<DrumBeat: July 9, 2007The Oil DrumThe International Energy Assocation's Medium-Term Oil Market Report>

20 comments on Some history on Coal EROI and UK coal numbers

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

noutram on July 9, 2007 - 12:31pm Permalink | Subthread | Comments top

I find talk of historic coal extraction so utterly depressing from a social perspective. To think that generations of men, women, children and beasts toiled all their lives underground, sucking in Uranium enriched coal dust in dim, wet and cold mines. Life for these people was unimaginably harsh -'it sucked' hardly comes close.

I'm really not sure what lies ahead in the next 20-30 years given what I read here on TOD but can it really be as bad as this? ["Ultimate Doomers" queue up to respond.]

Regards, Nick.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Heading Out on July 9, 2007 - 3:03pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Nick:
The dramatic license of some of those who have written about historic mining can make it seem much worse than it actually was. Firstly, because of the geothermal gradient, as one mines down to any significant depth the mines became comfortably warm, rather than cold. Secondly since water was (and is) an issue it is drained away so that it does not interfere with most of the mining operations, so that the working area itself was (and is) generally dry. Dim it certainly was, and walking the ways back to the shaft in the dark after my light failed is something I still remember 40-some years later, but there was a lot of cameraderie and a sense of self-worth in those who worked there that should not be forgotten. The problems of coal dust were long neglected, as were other health and safety issues, but the damage done by the dust had little to do with uranium enrichment, somewhere in the back of my mind I seem to recall some early coal roof detection equipment that worked because of the emission from the overlying shale, because the coal didn't have any.

Unfortunately society was more concerned to get cheap energy than to worry about the conditions of those who produced it. As Barbara Freese pointed out their view of the industry and its workers has more often been tinged with comtempt than, for example, the more glamorous view of oil.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
oilmanbob on July 9, 2007 - 3:44pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

One of my great-great grandfather's worked as a coalminer in Pennsylvania in the 1860's. His father died and he left home at 12, because his step-mother had young children and he had to support himself. He was from a large Mennonite family in Pennsylvania. He went to Nebraska in the middle 1870's and homesteaded, lived in a sod house on the prairie near Lincoln.
Life was just plain hard for most people in the world in the 19th century before the fossil fuel age. And it may become hard for us again, but I think its important for people to remember our roots.
EROEI isn't nearly as important as ROI. As long as people can scratch out a living mining coal, its going to be mined, just as oil production is going to continue as long as people think they can make a living at it.

Bob Ebersole

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jjhman on July 9, 2007 - 11:23pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

ROI is subordinate to EROEI for primary energy sources. There is no economic value in digging coal, or oil, or Uranium if you cannot get net positive energy from it. That only works for things like batteries where people will pay a premium for the energy in a convenient form.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
TheRedBaron on July 10, 2007 - 1:38am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

We never thought much about ROI in energy planning. As Schumacher put it there are two basic commodities - fuel and food. All others are secondary. For fuel and food, short term market prices are a poor guide for long term planning. Overriding importance is attached to secuity of supply.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
snuffy on July 9, 2007 - 3:14pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Nick,I think a example of "best case"of break-up,or powerdown in a relitive timeframe could be the collapse of the USSR....but the problem is there were functional modern societies nearby to supply consumer goods.At this next big powerdown that will not be the case.It will just keep getting worse."Where it stops,nobody knows".Make your preps as you see fit.Fruit trees are good...as are kiwi vines,grapes,a secluded residence LED lights,ect ect ect

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.