Skip to content

India, Australia, China, Russia pushing ‘massive’ coal expansion

June 7, 2021

By Paul Homewood


From The Economic Times of India:




Coal producers are actively pursuing 2.2 billion tonnes per annum of new mine projects around the world, a growth of 30 per cent from current production levels, a new report from Global Energy Monitor said on Thursday.

The first-of-its-kind analysis surveyed 432 proposed coal projects globally and found a handful of provinces and states in China, Russia, India, and Australia are responsible for 77 per cent (1.7 billion tonnes per annum) of new mine activity. If developed, these proposed projects boost supply to over four times the 1.5 degrees Celsius-compliant pathway necessary to meet the goal of the Paris climate agreement.

While three-fourths (1.6 billion tonnes per annum) of proposed coal mine capacity is in the early stages of planning and thus vulnerable to cancellation, the report finds one quarter (0.6 billion tonnes per annum) of proposed mine capacity is already under construction. The prospect of a low-carbon transition and tighter emission policies put these projects at risk of becoming up to $91 billion in stranded assets.

Currently world coal output is around 8 billion tonnes a year, of which the US and EU account for 1 billion. The new capacity implied would therefore cancel out any cutbacks in the latter.

  1. June 7, 2021 6:23 pm

    Exactly why we are wasting our time with 0% carbon

  2. Gamecock permalink
    June 7, 2021 6:23 pm

    ‘The first-of-its-kind analysis’

    Junk science flag.

    ‘India, Australia, China, Russia pushing ‘massive’ coal expansion*’

    Why wouldn’t they be? The West’s ecosuicide creates no obligation on them.

    *Brazil could probably be added to the list.

  3. Broadlands permalink
    June 7, 2021 6:30 pm

    The US and the UK are doing the opposite. By naively thinking “we” can rely on non-carbon renewables (even nuclear) for our increasing energy needs, those who are in the real world will be enjoying the reliable energy that fossil fuels provide. In addition, the Chinese already have a big edge up on the raw materials required for EV batteries.

    Somebody needs to wake up?

  4. Colin R Brooks AKA Dung permalink
    June 7, 2021 6:51 pm

    They are doing what any reasonable person would do, er why don’t we have any of those in parliament??

  5. REM permalink
    June 7, 2021 7:08 pm

    Natural fuels are good. I don’t blame them at all.

  6. Paul Michaels permalink
    June 7, 2021 8:49 pm

    This looks very interesting, I’d like someone to send it on to PaulH if possible:

    • AC Osborn permalink
      June 7, 2021 9:04 pm

      That looks like a scam advert to get investment to me.

    • June 7, 2021 9:11 pm

      Ha!! Hydrogen!

      Except it is not an energy source, but a carrier which needs a proper energy source to produce it at immense cost in the first place

    • Gamecock permalink
      June 7, 2021 10:14 pm

      ‘Bank of America says hydrogen technology is at a tipping point and could be set to EXPLODE with a total market potential reaching $11 trillion by 2050.’

      Great metaphor!

      ‘So what is the connection between hydrogen and ammonia?

      To put it simply, hydrogen is an absolute nightmare to store and transport.’

      Great work, Sherlock.


      ‘it has a very low volumetric energy density’

      Make up your mind.

      ‘It is ammonia, and the remarkable technological breakthroughs being made by companies like AmmPower, that may hold the key to the hydrogen revolution.’

      Ammonia has 40% of the energy density of fuel oil. You gonna need a much bigger tank.

      ‘Ammonia is also being considered as a means to store renewable energy for delayed use, and as a carrier for hydrogen transportation. That’s because, as an energy source, ammonia has 9x the energy capacity of lithium-ion batteries and is 1.8X more energy-dense than liquid hydrogen.’

      Proof that NEITHER is viable.

      • Graeme No.3 permalink
        June 7, 2021 11:06 pm

        If ammonia has 1.8 times the energy density of liquid hydrogen, it would still be a flop.
        I calculated that a 200Litre (@190Kg) tank of diesel would contain 4 times the energy of the same volume of liquid hydrogen, so with ammonia you could drive your truck a bit further, 40% from their claim.
        Do you foresee a rush by trucking companies to convert to ammonia?

        And have these “entrepreneurs” every had a whiff of ammonia ?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: