Which Way with the Coal Industry?
A commenter asked for my viewpoints on the coal industry, while claiming, incorrectly, that it’s supported by everyone except environmentalists who are “extremist and idealist.” Here goes:
The first thing to understand about the coal industry is that it’s small and going away. As we sit here today, there are 34 times more people working in McDonald’s alone than there are in U.S. coal mines. Even its leaders caution those families who may be dependent on coal that Trump’s rhetoric on bringing back jobs in this space is completely empty.
You point to articles like this editorial in the opinion section of the Denver Post to support the idea that coal is a viable and sustainable industry, but this is a fringe and unsupportable viewpoint if there ever were one. This particular post happens to be an obvious piece of pro-Trump propaganda, lavishing praise on him for having kept his campaign promises—a laughably false assertion. (I won’t be taking vacations, I won’t play golf, I’ll repeal and replace Obamacare on Day One, I’ll have Mexico pay for the wall, I’ll rid government of Wall Street insiders, I’ll defeat ISIS in 30 days…..) It also bashes the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, something that is supported by the vast majority (69%) of Americans.
By most accounts, coal carbon sequestration is a non-starter, even given the considerable sums of cash that have been poured into its R&D. Having said that, I do not blame or deride those responsible for having conducted this failed experiment, any more than I would criticize Thomas Edison for the first few hundred things he tried before he could make a light bulb that would work for more than a few seconds. Per what I wrote here, Robert Murray, CEO of Murray Energy, the country’s largest privately held coal-mining company, told E&E News, “Carbon capture and sequestration does not work. It is neither practical nor economic; it is just cover for the politicians, both Republicans and Democrats that say, ‘Look what I did for coal,’ knowing all the time that it doesn’t help coal at all.”
All environmentalists, whether they be pragmatic, idealist, smart, foolish, mild-mannered or extremist, are working hard to make coal go away as soon as possible. Obviously, we won’t be building more coal plants in the U.S., and we’ll be working as hard as possible to shutter the remaining 400 or so that are still in operation (after we whacked the first 100+ over the past few years).
What happens in the rest of the world is indeed, up for grabs. It’s important to note that all but three countries on Earth have signed the Paris Accord, in recognition of the importance of cutting greenhouse gas emissions, (and, of course, GHG emissions are not even the worst thing to be said about coal, given its oxides of sulfur and nitrogen, cadmium, selenium, arsenic, mercury and dozens of different types of radioactive isotopes being dumped into our atmosphere).
Also, countries like India and China are working hard to architect their burgeoning power grids without coal. Whether or not they’ll be successful has everything to do with U.S. leadership in this space, which, needless to say, is entirely absent at this time.
Hope this helps, though I somehow suspect that this wasn’t what you wanted to hear.
Craig,
Firstly, let me thank you for stating your opinion.
As an influential opinion-maker your attitudes and beliefs are important contributions to the clean(er) technology discussion.
Regrettably, you seem to be very close minded and emphatic.
(tending to belong in the later of the three categories I listed).
The Coal industry is neither “small” nor is it “going away” !
Even in the US where alternatives, mainly gas, are available, Coal is making a comeback. Over the past six months US domestic coal consumption has increased by 12%. US Coal exports have risen 60% and forward contracts for 2018-23 guarantee an increase 170+% for that period.
Coal fired generation, as a percentage of total US production has increased, not fallen, from 29% to 34%.
The claim employment in the coal resource sector is falling, is inaccurate. In fact, not only has the decline in employment stopped, but the industry has created a vast swathe of jobs and economic activity in recent months.
Although many traditional coal mining jobs have disappeared as a result of automation, other new highly skilled jobs have been created.
Outside the US, neither China, India or any other developing nation is turning away from coal. The demand for coal is so great in China the PRC is building a huge new waterway costing over $1 trillion just to accommodate coal imports arriving directly into the heart of China.
Such investment is not a short term, stop gap measure !
Even Germany, the most optimistic of green energy exponents remains reliant on Coal fired power. (using Brown lignite, the dirtiest of all coal grades!).
But it’s predominately devloping nations where Coal usage will increase.
Just sticking your head in the sand while ignoring reality, won’t help.
Like solar, carbon sequestration technology comes in many forms. Although some of the technologies have proved less successful, and there have been failures there are also successes.
