Mrs Thatcher - rather different from todays politicians

[andymadmak]

crankedup said:

Even taking inflation into account half billion was a pittance (no pun intended)Loosing a whole National industry for such a paltry sum is a scandal IMO. Strange that we are now 'happy' to throw thirteen billion overseas in the name of aid and yet wouldn't support our own industry.

I am not sure you are correct. Taking inflation into account would suggest that the figure today would be more than 5 billion. And that's assuming that there would have been no additional costs in terms of equipment, safety related changes to work practices etc. In reality we might have been spending double that had we kept the coal industry. The other thing that is very clear is that Governments make crap managers of industry. They tend to make investment decisions for political rather than sound business reasons. You can imagine that investments in efficiency would be ignored if that meant making people redundant in marginal constituencies... or the investment in critical equipment such as rolling stock or production machinery would be delayed because Government wanted to spend money on vote winning policies.
One of the reasons ( I do say one!) that rail costs have risen in the way they have is that successive Governments of all colours saw the railways as a place to not spend money - just enough and not a penny more, unless there was a rail disaster/tragic accident of some sort and then lots of people would be wise after the event. The railways are far safer and more efficient than they were 20 years ago. (But still no where near perfect due to the silly privatisation model used) The cost has been high, but I honestly don't see that it would have been any cheaper in state hands, indeed it's likely it would have been more expensive!

[crankedup]

TheHeretic said:

crankedup said:

Even taking inflation into account half billion was a pittance (no pun intended)Loosing a whole National industry for such a paltry sum is a scandal IMO. Strange that we are now 'happy' to throw thirteen billion overseas in the name of aid and yet wouldn't support our own industry.

*sigh*

Our coal industry was in decline long before the subsidies were removed, (see the production stats). Do you genuinely think that it is better to thrown good money after bad in the vain hope of propping up an industry that is failing?

Edited by TheHeretic on Monday 31st December 12:10

I can't argue against the coal industry being in decline, I cannot deny that coal was a product of its time, but really for such a small sum of money to close these mines I find hard to stomach. And then we throw billions of pounds away into far off lands!It compounds the situation, as I see it, that China is opening coal fired power stations quicker than we open a new Tesco store. It annoys me that when I purchased a few hundredweight of domestic heating coal it comes from abroad, and the quality being so poor I no longer buy the stuff. In thirty short years we see a turnaround in thinking, clean coal technology will soon be viable, I hope against hope that our coalfields will once again be exploited rather than import the stuff, maybe another twenty years time.
I have lived in the U.K. all my life, that's long enough to understand why the U.K. is so far behind our main European competitors, Governments short term policies enabling their cherished re-election.

[hyperblue]

crankedup said:

In thirty short years we see a turnaround in thinking, clean coal technology will soon be viable, I hope against hope that our coalfields will once again be exploited rather than import the stuff, maybe another twenty years time.
I have lived in the U.K. all my life, that's long enough to understand why the U.K. is so far behind our main European competitors, Governments short term policies enabling their cherished re-election.

"Clean coal" is never going to get off the ground. All the existing coal fired plants are converting to biomass or being decomissioned. The only planned one, Kingsnorth, was shelved in 2008. There will never be a new coal power station built in the U.K.

In 30 years time the new generation of Nukes will be running, alongside gas and renewables.

[crankedup]

hyperblue said:

crankedup said:

In thirty short years we see a turnaround in thinking, clean coal technology will soon be viable, I hope against hope that our coalfields will once again be exploited rather than import the stuff, maybe another twenty years time.
I have lived in the U.K. all my life, that's long enough to understand why the U.K. is so far behind our main European competitors, Governments short term policies enabling their cherished re-election.

"Clean coal" is never going to get off the ground. All the existing coal fired plants are converting to biomass or being decomissioned. There will never be a new coal power station built in the U.K.

In 30 years time the new generation of Nukes will be running, alongside gas and renewables.

That's it, kick a man while his down I have a greater optimism for the future of coal and science already has to a great extent made the fuel much cleaner for use. www.cleancoaltechnologiesinc.com

Renewable's I agree with. Nuclear, well the problem remains one of waste product.