the death of coal?

Quote: kenarman

The flip side of this is that 150,000 plus people lost their jobs and the coal mine towns are starting to look like Detroit does and have massive unemployment. Nothing happens in a vacuum but too many people only want to consider one side of any question.

In 1979, Britain's domestic coal industry produced 122 million tons annually.

But those days are long gone. By the early 2010s, only 13% of its coal was produced domestically. The remaining 87% was imported from Russia, USA, Colombia, and Australia. Russia was providing half of the coal used in Britain.

Quote: kenarman

The flip side of this is that 150,000 plus people lost their jobs and the coal mine towns are starting to look like Detroit does and have massive unemployment. Nothing happens in a vacuum but too many people only want to consider one side of any question.

I think that's been an argument since machine manufacturing started. You get a shoveling machine it replaces 20 individual workers. Are you just going to stop progress?

Quote: rxwine

You get a shoveling machine it replaces 20 individual workers. Are you just going to stop progress?

Arm the Luddites

No I don't want to stop progress and for the record I don't think burning coal in large quantities is a good idea. The point I was trying to make is that our society is so intent on technological advancement that we seldom stop to think about those that are displacement by the latest advancement. We are content to just leave the human debris lying on the side of the tracks as the technology train races forward.

I think that this is the reason that elections are becoming unpredictable. So many are being screwed now by the continuous changes in what is a good job or a secure job they will support anyone that promises them a better life, be it Trump, Putin or Brexit. I think that this the overriding problem in our world today but am very disappointed in the fact that I can see no solution to this problem.

Quote: rxwine

I think that's been an argument since machine manufacturing started. You get a shoveling machine it replaces 20 individual workers. Are you just going to stop progress?

The difference is the shoveling machine is actual progress. Coal has more been legislated out of existence. The is not progress, that is artificial killing of an industry.

Quote: rxwine

I think that's been an argument since machine manufacturing started. You get a shoveling machine it replaces 20 individual workers. Are you just going to stop progress?

Have you any idea how many whaling jobs have been lost in the US since people stopped using whale oil for lamps?

Quote: AZDuffman

The difference is the shoveling machine is actual progress. Coal has more been legislated out of existence. The is not progress, that is artificial killing of an industry.

I think if nothing else it pertains to national security, to keep a few coal mines working, coal to elec. plants running, and follow up on the Fisher Tropsch method of making diesel from coal: https://www.purdue.edu/discoverypark/energy/assets/pdfs/cctr/outreach/Basics1-CoalGasification-Jun07.pdf

With all the conflicts erupting daily in the ME, and who knows where Venezuela is at any given time, and what the current state of oil production is in the US. It only makes sense to keep our options available. A hurricane in Louisiana that disrupts the south coast oil terminals of Texas, add to that just a trunk load of RPG's flying into Cushing OK, and there is significant disruption in the US. Fifteen years ago, both Mont and Penn, were supposed to have working CTL plants creating electricity by now. I guess something changed? Maybe those stupid raptor killing windmills?

If the US isn't going to use what we have lots of [coal] than we should get to work erecting nuclear plants as fast as China. Even Iran has ordered 5 nuke plants from Russia. Even they with their huge petroleum reserves can see the intelligence of not burning fossil fuel to make electricity.

Quote: AZDuffman

The difference is the shoveling machine is actual progress. Coal has more been legislated out of existence. The is not progress, that is artificial killing of an industry.

So what, coal has received plenty of extra government incentives over the years. You want things to operate fairly by demand, but it never did.

Probably helped run the lumber and oil guys out of business.

Quote: AZDuffman

The difference is the shoveling machine is actual progress. Coal has more been legislated out of existence. The is not progress, that is artificial killing of an industry.

No, it's progress. Yearning for the good ol' days? How about the week of December 5, 1952 when 4,000 people in London died from exposure to coal?

Quote: Texas A&M

But over the next few days, conditions deteriorated, and the sky literally became dark. Visibility was reduced to only three feet in many parts of the city, all transportation was shut down and tens of thousands of people had trouble breathing. By the time the fog had lifted on Dec. 9, at least 4,000 people had died and more than 150,000 had been hospitalized. Thousands of animals in the area were also killed.

It is theorized that the coal's nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide combined with fog rather than humidity; larger droplets of water diluted the acid products, allowing more sulfate production as sulfuric acid. Sunrise burned off the fog, leaving concentrated acid droplets which killed citizens.

I'm not sure why anyone would want to return to that.

Quote: petroglyph

I think if nothing else it pertains to national security, to keep a few coal mines working, coal to elec. plants running, and follow up on the Fisher Tropsch method of making diesel from coal: https://www.purdue.edu/discoverypark/energy/assets/pdfs/cctr/outreach/Basics1-CoalGasification-Jun07.pdf

With all the conflicts erupting daily in the ME, and who knows where Venezuela is at any given time, and what the current state of oil production is in the US. It only makes sense to keep our options available. A hurricane in Louisiana that disrupts the south coast oil terminals of Texas, add to that just a trunk load of RPG's flying into Cushing OK, and there is significant disruption in the US. Fifteen years ago, both Mont and Penn, were supposed to have working CTL plants creating electricity by now. I guess something changed? Maybe those stupid raptor killing windmills?

If the US isn't going to use what we have lots of [coal] than we should get to work erecting nuclear plants as fast as China. Even Iran has ordered 5 nuke plants from Russia. Even they with their huge petroleum reserves can see the intelligence of not burning fossil fuel to make electricity.

I have heard that gasoline can be made from coal. Why the Saudi Arabia of coal never did more of that I never understood. Could be that it is too complex to make it worth it. With fracking, we should be OK for a generation at this point.