Western Railroad Discussion > California Governor Shuts Down Port of Oakland Coal Port funding

And the person he denied funding was a long-time friend and political supporter of his.  Apparently, this denial of funds may now put the entire re-build of the old Oakland Army Base at the Port in doubt.  You can hear the money going down the drain...

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Gov-Brown-delivers-huge-blow-to-Oakland-coal-plan-9187855.php

Coach

You would think that California best interest would be in seeing that low sulphur coal gets exported. After all, the winds will bring the pollution from whatever is burned in the Orient back to them.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You would think that California best interest
> would be in seeing that low sulphur coal gets
> exported. After all, the winds will bring the
> pollution from whatever is burned in the Orient
> back to them.

Wouldn't even make a dent in all of the pollution that already makes it here from all of the high sulpher coal that is mined and burned in China.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ts1457 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You would think that California best interest
> > would be in seeing that low sulphur coal gets
> > exported. After all, the winds will bring the
> > pollution from whatever is burned in the Orient
> > back to them.
>
> Wouldn't even make a dent in all of the pollution
> that already makes it here from all of the high
> sulpher coal that is mined and burned in China.

This is ideological, not environmental.

Bob

People need to wake up!  Coal is still on the decline - get over it!  Read the threads on TO (newest on Alaska RR coal decline) and believe it!  Just like technology continues to grow, the world has changed.  There are other energy sources, which produce the same results for cheaper costs.  Citizens of states with coal reserves better get realistic - coal is not coming back in any great quantity.  Move on!  There are jobs in other fields that will replace those jobs lost in the coal industry - Solar Power is just one example.  These jobs didn't exist previously, yet people bemoan the fact that coal isn't a viable resource any longer.  We can't go back to the old days...history proves it!  

I'm sure Mr. Embrace the Inevitable Future 619 (heavily manipulated by government decisions) also believes:


> People need to wake up! Long distance passenger trains are on the
> decline - get over it!  Read the threads on TO
> (France canceling many of theirs) and believe it!
>  Just like technology continues to grow, the
> world has changed.  There are other transportation
> options, which produce the same results for
> cheaper costs.  Citizens of states with long distance
> trains better get realistic -they are not coming
> back in any great quantity.  Move on!  There are
> jobs in other fields that will replace those jobs
> lost in the rail industry - Bus drivers, stewardesses, and auto mechanics are just
>three examples. 
>We can't go back to
> the old days...history proves it!  

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/16 07:57 by darkcloud.

Cliffs619 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> People need to wake up!  Coal is still on the
> decline - get over it!  Read the threads on TO
> (newest on Alaska RR coal decline) and believe it!
>  Just like technology continues to grow, the
> world has changed.  There are other energy
> sources, which produce the same results for
> cheaper costs.  Citizens of states with coal
> reserves better get realistic - coal is not coming
> back in any great quantity.  Move on!  There are
> jobs in other fields that will replace those jobs
> lost in the coal industry - Solar Power is just
> one example.  These jobs didn't exist previously,
> yet people bemoan the fact that coal isn't a
> viable resource any longer.  We can't go back to
> the old days...history proves it!  

The problem with your rant is while coal use might be on the decline in North America its not truly on the decline in most of Asia, no matter how the Sierra Club or other groups want to spin it.  True, electrical demand is peaking in many of those countries, especially China.  But that doesn't mean they will suddenly stop buying coal.

The point that lots of people have made over the years (and IMHO correctly so) is exporting low sulfur PRB coal to a country like China, that still uses too much high sulfur coal, could have greatly benefitted the air quality over there AND helped with the trade imbalance at the same time.  China was willing to buy it because back in 2014 they publicly stated they wanted to wean themselves away from using high sulfur coal.  Why do you think the coal export terminal at Cherry Point, WA, or even at Port of Oakland, was proposed in the first place??  Instead China (and India) continue to buy coal from Australia, Indonesia, ect. while the North American mines, for the most part, get cut out.  It makes no sense at all and never will...

As for the Port of Oakland and those running it I could, but won't, go off on a tirade.  For the life of me I'll never understand why they entered into a deal like that when both the Port of Stockton and Port of Richmond can and do handle coal exports, though in a limited scope.  Then they turn around recently and say "we won't handle coal at the port after all", so why even dare enter into the deal in the first place and face possible litigation when you say no??   Again, makes to sense at all...



Allen



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/16 08:37 by bradleymckay.

I bet the BNSF or UP would take that new yard off their hands. The OIG could always use more storage capacity and not have to cart baretables out onto the Stockton Sub.

