The Oil Drum | Are Reserves of the Largest US Coal Field Overstated by 50%?

58 comments on Are Reserves of the Largest US Coal Field Overstated by 50%?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

sf on February 24, 2009 - 10:27am

If reserves are being downgraded 50%, then they were overstated by 100%.
I wonder how sensitive coal mining costs are to oil and electricity costs?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Rembrandt on February 25, 2009 - 3:10am

@SF

That perception is correct if you look at it from the 'new' reserve figure. But when you look at the original figure one can perceive it as 50%. Half of a random number is 50% of that number. Is the glass half full or half empty?

When we talk about - overstatement - it becomes logical to reason from the new number I guess, I am not a native speaker so this is a bit confusing to me.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

58 comments on Are Reserves of the Largest US Coal Field Overstated by 50%?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

Search The Oil Drum with Google

Support The Oil Drum

Click the button to learn about supporting The Oil Drum with a secure donation.

Peak Oil Primers

Beware email scams!

Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.

“The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences…”

—Winston Churchill, November 1936