Thread by @davidfickling

One thought I have about this comment from Yan's excellent thread (do read the whole thing!):

"Regulatory factors" and "production capacity" in mining are not, IMO, as much a separatable dichotomy as this quote suggests.

https://twitter.com/YanQinyq/status/1463127469310070793

For instance, how do you prevent fires in coal mines?

The best way is to avoid digging "gassy" deposits that let off a lot of methane; and regularly monitoring and servicing equipment and ensuring it's used within its rated capacity to ensure that you don't get sparks etc.

What happens when the order is to just produce more at all costs? You skip on maintenance, run machinery above its rated capacity, and look at reopening that geologically easy but riskily gassy deposit you mothballed in 2015.

The end result is more dead coal miners.

Similarly with some of the details about some of the environmental regulations around tailings ponds etc. What do you want mining regions to look like, and what air quality are residents entitled to?

I often drive through the Hunter Valley coal region near Sydney, one of the world's biggest coal basins.

It has significant air quality issues but a lot of money has been spent ensuring that mining is largely out of sight from the neighbouring horse stud/winery/tourist trade.

If you want a coal mining sector that kills large numbers of miners and turns China's coal belt into a polluted hellscape as in the 2000s and early 2010s, you can definitely increase capacity at relatively low costs.

If you want a moderately prosperous society, though?

China's coal belt isn't simply some backwater that can easily be ignored.

Yan'an, near the coal-rich Shaanxi/Shanxi/Inner Mongolia border, is one of the birthplaces of the Communist revolution.

All routes to NW China pass straight through the coal belt.