Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Breitbart – White House National Economic Council director Gary Cohn has just re-opened the US Government’s war on coal.
Gary Cohn Relaunches War on Coal: Fuel from America’s Heartland ‘Doesn’t Make Much Sense Anymore’
White House National Economic Council director Gary Cohn, a former Goldman Sachs banking executive, has reopened the U.S. government’s war on coal in direct contravention of directions from President Donald Trump.
“Coal doesn’t even make that much sense anymore as a feedstock,” Cohn said in Europe on Air Force One, while speaking for the White House to the press, the New York Times’ Brad Plumer noted.
“Natural gas, which we have become an abundant producer, which we’re going to become a major exporter is, is such a cleaner fuel,” Cohn continued.
Trump adviser Gary Cohn a bit off-message on Air Force One, per pool report: “Coal doesn’t even make that much sense anymore as a feedstock" pic.twitter.com/0QLXZOik6k
— brad plumer (@bradplumer) May 26, 2017
…
Frankly I’m getting very disappointed about this kind of thing. The Trump Presidency is supposed to deliver the straight shooting leadership we’ve all been waiting for, the White House administration which doesn’t have to be continuously reminded about the President’s campaign promises.
A chief economic advisor who despises coal has no place in the government of a President who expects future support from coal country.
What really doesn’t make much sense anymore is Gary Cohn’s job.
So, this administration IS caving in to globalwarmists. Not good.
Nope! At least not yet and I doubt they will.
“Merkel Mad: Donald Trump Declines to Endorse Paris Climate Agreement”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/05/27/merkel-mad-trump-declines-endorse-paris-climate-agreement/
Most things that would make Mad Merkel Mad make me relieved if not down right happy. Just as about 98% of the time if the old media is for it, then I’m against it and if their against it then I’m for it.
I love how the coal-haters try to pretend that there is a level playing field, after years of coal getting bashed by the Obama Administration. Sure, coal has taken a hit from cheap NG, but that isn’t the only reason it’s down.
Coal has externalities – I guess you are saying those should not be considered. Air pollution and the associated impact on health care, mining site cleanup and environmental damage are the main ones.
Let’s wait until we hear it from President Trump before we get worried.
Sure, the fat lady hasn’t sung yet, however a lot of the tunes we’ve been hearing, along with the sounds of dead silence have been out of tune and disharmonious. So yeah, people are worried.
Gary Cohn had better start preparing his resume.
Gee, is Trump now going to unsign this Executive Order Rescuing Coal?
J. Philip Peterson
May 27, 2017 at 8:07 am
Rescuing Coal, and even helping coal is one thing…..and pretending that Coal must be the “King” of the lot, just like that, is another thing entirely….please do consider to stop pushing wrongly…
If Coal has to be considered as “King” coal has to be worth it, which it seems not to be the case…..i
Swapping one kind of swamp critters for another is not the way……not what was promised, I think…..
cheers
“Gee, is Trump now going to unsign this Executive Order Rescuing Coal?”
Yeah, all the actions Trump has actually taken are directly opposed to the Paris Agreement. He would have to roll back his EO and all the rules the EPA has been changing over the last few weeks.
Trump allowed the Europeans to have their say on climate change, and he listened to them (the French president just had some nice things to say about Trump, and how he deals with people), but in the end Trump refused to sign on to a joint statement promoting climate change. I would think that if he were inclined to go along, he would have signed the agreement
I just don’t see how Trump is going to stay in the Paris Agreement. His every move says “no”.
I do hope he will submit the Paris Agreement to the U.S. Senate as a treaty, and that way the onus won’t all be on Trump when the deal is killed. It won’t be Trump alone, it will be the whole United States, through the U.S. Senate, that is declining to participate.
Next week can’t come fast enough!!!
From what I found about executive agreements, Trump putting up the Paris accord as a treaty would be very bad tactics. If Obama had done so, and succeeded, the resultant treaty would bind Trump. As Paris is only an executive agreement, the authority of the accord rests with each individual President on his own authority as President, so all Trump has to do to eliminate it is to not follow it.
The Supreme Court has never, as far as I can tell, ruled on the status of foreign executive agreements, so if Paris is treated the same as executive orders, it ended on Jan 20, 2017.
In the current state of Judicial non-lawful derailing of Trump policies it would be very dangerous to revisit EO’s. Paris must be rejected formally and soon.
I disagree. I think the Senate would vote it down and when they did that would kill it for the US. Remember it takes a 2/3 majority to ratify a treaty in the senate. So I say send it to them and let us be done with this madness that CO2 is a pollutant.
There is another political angle I like about an attempted ratification. It will drawl a clear line with no weasel room between those senators that support this “climate change” scam and those that do not. Further, there are one heck of a lot more Democrats coming up for re-election in 2018 than Republicans. At least 8 of those Democrats in states that Trump won are vulnerable. Make them take a stand on the issue and then let their constituents decide.
I’m disappointed WUWT would resort to such a cheap click bait headline that contradicts the substance of the story.
