Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Global emission hotspots of coal power generation


Coal power generation is a primary cause of greenhouse gas (GHG) and toxic airborne emissions globally. We present a uniquely comprehensive inventory of CO2, methane, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and mercury emissions for 7,861 coal-generating units including their supply chains. Total GHG and toxic substance emissions are largest from China, the United States, India, Germany and Russia (together >64% per pollutant). Overall supply chain contributions are below 19%, but exceed 75% for individual units and pollutants. Methane emissions from underground coal mining offset Chinese coal power plant efficiency advantages in comparison to India. Health impacts, as quantified by regionalized life cycle assessment, are highest in India and parts of eastern and southeastern Europe due to lack of modern flue gas treatment, and in China due to widespread coal power generation. Deployment of state-of-the-art flue gas treatment, driven by local emission limits, can mitigate health impacts in India and parts of Europe while it is already largely used in China and the United States. Phase-out of the 10% most polluting coal power plants (by capacity) would reduce coal power GHG emissions by 16% or human health impacts by 64%, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Globally modelled coal transport amounts from mines to power plants for four transport modes in 2012.
Fig. 2: Airborne emissions along the coal power supply chain.
Fig. 3: GHG emissions from coal power generation.
Fig. 4: Human health impacts of airborne emissions from coal power generation.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Detailed descriptions of existing research, extended methods, additional results, discussion of policy relevance, limitations of this work, uncertainties, and recommendations for future work are available in the Supplementary Information. The emission dataset per power plant and the source code for the model is available at For specific questions or data requests, please contact the authors directly at


  1. GBD 2017 DALYs and HALE Collaborators. Measuring progress from 1990 to 2017 and projecting attainment to 2030 of the health-related Sustainable Development Goals for 195 countries and territories—a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet 392, 2091–2138 (2018).

  2. WHO Air Quality Guidelines for Particulate Matter, Ozone, Nitrogen Dioxide and Sulfur Dioxide—Global Update 2005—Summary of Risk Assessment (WHO, 2006);

  3. Ambient (Outdoor) Air Quality and Health (WHO, 2018);

  4. Pirrone, N. et al. Global mercury emissions from natural and anthropogenic sources. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 10, 5951–5964 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ummel, K. CARMA Revisited: An Updated Database of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Power Plants World Wide Working Paper 304 (Center for Global Development, 2012);

  6. Steinmann, Z. et al. How to address data gaps in life cycle inventories—a case study on CO2 emissions from coal electricity. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 5282–5289 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Spath, P. L., Mann, M. K. & Kerr, D. R. Life cycle assessment of coal-fired power production (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, US Department of Energy, 1999);

  8. Holland, M. & Berry, J. ExternE—Externalities of Energy, Volume 1—Summary (European Commission, Directorate General XII, Science, Research, and Development, 1995).

  9. NEEDS—New Energy Externalities Developments for Sustainability—Publishable Final Activity Report (Institute of Studies for the Integration of Systems, 2009).

  10. Treyer, K. & Bauer, C. Life cycle inventories of electricity generation and power supply in version 3 of the ecoinvent database—part I: electricity generation. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 21, 1236–1254 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tong, D. et al. Targeted emission reductions from global super-polluting power plant units. Nat. Sustain. 1, 59–68 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. IPCC Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report (eds Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R. K. & Meyer L. A.) (IPCC, 2014).

  13. Sloss, L. Coalbed Methane Emissions—Capture and Utilisation (International Energy Agency Clean Coal Centre, London, 2005).

  14. Attalla, M., Day, S., Lange, T., Lilley, W. & Morgan, S. NOx emissions from blasting operations in open-cut coal mining. Atmos. Environ. 42, 7874–7883 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Carras, A., Day, S., Saghafi, A. & Roberts, O. Spontaneous combustion in open cut CoalMines—recent Australian research. In Coal 2005: Coal Operators’ Conference (ed. Aziz, N.) 195–200 (Univ. Wollongong & Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 2005).

  16. ITF Transport Outlook 2013 (International Transport Forum, 2013);

  17. National Research Council of the National Academies in Coal: Research and Development to Support National Energy Policy 80–90 (National Academic, Washington DC, 2007);

  18. Norris, J., Ntziachristos, L., Samaras, Z. & Zierock, K. Chapter 1.A.3.c: Railways in EMEP/EEA Emission Inventory Guidebook (EEA, Copenhagen, 2013).

