If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Where does the best (and worst) coal come from?

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by R.W. Grant, Dec 26, 2016.

  1. Forest Rail

    Forest Rail New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2012
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Hammer wielder!
    Location:
    Forest of Dean
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Bit of a bugger to get out in large lump too in some of the seams, though some of the deeper ones had steamable coal, sadly a wee bit flooded now. Nice to see at least 4 or so working regularly and another one being reopened up Ruardean way!
     
  2. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes Received:
    3,596
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Do any of the overseas sources provide what we might describe as "good" coal? - good burning characteristics, low smoke? I've yet to come across one that doesn't produce vast quantities of smoke.
     
  3. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    10,088
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I think that there is a general misconception that the coal we have today is smokier than that of yesterday. Blidworth colliery was a preferred source of good coal and if you look at the Blidworth coal used for the Rugby tests of 7916 (see below), it had an as received proximate analysis of:
    fixed carbon - 55.1%
    volatile - 32.5%.
    moisture - 9.7%
    ash - 3.7%
    sulphur - 0.5%
    chlorine - 0%

    and the typical proximate analysis of coal from Killoch in Scotland is:
    fixed carbon - 56%
    volatile matter - 34%
    moisture - 5%
    ash - 4%
    sulphur - 1%
    chlorine - 0%

    The Russian coal recently imported by Hargreaves had a stated proximate analysis of:
    fixed carbon - 61%
    volatile matter - 27%
    moisture - 8%
    ash - 4%
    sulphur - 0%
    chlorine - 0%

    On that basis, the Killoch coal is pretty comparable with the Blidworth as a smoke producer and the Russian should be less smokey. I would seriously suggest that the problem lies more with the heritage railway fireman than with the coal. I know from my own experience on the NYMR that most firemen like to have a show at the chimney as it means they have the grate covered and the loco will make steam. Getting them to run with a clear exhaust is a continual challenge.

    upload_2017-1-2_16-15-18.png
     
    Black Jim, michaelh and paulhitch like this.
  4. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Some Kent coal was used for locomotives, though it seems that even at peak production, there was only enough to supply the "country" sheds in east Kent (Dover, Faversham, Ramsgate, Ashford etc.) - the rest of the Eastern section, and the all the rest of the SR needed other supplies. In pre-grouping days and the early years of the SR, the LSWR generally used Welsh coal, but to avoid paying the GWR for haulage, much of it came by boat from South Wales to Fremington Quay in Devon, from where the LSWR could distribute it by their own trains. The LBSCR originally used coals from the north of England bought by ship to Kingston Wharf, Shoreham (Sussex) (*). After the GWR lines in south Wales converted to standard gauge in the 1870s, the LBSCR started to also use Welsh coal - previously, they had not been able to because the GWR wagons could not reach the LBSCR sheds. The SECR appears to have mainly used coals from northern coalfields bought to London originally by ship and latterly by train, in addition to the Kent coal. In SR days, Kentish coals continued to be used for the sheds nearby, and Welsh coal was also widely used, generally bought either via Fremington by boat, or via train to Salisbury as the easiest and shortest interchange off the GWR.

    Whichever source was used, transport costs were always a significant concern - more so, probably, than for the other three companies. Interestingly, some prices I have seen for the cost of a ton of coal, delivered to London in 1914, indicate that Kent coal was scarcely cheaper than from elsewhere - presumably the high cost of extraction wiped out some of the transport advantage. (Prices include 14/- for Snowdown and 15/- for Tilmanstone in Kent, and range up to a maximum of 20/1 for Blaenavon. Some of the prices for Warwickshire coal were even slightly less than the Kent coal despite the need for haulage; Derby coals just a fraction more and Yorkshire coals typically 3 - 4/- per ton more, delivered).

    (*) Which I suspect explains why in the very early days of the London and Brighton, the branch line from Brighton to Shoreham was opened even before completion of the London - Brighton mainline).

    Tom
     
    Black Jim and Wenlock like this.
  5. Johnb

    Johnb Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2014
    Messages:
    14,318
    Likes Received:
    16,396
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired, best job I've ever had
    Location:
    Buckinghamshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Kent coal was always expensive for two reasons. It was difficult to extract due to water incursion, particularly at Snowdown and as a relatively new coalfield established in the early 20th Century experienced miners could only be enticed away from their native area by paying higher wages. They mainly came from Durham and South Wales (I don't know if it still exists but the pit village of Aylesham had a male voice choir). Some blacklisted men came down after the 1926 strike.
    As a coalfield it never lived up to the initial expectations that predicted around 20 pits and there were many failures. The surface building from some of these survive today in other use. One of the first operational pits was on the coast at Shakespeare Cliff but was only in production for a few years. The coal burnt very hot making it ideal for steel making which is where most of the production went. Most railway use coal seems to have come from Chislet and being a soft coal was it only supplied to sheds without overhead coalers? I mention this as the reason given for the GWR not building such plants was said to be their use of soft Welsh coal.
     
    Wenlock likes this.
  6. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Interesting point about the GWR (non) use of overhead coalers. The Southern had such a plant at Nine Elms: Holcroft quotes some testing that was carried out that indicated that, after passing through the mechanical coaler there, 19% of the coal ended up crushed to dust (i.e. weighing samples of coal before loading into the hopper, and then taking samples periodically through the day, in each case weighing what proportion of the sample would pass through a fine screen). The daily tonnage through the Nine Elms plant was 160 tons, of which 31 tons was ending up as dust. That was also using Welsh coal - so one can understand the reluctance of the GWR on that point!

    It would be interesting to know with Welsh coal how much is lost as fine dust blown off the tender by the speed of the loco. Holcroft explicitly mentions the problem, but I am not aware of any attempt to quantify it. The difficulty of wetting Welsh coal exacerbates the problem.

    Tom
     
    Steve and Johnb like this.
  7. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    10,088
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    In my time on the Talyllyn, they were using Bargoed and Oakdale coal and its friability was a real problem. It was treated with kid gloves when unloaded from a 16 tonner by hand onto a conveyor belt, the angle of which was constantly adjusted to eliminate all but the shortest drop onto the coal pile. It was still necessary to use forks to coal up the locos, though, leaving the dust on the floor. The dust did get used, as it could be burned on the workshops stove, which was always glowing over the winter months. If you used it on the locos, though, you just ended up with a box full of clinker and no steam.
     

Share This Page