The return of coal mining. Bet Arthur Scargill is chuffed

The youngest miners in the last mines to close are now in their 60s. Who will have the expertise to run this charade?
NB I’ve a couple of lamps I’d let go for the right price

saw this and i think it is a good thing. i am from a mining family.

i think it is a good thing.

What is good about it?

I think Sunak only got as far as the mention of “coke” and his eyes lit up and he approved the scheme!

Im curious about something. Is there another peacetime U.K. industry that caused as much illness to those working in it in modern history?

Agriculture. A friend’s father is currently dying of a brain cancer the hospital has put down to agri-chemicals.

What is good about it?

To be fair the local Labour/LibDem coalition county council was originally very strongly in favour of the scheme so there presumably are some positive local benefits.

The Westminster government initially resisted getting involved in the decision but under strong pressure to do so did decide to. At that point the county council withdrew its support for the proposal and declared that it was officially neutral on the matter.

I am fairly ambiguous/don’t know on issue. On the face of it I am very strongly opposed to burning carbon and the consequences for the environment/climate, but on the other hand I am not sure why this proposed new mine would increase coal consumption?

Surely the drive to cut back on non-renewables has nothing to do with shortages? Presumably the coal from this mine would simply be replacing coal from another mine – such as from Australia or the United States?

I expect its as likely to actually go ahead as Johnsons 40 hospitals

There’s a global coal shortage, Ernie, that’s why the price is so high, high enough to making mining in the UK viable again it would appear so all new production will be bought and burned.

To be fair the local Labour/LibDem coalition county council was originally very strongly in favour of the scheme so there presumably are some positive local benefits.

The local benefits are a small number of jobs. Better than nothing – if the alternative is really nothing.

But local counci support for something is not a glowing endorsement. IIRC the Northumberland CC approved planning permission for an opencast mine at Druridge Bay, which is now a country park. They have little interest in preserving the environment.

But local counci support for something is not a glowing endorsement. IIRC the Northumberland CC approved planning permission for an opencast mine at Druridge Bay, which is now a country park. They have little interest in preserving the environment.

There’s been opencast sites up that way & some of those that are finished are now nature reserves. Same with a lot of disused gravel pits.
Also, but in Yorkshire not Northumberland, St Aidens RSPB reserve was once a massive opencast & is now a massive reserve, & so was Fairburn Ings.
It’s just the burning of what comes out of the ground that’s the problem.

I too reckon it’s a non-runner.

I was talking about this at work, this morning, with 3 other ex-miners. We all agreed that there wouldn’t be enough coal mining knowledge to man it up.

The youngest miners in the last mines to close are now in their 60s.

Not that it makes much difference but 50s not 60s.

So lets see where we are with this.

Unsuitable for steel mills.

Not enough to make a difference to warming enough homes via power stations.

No actual miners fit enough to do the work.

.

Its a nuclear bomb shelter for the government.

Not that it makes much difference but 50s not 60s.

I don’t suppose age is really the issue. More the fact that none of them will have actually been near a coal mine for 30+ years

Age is an issue, Binners, when I worked for the NCB in the 80’s, the over 50’s were getting their redundancy, no question. That kind of hard work is not for the older end.

I don’t doubt that for a second. It’s difficult to imagine a more physically demanding job.

But I’m thinking that even if they were up to it (which I doubt) they won’t have done it for decades and I imagine it’s a very different job nowadays, as most things are

i watched a documentary thing on Youtube or Water bear.
a environment scientist bloke from america was on. he said words to the effect that no matter what the rest of the world did to look after the environment and the planet, the damage done by the big 4 culprits, China, USA, India and Russia would still undo the good work do by the rest. he also said, that those 4 would never stop doing what they are doing, and would never reach any safe levels.

So on that note, a new coal mine in cumbria, to supply some local jobs to a area with little work, is a good thing in my book.

I don’t think man-power would be an issue. Contract mining services exist in most areas of mining. They could fill the skills gap.

TBH I’m pretty conflicted about the Cumbrian mine.

Ultimately, I’d love to see all coal stay in the ground but, as Ernie said somewhere above, we need lots of steel for the switch to a low emission economy. It’s pretty sad/ironic that most of this is going to be produced using coking coal.

Also, I’m resigned to the idea that China, Russia, India, Turkey etc.. are so hooked on coal that leaving the Cumbrian coal in the ground will make negligible difference to climate outcomes.