  19. Ecoinvent v.3.3 Database—Cut-off System Model (Ecoinvent Centre, 2016).

  20. Carpenter, A.M. Management of Coal Stockpiles CCC/23 (International Energy Agency Clean Coal Centre, 1999).

  21. Energy Technology Perspectives 2014—Harnessing Electricity’s Potential (International Energy Agency, 2014).

  22. Barnes, I. HELE Perspectives for Aelected Asian Countries CCC/287 (International Energy Agency Clean Coal Centre, 2018).

  23. World—Coal Supply (International Energy Agency, 2018);

  24. Bian, Z., Inyang, H., Daniels, J., Otto, F. & Struthers, S. Environmental issues from coal mining and their solutions. Mining Sci. Technol. 20, 215–223 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data—Detailed Data by Party (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 2018);

  26. Analysis of Heat Rate Improvement Potential at Coal-Fired Power Plants (US Energy Information Administration, 2015);

  27. Macmillan, S., Antonyuk, A. & Schwind, H. Gas to Coal Competition in the U.S. Power Sector (OECD/IEA, 2013).

  28. IPCC Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report (eds Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R. K. & Reisinger, A.) (IPCC, 2007).

  29. Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2015);

  30. 20 Years of Carbon Capture and Storage—Accelerating Future Deployment (International Energy Agency, 2016).

  31. Fantke, P. et al. in Global Guidance for Life Cycle Impact Assessment Indicators Vol. 1, 76–99 (United Nations Environment Programme, 2016).

  32. Global Mercury Modelling—Update of Modelling Results in the Global Mercury Assessment 2013 (United Nations Environment Programme, 2015).

  33. GBD 2016 DALYs and HALE Collaborators. Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 333 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet 390, 1260–1344 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rosenbaum, R. K. et al. USEtox—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 13, 532–546 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Burger Chakraborty, L., Qureshi, A., Vadenbo, C. & Hellweg, S. Anthropogenic mercury flows in India and impacts of emission controls. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 8105–8113 (2013).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Central Pollution Control Board Notification S.O. 3305(E) (Government of India, New Delhi, 2015);

  37. Emission Standards (International Energy Agency Clean Coal Centre, accessed 8 December 2017);

  38. Cai, W., Wang, C., Jin, Z. & Chen, J. Quantifying baseline emission factors of air pollutants in china’s regional power grids. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 3590–3597 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Best Available Techniques (BAT) Reference Document for Large Combustion Plants (European Commission Joint Research Centre, 2017);

  40. Control of Mercury Emissions from Coal-Fired Electric Utility Boilers (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2004).

  41. Sloss, L. Mercury—Emissions and Control (International Energy Agency Clean Coal Centre, 2002).

  42. Balogh, S. S. & Liang, L. Mercury pathways in municipal wastewater treatment plants. Water Air Soil Pollut. 80, 1181–1190 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Eros, J. M. et al. Mineral Operations Outside the United States (Minfac) (USGS, 2010);

  44. Trippi, M. H. AllChinaCoalMines (USGS, 2014);

  45. Trippi, M. H., Belkin, H. E., Dai, S., Tewalt, S. J. & Chou, C. J. USGS Compilation of Geographic Information System (GIS) Data of Coal Mines and Coal-Bearing Areas in China (USGS, 2014).

  46. National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) (Department of the Environment and Energy, Australian Government, 2012);

  47. National Pollutant Release Inventory (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2012);

  48. European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR) (European Environment Agency, 2017);

  49. Coal Mines, Surface and Underground (US Energy Information Administration and US Department of Labor, 2014);

  50. Coal (US Energy Information Administration, 2017);

  51. Walker, S. Major Coalfields of the World 2nd edn, CCC/32 (International Energy Agency Clean Coal Centre, London, 2010).

  52. Finkelman, R. National Coal Quality Inventory: NACQI (USGS, 2005);

  53. Tewalt, S. J., Willett, J. C. & Finkelman, R. B. The world coal quality inventory: a status report. Int. J. Coal Geol. 63, 190–194 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Tewalt, S. J. et al. Chemical Analyses in the World Coal Quality Inventory, V.1 (USGS, Reston, 2010).

  55. Palmer, C.A. et al. COALQUAL Database (USGS, Reston, 2015);

  56. Lignite—An Industry Takes a Bow (DEBRIV, Bundesverband Braunkohle, 1999);

  57. ASTM D388-15—Standard Classification of Coals by Rank (American Society for Testing and Materials, 2015).

  58. Walker, S. Major Coalfields of the World CR/51 (International Energy Agency Clean Coal Centre, London, 1993).

  59. IEA Coal Information Statistics 2013 (International Energy Agency, 2013);

  60. Donnes, R., Bauer, C. & Roder, A. Ecoinvent Report No. 6-VI—Kohle—Data v.2.0 (Ecoinvent, 2007).

  61. IEA World Energy Balances 2017 (International Energy Agency, 2017);

  62. Schmitz, J. Control of Coal Dust in Transit and in Stockpiles (IAEPER15) (International Energy Agency Clean Coal Centre, 1994).

