There are good physics reasons why coal is the KING of fossil fuels, not oil, and certainly not natural gas:
When the ancient plantations were buried underground, they were mostly carbohydrates, when they are heated underground, the most stuff formed is coal, and then a small portion react with water to form hydrocarbons. And an even smaller portion of the hydrocarbon are of the lightest molecules, methane. The bulk forms petroleum. So the methane is the rock bottom in terms of formation.
So when ancient biomass turned into fossil fuel, 70% goes into coal, pure carbon, 30% goes into hydrocarbon, compound of hydrogen and carbon. And then within the 30% hydrocarbon, 20% goes into bigger molecules which is oil, and only 10% goes into natural gas, methane, the lightest hydrocarbon molecule, with CH4.
Now in producing them. Coal can be digger almost 100% from good open-pit coal mines. For oil field, they can recover maybe 30% to 35% of original oil in ground. When it comes to shale gas, Only 3% to 5% of original shale gas underground can be produced. That's another big factor favoring coal, not gas.
All considered, the amount of producible coal versus natural gas, is roughly 100 to 1 ratio. We will run out of gas, long before we run out of coal.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Are you still here pretending to know something after all your massive losses in coal? We all remember you, you are fooling no one.You have the worst track record of anyone on the web. Go lick your wounds, what chutzpa you have to keep posting on Yahoo. I'm making a lot in energy in this market, but my only coal play is BTU. About 5% my energy portfolio. Clueless cadmium as always. Biggest fraud on the web.
You know as much about physics as you do about successful investing you 'cold fusion' fraud. Tell us again how diamonds (from Hell Earth temp pressures) are made at higher temps than platinum you clueless, science ignorant moron. Only YOU managed to pick the only HORRIBLE sector durin gthe best bull market in decades, and only YOU managed to pick the very worst plays in that sector, first PCX (now BK), then JRCC, and then ACI, and lose ALL your capital as everyone else got rich from this roaring incredible bull market of the past 5 years.
Stop pretending to know something you are entirely ignorant about, when you are nothing but a chemistry student drop out, uncredentialed, nonsense spewing, phony, lying, 'worst investor of all time' nobody, who truly believes that a display of ignorance is a virtue.
Did you get a promotion for bashing me on Yahoo board for 6+ years, after posting maybe a million messages non-stop? Are you not sick and tired of this dirty job already? I am sure you can find a better paying job, can't you? How much do you get paid per message?
You laugh at me the SAME as you laughed at me when I picked up JRCC at $4 in Aug. 2007. How come you did not laugh that JRCC ran up to $62.86 in just ten months then, and I kicked myself for selling way too early? You laughed at me for jumping on board dry bulk shipping at the beginning of Dec. 2008. But you did not laugh when some of the shipping stocks went from $3.50 to $18 in just 4 months by May 2009? You laughed at me for sticking to my SWC shares at $1.70 per share at the end of 2008. How come you did not laugh when SWC reached $25 in early 2011, and I reaped tremendous amount of profit on aggressive margin buying on the way up? Do you even comprehend that when you are on 50% margin, a ten fold gain of share price turns into 100 fold gain, and even more when you are on 33% margin?
Keep laughing. I am sure you will not laugh when ACI reaches $100 per share, and hopefully within one year from now. This is the once in a lifetime opportunity I see. It wouldn't be a super coal cycle if shares go from $50 to $75. But it surely is a super cycle going from $4.12 to $124.00, in a matter of one year.
Or, you also laughed at me for shorting FSLR at $300 plus and laughed that I predicted FSLR to go down to $20 per share, and within 3 to 4 years? How come you did not laugh when I was vindicated. Who else in the entire world dared to call for $20 per share FSLR, when it was $300+, and it seemd to have unlimited growth potential. No one but ME!
BTW I recently also predicted $100 per share apple stock in 3 or 4 years. Watch that one, although I am not in a short Apple play. I will be vindicated.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Explanation of names:
Carbohydrate: compound of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen atoms, with hydrogen to oxygen ratio roughly 2:1, same as in water H2O. Most biomass matter is cabohydrates. When buried underground and heated by the underground heat, the hydrogen and oxygen form water and get out, leaving only the carbon. That's how coal is formed.
Hydrocarbon: Hydrocarbon is not carbohydrate. Hydrocarbons are compounds of hydrogen and carbon atoms, no oxygen atoms. Simplest hydrocarbon is methane, natural gas, CH4. One carbon with 4 hydrogen atoms. Bigger molecules of hydrocarbon are the stuffs that form petroleum.
when biomass are buried, they are most likely hydrocarbon and the water is dissipated to leave carbon only and that forms coal. That's the most common outcome, and the first step under the extreme heat underground.
Once water is out and only carbon is left, how do you further form hydrocarbon and petroleum? You need HYDROGEN to do that. You need suitable conditions. The temperature can not be too high so there are germs alive. There must be water present. The germs, living in an environment without oxygen, try to break water molecules to obtain oxygen. Water breaks into hydrogen and oxygen, The oxygen combines with carbon to form carbon dioxide and get out of ground. Then hydrogen combines with carbon to form hydrocarbon, the basis for oil and natural gas.
So coal will ALWAYS form with enough biomass buried in concentration. But gas and oil may not always form, depending on the temperature and presence of water. This is why natural gas and oil is inherently LESS abundant than coal.
Sentiment: Strong Buy