The AGW argument doesn't matter anymore

thuja

Yes agreed- coal production has exploded...and I believe you are right gthat it will continue to explode...until we reach a max production level...perhaps as early as 10 years from now...

Lore

thuja

Yes but Lore you are not taking into account that oil production will start declining rapidly even as we try to ramp up coal production. Soon enough, oil production depletion will become so rapid that emissions will decline even if we can ramp up coal production somewhat.

It is likely that in a decade, coal production will be maximized while oil production will have dropped considerably- leading to a serious drop in emissions. Within 20 years- emissions will drop even more significantly as there will be a big decline in oil production as well as a drop in coal production.

IN any event, accords are not taking any of this into account. They see limitless (PLantagenets 164 years) growth in coal and many decades more of oil production. These accords have little teeth and are highly likely to be outpaced by natural geological mandates.

And yes- it is sad that we cannot set aside oil and coal reserves and outpace depletion levels with voluntary cuts- but it seems infeasible for governments to agree to cuts that will be any more draconian than what the geological mandates will be...

Alcassin

Thuja, I have read the article of Heinberg and his stand on peak coal. Basically I don't buy it.

Our reserves when you include brown coal are still huge... Peak coal is going to happen, but I don't make predictions on few sources of data.
_________________
Resources exist to be consumed. And consumed they will be, if not by
this generation then by some future. By what right does this forgotten
future seek to deny us our birthright? None I say! Let us take what is
ours, chew and eat our fill.

Bas

due to the nature of coal mining compared to oil production, I'd say we're well equiped to increase coal production by 4% (!) a year like we've been doing this decade for several decades to come; the decline will be all the more steep though. But an imminent peak coal? I don't think so. Pretty much all the coal mines in Europe and Russia are still closed and south America and Africa have hardly been surveyed for it.

Instead the point in the climate debate should be the use of coal while we should leave oil and gas to the market. IMHO.
_________________
"The best thing about the future is that it comes only one day at a time."

- Abraham Lincoln

thuja

OK- How about this report from the oil drum that lists 5 different reports seriously questioning world coal reserves.

Peak Coal Continued

Please take a serious read and give strong counter support to your argument that we have decades (or more than a century) in which we can continue to expand global production of coal.

We have had this debate over oil and it has become quite apparent that there has been a pattern of exagerated projections from many different areas. Serious studies have put those beliefs into question.

Key sentence from synopsis of reports...

If the report conclusions are correct, this is good news for climate change and bad news for the global economy. The implication is that as natural gas supplies get tight over the next two decades, coal will be unable to replace gas for producing electricty. It also implies that there is no long-term future for producing liquid fuel from coal (see Fischer-Tropsch, better known as coal-to-liquids).

Bas

anagami

Plantagenet

Thuja....

You claimed that a peak in coal was "imminent"....so there is no need for the "Bali" agreement restricting coal use.

The broad concensus amoung scientists has been that there is enough coal to support current productions levels for ca. 150 years (see my link above).

The 5 new Peak Coal reports you just linked to actually include the exact same ones you previously linked to together with a new estimate by an individual investigator at CalTech, and an important new review by the US National Academy of Science/National Research Council. I work with the National Research Council on other science issues, so naturally I respect their work on the peak coal issue. Here is their conclusion as cited in your link:

"It is clear that there is enough coal at current rates of production to meet anticipated needs through 2030, and probably enough for 100 years, the committee said. However, it is not possible to confirm the often-quoted assertion that there is a sufficient supply for the next 250 years."

OK........if you accept the new NAS/NRC report, I do too as it says there is probably enough coal for the next 100 years.....and that clearly demonstrates that PEAK COAL IS NOT IMMINENT.
Smile

thuja

Plantagenet I don't know if you read the National Academy of science report fully- key sentence here...

The report questions the myth of enough coal for 250 years, indeed, is certain there is enough coal only to 2030, and that is at current rates of production.

Again- they suggest only enough coal to 2030 (23 years away)...at current production levels. If we ramp up coal production even more...it is likely we will see peak coal within 10-15 years as others suggest.

As I have said previously...first peak oil, and then...soon after...perhaps within 10-15 years...peak coal...

So again- sorry- you sound like the same folks who deny peak oil and think that we will have oil...forever...

thuja

clv101

On the AGW argument, this Oil Drum article is relevant:

Implications of "Peak Oil" for Atmospheric CO2 and Climate
_________________
"Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen." The Emperor (Return of the Jedi)
The Oil Drum: Europe

Plantagenet

thuja

OK PLant- how about the president of ASPO...here are very key excerpts that describes my view...and then you can read his full article...

In the present climate debate, however, the amount of available fossil fuels does not appear to be an issue. The problem, as usually perceived, is that we will use excessive amounts in the years ahead. It is not even on the map that the amount of fossil fuels required in order to bring about the feared climate changes may in fact not be available.

We do not have to discuss or doubt the established historic rise in temperature, but we have to discuss and doubt the future temperature increases that the IPCC scenarios project and the fossil resources that IPCC assumes in its prognoses.

And in terms of coal...

The third fossil source of CO2 emissions is coal. According to a widely held view, the amount of available coal is virtually endless. However, when we do detailed studies of production profiles in the six countries harboring 85% of the world's coal reserves, we discover clear signs of peaking coal production in certain regions. Moreover, we notice a decline in production of the highest quality coal, that is, the coal with the highest energy content per volume. In the US, the world's second largest coal user, the volume of mined coal is increasing while the total energy content is decreasing. Has US already reached "Peak Coal" in terms of energy.

China will soon reach its maximum coal production capacity, leading to a situation where Russia alone will be sitting on the last large coal reserves. Future production in Russia will determine when we will reach "Peak Coal" at the global level. In contrast to conventional wisdom, we will be CO2 winners.

ASPO president on Climate Change

You seem to be very wedded to the idea of limitless coal when it has become quite apparent that this is far from the truth. You claim uniform consensus of a century of more of production at this rate. You disagree with several recent studies that descrfibe a much more narrow band until we reach global peak coal- you even disagree with the president of ASPO...

dorlomin · Intermediate Crude Joined: Aug 05, 2007 Posts: 974

The issues around peak oil are very well understood and have been solid science since the 50s with very dramatic proof since the 70s and subsiquently repeatedly proven by actual events in various oil fields round the world and subjected to a huge array of studies.

Peak coal has not had the same scrutiny and it would be premature to make massive descions based on it, especialy climate related descions.

Living in the UK I can guarentee you we have huge coal reserves here. Coal reserves that were economicaly exploited for decades and are believed to have decades more life in them. They were shut down in the 80s due to the opening up of open cast mines around the world that were able to easily outperform our deep mines for cost. Coal seems to be almost ubiquitous and not many countries lack large deposits. There may not be as much coal available as people assume, but it will take one hell of a lot of science to convince me there is an imminent problem.

Has any country genuinely been mined out yet? The UK the worlds great pioneer of coal was hitting record production volumes when its coal industry was wound down, then because it had to compete with North Sea gas and cheap foreign coal, not because many of the mines were worked out.

Hell the old mines in Lanarkshire were abandoned in the 50s because newer,deeper richer seems were opened up with new technology at lower costs and abandoned with god knows how much still down there.