Until recently, I've only had one chance to visit an Alaska coal mine, the Usibelli mines near Fairbanks. The coal seams of the region are rich, thick, and near the surface -- so it is relatively easy to remove the overlying rock, mine out the coal, and reclaim the surface.
As the UAF Chancellor Brian Rogers has noted, coal provides a considerable power benefit to Alaska, though many oppose its growth, particular Mat-Su residents fighting a new mine at Wishbone Hill.
This opposition comes in a region where, in the past, miners have removed some 7 million tons of coal in 18 different operations.
But I don't want to argue the pros and cons of individual sites. Usibelli currently mines more than 1.5 million tons of coal a year, with about 1 million tons used domestically, with half that amount shipped to the Pacific Rim, mainly Korea.
Usibelli argues that one reason Alaska's power costs remain high is because coal plays a much smaller role here than it does in the Lower 48.
But if problems arise bringing natural gas to more Alaskans, coal's portion of the mix may well increase.
Certainly, Alaska has vast coal reserves, as much as 5 trillion tons -- or about 40 percent more than all of the Lower 48. It's concentrated in three areas: Northern Alaska-Slope, Central Alaska-Nenana, and Southern Alaska-Cook Inlet.
But the coal likely to be mined in the next 30 years comes from coal beds being developed in existing mines or in areas already leased.
Coal is considered a reserve if it's likely to be mined.
At the moment, coal near Fairbanks is sufficient for coal to contribute to the region's energy mix, is all that fits the bill.
But there has been exploratory work elsewhere.
North of the Brooks Range and lying over the National Petroleum Reserve, the Arctic coal deposits may be the richest in the state. Unfortunately, those deposits are difficult to reach. Although coal was mined in the region as far back as 1879 -- when it was used to supply whaling ships -- those days are long gone.
The state is considering prospecting permits in the Nanushuk region, north of the Brooks Range just off the haul road. However, the Naqsragmuit Tribal Council of the area has objected.
The major problem with coal mined north of the Brooks Range is getting it to market.
There is talk of moving the coal to the terminal where the Red Dog Mine ships out zinc concentrate, but that facility is only open July to October, which does little for the high winter demand for fuel in the northern hemisphere. Further, I can't see the haul road handling heavy loads of coal consistently.
Another mine is being considered at Chuitna, north of Cook Inlet about 45 miles from Anchorage. As proposed, that project would mine up to 12 million tons of coal a year for at least 25 years. The Division of Mining, Land and Water awaits an updated proposal before moving ahead on a preliminary ruling next year.
Clearly, there are massive deposits of coal in Alaska but it's unlikely much of it will reach market soon. Until the demand changes -- and I think it will -- it's difficult to consider Alaska coal as more than a resource in the bank.
Given given the need for expensive infrastructure, it seems unreasonable to expect much new Alaska coal making it to market until five or 10 years after global demand takes off.
Used with permission from The Oil Drum website. Author Dave Summers retired last year from Missouri University of Science and Technology, where he's a professor emeritus of mining engineering. He directed the Rock Mechanics and Explosives Research Center there until 2008, developed new mining and extraction technologies. He was among the founders of The Oil Drum in 2005.