Mining companies aim to export coal t...

Mining companies aim to export coal to China through Northwest ports

There are 33 comments on the Oregonlive.com story from Sep 9, 2010, titled Mining companies aim to export coal to China through Northwest ports. In it, Oregonlive.com reports that:

Portland General Electric has proposed closing Oregon's only coal-fired power plant, in Boardman, by 2020, part of a slow-growth picture for U.S. coal consumption.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Oregonlive.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Northie

Spokane, WA

#1 Sep 9, 2010
Good article. The international coal burning comparison graph is startling. How many of us know that China already burns twice as much coal as the United States, and that China's coal consumption will nearly double again in twenty years? Or that Brazil's appetite for coal is the planet's fastest growing? Or that the US is the only rich major nation where coal pollution is still rising?

Oregon, California and Washington are all leading the way towards banning coal in the US, yet they stand squarely between the world's largest coal polluters in Asia and the world's largest coal mines in Wyoming and Montana. It looks as if this will be a main front in the coming coal wars.
Earthling

Valencia, Spain

#2 Sep 9, 2010
I'm surprised that Norfie hasn't compared the population figures for China against the USA.
It's a clue to why coal consumption in China is high and likely to get a lot higher as the Chinese demand more of what the west has enjoyed for many decades.
LessHypeMoreFact

Hamilton, Canada

#3 Sep 9, 2010
Earthling wrote:
I'm surprised that Norfie hasn't compared the population figures for China against the USA.
It might be more interesting to compare sulfur levels in typical Chinese coal vs the Powder River formation. If China has any incentive to lower coal use, it is in the air quality.

And promoting Nuclear or Natural Gas ( Russia?) would be a good idea rather than exporting pollution to another country.

The best methodology for now is to lower coal use as much as possible while actively researching ways to make it clean(er).
Earthling

Pinoso, Spain

#4 Sep 9, 2010
I remember we dreamed of a bright new future when the 60s dawned, having lived through the black 40s and the grey 50s, but nothing much has changed except for the name of the next threat to humanity.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#5 Sep 9, 2010
Earthling wrote:
I'm surprised that Norfie hasn't compared the population figures for China against the USA.
It's a clue to why coal consumption in China is high and likely to get a lot higher as the Chinese demand more of what the west has enjoyed for many decades.
If that continues, our world is toast, and our great grandkids live in a police state.
Earthling

Valencia, Spain

#6 Sep 10, 2010
Northie wrote:
If that continues, our world is toast, and our great grandkids live in a police state.
I'd be interested to know how you manage to link those two separate items?
Knowing how your mind works, I thought you'd have chosen anarchy, or does that follow your police state theory?
Northie

Spokane, WA

#7 Sep 10, 2010
Trend One: If emerging nations continue to increase coal pollution at a breakneck pace, economic and environmental collapse seems assured. By the time we address the problem the damage would probably be irreversible. Nothing in life is certain, but the probability of all this is high enough and the costs catastrophic enough to warrant action now, even if it were costly--but it's cheap, so we have NO excuse to continue in willful ignorance.

Trend Two: If economic and environmental systems do begin to collapse, we can be sure that the public response will be to clamp down hard, to contain growing violence and to enforce harsh regulations in a desperate effort to fix the problem too late. Those efforts would likely fail, as growing disorder feeds upon itself; there are always a few warlord winners when society falls apart, and they always have strong incentives to protect their status by fanning the flames of anger.
GEEWIZ

Russell, KY

#8 Sep 10, 2010
export that COAL=money and jobs.coals getting greener everyday.
GEEWIZ

Russell, KY

#9 Sep 10, 2010
Northie wrote:
Good article. The international coal burning comparison graph is startling. How many of us know that China already burns twice as much coal as the United States, and that China's coal consumption will nearly double again in twenty years? Or that Brazil's appetite for coal is the planet's fastest growing? Or that the US is the only rich major nation where coal pollution is still rising?
Oregon, California and Washington are all leading the way towards banning coal in the US, yet they stand squarely between the world's largest coal polluters in Asia and the world's largest coal mines in Wyoming and Montana. It looks as if this will be a main front in the coming coal wars.
IF any of those states had any COAL they would b coal biggest promoters.that the trouble with greenies doing everything 2 put ppl. out of work.COAL is nothing like u greenies claim, its pretty clean and THERES NO MANMADE g.w. so theres no reason not 2 use it unless u make up the dangers which extream greenies are doing a good job at.
Earthling

