Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Coal - where to now?

Jump to new
Foreign energy analysts are mostly sceptical that China can meet its “non-binding” energy goal, pointing out that it missed its 2010 target by a large margin.
They are broadly unconvinced that the energy targets can be achieved without an intolerable drop in the GDP growth rate.
Chinese officials and analysts acknowledge that state-owned enterprises, regional leaders and their political patrons have resisted or ignored previous edicts.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/carb...-coal-usage-20130206-2dxrv.html#ixzz2K62SYdnK
Click to expand...

Their still building coal fired power stations all over the joint.
The asphyxiating air is becoming an issue for the people.
But the rulers think it's quite a good situation and solution to the aging population weight on the dictatorship, so not much motive to pull back yet. Making electricity is profitable and cheaper than building gas chambers and is also more balanced than the one child policy given girls are regularly minced into the trash.
 
http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.a...-on-low-grade-coal-becomes-clearer-43678.html

China import ban on low grade coal becomes clearer
Friday, May 24, 2013 by Proactive Investors

China import ban on low grade coal becomes clearer

China's proposed ban on the import of lower grade thermal coal is becoming clearer after Platts has published the draft regulation.

This month, China's National Energy Administration (NEA) said it was proposing imports of thermal coal should have a calorific value of at least 4,540 kcal/kg on a net-as-received basis, a maximum sulfur content of 1%, and a maximum limit for ash of 25% on an as-received basis.

It did not include any detail on total moisture. NEA is a government body that promulgates energy policy in China.

The reasons given by the NEA for its ban on some coal imports was to better regulate the production and distribution of coal products in China.

Another reason given by the NEA for its regulation was that it wanted to improve the utilization of cleaner coal products in China, given the continued smoggy weather in northern China.

It is understood there was no time frame given for how long the edict would remin in place or when the ban would commence.

Domestically produced metallurgical coal would also not escape the net as it the regulation would mean this coal would have a maximum ash content of 12%, a maximum total moisture content of 12%, and a maximum sulfur content of 1.75%.

The ban if put in place would have significant ramifications for coal miners and explorers globally.
 
pacestick said:
This month, China's National Energy Administration (NEA) said it was proposing imports of thermal coal should have a calorific value of at least 4,540 kcal/kg on a net-as-received basis, a maximum sulfur content of 1%, and a maximum limit for ash of 25% on an as-received basis.
Click to expand...
What this means in terms of the environment really depends on how the coal is being used. If you're burning the stuff at home then yes, higher grade coal will pollute less and the same applies to older industrial boilers etc. But if it's going into a reasonably modern power station then sulphur is the only real point of relevance. Energy content, ash and moisture won't make much difference to what comes out the stack since the ash is mostly captured anyway, and water vapour wouldn't normally be considered a problem.

In terms of market impacts, the practical effect is likely to be a "split" in the market. Coal that doesn't meet these standards will still end up finding some other buyer, but will do so at a discount. That being so, if the gap is large enough then it's not impossible that countries with coal meeting these requirements end up exporting it to China then using lower grade (cheaper) imports to supply their own consumption.

It sounds a bit odd, but that is essentially what Australia already does with oil (and has done so for decades). Sell the good stuff at one price, import lower grade and cheaper product to use at home. :2twocents
 
I have neglected coal. I will need to start posting some charts. I found an interesting article today with some nice pictures.

What Life After Coal Looks Like
The Jiu Valley in Romania was once an economic powerhouse, producing millions of tons of coal. Now most of the mines in the region are closed.


A couple of charts. The first one is a short term 12 month chart which shows a fail of a bearish Descending Triangle, the second one is a long term view 10 year chart. It has broken above its falling overhead resistance line and it may be traveling in an upward channel or it may continue to fall for a while and create a reasonably bullish Megaphone pattern or it could keep falling to make a double bottom. I just want to get up to speed with the price of Coal as it is not a commodity I have looked at before. I think it needs to be watched. Just for fun! :)

coal 1 year 10.4.19.png

coal 10year 10.4.19.png
 
Trump's Latest Idea to Help Coal Is Mini Power Plants

President Donald Trump’s latest idea to save coal-fired power plants: shrink them.

The U.S. Energy Department said Friday it’s making $100 million available to help develop what it labeled as coal plants of the future -- ones that are smaller than conventional, utility-scale plants, more nimble and more efficient. This builds on the agency’s recent efforts to get small coal plants off the ground. It’s calling the initiative “Coal FIRST” (for flexible, innovative, resilient, small and transformative). More...
 
This doesn't bode well for our coal miners........

"That's Something China Can't Tolerate": Tensions Erupt As China Slams Australia's "Irresponsible Comments"

It all started in late February when we reported that a political row had erupted between China and Australia, with Beijing cracking down on imports of coal from Australia, cutting off the country's miners from their biggest export market and threatening the island nation's economy at a time when it and its fellow "Five Eyes" members who have sided with the US by blocking or banning Huawei's 5G network technology.


In the weeks that followed, while Beijing disputed such a draconian export crackdown, China was overtly targeting Australian coal imports with increased restrictions – what Beijing claims were quality checks – that delayed their passage through northern ports. Given Australia has the highest level of income dependency on China of any developed nation as 30.6% of all Australian export income came from China last year, equivalent to US$87 billion (twice the trade volume with Japan, Australia’s next biggest trading partner), and Australia’s coal industry is deeply dependent on its exports to China, which account for 3.7% of Australia’s GDP, this prompted much speculation that Beijing is punishing coal companies as retribution for political acts by Canberra, one of Washington’s closest allies. "The last time Australia was so dependent on one country for its income was in the 1950s when it was a client state of Britain," Sydney Morning Herald’s international editor, Peter Hartcher Hartcher said in March, according to the SCMP.

More...
 
Ann said:
This doesn't bode well for our coal miners........

"That's Something China Can't Tolerate": Tensions Erupt As China Slams Australia's "Irresponsible Comments"

It all started in late February when we reported that a political row had erupted between China and Australia, with Beijing cracking down on imports of coal from Australia, cutting off the country's miners from their biggest export market and threatening the island nation's economy at a time when it and its fellow "Five Eyes" members who have sided with the US by blocking or banning Huawei's 5G network technology.


In the weeks that followed, while Beijing disputed such a draconian export crackdown, China was overtly targeting Australian coal imports with increased restrictions – what Beijing claims were quality checks – that delayed their passage through northern ports. Given Australia has the highest level of income dependency on China of any developed nation as 30.6% of all Australian export income came from China last year, equivalent to US$87 billion (twice the trade volume with Japan, Australia’s next biggest trading partner), and Australia’s coal industry is deeply dependent on its exports to China, which account for 3.7% of Australia’s GDP, this prompted much speculation that Beijing is punishing coal companies as retribution for political acts by Canberra, one of Washington’s closest allies. "The last time Australia was so dependent on one country for its income was in the 1950s when it was a client state of Britain," Sydney Morning Herald’s international editor, Peter Hartcher Hartcher said in March, according to the SCMP.

More...
Click to expand...

This video is funny, but also offers some interesting facts and perspective to the debate.

 
Chinese import curbs, high renewable energy generation and collapsing gas prices in Europe are not supporting coal. In Asia, gas is competing closely with coal in power generation. However, low income emerging markets will create some demand for coal as their power sectors are expanding.
 
Ann said:
Trump's Latest Idea to Help Coal Is Mini Power Plants
Click to expand...
The only power I can see being generated there is political not electrical.

There's nothing new about the idea of small coal-fired power stations, indeed that's exactly what we had before big ones were built.

Circa 1900 things in the order of 1 - 2 MW were being built.

1920 it was 10 - 15 MW machines going in.

1950's it was still 50 MW machines being commissioned which then went to 60 MW.

1960's saw a very quick rise to 120, 200, 275, 350 MW.

1970's it went to 500 then 660 MW.

In the late 1960's anything smaller than about 30 MW was scrapped as uneconomic due to too much labour versus output. Another round of scrapping in the 1980's killed off most plant under 120 MW.

In Australia today, there's nothing under 200 MW still running so far as coal plant is concerned and of the 28 units in the 200 - 275 MW range ever built in Australia, only 12 are still in service today so they're on the way out too.

So I'm not seeing anything other than politics in the idea of building small coal-fired power stations. They're considerably more expensive per unit of output than large ones and the trend is very much that smaller plants are increasingly uneconomic and end up closed.