Natural gas is cheaper and cleaner than coal, those are just facts which any neutral observer can see. This story reports no gov’t action is being taken against coal, its just jawboning about coal vs. gas vs. other.
Crap story. You wasted my time and I wasted more time replying to it. One more item like this and my email feed of your stories gets terminated.
[I’m disappointed that you are such a mouse that you can’t even give your name while harshly criticizing, but must resort to a fake name to hide your identity. Stand up for your convictions! Feel free to be as upset as you wish – Anthony Watts]
Hard to tell if Cohn is stating Trump”s policy or his own. Trump is out of the country, and is notorious for bad staff work.
Frankly I’m getting very disappointed about this kind of thing. The Trump Presidency is supposed to deliver the straight shooting leadership we’ve all been waiting for, the White House administration which doesn’t have to be continuously reminded about the President’s campaign promises.
A chief economic advisor who despises coal has no place in the government of a President who expects future support from coal country.
In reverse order, I don’t think that is a war on coal, just a statement of his economic views. His emphasis was, I think, natural gas. He did not, for example, promise to work for government intervention against coal, or promise to work against coal exports to Germany and China. Nor is it a stated policy, but just his opinion.
As to Trump, my expectation was that his government would be quite erratic. I think that people who expected a consistent, principle based, disciplined government under him were mistaken. I am not as critical of his governance to date as a bunch of my friends and family who voted against him, but his career has been quite erratic. I prefer him to former Pres Obama, but Obama had an extremely good chief of staff in Valerie Jarrett, and Trump needs to find one of those.
Trump and his people need to shut up a lot more if they want to be effective in the long run, in my opinion.
If Trump reneges on his promises to the miners AND makes some bs compromise on Paris I’m done with him. Must be tough fighting globalist corruption single handed but he knew that ahead of time. If he u-turns on basic stuff like this when he absolutely knows it’s a crock in order to float in the swamp then he’s finished.
It’s NG fired combined cycle designs that make the difference. If NG had to compete with coal on the historical steam Rankine cycle it could not do it especially if NG had to use HHV and quit using LHV to lie about combustion/stack efficiency.
Opps, so much for the claim of war on Coal!! Trump just signaled that the USA will not sign the Paris accord. …. I just read it on Breitbart. Gary Cohn is not the president. Donald Trump is. So Gary.. STFU.
Hahaha – “I just read it on Breitbart” so it must be true.Trump has not decided yet re Paris. And in any case, that has nothing to do with coal’s cost disadvantage against natural gas, Nor coal’s disadvantage against gas in states that are taking action on CO2 regardless of whether Trump pulls out of the Paris accord.
The author must have LOVED Obama. Every single person in his cabinet and agencies marched lock-step with Obama. No individual thought. Curse Trump for not stacking his cabinet with clones who march lock-step with him. After all, individual thought is SO VERY WRONG. We all know that.
This seems to be part of the media circular firing squad that blasts the Trump Administration at every opportunity.
Simple. Trump must replace him. If the reporting is accurate, and I no longer know whom to trust,
Then This fella is a great ” ungluer “.
Is there intelligent life out there?
The danger of staying in the Paris Agreement is that a Court will use its presence as an agreement to justify a ruling to prevent the reform and rollback of climate imposed regulations and policies.
The Paris agreement must die.
There was no talk of amending the Paris Agreement after the G7 met, so I would guess that particular option is off the table. If there had been any talk of that kind, you can bet there would be news reports predicting Trump will agree to the Paris Agreement. But, no such reports have surfaced.
Here’s another example of Trump taking actions which are counter to staying in the Paris Agreement. And the article below kind of puts the lie to the fact that Trump is going soft on the coal business. He is increasing the funding for coal while cutting back in other areas:
http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/25/trumps-blm-budget-proposal-signals-an-american-energy-renaissance/
Trump’s BLM Budget Proposal Signals An ‘American Energy Renaissance’
“President Donald Trump’s budget proposal for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) aims to reign in the agency while refocusing its priorities on energy production.
Trump’s budget, released Tuesday, allocates $1.1 billion total in federal funds to BLM, a cut of $160 million from last year.
In large part, the cuts are made to functions of the agency related to protection of federal land and conservation of resources, Lori Sanders told The Daily Caller News Foundation. Sanders is the vice president of federal affairs for the R Street Institute, a free-market think tank.
“There’s a huge focus [in Trump’s budget proposal] on energy issues and creating an American energy renaissance,” Sanders said.
This “American Energy Renaissance” is actually a return to traditional fuels like coal and oil while withdrawing emphasis from renewable energy investment. The Energy and Minerals Management section of the budget, which covers coal, oil and gas, and renewable energy programs, reflects Trump’s America First energy plan.
