Coal reserves may be under-reported if the figures are based on estimates made before 2003. Take the example of that Ukranian mine - it wasn't worth digging up at all with a coal price below $30 per ton. Presumably there would have been other companies at the time who left a lot of coal out of their reported reserves because it wasn't economical to extract it.

Now the coal price is over $50 per ton, a lot of black gunk that could not previously justify its inclusion in reserve figures might get added in.

Of course with oil prices higher, costs will be higher too. It depends what proportion of mining costs are made up by fuel costs.

I know it's tempting to believe that coal will run out soon after oil (because it is foul polluting stuff etc) but wishing does not make it so.

If we are to believe in things we cannot see or touch, how do we tell the true belief from the false belief?

The limiting factor in coal production is the CO2 absorption capacity of the atmosphere. I want to remind everyone here that NASA climatologist James Hansen has calculated in:

Implications of "peak oil" for atmospheric CO2 and climate
http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.2782

that - if we burn all oil and gas - we must have phased out all coal - where CO2 sequestration is not done - by 2050. This is the condition to keep CO2 concentrations under 450 ppm CO2 and hence further warming under 1 degree. Remember that in the last interglacial periods temperatures were around 1 degree higher and sea levels 5-6 m higher.

Hansen writes in his latest press release (29/5/07)

We conclude that the "dangerous" level of atmospheric CO2 is at most 450 ppm, likely less than that, perhaps substantially less.

"Dangerous human-made interference with climate: a GISS modelE study"
http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/7/2287/2007/acp-7-2287-2007.pdf

The paper documenting the climate model employed in that study is available now at:
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/notyet/inpress_Hansen_etal_1.pdf