UK Coal Mining

Mistermeaner

My hope was to find some coal on the way down.

My real view, if anyone cares - nuclear + shale, with mildly subsidised renewables but only once technology has advanced further.

Renewable Storage wise compressed air into underground cavities that can be released to power generators. Inefficient but better than wasting it.

We need uk energy independence from Russia particularly but also eu.

Also while I believe north sea oil to be basically dead expect some resurgence on back of / in front of shale (similar technology) focus will be on reducing economic obligations on decommissioning.

ukcarper

ggb1979 wrote: »

My hope was to find some coal on the way down.

My real view, if anyone cares - nuclear + shale, with mildly subsidised renewables but only once technology has advanced further.

Renewable Storage wise compressed air into underground cavities that can be released to power generators. Inefficient but better than wasting it.

We need uk energy independence from Russia particularly but also eu.

Also while I believe north sea oil to be basically dead expect some resurgence on back of / in front of shale (similar technology) focus will be on reducing economic obligations on decommissioning.

I'm not sure anybody does I suspect any coal you find would belong to government like the shale oil.

As for shale I'm undecided don't tend to believe the facts as presented by interested parties which stand to gain.

Mistermeaner

ukcarper wrote: »

As for shale I'm undecided don't tend to believe the facts as presented by interested parties which stand to gain.

By interested parties you mean the whole UK economy?

cells

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Of course you don't. You've previously told me that you don't believe the claims over the health impacts of coal emissions.

Living in denial of the real cost of fossil fuels and the subsidies they receive ($5.3tn pa) by not being held accountable for their full impact, is an essential position now for those still wishing to complain or criticise the open and transparent subsidies ($120bn pa) being paid to renewables.

Fossil fuels subsidised by $10m a minute, says IMF

Nobody likes the idea of subsidies, but until the playing field is level, renewables will continue to need support. But the level of support is shrinking fast.

Mart.

total bull !!!! propaganda about $5T fossil subsidies

virtually all the fossil 'subsidies' arise from the oil and gas producing nations selling to their own people at cost rather than $100 a barrel

Clearly this 'subsidy' is an accounting trick. How the hell can whole nations run off the back of fosail fuels if they are such a burden? How has qatar become a $150,000/head country if it costs so much subsidy?

Stop with the BS

Martyn1981

cells wrote: »

total bull !!!! propaganda about $5T fossil subsidies

Stop with the BS

So you want the IMF to stop publishing information on the true cost of coal, whilst you continue to criticise renewables subsidies, and claim that the health impacts of coal pollution are overstated?

Doesn't seem very fair!

cells wrote: »

virtually all the fossil 'subsidies' arise from the oil and gas producing nations selling to their own people at cost rather than $100 a barrel

Not sure why you stated that. If you read the article, you'll find that more than half of the subsidies are for coal.

Mart.

PS. Do you really believe that the IMF are 'in on it' too?

CLAPTON

Martyn1981 wrote: »

So you want the IMF to stop publishing information on the true cost of coal, whilst you continue to criticise renewables subsidies, and claim that the health impacts of coal pollution are overstated?

Doesn't seem very fair!



Not sure why you stated that. If you read the article, you'll find that more than half of the subsidies are for coal.

Mart.

PS. Do you really believe that the IMF are 'in on it' too?

the 'true ' cost as defined by the IMF include those very subjective 'climate change' costs (plus a lot of other doubtful nonsense).

the IMF 'true cost' exclude the 'true benefits' of man made climate change : these benefits, as very single climate scientist knows, include the avoidance of the total destruction of the world's economy as we know it.

ukcarper

ggb1979 wrote: »

By interested parties you mean the whole UK economy?

No in this case I mean the gas company. Do you always believe what companies or organisations tell you.