Coal burners

[NW Mailing List]

Ken writes:


> putting a massively wide or long (or both) firebox on a 

> boiler.  As I understand it, its not that anthracite is 

> better as locomotive fuel, but rather than it was cheaper 

> than bituminous for some railroads.


In general, the processing of anthracite resulted in lots of 
waste coal that was discarded in huge culm piles. Most of 
the anthracite burning locomotives burned the culm -- or 
waste anthracite.

The finished product -- domestic sizes popular consumers --  
was worth far too much to throw in a locomotive firebox.

It should be noted that within the domestic fuel industry 
"Virginia Anthracite" was a figment of the imagination. A 
trip through various coal publications through the years 
will find all manner of articles denouncing the very idea 
<g>. One sure sign was that sellers could never get 
anthracite prices for the Virginia stuff.

Cheers,
Jim Guthrie