[ROCKMAN]

Poland appears to have some specific ideas: Poland Gives Coal a Voice During UN Climate Talks

From Rig Zone: Coal-reliant Poland will host the U.N. climate talks. But in a move that has infuriated climate activists, the Polish government will also preside over a high-level coal industry event on the sidelines of the two-week climate conference. "It's been seen as a real provocation and a statement from the Polish government that they have no intention to move away from coal," said Wendel Trio, director of the Climate Action Network in Europe. Polish officials say that coal, which accounts for more than 80 percent of Poland's electricity generation, won't go away anytime soon and needs to be a key part of the climate debate. So on Nov. 18-19, as the U.N. conference enters its final week in Warsaw, the World Coal Association and Poland's Economy Ministry are organizing a conference billed as "the coal industry's most important event of the year."

The UN climate chief Christiana Figueres will be a keynote speaker at the event. Given the irritation the coal summit has stirred in the climate community, attending it may have been an awkward decision for Figueres, who regularly promotes efforts to boost renewable energy and cut funding for fossil fuels. "She could either completely ignore that it's happening or go there and make a point, and I think she's chosen the latter one," said Gallagher. Though Poland has started restructuring its energy mix to boost renewables, officials say coal will remain the staple source of energy. The coal industry and affiliated sectors provide almost 600,000 jobs in Poland.

On Sunday Polish labor unions and nationalists are planning a panel discussion against climate actions they say could harm Poland's economy. The nationalists will also march the next day, the conference's opening day, which coincides with Poland's independence day. Their marches sometimes turn violent. "Rich European nations are imposing short-term goals on us which they took some 50 years to achieve," said Krzysztof Bosak, a prominent member of the right-wing National Movement.

[Tanada]

Not surprising given that Poland sits on top of some of the richest coal seams on the planet and that they built their entire system on coal powered supply of electricity and industrial energy.

[Lore]

You left out wood? Unless you lump it with bio fuels, but I believe it deserves a category of its own since it's the go to source when all else fails.

In the United States, wood fuel is the second-leading form of renewable energy (behind hydro-electric).

http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/report/renew_co2.cfm

[vision-master]

What will be the no1 energy source in 20 years?

LENR

[dissident]

Gotta love that media propaganda phrasing: "climate activists". As if global warming was some political agenda and not an existential crisis for humanity. It's not activists that want to save humanity from oblivion, it is people with a clue. Clearly the worms that write these articles do not belong in the latter category. They clearly belong in the activist category themselves. Paid fossil fuel industry shill "activists" doing "journalism".

At the rate we are going, we are likely to have human labour as the main energy source in 20 years. Coal will not replace oil as the energy source for the global economy. Places like Poland with lots of coal per capita will not likely be able to extract it if there is a global economic collapse. This is a point that asshats like Stephen Harper, the Canadian Prime Minister, and a global warming denier clown, cannot understand. Being able to produce enough for domestic consumption is not enough. You have to keep the economy of the USA and other economic centers afloat as well.

[ROCKMAN]

“Coal will not replace oil as the energy source for the global economy.” True but OTOH I haven’t seen anyone making such a prediction. The title of the thread deals with the #1 energy source in the future…not a sole energy source. One such prediction from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/1 ... 95221.html

“Reuters - Coal will surpass oil as the key fuel for the global economy by 2020 despite government efforts to reduce carbon emissions, energy consultancy firm Wood Mackenzie said on Monday. Rising demand in China and India will push coal past oil as the two Asian powerhouses will need to rely on the comparatively cheaper fuel to power their economies. Coal demand in the United States, Europe and the rest of Asia will hold steady. Global coal consumption is expected to rise by 25 percent by the end of the decade to 4,500 million tonnes of oil equivalent, overtaking oil at 4,400 million tonnes, according to Woodmac in a presentation on Monday at the World Energy Congress.”

So the key issue is how we reduce the GHG output from burning coal. Seems everyone appears to be in agreement increased coal consumption is inevitable.

"Being able to produce enough for domestic consumption is not enough. You have to keep the economy of the USA and other economic centers afloat as well." Also true. But at the moment increased coal consumption is doing its part to help float a number of economies such as China and India. Significantly increased exports of US coal is helping our trade imbalance and domestic economy a tad also.

[Plantagenet]

The US is well positioned to take advantage of the boom in coal. While US consumption of coal is going down, US coal exports are going up Up UP!


US coal exports going up Up UP!

[dissident]

US coal reserves are exaggerated by a large factor like they are for many other locations, including Poland. Coal will not fill the gap from declining oil production. Non-conventional oil will also not fill the gap from declining conventional oil production.

Having shifted a lot of energy intensive industry abroad, the USA cannot just worry about the reduced local consumption, it has to worry about the energy consumption in places like China.

[dissident]

One short ton of coal has 20 million btu. One barrel of oil has 5.8 million btu. So the coal exports of the USA amount to 1.2 million barrels of oil per day in heat energy terms. Taking into account the fact that coal is not oil in terms of practical application (you can't use it for making gasoline with the same EROEI), this is nothing to write home about.