The fact is we need lots more mines to source the so-called critical elements required for the switch (Li, REEs, Ni, Cu, Co etc..). We are nowhere near meeting the supply required, and it all looks pretty **** bleak to me.

I too reckon it’s a non-runner.

I was talking about this at work, this morning, with 3 other ex-miners. We all agreed that there wouldn’t be enough coal mining knowledge to man it up.

So why is it being backed up with £165 million of private money then? I have no idea where the West Cumbria Mining Company are getting their £millions from but how do you imagine have they managed to convince anyone to lend money for a non-runner?

I just don’t understand why some people appear to think that it simply can’t happen. The government just needs to give its approval and it can go ahead.

When the Channel tunnel was given the go ahead no one suggested that it would never happen because no one in the UK had any experience of building tunnels under the Channel.

I can’t imagine that lack of expertise is going to be an unresolvable problem.

Going to be used in making the steel for “the line”

I just don’t understand why some people appear to think that it simply can’t happen. The government just needs to give its approval and it can go ahead.

Correct, no reason it won’t happen, it is not a government project.

If you read the explanation there is demand from European steelmakers and this demand is not expected to decrease significantly. Even if it does, the proposed mine’s cost of production in both financial and carbon terms is less than its US competitors so there should be an overall good in net terms if it replaces them.

UK jobs. UK exports. UK profits to tax. No taxpayer cash involved. Meets a demand that is there and not going away. Won’t even generate any local pollution by being burnt here. What is the problem?

If they can’t find miners or make a profit it will close and everyone will be happy.

Of course they will find miners. It’s like the oil filed. Need a few skilled people to instruct, some training and attractive wages (and it will be very good wages, tough work don’t get me wrong but probably tough to match wages) and people will be beating the door down. These things ramp up and so will the supply of workers.

It was touted by conservative MP’s as useful to the UK Steel industry. That’s not true. So this was either a lie, or they don’t know what they’re talking about.

So on that note, a new coal mine in cumbria, to supply some local jobs to a area with little work, is a good thing in my book.

They’re all for it because the town center is apparently a waste town, and the population are desperate for some sort of funding, but the town center will remain a waste town and as the project starts the population will start complaining when the 24/7 big trucks start hitting the roads.

Whatever beautiful scenery is going to be affected also when they start pouring out millions of cubic meters of debris that comes from digging it.

Of course they will find miners.

Poland probably, or somewhere else but not local, as said previously, we dont really have a stock of tradsemen ready to go.

Sellafield has opened new offices in Whitehaven with the aim of bringing more hard cash into the town centre. The harbourside is actually really nice!

So Whitehaven isn’t quite a ‘waste town’. Although it is full of jam eaters…

Well after not having any strong opinion on the particular matter of the Whitehaven mine I sought the opinion of organisations and those that I trust.

Opposition from those whose sole concern is the environment and the effects of human activity on the planet, such as the WWF, is absolutely overwhelming. So on that basis I am happy not to remain neutral. I was particularly struck by this comment:

A landmark report from the International Energy Agency stated that “no new coal mines or extensions of existing ones are needed” on the road to net zero, adding that existing sources of coking coal production are sufficient to cover demand through to 2050.

The UK I believe is a member of the International Energy Agency, you can’t be a member of an organisation and simply ignore the stuff that you find inconvenient.

I was also impressed by the fact that the Government’s top climate change advisor, John Gummer, the Tory politician who famously forced his 4 year old daughter to eat a beef burger in front of TV cameras at the height of the Mad Cow epidemic, said that approving the mine would be “absolutely indefensible”.

If John Gummer says it’s absolutely indefensible it really must be indefensible.

Something can be a net benefit even if it is not needed. That is the case being made in this instance based on the decision letter. It refers extensively to the Independent Commission report, which I haven’t read, but I think that is the gist. Anyway here is is if you are interested (paras 18 to 38).

Poland probably, or somewhere else but not local, as said previously, we dont really have a stock of tradsemen ready to go

Of course. Every big engineering project is mainly imported labour either from across the country or across the world. People travel across the the world for rotations on oil fields and mines. I don’t know why anyone would think this would be any different.

Something can be a net benefit even if it is not needed.

Well obviously. But whatever the benefits might be they don’t appear to be benefits for the environment.

