Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-31-2018, 03:40 PM
 
7,800 posts, read 4,417,102 times
Reputation: 9439

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
Sure. The Democrats made sure it was an "economically bad choice." Coal is cheap. They were making it very expensive. It's called "regulation." Raising the price of something through regulation is what Democrats do to ensure it's demise. That's what they did to the coal industry.
God forbid, they have regulations on coal sludge and dumping coal waste in the waterways. I guess certain people and their children are expendable. Profit over the living. So what if they die early or get cancer as long as conservatives can save a buck.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-31-2018, 03:45 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,651 posts, read 26,457,394 times
Reputation: 12664
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard View Post
His healthcare was better than none at all and I know plenty of people were happy with it....but I digress.

Yeah, those people are called mooches.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2018, 03:48 PM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,365,344 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigCreek View Post
You write as if exporting coal is a good thing. It is not. Read my previous post. Appalachia's mountains are being destroyed in order to sell coal to China and other third world countries. The game isn't worth the precious candle.
Oh, now we're destroying the mountains! SAVE THE MOUNTAINS! SAVE THE TREES! SAVE THE WHALES! SAVE THE AIR WE BREATH!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2018, 03:51 PM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,275,168 times
Reputation: 12102
I use coal to heat my home. Cheap.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2018, 03:51 PM
 
7,800 posts, read 4,417,102 times
Reputation: 9439
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Yeah, those people are called mooches.
I do not begrudge anyone who gets subsidies For their health insurance because the idea of people dying on the street and kids dying of cancer and other diseases because of lack of medical coverage bothers me. Maybe not you, but it does me. That is a topic for another day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2018, 03:52 PM
 
Location: New Orleans, La. USA
6,354 posts, read 3,666,098 times
Reputation: 2522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metsfan53 View Post
all Evil Obama plotting...
The Obama coal regulations would save 1,000's of Americans from dying each year from coal pollution caused heart attacks and respiratory disease. And Obama's regulations would stop neurological and developmental deficits in children, and stop huge numbers of children from getting asthma.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c56153975be2
Coal epidemiology: Burning coal harms children and worsens asthma and heart disease.

Republicans literally want to kill 1,000's of Americans and give kids asthma to support the coal corporations that give republican politicians campaign money (while they claim Obama is the bad guy.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2018, 03:57 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,190,715 times
Reputation: 17866
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
frakking has released a ton of natural gas that is cheaper then coal.
BTU for BTU it's not cheaper than coal, it's probably averaged about 50% more over the past few years and that is even before we consider the price spike. It's goiing to be interesting to see what the markey does when they start exporting a lot of this gas.

http://aemstatic-ww1.azureedge.net/c...sts_coalSE.png





The newest natural gas plants are more efficient and preferable for filling the role of intermediary plants which is role they have always filled. The same tech that makes them more efficient is being worked on for coal and if it comes to market NG will lose that advantage. The other thing is is if you are going to invest hundreds of millions or even billions into a power plant with the expectation it will produce power for the next 6 or 7 decades it's risky investment with the threat of regulations.

Last edited by CaseyB; 01-31-2018 at 04:30 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2018, 04:00 PM
 
12,003 posts, read 11,947,931 times
Reputation: 22696
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
Oh, now we're destroying the mountains! SAVE THE MOUNTAINS! SAVE THE TREES! SAVE THE WHALES! SAVE THE AIR WE BREATH!
That the best you got??

I suppose one could manage without whales, and even without mountains.

But "the air we breath (sic)"?

Think about it.

I take it you've never seen mountaintop removal. Once again, check out Google Earth's views of southeastern Kentucky and southern West Virginia. Educate yourself, so you won't further embarrass yourself here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2018, 04:02 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,190,715 times
Reputation: 17866
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
So to answer your question, given current trends it will do absolutely nothing to the economy.
The problem with this statement is we know from history the stability of the coal market, the natural gas market is whole other ballgame and is still quite volatile. I don't think that will change especially when they start exporting huge quantities of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2018, 04:18 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,190,715 times
Reputation: 17866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metsfan53 View Post
so If we use more coal on Wed then we did on Tue that means coal is no longer in a decline?
In this case yes because you need to look at what happened the days previous to that. There is a plethora of issues that have caused the slump in coal over the past 9 years. Lower natural gas prices, the Obama era regulations that prematurely closed many plants, the threat of new regulations and some unusually warm winters that suppressed both the price of coal and natural gas.

There was glut of coal on the market because the industry never had a chance to adjust. That's behind them. With the demand for more exports and the unusually cold winter things are going to drastically change the amount of coal used and the subsequent mining activity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top