brown effect., page-3

Some comments re post by VJB and carbon trading.

"The Australia Institute estimates the carbon liability of the NSW-owned black coal-fired generators between 2010 and 2030 is just over $15 billion. That's more than some analysts' valuations of the state's generation and retail assets combined."

I cannot see any Ausie govt introducing carbon trading legislation so severe it make coal power stations bankrupt. Also I can't see significant carbon trading appearing in either USA or Europe as they enter what appears to be a long slow down and probably recession.

"Reading holimagimon's spost on the CXY thread, there is going to be a huge difference in terms of the 'cost' of emisons between gas and coal as a fuel source for power.

How is this going to effect BLK given their resource is all lignite?

If they can't use CTL, BLKs resource is much much less valuable right?"

VJB is right. IF lignite is unable to be used for CTL then BLK's resource is worthless.

CTL technology is 70 years old. SASOL do it very profitably on a massive scale using 'low-grade' coal. I doubt SASOL use lignite but possibly the next grade up. Lignite or brown coal is poorest grade of the true coals. However, lignite itself varies enormously in energy content and ash residue. We know BLK's resource is 'low ash' lignite with good carbon content. But agree in current times it is very unlikely to be used for power generation.

I have written to SASOL and a CLT firm is Brisbane enquiring whether low-ash lignite is the more suitable type for CTL. Let's hope it is. I bought into BLK before checking this info.

Will post when i get answers.