  63. Tu, K. J. Industrial Organization of the Chinese Coal Industry Working Paper No. 103 (PESD, 2011).

  64. Metal Expert. International Seaborne Market. Panamax/cape freight market. Coal Shipping Costs, Week 17, 2014 (2014).

  65. Metal Expert. International Seaborne Market. Handy freight market. Coal Shipping Costs, Week 17, 2014 (2014).

  66. Forkenbrock, D. Comparison of external costs of rail and truck freight transportation. Transp. Res. A 35, 321–337 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Coal Transportation Rates to the Electric Power Sector (US Energy Information Administration, 2017);

  68. Global Energy Observatory: Information on Global Energy Systems (Gupta, R. & Shankar, H, accessed 8 November 2016);

  69. Coal Power Plant Database (CPPDB) 2005 (National Energy Technology Laboratory, US Department of Energy, accessed 30 September 2015).

  70. Coal Power Atlas (International Energy Agency Clean Coal Centre, 2010).

  71. Su, S., Li, B., Cui, S. & Tao, S. Sulfur dioxide emissions from combustion in China: from 1990 to 2007. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 8403–8410 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. UN Comtrade Database (UN, accessed 24 October 2017);

  73. World—Coal Supply (International Energy Agency, accessed 11 December 2017);

  74. Tukker, A. et al. EXIOPOL—development and illustrative analyses of detailed global MR EE SUT/IOT. Econ. Sys. Res. 25, 50–70 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Dijkstra, E. W. A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numer. Math. 1, 269–271 (1959).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. World Electric Power Plants Database (WEPP) v. March 2012 (S&P Global/Platts, 2012).

  77. Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID) 2012 (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2014);

  78. Raptis, C. E. & Pfister, S. Global freshwater thermal emissions from steam-electric power plants with once-through cooling systems. Energy 97, 46–57 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Notification on Publishing 2012 Energy Efficiency Targets and Competition Data of 600MW Thermal Power Units in China (in Chinese) (China Electricity Council, 2013);

  80. Notification on Publishing 2012 Energy Efficiency Targets and Competition Data of 300MW Thermal Power Units in China (in Chinese) (China Electricity Council, 2013);

  81. Notification on Publishing 2013 Energy Efficiency Targets and Competition Data of 300MW Thermal Power Units in China (in Chinese) (China Electricity Council, 2014);

  82. CO 2 Baseline Database for the Indian Power Sector, V.10.0 (Central Electricity Authority, 2014);

  83. Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2013);

  84. ConsumptioData2010–14—Eskom CDM Grid Information for Application Within the CDM (Eskom, accessed 16 October 2015);

  85. PRTRkensakun (in Japanese) (Ministry of the Environment, Government of Japan, 2014);

  86. van Zelm, R., Preiss, P., van Goethem, T., van Dingenen, R. & Huijbregts, M. Regionalized life cycle impact assessment of air pollution on the global scale: damage to human health and vegetation. Atmos. Environ. 134, 129–137 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Verones, F. et al. LC-Impact—Version 0.5, Particulate Matter Formation Shapefiles (2016);

  88. Fantke, P. et al. Characterizing aggregated exposure to primary particulate matter: recommended intake fractions for indoor and outdoor sources. Environ. Sci. Technol. 51, 9089–9100 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Fantke, P. et al. USEtox (corrective release 2.1) (Task Force on Toxic Impacts of the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, 2017);

  90. Oberschelp, C., Pfister, S., Raptis, C. E. & Hellweg, S. Global Coal Power Plant Airborne Emission Dataset v1 (Mendeley Data, 2019);

Download references


We thank C. Walker for proofreading our manuscript, C. Bogdal and B. Denzler for advice on mercury health impacts, and S. Stocker and M. Lei for their contributions on coal washing and collection of Chinese power plant data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



C.O., S.P. and S.H. designed the research. C.O. collected the data and did the modelling with contributions from C.E.R. C.O. and S.P. interpreted the results. C.O. wrote the paper with inputs from S.P., C.E.R. and S.H.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Oberschelp.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Discussion, Supplementary Figures 1–14, Supplementary Notes, Supplementary References 1–94

Supplementary Dataset 1

A broad range of machine-readable model input data and results, containing 37 data tables and a list of additional references

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oberschelp, C., Pfister, S., Raptis, C.E. et al. Global emission hotspots of coal power generation. Nat Sustain 2, 113–121 (2019).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene