The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Peak coal: sooner than you think > Comments

Peak coal: sooner than you think : Comments

By Richard Heinberg, published 21/5/2007

Two new reports deliver a shocking message: coal will be running out much sooner than we think.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
Alzo,
This report by the German Energy group was published a few months back.
There has been plenty of opertunity for it to have been denied, but I
have not seen any critism of the report at all.
Richard Heinberg is the messanger, why do you want to shoot him ?
Posted by Bazz, Monday, 21 May 2007 4:15:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alzo, Tas, and Perseus,
you mock some basic math at your peril... and look foolish as a result.

Wasn't it Perseus that insulted peak oil as a concept a year ago? Yet this Thursday night at 8:30 the ABC Science unit movie "Crude" will announce the unthinkable, that the final oil crisis is almost upon us.

So tell me — if oil reporting is so pathetically weak, why can't coal be? Have you even READ these reports? Sure some of them are by greenie sources... but then again, "Greenies" are known for asking questions that others would rather have just swept under the carpet. I'm more inclined to trust Greenie sources than big business funded efforts like the global warming "Denial Machine" brought to you courtesy of Esso. (As shown on 4 Corners recently).

But forgetting the source of the argument, what about the argument itself? Who is honestly reporting RESERVES against the rate of exponential consumption? Or is everyone today so DUMB that we can't check the reserves, do the math, and realize that there is a problem? I think we are. We are so pathetically DUMB that we'll debate the merits of one author over another, listening to whom we darn well please, choosing the prophets we want to hear, all at the expense of reason and logic.

Please remember the 70 year "life-span exponential growth chart."

1% growth in consumption for 70 years means we will be consuming twice as much in 70 years.

1% = 2
2% = 4
3% = 8
4% = 16
5% = 32
6% = 64 times as much coal being consumed per day, just from 6% growth per year.

So if we DO hit peak oil by 2010 as the ABC science unit is declaring Thursday night, what do you think happens to coal? Hmmm? The Nazi's turned coal into liquid-fuels. Coal consumption growth, already quite alarmingly high, will simply explode as we fail to offset oil decline with coal liquid fuels. It will explode exponentially.

So guys, please do the math before you jump on the denial bandwagon!
Posted by Eclipse Now, Monday, 21 May 2007 4:51:30 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Fossil fuel consumption could be easily met with renewable sources. The challenges are substantial but technical. Rather than calculating the economic devastation from peak oil/peak coal/global warming, perhaps it might be more inspiring to calculate the economic benefits resultant from overcoming the technical challenges for converting biomass to liquid fuels.
Posted by Fester, Monday, 21 May 2007 8:25:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hmmm...

Coal, as a finite resource, will peak, particularly as more and more of it gets munched up. However, I don't think the threat of an immenent peak is really that high.

For one, coal reserves, while dwindling, are still enormous. A Hubbert peak for bitumous coal in the US (bitumous is the "bad" type of coal, that is dirtier and less economically viable as the "good" antracite) is probably around 2200 based on http://www.geo.umn.edu/courses/3005/resource.html. Anthracite will most likely peak eariler, as there is less of it and it is cheaper to mine and process (although I couldn't find any data on it. Anyone know a source?).

Although there is some evidence that coal reserves may not be as large as we thought (ie this piece on NSW coal

http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/reserves-to-dry-up-as-clean-coal-becomes-viable/2007/04/09/1175971023057.html

and the reports refered to by the author) I would suggest that they are pesimistic estimates, (although British coal production has already peaked). This is hardly an immediate problem, as is the issue with peak oil.

My own worry is that with a more likely nearby peak in oil and gas, liquified coal may become economically viable, bringing with it a surge both in coal consumption for transport fuel (to pick up the slack form oil) and a electricity generation (to pick up the slack form gas) along with it a massive increase in CO2 emissions (along with conventional pollutants).

We may resort more to the use of brown and bitumous coal, as opposed to anthracite.

My own impression is that peak coal is not the worry at the moment. Peak oil is much, much more urgent.

However, peak coal may become a problem in the future (if we let it). As such, I welcome any new attempt and research to estimate our remaining reserves more accuratly, and put that in economic and environmental context. I would say the data are not yet of sufficient quality to make the call, and I will be awaiting the release of the second report the author refered to.
Posted by ChrisC, Monday, 21 May 2007 10:02:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We haven’t got enough water anyway for coal>electricity in SE Aus
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/drought-threat-to-power-supply/2007/05/19/1179497318748.html
i vote we turn it into charcoal, burn the off-gas (making less electricity) and sequester the solid carbon in soils. Don't forget the community ed, smart meters, & ubiquitous solar-thermal, Mr Theophanous (Vic Energy Minister - no point appealing to the COALition government).

--

Richard wrote: ..There seems to be a fair amount of ad hominen attack rather than reasoned debate. If it was crap it is surely easy to debunk by an informed critic.

Instead we have critics:
Taz, unexplained y2k reference
alzo ridicule
Perseus abuse, misrepresentation
Taz another y2k reference
Perseus more abuse, unevidenced claim

Flat-earthers only have a very small set of tunes.
Posted by Liam, Monday, 21 May 2007 11:10:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I find it difficult to comprehend some of these posts,the contention that we don't have to worry, we have 200 years coal left, haven't you any thought at all for your decendants, or it will be ok we will burn all the oil and coal, then you can use alternatives. It doen't matter if we burn it all now or in 200 years the fact remains it will be gone.
We shouldn't be burning anything, coal and oil should be reserved for plastics, lubrication and other chemical products then it might last a few thousand years.
There are alternatives for just about everything, we just need to take them up, all this blather about cost is a load of crap, example when the US Army switched to computers the cost of a silicon chip dropped to $2.50, thats why we all have computers today.
This continual deriding of people that suggest something you disagree with is crap, nearly 40 years ago we were warned about clobal warming and depletion of natural resources, if more notice had of been taken then we could have averted the future we now face, in the long run we will have to face the realities of our stupidity.
Just remember this the first bloke that stepped out of the cave and said "I am going to build and live in a hut " was derided "your going to live in a what" "Whats wrong with the cave you ratbag" and its been the same ever since, every advance made by mankind has been greeted with derision, plastic money, daylight saving, steam trains , round earth, earth not the centre of the universe, whatever, theres always a naysayer and his parrot in the wings.
Life doesn't swim merrily along theres always change, chaos, upheavals, disasters shooting the messenger won't stop that.
Posted by alanpoi, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 12:05:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy