Cumbria coking coal. Pros and cons.

[Yellow Fever 3,733]

For what its worth I can see the argument for using our own coal as opposed to imported for steel making.

However, given that we also import iron ore it seems mute to have our own coal. Surely makes sense to make new steel where both raw materials are in abundance and at the required quality and not ship either expensively half way around the world.

So on balance, given we no longer mine iron ore but import (UK iron ore was actually historically low quality) then there is no strategic reason not to import coking coal as well. All or nothing.  Add to that the cumbrian  coking coal is likely to be sulphur rich and likely not that required by our remaining domestic blast furnaces and it becomes clear that this is just a short term political fix.

We could all do so much better.

 

 

Edited December 7, 2022 by Yellow Fever

[Herman 9,698]

It does seem a regressive step, especially where the climate is concerned. Add to the recent regressive step with regards to onshore wind and it feels that this government has no real long term plan for what is best for the country.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Why the hell do we still want to send people down deep holes in the ground?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

For what its worth I can see the argument for using our own coal as opposed to imported for steel making.

However, given that we also import iron ore it seems mute to have our own coal. Surely makes sense to make new steel where both raw materials are in abundance and at the required quality and not ship either expensively half way around the world.

So whilst our domestic coal is very high quality and abundant, I've been told by a former miner who reckons he knows about this stuff (and supported fully from what I can find on Google) that our import of iron ore isn't just about the lower prices but also about the inferior quality. Domestic iron ore has a lot of impurities and produces lower quality iron.

And I suspect that our decision to produce our own coal has little to do with either the cost of importing or the environmental impact of shipping it halfway across the world but the fact that 19% of it was coming from Russia, meaning we're far too reliant on a single country (USA) which was selling us 54% of coal used pre-Ukraine war and presumably now supplies us with most of that 19% which came from Russia.

It also wouldn't surprise me at all if our final three active coal-fired power plants (due to be decommissioned in 2023 and 2024) are 'mothballed' as a contingency against energy insecurity and that we'd be seeing train loads of the stuff heading to those three plants if necessary - Germany do it when demand surges. 

Edited December 7, 2022 by TeemuVanBasten

[Yellow Fever 3,733]

9 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Why the hell do we still want to send people down deep holes in the ground?

I can think of a few deserving world and ex world leaders..... plus some local politicians.

 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

5 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Why the hell do we still want to send people down deep holes in the ground?

It is in the DNA of many of our communities, particularly in the North and in Wales.

You may not want to send people down deep holes but there will be many who would love to be sent down them.

[Yellow Fever 3,733]

21 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

So whilst our domestic coal is very high quality and abundant, I've been told by a former miner who reckons he knows about this stuff (and supported fully from what I can find on Google) that our import of iron ore isn't just about the lower prices but also about the inferior quality. Domestic iron ore has a lot of impurities and produces lower quality iron.

And I suspect that our decision to produce our own coal has little to do with either the cost of importing or the environmental impact of shipping it halfway across the world but the fact that 19% of it was coming from Russia, meaning we're far too reliant on a single country (USA) which was selling us 54% of coal used pre-Ukraine war and presumably now supplies us with most of that 19% which came from Russia.

It also wouldn't surprise me at all if our final three active coal-fired power plants (due to be decommissioned in 2023 and 2024) are 'mothballed' as a contingency against energy insecurity and that we'd be seeing train loads of the stuff heading to those three plants if necessary - Germany do it when demand surges. 

Only 15% is for domestic purposes apparently. Rest is export. 

It's just a new coal mine argued for on the flimsiest of reasonings.

Edited December 7, 2022 by Yellow Fever

[horsefly 4,273]

9 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

Why the hell do we still want to send people down deep holes in the ground?

You seem to have forgotten the current cabinet. I would happily send them down a deep hole in the ground providing there was no prospect of their return above ground (could we also send Hancock down with them to assist with survival techniques).

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

12 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

It is in the DNA of many of our communities, particularly in the North and in Wales.

You may not want to send people down deep holes but there will be many who would love to be sent down them.

Surely you mean was.

Tin Mining was the staple industry in Cornwall before Tourism. Men used to go down deep mines to bring out Tin as well as Copper, Arsenic etc.

Then the price of Tin dropped when other nations found they could almost scrape it off the surface. Then the mines started to close and there was a clamour to reopen them by some enthusiasts.

But the majority of ex miners are now in their 60s even if they were young back then. Nobody wants to return to it, only a few romantics.

 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

19 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Surely you mean was.

Tin Mining was the staple industry in Cornwall before Tourism. Men used to go down deep mines to bring out Tin as well as Copper, Arsenic etc.

Then the price of Tin dropped when other nations found they could almost scrape it off the surface. Then the mines started to close and there was a clamour to reopen them by some enthusiasts.

But the majority of ex miners are now in their 60s even if they were young back then. Nobody wants to return to it, only a few romantics.

Many former coal mining communities are still destitute, with sky high youth unemployment, nothing but minimum wage zero hour contract jobs in fulfilment centres and serious problems with crack and heroin addiction.

Mining jobs are more skilled now then they used to be, require ability to operate and maintain some pretty complex machinery and the typical salary would be £35k-£42k and unionised so decent work related benefits and pension contributions.

I don't support UK coal for export, but I could see a lot of upsides to digging more UK coal to meet existing domestic coal demand. Not least the knowledge that the people digging it would be adequately paid and protected by UK employment and health and safety laws, dread to think what the working conditions are for some foreign miners who are supplying coal to the UK.

A relative mine has a multi-fuel stove and is seriously struggling with the cost of living, they are currently only staying warm because they buy a sack of coal every few weeks, only when they buy it from the fuel merchant down the road it says "South Africa" on the bag. That feels a bit backwards to me. You can preach virtues about how its bad for the environment for her to be burning coal if you like but I'd do the same if I were in financial difficulties and trying to survive a winter. 

By the way, your post is written as if you think coal mining no longer exists in the UK, sorry but that is simply not the case. There are still active colleries in Wales, Cumbria and Gloucestershire, and only in the past 10 or so years mines have closed in Yorkshire, Durham, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Lancashire and the West Midlands. 

Edited December 8, 2022 by TeemuVanBasten

[A Load of Squit 5,111]

2 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

 

By the way, your post is written as if you think coal mining no longer exists in the UK, sorry but that is simply not the case. There are still active colleries in Wales, Cumbria and Gloucestershire, and only in the past 10 or so years mines have closed in Yorkshire, Durham, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Lancashire and the West Midlands. 

I didn't think there was any left in Cumbria, I remember a visit to the museum near the Haig Colliery and they said it was the last one.

Incidently, the museum has also closed due to lack of visitors.

 

[Yellow Fever 3,733]

I think you recall my RTZ and CSM in the day. I like holes in the ground 🙂

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

46 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

I didn't think there was any left in Cumbria, I remember a visit to the museum near the Haig Colliery and they said it was the last one.

Ayle Colliery.

https://thelastpit.simdif.com/

Until recently used to be able to go down it on a guided tour but they've stopped that due to an increase in demand for coal.

Edited December 8, 2022 by TeemuVanBasten

[A Load of Squit 5,111]

51 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Ayle Colliery.

https://thelastpit.simdif.com/

Until recently used to be able to go down it on a guided tour but they've stopped that due to an increase in demand for coal.

Ah, Alston, I would imagine that people in Whitehaven only think Alston exists in myths and legends. 😀

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,503]

Coking coal is regarded as a critical resource by the EU and the ban on imports from Russia leaves the EU more or less beholden to Poland, which has its own issues with the EU although less so since the invasion of Ukraine, so UK production of coking coal is probably going to be good for building bridges with the EU as well as reducing our own security of supply concerns.

1.2 billion tonnes is consumed annually; 54% of global production comes from China, 7% from Russia.

Cumbria aims to produce 2.7 million times per year. Current price is about $300 a tonne, so it'll be over half a billion dollars on the UK's export in goods for something that's actually quite trivial in environmental terms when stacked up against the size of the industry globally.

Edited December 8, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[A Load of Squit 5,111]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Coking coal is regarded as a critical resource by the EU and the ban on imports from Russia leaves the EU more or less beholden to Poland, which has its own issues with the EU although less so since the invasion of Ukraine, so UK production of coking coal is probably going to be good for building bridges with the EU as well as reducing our own security of supply concerns.

When will it be producing coal?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,503]

2 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

When will it be producing coal?

They asked that on the today programme of Blomberg's commodities analyst. Hard to say as there'll no doubt be legal challenges to come.

[A Load of Squit 5,111]

Just now, littleyellowbirdie said:

They asked that on the today programme of Blomberg's commodities analyst. Hard to say as there'll no doubt be legal challenges to come.

So it won't fix any current shortages caused by Russia.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,503]

6 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

So it won't fix any current shortages caused by Russia.

