Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Murray Growing As National Coal Player

Consol Acquisition to Put Company in Top Five

November 3, 2013

ST. CLAIRSVILLE — Once the $....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(43)

nobama

Nov-05-13 8:14 AM

Wonder where the money is coming from? Oh well maybe he'll pay his debt off on all the MSHA citations he has not paid...or maybe even give his company retirees their health insurance back...that was the deal..remember Bob? because we all went above and beyond our duties...

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Nov-04-13 9:05 PM

wonderwhy, I apologize for inserting that Democrit Party trademark into my post. I can see why you Progressive Enlightened Democrit Obamazombies would be upset... LOL

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Nov-04-13 7:51 PM

There has not been one successful large scale application of carbon sequestration in the world.

Idiots, tell us what happens when large scale pockets of CO2 under pressure underground escape back in the atrmosphere via cracks in the crust.

Funny that all the anti frackers claim that happens all of the time with facking a thick LIQUID while they think it won't happend with a light GAS?

JUNK SCIENCE!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wonderwhy

Nov-04-13 6:49 PM

TrollSlayer

Nov-04-13 9:18 AM Agree | Disagree

But you Klamoring Karbon Kooks want to take your War on Coal international, calling for worldwide caps on carbon. Of course you won’t be able to dictate to China or Europe what they can do with their coal, but you might succeed in capping US exports. And then your War on American Coal WILL succeed

Nice display tool. KKK........good one.......not surprised at all......no wonderwhy............pathetic

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigMike

Nov-04-13 4:17 PM

WVUGEO: I find it odd when you accuse others of being in denial when you will not acknowledge the high cost of all of the novel methods that you have been touting for months. You also will not acknowledge the economic impact of sky high energy prices. Until you are willing to face those realities you will be the one in denial.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

atoddh

Nov-04-13 12:00 PM

folks: expect some sort of moratorium on coal plant construction and a huge uptick in nuclear plants in China and India. Australia has an advantage for coal to China and India with shipping. Peabody has huge operations there.

Met coal exports will continue to increase from the USA. Thermal coal will decrease.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Nov-04-13 9:18 AM

But you Klamoring Karbon Kooks want to take your War on Coal international, calling for worldwide caps on carbon. Of course you won’t be able to dictate to China or Europe what they can do with their coal, but you might succeed in capping US exports. And then your War on American Coal WILL succeed.

But no worries, because those miners can go on Obama Food Stamps and Obama welfare and Obama subsidized housing and Obamacare. And they can be just like you liberals. Dependent wards of the Obamastate.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Nov-04-13 9:17 AM

wonderwhiner, I’ve reported many times here that coal production is not declining here, yet, because growing exports of coal are making up for declining domestic use. So far Barry Bankrupter’s War on Coal has been only a war on DOMESTIC USE of coal, making it in reality a War on American Manufacturing Industries. “If somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them...” Remember Barry’s threat? No? Well, don’t feel bad because the “progressive” UMWA forgot about it, too.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

promo61

Nov-04-13 8:57 AM

Break down the production numbers by how much is exported vs domestic use ATOOL.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wonderwhy

Nov-04-13 8:42 AM

For the week ended October 26, 2013:

•U.S. coal production totaled approximately 19.3 million short tons (mmst) •This production estimate is 0.9 percent higher than last week's estimate and 0.4 percent higher than the production estimate in the comparable week in 2012 •Coal production east of the Mississippi River totaled 8.1 mmst •Coal production west of the Mississippi River totaled 11.2 mmst

Wonderwhy Murray would buy something that will produce loss? Oh.....that's right, coal production is up! SHHHHHH, don't tell Toolplayer, wouldn't want to burst his delusional bubble. LOL

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Nov-04-13 8:10 AM

Take a chill pill, Fritz. Coal is dead, remember?

You should be happy “bloody Bob” spent his last dime on Consol’s mines. When the wailing wing nuts win their War on Coal it will be the ugly end of Murray and his mines. And the ugly end of his miners, but what difference, at this point, do they make? Don’t expect your Barry Obankrupter-endorsing UMWA to save them - hah.

Then we can all live together in eternal peace, happily burning clean natural gas, until the greenies discover it’s 75% carbon by weight, too. And then when those Karbon Killing Kooks lynch the gas industry we can survive on green pixie dust. mmm mmm mmm...

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Fritz43

Nov-04-13 7:43 AM

Yet another absurd, ridiculous piece of marshmallow puffery for the Obama-hating, EPA-hating, union-hating, just about everything & everyone-hating Bloody Bob Murray.

The purchase of Consol by Bloody Bob is just about the worst piece of news imaginable for UMW members. Far from applauding him for his support of coal, alarm bells should be going off far and wide. It's only a matter of time before the cuts start, the restrictions start and the Law of Unintended Consequences kicks in.

(Or maybe it's not so 'unintended'.)

Hopefully, no deaths or major accidents, but lots of folks are holding their collective breaths.