Ron

Hmmm... Coal is approx $40/ton. What other energy source produces similar results for less cost? I am coal powered, and pay less than 10 cents per KWH. 

bradleymckay Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cliffs619 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > People need to wake up!  Coal is still on the
> > decline - get over it!  Read the threads on TO
> > (newest on Alaska RR coal decline) and believe
> it!
> >  Just like technology continues to grow, the
> > world has changed.  There are other energy
> > sources, which produce the same results for
> > cheaper costs.  Citizens of states with coal
> > reserves better get realistic - coal is not
> coming
> > back in any great quantity.  Move on!  There
> are
> > jobs in other fields that will replace those
> jobs
> > lost in the coal industry - Solar Power is just
> > one example.  These jobs didn't exist
> previously,
> > yet people bemoan the fact that coal isn't a
> > viable resource any longer.  We can't go back
> to
> > the old days...history proves it!  
>
> The problem with your rant is while coal use might
> be on the decline in North America its not truly
> on the decline in most of Asia, no matter how the
> Sierra Club or other groups want to spin it. 
> True, electrical demand is peaking in many of
> those countries, especially China.  But that
> doesn't mean they will suddenly stop buying coal.
>
> The point that lots of people have made over the
> years (and IMHO correctly so) is exporting low
> sulfur PRB coal to a country like China, that
> still uses too much high sulfur coal, could have
> greatly benefitted the air quality over there AND
> helped with the trade imbalance at the same
> time.  China was willing to buy it because back
> in 2014 they publicly stated they wanted to wean
> themselves away from using high sulfur coal.  Why
> do you think the coal export terminal at Cherry
> Point, WA, or even at Port of Oakland, was
> proposed in the first place??  Instead China (and
> India) continue to buy coal from Australia,
> Indonesia, ect. while the North American mines,
> for the most part, get cut out.  It makes no
> sense at all and never will...
>
> As for the Port of Oakland and those running it I
> could, but won't, go off on a tirade.  For the
> life of me I'll never understand why they entered
> into a deal like that when both the Port of
> Stockton and Port of Richmond can and do handle
> coal exports, though in a limited scope.  Then
> they turn around recently and say "we won't handle
> coal at the port after all", so why even dare
> enter into the deal in the first place and face
> possible litigation when you say no??   Again,
> makes to sense at all...
>
>
>
> Allen

Unfortunately, Allen is correct. Cheaper sources of coal will eventually drive UP & BNSF out of the  low sulfur coal hauling business and the mines that supply it will close down. Clean coal technology is barely in it's infancy. Sequestration of CO2 is physically possible, but damned expensive. In one of my former careers, for seven years I was a mechanical engineer at Bechtel Norwalk (CA) . I still follow the electric generating industry. IMHO, I know a bit about power generation. Natural gas is still less expensive in the US, so power producers will build generating stations powered by gas. Nuclear is the way to go, but is fraught with screaming environmentalists (apologies, Cliffs619) and waste disposal issues. The Southern Nuclear Operating Co., Inc, a division of Southern Services, is building Vogtle Units 3 & 4 (pressurized water reactors) to generate electricity for the growing South, Hell, I worked on Units 1 & 2.

California is a Nanny state. Gov. Brown is merely "securing his legacy" as an environmentalist. This is his final term. A new Governor will be inaugurated in 2018. The old Oakland Army base will be used for something else. Life will go on.

William Jeffers, P.E.
San Dimas, CA

wpdude Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hmmm... Coal is approx $40/ton. What other energy
> source produces similar results for less cost? I
> am coal powered, and pay less than 10 cents per
> KWH. 

Cheap.... but dirty...(insert joke if required)! The real cost is environmental, which is why coal is dying on its arse, especially in the wealthier parts of the world where there are developed economies and viable alternatives.
Start saying your goodbyes to coal...it's not long for this earth.

My wife and I lived next to a coal-fired power plant in the upscale community of Alexandria, VA, in the '80s. It was filthy! I had to wash my car every week. It doesn'r matter where the coal is being burned, it all goes into the same atmosphere. As the man said, get over it! It's like livery stable owners getting upset when cars were invented. The smart ones opened garages, service stations, and dealerships, and why we are now seeing charging stations installed and why I have solar panels on my roof...
I have a poster on my office wall of the fossil of a long-gone critter, with the words, "If you don't adapt, you get left behind."
We are building and flying spaceships here in Mojave less than a mile from where the 20 Mule Team wagons were built and operated.

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

Once you accept that India and China are building new coal fired plants (higher efficiency, but still coal), their question becomes "where can I get good BTU and what will it cost?"  Why buy coal in the US if you can buy it from Australia for 15% less, and get it at lower shipping cost?

The same exepnsive dollar that draws all kinds of imports into the US makes our coal exports much more expensive to a purchaser paying in rupees or yuan. Our imports of cheap clothing, electronics, car parts, tennis balls, screw drivers, come here precisely because the US dollar makes them cheap to import.  Good for the railroads, bad for US manufacturers of shirts, TV sets, etc.

We live in a global economy.  Countries buy locomotives built in Erie, Muncie and Fort Worth. And they sell us clothing, vanilla, chile, electronics, screw drivers, etc.

Interesting dichotomy, Australia is more environmentally sensitive than the US yet still exports coal, The
coal terminal at Mackay is massive! But on the other hand, they seem to have a better grasp of economics,
yes the environment is important but so are out of work people. That's a point that seems lost on many US
politicos,

Out

The comparisons to whale oil, wagons, etc. would be valid if coal were falling on its own accord.  It's not.

Yes, nat gas is currently cheaper.  It has been before too...historically utilities have kept a mix of coal and nat gas capability so they can favor whichever happens to be less expensive at the moment.  But utilities can see the regulatory writing on the wall.  For those who can't see the regulatory aspect of the writing on the wall,  I'll quote the EIA report that was posted on the eastern board last week:
"Due to new regulations (CAA 111b), conventional coal plants cannot be built without CCS [i.e. carbon capture (i.e. really expensive stuff)] because they are required to meet specific CO2 emission standards."
Nope, no war on coal there.

If or when "clean" energy can compete - unsubsidized - with traditional coal, then it's time to start lecturing people about getting with the times.  Under the current environment, the appropriate lecture would be about government policy making energy more expensive than it needs to be*.  Because it's the poor, elderly, and minorities that suffer the most from higher prices.


MojaveBill Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My wife and I lived next to a coal-fired power
> plant in the upscale community of Alexandria, VA,
> in the '80s. It was filthy! I had to wash my car
> every week. It doesn'r matter where the coal is
> being burned, it all goes into the same
> atmosphere. As the man said, get over it! It's
> like livery stable owners getting upset when cars
> were invented. The smart ones opened garages,
> service stations, and dealerships, and why we are
> now seeing charging stations installed and why I
> have solar panels on my roof...
> I have a poster on my office wall of the fossil of
> a long-gone critter, with the words, "If you don't
> adapt, you get left behind."
> We are building and flying spaceships here in
> Mojave less than a mile from where the 20 Mule
> Team wagons were built and operated.

This is not a rant at all - just a realistic view of the future as it relates to our country and the railraods - which this forum is about!  Don't go on a rant yourself about the world's need for coal and how it will save the coal industry here - get a life!  Too many people on TO think they are an "expert" at everything and in reality...they aren't!

The Chinese are increasingly aware that using high sulphur coal is creating widespread pollution in their rivers, and blocking sunlight for their environmental business. The choking, killing smog and all that. These two items alone affect ag output, and solar electric generation. Each of which is an important national priority.  If the Southern Company's pressurized water reactor technology works as intended, they'll probably steal it, and have their own plants up and running by 2025.

 

Here's two photos I took in Mackay last year from my hotel balcony.  One is a distant shot of the coal loading facility, and the other is of a small portion of the 25+ vessels waiting to load.  Every day there were this many ships on the horizon.  I can't imagine how many tons went to China every day.

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting dichotomy, Australia is more
> environmentally sensitive than the US yet still
> exports coal, The
> coal terminal at Mackay is massive! But on the
> other hand, they seem to have a better grasp of
> economics,
> yes the environment is important but so are out of
> work people. That's a point that seems lost on
> many US
> politicos,
>
> Out

---

---

This made the news in Utah because the state was trying to invest in a coal terminal at the Port of Oakland. They are trying to find ways to keep the coal mines going, but it looks like an uphill battle.

Nathan

Posted from iPhone

Cliffs619 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is not a rant at all - just a realistic view
> of the future as it relates to our country and the
> railraods - which this forum is about!  Don't go
> on a rant yourself about the world's need for coal
> and how it will save the coal industry here - get
> a life!  Too many people on TO think they are an
> "expert" at everything and in reality...they
> aren't!

Well I obviously know more about the subject than you do.  What?  Can't stand it when someone knows more about a topic than you?  Too bad. 


Allen