[Plantagenet]

coal reserves are exaggerated by a large factor

Its more likely that global coal reserves are underestimated. Because existing coal reserves are so large, very little exploration has been done in decades to prove up new coal reserves. Modern exploration would undoubtedly find more coal.

[ROCKMAN]

“Coal will not fill the gap from declining oil production. “ Won’t fill the gap??? Given that global coal production has increased about 70% since 2000 it seems to be doing a fair job of it already with rather solid predictions that it will be doing it even more so as we go forward.

“Having shifted a lot of energy intensive industry abroad, the USA cannot just worry about the reduced local consumption, it has to worry about the energy consumption in places like China.” Apparently that concern has led to a 500% increase in US coal exports to China with pending approval from the US govt to increase the number of coal export terminals on the west coast.

None of which is to say your point about the damage from burning coal isn’t valid. It’s just that so far those concerns are not an issue for either the coal producers, like the US, or the coal consumers, like China.

[Plantagenet]

the coal exports of the USA amount to 1.2 million barrels of oil per day in heat energy terms....this is nothing to write home about.

If the US was exporting a million barrels per day of oil it would indeed be something to talk about. It would be utterly amazing.

Growth in US coal exports is darn impressive, especially when you consider that US coal-exporting sea ports are at capacity so some US coal exports have to go out through Canada. IN a world where economic growth is hard to find, US coal coal exports to the EU grew by 90 PERCENT in one year. Thats a huge gain just to the slow economies in the EU.

Its not straight up, but all the signs point to continued growth of US coal exports, and continued global increases in coal use.

US coal export map

[Tanada]

“Reuters - Coal will surpass oil as the key fuel for the global economy by 2020 despite government efforts to reduce carbon emissions, energy consultancy firm Wood Mackenzie said on Monday. Rising demand in China and India will push coal past oil as the two Asian powerhouses will need to rely on the comparatively cheaper fuel to power their economies. Coal demand in the United States, Europe and the rest of Asia will hold steady. Global coal consumption is expected to rise by 25 percent by the end of the decade to 4,500 million tonnes of oil equivalent, overtaking oil at 4,400 million tonnes, according to Woodmac in a presentation on Monday at the World Energy Congress.”

Sadly that analysis inherently assumes that we will be producing 4,400 million tons of petroleum per year in 2020. While I admit this is possible I find it highly unlikely as it implies the plateau extending out to well over a decade before world decline overtakes world new production.

I have frequently first predicted and then puzzled over the plateau phenomenon. I just find the idea that it will still be in place 6 more years into the future implausible.

[Lore]

I have to agree with Tanada and once the jig is up you're going to see a lockdown of all individual countries reserves of fossil fuels with the exception of those that need to trade for food.

[ROCKMAN]

"Taking into account the fact that coal is not oil in terms of practical application (you can't use it for making gasoline with the same EROEI), this is nothing to write home about." And once again a reminder that no one said coal would replace motor fuels.

Some more shocking revelations: NG is not oil, oil is not solar power, coal is not NG and lastly, coal is not peanut butter. Now that we've cleared up all those misconceptions we can get back to the subject of this thread: coal is becoming an increasing more important factor in the future global energy reality. Increased coal consumption, unless some miracle method of reducing GHG emissions from coal burning is developed, is IMHO very much worth “writing home about” especially given the path towards climate change that has already begun.

[Synapsid]

Plantagenet,

On the coal map: Far as I know the Coos Bay and Port of St Helens projects in Oregon have been cancelled. The proposed Millennium project at Longview in Washington is being opposed strongly by the locals, and the Gateway proposal in Bellingham, also in Washington, has locals including the Lummi Nation against it. Bellingham had a county council election last week that was being paid attention to because the council includes the people who will be ruling on the application.

So far coal-export terminals have not been getting an easy pass in Washington and Oregon.

[Plantagenet]

Of course. Thats why US producers are shipping so much coal to Asia via Canadian ports.

If the US doesn't want those good-paying union jobs on the docks, the Canadians will be happy to have 'em.

[sparky]

.
On the subject of human power usage , slaves are quite costly
it take one in ten to provide support and an overseer for thirty
slaves have to be purchased , their cost is about two years worth of their food intake
they have to be cared for all year , slaves are kept even when inactive or barely productive
that's why there was very few children transported ,
they would eat their cost before being fully grown

The sugar plantation of Cuba free their slaves and hired the new "free"peasants as labor for harvest and planting
or work hard for two months and spend ten starving .
Miserable farm workers are sooooo much less troubles and they breed abundantly

[Subjectivist]

I voted coal, not that it is what I want but at this point I believe TPTB will cling to BAU until they are forced to give it up and paradigm shift to a new way of life.

[Plantagenet]

I voted coal, not that it is what I want but at this point I believe TPTB will cling to BAU until they are forced to give it up and paradigm shift to a new way of life.

I don't see any mad rush among average Americans, Canadians, Brits, Japanese etc. etc to give up on their little piece of BAU either. In fact, the Chinese and Indians seem to want to join in on western-style BAU---to them it looks like being rich.

.
On the subject of human power usage , slaves are quite costly

Especially when compared to fossil fuels. Thank goodness---the world is far more likely to transition to NG and coal and solar and wind then go back to slavery.