Coal management funding increased by $8 million, despite the BLM’s overall budget being cut. According to budget justifications released by the Department of the Interior, the increased funding will go towards implementing a more efficient system of leasing and permitting coal companies to develop federal land.”
end excerpt
And there is this confirming Trump’s action are not consistent with staying in the Paris Agreement:
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-05-26/merkel-says-it-was-six-to-one-against-trump-on-climate-change
Six to One Against Trump on Climate in ‘Honest’ Exchange at G-7
“In the meeting, G-7 leaders asked Trump his time frame for making a decision. Cohn said Trump told his foreign counterparts: “I’d rather take my time” and get to the right decision.
But Trump told the other leaders that he still has reservations. China, India and other countries working to pare their climate emissions had seen job growth suffer — and he made clear he was not prepared to live with that trade-off, Cohn said.
Trump told the leaders “he didn’t want to be in second place,” Cohn said, especially because he is committed to keeping his campaign promises to create jobs and improve working-and middle-class opportunities.
Merkel said that the U.S. made clear it hasn’t yet taken a decision on whether to scrap Paris “and won’t make a decision here” at the G-7.
Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni, the summit’s host, said separately that there was “no agreement” on the Paris accord.
“President Trump will take time to reflect on it, and the other countries are taking note of that,” Gentiloni said.
The Paris agreement may be addressed in a formal communique expected to be issued Saturday by the G-7, though the nations remained at odds Friday over possible wording that would draw unanimous support.
Any language clarifying that member countries have the freedom to rewrite their pledges under the Paris accord could buttress those seeking to persuade Trump to remain in the pact. That has emerged as a key concern for Trump administration officials worried the U.S. is barred from staying in the accord while scaling back its carbon-cutting commitment.
Even without a formal decision on the Paris deal, Trump has moved to dismantle environmental policies seen critical for the U.S. to satisfy its pledge.”
end excerpt
Coal isn’t dead. It is true that about 1/3 of conventional coal capacity is due for retirement by 2025, and a lot of that will be replaced by CCGT. And we export high quality (low sulfur, low ash) thermal coal to Asia, and could do more if the idiots in Oregon and Washington would allow one more terminal.
In the us coal us dead.
Zero chances for growth.
How many coal stocks you own rud?
Like I said.
Dead.
Bury it . Offer it as a sacrifice to the greens and get nukes as
Compensation.
There are no trade-offs with the Greens. Their religion does not allow it. If they agree to such a thing, they will revoke their support eventually and at the worst time. They are in the game for power and virtue signalling and cannot be trusted. They will not be happy until Western society and economies collapse. Then they will show their Socialist colours and blame Capitalism for what they destroyed.
It would be nice to think Trump has handed folks like Crohn just enough rope.
Burn coal. Ship gas. Rebuild energy infrastructure in a rational manner when economics dictate. Quit flogging the renewable dead horse. Everybody wins!
Only 4 new coal plants are planned.
No sane utility company will plan for growth in coal when 4 years from now administrations could change.
Uncertainty kills coal.
Better to spend your dollars drilling and building gas fired.
Coal is dead. Should we need it years from now it will still
Be there.
Rip.
I too wonder why Obama destroyed coal industry. Maybe his friends made a fortune selling coal stocks short. Maybe a coal miner made a pass on Michelle. Maybe he is a believing ideologue. In any case, coal is now officially toxic in Oakland, CA.
Just quit turning perfectly viable generating units off prematurely. That’s all we have to do. The uncertainty built on uncertain science has certainly done damage to the industry. Needless damage in my opinion but damage nonetheless. Proud of yourselves boys?
As an “economic advisor”, Cohn needs to stick to economics. If he can’t, he should resign or be fired. Bringing him into the administration was a mistake.
If he was strictly speaking economically of coal vs gas with the current CAGW-inspired regulations on coal in place, he’s right.
Remove the CAGW-inspired regulations (which will take time) and, THEN, let the market decide.
More politically-motivated idiocy from Eric. He never quotes Cohn mentioning climate change, GHGs, or using EPA regulation to shut down coal plants. Cohn’s point is merely economic: Natural gas generally produces electricity more cheaply, more flexibly, and more cleanly (in terms of traditional air pollutants) than coal. This economic reality is why few coal plants have been built recently in the US and the average age of a US coal plant is 42 years! Preserving “black” coal jobs is almost as economically absurd as creating “green” jobs.
For lukewarmers – ie those smart enough to realize that rising CO2 is causing, and will continue to cause, warming and SLR – there may be other reasons to hope the all countries burn as little coal per unit GDP as possible. Unfortunately, it isn’t obvious that global GHG emissions (coal is the biggest contributor) will ever be reduced in a cost-effective manner. Under selectively-binding Kyoto, global emission rose 24% from 1990-2010, despite some impressive emissions decreases in some European countries (emissions that may have simply shifted to other countries). Under non-binding Paris, emissions will grow 23% from 2010-2030 – IF everyone meets their objectives in economic growth, emissions reductions and development aid. Google has proven that there is no renewable option that beats coal, so the best we can hope for is a technological breakthrough and in most countries increased use of natural gas or nuclear.
Sometimes we get a little more politics here than we need.