Otherwise it is hard to fathom why a multitude of widely respected organisations concerned with environmental issues, such as Greenpeace and the WWF, should be so strongly opposed to the proposal.

You would expect them to be enthusiastic supporters of a proposal which benefits the environment, would you not?

Apparently not even the government’s top climate change advisor supports the proposal.

I think you need to look at the Cayman Islands private equity fund managed by EMR Capital for the biggest possible benefactor of this proposal.

And I am not sure how high up their list of priorities the environment and the residents of Whitehaven are.

don’t know why anyone would think this would be any different.

Because it is being touted that the majority of the 500 jobs the scheme will create will go to local people. I would expect it to be a condition of planning permission.

500 employees doesn’t exactly make a huge engineering project imo.

It’s quite something watching the Tory muppet who drew the short straw tonight on Question Time trying (and failing quite comprehensively) to justify this nonsense

The more detail comes out, the more ridiculous this whole thing seems.

Last deep mine, one of the super pits, Kellingley closed almost 7 years ago to the day but i doubt any of the Yorkshire miners will cross the border. It would be interesting to know what sort of mining it will be. Long wall is pretty automated and needs mechanics and engineers rather than traditional miners and is highly skilled. There are still mine equipment manufacturers in the UK, mainly exporting out to China to be copied.

For the record it’s a bonkers idea harking back to the dam busters, Spitfires over Dover and the early fifties. Coal has no place in the modern world except in China and even they have woken up and smelt the smog.

You would expect them to be enthusiastic supporters of a proposal which benefits the environment, would you not?

Not really, I think they would object to any new development of any fossil fuel, they would prefer that money to be invested in green technologies but that ignores real world economics that there is going to be a long term demand for fossil fuel. That has been taken into account and a sensible pragmatic decision has been made in my view.

It’s difficult to imagine a more physically demanding job

Yip. I do wonder how viable the jobs are nowadays with the much more modern h&s laws, working condition laws etc. Even if they can get round that, they’ll have to offer eye watering wages to attract people, or attract those that are so destitute they have no other options, which is effectively exploitation

but that ignores real world economics

Yes that is precisely my point. The argument in favour of this scheme is only really about ‘real world economics’ and not about the environment at all, which is presumably why Greenpeace and the WWF aren’t enthusiastic backers of the scheme.

And there is no point ignoring environmental issues which are likely to have a profound effect on real world economics btw. Climate catastrophes don’t generally provide a very good business environment.

If the negative effect on the environment of opening a new mine producing 3 million tons of coal per year outweighs any environmental benefits of not transporting coal half way round the world then it is obvious that it shouldn’t be permitted.

Nothing frankly is more important than protecting the planet. If you want to encourage new economic activity then the obvious area to focus on is the huge potential of the renewable industry, not outdated technology which is suffocating the planet.

It would be interesting to know what sort of mining it will be. Long wall is pretty automated

Think they were looking at room and pillar at the time of the original application – so more conventional continuous miners; quicker to get mining and lower initial outlay but need more staff for shuttle cars or running flexible conveyors. Longwalls are expensive and time consuming to set up but optimal for bigger mines. One of the main manufacturers of all this gear Joy Global – now Komatsu – still have a good presence in the UK.

Isn’t this just about principles?

That we/they are environmentalists when it suits them, but will happily abandon those principles for the sake of 500 jobs. Are we really at the point when we “can’t afford principles”?

Personally I think this is a cynical and calculated move by the tories. They have calculated that their “base” is more worried about the economy than the environment, to the point that they would give the former absolute priority over the latter.

This also has the benefit of being wonderfully nostalgic, and has lots of potential for some juicy xenophobia, racism and anti-EU sentiment….. all high-word-scores on the Tories reelection scrabbleboard.

But most of all, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the Trade Unions in the UK are all ramping-up and (feel free to disagree) are gaining widespread public support – meanwhile the government announce what? Only the bloody re-birth of the UK mining industry.

I also agree that they’ll be a tory donor behind this somewhere. Just because the Tories just can’t seem to help themselves – corruption is one of their guiding principles.

For those saying there is no place for coal. On its way out. The world disagrees. According to BP World Energy Review coal production has been fairly stable for 10 years. Year to year variation but overall stable.

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2021-coal.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwib1dHB3-v7AhWThFwKHafLCSAQFnoECAkQAg&usg=AOvVaw10KDlIrF_2GoApO9Nyc2r6