Nationals Leader: Don't Worry, We'll Mine And Export Coal Well Into The 2040s And 2050s

[hatrack]

The National party has exited a marathon meeting where they discussed the Morrison government’s climate policy without coming to an agreement – with discussions to continue into the parliamentary sitting week.

The not-unexpected outcome came after more than four hours of talks on Sunday. The Liberal energy minister, Angus Taylor, spent the first three hours briefing the party room on a proposal to commit Australia to a net zero emissions target by 2050 and the roadmap to get there.

EDIT

Taylor released a statement following his presentation, calling the discussion “constructive and collegiate” while focussing on jobs. “There was a strong joint commitment to policies that strengthen our regions, not weaken them,” the minister said. “It was also clear that there was absolutely no appetite for policies that impact jobs or add to the cost of living through an explicit carbon tax or a sneaky carbon tax. Which we won’t be doing.”

Littleproud attempted to reassure a core LNP constituency they were not at risk. “If you’re a coalminer in central Queensland you shouldn’t be shuddering in your boots tonight, you’re still going to have a job, we’re going to see those jobs and coal exports go well into the 2040s, probably into the 2050s,” he said.

EDIT

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/17/a-long-way-to-play-out-nationals-fail-to-reach-agreement-on-2050-emissions-reduction

[NNadir]

1. He's almost certainly right. In 2021 coal use is rising, and has always dominated...

...electricity generation, despite all those Tesla ads showing wind turbines. Those turbines are on steel posts, made by heating anthracite coal using coal fires to make coke.

It's tragic, but he's right. We have no program to eliminate coal.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

2. No appetite for adding to the cost of living ... means efforts are doomed to fail ...

In my estimation, barring a technological miracle, increasing the 'cost of living' to the point where the population is reduced by BILLIONS of people over the next 20-30 years, literally because they can't afford to live (or to bring more children into the world) ... is the only viable solution at this point in time ... if we want to avoid an absolute climate catastrophe.

There's even LESS appetite for giving that public that bit of bad news, so ... climate catastrophe is a 'given' at this point AFAIC.

As a world, we're not giving up the bajillions of high EROI BTU's, the millions of years of accumulated and concentrated solar power in the form of carbon bonds that our species voraciously slurps out of the ground every day, and that fuel virtually everything we associate with our 'standard of living', and damn near the entire worlds infrastructure.

We'll adapt as long as we can, but then something absolutely critical will fail ... and then simple physics (or perhaps disease) will make the decision FOR us ... to curb our population to more sustainable levels.

MHO.

And yes, I know I'm a ray of sunshine on a Sunday morning

[multigraincracker]

3. There are lots of other uses for coal.

Perhaps we could focus on those and take away the concerns of miners and areas that mine it.
Some other uses that don't require the burning of coal.
It can become the basis for solar panel, batteries and other electronic devices.
When you look at coal as a material, and not just something to burn it may make sense to mine it, saving jobs and communities.

We need new ideas for coal that do not require adding to Global Warming. Could make it a win, win issue..

[NCjack]

4. The coal and other non-renewable energy resources should be nationalized.

Then, those resources can be managed at non-threathening rates to produce precious chemicals too costly by renewable paths.