If the aim was to make coal more economical then going larger, not smaller, would be the focus. :2twocents
 
China's Far From Done With Coal as Regulator Eases New Plant Ban

China allowed 11 provinces and regions to resume building coal power plants, in another sign that the world’s largest energy user is far from finished with the most-polluting fossil fuel.

The National Energy Administration forecast that only 10 provinces and regions would have an excess of coal-fired electricity generation capacity in 2022, down from last year’s outlook for a glut in 21 areas by 2021. That means 11 areas can start building plants again, as the overcapacity label had suspended construction of new projects until the issue was addressed. More...

 
Smurf1976 said:
If the aim was to make coal more economical then going larger, not smaller, would be the focus. :2twocents
Click to expand...
To add to that comment, coal was well and truly on the way out during the 1960's.

Cheap fuel oil flooded the market from about 1958 onward and within just a few years pretty much nobody was building anything new that used coal unless it was either technical necessity (eg steel) or on a very large scale (big power stations). A lot of existing facilities were converted from coal to oil, households abandoned it and in quite a few places around the world coal was close to extinct within a decade. Even the UK was building primarily oil and nuclear plant by 1970.

It was only the 1973 and 1979 oil crises which saved coal from extinction back then as "anything that worked" as an alternative to oil was embraced in a panic and when it came to running boilers coal was the obvious answer. Coal made a comeback in a big way.

A key point there being this isn't the first time the future of coal has been in doubt and if there's a straightforward alternative available then only the very largest single site uses of coal are viable. That comes down to the reality that as a bulky solid material which contains ash, it's simply far more capital and labour intensive to use when compared to other means of producing heat. Only way around that in any country with high labour costs is truly massive scale and automation.

Anyone who thinks small is going to save coal is dreaming really. Even in China they might be building more huge coal power stations but they're also actively ditching coal for residential heating. :2twocents
 
China's `Friendly' Neighbors Seize Coal Share From Australia

China’s move to stifle coal imports from Australia is hurting its No. 2 supplier, with shipment figures showing the exporter conceding share in the world’s largest market.

Cargoes from Australia accounted for 18 percent of China’s overseas purchases in March, near the lowest since 2012, according to customs data and Bloomberg calculations. Meanwhile, Russia and Mongolia steadily built their share in the past few months as customs delay hobbled their rival. Top shipper Indonesia maintained its stake at about 50 percent. More...
 
UK has first coal-free week for a century

Britain has had its first week without using electricity from burning coal since the 1880s, according to the National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO).

Fintan Slye, director of ESO, said this would become the "new normal".

The world's first centralised public coal-fired generator opened in 1882 at Holborn Viaduct in London.

The government plans to phase out the UK's last coal-fired plants by 2025 to reduce carbon emissions.

Mr Slye said: "As more and more renewables come on to our energy system, coal-free runs like this are going to be a regular occurrence.

"We believe that by 2025, we will be able to fully operate Britain's electricity system with zero carbon." More...
 
Instead of closing down an old nuclear plant, they are going to extend its life by 10 years.....
I reckon this whole CC push is being funded by Big Nuclear Energy.

Two Coal Plants Closing a Decade Early in the U.S. Midwest

Xcel Energy Inc. plans to shutter its last two coal-fired power plants in the Upper Midwest a decade ahead of schedule as part of a pledge to phase out carbon-dioxide emissions.

The Minneapolis-based company expects to close the Allen S. King power plant in 2028 and its Sherco 3 facility in 2030, according to a statement Monday. Both plants are in Minnesota.

cut carbon-emissions 80% by 2030 and 100% by 2050. In December, the company became the first big U.S. utility to commit to eliminating all its carbon emissions, mainly by using renewable energy. Xcel is accelerating its plan to close the two coal plants by seeking permission to operate its Monticello nuclear plant through at least 2040, instead of retiring it by 2030. More...
 
First China, now India is running short of coal: https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/06/energy/india-energy-crisis-coal-hnk-intl/index.html

That can only mean higher coal prices in the short term as energy producers scramble to secure more supply.

I would like to believe that there will be a shift to renewables at some point in the medium term, but suspect that nuclear will be the direction many countries will move to out of convenience.
 
is the problem digging it ( including getting approvals to expand existing projects ) or delivering it , or maybe the right type of coal available ( maybe a bit of all of them )

take care

there are some with an agenda out there

i hold WHC ( 'free-carried ' ) NHC , S32 and BHP

i am not anti-coal , but some out there are
 
Top