THE DOE SAYS THE U.S. HAS 140 YEARS SUPPLY OF COAL - BUT IS THAT AT THE CURRENT 1 BILLION TONS PER YEAR USED TO PRODUCE ELECTRICITY? BY THE WAY CONGRESSMAN ROSCOE BARTLETT FROM MARYLAND ALSO RAISED THESE SAME ISSUES.

5 MILLION BARRELS PER DAY OF TRANSPORTATION FUELS, PRODUCED THROUGH THE FISCHER-TROPSCH PROCESS (CTL) WILL REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL 1 TON OF COAL PER YEAR. (APPROXIMATELY THE VOLUME OF CRUDE OIL RECEIVED FROM OPEC NATIONS)

DOES THAT MEAN THE U.S. WOULD ONLY HAVE 70 YEARS COAL SUPPLY? WHAT HAPPENS IF WE WANT TO REDUCE IMPORTS TO NEAR ZERO OR BY 10 MILLION BARRELS PER DAY. WE WOULD NEED AN ADDITIONAL 2 BILLION TONS PER YEAR. WOULD THE U.S. THEN ONLY HAVE A 35 YEAR SUPPLY OF COAL?

SHOULD THE U.S. ALLOW THE EXPORT OF COAL WITHOUT ANY OVERSIGHT UNTIL WE DETERMINE HOW BIG A SYNTHETIC FUEL PROGRAM FROM COAL WILL BE?

SHOULD THE U.S. REQUIRE EXPORT PERMITS FOR COAL UNTIL IT HAS HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLORE ALL OPTIONS OR SHOULD WE ALLOW THIS U.S. ENERGY RESOURCE TO BE EXPORTED WITH NO OVERSIGHT OR ABILITY TO CONTROL

HERE IN ALASKA, RED CHINA HAS EMBARKED ON A PROGRAM TO BUILD A COAL EXPORT TERMINAL IN THE COOK INLET. THE COAL CONVEROY SYSTEM AND OFFSHORE LOADING TERMINAL WILL BE MANUFACTURED IN CHINA AND INSTALLED ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE COOK INLET.

ONCE COMPLETED RED CHINA THROUGH ONE OF ITS "INDEPENDENT" POWER PRODUCERS WILL CONTROL THE EXPORT OF COAL FROM ALASKA TO CHINA.

SHOULD THE U.S. ALLOW ALASKA COAL TO POWER CHINA's THURST FOR ELECTRIC ENERGY WHEN THEY REFUSE TO INSTALLED THE ENVIRONMENTAL SAFE GUARDS REQUIRE HERE IN THE U.S. WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW CHINA TO POLLUTE THE SAME AIR WE BREATHE. SHOULD THE U.S. REGULATE COAL OR ENERGY EXPORTS TO COUNTRIES WHO WILL SOON PASS THE U.S. AS THE LARGEST SOURCE OF GREEN HOUSE GASES AND OTHER POLUTANTS.

WE DON'T THINK SO BUT WITHOUT EXPORT PERMITS, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT HAS NO SAY OR CONTROL OF HOW U.S. NATURAL RESOURCES ARE EXPORTED.

IF YOU AGREE ASK YOUR CONGRESSMAN "WHY IF MOST OTHER FORMS OF U.S. ENERGY REQUIRE A PERMIT TO BE EXPORTED THEN WHY WOULDN'T WE REQUIRE ONE FOR THE ONE DOMESTIC ENERGY RESOURCE THAT COULD REDUCE OR ELIMIANTE IMPORTED CRUDE OIL?

IN 2005, ANGTL ASKED THE U.S. COMMERCE DEPARTMENT THIS SAME QUESTION.  THEY PUBLISHED THE QUESTION IN THEIR MONTHLY “NEWS LETTER” BUT DECLINED TO INVESTIAGE FURTHER OR BRING THE ISSUE TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ADMINISTRATION. WE BELIVE THIS IS THE WORNG APPROACH, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE DOE BELIEVES COAL WILL PLAY SUCH AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN REDUCING U.S DEPENDENCE ON IMPORTED CRUDE OIL AND TRANSPORTATION FUELS. 

JUST BECAUSE WE EXPORT A SMALL VOLUME OF COAL TODAY DOESN’T MEAN IT WON’T INCREASE TOMORROW – ESPECIALLY TO COUNTRIES LIKE CHINA WHO DON’T SHARE OUR SAME DESIRE TO CAPTURE AND CONTAIN POLLUTANTS EMMITED FROM THE BURNING OF COAL.  

30 MILLION TONS PER YEAR IS 160,000 BARRELS PER DAY OR 2.5 BILLION GALLONS PER YEAR.  THAT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

(see copy of U.S. Department of Commerce public comment news letter)