OT: Kellingley pit shuts and causes leftist dilemma

I don't think it's due to the environmental BS since the power station down the road is going to continue to run on cheaper imported coal. Seems the miners in this instance are just simple victims of globalisation.

The Beeb had it from a miner this morning that the decline of the coal industry started in 1984. But we all know better than that.

And I don't know what you mean by "victims" of globalisation. Unless you think that people who used to make a living off horses (like blacksmiths, horse-whip makers, etc) are victims too.

Only for a few months

that too

Eh ?

People who made a living off horses weren't put out of business as a result of imports of cheap horses, whips, or horseshoes. They were overtaken by technology in the form of the internal combustion engine.

"Victims" of globalisation are rendered uncompetetive as a result of cheaper imports of the same thing resulting from foreign investment in technology, (often as a result of having started later) cheaper labour, and the advent of bulk carriers.

michael adams

...

To be fair to the coal company

the first of you examples does to apply here

tim

In English please ?

michael adams

...

IIRC, Kellingley was supplying Drax, not Ferrybridge (it used to, but that was years back). The report I saw was that the contract was for £x/tonne, but the world price was now well under £x, and the contract expires about now.

Given the recent announcement that the government wants to close all coal fired power stations in the 10 years, then its days would have been numbered anyway, unless they could find an export market.

Sympathy for those involved, but the writing has been on the wall for some time now.

Adrian

It wasn't long ago that the announcement was made that all coal-fired power stations would be closed once sufficient new gas-powered once come on stream.

So there is some environmental BS behind it, and my guess is that the powers that be wanted to avoid a simultaneous outcry from miners and power station workers.

By running the local power station on imported coal for a while longer, they can ask for brownie points for cutting imports, at the appropriate time.

Jim

The coal from Kellingley is not more expensive than that from e.g Colombia (apparently) because the Colombians invested in HiTech modern methodology and the Brits did not. - Bcause the Brits did (so invest) (and at a guess the Colombians didn't,relying simply on lower wages to cut costs)

tim

Ah right. I wasn't being specific just listing possible reasons why imported coal might be cheaper. Basic geology which determines extraction costs probably make a big difference as well.

michael adams

...

Yes, both were rendered uncompetitive. The details are not important - unless you believe in import tariffs, etc, or in supporting industries that are past their sell-by date.

So to use your own example you're claiming that had the British Government of the time supported horse breeders, whip makers, and blacksmiths to a greater extent, while banning motor manufacture, motor cars would have never have taken off in this country.

I see.

michael adams

...

Does Colombia have deep mines? I thought these days all the "global" coal came from open cast mining, which is a very different animal.

Colombian coal is coming from open-cast mines whilst Kellingley's coal is

in a country that prefers to import cheap coal mined by child labour in South America.

A ton of coal costs £45 to mine in UK A ton of coal costs £35 to mine in Russia A ton of coal costs even less to mine using child labour in South America.

Almost everything except shelf stacking is past its sell by date in UK.

Drax is partly converted to burning wood chips imported from Canada.

You're being your usual "if-it's-not-black-it-must-be-white" fatheaded self.