unplugging asean

8/6/2019 Unplugging ASEAN

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/unplugging-asean 1/14

globalprosperity

CONSUMERS ALLIANCE FOR

January 2011

Unplugging ASEAN An Inside Look at Greenpeace and WWF’s Anti-Coal Scheme

to Freeze Southeast Asia’s Energy and Economic Future



2

Executive Summary

The Campaign Against Coal

in ASEAN CountriesGreenpeace, WWF and other non-governmental organiza-

tions (NGOs) have reopened their global campaigns

against coal in Southeast Asia. They are seeking to reduce

the use of the world’s most affordable, most abundant and

most efficient mineral resource. By pushing an agenda that

aims to replace this resource with high-cost and highly-

inefficient renewable energy sources, Greenpeace and its

allies seek to limit the possibilities for socio-economic

transformation in the region’s developing countries.

An Unjustified Attack on ASEAN Coal

These NGOs claim that coal is the “dirtiest” of all mineralresources. They have argued that the industry is responsible

for poor worker safety conditions and even human rights

abuses. There are many forms of coal, some more clean

than others, and Asian coal is generally regarded as being

more energy efficient and thus cleaner. And one must keep

in mind that every source of energy comes with its positive

and negative aspects. As for the allegations regarding

safety and rights, these claims are commonly levied against

nations whose desire to develop is being stifled by elite

Western groups.

Greenpeace Creates More Enemies

than Friends in Southeast Asia

At the end of September 2010, Greenpeace launched its

“Turn the Tide” campaign, which sought to “promote climate

change solutions by showcasing renewable energy and

energy efficiency solutions in Thailand, Indonesia and the

Philippines — and expose how coal-fired power plants and

deforestation are worsening the global problem of climate

change.”1

The campaign proved controversial for Greenpeace,who developed more enemies in the region than friends.

The Economic Importance of

Coal to ASEAN Countries

Coal makes a significant economic contribution to the

global economy. It i s mined in more than 50 countries, and

the industry employs over seven million people worldwide,

90 percent of them in the developing world. It is a major

source of foreign hard currency earnings, as well as saving

import costs. Five of the 11 countries in Southeast Asia —

Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam

– produce coal. In 2008 these countries produced approx-imately 337 million metric tons of coal.2

Coal-Generated Electricity:

The Development Angle

The global challenge to provide adequate access to energy

is daunting. According to the International Energy Agency

(IEA), 1.4 billion people in developing countries, or 20 percent

of the world’s population, do not have access to electricity. 3

Developing countries in Asia currently account for 55 percent

of the total number of people in the world without access

to electricity. Electricity is the lifeblood of any developing

society. Burning coal is the simplest, least expensive way to

convert that mineral’s stored energy into electricity.

World Bank, ASEAN Have Committed to

Coal for Economic Development

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has

re-committed to intensifying cooperative partnerships in

the promotion and use of coal and to explore an ASEAN

agreement on coal supply and trading for regional energysecurity. The importance of coal-generated electricity also

has a health aspect. According to the World Health

Organization (WHO), each year over 1.45 million people die

prematurely due to household air pollution caused by the

inefficient combustion of biomass.4 Affordable electricity

will save lives.

The Anti-Development Angle of the

Renewables Campaign in ASEAN

In place of the use of coal, NGOs propose the widespread

use of renewable energy resources, combined with meas-

ures to slow increases in overall demand for energy in thedeveloping world. There are very specific impediments to

the transition to renewable energy resources, and a slow-

ing of the overall demand for energy in the developing

world is akin to a slowing of its economic growth.

Conversion Risks too Great for

Developing ASEAN Nations

Renewable energy sources have struggled to make an

impact in the developed world, let alone in developing

countries. In 2007, these resources, such as hydroelectric,

geothermal, solar and wind, accounted for only 15 percent

of electricity generation in the ASEAN region. As European

countries with better access to technologies and greater

financial resources fail to effectively develop electricity from

renewable sources, it is not surprising that ASEAN countries

have stuck by traditional, cost-effective methods of

generating electricity.

1 Greenpeace Philippines, “Turn the Tide and Make a Difference”, September 2010, accessed at: http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/ph/Turn-the-Tide/ .

2 International Energy Agency (IEA), “Coal and Peat Statistics”, 2008, accessed at:http://www.iea.org/stats/prodresult.asp?PRODUCT=Coal%20and%20Peat.

3 The Christian Science Monitor, Stephen Kurczy, “To meet UN Millennium Development Goals, fight energy poverty, report says”, September 21, 2010, accessed at:http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-Issues/2010/0921/To-meet-UN-Millennium-Development-Goals-fight-energy-poverty-report-says.

4 International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2010, “Energy Poverty & Health”, 2010, accessed at: http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/health.asp.