Nope, but equally we have no idea how long we're going to have to keep sanctioning Russia, and China accounts for 51% of production at a time when they're increasingly rattling sabres over Taiwan, so improving security of supply is clearly important.

At the end of the day, if they jump through the legal hoops, but supply issues are fixed and the price of coking coal crashes then the investors will likely pull the plug anyway.

Edited December 8, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[A Load of Squit 5,111]

10 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Nope, but equally we have no idea how long we're going to have to keep sanctioning Russia, and China accounts for 51% of production at a time when they're increasingly rattling sabres over Taiwan, so improving security of supply is clearly important.

At the end of the day, if they jump through the legal hoops, but supply issues are fixed and the price of coking coal crashes then the investors will likely pull the plug anyway.

So now you're disagreeing with youself.

If 85% is going to export who's security of supply are we improving?

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

5 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Many former coal mining communities are still destitute, with sky high youth unemployment, nothing but minimum wage zero hour contract jobs in fulfilment centres and serious problems with crack and heroin addiction.

Mining jobs are more skilled now then they used to be, require ability to operate and maintain some pretty complex machinery and the typical salary would be £35k-£42k and unionised so decent work related benefits and pension contributions.

I don't support UK coal for export, but I could see a lot of upsides to digging more UK coal to meet existing domestic coal demand. Not least the knowledge that the people digging it would be adequately paid and protected by UK employment and health and safety laws, dread to think what the working conditions are for some foreign miners who are supplying coal to the UK.

A relative mine has a multi-fuel stove and is seriously struggling with the cost of living, they are currently only staying warm because they buy a sack of coal every few weeks, only when they buy it from the fuel merchant down the road it says "South Africa" on the bag. That feels a bit backwards to me. You can preach virtues about how its bad for the environment for her to be burning coal if you like but I'd do the same if I were in financial difficulties and trying to survive a winter. 

By the way, your post is written as if you think coal mining no longer exists in the UK, sorry but that is simply not the case. There are still active colleries in Wales, Cumbria and Gloucestershire, and only in the past 10 or so years mines have closed in Yorkshire, Durham, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Lancashire and the West Midlands. 

I was talking about Tin Mining in Cornwall. I can't speak for other parts of the country.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,503]

11 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

So now you're disagreeing with youself.

If 85% is going to export who's security of supply are we improving?

How am I disagreeing with myself?

Firstly, we have first call on anything we produce so we're guaranteed the availability of the 15% we use domestically, but equally if we're improving the EU's security on this commodity then that gives us credit back for things we may need from the EU, which fundamentally helps us improve relations with the EU. That's worthwhile in my opinion for the sake of looking a bit bad in the eyes of people that invest too much in symbolism over substance.

Edited December 8, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,733]

33 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

How am I disagreeing with myself?

Firstly, we have first call on anything we produce so we're guaranteed the availability of the 15% we use domestically, but equally if we're improving the EU's security on this commodity then that gives us credit back for things we may need from the EU, which fundamentally helps us improve relations with the EU. That's worthwhile in my opinion for the sake of looking a bit bad in the eyes of people that invest too much in symbolism over substance.

The EU is not short of coking coal should it need it. That from Cumbria may also actually not be suitable anyway (sulphur content and if I read correctly some large existing UK 'users' won't take it / change anyway).

Oddly, we also don't have any domestic suitable iron ore (the other most essential part of the equation needed to make 'new' as opposed to recycled steel) in a blast furnace.

Hence all in all its very difficult to see or argue how this is today truly of any 'strategic' value. (The old argument used to be be for defence applications we needed to make steel bit I think that argument is long past it's sell by date).

Frankly, if I was SKS, I would just say we will not allow it to open as we stand by our COP commitments (we will honour our international commitments / treaties unlike this current lot who rip them even before the ink is dry) but will commit to 500 or so long term term 'Green' jobs at Windscale and elsewhere in the constituency. Levelling up not levelling down. Forward not backward.

Woodhouse colliery closed for a reason !

Edited December 8, 2022 by Yellow Fever

[A Load of Squit 5,111]

37 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

How am I disagreeing with myself?

Firstly, we have first call on anything we produce so we're guaranteed the availability of the 15% we use domestically, but equally if we're improving the EU's security on this commodity then that gives us credit back for things we may need from the EU, which fundamentally helps us improve relations with the EU. That's worthwhile in my opinion for the sake of looking a bit bad in the eyes of people that invest too much in symbolism over substance.

The domestic steel industry have said they are very unlikely to be customers of this coking coal so what's going to happen to the 15% that no one wants?

