Hatfield Colliery Closure

[The Seeker 3,048]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-33321874

 

After nearly 100 years the last deep mine is to close, not good for the men working there. Millipede says if he was prime minister he would have bailed out the mine however is the government right not to carry on subsidising the colliery? It needed £14 Million this year alone to survive?

 

 

 

[DIDO.1 22,864]

Sad but inevitable

[unlacedgecko 1,467]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-33321874

 

After nearly 100 years the last deep mine is to close, not good for the men working there. Millipede says if he was prime minister he would have bailed out the mine however is the government right not to carry on subsidising the colliery? It needed £14 Million this year alone to survive?

 

No the government shouldn't bail them out.

 

Maybe the miners can get jobs at the new potash mine (if it opens).

[Blackbriar 8,569]

Even though I speak as an ex-miner, its difficult to justify £14 million a year for one pit.

A very sad day for our country.......

[WILF 51,086]

No, why should they bail them out....especially to the tune of 14 mil

 

I know plenty of self employed blokes who went skint ( and through masses of personal and family stress in the process) and nobody rolled up to save them.

 

That's life I am afraid folks, if a business don't earn money then it has to die.

 

Shame for the blokes losing their jobs but they will get a pay off which is a damn sight more than lots of blokes get.

Edited June 30, 2015 by WILF

[3175darren 1,102]

14 million sounds a lot, but it depends what it is for, if it is for new drivages into new workings then it would be worth it as it could give the mine a long term future, and keep British men in work, but if it's just a bail out, with no long term prospects then no, I am an ex miner and proud to say it, I did my 12 months, on strike and in truth a lot of pits were unviable, but a lot were made unviable,so the government could get its way, it's a crying shame to shut a pit, but we can't compete with foreign coal which is still subsidised, and the people who think we can wave a magic wand and produce enough electricity for the future, without coal or nuclear power, have the governments ear,and we couldn't have anything competing with fracking now could we,

 

I Would rather bale out a British industry which could repay long term, than bale out a foreign country that will contribute sod all back

[The Seeker 3,048]

They didn't say what the money was needed for just "improvements" that were needed. Problem is no one wants their coal, the TV showed feckin mountains of the stuff in the back ground which they said was too expensive. The Russians and Brazillians were mining and then shipping coal to the UK cheaper than they could dig it out of the ground in their own back yard.

 

Like it or not if your not competitive the you don't survive. I was surprised to hear just how long they have been subsidised, even the Miners Union gave them £4Million last year to keep going.

[DIDO.1 22,864]

I think most people disagree with the bail outs you mentioned but that dosnt mean we should spend millions producing coal we don't need

[3175darren 1,102]

We don't need yet, and once these places shut and the experienced work force is gone, you are left with open casting, I agree at this moment in time we have alternatives, but that could change in a heartbeat, the world is up in arms and countries are ready, to go mad with each other , coal got us through 2 wars, without it we wouldn't have had the freedom we have enjoyed,

[Blackbriar 8,569]

The truth of it is that the British coal industry was finished years ago - Thatcher saw to that.

This is just the final step in a process that began 30 or more years ago.

[hily 380]

I live in an area that used to be dominated by deep coal mines now as they are all close we are surrounded by open cast and have many application for more that are rubber stamped by the council planners as they do not have the money to back the locals who many appose the applications and when opencast companies do reinstate the mined area they do not turn it back to what it was productive arable or stock filled fields no we are left with nature reserves that are in my mind the cheapest option and are in fact scrub land and ponds were you can walk your dog and good for nothing else ow sorry yes its good for wind farm application submitted by the same coal extraction companies these companies say it's good for the area and provides jobs not many workers are locals if any and the wind turbines are manufactured from outside the uk and the tax payer hands over money towards these to make them a viable energy providers bigger picture I could go on but I am a boring old barsteward.

[Born Hunter 17,960]

We don't need yet, and once these places shut and the experienced work force is gone, you are left with open casting, I agree at this moment in time we have alternatives, but that could change in a heartbeat, the world is up in arms and countries are ready, to go mad with each other , coal got us through 2 wars, without it we wouldn't have had the freedom we have enjoyed,

 

There was a time certainly, when coal and our ability to produce our own was important. But is it still? Being such a small industry in this country anyway, could the miners cope with a massive demand if ever needed? If not, there's no justification for keeping that skillset alive surely?

 

I'd have to question as well if coal ever could be relied upon again. Do we have the infrastructure in terms of power stations to make it viable? Or is it shifting to gas?