3

Various environmental NGOs continue to wage vicious

campaigns against the use of coal in Southeast Asia. Theseefforts blatantly disregard the fact that ASEAN is one of the

fastest growing economic regions in the world. In addition,

increasing energy demand is especially prevalent throughout

ASEAN countries, given the region’s economic and demo-

graphic growth. Advocating an agenda that aims to replace

one of the world’s most affordable and abundant natural

resources will severely hinder socio-economic progress

throughout ASEAN countries.

Yet ASEAN is also still a developing region with high levels

of poverty and low levels of social development. Until now,

economic growth has been based on the availability anduse of affordable and efficient energy.

ASEAN’s primary energy demand is projected to triple

between 2005 and 2030, with an average annual growth

rate of four percent. This rate is much higher than the

world’s average of 1.8 percent.5 If the region is to eradicate

poverty, much will depend on meeting this demand as

cheaply and efficiently as possible.

The developed world was built on the availability and use

of economical energy resources, primarily coal. Low-cost

energy drove the Industrial Revolution and lif ted today’s

developed countries out of poverty.

Without the ability to use affordable energy sources,

ASEAN countries will not be able to do the same. An

anti-coal vision for the ASEAN region is essentially an anti-

development vision, one that will condemn the developing

nations of Southeast Asia to limited growth and continued

high levels of poverty.

An Unjustified Attack on ASEAN Coal

Recent reports on coal in Southeast Asia by NGOs such

as Greenpeace and WWF have blamed the industry for

everything from human health issues to climate change and

deforestation. 6

NGOs claim that coal is the “dirtiest” of all mineral

resources.7 These groups have argued that the coal

industry begets human rights abuses and hazardous work-

place conditions. They have associated coal mining wi th

land and water system degradation. Environmental NGOs

claim, moreover, that coal combustion is the largestcontributor to GHG emissions; they have also blamed coal

for a host of other pollution problems.8

In a recent report condemning the Indonesian coal industry,

Greenpeace argued that coal mining was primarily respon-

sible for the destruction of forest cover in the Province of

South Sumatra, where the NGO claimed there “was little

forest cover left.”9 This claim runs counter to Indonesian

Government figures that state the province has a total land

area of 53,435 sq. km, of which almost 60 percent remains

forested.10

Anti-coal arguments made against ASEAN countries fail to

address the vital contribution the industry has to economic

growth and poverty alleviation in favor of an over dramati-

zation of environmental issues to forward a global environ-

mentalist agenda.

Additionally, these arguments fail to consider the effects

that a cessation of coal-generated power would have on

developing world economies. This anti-coal advocacy,

moreover, adds to the plight of the poor. Increased elec-

tricity prices would raise costs across the board. Health,

education, food, water and industry would all be affected,

and the people that can least afford increased expenses

would be hurt most.

Environmental groups would prefer that natural resources

5 ASEAN, “Plan of Action for Energy Cooperation 2015,” ASEAN Ministers on Energy, 2010, Vietnam, 4.

6 WWF, “Coming Clean: The Truth and Future of Coal in Asia Pacific”, 2007, Hong Kong, 6.

7 Greenpeace Southeast Asia, “Batubara Mematikan: The High Price of Cheap Coal”, 2010, Indonesia, 3.

8 WWF, “Coming Clean: The Truth and Future of Coal in Asia Pacific”, 2007, 13 – 17.

9 Greenpeace, “Batubara Mematikan: The High Price of Cheap Coal”, 2010, 8.10 Embassy of the Republic of Indonesia, Sri Lanka, accessed at:http://indonesia-colombo.lk/culture-tourism.php?article_id=1.

The Campaign Against Coal in ASEAN Countries



4

were not used by humans to further social, cultural or

economic development. They have fought to ceaseconversion of forests, for the limitation of agricultural

practices in developing countries and for the cessation of

mineral resource production.

Aside from ASEAN, even in the United States the problem

is compounded, given that Greenpeace and other NGOs

have effectively killed the domestic coal industry. From

burdensome regulations governing mining to an aggressive

agenda to restrict access to mineral rich land, these

groups have ensured that U.S. businesses – and the

workers these firms employ — must source their coal from

outside the U.S. And this coal now must come from

Southeast Asia.

It is clear that, despite these NGOs’ continued protests

that they are looking for relatively cleaner sources of

energy, their agenda is driven by one goal: to see an end

to the use of one of the world’s least expensive sources of

energy. In sum, without cost-effective energy for the power

industry and without major trade sectors such as mineral

resources, forestry and agriculture to drive economies,

however, developing countries would simply fall out of

the race. The environmentalist agenda against coal is

simply unsustainable, unrealistic and impractical.

