23,969
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
SW: reserve reduction examples
Two recent analyses of coal reserves have concluded that published figures are too high.
'''Energy Watch Group:''' In 2007, Energy Watch Group, a private research group initiated by the German member of parliament Hans-Josef Fell, completed an analysis of worldwide reserve figures.<ref>[http://www.peakoil.net/files/EWG-Coalreport_10_07_2007.pdf "Coal: Resources and Future Production,"] Energy Watch Group 3/07</ref> The study concluded that "data quality of coal reserves and resources is poor, both on global and national levels." Although published reserve figures were lowered by 50 percent between 1980 and 2005, the study argued that the worldwide reserve estimates still appeared to be too high. In a number of countries, careful evaluation of published reserve figures had resulted in a downgrading of those figures, often in several cases by 90 99 percent or more. For example:
* '''Germany: ''' In 2004, without explanation, Germany downgraded its estimate of proven hard coal reserves from 23 billion tons to 0.183 billion tons, a ''99 percent'' reduction. * Poland''' United Kingdom:''' The "proved recoverable coal reserves" were of the United Kingdom were reported at 45 billion tons in 1980. In 2004 the figure was reduced to 0.22 billion tons, a 99+ percent reduction. * England'''Botswana:* ''' In 1980 Botswana:reported 3.5 billions tons of "proved recoverable reserves." In the WEC 2004 Survey the "proved recoverable reserves" were lowered to 40 million tons, a 99 percent reduction.
Another problem was that published figures had not been revised to account for production over time. For example, China's official coal reserve figures have not been revised since in 1992, "in spite of the fact that about 20 percent of their then stated reserves have been produced since then."