Valencia, Spain

#10 Sep 10, 2010
Poor old Norfie and his trends.
He hasn't grasped the fact that emerging nations are only interested in emerging, no matter the consequences.
He believes the public can contain violence, yet violent behaviour continues to grow.
All that's left is anarchy.
Welcome to 2100, where we're not bothered by AGW, the fight to survive on a daily basis is all we're able to think about.
Life expectancy has dropped to an average age of 40, depending on ability to defend yourself, or how many troops you can afford to defend your bunker.
Oh yeah, sea level has risen 20 feet, just that guy like Fat Al predicted 95 years ago, but we have plenty of sea going vessels with comfy accomodation and lots of firepower.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#11 Sep 10, 2010
GEEWIZ wrote:
<quoted text>IF any of those states had any COAL they would b coal biggest promoters.that the trouble with greenies doing everything 2 put ppl. out of work.COAL is nothing like u greenies claim, its pretty clean and THERES NO MANMADE g.w. so theres no reason not 2 use it unless u make up the dangers which extream greenies are doing a good job at.
There are at least a dozen good reasons to stop burning coal that have nothing to do with climate cooking. Coal soot and heavy metal fallout kill between 100,000-200,000 worldwide each year, including 23,000-30,000 in the US alone. Around ten times that number are developmentally impaired by heavy metals pollution from coal, and many more are physically weakened by coal pollution. Coal-caused acid rain costs the world hundreds of billions of dollars in lost biosphere productivity. Many thousands die mining and burning coal each year. Coal is highly subsidized, with many millions each year drained from taxpayers to build and operate coal plants. And so on.

Add the fact that coal is also most of the global warming problem, the costs of which will vastly outstrip all the above, and it's clear that coal's days are numbered--no matter how many US political swing states happen to be major coal states.

http://www.psr.org/resources/coals-assault-on...
Earthling

Valencia, Spain

#12 Sep 10, 2010
"There are at least a dozen good reasons to stop burning coal that have nothing to do with climate cooking."
-
We all know that, but we also know that there aren't practical alternatives available to jump into, just like you know but won't accept.

And whichever way you look at the situation, it isn't the fault of sceptics or deniers, it's economic or the fossil fuel industry is out to kill us all off, take your pick.
GEEWIZ

Russell, KY

#13 Sep 10, 2010
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
There are at least a dozen good reasons to stop burning coal that have nothing to do with climate cooking. Coal soot and heavy metal fallout kill between 100,000-200,000 worldwide each year, including 23,000-30,000 in the US alone. Around ten times that number are developmentally impaired by heavy metals pollution from coal, and many more are physically weakened by coal pollution. Coal-caused acid rain costs the world hundreds of billions of dollars in lost biosphere productivity. Many thousands die mining and burning coal each year. Coal is highly subsidized, with many millions each year drained from taxpayers to build and operate coal plants. And so on.
Add the fact that coal is also most of the global warming problem, the costs of which will vastly outstrip all the above, and it's clear that coal's days are numbered--no matter how many US political swing states happen to be major coal states.
http://www.psr.org/resources/coals-assault-on...
yes COALS days are numbered as soon as they come up with something better and then u still got coal 2 oil.COAL has not even boomed yet.and lives cost=paying higher energy prices unemployment,dispair.i have been around a coal stove all my life thats were u get real coal emissions not phoney ones from a power plant,at school in the 70s u could see em shoveling coal in the furance 2 heat the school=no 1 complained.i would not recommend breathing emissions 24-7=standing over a smokestack.the dangers of emissions are over stated. don;t need a wed site 2 tell me,been around 2 many ppl.that has breathed coal emissions and lived long lives.exporting coal=getting some of our money back from china and jobs.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#14 Sep 11, 2010
If they cannot export coal through ports on the west coast of the US they will use the west coast ports in Canada or Mexico. The developing world needs energy that is simple and requires little high tech help and that is coal. The Sierra Club wants to world to move past coal then they need something that replace it that is reliable, cheap, and easy to use. Solar is neither reliable or cheap, nuclear is neither cheap or easy, and wind is just as unreliable as solar.

The US needs something other than foodstuffs to export to China. China is going to need more coal from somewhere.
GEEWIZ

Russell, KY

#15 Sep 12, 2010
the state of washington needs a large port 4 jobs and taxes 2 pay 4 all those higher energy prices because of wind power.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#16 Sep 12, 2010
GEEWIZ wrote:
the state of washington needs a large port 4 jobs and taxes 2 pay 4 all those higher energy prices because of wind power.
You don't know what you're talking about--but we've already established that.

The State of Washington has the cheapest electric power in the nation, as well as some of the greenest, and we voters passed a law a few years ago to make it even greener, with mandates for more renewables.(We still have one big coal power plant, however; foreign-owned, employing just a few locals, burning coal shipped from a thousand miles away, yet we subsidize the sucker to the tune of $5 million per year.)

The ports of Seattle and Tacoma are also doing extremely well without shipping coal, thank you. Multimodal is the name of the game here; it adds value that you can't get from shipping heaps of cheap rocks.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#17 Sep 12, 2010
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't know what you're talking about--but we've already established that.
The State of Washington has the cheapest electric power in the nation, as well as some of the greenest, and we voters passed a law a few years ago to make it even greener, with mandates for more renewables.(We still have one big coal power plant, however; foreign-owned, employing just a few locals, burning coal shipped from a thousand miles away, yet we subsidize the sucker to the tune of $5 million per year.)
The ports of Seattle and Tacoma are also doing extremely well without shipping coal, thank you. Multimodal is the name of the game here; it adds value that you can't get from shipping heaps of cheap rocks.
And what makes you think that you do know what your talking about. Washington is also like California in that they import electricity just from a closer source which means they are cheaper power than thier next door neighbors. Your green power is subsidized by even more by money from both state and federal.

