Thermal coal demand to increase to 1,500 million tonnes by 2040- India’s Coal Minister
By Paul Homewood
You’ve heard it from the horse’s mouth!
The demand for coal in India is set to jump to 1.5 billion tonnes by 2040, according to India’s coal minister. This is an increase of 50% from the current demand of 1 billion tonnes
The thermal coal requirement in India will go up to 1,500 million tonnes (MT) even as the country’s energy demand is set to double by 2040, Union Minister of Coal, Mines and Parliamentary Affairs Pralhad Joshi has said.
He was speaking after inaugurating the renovated Registered Office of NLC India Ltd. (NLCIL) in Chennai through virtual mode from Neyveli on Saturday.
Mr. Joshi stressed the importance of coal in India’s energy security today and said that the country had a balanced energy mix and this was helping it move steadily towards its energy-environmental goals. The expected electricity generation by 2040 would be approximately 3,000 billion units and the energy demand would double by 2040.
“To cater to this requirement, thermal coal demand would increase to 1,500 million tonnes. However, we will also have to be conscious about the environment and keep in mind our sustainable mining goals. Though we are doing our best to balance our dependence on coal and lignite with development of renewables, our transition to renewables will mostly be gradual,” he said.
The Minister also lauded NLCIL’s efforts towards mining lignite and generating power.
This is consistent with my previous projections which show that even the ambitious targets for renewable energy cannot get anywhere near keeping up with the relentless increase in demand for power.
For instance, my analysis in February, here, suggested that India’s emissions would be 50% higher in 2040.
There are of course vague promises to cut emissions thereafter, but these should be treated with a large pinch of salt.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
I suspect the quoted figures are underestimates and demand is more likely to double in reality. As Michael Shellenberger has frequently pointed out, the likes of the US, Germany etc, have no right to complain about this and India could not give a toss even if they did.
Indeed.
Prosperity produces decadence. Decadence produces revolutions.
Decadence produces defeat. Tyranny produces revolution.
There would be a case to claim that switching from burning wood and cattle dung would be healthier and better for the Indian environment and population.
Have we told Johnson and Kwarteng, and perhaps Goldsmith, Carney, Hohn, Kerry and others.
And perhaps Deben and his ridiculous CCC.
So India becomes the first nation to recognize the absurdity of fossil fuel emissions as a climate control device. Good for them. But remember, Trump actually did it first, but neglected to push harder for climate change sanity.
Nope. When it comes to Trump – who was succeeding in playing them – the Elites of the NWO managed to frig the system to get him out and, in his place, installed the Obama puppet, Biden. While the West de-carbonises (cough) these ‘leaders’ will play the racist, patronising masters which they believe allows them to ‘allow’ India to continue with coal while punishing the West. They, like Putin, long to create a desert – and call it victory. I just feel that the wars and corruption of the 20thC will be nothing compared to what is to come in the 21stC. And what is worse is that just about all of them will never live to see the results of their labours. Sigh.
Let’s not forget that the green blob managed to overthrow the Australian Govt. as well.
It all, of course does not apply to the global elites and their “do what we say, not what we do” stance, who still tootle around the globe to climate shindig after climate shindig in their private jets and gas guzzling armour plated limousines.
The truth needs out, and quickly.
Harry, the economic success of Trump is hard to erase, no matter what they accuse him of his economic success is etched in the records and will stand him in good stead in the future. I just hope he clears the decks of Rinos if he’s re-elected.
I think it will need another big war to sort out the crap we’re living through.
As ive always thought whatever we do is pointless in the face of what the big countries are doing.
Fancy having a minister of ‘Coal’, I like that.
Perhaps we should have four new ministries for Gas, Nuclear, Fracking and a North Sea mining.
A ministry of carbon capture is more likely 😣
Please no. Gas, coal, oil, all perfectly easily sourced by those who need them from those who produce them. No need for politicians or civil servants to “help”.
It is clear that most of the developing word, in order to develop, need fossil fuels.
It would be remiss of anyone to credit the Climate Change Committee to look at facts. The CCC is driven by emotions which they stir up in themselves and others as frequently as possible.
The CCC, like all Progressives, Greens and Lefties, is driven by its pre-concluded solutions. The basic solution for all of those groups, no matter what the problem, is the state spends more and decides what should be done.
It is also driven by vested interest. Rebecca Heaton of Drax, only recently left the CCC after complaints of conflict of interest. She joined Ovo energy. Baroness Brown, (Julia King), is a director of Orsted, who are in line for big offshore contracts as we become the “Saudi Arabia of Wind”. She pockets 40 grand a year from them, you can’t get more vested than that. Deben’s associations have been covered many times, not least by Christopher Booker and by David Rose.
