September 6, 1918.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

497

COAL CONSERVATION COMMITTEE.

FINAL REPORT.*

(Continued from page 443.)

APPENDIX V.
REPORT OF THE CARBONISATION
SUB-COMMITTEE.

At a meeting of the Main Committee held on
January 31, 1917, the Carbonisation and Metallurgical
Sub-Committees asked permission to amalgamate into
one Sub-Committee which should be called “ The
Carbonisation Sub-Committee.” This amalgamation
was authorised, and the reference to the new Sub-
Committee was defined as “ The question of the appli-
cation of carbonisation to the preparation of fuel for
domestic and industrial purposes.”

As a result of a letter addressed to the Advisory
Council for Scientific and Indk Trial Research on
August 11th, 1916, by the Chairman of the Coal Con-
servation Sub-Committee with reference to a survey
of the coal seams of Great Britain, the Committee
of Council established on February 6th, 1917, a Fuel
Research Board, with Sir George Beilby as Director
of Fuel Research.

At a meeting of this Sub-Committee held on March
27th, 1917, the Vice-Chairman made a statement as
to the proposed action of the Fuel Research Board
with respect to—(i) The suggested chemical and
physical survey of the coal seams of Great Britain;
(ii) the testing and development of methods of low
temperature carbonisation.

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the Fuel
Research Board as set up by the Committee of Coun-
cil was the proper body to carry out surveys and
researches in connection with fuel, as they realised that
work of this nature would require for its execution
a properly qualified, whole-time staff, as well as finan-
cial and other resources which no unofficial body could
hope to provide.

In view of the taking over of this important work
by the Fuel Research Board, the Sub-Committee re-
considered their original programme and decided on
new lines of enquiry.

They have given much attention to the part which
the carbonisation of coal is calculated to play in
Reconstruction after the war, and in so doing they
have endeavoured to keep before them mainly the
larger issues which are involved. From this stand-
point they consider that the problems ought to be
stated in terms first of existing conditions and prac-
tice ; second, of the extension and development of
the best existing practice on lines which have already
been proved technically and economically; and third,
development oh lines which have been suggested but
have not yet been proved.

Under the term “Carbonisation” they have con-
sidered that all methods for the preparation or treat-
ment of coal in its natural state as it is brought to
the surface might have to be dealt with in any com-
prehensive schemes. The purpose of these methods
of preparation may be regarded as threefold, namely—
(a) To utilise more effectively coals which are at
present marketed and consumed in the raw state;
(5) to make available for use products of the coal mine
which are at present regarded as waste, e.g., inferior
coals, shales, small coal and duff; (c) by either (a)
or (b) to add to the home supplies of the products of
carbonisation which at present need to be imported,
e.g., fuel oil for the Navy, motor spirit for use in
transport by air, land and sea,- and the raw materials
for the preparation of explosives, dyes and drugs.

While the issues covered by (b) are of first-class im-
portance from the national point of view, the Sub-
Committee believe that the answers to the more funda-
mental problems will in the first instance be more
easily and satisfactorily obtained in connection with
the experimental enquiries which will be involved in
the settlement of (a) and (c). If the technical and
economic possibilities of artificial methods of prepara-
tion can be worked out and proved for the various
types of coal as these are at present produced and
marketed, the possibility of extending these methods
to those products of the mine which are at present
regarded as unsaleable will become a comparatively
simple and straightforward problem. It is not con-
tended that there should be no action in anticipation
of the completed conclusion under (a) and (c) in the
application of these to (b), but merely that the general
procedure should follow the lines of an orderly de-
velopment from the well known to the less known.

Combining the classification of the above paragraphs
we have in order of practicability, first, the applica-
tion of the best existing practice to as large a pro-
portion as possible of the present output of marketable
coals; second, the proving of new methods and their
application as in the first case; and third, the appli-
cation of the best methods, old and new, of dealing
with these possible products of the coal mine which
at present are either neglected or wasted.

The preparation of raw coal by carbonisation pro-
cesses for use in domestic and industrial lighting and
heating is almost entirely in the hands of two great
branches of industry, gas making and coke making.
In round figures the amounts of coal carbonised
annually in these industries are: In gas works—
about 18 million tons; in coke works—over 20 million
tons.

In gas works the primary object is to obtain from
the coal carbonised the maximum yield of gas of
standard quality, the coke, tar and ammonia which are
obtained being regarded as by-products. In coke
works hard metallurgical coke is the primary product,
and the hydrocarbon gas, tar and ammonia are the
by-products.

The Gas Industry.

