Its an unfortunate fact that if the world wants Primary Steel making capabilities then it needs coal (actually coke) as part of the process. The Carbon element in Carbon steel needs to come from somewhere.
The mine in Cumbria would only produce steel making coal, its properties are very much aligned for the steel making furnaces we have in the UK. It would not be used for anything else except maybe a few steam locomotives, but even then its probably not going to burn hot enough.
In fact consider the market for thermal generation coal in the UK.
We have 3 coal fired power stations operating, Drax, (2 units) West Burton and Ratcliffe (4 units each).
Drax announced last week that it had ended commercial generation on its two coal units, and they would only operate in an emergency situation from now on (We had at least 8 of those last winter when the wind wasn't blowing or the sun shinning, or winter as its known)
West Burton will probably keep 2 units in reserve for next winter and to cover in case Hinkley B and/or Hunterston find more cracks in the reactors (both will close in 2 years anyway) and have to shut down.
Ratcliffe is pretty much in the same position.
Either way coal generation will be forced to stop in 2025 due to legislation. in reality in will be long before that due to statutory requirements required to keep a generating unit operational.
So despite all the protests on the Cumbrian mine, and the attempts to link the production there to power generation, there isn't a market for thermal coal in the UK.
The bottom line is that the people and organisations complaining about the mine and using generation as an argument are misleading the public. This is about objections coal, the new pariah, even when their are no alternatives. Or do we close the Primary Steel making facilities in the UK?
CO2 production aside, the mine is being sunk on a old chemical plant, formally owned by Albright and Wilson...it made volatile base products for the washing powders, the next door neighbour to the south is Sellafield, the environmental impact of the mine will be negligible compared to either of these.
I understand the issues with burning coal for power generation. If the previous government had listened to advice, all the coal generation could have been removed from the grid now, replaced by 10GW of reliable, renewable generation, which in turn would have removed a similar amount of gas generation from the system.
As a final point, I wonder what the people and organisations complaining about the mine think about the fact that through the coldest part of this last winter, only the generation by Drax, West Burton and Ratcliffe, prevented blackouts.
I wonder if they would have been happy to lose their lights, heating and cooking, have to park their electric cars? No trains. What would they have done with the internet down?
Coal generation kept all those systems on, blissfully ignored by all. They never seemed to complain then, which does seem somewhat hypocritical.