Cumbrian coal mine - media frenzy or valid concern?
Discussion
Go ahead has been given for the first coal mine opened in Britain for decades, to claims of climate crime:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63892381
But, given the coal is being used for making steel, not energy, is it such a crime? I thought steel was made by combining iron and carbon, so believe that all steel needs coke in production, in which case is this a climate crime? Or is it a necessary part of steel making? If we have the natural resource, why shouldn't we use it to generate jobs and wealth?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63892381
But, given the coal is being used for making steel, not energy, is it such a crime? I thought steel was made by combining iron and carbon, so believe that all steel needs coke in production, in which case is this a climate crime? Or is it a necessary part of steel making? If we have the natural resource, why shouldn't we use it to generate jobs and wealth?
hiccy18 said:
Go ahead has been given for the first coal mine opened in Britain for decades, to claims of climate crime:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63892381
But, given the coal is being used for making steel, not energy, is it such a crime? I thought steel was made by combining iron and carbon, so believe that all steel needs coke in production, in which case is this a climate crime? Or is it a necessary part of steel making? If we have the natural resource, why shouldn't we use it to generate jobs and wealth?
There are new technologies involving hydrogen - the M53 was recently closed to allow the movement of a hydrogen furnance.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63892381
But, given the coal is being used for making steel, not energy, is it such a crime? I thought steel was made by combining iron and carbon, so believe that all steel needs coke in production, in which case is this a climate crime? Or is it a necessary part of steel making? If we have the natural resource, why shouldn't we use it to generate jobs and wealth?
But it's certainly not like using coal for power generation, IMO. Although the climate impact is the same - but domestic production vs foreign production is the same.
hiccy18 said:
Go ahead has been given for the first coal mine opened in Britain for decades, to claims of climate crime:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63892381
But, given the coal is being used for making steel, not energy, is it such a crime? I thought steel was made by combining iron and carbon, so believe that all steel needs coke in production, in which case is this a climate crime? Or is it a necessary part of steel making? If we have the natural resource, why shouldn't we use it to generate jobs and wealth?
Using locally produced coal also saves huge amounts of CO2 that would otherwise have been produced in shipping it in from other countries. So makes perfect sense to me if steel production is (rightly) to continue. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63892381
But, given the coal is being used for making steel, not energy, is it such a crime? I thought steel was made by combining iron and carbon, so believe that all steel needs coke in production, in which case is this a climate crime? Or is it a necessary part of steel making? If we have the natural resource, why shouldn't we use it to generate jobs and wealth?
Solocle said:
There are new technologies involving hydrogen - the M53 was recently closed to allow the movement of a hydrogen furnance.
But it's certainly not like using coal for power generation, IMO. Although the climate impact is the same - but domestic production vs foreign production is the same.
I think that one was for oil production, but reading a little I found yes indeed there is a hydrogen based process being trialled right now, but it'll probably be a decade before it goes mainstream.But it's certainly not like using coal for power generation, IMO. Although the climate impact is the same - but domestic production vs foreign production is the same.
Sounding to me like all the commentators (can't really call them "journalists") and talking heads are showing their ignorance on this.
Mixed messages from the steel industry saying they don't actually want this, pointing the finger at high sulphur content.
But, there's definitely a political slant on that. Because firstly it's going to cost them more to process if it is high-sulphur, and they're going to have to manage their emissions more tightly and what they really all want is taxpayers money to fund their arc furnaces and hydrogen investment.
But, there's definitely a political slant on that. Because firstly it's going to cost them more to process if it is high-sulphur, and they're going to have to manage their emissions more tightly and what they really all want is taxpayers money to fund their arc furnaces and hydrogen investment.
Evanivitch said:
Mixed messages from the steel industry saying they don't actually want this, pointing the finger at high sulphur content.
But, there's definitely a political slant on that. Because firstly it's going to cost them more to process if it is high-sulphur, and they're going to have to manage their emissions more tightly and what they really all want is taxpayers money to fund their arc furnaces and hydrogen investment.
Arc furnaces are not viable for large scale iron production, the coke is needed for the blast furnaces. Arc furnaces are good for scrap and steel processing though.But, there's definitely a political slant on that. Because firstly it's going to cost them more to process if it is high-sulphur, and they're going to have to manage their emissions more tightly and what they really all want is taxpayers money to fund their arc furnaces and hydrogen investment.
(I know this is about coking coal, but)
I went to a steam fair once, and it reminded me why it was phased out.
The smell permeates everything, and not in a pleasant way. The sheer labour and inefficiency involved in harnessing coal's energy was obvious.
Yes, it helped forge the path through the industrial revolution, and the quality of engineering and ingenuity from that era is fantastic.
But at what cost....
As far as this mine goes: I see they have picked a better time than before a domestically hosted cop to announce it.
If industry genuinely wants this product, then fine. We will need steel for quite some time.
I went to a steam fair once, and it reminded me why it was phased out.
The smell permeates everything, and not in a pleasant way. The sheer labour and inefficiency involved in harnessing coal's energy was obvious.
Yes, it helped forge the path through the industrial revolution, and the quality of engineering and ingenuity from that era is fantastic.
But at what cost....
As far as this mine goes: I see they have picked a better time than before a domestically hosted cop to announce it.
If industry genuinely wants this product, then fine. We will need steel for quite some time.
