650

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN

April 7, 1916.

The retort house portion of the plant is arranged as
usual, with an inclined portion outside the house,
delivering on to a long yard conveyor.. On one or both
sides of this yard conveyor a track is arranged, on which
runs a travelling cross conveyor. These cross con-
veyors take their supply of coke from doors and shoots
in the yard conveyor trough, and are hinged at the
inner ends, the outer ends being slung on chains by
which they can be raised or lowered. The lowering con-
veyors enable the coke to be placed gently on the ground
instead of dropping it from a considerable height, and,
as the heap increases, the conveyors are raised,’thus
greatly increasing the storage capacity of the ground.
Instead of depositing the coke on the heap, the doors
may be closed, the two shoots at the lower end opened,
and railway wagons filled at any point along the sidings.

In a large telpher plant for handling coal and ashes,
recently erected in London, the bunkers hold 1,300 tons
of coal', and the plant can unload barges at the rate of
40 tons per hour. There is a double track, on which
two machines can work simultaneously, and weighing
machines are embodied in the track girders, so that the
actual weight of coal delivered by the barges is checked
as it enters the works. In this case, as the telpher has
to deal with a total load, including the grab, of nearly
three tons, the hoisting motor is of 25b.h.p., and the
travelling motor of 12 horse-power. The hoisting speed
is 80 ft. per minute, and travelling 450 ft.

Coke Oven Machinery.

Until recently the manufacture of gas and the manu-
facture of furnace coke have been two entirely different
businesses, and it is only in the last year or two that the
two processes have been. combined on a gas works in
this country in the large plant installed at the Saltley
Works of the Birmingham Gas Department. In
Middlesbrough, also, arrangements have been made to
utilise some of the gas produced at the local coke ovens
of Sir Bernhard Samuelson and Company, by mixing it
with the gas produced at the gas works, and delivering
it through the town mains in the usual way.

It is sometimes advisable to compress the crushed coal
into a solid mass before placing it in the oven, in order
to make a dense homogeneous coke, the wet crushed
coal being fed into a box, of approximately the same
section as the oven, over which is fixed a travelling
carriage carrying a pair of stamps, which are alternately
lifted and allowed to fall as the carriage travels to and
fro over the top of the box. The bottom of the box
consists of a movable peel, which is driven forward into
the oven-, carrying with it the cake of ccal. ■ The charge,
after coking, is pushed out by means of a ram, frequently
carried on the same framework as the charger.

Coal which does not require stamping is introduced
into the ovens through openings in the top or crown, and
the charge is levelled/off and slightly compressed. by
means of a reciprocating bar -introduced through a small
opening left in one of the doors. . The coke pushed out
by the ram usually falls on to a sloping table or bench
lined with cast iron plates, on which it is quenched. In
many cases this work and the loading of the coke into
wagons ‘is still done by hand, but recently mechanical
arrangements have, been adopted, and are becoming
more general.	‘

Where the coke has to be loaded at a fixed point near
the end of the bench, a conveyor may be used. The
bench is constructed-with a steep slope (say, 30 degs.)
down from the ovens, and a conveyor. arranged along
the lower edge, with gates to prevent the coke falling on
to the conveyor before it is properly quenched. These,
conveyors are usually of the tray type, and are expensive
in upkeep, while considerable shunting is required to
keep a supply of empty wagons at the loading point.
More recently machines have been brought out for
quenching the coke, screening it, and loading it into
the wagons mechanically at any point along the bench.

The Goodall machine, patented by Mr. A. Goodall,
for this purpose, consists of a large under frame sup-
ported on wheels, which run on rails placed along the
front of the ovens in the position usually occupied by
the coke bench. The under frame carries a motor and
gearing to propel the machine along the rails, to rotate a
table, and drive a shaking screen. The table revolves
inside a shell of steel plate and angles with cast iron
liners. A perforated hood is provided, and quenching
pipes are arranged round it to enable the cake of coke to
be quenched as it is pushed out of the oven. The coke
coming off the table falls on to the shaking screen, and
thence into the wagon. A small hopper under the
screen receives the breeze and small coke, and can be
emptied periodically. Above the revolving table is fixed
a radial quenching pipe, perforated to act as a spray,
and two single nozzles, one to play on to the middle,
and the other on to the side of the cake of coke as it
falls forward on to the revolving table.

