4 ms·

Coal has been at all time record highs the past couple of years (well before Russia Ukraine war), and it's not even close. Like 3x previous record highs and mor

Coal has been at all time record highs the past couple of years (well before Russia Ukraine war), and it's not even close. Like 3x previous record highs and more like 6x usual prices. 10 years ago I was assured that coal was dead, killed by wind and solar, which were already cheaper than coal at $60/T, and falling. How is it possible then that 10 years on with all the vastly expanded and even cheaper and better renewables, that people are paying $430/T for coal? And it's not the remaining few legacy assets winding down as they compete for a dwindling supply of fuel, global coal production is rising, new coal power plants are being built. I've never heard any of these people go back and reflect on what they got wrong about their predictions about coal, what they missed and where their logic was flawed. What I do hear frequently though is "nuclear is dead, renewables are already cheaper"... I'm a little less open minded this time around.

cinntaile 4y ago
I think you're mixing things here. The western world, the part of the world that bet on renewables, has reduced their dependency on coal. For the rest of the world that is not the case. It's very easy and fast to build a coal plant and pretty much every country has access to the raw material (independency). For the most part you don't need a specialized workforce either, which you do need for nuclear. It's also not intermittent like solar and wind and the supply chains for solar and wind wouldn't have been able to keep up anyway.
- throwawaylinux 4y ago
  I don't think I'm mixing things up, I think you are. Coal extraction in the western world is making huge amounts of money and scaling up production, exactly the opposite of what the naysayers were incessantly parroting. Coal is no different than wind and solar in terms of accessibility of plant or product. Actually renewables are significantly easier to acquire and scale and deploy in many cases -- millions of people have solar panels on their houses for example. Private, as well as municipal or county level installations are common. As are much larger ones. > For the most part you don't need a specialized workforce either, which you do need for nuclear. You certainly do. You can't just throw a bunch of people from the street together and tell them to run a coal mine, supply line, and power plant. > It's also not intermittent like solar and wind and the supply chains for solar and wind wouldn't have been able to keep up anyway. Might be zeroing in on some of the problems...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - cinntaile 4y ago
    https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Coal_production_and_consumption_statistics https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php... https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/united-states/coal-production https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/united-states/coal-pro... https://www.statista.com/statistics/184333/coal-energy-consumption-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/184333/coal-energy-consu... https://www.worldometers.info/coal/australia-coal/ https://www.worldometers.info/coal/australia-coal/ Australia has consumption going down but production going up, they're selling to China and India. I hope this clears up your confusion. > Actually renewables are significantly easier to acquire and scale and deploy in many cases -- millions of people have solar panels on their houses for example. Private, as well as municipal or county level installations are common. As are much larger ones. You missed my point. You need a lot less materials for the same amount of power in a coal plant and digging for coal is easier to scale up.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - throwawaylinux 4y ago
      I didn't, you're confused about my original point. Nothing you said addresses what I wrote. Try going back and re-reading it.
      - cinntaile 4y ago
        I'm saying those claims were limited to the western world, they didn't address anything else. Where it is true that coal is on its way out.
        throwawaylinux 4y ago
        No they weren't.

cinntaile 4y ago

I think you're mixing things here. The western world, the part of the world that bet on renewables, has reduced their dependency on coal. For the rest of the world that is not the case. It's very easy and fast to build a coal plant and pretty much every country has access to the raw material (independency). For the most part you don't need a specialized workforce either, which you do need for nuclear. It's also not intermittent like solar and wind and the supply chains for solar and wind wouldn't have been able to keep up anyway.

throwawaylinux 4y ago
I don't think I'm mixing things up, I think you are. Coal extraction in the western world is making huge amounts of money and scaling up production, exactly the opposite of what the naysayers were incessantly parroting. Coal is no different than wind and solar in terms of accessibility of plant or product. Actually renewables are significantly easier to acquire and scale and deploy in many cases -- millions of people have solar panels on their houses for example. Private, as well as municipal or county level installations are common. As are much larger ones. > For the most part you don't need a specialized workforce either, which you do need for nuclear. You certainly do. You can't just throw a bunch of people from the street together and tell them to run a coal mine, supply line, and power plant. > It's also not intermittent like solar and wind and the supply chains for solar and wind wouldn't have been able to keep up anyway. Might be zeroing in on some of the problems...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- cinntaile 4y ago
  https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Coal_production_and_consumption_statistics https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php... https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/united-states/coal-production https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/united-states/coal-pro... https://www.statista.com/statistics/184333/coal-energy-consumption-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/184333/coal-energy-consu... https://www.worldometers.info/coal/australia-coal/ https://www.worldometers.info/coal/australia-coal/ Australia has consumption going down but production going up, they're selling to China and India. I hope this clears up your confusion. > Actually renewables are significantly easier to acquire and scale and deploy in many cases -- millions of people have solar panels on their houses for example. Private, as well as municipal or county level installations are common. As are much larger ones. You missed my point. You need a lot less materials for the same amount of power in a coal plant and digging for coal is easier to scale up.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwawaylinux 4y ago
    I didn't, you're confused about my original point. Nothing you said addresses what I wrote. Try going back and re-reading it.
    - cinntaile 4y ago
      I'm saying those claims were limited to the western world, they didn't address anything else. Where it is true that coal is on its way out.
      - throwawaylinux 4y ago
        No they weren't.