Greenpeace Creates More Enemies

than Friends in Southeast Asia

Last fall, Greenpeace launched its misguided “Turn the Tide”

campaign, which sought to “promote climate change solu-

tions by showcasing renewable energy and energy efficiency

solutions in Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines — and

expose how coal-fired power plants and deforestation are

worsening the global problem of climate change.”11

The campaign coincided with the 10th anniversary of

Greenpeace’s official presence in Southeast Asia. During

this imprudent effort, Greenpeace’s Rainbow Warrior vessel

protested against coal operations in all three countries.12

Greenpeace’s activities were disruptive and, in some

cases, were on the verge of being illegal.

Greenpeace Crimes Against

Sovereign Nations and People

Thailand

• Greenpeace used inflatable boats to trespass in Map Ta

Phut Industrial estate waters to protest against a coal-

fired power generation plant. This il legal water-borne

exercise disrupted business in the estate; and

• Greenpeace activists also called for increased

investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy

technologies by ending all subsidies to fossil fuels,

nuclear projects and energy-intensive industries in

Thailand.13

11 Greenpeace Southeast Asia, “Turn the Tide”, accessed at:http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/news/ .

12 Ibid.

13 Greenpeace Southeast Asia, “Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior calls on Thailand to ‘Turn the Tide’”, September 17, 2010, accessed at:http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/news/Greenpeace-flagship-Rainbow-Warrior-calls-on-Thailand-to-Turn-the-Tide /.

The environmentalist agendaagainst coal is simply

unsustainable, unrealistic

and impractical.

Environmental groups would

prefer that natural resources

were not used by humans to

further social, cultural oreconomic development.



5

Indonesia

• The Rainbow Warrior , which the Consumers Alliance for

Global Prosperity (CAGP) deemed a warship, was

banned from docking in Indonesia by the Indonesian

Government, citing differences in the ship’s planned

itinerary and visa applications.

• Despite being banned from docking, Greenpeace

disrupted local villagers and workers by protesting

offshore at the Cirebon coal-fired power plant. They

also launched a new report which protested against

Indonesia’s plans to increase electricity generation from

coal to roughly 34.4 percent by 2025. Greenpeace

called on Indonesia’s government to embrace clean

energy instead.14

Philippines

• On the last leg of its “Turn the Tide” tour, Greenpeacedisrupted local villagers during an offshore protest

against plans to build a $450 million, 200 megawatt

(MW) coal-fired power plant at a proposed construction

site in Mindanao, Southern Philippines.15

The campaign proved controversial for Greenpeace, who

developed more enemies in the region than friends. Most

symbolic was the Indonesian Government’s refusal to allow

the Rainbow Warrior to dock at the main port in Jakarta,

the nation’s capital.

This denial of Greenpeace’s flagship campaign symbol wasa telling sign that the people of Indonesia had enough.

Greenpeace’s scare tactics threaten the livelihoods of

millions of Indonesians, and its use of media-savvy antics

like the Rainbow Warrior steals the chance of a better life

away from hard-working families throughout Southeast

Asia. Indonesia sent a clear message: stop blindly pushing

radical environmentalism to the detriment of our economic

development.

Perhaps Indonesia had learned from the experiences of oth-

ers. Last year, Greenpeace lobbied the British Government

to block a World Bank loan slated for South Africa intended

to assist the country in financing a range of energy initiatives,

including a new coal-fired power plant and renewable power

sources. The organization argued that the “risk to the

world’s climate from the [coal] plant’s emissions outweighs

the benefits of the secure electricity it would supply.”16

This intense lobbying effort was undertaken despite the

fact that as many as one-third of households in certain

South African provinces have no electricity supply at all.

And prior to this coordinated assault on the future of South

Africa’s reliable electricity supply, electricity prices rose al-

most 30 percent in 2008.17

South Africa’s Government rightfully chastised the group

for its lobbying. South African Finance Minister Pravin

Gordhan stated, “It is regrettable that [a] very small group

of NGOs … are putting their environmental concerns …

above the economic needs of South Afr ica and our need

to grow the economy so that all the people benefit.”18

14 Greenpeace Southeast Asia, “Greenpeace Calls for An Energy Revolution in Indonesia”, October 19, 2010, accessed at:http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/news/Quit-Coal-Indonesia/ .

15 Greenpeace Southeast Asia, “Sarangani communities all set to knock out coal”, November 20, 2010, accessed at:http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/ph/News/news-stories/sarangani-communites-all-set-to-knock-out-coal/ .

16 TheTimes, Ben Webster, “Britain may block World Bank loan for coal plant in South Africa”, April 6, 2010, London, UK, accessed at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7088297.ece.

17 MarketWatch , Polya Lesova, “South Africa raises electricit y prices by 27.5%: In response to crippling power shortages, regulator allows price hikes”, June 18, 2008, accessed at:http://www.marketwatch.com/story/south-africa-raises-electric-ity-prices-by-275.

18 TheTimes, Ibid.

Greenpeace’s scare tactics

threaten the livelihoods of

millions of Indonesians, and its

use of media-savvy antics like

the Rainbow Warrior steals the

chance of a better life...



6

19 World Coal Institute, “Sustainable Entrepreneurship, the Way Forward for the Coal Industry”, 2002, London, UK.

20 World Coal Institute, “The Role of Coal as an Energy Source”, 2004, London, UK, 7.

21 International Energy Agency (IEA), “Coal Data for Southeast Asia 2008”, 2008, accessed at:http://www.iea.org/stats/coaldata.asp?COUNTRY_CODE=31.

22 Ibid.

23 World Coal Association, “Coal and Electricity”, 2010, accessed at:http://www.worldcoal.org/coal/uses-of-coal/coal-electricity/ .

24 World Coal Association, “Coal & Steel Statistics”, 2010, accessed at:http://www.worldcoal.org/resources/coal-statistics/coal-steel-statistics/ .

25 ASEAN Statistics, “Top Ten ASEAN Trade Commodity Groups 2009”, 2009, accessed at:http://www.aseansec.org/stat/Table22.pdf .

26 Bloomberg, Yoga Rusmana, “Indonesia’s Coal Benchmark Gains Most Since February”, December 08, 2010, accessed at:http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-12-08/indonesia-s-coal-benchmark-gains-most-since-february.html.

27 ASEAN, “ASEAN Community in Figures 2009”, 2009, ASEAN, Jakarta, Indonesia, 29.

28 Ibid., 57.

Coal makes a substantial contribution to the global econ-

omy. It is mined in more than 50 countries worldwide, and

the industry employs more than seven million people; 90percent of these workers reside in the developing world.19

A large portion of the coal industry in the developing world

is export oriented. It is thus a major source of foreign

currency earnings and acts as a saver of import costs,

as well.

Overall, coal generates more than $7 billion per year in

export revenues for developing countries and saves them

$60 billion or more in energy import costs every year.20

Five of the 11 countries in the Southeast Asian region —

Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and

Vietnam — produce coal. Between 1996 and 2003, coal

production in the region almost doubled, increasing from

approximately 83 million metric tons to over 155 millionmetric tons. By 2008 this figure had doubled again, with

the region producing some 337 million metric tons of coal

that year.21

Indonesia dominates regional coal output, accounting for

over 80 percent of production. Vietnam and Thailand are

the next largest coal producers, with production shares of

11 and five percent respectively. The Philippines accounted

for an additional one percent of regional coal production.22

Outside of export income and tax revenue, coal mining

generates economic development at a local level. Large-

scale mines are often the biggest source of income for

rural communities in developing countries. They provide

wages for local employees and economic and social

infrastructure for local communities.

For consumers, coal offers excellent value. In most circum-

stances, it is cheaper per energy unit than other fuels, and,

as a result, has remained the fuel of choice for electricity

generation on a global basis. Coal produces 41 percent of

the world’s electricity,23 which is twice the share of its

nearest competitors, natural gas and hydroelectric. Coal

also is an essential element in 68 percent of the world’s

steel production, where it is used as fuel for the process of

extracting iron from iron ore.24

The Numbers: The Importance of

Coal and Minerals to ASEAN Exporters

ASEAN Total

In 2009, minerals and mineral products represented the

second most traded group of commodities for the ASEAN

region. Their trade represented $240 billion, or 16 percent

of total ASEAN trade. Minerals had an export value of

some $112 billion, or close to 14 percent of total ASEAN

exports.25 In fact, ASEAN member Indonesia is the world’s

second largest coal exporter, behind only Australia.26

In 2008, coal represented the 11th most exported trade

commodity in the ASEAN region and the second most

exported energy commodity behind petroleum. It com-

manded 1.3 percent of total ASEAN exports that year and

had a total export value of over $11 billion.27

Throughout ASEAN countries, the mining industry supplies

jobs to between one and five percent of the employed

population.28

The Economic Importance of Coal to ASEAN Countries

Outside of export income and

tax revenue, coal mining gener-ates economic development

at a local level.



7

Indonesia

Indonesia is currently the world’s leading exporter of thermal

coal. In 2007, the country shipped 165 million metric tons,

or 30 percent of the global seaborne thermal coal supply.29

Indigenous coal reserves have played an important role in

Indonesia’s economy as a source of energy, industrial raw

material and foreign exchange. In 2007, mining and quar-rying contributed to 11.2 percent of national gross domes-

tic product (GDP). In 2008, mineral exports including coal

contributed the second largest share (18.8 percent) of

Indonesia’s total exports of more than $136 billion, behind

only oil and natural gas.

Overall, tax and non-tax revenue from oil, natural gas and

minerals accounted for 27.2 percent of the Indonesian

Government’s national budget in 2008.

Vietnam

In 2003 mining and quarrying accounted for a 9.4 percent

share of GDP and the sector employed around one percent

of the workforce. Coal is one of the main mineral exports,

along with petroleum. The country also mines antimony,

bauxite, chromium, gold, iron, natural phosphates, tin and

zinc.30

After petroleum, coal is the most important source of com-

mercial energy, meeting approximately 25 percent of the

country’s energy demand.

Thailand Thailand produces more than 40 types of minerals, with an

annual value of about $740 mill ion. More than 80 percent

of these minerals are consumed domestically.

In 2004, estimated coal consumption of 30.4 million short

tons exceeded coal production of 22.1 million short tons.

Philippines

The U.S. Department of State estimates that the Philippines

possess untapped mineral wealth of $840 billion.31 Atvarious times in i ts history, mining has contributed to as

much as 30 percent of the country’s GDP. In 2004, the

country derived 12 percent of its energy from coal, while

mining employed four percent of the labor force and used

about 9,000 hectares of the country’s total land area.

The Advantages of Coal Worldwide

The general ubiquity of coal globally makes it one of the

most cost-effective energy sources available to mankind.

Inexpensive energy is the life-blood of any economy, from

the least developed to the most advanced.

When the supply and production of such an inexpensive

energy resource is limited, the cost for that resource

increases markedly. This impacts not only the economies

where coal is extracted, but also everyone who demands

the energy coal provides to operate their businesses, as

well as the consumers who rely on readily accessible and

inexpensive goods and services, namely electricity.

It is estimated that more than 847 billion metric tons of

proven coal reserves still exist worldwide, enough to

provide the world with affordable and readily accessibleenergy for the next 119 years at current rates of produc-

tion.32 Thus, in the cyclical relationship of global prosperity,

there are few resources more important than coal.

29 Donald Ewart, Jr., Robert Vaughn, “Indonesian Coal”, Marston & Marston Inc, World Coal Asia Special, 2009, 1.

30 U.S. Library of Congress, “Country profiles: Vietnam”, Federal Research Division, 2005, 10.

31 U.S. Library of Congress, “Country profiles: Philippines”, Federal Research Division, 2006, 13.

32 World Coal Association, “Where is Coal Found?”, 2010, accessed at:http://www.worldcoal.org/coal/where-is-coal-found/ .

Throughout ASEAN countries,

the mining industry supplies

jobs to between one and fivepercent of the employed

population.



8

Coal-Generated Electricity: The Development Angle

The global challenge to provide adequate access to

energy is daunting.

According to the IEA, around 2.4 billion people rely on

primitive biomass fuels for cooking and heating.33 What is

more, developing countries in Asia currently account for

more than half of the total world’s population that lacks

access to electrici ty.34 In Indonesia alone, some 81 million

people lack electricity. In the Philippines and Cambodia,

the figure is 9.5 and 11 million respectively. 35

In the absence of radical new policies, one billion people

may still lack access to electricity in 30 years time and the

number of people relying on biomass for cooking and

heating will actually rise to 2.6 billion.36

The need for affordable energy is particularly acute for the

poorest groups who spend a high proportion of their

incomes on heating and lighting.

In its recent Energy Strategy Approach Paper , the World

Bank states that, “Wi thout energy, economies cannot grow

and poverty cannot be reduced.”37 Electricity is the lifeblood

of any developing society. Burning coal is the simplest,

least expensive way to convert that mineral’s storedenergy into electricity.

If poor people have to wait for the development of renewable

substitutes for coal, they may have to wait a very long time.

World Bank, ASEAN Have Committed to Coal

for Economic Development

The World Bank and ASEAN have recognized coal’s bene-

fits to economic development.

In a recent justification of their continued financial support

for the development of coal-generated power plants, the

World Bank noted that while renewable energies offered

great potential, they were a long way off supplying the

base-load required in many developing countries.38

ASEAN has re-committed itself to intensifying cooperative

partnerships toward the promotion and use of coal. In

addition, member countries are currently exploring an

agreement on coal supply and trading to promote integral

energy security throughout the region.39

For many years, coal has been a crucial ingredient in

ASEAN planning for economic development. In the ASEAN

Plan of Action for Energy Cooperation 1999 – 2004, the

group of countries noted that, “Coal is an energy resource

crucial for the region’s economic development. Besides itsabundance and wide distribution, coal... is one of the

cheapest fossil fuels.”40

ASEAN coal consumption increased from 50 million to

80 million metric tons between 1996 and 2002. By 2008,

this figure had doubled again to over 150 million metric

tons.41 Consumption in Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia,

Myanmar, the Philippines and Singapore at least doubled

or tripled during this time.

In Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and

Vietnam, coal is used extensively for power generation. It is

a particularly important ingredient in the energy mixes of

33 World Coal Institute, “The Role of Coal as an Energy Source”, 2004, London, UK, 7.

34 International Energy Agency (IEA), “Access to Electricity”, World Energy Outlook, 2010, accessed at:http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/electricity.asp.

35 International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2010, “The Electricity Access Database”, 2010, accessed at: http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/database_electricty10/electricity_database_web_2010.htm.

36 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), “Energy and Poverty”, IAEA Bulletin, September 2002, accessed at: http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull442/44204002429.pdf .

37 World Bank, Energy Strategy Approach Paper , 2009, World Bank, Washington, DC, USA, 1.

38 World Bank, Justin Lin, “World Bank Argument for Coal in Developing Countries”, March 02, 2009, accessed at:http://blogs.worldbank.org/climatechange/why-coal.

39 ASEAN, “Joint Media Statement of the 28th ASEAN Ministers on Energy Meeting (AMEM)”, July 23, 2010, Da Lat, Vietnam, accessed at:http://www.aseansec.org/24940.htm.

40 ASEAN, “ASEAN Plan of Action on Energy Cooperation”, 2004, ASEAN, Jakarta, Indonesia, 19 – 20.

41 International Energy Agency (IEA), “Coal Data for Southeast Asia 2008”, 2008 accessed at:http://www.iea.org/stats/coaldata.asp?COUNTRY_CODE=31.



9

Indonesia and the Philippines, with close to one third of the

electricity in these countries generated by coal-fired power

plants.

In Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, coal fired power ac-

counts for 10 to 15 percent of total electricity generation.42

Overall, coal accounted for 28 percent of electricity gener-

ation in the ASEAN region in 2009.43

ASEAN has predicted that both electricity and coal will

have the highest rates of growth in annual demand among

energy resources, as the region continues its economic

development towards 2030.44

Globally, the IEA predicts that coal use for power generation

will rise approximately 60 percent in the next three

decades.45

Across ASEAN, coal provides an affordable, safe and

increasingly clean fuel for power generation, where there is

often no alternative route to achieving widespread access

to electricity in a reasonable time frame.

Health Benefits of Affordable Electricity

The importance of coal-generated electricity also has a

health aspect.

Where electricity is not available, people use traditional

devices for cooking with biomass inside the home, includ-

ing open fires and mud stoves. With no operating chimneys,

the pollutants emitted by these devices are often many

times more lethal than typical outdoor levels.

Today, the number of premature deaths from household air

pollution is greater than the number of premature deaths

from malaria or tuberculosis.46 In particular, the WHO has

calculated that more 1.5 million people die from inhaling

the smoke of poor biomass combustion each year. This is

more than 4,000 people per day.47

42 Donald Ewart, Jr., “Southeast Asian Coal Developments”, 2004, Marston & Marston Inc, World Coal, 2.

43 International Energy Agency (IEA), Samantha Olz, Milou Beerepoot, “Working Paper: Deploying Renewables in Southeast Asia”, 2010, 26.

44 ASEAN Centre for Energy, “Presentation: Status of Renewable Energy i n ASEAN Region”, November 18, 2009, IEA-RETD Workshop on Cross-Regional Dialogue on Renewable Energy Visions and Initiatives, Tokyo, Japan.

45 International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2002, OECD/IEA, 2002, Paris, France.

46 International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2010, “Energy Poverty & Health”, 2010, accessed at: http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/health.asp.

47 Ibid.

The need for affordable energyis particularly acute for the

poorest groups who spend a

high proportion of their

incomes on heating and lighting.



10

The Anti-Development Angle of the

Renewables Campaign in ASEAN

Instead of coal, NGOs propose the widespread use of

renewable energy sources combined with measures to

slow increases in the overall demand for energy in the

developing world.48

There are very specific impediments to the transition to

renewable energy sources, as recognized by the World

Bank and other development institutions. These mostly

relate to the financial cost of transition to renewable energy

technologies, the appropriateness of these resource devel-

opments to local environments and the inability of renew-

able resources to deliver even base-load levels of power.

Second, less energy demand in the developing world isakin to a slowing of the economic growth of the develop-

ing world. Any measures to decrease or slow the demand

for energy would no doubt affect the growth of national

economies throughout the ASEAN region.

The NGO alternative to the use of coal in energy develop-

ment is unrealistic. Solutions proposed by these environ-

mentalist groups fail to take into account immediate

economic consequences and seek to obstruct economic

development in the countries that need it most.

In its blueprint for the development of the global energy

sector, Greenpeace proposes that by 2020 some 38 percent

of the world’s electricity needs could be supplied by

renewable sources.49 By 2050, Greenpeace believes that

over 85 percent of the world’s energy consumption couldcome from renewable resources.50

These figures are unrealistic. As the World Bank has noted,

“Renewable energy offers great potential, but it alone can-

not, by any stretch of the imagination, provide all the elec-

tricity that is needed.”51

Conversion Risks too Great for

Developing ASEAN Nations

Throughout the developed world, renewable energy

sources thus far have failed to make a meaningful impact

on society. Their impact on the developing world, more-

over, has been even more minuscule.

In 2007, renewable energies such as hydroelectric,

geothermal, solar and wind accounted for only 15 percent

of electricity generation in the ASEAN region.52

In Malaysia and Thailand, renewable energy sources only

contribute between 5 and 8 percent of electricity genera-

tion. Historical data for Singapore shows no officially re-

ported power generation from renewable energy

sources.53

ASEAN countries have highlighted lack of infrastructure,

lack of financial support from banks, the high costs associ-

ated with small scale production and grid connection,

higher electricity prices and the complexity of necessarypermits and regulatory systems as key non-economic bar-

riers to the wholesale adoption of renewable power gener-

ation.54

Market-related barriers to renewable development in

ASEAN include high transaction costs, higher taxes, invisi-

bility of full costs, missing market infrastructure, restricted

access to technology and lack of market competition.55

48 Greenpeace, “Greenpeace Energy Revolution”, 2010, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 4.

49 Ibid.

50 Ibid.

51 World Bank, Justin Lin, “World Bank Argument for Coal in Developing Countries”, March 02, 2009, accessed at:http://blogs.worldbank.org/climatechange/why-coal.

52 International Energy Agency (IEA), Samantha Olz, Milou Beerepoot, “Working Paper: Deploying Renewables in Southeast Asia”, 2010, 26.

53 Ibid., 29.

54 Ibid., 104.

55 Ibid., 106.

Any measures to decrease or

slow the demand for energy

would no doubt affect the

growth of national economies

throughout the ASEAN region.



11

The anti-coal campaigns being waged by radical organizations such as Greenpeace and

WWF, along with their pushing for the wholesale adoption of renewable energy development

and power generation, are disadvantageous to the developing world generally and ASEAN

countries specifically. By insisting that developing countries adopt a whole range of economic

and non-economic measures at a time when they can least afford to do so, these

environmentalist groups are proving once again that they will shamelessly put their biased

worldview above the needs of the world’s most vulnerable.

It is no wonder ASEAN remains committed to coal and cheap electricity generation. ASEAN

countries need affordable and abundant energy to not only improve the social welfare of their

citizens, but also drive economic development in the region. The production and consumption

of coal are some of the best solutions to meet these challenges. It is disingenuous for

Greenpeace, WWF and other environmental groups to ignore this reality. Thankfully, ASEAN

countries know better.

Conclusion



12

Reference List

ASEAN, “ASEAN Community in Figures 2009”, 2009, ASEAN, Jakarta, Indonesia.

ASEAN, “ASEAN Plan of Action on Energy Cooperation”, 2004, ASEAN, Jakarta, Indonesia, 19 – 20.

ASEAN, “Joint Media Statement of the 28th ASEAN Ministers on Energy Meeting (AMEM)”, July 23, 2010, Da Lat, Vietnam, accessed at: http://www.aseansec.org/24940.htm.

ASEAN, “Plan of Action for Energy Cooperation 2015,” ASEAN Ministers on Energy, 2010, Vietnam.

ASEAN Centre for Energy, “Presentation: Status of Renewable Energy in ASEAN Region”, November 18, 2009, IEA-RETD Workshop on Cross-Regional Dialogue on Renewable Energy Visions and Initiatives, Tokyo, Japan.

ASEAN Statistics, “Top Ten ASEAN Trade Commodity Groups 2009”, 2009, accessed at: http://www.aseansec.org/stat/Table22.pdf .

Bloomberg, Yoga Rusmana, “Indonesia’s Coal Benchmark Gains Most Since February”, December 08, 2010, accessed at: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-12-08/indonesia-s-coal-benchmark-gains-most-since-february.html.

Embassy of the Republic of Indonesia, Sri Lanka, accessed at: http://indonesia-colombo.lk/culture-tourism.php?article_id=1.

Donald Ewart, Jr., “Southeast Asian Coal Developments”, 2004, Marston & Marston Inc, World Coal.

Donald Ewart, Jr., Robert Vaughan, “Indonesian Coal”, 2009, Marston & Marston Inc, World Coal Asia Special.

Embassy of the Republic of Indonesia, Sri Lanka, accessed at: http://indonesia-colombo.lk/culture-tourism.php?article_id=1.

Greenpeace, “Batubara Mematikan: The High Price of Cheap Coal”, 2010, Greenpeace Southeast Asia, Indonesia.

Greenpeace, “Greenpeace Energy Revolution”, 2010, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Greenpeace Philippines, “Turn the Tide and Make a Difference”, September 2010, accessed at: http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/ph/Turn-the-Tide/ .

Greenpeace Southeast Asia, “Batubara Mematikan: The High Price of Cheap Coal”, 2010, Indonesia.

Greenpeace Southeast Asia, “Greenpeace Calls for An Energy Revolution in Indonesia”, October 19, 2010, accessed at: http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/news/Quit-Coal-Indonesia/ .

Greenpeace Southeast Asia, “Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior calls on Thailand to ‘Turn the Tide’”, September 17, 2010, accessed at:http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/news/Greenpeace-flagship-Rainbow-Warrior-calls-on-Thailand-to-Turn-the-Tide/ .

Greenpeace Southeast Asia, “Turn the Tide”, accessed at: http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/news/ .

Greenpeace Southeast Asia (2010), “Sarangani communities all set to knock out coal,” 20 November, accessed at: http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/ph/News/news-stories/sarangani-communites-all-set-to-knock-out-coal/ .

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), “Energy and Poverty”, IAEA Bulletin, September 2002, accessed at:http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull442/44204002429.pdf .

International Energy Agency (IEA), “Access to Electricity”, World Energy Outlook, 2010, accessed at: http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/electricity.asp.



13

International Energy Agency (IEA), “Coal Data for Southeast Asia 2008”, 2008, accessed at: http://www.iea.org/stats/coaldata.asp?COUNTRY_CODE=31.

International Energy Agency (IEA), “Coal and Peat Statistics”, 2008, accessed at: http://www.iea.org/stats/prodresult.asp?PRODUCT=Coal%20and%20Peat.

International Energy Agency (IEA), Samantha Olz, Milou Beerepoot, “Working Paper: Deploying Renewables in Southeast Asia”, 2010.

International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2010, “Energy Poverty & Health”, 2010, accessed at: http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/health.asp.

International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2010, “The Electricity Access Database”, 2010, accessed at: http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/database_electricty10/electric-ity_database_web_2010.htm.

International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2002, OECD/IEA, 2002, Paris, France.

MarketWatch , Polya Lesova, “South Africa raises electricity prices by 27.5%: In response to crippling power shortages, regulator allows price hikes”, June 18, 2008, accessed at:http://www.marketwatch.com/story/south-africa-raises-electricity-prices-by-275.

The Christian Science Monitor, Stephen Kurczy, “To meet UN Mi llennium Development Goals, fight energy poverty, report says”, September 21, 2010, accessed at: http://www.csmoni-tor.com/World/Global-Issues/2010/0921/To-meet-UN-Millennium-Development-Goals-fight-energy-poverty-report-says.

The Times, Ben Webster, “Britain may block World Bank loan for coal plant in South Africa”, April 6, 2010, London, UK, accessed at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environ-ment/article7088297.ece.

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), International Energy Outlook 2010, 2010, Washington, DC, USA.

U.S. Library of Congress, “Country profiles: Vietnam”, Federal Research Division, 2005.

U.S. Library of Congress, “Country profiles: Thailand”, Federal Research Division, 2007.

U.S. Library of Congress, “Country profiles: Philippines”, Federal Research Division, 2006.

World Bank, Energy Strategy Approach Paper , 2009, World Bank, Washington, DC, USA.

World Bank, Justin Lin, “World Bank Argument for Coal in Developing Countries,” World Bank Blog, Climate Change, March 02, 2009, accessed at: http://blogs.worldbank.org/climate-change/why-coal.

World Coal Association, “Coal and Electricity”, 2010, accessed at: http://www.worldcoal.org/coal/uses-of-coal/coal-electricity/ .

World Coal Association, “Coal & Steel Statistics”, 2010, accessed at: http://www.worldcoal.org/resources/coal-statistics/coal-steel-statistics/ .

World Coal Association, “Where is Coal Found?”, 2010, accessed at: http://www.worldcoal.org/coal/where-is-coal-found/ .

World Coal Institute, “Sustainable Entrepreneurship, the Way Forward for the Coal Industry”, 2002, London, UK.

World Coal Institute, “The Role of Coal as an Energy Source”, 2004, London, UK.

WWF, “Coming Clean: The Truth and Future of Coal in Asia Pacific”, 2007, Hong Kong.



The Consumers Alliance for Global Prosperity (CAGP) is an

action-oriented advocacy group that promotes free trade,

economic growth and pro-consumer policies across the

world. We are passionate in the defense of individual rights

and the interests of consumers. CAGP is a project of the

Institute for Liberty, a non-profit advocacy organization

dedicated to preserving individual rights, protecting entre-

preneurship worldwide, and promoting prosperity both in

America and abroad.

The Consumers Alliance for Global Prosperity (CAGP)

1250 Connecticut Avenue, NW

Suite 200

Washington, DC 20036

USA

www.consumerprosperity.com

www.twitter.com/cagprosperity

www.facebook.com/pulpwars

unplugging asean

Documents