Extinguishing Small Petroleum Spirit, etc., Fires.—The
British Fire Prevention Committee recommend sawdust inti-
mately mixed with bicarbonate of soda, and applied in bulk,
as an extinguishing medium for comparatively small fires
occasioned by the ignition of the vapour of up to 2 gals, of
petroleum spirit (petrol) and other inflammable liquids.
Ordinary sawdust, as obtained from sawmills, is the most
suitable. It must be free from shavings and chips of wood,
but need not be specially dried or contain added moisture.
Under the action of the heat from the burning liquid, carbonic
acid gas is given off from the bicarbonate of soda, and assists
in extinguishing the fire. An effective proportion of bicar-
bonate of soda to sawdust is 10 lb. to 1 bushel (or, say, 12 lb.)
of sawdust. Any form of bin, such as a dust-bin or corn-bin,
can be used, and any form of shovel or scoop, preferably one
with a long handle and a large scoop. The mixture should
be applied not only in bulk, but rapidly and systematically,
the object being to produce a lateral “ curtain ” or scythe
effect.

THE COAL SITUATION IN CANADA.*

By W. J. Dick, Ottawa, Ont.

In a country of such -enormous proportions as the
Dominion of Canada, extending from the Atlantic to the
Pacific Ocean, and northward to the Arctic Ocean, with
its^ severe winters, the question of an adequate fuel
supply as a source of heat, light, power and for use in
the metallurgical industries must always be of para-
mount importance. Although hydro-electric energy
will, where available, to a great extent replace the use
of coal for light and power purposes and for certain
metallurgical work, the necessary uses of coal will con-
tinue on a large scale.

The coal deposits of Canada compare favourably with
those of the greatest coal mining countries of the world
in respect of quality, quantity and accessibility for
mining purposes. According to estimates prepared by
D. B. Dowling, of the Geological'Survey, the known area
in Canada underlain by workable coal beds is 111,168
sq. miles. About one-quarter of the coal resources
of the world is possessed by the British Empire, about
70 per cent, of which is credited to Canada. Although
the coal resources of Canada are so great, the production
in 1913 amounted to but little over 15,000,000 tons,
while, in the same year, the production of Great Britain
was over 292,000,000 tons.

The coal mining industry of Canada has developed at
a very rapid rate. In 1874, the earliest year for which
there is a reliable record, the production was 1,063,742
tons; 12. years later, in 1886, it had doubled; after
12 years (in 1898) the production had again doubled,
4,173,108 tons of coal having been produced. From
1898, the production rose more rapidly, and in six years
the production was again doubled, amounting to
8,254,595 tons in 1904. In 1913, the production was
15,012,178 tons, or an increase of nearly 85 per cent, in
nine years. This rate of increase is somewhat lower
-than for the previous few years on account of the effect
of labour troubles and the use of California fuel oil in
Western Canada.

TONS

30,000 b00

25 000000

CURVE SHOWING .

PRODUCTION IMPORTS ano EXPORTS
'OF	.	. ' ,

COAL in CANADA

frorr	th ' I9t_3 , '	'

Dotted hne* denotes exports

The imports of coal into Canada have increased faster
than the production. In 1886 the imports amounted to
1,962,604 tons; 12 years later, in 1898, they had
increased about 70 per cent., and amounted to
3,374,170 tons. From 1898 they increased very rapidly,
and, in six years, they were more than doubled, amount-
ing to 6,936,959 tons in 1904. In 1913 the imports
amounted to 18,201,953 tons, or an increase of over 2*6
times in nine years. The above diagram shows the
production, exports, imports and consumption of coal
in Canada from 1886 to 1913. Of the total consumption
during 1913, 42'6 per cent, was domestic coal, and 57’4
per cent, imported coal, or, in other words, Canada
imports more coal than she produces. The importance
of this fact may be more fully recognised when it is
realised that the value of the coal production greatly
exceeds that of any other mineral product, and amounted
to over 25 per cent, of the total mineral production of
Canada in 1913, being valued at about 37,335,000 dols.
The situation then is this : although Canada has over
17| per cent, of the world’s reserve of coal, our pro-
duction is small, and we import more than we produce.
The reason why this condition exists is because the
coal fields of Canada are situated in the eastern and
western portions of the Dominion; the distance
separating them being about 2,500 miles.

Eastern Canada possesses no deposits of anthracite
coal, and as this class of coal is admirably suitable for
domestic heating and cooking purposes, it is imported in
considerable quantity from the United States, and is
sold over an area extending from Nova Scotia in the
east, to Battleford, Saskatchewan, in the west. The
imports in 1913 amounted to over 4,640,000 tons, being
more than double the imports of 1906. From this it
can be seen that the demand for this class of coal’is
increasing, notwithstanding the increasing prices; again,
the supply of anthracite coal in the United States is
limited, and there is no assurance that its export to
Canada will be long continued. In 1913 it was

*From a paper read at the annual meeting of the Canadian
Mining Institute.

estimated that there were 16,153,000,000 tons of
anthracite coal in the United States. In 1913,
91,524,922 tons were mined, and, as it has been
estimated that for every ton of coal lost a ton and a-half
is sold or used, the exhaustion is proceeding at the rate
of 152,541,536 tons per annum. If the production con-
tinued at the same rate it would exhaust the anthracite
of the United States in little over 100 years. We must
therefore expect that the price will gradually increase
until only the wealthy few can afford it. Coincidently
with the rising price, production will decrease, thus
prolonging the life of the mines.

From the above it may be seen, that before many years
’Eastern Canada cannot be assured of getting supplies
of anthracite coal from the United States unless at a
greatly increased cost, which increase is already being
felt; also that, as there are no supplies of this class of
coal in the above mentioned area, we cannot expect to
supply the need from our own resources. Hence, we
arrive at the conclusion that some kind of substitute
must be developed to take its place. This may take the
form of peat, electric energy, coke or a combination of
all three.

In so far as peat is- concerned there are undoubtedly
areas where it may be used to a small extent for
domestic fuel, but its greatest use will, probably, be
in the generation at the bog of electric energy.

Over 175,000 horse-power of the hydro-electric,energy
generated in Canada is utilised in the electro-chemical
and metallurgical industries. In the field of domestic
cooking we may attribute the cause for’the substitution
first, to convenience, and, second to reasons of economy.
The rates considered some time ago to make electric
heating economically possible varied from J to | cent
per kw. It would be difficult to predict exactly: what
the future has in store in. connection- rwith^ the dotal
substitution of hydro-electric energy foi\ coal ’in the
different uses where heat only is required. That it is‘ a
practical possibility has' already ‘ been • demonstrated - in
almost every use one’ .can - think ' of, • So’ that’the', only
problem to be solvedis that .of cost. The .cheapest

development, under present conditions in Canada, can
supply hydro-electric energy at, we will say 10 dots, per
hoirse-power year, and this figure is not far from the
truth. If we compare the heat equivalent of coal with
the heat contained in this electrical energy, after allow-
ing a loss of 30 per cent, in the theoretical heat, of the
coal, we find the equivalent rate for electricity to be
11 dels, per horse-power year. This condition, however,
assumes that the heat will be used for 24 hours per day
during the whole year, a condition which does not exist
for ordinary industrial uses and domestic heating. If
we consider that the electricity or heat will only be
required for half the time during the period, then the
price to compete with coal would have to decline to half
the amount stated, or 5’50 dols. per horse-power year.
These figures refer to present conditions, and although
the margin seems wide between 10 dols. and 5-50 dols.
per horse-power, the increase in coal prices and progress
in hydro-electric development will both tend to bring
them closer together.

In Canada, gas coke (inferior to by-product coke) is
used to a considerable extent for domestic heating pur-
poses, and is sold at a price very little below that of
anthracite coal. On account of the high price of
anthracite coal in Canada, and the necessity for its
use as fuel for ordinary house heating boilers during
the winter, there seems to be a good opportunity for
the installation of small by-product coke ovens at well
chosen points. These localities should be on the St;
Lawrence or Great Lakes route. Where proper markets
exist, the profit would be that approximately represented
by the difference in the price of coal as compared with
the selling price of a ton of coke; in other words, the
returns from by-productis would cover all other charges.
Gas companies have not taken this matter up because
their main product is gas, while, in the suggestion out-
lined above, the main product is coke.

The distribution of coal sold in Canada is as follows :

(1)	Nova Scotia bituminous coal is used only as far
west as Cornwall, Ontario.

(2)	United States bituminous coal is used from