It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Just so I’m clear: are you asserting the coal industry could have used coal as an intermediary good to produce graphene as a final good, as opposed to electric power as a final good and been a viable industry? Talk about vertical integration.
As noted ad nauseam, the American coal industry is export-dependent and the great things going for it are China and India. Power generation using coal as a feedstock is, effectively, dead in America.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: BeefNoMeat
Just so I’m clear: are you asserting the coal industry could have used coal as an intermediary good to produce graphene as a final good, as opposed to electric power as a final good and been a viable industry? Talk about vertical integration.
"Feedstock" means the raw material used to create plastic. The first plastics were created using coal tar as a feedstock. Petroleum turned out to be a more efficient feedstock as usable materials were a natural byproduct of the refining process used to create transportation fuel. Coal can be made into neoteric products like carbon microtubules using any number of non-polluting processes. The coal industry just couldn't wrap its greedy little head around that.
As noted ad nauseam, the American coal industry is export-dependent and the great things going for it are China and India. Power generation using coal as a feedstock is, effectively, dead in America.
Coal power is dead in America and the industry is dependent on exports to China, the country with which Trump has picked a trade war. Ironically, Trump may have just done more to kill the coal industry than eight years of Obama.
originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: DJW001
There is already industry for coke coal production. Is it heavily underserviced? Why would mining companies delve into an already stable market? As opposed to, you know, mining and distribution...
And I have no idea how you think you'll create coke in an environmentally friendly process, but by all means, demonstrate.
Coal exports to China is only c3.5% of total exports.
It's even lower than 3.5% if you include steam coal exports.
India , South Korea and Japan are the key export markets in Asia for US coal.
You need to brush up on your knowledge.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: BeefNoMeat
Just so I’m clear: are you asserting the coal industry could have used coal as an intermediary good to produce graphene as a final good, as opposed to electric power as a final good and been a viable industry? Talk about vertical integration.
"Feedstock" means the raw material used to create plastic. The first plastics were created using coal tar as a feedstock. Petroleum turned out to be a more efficient feedstock as usable materials were a natural byproduct of the refining process used to create transportation fuel. Coal can be made into neoteric products like carbon microtubules using any number of non-polluting processes. The coal industry just couldn't wrap its greedy little head around that.
As noted ad nauseam, the American coal industry is export-dependent and the great things going for it are China and India. Power generation using coal as a feedstock is, effectively, dead in America.
Coal power is dead in America and the industry is dependent on exports to China, the country with which Trump has picked a trade war. Ironically, Trump may have just done more to kill the coal industry than eight years of Obama.
I am not talking about coke.
Coal can be made into neoteric products like carbon microtubules using any number of non-polluting processes. The coal industry just couldn't wrap its greedy little head around that.
Since the most efficient way to get carbon from a substance is from a coke, I assumed you must mean coke coal production. Coke coal is nearly pure carbon. Please tell me the revolutionary (and environmentally friendly) way in which you proposed to turn coal into carbon that doesn't use coal heated in an airless environment (coke coal).
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: RadioRobert
Since the most efficient way to get carbon from a substance is from a coke, I assumed you must mean coke coal production. Coke coal is nearly pure carbon. Please tell me the revolutionary (and environmentally friendly) way in which you proposed to turn coal into carbon that doesn't use coal heated in an airless environment (coke coal).
That's what the coal industry needs to be figuring out.
Coal can be made into neoteric products like carbon microtubules using any number of non-polluting processes.
Id like to know how you propose it be done. Just one of the number of ways would be sufficient to impress me.
Further, as noted, we already have coke coal (essentially pure carbon) production, and that industry shows no sign of being underserviced. So why are struggling coal mining companies going to invest in inventing entirely new processes to produce something already being produced in the most efficient way possible in quantities sufficient for demand?
originally posted by: BeefNoMeat
a reply to: charlyv
Hmmm, that’s interesting....I did not know of that. Definitely an indicator of something...thanks for the info
I remember when the oracle of Omaha bought Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway in 2009, it stands to reason he’d continuing buying rail...did he buy just for the railway, or did he bet on coal exports and double down on rail? Again, coal production in America is projected to increase in a direct relationship to world-wide demand...that’s why tariffs are the single most inefficient tax.
Coal, which is abundant and has an incompact structure, is a good candidate to replace graphite as the raw material for the production of graphene. Here, a new solution phase technique for the preparation of graphene from coal has been developed.