The reason why your port is doing so well is that it is involved in transshipping cargo from China across North America to eastern points to continue to Europe. Take that away and you have an instant ghost town. Of course California could is the business even more considering thier unemployment.

Take a look at your state's unemployment. Could it be lower, if so then coal being shipped out of those ports would produce the jobs you needed.

What the real issue is desire to see fossil fuels go away and green energy prosper dispite the fact that wind and solar has failed repeatedly that your grasping for any excuse and are desperate to see this fail.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#18 Oct 25, 2010
Available Drilling Rigs for Africa and Middle-East Drilling Projects

Current available drilling rigs for drilling rig projects, National 1320UE, ZJ20 Six Axle Carrier mounted Drilling rig, 700 HP, and IDECO Double Drum Drawworks, 1000HP.
please visit our website for updated inventory list, or contact us for more info.

http://www.midwestoilgas.com/Drilling.htm
Northie

Spokane, WA

#19 Oct 26, 2010
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
And what makes you think that you do know what your talking about. Washington is also like California in that they import electricity just from a closer source which means they are cheaper power than thier next door neighbors. Your green power is subsidized by even more by money from both state and federal.
The reason why your port is doing so well is that it is involved in transshipping cargo from China across North America to eastern points to continue to Europe. Take that away and you have an instant ghost town. Of course California could is the business even more considering thier unemployment.
Take a look at your state's unemployment. Could it be lower, if so then coal being shipped out of those ports would produce the jobs you needed.
What the real issue is desire to see fossil fuels go away and green energy prosper dispite the fact that wind and solar has failed repeatedly that your grasping for any excuse and are desperate to see this fail.
Tina manufactures her own "facts" once again. Unfortunately, none of them bear any resemblance to actual facts:

1) Washington is a net energy exporter

2) Container cargo entering the ports of Seattle and Portland is not on its way to Europe, unless Idaho is considered Western Europe.

3) Coal transhipment is highly automated, producing few local jobs, and the low margins on coal leave little cash to spill over into the local economy.

4) Rather than "failing", wind power is doing exceptionally well here. There is a reason that the Columbia Gorge is the world capital of windsurfing.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#20 Oct 26, 2010
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
Tina manufactures her own "facts" once again. Unfortunately, none of them bear any resemblance to actual facts:
1) Washington is a net energy exporter
2) Container cargo entering the ports of Seattle and Portland is not on its way to Europe, unless Idaho is considered Western Europe.
3) Coal transhipment is highly automated, producing few local jobs, and the low margins on coal leave little cash to spill over into the local economy.
4) Rather than "failing", wind power is doing exceptionally well here. There is a reason that the Columbia Gorge is the world capital of windsurfing.
And your claiming that I making things up.

1. Washington is a net energy transporter. In other words it is passing through the state like electricity generted in Texas ends up powering the lighs in California.

2. The cargo that is being unloaded in Washington because it is faster to tranship by rail than sail around North America via the Panama Canel or the North West Passage. Freight in transit is capital tied up and unavailable for other uses. So the faster you can deliver the faster you can invoce the receiver and be paid.

3. Nearly all cargo operations are automanted to one degree or another. That includes containerized cargo. But even with all that automation there are still plenty of jobs from working on the docks which includes handling the mooring and unmooring process to tugs, to providing those ships with the supplies needed to support the crew and keep that ship in proper running order. All of which are very well paying jobs.

4. Just because it is the captial of windusrfing dosn't mean that it is great for generating wind power. Another place that is excellent wor wind surfing is Hawaii and there are plenty of abandond wind farms rusting away.

Before saying what I "generate" resembles nothing to the facts I suggest you start looking to see what the facts are instead of swallowing another spoonfull of propaganda.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Peabody Energy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Burned Out on Coal: Industry Decline, Lives Des... (Mar '16) Apr '16 Noble 4
News Miners' Union Takes Unusual Legal Turn to Save ... (May '13) Dec '15 JBH 1995 7
News Coal miner Peabody posts 3Q loss on weaker demand (Oct '13) Oct '13 Giuseppe Stefani 1
News Lee-Ann Goodman: U.S. activists rap Keystone bu... (Jul '13) Jul '13 Calling Her Out 1
News UMW sues to keep benefits as Patriot shakes up ... (Nov '12) Nov '12 letemrip 2
News New Indiana coal mine to create 350 jobs (Apr '09) Jul '12 Kory stone 3
News UMWA locals approve contract, setting stage for... (Jan '07) May '12 consol energy lay... 611
More from around the web