The gas industry has obtained the position it at
present holds through a long course of evolution, and
the methods and apparatus in use to-day mark a great
advance on those in use even in the later decades

* Published by H.M. Stationery Office, London, [Cd.
9084], price Is. net.

of the last century. As with many other industries,
the conditions brought about by the war have checked
the natural flow of development. The resources of
even the largest and best equipped gas works are being
strained to the utmost to meet the heavy demands
not only for an increased output of gas, but also for
benzene, toluene, naphtha, creosote and fuel oil. These
extra demands have to be met in spite of increasing
difficulty in obtaining supplies of coal of pre-war
quality. The energy and forethought of the adminis-
trative and technical staffs of these concerns have
necessarily to be concentrated on the immediate
problem involved in the maintenance of output, and
the natural course of improvement and development
has in consequence been seriously checked if not
entirely suspended.

Under these circumstances the Sub-Committee do
not think that any useful purpose would be served
by discussing here any suggested reforms and exten-
sions of the gas industry. In the recently published
report of the Fuel Research Board it is pointed out
that the scheme of research which it is proposed to
carry out at the Central Fuel Research Station may
have an important bearing on future developments in
the gas industry, and the Sub-Committee concur in
this view. By this work it is hoped that the way
may be prepared for the consideration of reconstruc-
tion schemes after the war.

Developments in this industry are also conditioned
to a great extent by the fact that the right to dis-
tribute “ town gas ” is a monopoly secured by Acts of
Parliament and hedged round by the imposition of
certain fixed standards of quality and price. “ Town
gas ” is therefore legally, as well as technically, the
principal product of the industry, and any proposed
improvement in the processes or apparatus employed
in its manufacture has to be scrutinised very closely
from the point of view of the Acts of Parliament and
the standards and responsibilities involved in the
supply of this particular product.

Important changes in these standards were made
prior to and early in the war, notably in the relaxa-
tion of the older “ Sulphur clauses,” in the substi-
tution of a calorific for a photometic standard, and
by the introduction of a stripping process for the
recovery of benzene and toluene for war purposes.

Soon after its establishment, the Fuel Research
Board was asked by the Board of Trade “ to advise
as to what is the most suitable composition and quality
of gas and the minimum pressure at which it should
generally be supplied having regard to the desirability
of economy in the use of coal, the adequate recovery
of by-products, and the ^purposes for which the gas is
now used.” The Fuel Research Board agreed to insti-
tute the necessary enquiries, experimental and other-
wise, and thereafter to advise the Board of Trade on
the whole question as set forth in the reference.

As the Vice-Chairman and other members of the
Sub-Committee are officially concerned in this enquiry,
the full discussion of gas manufacture and policy in
this report is obviously inadvisable.

The Coke Industry.

The principal product of this industry is metal-
lurgical coke, the greater part of which is used in
blast furnaces for the smelting and reduction of iron
ore. The development of the coke industry is there-
fore closely knit up. with that of the iron and steel
industries.

It is a matter of common knowledge that every
effort is being made to increase the output of iron
and steel in Great Britain. While the immediate cause
of this effort is the present shortage caused by war
demands for ships, munitions, transport and building
construction, there can be no doubt that Reconstruc-
tion after the war will make almost equally heavy
demands on the production of iron and steel, and
therefore on the production of coke.

The Sub-Committee realise that .not merely the
economical production of metallurgical coke, but also
the more economical use of the other forms of fuel
which result from carbonisation in coke ovens in the
iron and steel industry call for serious consideration
at this time.

They therefore asked two of their colleagues, Mr.
Benjamin Talbot and Professor W. A. Bone, to pre-
pare special reports on these subjects. Mr. Talbot
prepared and sent in a report on “ Fuel Economy in
a Modern Steel Works Unit,”* which was circulated
among the members of the Sub-Committee for their
criticism and remarks. More recently Professor Bone
sent in a report on “The Manufacture of Metallur-
gical Coke in Great Britain.”f

The Sub-Committee consider that these reports give
an admirably clear presentation of the subjects with
which they deal, and that they ought to be reproduced
in extenso as appendices to this report. They will
therefore be referred to here mainly in respect to their
bearing on the larger aspects of the reconstruction
problems with which the Sub-Committee are dealing.

From these reports it will be seen that the future
as well as the present needs of the nation for iron
and steel are evidently reacting very powerfully on
the output of metallurgical coke, and the figures
quoted show that development is proceeding rapidly
and on the right lines.

It has emerged during the discussion of the Sub-
Committee that in the past large quantities of first-
class coking coal have been shipped for bunker and
other purposes. As the available resources in this
class of coal are believed to be limited, it has been
represented that this export involves a serious waste
of the national resources. It has also been stated
on behalf of the gas industry that this practice
seriously affects the supplies of coal suitable for
carbonisation in that industry.

Fuel Economy in Iron and Steel Manufacture.