Ian Geary said:
(I know this is about coking coal, but)
I went to a steam fair once, and it reminded me why it was phased out.
The smell permeates everything, and not in a pleasant way. The sheer labour and inefficiency involved in harnessing coal's energy was obvious.
Yes, it helped forge the path through the industrial revolution, and the quality of engineering and ingenuity from that era is fantastic.
But at what cost....
As far as this mine goes: I see they have picked a better time than before a domestically hosted cop to announce it.
If industry genuinely wants this product, then fine. We will need steel for quite some time.
Coal also emits radioactive chemicals.I went to a steam fair once, and it reminded me why it was phased out.
The smell permeates everything, and not in a pleasant way. The sheer labour and inefficiency involved in harnessing coal's energy was obvious.
Yes, it helped forge the path through the industrial revolution, and the quality of engineering and ingenuity from that era is fantastic.
But at what cost....
As far as this mine goes: I see they have picked a better time than before a domestically hosted cop to announce it.
If industry genuinely wants this product, then fine. We will need steel for quite some time.
Although quantity is everything. This is Vaseline Glass. Nice radioactive green glow? Yeah, that's Uranium... And nothing to do with its radioactivity.
Not to mention other chemical nasties. Alas, between imported and domestic coal, the choice should be obvious.
Evanivitch said:
Mixed messages from the steel industry saying they don't actually want this, pointing the finger at high sulphur content.
But, there's definitely a political slant on that. Because firstly it's going to cost them more to process if it is high-sulphur, and they're going to have to manage their emissions more tightly and what they really all want is taxpayers money to fund their arc furnaces and hydrogen investment.
Even if someone miracled a coke-free hydrogen powered process overnight there's no capacity to make hydrogen to fire it; it will take all the time between now and whatever net zero date has been plucked from the ether to change the steel sector over to that, and if the UK wants steelmaking as a domestic industrial capacity then the govt will have to offer industry sweeties to stick around.But, there's definitely a political slant on that. Because firstly it's going to cost them more to process if it is high-sulphur, and they're going to have to manage their emissions more tightly and what they really all want is taxpayers money to fund their arc furnaces and hydrogen investment.
Solocle said:
Coal also emits radioactive chemicals.
Although quantity is everything. This is Vaseline Glass. Nice radioactive green glow? Yeah, that's Uranium... And nothing to do with its radioactivity.
Not to mention other chemical nasties. Alas, between imported and domestic coal, the choice should be obvious.
Scorpions glow green under UV lights as well.Although quantity is everything. This is Vaseline Glass. Nice radioactive green glow? Yeah, that's Uranium... And nothing to do with its radioactivity.
Not to mention other chemical nasties. Alas, between imported and domestic coal, the choice should be obvious.
Is that common glass or something antique / unique (genuine question BTW - I'm utterly ignorant of these things)
sorry for the thread drift.
Solocle said:
Ian Geary said:
(I know this is about coking coal, but)
I went to a steam fair once, and it reminded me why it was phased out.
The smell permeates everything, and not in a pleasant way. The sheer labour and inefficiency involved in harnessing coal's energy was obvious.
Yes, it helped forge the path through the industrial revolution, and the quality of engineering and ingenuity from that era is fantastic.
But at what cost....
As far as this mine goes: I see they have picked a better time than before a domestically hosted cop to announce it.
If industry genuinely wants this product, then fine. We will need steel for quite some time.
Coal also emits radioactive chemicals.I went to a steam fair once, and it reminded me why it was phased out.
The smell permeates everything, and not in a pleasant way. The sheer labour and inefficiency involved in harnessing coal's energy was obvious.
Yes, it helped forge the path through the industrial revolution, and the quality of engineering and ingenuity from that era is fantastic.
But at what cost....
As far as this mine goes: I see they have picked a better time than before a domestically hosted cop to announce it.
If industry genuinely wants this product, then fine. We will need steel for quite some time.
Although quantity is everything. This is Vaseline Glass. Nice radioactive green glow? Yeah, that's Uranium... And nothing to do with its radioactivity.
Not to mention other chemical nasties. Alas, between imported and domestic coal, the choice should be obvious.
texaxile said:
Solocle said:
Coal also emits radioactive chemicals.
Although quantity is everything. This is Vaseline Glass. Nice radioactive green glow? Yeah, that's Uranium... And nothing to do with its radioactivity.
Not to mention other chemical nasties. Alas, between imported and domestic coal, the choice should be obvious.
Scorpions glow green under UV lights as well.Although quantity is everything. This is Vaseline Glass. Nice radioactive green glow? Yeah, that's Uranium... And nothing to do with its radioactivity.
Not to mention other chemical nasties. Alas, between imported and domestic coal, the choice should be obvious.
Is that common glass or something antique / unique (genuine question BTW - I'm utterly ignorant of these things)
sorry for the thread drift.
hiccy18 said:
Solocle said:
There are new technologies involving hydrogen - the M53 was recently closed to allow the movement of a hydrogen furnance.
But it's certainly not like using coal for power generation, IMO. Although the climate impact is the same - but domestic production vs foreign production is the same.
I think that one was for oil production, but reading a little I found yes indeed there is a hydrogen based process being trialled right now, but it'll probably be a decade before it goes mainstream..But it's certainly not like using coal for power generation, IMO. Although the climate impact is the same - but domestic production vs foreign production is the same.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff