Coal is the mainstay of American electricity generation. Half the nation's electrical supply comes from burning coal. A common argument that shows up in energy discussions, both on Daily Kos and elsewhere, is that coal mining employs many people. Some claim this as a defense for using coal. Others claim it as a reason why the coal industry has political support.
Like so many things people believe about coal, often with the best of intentions, this is simply another lie the industry has spun. Political support for coal comes from profits and the illusion of jobs.
To begin, here is what sparked me to write this. A few hours ago in a diary about coal to liquid conversion, I saw this series of comments.
Coal mining provides ongoing jobs at a much higher rate than a wind farm or solar plant would.
When you think political money, think patronage jobs - that's where the real money's at.
And how many jobs from a wind farm after its up?
I'm guessing nearly none.
I was explaining why coal has political traction while wind doesn't. That's it.
I don't think the commenter was intending to repeat any coal industry spin, but I do believe those comments are dead wrong. Of course, I'll back up my point of view with some statistics. (Yes, it's yet another retrograde diary full of energy statistics. Did you expect anything else? There's no need to be afraid of them - after all, reality has a strong liberal bias.)
An interesting experiment would be to ask people how many coal workers they think there are in the United States. How many do you think there are? Remember, it's a country of 300 million people that gets half its electricity from coal. A country responsible for 20% of the world's coal production and consumption every year. More than 1.1 billion short tons in 2006. That's a lot of coal. To help with perpsective, BLS estimates for other professions include: 300,000 chief executives; 240,000 pharmacists; 550,000 lawyers; 280,000 fire fighters; 86,000 dentists. Have you made a guess for coal workers? Good.
If you had an image of hundreds of thousands, you've proven the value of the coal industry spin. The current number is less than 80,000. Furthermore, as I'll justify below, that number will surely drop in the coming years even if coal companies manage to push through legislation that promotes increased coal use.
First, here are a few facts about how American coal worker employment has changed over time. Over the 1990s decade, coal production increased 6% but coal worker jobs were reduced by 40%. More than 50,000 jobs were lost, even though output increased. Production at both underground and surface mines (in short tons per worker hour) nearly doubled in that decade.
In the current decade, that trend has slowed but is continuing. The main reason is the shift of coal mining to states where it is mined very easily. In just ten years, Wyoming has risen from 26% of US production (1997) to 38% in 2006. Yes, the nation's least populous state now produces nearly 40% of American coal. And it does it with only 5000 of those 80,000 workers.
Looking at just the largest two mines, the employment figures are even more striking. The two supermines are both in Wyoming, and each produced around 8% of the total US coal production in 2006. They are Black Thunder operated by Arch Coal, and the North Antelope Rochelle Complex operated by Peabody Energy. (Peabody is the world's largest mining company; more about them later.) What is the employment at these mines? The Concise Guide to Wyoming Coal 2006 (large PDF file) tells us: 948 at Black Thunder, and 825 at NARC. So 15% of the nations's coal comes from the efforts of fewer than 1800 workers.
With 5000 people producing nearly 40% of the output, how long will the remaining 75,000 workers keep their jobs? If the 53,000 coal workers sacked in the 1990s are any indication, it should not be long before coal companies shift even more of their production to the easy pickings just east of the Rockies.
But that's not the reality the coal industry wants you to see, and it's not the image a compliant media portrays. Check out this news article of last year:
Coal mines' hiring spree
Gillette, Wyo., area sees employment boom since 2005
By Peter Gartrell, The (Gillette) News-Record
October 21, 2006
Source: rockymountainnews.com
GILLETTE, Wyo. - Increasing demand and production, impending retirements and an eye toward future growth that includes two new mines has area coal mines hiring at clip not seen in years.
The 14 mines within an hour's drive of Gillette have combined to hire 1,000 more mine workers over the past three years, according to Mine Safety and Health Administration filings.
...
"There are labor shortages in both the East and the West and we're in an aggressive hiring mode," Steve Leer, chairman and CEO of Arch Coal, told The News-Record recently. "It doesn't matter whether you're in West Virginia or Wyoming."
Arch is the owner of Black Thunder, the largest coal mine in the nation, and Coal Creek, a mine that has hired almost 100 people since it reopened earlier this year. The company, along with Peabody Energy and Rio Tinto Energy America - which together produced more than 300 million tons last year - have hired the lion's share of new employees in the area.
...
Pointing to predictions by the federal Energy Information Agency, he [Leer] expects U.S. power generation to be increasingly reliant on coal. ... He also cited a recent railroad study that predicted Wyoming coal loadouts would reach 600 million tons by 2015.
The image of coal providing vital economic benefit to communities across the nation is pure industry spin. It is a myth, an illusion, a total lie. Any politician who argues for coal use on employment grounds is speaking with no basis in reality and has either been supported generously by coal industry contributions, or has fallen for their propaganda and is misguidedly backing them for free.
Back to the flip side of those comments I quoted. Can alternative energy provide employment to match coal? Let me make one example: wind energy. I don't know how many people the wind power industry employs right now, but a page at the American Wind Energy Association website indicates more than 2000 people are directly employed already. Frankly, I'd be amazed if the figure is that low.
Could an American renewable energy company ever top the coal mining industry in value and employment? Could one get as big as Peabody Energy? Peabody is the world's largest mining company, producing close to a quarter of American coal. According to the Fortune 500 where the company is ranked 431, Peabody has a current (March 2007) market value of $10.8 billion and more than $5 billion in annual revenues. According to end of 2005 company figures cited in its Wikipedia entry, Peabody Energy employs around 8,300 people.
Since the American wind industry is in its infancy, let's look overseas for a comparison. Total Danish employment in wind energy is estimated at more than 20,000 people. Much of that is in high value export-creating employment. Danish company Vestas is the largest wind turbine company in the world. Their current product line is simple: Vestas makes wind turbines. Nothing else, just wind turbines and the software that optimizes their use. It was only 20 years ago in 1987 when Vestas started to concentrate exclusively on wind energy, with a staff of 60 people. Today, Vestas has a market capitalization (as listed on their home page) of 9.4 billion Euros; that's about 12.8 billion US dollars. Revenue in 2006 was over US$5 billion. According to the company profile, Vestas employs more than 13,000 people globally.
Perhaps twenty years of focus on renewable energy would have produced an American equivalent of Vestas. Instead, the nation with 4.5% of the world population continues to be responsible for 20% of the coal, 25% of the crude oil and 40% of the gasoline consumed on this planet every year.
If anyone here actually wants to defend the coal industry, pick something defensible. Like the way mined land in Wyoming is restored, which is about the only thing the industry does well. Or cite research into carbon sequestration, but you'll need to conveniently forget that not a single full sized coal plant in the world has carbon capture yet and there is no sign of that changing soon. But please, stay away from the industry lie about jobs. I think I've demonstrated here that it's tiresome, refutable bullshit.
Yet sadly, most people will continue to believe it.