 

With the advancements in renewables and particularly battery tech over the past decade, the future is not in coal imo. Can we really perceive any scenario where it would be?

 

IMO the future will/should be in renewables (which will become more viable with improved tech), nuclear and shale gas.

[hily 380]

 

We don't need yet, and once these places shut and the experienced work force is gone, you are left with open casting, I agree at this moment in time we have alternatives, but that could change in a heartbeat, the world is up in arms and countries are ready, to go mad with each other , coal got us through 2 wars, without it we wouldn't have had the freedom we have enjoyed,

 

There was a time certainly, when coal and our ability to produce our own was important. But is it still? Being such a small industry in this country anyway, could the miners cope with a massive demand if ever needed? If not, there's no justification for keeping that skillset alive surely?

 

I'd have to question as well if coal ever could be relied upon again. Do we have the infrastructure in terms of power stations to make it viable? Or is it shifting to gas?

 

With the advancements in renewables and particularly battery tech over the past decade, the future is not in coal imo. Can we really perceive any scenario where it would be?

 

IMO the future will/should be in renewables (which will become more viable with improved tech), nuclear and shale gas.

 

AAh viable= profitable/ renewables with tax payers money nowt to do with saving the planet.

[Born Hunter 17,960]

 

 

We don't need yet, and once these places shut and the experienced work force is gone, you are left with open casting, I agree at this moment in time we have alternatives, but that could change in a heartbeat, the world is up in arms and countries are ready, to go mad with each other , coal got us through 2 wars, without it we wouldn't have had the freedom we have enjoyed,

 

There was a time certainly, when coal and our ability to produce our own was important. But is it still? Being such a small industry in this country anyway, could the miners cope with a massive demand if ever needed? If not, there's no justification for keeping that skillset alive surely?

 

I'd have to question as well if coal ever could be relied upon again. Do we have the infrastructure in terms of power stations to make it viable? Or is it shifting to gas?

 

With the advancements in renewables and particularly battery tech over the past decade, the future is not in coal imo. Can we really perceive any scenario where it would be?

 

IMO the future will/should be in renewables (which will become more viable with improved tech), nuclear and shale gas.

 

AAh viable= profitable/ renewables with tax payers money nowt to do with saving the planet.

 

 

Viable means viable.

 

As in, the associated technology is developing fast enough to make it possible and beneficial to replace the current energy infrastructure.

 

And before someone tells me I'm biased in some way, my career prospects would certainly be improved if the coal industry was booming. But I try to keep bias and emotion out of sensible decision making.

Edited July 1, 2015 by Born Hunter

[3175darren 1,102]

 

 

We don't need yet, and once these places shut and the experienced work force is gone, you are left with open casting, I agree at this moment in time we have alternatives, but that could change in a heartbeat, the world is up in arms and countries are ready, to go mad with each other , coal got us through 2 wars, without it we wouldn't have had the freedom we have enjoyed,

 

There was a time certainly, when coal and our ability to produce our own was important. But is it still? Being such a small industry in this country anyway, could the miners cope with a massive demand if ever needed? If not, there's no justification for keeping that skillset alive surely?

 

I'd have to question as well if coal ever could be relied upon again. Do we have the infrastructure in terms of power stations to make it viable? Or is it shifting to gas?

 

With the advancements in renewables and particularly battery tech over the past decade, the future is not in coal imo. Can we really perceive any scenario where it would be?

 

IMO the future will/should be in renewables (which will become more viable with improved tech), nuclear and shale gas.

 

AAh viable= profitable/ renewables with tax payers money nowt to do with saving the planet.

 

We will spend all this tax money on wind turbines, and stuff like that, no one can stop it now, coal is a fossil fuel from a fossil age but it worked, and the technology that's around today, we would be able to use it in a much more efficient and clean way, if we had a will to try, I agree renewable energy is probably the way to go,and coal can cause scars on the land scape, although less so deep mined, but jesus them wind turbines are dog awful to look at, to say to people sorry but we can't justify your skill sett,is a little bit of a worry to me,when at least they want to graft and earn a living, the 14 million investment would filter out into the area, as in shops local trades and businesses, and not only boost the mine but cash inject into the local economy,and a lot of that would come back in as taxes, so I doubt it would long term cost 14 million, its affect would ripple through the area,in a time when it is desperately needed, how much of the bank bailout did you see back ?? how much of the foreign aid did you see come back??, also while ever we are importing coal how can we say that coal is not needed, surely the import should stop before the home produced stuff,