Because, just like Bloody Blankenship, the only two things on his radar screen are his money and his power.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Nov-04-13 6:22 AM

RockE, I thought your Climate Research Unit “lost” the data. Oh well, when you have dogma, who needs data. Here's a little music for ya, dummy.

Onward Climate soldiers, marching as to war, hockey sticks now straightened, still trusting in Al Gore...

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RockEReputation

Nov-04-13 5:17 AM

Summing then: Despite concise, factual data informing us that researchers are working daily, and succeeding, to solve problems relevant to our "tainting the planet and environment" dilemma...."a psychological defense mechanism, postulated by Sigmund Freud"...maintains that we should throw a coupla' lumps a' coal in the basement furnace and cozy up with our All in the Family reruns, 'cause coal is King.

Music is no different than s tongue-lashing to a deaf audience.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

atoddh

Nov-03-13 10:57 PM

The latest global warming reports will have an effect on coal use policy. It is a global problem. Coal for power is on the way out ;as it was for home heating.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

atoddh

Nov-03-13 10:54 PM

geo:I think you will see a change in policy very soon on coal globally. The Chinese have a new prefab nuke they are promoting. The public in both China and India are putting pressure on their respective governments to clean the air up.

BTW: Where were Peabody and the others on the Consol mines. They must not have thought them attractive buys.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CTMountaineer

Nov-03-13 10:29 PM

I never cease to be amazed by the wackos, most of whom work in cozy academic environments and are insulated from the insanity of their ridiculous claims, when they clap their hands in glee every time another coal mine closes and thousands more of their fellow citizens are plunged into poverty.

This same brain trust is the one that is fully behind rewarding illegal aliens for breaking in our back door, and the open borders concept that ships jobs, and now coal and energy to cheap labor countries where they impose absolutely no controls on emissions.

One wonders why such an erudite group simply can not connect the dots? Space Cadets forever?

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Nov-03-13 9:23 PM

GEO, I never denied you can make carbon-based fuels from CO2. I even confirmed your assertion that was possible earlier in this thread. So your analysis of my psyche, while amusing, is irrelevant.

What YOU seem to be in denial about are the first and second laws of thermodynamics. You will always get less energy out of the fuel than you put into the waste products you created it from, and you will always make more efficient use of any energy you can convert from environmental sources by putting it on the power grid and burning less fuel to generate grid power than by using it to convert waste produced in generating grid power to fuel. It's just simple physics.

I won't be surprised if you find several Congressman you can confuse into giving you a taxpayer funded grant, with all your waste to snake oil babble, though. LOL

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Nov-03-13 9:09 PM

Troll: According to the Wikipedia, the label "denial" "is used for a psychological defense mechanism, postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence". The evidence that both Coal and Carbon Dioxide can be used and consumed in the synthesis of hydrocarbons isn't just "overwhelming", it is, since some very credible folks around the world are actually doing it, irrefutable. You seem to be suffering from, you seem to be manifesting, Freud's classic "denial" neurosis, even, apparently, to the point of obsession-compulsion.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Nov-03-13 9:00 PM

So GEO, you're suggesting they should go back to wind power to make your snake oil? When they have a 500 MW nuclear reactor ready to provide it? Maybe you should suggest they use coal. LOL

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Nov-03-13 8:45 PM

Troll: Regarding your last comment, you mean they had "500 MW reactor"s "100 years ago", and "that's one reason the Navy stopped using wind power"? That's what it reads like you're saying. The reason the Navy gave up wind power is Coal. Period.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Nov-03-13 8:38 PM

You’re correct, GEO, that any source of energy will work. Nuclear, wind, solar, flashlight batteries...

But that 500 MW reactor is by far the most powerful, reliable, continuous source of electrical energy on the ship, so it would be the source of choice to drive your fuel-producing reactor. And it’s one reason the Navy stopped using wind power about 100 years ago.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Nov-03-13 8:19 PM

Much of the Navy's CO2-to-Fuel work was founded on earlier developments by major defense contractors, as represented, for one example, by: "US Patent 4,568,522 - Synfuel Production Ship; 1986; Grumman Aerospace; Abstract: A vessel ... is self-equipped with means for producing and storing synthetic fuel generated from the synthesis of carbon dioxide and hydrogen. Claims: A ship for producing gasoline while sailing".

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Nov-03-13 8:00 PM

Troll: Another of the Navy's CO2-to-Fuel technologies is embodied in: United States Patent 8,017,658 - Synthesis of Hydrocarbons via Catalytic Reduction of CO2; 2011; Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy; Abstract: A method of: introducing hydrogen and a feed gas containing at least 50 % carbon dioxide into a reactor containing a Fischer-Tropsch catalyst; and heating the hydrogen and carbon dioxide to ... produce hydrocarbons in the reactor".

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Nov-03-13 7:52 PM

atoddh: Actually, as of about a year ago, there were right around 1,100 new Coal-fired power plants proposed around the world, with China and India leading the pack. China has banned new Coal power plants around Beijing because of their pollution problems. And, China has worked with British nuclear energy folks for new generators there. But, China and India still plan on a lot of new Coal units. By last reports, China was bringing one new Coal power plant online per month.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 43 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: