[woodandsteel]

Trump says he is going to bring back coal as a part of his program to make America great again.

But the reason America was so great is that it was at the leading edge of technological change. That is relevant because in the 19th century, coal was the hot new technology. It was used for powering factory machines, electric generators, railroads and steam boats, heating, and producing steel.

But technology continued to advance, and coal has gradually been replaced. It survives today only for steel production and part of electric generation, and even there it is being replaced by gas and renewables.

So when Trump wants to revive coal, he is going backwards technologically, and that would mean losing out in the global economy, too.

Any Trump defenders want to disagree?

[francisofascii]

This reminds me of Kodak, who was given advanced warning that digital would disrupt the film industry. Kodak did little to prepare, and that blunder ultimately led to its decline. I fear the US is also blundering in the areas of energy and infrastructure policy.

[prawn]

I feel like we're in a similar position in Australia. Ruling party is over-reliant on coal when we are in a great position to go in harder on renewables, especially solar. Our solar-pickup is amazing, you see panels on so many houses, and we have loads of space and sunlight.

[VLM]

The geography is special and we're kind of the "Saudi Arabia" of world coal production. As the worlds best producer (or one of the best anyway) we should be the one place in the world still digging coal.

Kind of like how wheat is not quite as sexy as javascript frameworks. However, the midwest has the unique geological feature of being the "Saudi Arabia" of wheat production, so despite wheat not being as sexy as SV startups, we are one of the best places on the planet to grow it so you'd think we'd grow a heck of a lot of wheat compared to, say, Ecuador or Hawaii.

Imagine as a thought experiment that javascript frameworks were not cool and not the future, yet, SV remained the best spot on the entire planet to grow new javascript frameworks. If something (politics? regulation of programmers?) prevented SV from actually being the world capital of javascript frameworks, it would be a valid question to ask why and then fix it.

USA is a big country. We do all kinds of stuff, not just SV stuff. Also obviously 99.99% of the countries population isn't going to sit down and quietly die because they can't participate in SV tech scene, luckily they have plenty of economic activities to perform.

[woodandsteel]

>The geography is special and we're kind of the "Saudi Arabia" of world coal production. As the worlds best producer (or one of the best anyway) we should be the one place in the world still digging coal.

But Trump isn't just saying that the US should remain #1 in a shrinking industry. He claims that he can get coal employment back to where it was decades ago. That's crazy.

[tobltobs]

China is Nr.1 world producer by far. Then comes the US, Europe, India, Australia with more or less the same output each. Sure you could try to compete with China by removing all environmental regulations but even the Chinese slowly understand that drinkable water might have its use also.

Your corn example isn't a good story also, because without subsidies the "Saudi Arabia" of wheat production wouldn't exist.

How about concentrating on stuff which actually generates money?

[briantakita]

I wouldn't say we are going technologically backwards if you take a systemic look at energy, manufacturing, & infrastructure.

Steel is needed to rebuild existing infrastructure (roads, bridges, railroads) that have been falling apart over the years.

Steel is also needed to new infrastructure (buildings, electrical grid, solar panels (including those which will line the Mexican border wall), walls, housing, equipment, manufacturing).

Coal power is also inexpensive, transportable (power generation can be localized), & cleaner than ever. There's also a lot of coal left to be mined (> 260 bn short tons; 200 years).

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Energy.html

Coal can also be converted to diesel allowing states to create their own energy & reducing our need for foreign fuel sources. This will have geopolitical ramifications. Even if we decide to move toward renewable resources, having this coal stockpile in our back pocket will give leverage in acquiring the rare earth minerals needed for batteries & solar cells.

Also note that China & India burn a lot of coal, even though they could leap frog to a new energy infrastructure, giving more evidence that there must be compelling reasons to do so.

[andygates]

"Cleaner than ever" still ain't clean.

"I murdered fewer people last year!" would be a terrible defense for Jack The Ripper.

[briantakita]

> "Cleaner than ever" still ain't clean.

Ok, less dirty. Happy?

> "I murdered fewer people last year!" would be a terrible defense for Jack The Ripper.

By that logic, solar & wind are not clean either. You still have to mine for & process rare earth minerals for solar cells & batteries. Not to mention the poor Chinese workers who process the electronics in poor working conditions. How about the extra infrastructure needed to support solar cells & wind turbines everywhere, as you have power loss with power transmission over a distance.

Neither is fission clean. Perhaps Thorium is relatively clean?

> China and India burn a lot of coal... because they have a lot of inhabitants. But they have also got much more renewables than the US.

China & India are also building infrastructure, which uses steel. I don't think there's any qualms about using renewables in the US. It's a matter of letting the technology mature in the free market & reducing the Federal Budget & lowering taxes. When renewables are more mature, the US will adopt them more.

Note that there are several alternative technologies being developed. Thorium, Biogas, Fusion, etc. When these technologies mature, we can use them all in combination; taking "the right tool for the right job" approach.

[woodandsteel]

>I wouldn't say we are going technologically backwards if you take a systemic look at energy, manufacturing, & infrastructure.

It's going backwards because we need to be at the cutting edge, which is renewables. Trump is facing the past, when the US was great partly because of coal, rather than looking to where things are going in the future.

>Coal power is also inexpensive

But natural gas is even cheaper, and wind and solar are becoming so.

>cleaner than ever

But it is still much less clean than renewables, or even natural gas.

>Coal can also be converted to diesel allowing states to create their own energy & reducing our need for foreign fuel sources.

That's expensive, diesel pollutes, and besides fracking is already replacing foreign oil.

>Even if we decide to move toward renewable resources, having this coal stockpile in our back pocket will give leverage in acquiring the rare earth minerals needed for batteries & solar cells.

I assume you mean getting rare earth minerals from China, but that wouldn't work because China already has all the coal it needs, and besides is moving fast to get off of coal and onto renewables.

[francisofascii]

Coal will only become more expensive as it becomes more difficult to extract. The easy to access coal is gone. That is why in the article, they are resorting to destroying the county's state park. Everywhere else is either depleted or hard to access. All the more reason to use renewable, non depletable energy sources. Even China is beginning to moving away, producing a ton of solar panels.

[Faaak]

How is coal cleaner than ever ?

China and India burn a lot of coal... because they have a lot of inhabitants. But they have also got much more renewables than the US.