5 ms·

If the price of coal rises 50%, a whole host of non-coal alternatives suddenly become economically feasible. So yes, entrenched actors (i.e. coal companies) wi

• adventured 11y ago
  We've seen coal go up in price by more than 50%, and it didn't hammer the industry. For example, global coal prices basically doubled from 2003-2007. Coal consumption did not plunge during that time, China kept buying more of it at higher prices (coal at 2x the current prices, is still a cheap energy source if you don't properly force in environmental costs). It wasn't until fracking made huge amounts of natural gas available, that the US coal industry began to sink (in tandem with the Obama Admin targeting coal). More expensive coal can help speed the process, I certainly agree with that. The question is, can you buy enough coal mines around the world to crash the coal industry in that respect, and out-pace the amount of new coal supply other miners can bring to the market seeking higher profits. I seriously doubt it, I'd argue there's far too much coal. Politically you'd have to basically use the Obama Admin tactics, globally, to hit the coal industry, while also removing as many mines as possible. It's an incredibly expensive, risky proposition (and good luck getting everyone to sign on to it) - when we'd be far better off continuing to improve alt energy, and building nuclear plants. China for example isn't going to chop their own legs off to placate climate concerns, they're going to keep using coal until they can gradually diversify to other sources like nuclear, wind and solar.