4 ms·

When the price of coal rises other forms of fuel become more cost competitive. The net result should be a reduction in coal production as utilities switch to ot

by arcseco 11y ago

When the price of coal rises other forms of fuel become more cost competitive. The net result should be a reduction in coal production as utilities switch to other fuels.

de_Selby 11y ago
This appears to be the point the parent comment is missing. Making coal economically uncompetitive speeds the adoption of alternative energy sources
- adventured 11y ago
  It wouldn't make coal non-competitive, that's the central flaw in the argument. You have to buy the majority of all known coal deposits on earth to accomplish that, and there is far too much land / coal to be purchased to get even remotely close to that. Up to that point, more supply will perpetually come on-line to off-set the price gains, because of the substantial increase in profitability price increases enable. Not to mention that the vast global coal industry that remains - ie those mines not purchased (and there would be vast numbers of those) - will move into high gear and invest into producing more coal, faster, to capture the profits available. It's already very well understood that this is what happens in practice. See: the oil industry. Increase the price of oil from $50 to $200 and see how much supply comes on-line, and the unusual sources it starts coming from (eg tar sands, or two miles below the surface of the ocean).
iamsohungry 11y ago
Yes, but there are other ways to raise the price of coal which don't involve bribing coal companies to stop destroying the world. They're destroying the world, how about they pay for it? You could put a massive property tax on coal mining rights, a massive tax on profits from coal, and/or a massive sales tax on coal. Any of those would achieve the same result, but instead of rewarding sociopathic corporations that are literally destroying the world, they'd put that money in public coffers which could be used, for example, to fund renewable energy. I really don't think we need to bribe coal companies to stop killing us. EDIT: And don't even think of playing the "but if we tax them they'll pass that cost on to consumers" card. Driving up the cost of coal by buying mines will also result in them passing that cost on to consumers. All costs are always passed on to consumers: billionaires are billionaires because they're adept at getting other people to pay for things. At least if the money is going into taxes, it can be passed back to the consumers it was taken from in the form of public programs.
- gsibble 11y ago
  You really don't seem to have a good grasp on free market economics.
  - iamsohungry 11y ago
    Either present a counterargument or GTFO. Ad-hominem attacks do not contribute to the conversation.
adventured 11y ago
Supply would come on-line to control the price increases, which would completely neutralize any large price spike. We know this is how economics works. We have hundreds of years of commodity market examples to pull from that demonstrate exactly that. The oil industry has provided numerous obvious examples of it in practice in just the last 50 years. This is the flaw at the heart of the plan, that guarantees it can never be feasible. Unless you plan to buy the majority of all coal deposits on earth.

by arcseco 11y ago

When the price of coal rises other forms of fuel become more cost competitive. The net result should be a reduction in coal production as utilities switch to other fuels.

de_Selby 11y ago

This appears to be the point the parent comment is missing. Making coal economically uncompetitive speeds the adoption of alternative energy sources

adventured 11y ago
It wouldn't make coal non-competitive, that's the central flaw in the argument. You have to buy the majority of all known coal deposits on earth to accomplish that, and there is far too much land / coal to be purchased to get even remotely close to that. Up to that point, more supply will perpetually come on-line to off-set the price gains, because of the substantial increase in profitability price increases enable. Not to mention that the vast global coal industry that remains - ie those mines not purchased (and there would be vast numbers of those) - will move into high gear and invest into producing more coal, faster, to capture the profits available. It's already very well understood that this is what happens in practice. See: the oil industry. Increase the price of oil from $50 to $200 and see how much supply comes on-line, and the unusual sources it starts coming from (eg tar sands, or two miles below the surface of the ocean).

iamsohungry 11y ago

Yes, but there are other ways to raise the price of coal which don't involve bribing coal companies to stop destroying the world. They're destroying the world, how about they pay for it? You could put a massive property tax on coal mining rights, a massive tax on profits from coal, and/or a massive sales tax on coal. Any of those would achieve the same result, but instead of rewarding sociopathic corporations that are literally destroying the world, they'd put that money in public coffers which could be used, for example, to fund renewable energy. I really don't think we need to bribe coal companies to stop killing us. EDIT: And don't even think of playing the "but if we tax them they'll pass that cost on to consumers" card. Driving up the cost of coal by buying mines will also result in them passing that cost on to consumers. All costs are always passed on to consumers: billionaires are billionaires because they're adept at getting other people to pay for things. At least if the money is going into taxes, it can be passed back to the consumers it was taken from in the form of public programs.

gsibble 11y ago
You really don't seem to have a good grasp on free market economics.
- iamsohungry 11y ago
  Either present a counterargument or GTFO. Ad-hominem attacks do not contribute to the conversation.

adventured 11y ago

Supply would come on-line to control the price increases, which would completely neutralize any large price spike. We know this is how economics works. We have hundreds of years of commodity market examples to pull from that demonstrate exactly that. The oil industry has provided numerous obvious examples of it in practice in just the last 50 years. This is the flaw at the heart of the plan, that guarantees it can never be feasible. Unless you plan to buy the majority of all coal deposits on earth.