Coal to the rescue (appointed, mineral rights, closing)

[jody_wy]

Coal to the rescue as record cold grips the East

[branDcalf]

I read that a bit ago. Not surprised. Coal has a place in supplying our energy needs.

[thecoalman]

The issue is the infrastructure for the gas is not keeping pace with the demand for both residential uses and power generation. You can stack coal to the moon next to the power plant, doesn't matter how many gas plants you build if there isn't enough pipe to supply them.

[Wyomingwind]

I wonder if all the folks that are against fossil fuels are huddled near a solar device, for heat, during the day and a wind generated electric space heater at night?

I like being able to turn up the thermometer at my house.

Right now, a little global warming would be nice.

[Wyoprairie]

Read recently that if Wyo was country of it's own, would be world's 3rd largest exporter of energy, after Russia
and Saudi Arabia. Actually, here is the publication....this has lots of information in it.

https://wyomingbusiness.org/Uploads/DocumentLibrary/WBC/2017/wbc_thinkwyo_book_web.pdf"

[BugsyPal]

Originally Posted by jody_wy

Coal to the rescue as record cold grips the East

And a stopped clock is right twice a day, that does not change facts.


Coal has continued to decline even after DT has been in office over one year.


https://www.vox.com/energy-and-envir...-industry-2017


Supreme Court rejects case over EPA coal jobs reports | TheHill


https://www.npr.org/2018/01/07/57630...-mine-to-close




Face it, you've been had.

[sunsprit]

Originally Posted by BugsyPal

And a stopped clock is right twice a day, that does not change facts.


Coal has continued to decline even after DT has been in office over one year.


https://www.vox.com/energy-and-envir...-industry-2017


Supreme Court rejects case over EPA coal jobs reports | TheHill


https://www.npr.org/2018/01/07/57630...-mine-to-close




Face it, you've been had.

I get a kick out of seeing posts like this ... where somebody sees a headline and automatically infers that it supports their negative "point of view" regarding Wyoming and the energy industry. Perhaps BugsyPal has fallen into this fallacy and didn't even bother to read the articles?

Please note that the NPR article was about a PENNSYLVANIA Coal Mine that was closing, not a Wyoming mine. There's a lot of factors involved in the closing of that mine, primarily due to their costs/ton of production making them uncompetitive. Not mentioned in the article is the difference in the quality of the coal they produce vs what comes from Wyoming mines which is a superior product with low sulfur coal.

Vox's premise that coal was in decline due to expenses of operating coal fired plants and "stagnant electricity demand" really fell flat in ignoring two major aspects of the industry: 1) the expenses of operations was greatly impacted by the prior administration's burdensome EPA regulations designed primarily to force unsustainable costs upon the industry with a goal of shutting those industries down, and 2) the lessened major industries activities in the business climate of that administration creating the lower electricity demand. There's a huge relationship between taxation and/or burdensome regulations expenses and resulting activity ... you can tax something to death, which was clearly the paradigm of the prior administration and all it's unelected officials at many levels from the US Gov't. Sorry, pals ... but those intentionally burdensome regulations are being rolled back by the current administration to encourage renewed production demand and a healthier business climate. And it does take time for the new gov't direction to take effect and businesses to respond. The arbitrary time frame of saying not much has happened in a year's time doesn't reflect the reality of a changed business environment ramping up in response. But folk don't see immediate changes so mistakenly infer that nothing is happening, instant gratification is their benchmark, like little spoiled brats.

The Supreme Court article re EPA analyzing "jobs impact from their regulations" had the zinger in their last paragraphs ... where the current EPA direction from DT is to keep those impacts in mind when they made or enforced regulations. The prior direction of the EPA was to impose and enforce regulations intended to adversely affect the regulated industry (coal), so the court case regarding their activity was upheld. But the real take-away from the article is that the EPA is now focusing upon it's effects upon jobs as part of it's decision making, and the coal industry is in it's sights for some relief from burdensome regulations that were intended by the prior administration to shut down the industry.


Additionally, I've recently met with some of my Wyoming neighbors who own supporting businesses to the energy industry. They've been notified that there's a lot of new activity happening in the fields this year and been told to prepare to staff up and "get back to work". It took awhile before the impact of the different enforcement/regulations of the DT administration could take effect, the companies could make and get applications/permits approved, do their contracts with landowners/mineral rights holders, and so forth. It's a time consuming process to ramp up, commit resources, plan and schedule activity. But the positive results are now coming in the near term to fruition and Wyoming's energy industry, especially oil ... is soon to be booming again. Fracking shale oil is slated to be a significant activity in the area this year.

I'm told one of the biggest obstacles to that development right now is getting the power grid infrastructure upgraded to support the new wells. Some of the areas slated for new wells don't have adequate substations to power the facilities, for example. So the energy providers and transmission & distribution companies are also part of the equation of expansion of oil production in the area, and the oil guys are working to get the supporting industry on board with upgrading their side of the business. This all takes time to accomplish and implement, with substantial capital investment, labor, and materials all coordinated and delivered to the sites.

For those short sighted people who cannot understand how these industries function and cite not seeing immediate results in the new regulatory environment, they infer that nothing beneficial is happening. They couldn't be further from the reality of the near and long term economic impacts upon Wyoming which are now taking shape. As well, this activity isn't limited to Wyoming, it's regional in impact. Some high population areas of the USA where such energy production isn't favored are rapidly becoming highly dependent upon the resources from our fly-over country ability to produce what they need to survive. Even the open spaces and energy density of renewables are to be found here and it's a matter of infrastructure to deliver that energy to the consumers ... it will take decades to develop and implement that infrastructure, but the energy industry in Wyoming appears to be here to stay for a long time.

[aeros71]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.a9922cfaaeb8

The decision by the FERC doesn't seem like it will do the coal industry many favors going forward. I'm not sure if the decision is enough to set-back the current rebounding momentum of the industry but I guess time will tell.

Sunsprit, why does Wyoming continue to shun wind energy options? The amount of energy that could be created would be a boom to the state and the need for coal would still have a place. Is it rooted in the fear of the unknown and newness? From what you posted, it sounds like Wyoming is looking more into oil and fracking in what I assume is a hedge bet in case the coal industry doesn't recover to the levels being projected.

[branDcalf]

Aeros71 - I do not like wind 'farms' because they are ugly and take up a lot more area than a power plant or drilling areas. I don't like the potential affects on wind patterns. Those have not been studied well. And, they are a net loss as far as energy produced.

The only unknown is the effect on wind patterns. Those of us who live and work in open country already know they impact wildlife and I'm amused, in a dark way, that people who aren't closely familiar with migrating herbivores are fine with wind farms, but object to oilfields and pump jacks.

I'm angered by the "not in my backyard" attitude of many. Those types think it is fine to have the ugly, noisy windmills here, but object strongly to having them off shore or in the areas where they live or recreate.

[aeros71]

We have a handful of wind farms here in West Virginia and we hear the same reasons stating they are ugly, or that they kill thousands of birds and bats and that the wind patterns could be dangerous. However, I'm not sure there has been any definitive evidence that the impact on our winged friends is at a high level of concern or as you mentioned the effect on wind patterns.

Regarding a wind farm being labeled ugly, I'm always amused by this statement. Let me offer some context as to why. When compared to the devastation of mountain top removal in coal mining and the damage it causes to the surrounding communities, water supplies, etc. a wind farm is the farthest thing from ugly.