Heaton left Drax for Ovo. https://www.ovoenergy.com/ovo-newsroom/press-releases/2021/july/ovo-energy-appoints-dr-rebecca-heaton-as-new-director-of-sustainability
One point (amongst very many!) that really annoys me about this whole anti coal issue, is that a modern ultra-supercritical coal fired plant with associated district heating can run close on 85% overall energy end use efficiency. Everything otherwise genuinely harmful can be scrubbed out of the emissions and dealt with.
The overall life cycle emissions of CO2 per kWh of combined useful electrical and thermal energy are actually better than is achieved from wind turbines which obviously only generate electricity (and that only intermittently and variably). When you add in all the Frequency Management, Spinning inertia, Reactive Power control, Voltage and phase control et alia that effectively comes all but free with large thermal plants, then the obvious choice on environmental, economical and supply security for new generation in high latitudes is Coal.
Who actually are these knob ends who refuse to accept the realities?
where are those operating?
Try RDK8 operating at 47.5% electrical efficiency and running a district heating system.
https://www.ge.com/steam-power/coal-power-plant/usc-ausc
https://www.enbw.com/company/the-group/energy-production/new-buildings-and-major-projects/karlsruhe_rheindampfkraftwerk/
As I said this is what we should be building (alongside new nuclear and new pumped storage hydro). Run both nuclear and coal continuously at maximum efficiency and use PSH and planned summer maintenance breaks to even out daily/weekly/seasonal demand with a (small) amount of gas generation solely for peak lopping.
Good efficiency improvement but still produces CO2 although be interesting to see its emissions per MWh compared to a CCGT. Any country building out coal generation should be deploying technology that delivers to a minimum standard on CO2 emissions and the climate change lot would do well to put a bit of effort into those areas.
I should have added that most new plants are being built like this (notably Japan and China )
Belldune New Brunswick, I highlight this plant as a TRUE solution to Global pollution . . . See pages 6 & 7 . . .
https://www.allaboutenergy.net/66-environment/pollution/3207-global-warming-the-environmentalist-and-the-neanderthal?highlight=WyJsZSIsIm1haXN0cmUiLCJsZSBtYWlzdHJlIl0=
There’s an interesting series of 4 articles on PA Pundits International entitled Coal Fired Power Dying – Not So Fast
Interesting site thanks for referral
This from the EPA https://www.epa.gov/chp/chp-benefits#:~:text=By%20recovering%20and%20using%20heat,achieve%20efficiencies%20approaching%2090%20percent.
How come nobody seems to highlight these things in the media? Who gives a toss about goddam unreliable wind turbines…apart from the organisers of the Platinum Jubilee concert who felt it necessary to highlighted images of them whilst Attenbollocks droned on his usual crap.
“…highlight these things in the media…”
In a free-enterprise system (strange to think that once upon a time we had an approximation to one) the Media would not be part of the decision-making process, nor would the Government, nor would the People! There would imerely be businesses doing their quiet best within a framework of basic laws.
In response to Nicholas Lewis comment ” interesting to see its emissions per MWh compared to a CCGT”
Here is your answer …
“Clean coal crown. Unit 2 at J-POWER’s Isogo Thermal Power Station, a 600-MW ultrasupercritical unit in Yokohama, Japan, ranks as the cleanest coal-fired power plant in the world in terms of emission intensity, with levels comparable to those from a natural gas–fired combined cycle plant.”
https://www.powermag.com/who-has-the-worlds-most-efficient-coal-power-plant-fleet/
Now if you add to that the energy available to a CHP district heating system and it gets better still. Further consider no need for a permanent back up supply (when the wind don’t blow and the sun don’t shine) and then further consider no need for reactive power control via synchronous condensers, static VAR condensers etc. Then further add no batteries for synthetic inertia required and factor in the exceptionally long life span. Then remember the notion of CO2 emissions is baloney anyway and you have one of the best power supplies on offer.
Several interesting posts and links, thanks Ray S.
The CEGB had its faults, but the strategy of coal-fired and nuclear for baseload power generation remains difficult to criticise.
Decarbonisation is directly responsible for the current extortionate price of domestic energy.
absolutely but its not as if wind or solar were even on the radar then
Wind and solar should not be on the radar for baseload, they are too unreliable and the fuel cannot be stockpiled at the power station.
There is a case to be made that wind and solar are potentially too disruptive to be connected to the grid.