West Cumbrian Mine gets go ahead

[furnessvale]

Also different blast furnaces can take different types of coal, and can also add other minerals to counteract unwanted impurities
Remember, the coal is the input to a complex chemical reaction. It isnt just a heat source.

Exactly. As I say, I'm sure they did their homework and had suitable customers in the pipeline.

 

[randyrippley]

Cumbria Coal Mine – current situation

Cumbria Coal Mine: Current situation SLACCtt (charity Number 1139474) is the charity that, together with Friends of the Earth, opposed the development of a new coal mine under the Irish Sea. Here i…

slacc.org.uk

The proposed Cumbria mine will produce a quality of coal that is not suitable for UK and European steel makers, being too high in suphur.

Can proposed Cumbrian coal mine really reduce need for Russian imports? | New Civil Engineer

So what exactly has been claimed about the £165M Woodhouse Colliery - and what has happened up until now in the planning process? West Cumbria Mining

www.newcivilengineer.com

However experts have now said that it is unlikely that any of the coal will be used in the UK because its quality means it can't be used by UK steel companies.

Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit analyst Jess Ralston explained: “The likes of British Steel have already said that the coal’s high sulphur content may make it unusable. As Europe charges ahead with tens of green steel plants under development, the UK risks falling even further behind the pack by sticking with coking coal when green hydrogen is about to boom as the future of steel globally."

Last year, the Telegraph also reported that British Steel, operators of a steelmaking plant in Scunthorpe where the coal might be used, had raised concerns that the sulphur content could be be "an issue".

As such, the use of the coal in the UK is expected to be "limited", meaning the mine will not lead to energy independence or lessen the reliance on Russian fossil fuels.

Key facts and figures on the West Cumbria Mining Project - Coal Action Network

West Cumbria Mining Ltd. want to extract 2.78 million tonnes of coking coal a year from under the sea near Whitehaven in a ‘deep’ coal mine. The coal is predominantly for export and would be consumed by the steel industry. Find out the truth about the proposal.

www.coalaction.org.uk

West Cumbria Mining Ltd. say that 83% of the coal extracted would be sold abroad, via the port at Redcar potentially to Europe. Only up to 17% is expected to be used in the UK because this coking coal has a high sulphur content. If the British steel industry use too much, it risks exceeding the sulphur dioxide limits plants must adhere to. Sulphur dioxide causes acid rain

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Usually sulphur in steel is counteracted by adding Manganesse. However, that adds cost.

 

[randyrippley]

Usually sulphur in steel is counteracted by adding Manganesse. However, that adds cost.

and doesn't solve the sulphate emission problem

 

[GRALISTAIR]

and doesn't solve the sulphate emission problem

Exactly

 

[high camera]

BBC are reporting that the long delayed mine will be approved, so hope of coal trains running again in the north of England ?

 

[ItsGrimUpNorth]

The government have approved the mine:

The UK government has approved the first new coal mine in 30 years despite concern about its climate impacts among Conservative MPs and experts.

First UK coal mine in decades approved despite climate concerns

Climate experts and Tory MPs argued the Cumbria mine would scupper UK efforts to lower emissions.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[zwk500]

BBC are reporting that the long delayed mine will be approved, so hope of coal trains running again in the north of England ?

Whilst the revenue is welcome, I'm not entirely convinced the return of coal traffic should be celebrated, even just in the rail industry.

Does anybody know the proposed routings? I assume there's very little chance of the 3rd side of Carnforth triangle being reinstated.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Does anybody know the proposed routings? I assume there's very little chance of the 3rd side of Carnforth triangle being reinstated.

I had always imagined via Carlisle and Newcastle using the respective freight lines avoiding those cities, then ECML to Ferryhill, much shorter mileage than via Carnforth

 

[Railwaysceptic]

I had always imagined via Carlisle and Newcastle using the respective freight lines avoiding those cities, then ECML to Ferryhill, much shorter mileage than via Carnforth

Unless the trains travel during the night, I'd have thought they would go via the Durham Coast Line.

 

[AndrewE]

Why is it you can always rely on "our" government to pick the wrong answer?
(I would point it that I was in favour of this for employment (and reducing transport tonne-miles) reasons until I found out that UK steelworks just don't want the stuff!

 

[Oxfordblues]

I well remember the dreadful 12 months of divisive trauma and conflict suffered by thousands of miners and their families in 1984-85. So I'm delighted that at long last the Tories are making retribution, bringing jobs and prosperity to a neglected corner of England and a big boost for rail-freight.

 

[Ken H]

Whilst the revenue is welcome, I'm not entirely convinced the return of coal traffic should be celebrated, even just in the rail industry.

Does anybody know the proposed routings? I assume there's very little chance of the 3rd side of Carnforth triangle being reinstated.

Look at it as one of the chemicals needed for the iron and steel industry. Carbon is an important part of the changing of iron oxide found in ores to iron. And also an important element in steel. Mining it in Cumbria makes more sense than transporting it many miles from abroad.
A world without steel would be a poor place.

 

[Pacef8]

From what i have read elsewhere its not good quality coal but a-lot of sulphur which is no good for our steel industry.

 

[zwk500]

Look at it as one of the chemicals needed for the iron and steel industry. Carbon is an important part of the changing of iron oxide found in ores to iron. And also an important element in steel. Mining it in Cumbria makes more sense than transporting it many miles from abroad.
A world without steel would be a poor place.

Is it not possible to get reclaimed steel with Electric Arc Furnaces?

 

[xotGD]

I'm sure that any product going to Teesside for export will be routed via the Tyne Valley.

However, if any is used at Scunthorpe, then S&C or Bentham Line could well be used.

 

[MisterSheeps]

1) I wonder what the cost difference of moving it by rail to Redcar, over sending it by ship from Workington, are?
2) Given the recent paralysis of Petteril Bridge junction, the need to send it some route other than the Tyne Valley will crop up sometime ...

 

[zwk500]

2) Given the recent paralysis of Petteril Bridge junction, the need to send it some route other than the Tyne Valley will crop up sometime ...

There is a route via Lancaster and Hebden bridge to Tyneside

 

[MisterSheeps]

via Lancaster and Hebden bridge

or run round at Carnforth & go via Skipton, lesser gradient than Copypit

 

[AndrewE]

Is it not possible to get reclaimed steel with Electric Arc Furnaces?

"Reclaimed" (recycled) steel is made (i.e. recycled) that way... unfortunately we always need more.

It's a real shame that the UK primary steelmakers and other informed commentators say that they cannot use this coal because of its sulphur content - See post 31 and lots of others.
There is no point mining high-sulphur coal to be exported and just burnt elsewhere, increasing CO2 emissions from transport and use and also emitting sulphur dioxide too.

Much as I like stuff being transported by rail, this stuff (and Drax woodpellets) shouldn't be moving at all and arguing which route is most efficient is irrelevant.

 

[Yew]

"Reclaimed" (recycled) steel is made (i.e. recycled) that way... unfortunately we always need more.

It's a real shame that the UK primary steelmakers and other informed commentators say that they cannot use this coal because of its sulphur content - See post 31 and lots of others.

Could you provide a primary source for this? Given that there are many locations in the UK that have reserves of high quality coal, it seems odd to decide to set up a new mine for coking coal on an unstable seam.

 

[uglymonkey]

Would you rather have a coal mine or a nuclear power station?

 

[zwk500]

Would you rather have a coal mine or a nuclear power station?

Nuclear power station every time, but now the good people of Cumbria get both!

 

[AndrewE]

Could you provide a primary source for this? Given that there are many locations in the UK that have reserves of high quality coal, it seems odd to decide to set up a new mine for coking coal on an unstable seam.

Today's Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ine-and-why-does-it-matter-woodhouse-colliery):

However, at least two UK steel-makers have ruled out using coal from the Cumbrian mine, and steel-makers across Europe are increasingly turning to low-carbon steel-making techniques, such as electric arc furnaces with energy from windfarms and other renewable sources.

That means the market for such coal is likely to be limited. The coal is also expected to be high in sulphur and therefore liable to be rejected even by steel-makers still using coal.

About 83% of the coal produced from the mine would be for export, according to estimates, which would add to global greenhouse gas emissions.

and a steel industry consultant reported a week or two ago who said exactly that, and it wasn't because they have contracts for cheap coal from
Colombia or wherever, but because of the chemistry: https://www.theguardian.com/busines...claim-that-sector-needs-new-cumbrian-coalmine

However, influential figures in the steel industry have become increasingly frustrated about the claims – with the two domestic steel producers understood to be unlikely to be significant customers for the mine’s coal. Chris McDonald, chief executive of the Materials Processing Institute, which serves as the UK’s national centre for steel research, said there was no demand from his industry for the West Cumbria mine.

“There’s a frustration hearing other industries speaking on behalf of the steel industry when the steel industry itself has not come out to say that it wants this mine,” he told the Observer. “I would contend that there isn’t a demand for it. The case for the mine has been built around the need for coking coal produced in the UK for the UK steel industry. That’s the case that the coal industry is making. But that doesn’t stack up with the needs of the steel industry.

“There are only two potential customers for this coal in the UK: Tata Steel and British Steel. British Steel have said they cannot use the coal from this mine because the sulphur levels are too high. Tata Steel have said if the coal were available, then they may or may not use a small amount. There isn’t anyone in the steel industry who’s calling for the mine.”

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Dec 2022 ==

Could you provide a primary source for this? Given that there are many locations in the UK that have reserves of high quality coal, it seems odd to decide to set up a new mine for coking coal on an unstable seam.

and another (presumably well-informed) primary source:

And Prof Stuart Haszeldine, from the School of GeoSciences at University Edinburgh, said:

Opening a coalmine in Cumbria is investing in 1850s technology, and does not look forward to the 2030s low-carbon, local energy future.

We have studied the Cumbria coals and it’s clear that these are very high in sulphur and are not wanted by either of the two UK iron and steel makers.

Steel making in Europe is rapidly changing to use hydrogen, not coal.

Most, and maybe all, of this coking coal will be exported outside of Europe to escape environmental constraints on its use. England will become a global dirty fuel supplier.

(https://www.theguardian.com/politic...sunak-conservative-labour-latest-news-updates)

 

[Yew]

Today's Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ine-and-why-does-it-matter-woodhouse-colliery):

and a steel industry consultant reported a week or two ago who said exactly that, and it wasn't because they have contracts for cheap coal from
Colombia or wherever, but because of the chemistry: https://www.theguardian.com/busines...claim-that-sector-needs-new-cumbrian-coalmine


== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Dec 2022 ==


and another (presumably well-informed) primary source:

(https://www.theguardian.com/politic...sunak-conservative-labour-latest-news-updates)

Those are some good sources, and seem to not just be flawed "but electric arc furnaces exist" arguments that overlook that EAF's can't process raw iron ores. Given that, it does seem to be an odd decision to mine coal for coking in a place where the coal is unsuitable for coking, particularly when there are known coking-quality seams in Nottinghamshire, or high quality welsh steam coal.


Is it in a marginal constituency, or been subject to large amounts of lobbying?

 

[MisterSheeps]

I find it hard to believe that an investment of £165M would be made without test borings, and if the mine did not have any customers lined up ...

 

[Yew]

I find it hard to believe that an investment of £165M would be made without test borings, and if the mine did not have any customers lined up ...

That's fair, I do wonder if this "UK steel plants can't use it" is actually "We spoke to one person at a UK steel plant that expressed concerns over the sulphur level that could lead to their plant being unable to use it for certain speciality steels."

 

[AndrewE]

I find it hard to believe that an investment of £165M would be made without test borings, and if the mine did not have any customers lined up ...

I am sure that they have done test borings, and that they know full well that the chemistry is wrong for ironmaking. It might make good coke but that might not stop it being too high a sulphur content.

My guess is that they plan to export it for burning (high world price currently.) I have a mining engineer friend who says that in his experience the majority of proposed mines are not intended to be built, but the financial shenanigans throughout the preliminary phases ensure that the people on the inside do well out of it. It seems that there is always a pool of people (or funds) available to be fleeced...

That's fair, I do wonder if this "UK steel plants can't use it" is actually "We spoke to one person at a UK steel plant that expressed concerns over the sulphur level that could lead to their plant being unable to use it for certain speciality steels."

Chris McDonald, chief executive of the Materials Processing Institute, and Prof Stuart Haszeldine from the School of GeoSciences at University Edinburgh sound reputable to me.
My dad had a job where he had to liaise with steelworks and he certainly had his ear to the ground regarding what was going on...

 

[MisterSheeps]

plan to export it for burning

Well, there are various useful chemicals (and undesirable ones, like dioxins, that mean it is better exported!) that come out as a byproduct of coking. Personally I think if this corner of the world needs coal (it does, for now), it may as well come from here as from Australia, Colombia or Russia; and the carbon accounting seems what accounting usually is, a job creation exercise for bureaucrats adding nothing much useful
Meanwhile, it helps the economy of West Cumbria (desperately needs it), and retains the railway.
Thought ... dig the coal, leaves a hole, use it as part of the proposed deep nuclear waste repository

 

[Winthorpe]

RAIL has some information on the coal trains which will run from the Woodhouse Colliery. Initially up to four coal trains per day will run on the Cumbrian Coast Line, rising to six per day (dependent on signalling updates):

Cumbrian coal mine to generate four trains per day

Up to four coal trains per day will run on the Cumbrian Coast Line from Whitehaven, once the town’s new Woodhouse Colliery opens

www.railmagazine.com