The economy of fuel which would result from the
combination in single units of coke ovens, blast
furnaces, steel furnaces and rolling mills had been

* See p. 493 of this issue, f See p. 498 of this issue.

foreshadowed in Belgium and Germany in the early
years of the present century, and in 1910 by Mr.
T. C. Hutchinson, in his presidential address to the
Cleveland Institution of Engineers, when he suggested
“ that the time would shortly come when ironstone
would be brought in at one end of the works and
finished steel would be turned out at the other, only
such coal being used as was required for the coke ovens
to make sufficient coke to smelt the ironstone.” In
September, 1913, he repeated this suggestion in the
course of a discussion at the Brussels Meeting of the
Iron and Steel Institute. In his presidential address
to the Iron and Steel Institute in 1912, Mr. Arthur
Cooper expressed his confident belief that the time was
close at hand when the iron and steel industries would
be forced by the stress of competition to adopt this
reform.

At the Birmingham Meeting of the British Asso-
ciation in the same year, and again at the Manchester
Meeting in September, 1915, Professor Bone traced the
development of this idea and gave calculations and
statistics on the subject. Subsequently, in his lectures
on Fuel Economy at the Royal Institution in 1916,
he produced diagrams showing, for the purposes of
comparison, the production of iron and steel on the
old and new plans. Professor Bone’s calculations
showed that it should be possible under the new plan
to produce 1 ton of finished steel sections by the
consumption of no more than 1-6 tons of coal.

In his Report, Mr. Talbot has taken a more con-
servative view of the probable saving in fuel by the
adoption of combined units, and he is able even then
to present a very strong case for the adoption of this
scheme. While it is most satisfactory to know that
the most competent metallurgical experts believe that
there are further substantial margins of economy to
be drawn upon .in the practical development of the
scheme, the Sub-Committee consider that the simple
statement that these margins exist will tell most
effectively as an additional argument in favour of the
scheme.

The Sub-Committee do not consider that justice
could be done to Mr. Talbot’s concrete proposals by
any reasonably concise abstract in the body of this
report.

They are satisfied that a strong case has been made
out on practical as well as theoretical grounds for
the erection of combined units of a capacity of not
less than 300,000 tons of finished steel per annum,
and preferably of 500,000 tons. They further desire
to .record their approval of the suggestion that the
grouping of these units in conveniently situated
districts will be one of the most fundamental conditions
of success. They have no doubt that the larger con-
siderations of this kind are already fully in the minds
of the able leaders of the iron and steel industries.

Power Production and Fuel Economy.

In the Report of the Sub-Committee on Power
Generation and Transmission, the question of fuel
economy is dealt with mainly from the point of view
of the generation of steam in large modern power house
units in which coal is burned directly under the
boilers.

In conferences between the Vice-Chairman of the
Power Sub-Committee and the Vice-Chairman of this
Committee it was agreed that the introduction of
carbonisation and gasification processes for the
preparation of the raw coal as a preliminary to its
use for steam raising was still an open question, and
that pending fuller research on all the issues involved
the only practical course to follow in the planning
of “ Super-power Stations ” was to leave room in the
original lay-out for the introduction of carbonisation
or gasification plant should it be subsequently proved
that it would be feasible technically and economically
to do so.

In the Report of the Fuel Research Board on their
scheme of research and the establishment of a Fuel
Research Station, considerable prominence was given
to this subject, and the steps which it is proposed to
take are clearly outlined.

While electric power engineers are practically agreed
that the only feasible method of power production in
large central stations is by the use of large turbo-
generator units, the Sub-Committee consider that
there is a definite field for the use of gas engines
in special circumstances and in cases where the most
suitable units are of relatively small size, say under
3,000 to 4,000 K.W. They hope and believe that the
design and production of internal combustion engines
will be greatly forwarded by researches which are
already in progress, and that later, under the stimulus
of Reconstruction demands, important developments
will take place both in the design and use of these
engines.

The Need for Properly Trained Fuel Experts.

In conclusion, the Sub-Committee desire to express
their strong conviction that the practical realisation
of more scientific methods for the preparation and
use of fuel will to a great extent depend on the crea-
tion of a body of scientifically and practically trained
experts.

Even in the large industrial concerns in which the
annual fuel bill is an important item in the total
expenditure, it is the exception to find an organised
staff devoting their whole time to the control of the
fuel consumption. Too often systematic control is
altogether absent or is relegated to the members of
the engineering and process staff whose best energies
and attention are necessarily devoted to to the running
of machines and processes’to which the supplies of fuel
and power are regarded as merely incidental.

The evolution of new processes and apparatus is only
a first step. The pressing forward of the practical
adoption of these improvements in the industries con-
cerned is of equal importance, and this can only be
done by the personal effort of those who have been
thoroughly imbued with their significance. The main
point is that there must be a supply of trained experts.
Whether these are to be employed as agents of a
Government Department, as agents for the manufac-
turers of plant, or as members of the staff in indus-