This week offered a flurry of news signifying the end of Australia’s resource boom. Of course, that doesn’t mean the mining space won’t rebound in the years ahead. Commodities are famously volatile, and the steep correction that inevitably results from overinvestment and a glut of production will itself eventually correct.

But in the near term, the sector is definitely contracting. Even the uber-wealthy are hurting. Pundits have delighted as porcine plutocrats Nathan Tinkler and Gina Rinehart watched their fortunes drop precipitously over the past year. Tinkler is now merely a former billionaire, while Rinehart’s wealth declined by a staggering AUD7 billion, to AUD22 billion, over the past 12 months.

Their plight might be more entertaining if Australia’s economy weren’t so dependent on the mining industry. The Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE) recently detailed a significant increase in projects being deferred or cancelled, as well as a decline in investment for exploration. Altogether, roughly AUD150 billion in projects have been delayed or cancelled over the past year.

However, there are still AUD268 billion in projects at the committed stage, which is near record-high levels. Of course, the BREE notes that 11 percent of that figure is due to cost increases. Even so, the agency projects that committed investment will fall by just AUD8 billion next year, a number that supports the Reserve Bank of Australia’s forecast that resource investment would peak this year, but that the peak would be sustained over a number of months.

Most of the 73 projects that are under construction are valued at over AUD5 billion each, with 40 minerals projects, 18 gas and petroleum projects, and 15 infrastructure projects.

Meanwhile, fourth-quarter spending on greenfield exploration projects fell 16 percent sequentially, to AUD264 million.

The mining services industry has been especially hard hit. Unlike miners, these companies don’t own resources to backstop their valuations during periods when revenue is scarce. Over the past three months, stocks in this sector have fallen by 35 percent, erasing AUD17 billion in value. Over that same period, by contrast, the S&P/ASX 200 is off just 1.9 percent on a price basis.

One columnist with The Australian memorably described the selloff in this space as “arguably the biggest single sectoral destruction of value since the dotcom crash early last decade.”

Australia’s coal sector has also been suffering. Falling commodity prices coupled with rising labor costs, along with the government’s exquisite timing of enacting the Minerals Resource Rent Tax (MRRT) and carbon tax last July, have all taken their toll.

Thermal coal, which is primarily used to generate electricity, trades for less than half its 2008 high, near USD87 per metric ton. With thermal coal mines facing dangerously thin margins of USD7 per metric ton, that’s forced many less efficient mines to sell their coal at a loss. And the Australian Coal Association estimates that 9,000 jobs have disappeared from the industry over the past 15 months.

But amid all this gloom, there is at least one glimmer of hope: Australia’s coal industry could get a boost from a possible change in China’s import standards. The energy news service Platts reports that China’s National Energy Administration is considering banning poor-quality thermal coal imports. That could also help Australia supplant Indonesia as China’s preferred coal supplier. The policy change could take effect as early as next week.

Though the proposed rules were likely designed to support China’s own ailing domestic coal industry, they could also favor Australia’s higher-quality coal, unless the Middle Kingdom’s entire demand can be met internally.

The latter scenario, however, is unlikely. Last year, China imported 65 million tons of thermal coal that fell below the new standard, with Indonesia sourcing a majority of it.

The new standard bans coal with an energy value lower than 4,540 kilocalories per kilogram (kcal/kg) on a net-as-received basis. Australia’s thermal coal typically has an energy value of 5,500 kcal/kg, which is comfortably above the new threshold.

As analysts at Macquarie Bank put it, “If executed, this legislation could be the market-changing catalyst thermal coal has been desperately seeking.”

On the other hand, Platts notes that there are ways for Indonesia to boost the energy value of its coal exports via blending. Indonesia’s coal has an energy value that ranges between 4,200 kcal/kg and 5,200 kcal/kg. In a similar manner, Chinese producers could blend higher-quality Australian coal with poorer quality domestic coal to meet the new standard.