Old King Coal....

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
It's a specific type of coal for a specific purpose and, in world terms, at tiny volume. If it provides employment where it's otherwise limited then what's the problem?
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
It's a specific type of coal for a specific purpose and, in world terms, at tiny volume. If it provides employment where it's otherwise limited then what's the problem?

Plus, supposedly, unless we reduce our use of steel, then, the equivalent amount of suitable coal will be imported (from Russia?) and burnt here anyway, so, total CO2 etc output in terms of coal burnt (not transported) will be the same.
 

Beebo

Veteran
Plus, supposedly, unless we reduce our use of steel, then, the equivalent amount of suitable coal will be imported (from Russia?) and burnt here anyway, so, total CO2 etc output in terms of coal burnt (not transported) will be the same.

The article says they are looking at new ways of making Green Steel using hydrogen obtained via renewables.

I’m sure it’s years away so burning coke will be easier cheaper and quicker.
 

C R

Über Member
Plus, supposedly, unless we reduce our use of steel, then, the equivalent amount of suitable coal will be imported (from Russia?) and burnt here anyway, so, total CO2 etc output in terms of coal burnt (not transported) will be the same.

The article says that the coke extracted from that mine has too much sulfur for the UK market, so the UK steel manufacturers will continue using Russian coke with lower sulfur content.

The output of the mine will not replace Russian coke, and the expectation is that about 85% of the output will be exported.

As for touted benefits. It will not affect British energy security as the coal is not the right type for power generation, and the number of jobs created will be relatively small.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
The article says that the coke extracted from that mine has too much sulfur for the UK market, so the UK steel manufacturers will continue using Russian coke with lower sulfur content.

The output of the mine will not replace Russian coke, and the expectation is that about 85% of the output will be exported.

As for touted benefits. It will not affect British energy security as the coal is not the right type for power generation, and the number of jobs created will be relatively small.

The number of jobs being touted is 500. You are right, a small number, unless, that is, you happen to be one of the 500 who get a job. ;)

Rather like the risks quoted when considering surgery, say, for a cataract operation, 99% success, fantastic, unless that is, you happen to be in the 1%.
 
Last edited:

Ian H

Guru
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R
OP
OP
Fab Foodie

Fab Foodie

Guru
The number of jobs being touted is 500. You are right, a small number, unless, that is, you happen to be one of the 500 who get a job. ;)

Rather like the risks quoted when considering surgery, say, for a cataract operation, 99% success, fantastic, unless that is, you happen to be in the 1%.

£160M might be better invested in Cumbria and create more and longer lasting industries....
 
D

Deleted member 28

Guest
You should know by now 'toomuchfoodie' could never admit to anything this government does is ever a positive thing, can't wait for Labour to get in and improve our lives beyond our dreams.
 

ebikeerwidnes

Well-Known Member
One problem is that - even if the coal was needed to make steel - then the mine will produce more that we need

so it will be sold on the international markets to whoever will pay for it

and then they can do whatever they want with it - so a lot of it will end up as fuel for power stations and the like

If it could be guaranteed that all of the coal could be guaranteed to be used purely for steel making then SOME of the Tory points could make sense
but they won't/can't do that
 
Top Bottom