Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Coal Production Hits 35-Year Low
oilandgas360.com ^ | June 10, 2016

Posted on 06/10/2016 12:59:52 PM PDT by PROCON

Coal production in the first three months of 2016 was 173 million short tons, the lowest quarterly level in the United States since a major coal strike in the second quarter of 1981. Among the regions tracked by the EIA, the Powder River Basin (PBR) in Montana and Wyoming saw the largest decline both in terms of absolute tonnage and as a percentage of the previous quarter.

Demand for coal has dropped off steeply as natural gas becomes the primary fuel source for electrical generation. Electricity generation accounts for more than 90% of domestic coal use, but environmental regulations have caused the fuel source to fall out of favor. Compounding the problem for coal producers, electricity demand is growing more slowly, while historically-low natural gas prices are making it easier for electricity generators to switch to the cleaner burning fuel, reports the EIA.

(Excerpt) Read more at oilandgas360.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Society
KEYWORDS: 2016issues; bhoepa; coal; coalchart; electricity; energy; epa; trends; waroncoal
Electricity generation accounts for more than 90% of domestic coal use, but environmental regulations have caused the fuel source to fall out of favor.

IOW, the hoax of man-made global warming is putting Americans out of good paying jobs and economically hurting communities.

The "Change" in Hope and Change.

1 posted on 06/10/2016 12:59:52 PM PDT by PROCON
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Start some coal gasification refineries. Syn-gas was Hitler’s fuel.


2 posted on 06/10/2016 1:02:29 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON
With the price of natural gas nosediving, no wonder why coal usage is down as utilities around the country replace their coal-fired power plants with gas-fired power plants. We may be seeing a major demand for gas pipelines from various sources all over the USA over the next 20 years.

Indeed, the need to clean up the air of Chinese cities is why China signed that US$400 billion, 30-year deal with Russia to develop and import natural gas from eastern Siberia.

3 posted on 06/10/2016 1:04:56 PM PDT by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's Economic Cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: central_va

If we can get rid of these baseless environmental regulations, we can continue to burn plentiful, cheap coal.


4 posted on 06/10/2016 1:05:46 PM PDT by PROCON
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

I pray every day that the increased costs of liberal “thinking” hurts liberals badly, some mortally.

As for sure will be the case with the $15/hour wage. Higher energy costs (and associated costs like food) will be right behind, if not already there.


5 posted on 06/10/2016 1:07:00 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Don't mistake my silence for ignorance, my calmness for acceptance, or my kindness for weakness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: central_va
You mean coal-to-liquid using the Fischer-Tropsch process. The Nazis extensively invested in coal-to-liquid production plants starting in the late 1930's (remember, Germany had substantial coal resources) and that's why the coal-to-liquid production plants were among the highest-priority targets for Allied bombers.
6 posted on 06/10/2016 1:07:27 PM PDT by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's Economic Cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

As I recall from reading at the time, Nixon created the EPA to prevent California from usurping the power. By keeping the power federal Nixon hoped to ameliorate the potential damage that a California EPA could do. California was the nation’s largest single state market for many things and Nixon’s advisors told him that their regulation would force bizarre and damaging changes in products ranging from soap to trucks. The Democrats were furious at Nixon’s actions and managed to pass legislation preventing future presidents from creating an agency without Congress’ input and approval.

Since then, the liberals have seized the reigns and the EPA has become, in my opinion, the largest single driver of regulations. Regulations cost money. Latex paint, for example, has gone from about $4 per gallon in 1973 to $33 per gallon today. Latex paint is probably one of the least harmful chemicals you could use, but it is regulated to death. So too are things like water and carbon dioxide.

I can’t help but think if Nixon could have seen how the EPA has turned out he would not have created it.


7 posted on 06/10/2016 1:09:35 PM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Both Obama and Hillary! said they would put coal mines out of business and coal miners out of work. Is anybody surprised?


8 posted on 06/10/2016 1:14:22 PM PDT by originalbuckeye ("In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather
Yes, without a doubt and regardless of its original purpose, the EPA is the single government entity which costs Americans uneccessary untold amounts of money and hassle.

In a perfect world, it should be abolished. Period.

9 posted on 06/10/2016 1:19:31 PM PDT by PROCON
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

Once formed, the EPA became a central clearing house for eco-law suits. The tree huggers, instead of having to deal with the individual states to get regs. passed, would now just deal with the EPA. Once a reg would pass, they could then sue the EPA for not forcing the individual states to enforce it. Saved ‘em a TON of $$$$$.


10 posted on 06/10/2016 1:44:36 PM PDT by Roccus (POLITICIAN....JOURNALIST............... four letter words spelled with ten letters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

bump


11 posted on 06/10/2016 2:13:06 PM PDT by gattaca (Republicans believe every day is July 4, democrats believe every day is April 15. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather; PROCON; Roccus
The EPA was created so that there would be a single agency to administer and enforce environmental laws that Congress had already begun to enact and those that Congress was planning on enacting. Congressional committees would ratify the creation of EPA.

There were already environmental laws on the books when EPA was created and they were enforced by other agencies and commissions. These would be transferred to EPA.

One of the major environmental laws that Congress produced was the National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) which was enacted a year before EPA and it was transferred to EPA after EPA was set up.

Courts get involved in environmental issue also so EPA has to administer and enforce environmental laws that are a result of court decisions. Regulation of CO2 is a result of a SCOTUS decision. In 2007, in the case of Massachusetts vs EPA, SCOTUS ruled that CO2 was a pollutant and told EPA to regulate it with the Clean Air Act.

I'm sure that you recall how Congress was going to pre-empt EPA and enact legislation to regulate CO2, which was called Cap and Trade, but they failed to pass it, so in 2010 Obama and EPA would issue their first CO2 regs, based on the courts 2007 decision.

As for California, Guv Reagan signed the California Environmental Quality Act in 1968 and CA preceded the feds. Consequently, there are some environmental regulations(like air quality) in which California is the only state that can set more stringent standards than the feds.

As for the latex paint, there are two main costs to that. The resin, like vinyl acetate or acrylic are petrochemical based and are determined by the price of oil, which has gone up a lot since 1973. The other is white pigment. Back in those days they used a lot of lead sulfate pigment but that was outlawed so they had to switch to titanium Dioxide which costs a lot more.

Certainly latex paint has to be disposed of properly, but there are no air quality regulations on latex since water is the main solvent. OTOH, oil based paints use organic solvents which are highly regulated because they produce ozone/smog. This mainly affects manufacturers who make products that have to be painted

Getting rid of EPA solves nothing. It is the acts of Congress that have to be administered/enforced

12 posted on 06/10/2016 8:15:10 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Thank you for your informative, comprehensive response. Walter Lipmann, who wrote “Public Opinion” said that each of us can only know a little about each topic. About most, we have only a cartoon image like in a Japanese print where one or two lines represent mountains.

My image of the EPA is that the people running it revel in creating mountains of regulations, many of which are unnecessary and/or unnecessarily harmful to keeping jobs in America. However, it may be that the EPA mostly administers evil created elsewhere. I have read stories about the EPA funding NGO’s to sue it thus forcing it to enforce regulations that for one reason or another it is unable to enforce. (I’ve seen similar agenda driven infighting in corporations so I believe its possible for this scenario to exist.)


13 posted on 06/11/2016 3:49:04 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson