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.

 

Obama didn't kill Coal, Economics did.

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 04:06 AM
link   
The reason why coal miners are losing their jobs is very simple. It has nothing to do with environmentalists, regulations, Obama, big government, or all the other boogie-men. The reason is simple. Economics.

- Natural Gas is cheap, albeit there are concerns about fracking which is banned in my state.

- Renewables are cheap. So cheap that a new wind turbine or solar panel can displace already built coal or nuclear power stations.

Here is the evidence:





Source: Lazard Levelized Cost of Energy V12.0

US Energy Information Administration. Levelized Cost and And Levelized Avoided Cost of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2018 comes to similar figures but only includes Clean Coal.

The evidence for what this does to power prices is very simple. In my country:


On a national basis, residential electricity prices and bills are expected to decrease in the period from 2017-18 to 2020-21. This trend is primarily driven by wholesale costs reducing in South East Queensland, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. The reduction is driven by the estimated entry of 9,732 MW of accredited, committed or expected new generation and battery storage. The downward pressure this generation creates on wholesale prices more than offsets expected increases in gas and coal fuel prices over the period.

The 9,732 MW of new generation and battery storage that is expected to enter the NEM over the analysis period is comprised of:

8,961 MW of new large-scale intermittent generation.

566 MW of new thermal generation and upgraded capacity of existing generators

205 MW of battery storage, supported by jurisdictional programs.



Source: Australian Energy Market Commission

The point I am trying to make is this:

Economics do not care about your job or the family that it supports.

Economics do not care about your country.

Economics do not care about your planet.

Economics do not care about your health.

Do we have any thoughts on how we can fix all four issues here ladies and gentlemen?

(And as a side note, maybe renewables aren't a bad as you think they are).
edit on 22/12/18 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 04:13 AM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz




Economics do not care about your job or the family that it supports.

Economics do not care about your country.

Economics do not care about your planet.

Economics do not care about your health.


I disagree, economics is a tool used by humans. that means what the economics care about is at the direction of the humans using it



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: toysforadults


I disagree, economics is a tool used by humans. that means what the economics care about is at the direction of the humans using it


Good point! What do you think people most often use economics for?

How about: by private owners, for a profit.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 04:23 AM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz

it's not the tool it's how you use it



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 04:31 AM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz

High paid mining jobs equal high priced coal , it's part of what killed the coal industry here in the UK so yeah economics are to blame , reopening coal faces for political reasons doesn't chance the facts.

Gas powered energy is more economically viable and environmentally sensible especially when you create your own gas relatively cheaply but renewables have to be part of the future as is effective electricity storage.

Coal is old world technology and no longer suited to the modern world.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 06:56 AM
link   
0bama killed a lot of things, but wasn't able to pull off white genocide.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 07:15 AM
link   
I'd really like to know if existing nuclear is actually more expensive than renewables or if it is the corporations which own and manage these facilities, these corporations which seem to demand higher profit levels every year, that make nuclear uncompetitive. I have a feeling that if nuclear were run as a state utility (without normal government bloat) that it would be VERY competitive and probably much cheaper than renewables.

When I looked into buying commercial energy from nuclear plants in my state, which is something like > 1MwH per day (usually many to 10's of MwH's) the price was less than $.01 per KwH. So when you compare that to residential rates which were about $.09-.14 /KwH which is > 900-1400% greater than the bulk commercial rate.

I don't think renewables can compete with these bulk prices, even remotely but since the corporations need to maintain certain profit levels, they price themselves out of the market.

I think there is some other factor at play here, one we are not supposed to see or know about, and it will directly effect out energy security in the near future as the talk of early decommissioning of nuclear plants continues.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 07:22 AM
link   
China disagrees. Why waste money on wind. Solar. Gas when their coal plants are firing on all cylinders, making money.

It would cost money to switch over

In the u.s. the government will bankrupt companies through fines , regulations and forcing them to upgrade.

China looks at their bottom line, if anything effects profits, no way.

The u.s. is smart. But over kill everything. No balance



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: CADpro

This is the pinical of low conspiracy theories...

Anyways. Who cares about coal it's out dated, dirty, inefficient, and the people who get the coal out of the ground now days either work in gulags in north Korea and China or are making the same ridiculously high hourly wage as an iron worker or longshoremen.
Those skills for getting the coal can be used in much more ambitious worthwhile mining projects or in similar fields like natural gas or oil extraction.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 08:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Bloodworth

Yeah, funny how coal is making a comeback following the rollback of regulations that make coal unaffordable. I bet those "fines" were redirected to the flop i will never let anyone forget: Solyndra. Over 535 million dollars funneled into that solar garbage, lost forever to capitalists pockets. Thanks, Obama.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 08:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: CADpro


Those skills for getting the coal can be used in much more ambitious worthwhile mining projects or in similar fields like natural gas or oil extraction.


Skills used for mining coal have little in common with gas well drilling or oil field operations. Usually the technically ignorant make comments such as these and my favorite dolt comment "we should just use hydrogen."



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz

Sending train loads of virginia coal out west and Montana coal trains out east to keep sulfur levels even sure doesnt help either.

Stupid regulations.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz



“If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them,” Obama said, responding to a question about his cap-and-trade plan. He later added, “Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”


www.politico.com...



President Barack Obama has followed through on his promise to “bankrupt” the coal industry, causing coal use to fall by 29 percent since 2007, according to a chart published Thursday by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).


dailycaller.com...



Um, yeah. Obama did it.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Dont waste your time.
The cult of gore is stong......



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 08:35 AM
link   
a reply to: pteridine

Transferable skills aren't a thing?

And I said similar fields ... I know guys out west who are welders for three months and are working in the oil sands in the carpenters union for another four.
edit on 22-12-2018 by strongfp because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 08:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: DBCowboy

Dont waste your time.
The cult of gore is stong......


It's just funny and illustrates the mindset.

"Economics" killed the coal industry.

Just like a "gun" shoots someone.

Never any talk about who pulls the trigger.




posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: pteridine

Transferable skills aren't a thing?

And I said similar fields ... I know guys out west who are welders for three months and are working in the oil sands in the carpenters union for another four.


To be sure, skilled trades are transferable anywhere they are needed, but that is a trivial argument. The production workers have a skillsets unique to their occupations. Working in an underground coal mine has little in common with drilling gas wells. Running a longwall mining machine requires skills not readily available in the oil fields just as dealing with a high pressure Christmas tree of valves would be foreign to the miners.

Gas drillers are usually imported in the gas shale areas from Oklahoma and Texas and not recruited from the ranks of unemployed miners. Likewise, drillers wouldn't be recruited for working in an underground mine producing coal.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:06 AM
link   
I still wanna know what clean coal is.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:13 AM
link   
Obama killed coal through regulations which effected economics. Coal is the most economical means to produce energy and the U.S. has abundant amounts of coal. Some say we have enough coal to supply the world for 500 years. China uses enormous amount of coal, much of it coming from the U.S.. its economical enough to ship halfway around the world to China. The only reason why its not being used as much in the U.S. is because of government regulations by Obama's administration which either shutdown coal plants or made coal uneconomical to use. Try forging steel or any other metal with solar panels or wind generators & see what happens.

Most green energy products like solar panels, wind generators & batteries are manufactured in China in manufacturing plants powered by coal. These green products are then shipped halfway around the world on super freighter ships which run on dirty bunker oil with no emmisions standards. 15 superfreighter ships emit more CO2 than all the automobiles in the world combined. There are hundreds of these ships traveling at any given time. Jet airplanes which many so called environmentalists like Al Gore fly on also have a large CO2 footprint. So do their multiple mansions & their promotion of more debt spending.

For those who think CO2 is a threat to our planet. The 1st thing they should be calling for is the banning of ships which run on bunker oil from traveling & the banning of jet airplanes from flying. They should also only buy goods produced domestically, preferably locally & never buy new vehicles.

People will use whatever is more economical for them to use. If its cheaper to drive a hybrid or electric car. That's what the majority of people will use. Also, even solely petrol powered vehicles are getting more fuel efficient & are becoming cheaper to use. Imo, over the next decade, people will be switching to more hybrid or electric vehicles. This will cause oil demand & prices to drop dramatically. We'll probably see gas prices below $1 per gallon again when this happens but electric vehicles will still be more economical to use because they have fewer moving parts & less service requirements. Fyi, plants thrive on CO2. So if one wants a greener planet they should want more CO2 not less.
edit on 22-12-2018 by JBIZZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: DBCowboy

Dont waste your time.
The cult of gore is stong......


It's just funny and illustrates the mindset.

"Economics" killed the coal industry.

Just like a "gun" shoots someone.

Never any talk about who pulls the trigger.



Faux logic. How would you shoot someone without a gun?
How would the coal industry do, if nobody wanted or needed it?







 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join