• 3 hours Midwestern Refiners Seek Canadian Oil To Expand Output
  • 8 hours UK On Track To Approve Construction of “Mini” Nuclear Reactors
  • 12 hours LNG Glut To Continue Into 2020s, IEA Says
  • 14 hours Oil Nears $52 With Record OPEC Deal Compliance
  • 17 hours Saudi Aramco CEO Affirms IPO On Track For H2 2018
  • 19 hours Canadia Ltd. Returns To Sudan For First Time Since Oil Price Crash
  • 21 hours Syrian Rebel Group Takes Over Oil Field From IS
  • 3 days PDVSA Booted From Caribbean Terminal Over Unpaid Bills
  • 3 days Russia Warns Ukraine Against Recovering Oil Off The Coast Of Crimea
  • 4 days Syrian Rebels Relinquish Control Of Major Gas Field
  • 4 days Schlumberger Warns Of Moderating Investment In North America
  • 4 days Oil Prices Set For Weekly Loss As Profit Taking Trumps Mideast Tensions
  • 4 days Energy Regulators Look To Guard Grid From Cyberattacks
  • 4 days Mexico Says OPEC Has Not Approached It For Deal Extension
  • 4 days New Video Game Targets Oil Infrastructure
  • 4 days Shell Restarts Bonny Light Exports
  • 4 days Russia’s Rosneft To Take Majority In Kurdish Oil Pipeline
  • 4 days Iraq Struggles To Replace Damaged Kirkuk Equipment As Output Falls
  • 4 days British Utility Companies Brace For Major Reforms
  • 5 days Montenegro A ‘Sweet Spot’ Of Untapped Oil, Gas In The Adriatic
  • 5 days Rosneft CEO: Rising U.S. Shale A Downside Risk To Oil Prices
  • 5 days Brazil Could Invite More Bids For Unsold Pre-Salt Oil Blocks
  • 5 days OPEC/Non-OPEC Seek Consensus On Deal Before Nov Summit
  • 5 days London Stock Exchange Boss Defends Push To Win Aramco IPO
  • 5 days Rosneft Signs $400M Deal With Kurdistan
  • 5 days Kinder Morgan Warns About Trans Mountain Delays
  • 5 days India, China, U.S., Complain Of Venezuelan Crude Oil Quality Issues
  • 5 days Kurdish Kirkuk-Ceyhan Crude Oil Flows Plunge To 225,000 Bpd
  • 6 days Russia, Saudis Team Up To Boost Fracking Tech
  • 6 days Conflicting News Spurs Doubt On Aramco IPO
  • 6 days Exxon Starts Production At New Refinery In Texas
  • 6 days Iraq Asks BP To Redevelop Kirkuk Oil Fields
  • 7 days Oil Prices Rise After U.S. API Reports Strong Crude Inventory Draw
  • 7 days Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 7 days China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 7 days UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 7 days Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 7 days VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 7 days Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 7 days Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
Alt Text

China Creates World’s Biggest Power Group With $271B In Assets

Chinese authorities approved the merger…

Alt Text

The (Only) Culprit Of Coal’s Demise

Cheap and abundant natural gas…

Nick Cunningham

Nick Cunningham

Nick Cunningham is a freelance writer on oil and gas, renewable energy, climate change, energy policy and geopolitics. He is based in Pittsburgh, PA.

More Info

Why Appalachian Coal Can’t Compete With Colombia

Why Appalachian Coal Can’t Compete With Colombia

Deep in U.S. coal country, people are suffering economically not just from the White House’s determination to reduce America’s dependence on coal, but also because of competition from an unlikely place: Colombia.

To be sure, an abundance of cheap natural gas is responsible for most of economic hurt in mining states like West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania. Record natural gas production from shale has given utilities a cheaper, and cleaner, fuel.  

Also, as Republicans are eager to point out, environmental regulations have put a gradually tightening noose around the neck of Big Coal. With new limits on toxic emissions, and looming new restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions, the coal industry is facing a period of structural decline.

But surprising data just released from the Energy Information Administration shows that Appalachian coal is losing market share to cheaper coal from Colombia.

Despite being one of the largest producers of coal in the world, the U.S., confusingly, also imports coal. That’s because imports from Colombia can be cheaper, at least for the large market on the U.S. East Coast.

There are a few reasons why.

First, labor is cheaper in Colombia. Second, maritime shipping is cheaper than rail to some places on the U.S. Eastern Seaboard. For example, moving coal from Appalachia – from mines in West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania -- to Florida adds $26 to a ton of coal, while importing Colombian coal adds just $15 per ton.

Beyond that negative, the coal seams of Appalachia have been mined for over a century, and consequently, the richest coal deposits have been mined out.

Another advantage of Colombian coal is that it burns relatively cleanly, with low sulfur. For utilities seeking to comply with increasingly stringent limits on air pollution, low-sulfur Colombian coal can provide added flexibility.

One final factor undermining Appalachian coal is low international prices. China, which consumes as much coal as the rest of the world combined, and is by far the largest driver of the global coal market, is seeing its economy slow. As a result, Chinese coal consumption is expanding at a much slower rate than expected.

Meanwhile, several new coal mines have opened in recent years (mainly in Australia) in hopes of capitalizing on Chinese demand. The result has been depressed international coal prices, which has sent U.S. utilities looking for cheaper coal abroad.

And Colombia has become the exporter of choice for coal imports to the U.S. East Coast. The South American country has seen its coal exports spike over the last decade, enough to make it the world’s fifth largest coal exporter. In 2012, Colombia accounted for three-quarters of U.S. coal imports.

Colombia coal

Higher coal imports are coming even as overall coal consumption in the United States is drifting downwards. In an Aug. 13 article, The Wall Street Journal wrote about the trend towards more imports. Appalachian coal sells for $79 to $86 per ton while utilities on the U.S. East Coast can import Colombian coal for $75 to $82 per ton.

To be sure, the article goes a bit overboard. While U.S. coal imports have experienced an uptick, they are a small fraction of what they were in the mid-2000’s (see EIA chart). A brutally cold winter in 2014 led to a spike in coal use. As a result, coal consumption will likely rise by about 3 percent in 2014 compared to the previous year.

US coal imports

However, the temporary rise in coal consumption does not change the long-term picture for coal in the United States, which is one of gradual decline. But the situation for domestic miners is even worse than many anticipated – it appears that the coal industry in Appalachia not only has to worry about cheap natural gas and environmental regulations, but also about cheaper coal from abroad.

By Nick Cunningham of Oilprice.com

Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • CapitanColombia on August 17 2014 said:
    Colombian coal all the way!
  • Terry Headley on August 17 2014 said:
    The current price of Central App coal on the spot market according to EIA is about $54.60 per ton. Adding $26 a ton for rail takes it to @ $80 a ton -- essentially the same price as the Colombian deliveries you quote.
    Also, while Southern and South-central App coal reserves (up through eastern Kentucky) have been depleted to a considerable degree, West Virginia still has substantial high quality reserves.
    The war on coal, however, has essentially stripped away 60 percent of our market (the steam coal side). And the supposed price advantage of natural gas is a mirage because the gas companies are essentially selling it for below the break-even price point. So when the de facto mandated switch to gas takes place, you are essentially locking in a substantial inflation factor into electric prices.
  • JOE on September 19 2014 said:
    How much does it cost to destroy the atmosphere though?

Leave a comment

Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News