3 ms·

Those articles are about selling off old coal mines. This article is about India using coal. The thing about coal is that it's ubiquitous. It's hard to find a

by rsj_hn 5y ago

Those articles are about selling off old coal mines. This article is about India using coal. The thing about coal is that it's ubiquitous. It's hard to find a country that doesn't have at least some coal. But not all mines are profitable, and just as coal deposits are ubiquitous, so are money-losing mines or mines in which coal is no longer profitable to extract. That has as much to do with the nation abandoning coal as an energy as source, as the many auto-junkyards show that a nation is abandoning the automobile.

Arnt 5y ago
There being no bidders for 48 of 67 mines suggests to me that few investors expect much coal use near these 48.
- rsj_hn 5y ago
  No, it suggests that these are money losing mines. India's coal usage is not only increasing, but they have set official goals to increase it even further: From TFA: Power demand in India is expected to grow faster than anywhere in the world over the next two decades. [...] Coal India aims for 1 billion tonnes by 2024 Meeting that demand will not fall to people like Raju, but to Coal India. It is already the world's largest miner, and aims to increase production to 1 billion tonnes a year by 2024. However the percentage of coal in the total electrical output of india will fall because they are also trying to increase renewables. That's what a lot of people don't understand. Both India and China have an insatiable need for energy. It's not at all a contradiction that coal usage will grow while the percentage of electricity generated from coal will fall. In fact, China defines "net zero" as 20% or less of total energy being from fossil fuels by 2050, and it's quite easy to achieve that but still have actual fossil fuel usage increase between now and then. India is in a similar position.
  - Arnt 5y ago
    Right. Sorry, that was sloppy and too quick. I meant "increasing", I suppose, not "much". Let's say, then, that few investors expect demand for coal to raise prices to the point where these mines are profitable.
    - rsj_hn 5y ago
      Yes, the profit would be something like future price of coal * amount of coal recovered - cost of recovering the coal. What I don't understand is of these three variables, why you think the expected future price of coal is the one driving the decision. Because that is the only variable that has nothing to do with the mines being sold. But just think about this a little bit. You have Coal India, which publicly declared plans to ramp up production. That, too, is a statement on the future price of coal (since India imports much of its coal). So obviously Coal India thinks prices will be high enough to justify a ramp up of domestic production even though there is abundant coal available from nations with much more productive mines and higher quality coal. At the same time, Coal India is the one selling off these 60 mines (out of ~400). Why would they do that, if the mines weren't productive, or the cost of coal recovery high from them? In other words, you are drawing the exact opposite conclusion of what, IMO, should be drawn, and relying on this dubious oracle to predict future coal prices, when we have much better data with which to predict future coal prices.

by rsj_hn 5y ago

Arnt 5y ago

There being no bidders for 48 of 67 mines suggests to me that few investors expect much coal use near these 48.

rsj_hn 5y ago
No, it suggests that these are money losing mines. India's coal usage is not only increasing, but they have set official goals to increase it even further: From TFA: Power demand in India is expected to grow faster than anywhere in the world over the next two decades. [...] Coal India aims for 1 billion tonnes by 2024 Meeting that demand will not fall to people like Raju, but to Coal India. It is already the world's largest miner, and aims to increase production to 1 billion tonnes a year by 2024. However the percentage of coal in the total electrical output of india will fall because they are also trying to increase renewables. That's what a lot of people don't understand. Both India and China have an insatiable need for energy. It's not at all a contradiction that coal usage will grow while the percentage of electricity generated from coal will fall. In fact, China defines "net zero" as 20% or less of total energy being from fossil fuels by 2050, and it's quite easy to achieve that but still have actual fossil fuel usage increase between now and then. India is in a similar position.
- Arnt 5y ago
  Right. Sorry, that was sloppy and too quick. I meant "increasing", I suppose, not "much". Let's say, then, that few investors expect demand for coal to raise prices to the point where these mines are profitable.
  - rsj_hn 5y ago
    Yes, the profit would be something like future price of coal * amount of coal recovered - cost of recovering the coal. What I don't understand is of these three variables, why you think the expected future price of coal is the one driving the decision. Because that is the only variable that has nothing to do with the mines being sold. But just think about this a little bit. You have Coal India, which publicly declared plans to ramp up production. That, too, is a statement on the future price of coal (since India imports much of its coal). So obviously Coal India thinks prices will be high enough to justify a ramp up of domestic production even though there is abundant coal available from nations with much more productive mines and higher quality coal. At the same time, Coal India is the one selling off these 60 mines (out of ~400). Why would they do that, if the mines weren't productive, or the cost of coal recovery high from them? In other words, you are drawing the exact opposite conclusion of what, IMO, should be drawn, and relying on this dubious oracle to predict future coal prices, when we have much better data with which to predict future coal prices.