Pittsburgh again hosts annual AMC coal convention

Acid rain legislation, the new tax package, excess coal capacity, the effects of low oil prices, how to increase coal exports: These were among the items discussed at the May 4-7, American Mining Congress coal convention in Pittsburgh. Some 2000 people attended the convention, which also offered 15 technical sessions. As always, the state of the domestic coal industry might be characterized as "long-term promise, short-term problems." And one of these problems is acid rain. Acid rain The proposed acid rain legislation in Congress could be the most costly piece of environmental legislation ever written. In its present form, the measure could cost the nation up to $110 billion over the next 15 years. Rep. Henry Waxman's (D-CA) bill, HR 4567, would mandate large reductions in sulfur dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants. The bill has more than 150 Republican and Democratic cosponsors. Ed Addison is president of the Southern Co., one of the nation's largest utilities and users of domestic coal. Addison noted that America's electric utility industry buys and uses nearly 85% of the coal consumed in this country. He said Waxman's bill would drive up prices of low-sulfur coal, raise electric rates, and force miners out of work in high-sulfur coal regions. In repeating a standard coal industry response, Addison said the Clean Air Act is doing the job. In recent years, while coal use has gone up, S02 emissions have gone down. Current air pollution standards are producing cleaner air, he said. Despite concern over HR 4567, the bill's future is uncertain. Several coal industry executives and analysts predict the bill will die under weight of opposition from coal, utility, and steel interests. But the acid rain issue is gaining momentum. Future legislation of some kind is likely. Meanwhile, research continues to develop clean coal technology to deal with the S02 problem. Commercialization of these front-end technologies currently lags public sentiment for acid rain legislation. Ground water runoff and contamination is another area where future legislation would seem likely. Already, one bill has been introduced in Congress. A second is being drafted. The impact of such legislation may be significant according to Bruce Leavitt, a hydrogeologist with Consolidation Coal Co. He said if current proposals are adopted, there will be more federal, state, and local government involvement in ground water regulation. In any event, the coal industry can expect to see more emphasis on preventing acid mine drainage and on water replacement, according to Leavitt. He urged those in the coal industry to present information about mining and ground water. That is needed to prevent misdirected state and federal programs, he said. Another coal industry concern is excess capacity. The industry has the mines, equipment, and employees to produce 15% more coal than at present. Problem is, the markets are not there. Slower-than-predicted growth in electric utility coal use has kept sales sluggish. There are also tax uncertainties. Congress is considering repeal of the investment tax credit and elimination of black lung payments and excise taxes as deductible expenses. One analyst estimates the coal industry would lose $1.1 billion in five years, if the changes are approved. In addition, there are the usual concerns about excessive governmental regulations involving safety and environmental matters. Bill Kegel, for example, said these regulations mean extra costs and delays in developing mines. Kegel is president and chief executive officer of the Rochester & Pittsburgh Coal Co. More than half the electrical power in the US is generated by coal-fired plants. That percentage could slip by a couple of points as nuclear generators come on-line the next few years. About 1990, though, we will see the end of US nuclear plant construction. No new nuclear plants have been scheduled since 1978. So any growth in electric power use should benefit the coal industry. BethEnergy - High Power Mountain During 1985, BethEnergy - a Bethlehem Steel Corp. - subsidiary developed High Power Mountain, a 1.8-Mt/a (2-million-stpy) surface mine in West Virginia. Construction saw movement of more than 3 hm3 (4 million cu yds) of earth. A computerized 544 t/h (600 stph) heavy media cyclone prep plant and a 3.6-kt/h (4000-stph) railroad loadout facility were built in six months. And a 5.6-km (3.5-mile) railroad spur and loop bridging a major highway were constructed. Larry Willison of BethEnergy noted the project's ambitious construction schedule. It was forced by the need for the project to be market driven and - lacking available capital - externally financed. BethEnergy did several things before obtaining with Detroit Edison a market for 0.9 Mt/a (1 million stpy) of coal. Willison said his company prospected and proved the eastern half of its 8-km2