For Net Billing [...]...Read more

$.3m diesel bust in St Helena [...]...Read more

Oil prices edge higher [...]...Read more

Trinidad: Natural Gas, Oil Production Drive Energy Sec-

tor Growth [...]...Read more

Grand Welcome for Sol Petroleum Bermuda Limited

[...]...Read more

‘Bahamians Not Being Kept Informed Over Bec Fu-

ture’ [...]...Read more

6,500 Motorists Still To Pay Motor Vehicle Tax

[...]...Read more

EWI’s delay has ‘serious implications’ for 360MW

due diligence process, says OCG [...]...Read more

Fuel Quality Needs Regulating [...]...Read more

Puerto Rico Electric Downgrade Brings Price Up-

grade: Muni Credit [...]...Read more

Tantalus, Itron to install meter systems for Virgin Is-

lands AMI project [...]...Read more

Democratic Nation Alliance (DNA) press release –

Silence, Secrets and the Sale of BEC [...]...Read

more

No gas strike today [...]...Read more

New Petroleum Haulage Rates Deadline Today

[...]...Read more

Energy Minister: T&T will keep putting out

acreages for bid [...]...Read more

Caribbean Petroleum Update : March 2014 | Call: 1-876-927-1779 page 5

C A R I B B E A N E N E R G Y I N F O R M A T I O N S Y S T E M ( C E I S )

REGULAR UNLEADED GASOLINE AVERAGE PRICES AT THE PUMP

MARCH 2014 MARCH 2014

NOTE: *US Gallon = 3.785 L *Imperial Gallon = 4.546 L *As at November 1, 2009 MTBE was phased out from all gasoline blends in Jamaica and replaced with 10% Ethanol.

Retail prices for Regular Unleaded Gasoline in the fourteen Caribbean countries reviewed at the end of March 2014

showed increases in prices for six countries namely; Bahamas, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Jamaica and St. Vincent

and the Grenadines. Prices in the remaining eight countries remained stable. Price increases ranged between 0.4% and

3%, with Grenada experiencing the highest increase of 2.6%.

See prices for all products See prices for all products See prices for all products

at at at www.cippet.orgwww.cippet.orgwww.cippet.org

Regular Unleaded Gasoline: Average Retail Price (US$/Litre) 2014

COUNTRIES JAN FEB MAR 3 Mths

AVG

ANTIGUA/ BARBUDA 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23

BAHAMAS [91 OCT] 1.36 1.37 1.38 1.37

BARBADOS 1.54 1.57 1.59 1.57

BELIZE [87 OCT] 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42

B.V.I [87 OCT] 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21

DOMINICA 1.15 1.16 1.18 1.16

GRENADA (95 OCT) 1.26 1.25 1.28 1.27

JAMAICA 87 Octane[E10] 1.23 1.24 1.26 1.25

MONTSERRAT 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25

ST. LUCIA 1.32 1.31 1.31 1.31

ST. VINCENT/ GRENADINES 1.08 1.07 1.09 1.08

SURINAME [95 OCT] 1.39 1.37 1.37 1.37

TRINIDAD/ TOBAGO [92 OCT] 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42

TURKS/ CAICOS 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52

page 6 Call: 1-876-927-1779 | Caribbean Petroleum Update : March 2014

C A R I B B E A N E N E R G Y I N F O R M A T I O N S Y S T E M ( C E I S )

Caribbean Energy Information System (CEIS)

primary report of historical annual petroleum energy

statistics provided for 18 Caribbean Countries.

Included are data on total energy production,

consumption, and trade; overviews of petroleum,

natural gas, electricity, as well as financial and

environmental indicators for over twenty years.

Featured Offers:Featured Offers:Featured Offers:

Subscriptions If you wish to subscribe (free of charge) or cancel your

subscription to the CARIBBEAN PETROLEUM UPDATE, send us an email at:

ceis@src-jamaica.org

See CEIS FOR MORE: www.ceis-caribenergy.org

Join us through CIPORE on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn

and Subscribe to our RSS Feed

International Crude Oil Prices ended the three

month period January to March 2014 with an

average price per bbl of US$100.76. Prices in

March 2014 was 6.6% above January 2014

average and 0.2% lower than the average

price in February 2014. The highest weekly

price seen in March for the commodity was

US$103.07/bbl-reflected in week one while

the lowest price for the three month period

was in January (US$92.42/bbl). New pipeline

capacity from the Midwest to the Gulf Coast

helped to reduce inventories in the United

States.