If anyone is lacking substance it's you.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,503]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

The domestic steel industry have said they are very unlikely to be customers of this coking coal so what's going to happen to the 15% that no one wants?

If anyone is lacking substance it's you.

Who made this statement and what was their reasoning?

Regardless, the value of coking coal goes beyond steel production; it's also valuable for the manufacture of carbon fibre and hydrogen production, with the benefit over other hydrogen production methods that it's less dependent on natural gas prices, which funnily enough are also quite high.

Edited December 8, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Well b back 3,180]

The government's advisory Climate Change Committee (UKCCC) pointed out that 85% of the coal produced by the mine would be exported.

But the two companies that still make steel using coal in the UK - British Steel and Tata - say they plan to move to lower carbon production methods.

Steel industry expert Chris McDonald estimates that, at best, they will use less than 10% of the output of the mine and, by the mid-2030s, none at all.

That means the new mine will export virtually all the coal it produces.

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,503]

2 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

The EU is not short of coking coal should it need it. That from Cumbria may also actually not be suitable anyway (sulphur content and if I read correctly some large existing UK 'users' won't take it / change anyway).

Oddly, we also don't have any domestic suitable iron ore (the other most essential part of the equation needed to make 'new' as opposed to recycled steel) in a blast furnace.

Hence all in all its very difficult to see or argue how this is today truly of any 'strategic' value. (The old argument used to be be for defence applications we needed to make steel bit I think that argument is long past it's sell by date).

Frankly, if I was SKS, I would just say we will not allow it to open as we stand by our COP commitments (we will honour our international commitments / treaties unlike this current lot who rip them even before the ink is dry) but will commit to 500 or so long term term 'Green' jobs at Windscale and elsewhere in the constituency. Levelling up not levelling down. Forward not backward.

Woodhouse colliery closed for a reason !

This is not a government initiative; it's a private enterprise seeking to do something that they think will be profitable. If all this is true, why do the investors want to build it in the first place do you think?

Edited December 8, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,733]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

If all this is true, why do the investors want to build it in the first place do you think?

Because they want to see if they can make money digging coal.

Has sod all to do with environmental, local steel production or any other concerns - they are just try-ons to sweeten the idea and make a plausible excuse to do it. Most is for export - that's what you've been repeatably told so it has very little to do with what we need in the UK  - and will be sold on the global market.

If you're happy with this please don't criticize China or Germany or anybody else developing and burning coal. 

 

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,503]

26 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Because they want to see if they can make money digging coal.

Has sod all to do with environmental, local steel production or any other concerns - they are just try-ons to sweeten the idea and make a plausible excuse to do it. Most is for export - that's what you've been repeatably told so it has very little to do with what we need in the UK  - and will be sold on the global market.If you're happy with this please don't criticize China or Germany or anybody else developing and burning coal. 

 

 

But how can they make money when apparently there's no demand for it? I've been informed the British industry won't buy any and according to you the EU doesn't need it. By the sounds of it, we're just going to have a big mountain of coal!

Frankly, Owen Hegarty must be mad to be chucking 165 million quid at this. You'd think he'd have learnt something over his 40-year mining career with Rio Tinto and others.

If only he stopped to read the non-football section of the Pink Un, he could save himself a lot of grief.

PS, on the subject of China, they produce 51% of the world's coking coal so we needn't worry about them upping production in response to our few million tonnes a year; we just need to worry about what the West will do if they get shirty about Taiwan.

Edited December 8, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[sonyc 5,482]

1 hour ago, Well b back said:

The government's advisory Climate Change Committee (UKCCC) pointed out that 85% of the coal produced by the mine would be exported.

But the two companies that still make steel using coal in the UK - British Steel and Tata - say they plan to move to lower carbon production methods.

Steel industry expert Chris McDonald estimates that, at best, they will use less than 10% of the output of the mine and, by the mid-2030s, none at all.

That means the new mine will export virtually all the coal it produces.

 

I put an article on this under Brexit thread WBB. Because this move is all about Britain post Brexit, it's about a desperate political attempt at levelling up. It's also short termism and indicative of the vacuum of policy in the current administration. In short, it's a cheap trick. 500 jobs is good for this desperate community. But in a little over two years in my former employment we created over a 1000 jobs, 83% of which were sustained a year later. 

We need a far better industrial strategy that joins together new skills acquisition and growth sector jobs. I suppose coal mining may involve some transferable skills being developed but this isn't the future. Hopefully the 500 jobs created will help the local economy (the multiplier effect) but again it isn't going to change the whole town. Contractors no doubt will be brought in for a start!