Why you would rejoice at the failures and declare the task impossible,even after being provided with several examples of highly successful coal sequestration technologies (some even turning the emissions into valuable by products), baffles me.
(even the Guardian is more open minded !
[https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/03/indian-firm-carbon-capture-breakthrough-carbonclean ] 🙂
And the Washington Examiner [http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clean-coal-has-hit-a-speedbump-but-it-remains-essential/article/2628874]
[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-coal-exports-idUSKBN1AD0DU]
Imagine if simply due to Solyndra, Solar technology was proclaimed a failure and abandoned.
Coal provides 40% of the world’s electricity consumption. More importantly, Coal is the preferred choice for the world fastest growing consumption. Europe, China and the US are mature markets with slowing growth. But nations like India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Egypt,and Africa, are quickly industrializing.
Even nations like Poland, Belorussia, Romania and Bulgaria are investing in Coal fired generation to use local resources and double capacity.
Some nations with populations in hundreds of millions, 90% of generation is Coal fired.
More than 100 coal-generating units with a combined capacity of 42.5 gigawatts are in various stages of construction in 11 African countries outside South Africa.
These plants will increase the continents coal consumption more than eight-fold.
This expansion is mostly financed by foreign, or South African investment At least half are financed, constructed and operated by by the Peoples Republic of China.
China is experiencing over capacity in electricity production, so it’s government is able to announce the “closure’ of many coal fired plants and projects.
In fact, this is just propaganda for gullible Western media. Most of these projects were never serious, speculative or invented, while shutting down obsolescent plants, redundant due to newer plants and over-capacity has nothing to do with a concern for the environment.
For every plant not built in China, the Chinese build two in Africa !
Then there’s the Russians. Russia has the world’s second largest coal reserves. As Nat Gas slows, Russia is beginning to expand both domestic and export coal fired energy.
The IEA estimates coal consumption to increase by 200% by 2040.
Most consider this figure conservative.
No responsible agency has suggested that Coal will disappear in the next 50 years.
Craig, my question is this; In the face of all this evidence, why do you maintain coal sequestration shouldn’t be a priority ?
Why keep pretending the problem doesn’t exist ?
Do you really believe all these huge Global investments will simply disappear ?
While you are attending the Energy Storage North America conference in San Diego. I’m currently accompanying my youngest son on a tour of the principal Coal mining communities of the USA.
Obviously, we won’t be visiting all US Coal mining activity, that would be a huge undertaking, but our itinerary includes :
Wyoming, Montana, Maryland,Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Missouri Mississippi Alabama.
From what we have seen so far in Wyoming,Montana,Maryland and Virginia, there’s a real sense of new confidence and hope. Many new shops have opened, or re-opened and support for the President is very strong.
I don’t think any of thse people believe a new golden age is about to return, but they no longer feel abandoned, ignored and taken for granted. The best indication is the number of young people re-enrolling or staying in school.
This has been a recurring theme. It’s odd, because the Obama admin encouraged education ad received little or no response, but with the new hope promoted by the President these folks seem to be taking education more seriously.
There’s also evidence of Civic pride returning.
(Of course my observations are superficial and those of an outsider with only a little time to observe. My impressions are from local civic leaders, shop owners, cafe and bar owners, and bar frequenters !
I was surprised to see how little resentment existed for renewable energy, and how knowledgeable mining towns are on environmental issues.
This is a very different America than you describe. These folk are warm, friendly and deeply patriotic. They fear poverty and the destruction of their small communities. They don’t want to live in a sprawling metropolis like Los Angeles.
Thank you once again for your reply, and I’m sorry for the length of this post. Visiting these communities has been a wonderful experience. I wish I had more time to explore the fascinating history.
I urge you to reconsider investigating ing coal sequestration technology.
While I don’t always agree with my friend the conservative American writer Stephen Moore, I found his article in American Spectator thought provoking. [https://spectator.org/coal-is-1/].
My reasoning is simple, where can we use technology to most effectively mitigate global emissions ?
Banning bunker oil is possible as economic replacement technology exists, banning coal is a fantasy, (at least in the foreseeable future)so it’s more effective to promote technology to reduce the level of harmful emissions of coal.