IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change via the implementation of underground coal gasification


  • J. McInnis

    () (Research Council of Canada)

  • S. Singh

    () (Research Council of Canada)

  • I. Huq

    () (Research Council of Canada)


Abstract Coal is the most abundant hydrocarbon energy source in the world. It also produces a very high volume of greenhouse gases using the current production technology. It is more difficult to handle and transport than crude oil and natural gas. We face a challenge: how can we access this abundant resource and at the same time mitigate global environmental challenges, in particular, the production of carbon dioxide (CO2)? The editors of this special edition journal consider the opportunity to increase the utilization of this globally abundant resource and recover it in an environmentally sustainable manner. Underground coal gasification (UCG) is the recovery of energy from coal by gasifying the coal underground. This process produces a high calorific synthesis gas, which can be applied for electricity generation and/or the production of fuels and chemicals. The carbon dioxide emissions are relatively pure and the surface facilities are limited in their environmental footprint. Unused carbon is readily separated and can be geo-sequester in the resulting cavity. The cavity is also being considered as a potential option to mitigate against change impacts of other sources of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. These outcomes mean there is an opportunity to provide developing and developed countries a source of low-cost clean energy. Further, the burning of coal in situ means that the traditional dangers of underground mining and extraction are reduced, a higher percentage of the coal is actually recovered and the resulting cavern creates the potential for a long-term storage solution of the gasification wastes. The process is not without challenges. Ground subsidence and groundwater pollution are two potential environmental impacts that need to be averted for this process to be acceptable. It is essential to advance the understanding of this practice and this special edition journal seeks to share the progress that scientists are making in this dynamic field. The technical challenges are being addressed by researchers around the world who work to resolve and understand how burning coal underground impacts the geology, the surface land, and ground water both in the short and the long term. This special issue reviews the process of UCG and considers the opportunities, challenges, risks, competitive analysis and synergies, commercial initiatives and a roadmap to solutions via the modelling and simulation of UCG. Building and then disseminating the fundamental knowledge of UCG will enhance policy development, best practices and processes that reflect the global desires for energy production with reduced environmental impact.

Suggested Citation

  • J. McInnis & S. Singh & I. Huq, 2016. "Mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change via the implementation of underground coal gasification," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 479-486, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:21:y:2016:i:4:d:10.1007_s11027-015-9682-8 DOI: 10.1007/s11027-015-9682-8

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Solveig Glomsrød & Taoyuan Wei & Knut Alfsen, 2013. "Pledges for climate mitigation: the effects of the Copenhagen accord on CO 2 emissions and mitigation costs," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 619-636, June.
    2. Matthew Ranson & Robert N. Stavins, 2016. "Linkage of greenhouse gas emissions trading systems: learning from experience," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, pages 284-300.
    3. Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2006. "Indexed Regulation," Discussion Papers dp-06-32, Resources For the Future.
    4. Sebastian Strunz, Erik Gawel, and Paul Lehmann, 2015. "Towards a general Europeanization of EU Member States energy policies?," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics.
    5. Christoph Böhringer & Knut Rosendahl, 2010. "Green promotes the dirtiest: on the interaction between black and green quotas in energy markets," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 316-325, June.
    6. Zhang, Da & Karplus, Valerie J. & Cassisa, Cyril & Zhang, Xiliang, 2014. "Emissions trading in China: Progress and prospects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 9-16.
    7. Carolyn Fischer, 2010. "Renewable Portfolio Standards: When Do They Lower Energy Prices?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 101-120.
    8. Solveig Glomsrød & Taoyuan Wei & Torben Mideksa & Bjørn Samset, 2015. "Energy market impacts of nuclear power phase-out policies," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(8), pages 1511-1527, December.
    9. Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008. "Indexed regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 221-233, November.
    10. Rypdal, Kristin & Rive, Nathan & Astrom, Stefan & Karvosenoja, Niko & Aunan, Kristin & Bak, Jesper L. & Kupiainen, Kaarle & Kukkonen, Jaakko, 2007. "Nordic air quality co-benefits from European post-2012 climate policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6309-6322, December.
    11. Capros, Pantelis & Mantzos, Leonidas & Parousos, Leonidas & Tasios, Nikolaos & Klaassen, Ger & Van Ierland, Tom, 2011. "Analysis of the EU policy package on climate change and renewables," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1476-1485, March.
    12. Lehmann, Paul & Gawel, Erik, 2013. "Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 597-607.
    13. Eskeland, Gunnar S. & Rive, Nathan A. & Mideksa, Torben K., 2012. "Europe’s climate goals and the electricity sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 200-211.
    14. Shuwei Zhang & Nico Bauer, 2013. "Utilization of the non-fossil fuel target and its implications in China," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, pages 328-344.
    15. Thure Traber & Claudia Kemfert, 2009. "Impacts of the German Support for Renewable Energy on Electricity Prices, Emissions, and Firms," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 155-178.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:21:y:2016:i:4:d:10.1007_s11027-015-9682-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.