<DrumBeat: June 28, 2007The Oil DrumDrumBeat: June 29, 2007>

52 comments on Another thought on coal supply

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

TheRedBaron on June 30, 2007 - 9:16am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Why do you keep repeating this nonsense? Please refer me to any study prior to 1984 that mentions the energy required to extract and transport coal in the UK. Informed opinion in the UK coal industry was aware of « Peak Oil » in the early 1960s. I quote Dr Schumacher again, Economic Advisor the National Coal Board from his article « European Coal in the year 2000 » from the German revue « Schlågel und Eisen » February 1963

« According to all the conclusions of a careful investigation of the future, one must accept that the world is approaching a period of energy shortage that will be tied to lasting price increases for all imported fuels. This will not occur immediately…The need for a careful, responsible policy of conservation of the European coal industry should no longer be in doubt. It is clear that that not only the position in the world but the very existence of Western Europe would be seriously endangered if she were faced with an unfillable energy gap. Such a situation does not need to last long before it shakes the political and economic institutions to their foundations. »

Despite the now obvious correctness of Schumacher’s argument, the Thatcher Government sterilised some 6000 million tons of easily extracted, concentrated carbon. If it were true that UK reserves are down to 200 million tons, this must rank as one of the largest acts of vandalism ever by a Government. Fortunately, I suspect it is not true: that there is a lot more coal still down there. It will require a minimum of 10 years to construct new collieries and I was told this morning that Meridian Television (a UK digital channel ) had a program about a month ago about an feasibility study that a private company was undertaking to reopen Betteshanger colliery. I will try to get a video. BTW the private company is Chinese.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
BobCousins on June 30, 2007 - 2:15pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Whatever. Lap up what the National Coal Board says. Blame the right wing government. Of course, we believe what KSA says about it's oil reserves, why would they lie? Peak Oil? Nah, it's just lack of investment and politics. Why, there are trillions of barrels of oil yet to be produced.

When annual UK coal production shows a year on year increase, get back to me. Otherwise don't bother.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
TheRedBaron on July 2, 2007 - 2:52am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Again, could we have some evidence please rather than a stupid rant.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
BobCousins on July 2, 2007 - 5:36am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

It's not up to me to prove the negative. The case for renewed investment is your claim, it's up to you to show some convincing reasons why anyone should put their money into coal mining.

The facts speak for themselves. UK annual coal production has declined since the peak in 1910, and that trend shows no sign of changing. More pits are closing than opening. If this trend reverses, then maybe you have something.

The former Betteshanger colliery has been redeveloped at a cost of £18 million to office, light industrial and leisure use. I guess the Chinese deal fell through.

Instead of looking back to past glories, we need to be investing in less polluting energy sources like wind and solar.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Pitt the Elder on July 2, 2007 - 11:16am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

It's not up to me to prove the negative.
...
The facts speak for themselves. UK annual coal production has declined since the peak in 1910

Straw man - nobody's asking you to prove a negative. Nobody's even asking you to prove anything.

What they appear to be asking is that you provide evidence for your apparent claim that UK coal production's decline is irreversible; i.e., that UK coal production is low for geological and EROEI reasons rather than for political or economic reasons. Large coal deposits are known and located in the UK; you are asserting that they are not being mined due to physical constraints. That is a positive assertion, and requires evidence to back it up.

In response, you've provided only semi-coherent rants. Those aren't evidence, no matter how strongly you believe them.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
BobCousins on July 2, 2007 - 7:07pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

you are asserting that they are not being mined due to physical constraints. That is a positive assertion,

WTF does "not" mean? Hey, is that a negative? "irreversible" is also a negative. You ARE asking me to prove a negative, so don't lie.

Anyway, I am not arguing there is no longer coal down there, nor am asserting there are physical limits. Those are YOUR strawmen, so another lie.

[you claim] that UK coal production is low for geological and EROEI reasons rather than for political or economic reasons.

I agree! It is for economic reasons. The "political" decision that was made was to stop subsidising a loss-making industry. QED.

If you think that the economic or political stance will change in the future, it is up to you to provide evidence for that.

Thanks for poking your nose in, but your objections are not even semi-coherent!

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Rethin on July 3, 2007 - 12:42am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

You'll have to excuse Pitt. He often confuses posters on this board for the demons in his head.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.