Coal-Fired Power Generation Handbook. James G. Speight
when the real costs of energy are compared to the costs of using the indigenous coal resources of the United States (Hubbard, 1991; Speight, 2020).
In order to understand the politics of coal use and production, it is necessary to put coal into the perspective of oil and gas. In the early days of the oil industry, the United States was the major producer and was predominantly an exporter of crude oil, thereby serving as the “swing” producer insofar as production was adjusted to maintain stability of world oil prices. However, oil production in the United States peaked in 1972 and has been in decline ever since and the mantle of oil power has shifted to the Middle East, leading to new political and economic realities for the world. From the 1970s, oil prices have been determined more by international affairs (geopolitics) than by global economics (Yergin, 1991).
In contrast to current US oil production and use patterns, the United States is not a significant importer of natural gas. Trade agreements with Canada and with Mexico are responsible for the import of natural gas but these are more of a convenience for the border states rather than for the nation as a whole.
In the United States, the use of coal increased after World War II with the majority of the production occurring in the eastern states close to the population centers. The majority of the recovery methods used underground mining techniques in the seams of higher quality, i.e., the minerals and water content of the coal was relatively low and the coal had a high heat-content (Chapters 5, 6). However, by the late 1960s, natural gas and crude oil had captured most of the residential, industrial, and commercial market, leaving only power generation and metallurgical coke production as the major uses for coal.
On a global scale, the United States is a major source of coal (Figure 1.2) as well as a coal producer and coal exporter (Chadwick, 1992). There are many coal-producing states in the United States but the passage, and implementation, of the Clean Air Act in the early 1970s opened up new markets for the easily (surface) mined low-sulfur coals (Table 1.5, Table 1.6, Figure 1.3) from the western United States and captured a substantial share of the energy (specifically, the electrical utility) markets. In addition, states such as Wyoming were the major beneficiaries of the trend to the use of low-sulfur coal and occupy a significant position in the coal reserves and coal production scenarios of the United States (Speight, 2013, 2020).
Figure 1.2 Coal types and distribution in the United States.
Table 1.5 Distribution of US Coal Reserves (% of total) (Energy information Administration, 2011).
| Region* | Underground minable (%) | Surface minable (%) | Total (%) |
| Eastern United States | 36.9 | 8.2 | 45.1 |
| Western United States | 30.8 | 24.1 | 54.9 |
| Total United States | 67.7 | 32.3 | 100.0 |
*Mississippi River is dividing line beteween East and West.
Table 1.6 Sulfur content of US Coals by Region (Energy information Administration, 2011).
| Region | No. of samples | Organic S (%) | Pyritic S (%) | Total (%) |
| N. Appalachia | 227 | 1.00 | 2.07 | 3.01 |
| S. Appalachia | 35 | 0.67 | 0.37 | 1.04 |
| E. Midwest | 95 | 1.63 | 2.29 | 3.92 |
| W. Midwest | 44 | 1.67 | 3.58 | 5.25 |
| Western | 44 | 0.45 | 0.23 | 0.68 |
| Alabama | 10 | 0.64 | 0.69 | 1.33 |
Figure 1.3 Distribution of Sulfur content of US Coals (Energy information Administration, 2011).
Furthermore, the two oil shocks of 1973 and 1979, as well as the political shock that occurred in Iran in 1979, were related to the rediscovery of coal through the realization that the United States and other Western countries had developed a very expensive habit insofar as they not only had a growing dependence upon foreign oil but they craved the energy-giving liquid! The discovery of the North Sea oil fields gave some respite to an oil-thirsty Europe but the resurgence of coal in the United States continued with the official rebirth of coal in 1977 as a major contributor to the National Energy Plan of the United States. It is to be hoped that future scenarios foresee the use of coal as a major source of energy; the reserves are certainly there and the opportunities to use coal as a clean, environmentally acceptable fuel are increasing.
The question to be asked by any country, and Canada did ask this question in the early 1970s, is “What price are we willing to pay for energy independence?” There may never be any simple answer to such a question. But, put in the simplest form, the question states that if the United States, or, for that matter, any energy consumers, are to wean themselves from imported oil (i.e., nonindigenous energy sources) there will be an economic and environmental cost if alternate sources are to be secured (NRC, 1979; NRC, 1990). In this light, there is a study which indicates that coal is by far the cheapest fossil fuel. However, the costs are calculated on a cost per Btu basis for electricity generation only and whilst they do show the benefits for using coal for this purpose, the data should not be purported to be generally applicable to all aspects of coal utilization.
Nevertheless, the promise for the use of coal is there insofar as the data do show the more stable price dependability of coal. If price