The Economic Aspect of Geology Part 39

10. Centralization of power stations, rather than the use of many small units.

11. Elimination of the wasting of slack or fine coal, through more careful methods of mining, through limitations on the excessive use of powder and larger use of wedges, through the abolition of laws for the payment of miners on a run-of-mine basis, and in the case of anthracite through recovery of the "silt" or dust caused by mining and sorting. It has been argued that the excessive use of powder ("shooting from the solid") means loss of coal, owing to the fact that it shatters the coal and makes a relatively large amount of slack, besides being accompanied by increased danger from fire and explosion and from weakening of the roof. Although the excessive use of powder makes a large amount of slack, it does not necessarily result in waste, for this fine coal is carefully saved and for certain purposes is as valuable as the lump coal. So far as the procedure endangers life, it is of course objectionable.

12. Better use of fine coal. It has been recommended that infirm and finely broken coal be washed and compressed, thus avoiding the wasting of slack coal, which was formerly thrown away or burned. However, in recent years there has been comparatively little waste of this kind, for slack coal in general finds nearly as ready a market as lump coal and the use of slack is increasing. There has been much discussion also of the possibilities of using the coal waste on the ground to make power for electric transmission.

13. More careful attention to sorting and sizing of all grades of coal coming from the mine and to preparation of coals for special uses. On the other hand, some operators say that the ends of conservation will be best met by limiting the sorting and sizing now practiced. The large number of sizes now put on the market greatly increases the cost of production.

14. Wider use of the lower-grade fuels of the west, particularly with the aid of briquetting.

=Progress in above methods.= Methods of mining and preparation of coal have been improved. Campbell and Parker state:[50]

A much greater proportion of the product hoisted is now being sent to market in merchantable condition. Part of this is due to better and more systematic methods of handling, and part to the saving of small sizes which formerly went to the culm banks. The higher prices of coal and the development of methods for using these small sizes have also made it possible, through was.h.i.+ng processes, to rework the small coal formerly thrown on the culm banks, and these are now furnis.h.i.+ng several millions of tons of marketable coal annually.

In general there is increase in the percentage of recovery of coal.

Whereas in the past the loss in mining was said by Campbell and Parker[51] to average 50 per cent, now an extraction of 70 to 90 per cent may be looked for.

Quoting from Smith and Lesher:[52]

Observation of the advances made in mining methods in the last decade or two affords slight warrant for belief in any charge of wasteful operation. As consumers of coal we might do well to imitate the economy now enforced by the producers in their engineering practice. In the northern anthracite field machine mining in extracting coal from 22- and 24-inch beds, and throughout the anthracite region the average recovery of coal in mining is 65 per cent., as against 40 per cent. only twenty years ago. Nor are the bituminous operators any less progressive in their conservation of the coal they mine.

In anthracite mining, powdered coal or "silt" has acc.u.mulated in stockpiles and in stream channels to many tens of millions of tons. It is estimated that this const.i.tutes nearly 6 per cent of the coal mined.

Significant progress has been made recently in the recovery and use of this silt as powdered fuel for local power purposes.

However, physical and commercial conditions do not in all cases allow of the full application of these new methods. Once a mine has been opened up on a certain plan, it is difficult to change it. As a whole the longer and better organized companies are better able to change than the smaller companies.

Conservation measures of the above kinds, as so far applied, have come mainly from private initiative based on self-interest,--though the cooperation of the government has been effective, particularly along educational and publicity lines.

=(B) Improvement of labor and living conditions at the mines.= Under this heading should be mentioned the improvement of housing, sanitation, and living conditions; improvements in the efficiency of labor, through making living conditions such as to attract a higher-grade labor supply and through educational means; the introduction of safety methods; the introduction of workmen's compensation and insurance; and other measures of a similar nature. All these measures as a cla.s.s are sometimes grouped under the name of "welfare work."

Much thought and discussion have been devoted to the possibilities of improvement of labor and living conditions from the standpoint of conservation of human energy. In some quarters this subject has been treated as being independent of the physical conservation of mineral resources, and it has been the tendency to a.s.sume that conservation of human energy might be more or less inimical to conservation of mineral resources. Certain of the changes already introduced have undoubtedly increased the cost of mining; and, until there was a general increase in selling price, this increased cost may have had the effect of eliminating certain practices of mineral conservation which might otherwise have been possible. For instance, according to Smith and Lesher:[53]

The increased safety in the coal mines that has come through the combined efforts of the coal companies, the state inspectors, and the Federal Bureau of Mines necessarily involves some increase in cost of operation, but the few cents per ton thus added to the cost is a small price to pay for the satisfaction of having the stain of blood removed from the coal we buy. That form of social insurance which is now enforced through the workmen's compensation laws alone adds from 2 to 5 cents a ton to the cost of coal.

On the other hand, there can be no doubt that large advances have been made in welfare movements which were introduced for the purpose of insuring a steadier, better, and larger supply of labor, and that the general gain in efficiency of operation thereby obtained has absorbed a large part of the increased cost.

In general, conservation measures of this cla.s.s have been developed cooperatively by private and public efforts, without important sacrifice of private interest. There is obviously room for much wider application of such measures, especially in some of the bituminous fields where conditions are still far from satisfactory.

=(C) Introduction or modification of laws to regulate or to remove certain restrictions on the coal industry.= It has been proposed:

1. To modify the laws so as to take care of situations where vertically superposed beds are owned by different parties, preventing the proper mining of the coal by either party.

2. To modify the laws so as to eliminate conflict in mining practice in cases where the coal is a.s.sociated with oil and gas pools.

3. To allow larger owners.h.i.+p by companies utilizing the coal (now only 3 per cent owned by such companies).

4. To place restrictions on over-capitalization, which leads to wasteful mining in order to secure quick and large returns on large capital.

5. To remove restrictions on concentration of control. This means, as a corollary proposition, virtual restriction of compet.i.tion. Concentration of control into comparatively few hands has undoubtedly favored conservation. It is easy to see that the stronger financial condition of the large companies makes it possible for them to take fuller advantage of modern methods of extraction, distribution, and marketing.

This proposal was especially urged for the bituminous coal industry before the war in order to avoid over-production and over-development.

The very wide distribution of the bituminous coals, their enormous quant.i.ty, and their exceedingly diversified owners.h.i.+p had led to over-development of coal properties. Quoting from Smith and Lesher:[54]

In estimating the aggregate losses incurred by society by reason of the large number of mines not working at full capacity, the facts to be considered are that the capital invested in mine equipment asks a wage based on a year of 365 days of 24 hours, while labor's year averaged last year only 230 days in the anthracite mines and only 203 days in the bituminous mines, with only five to eight hours to the day.

These conditions prevented in some cases even the most modest introduction of better methods, or of changes that would enhance the average profits through a relatively short period of ten or fifteen years at the expense of the present year. It was necessary to get at the best of the coal available in the cheapest possible way, regardless of the losses of coal left in the ground.

To some extent the force of this argument was minimized by war and post-war conditions, but even yet development of coal mines is ahead of transportation and distribution.

6. To allow cooperation in the limitation of output, in the avoidance of cross freights, in gauging the market in advance, and in division of territory, all of which would allow cheaper mining and thus give larger leeway to conservational measures. This necessarily would be accompanied by government regulation. According to Van Hise,[55] who was active before the war in advocating this conservational measure, such a procedure

is neither regulated compet.i.tion, nor regulated monopoly; but the retention of compet.i.tion, the prohibition of monopoly, permission for cooperation and regulation of the latter. In Chicago there cannot be one selling agency for the different coal companies which operate in Illinois, but there must be many selling agencies, and the coal of Pittsburgh must come into Illinois and the Illinois coal go toward Pittsburgh; every one of which things makes unnecessary costs, but all of which are inevitable under the extreme compet.i.tive system.

Because of these facts it is necessary to waste the coal. If at the very same prices the different mines could cooperate in the limitation of the output, avoidance of cross freights, gauging the market in advance, and division of territory, they could mine their coal more cheaply, have a greater profit for themselves and conserve our resources.

To some extent the plan here advocated was put into effect during the war by the United States Coal Administration; but the conditions of this trial were so complicated by special war requirements, that the conservational advantages of unified control were not demonstrated.

7. To reduce the excessive royalties paid to fee owners. Smith and Lesher[56] have recently called attention to the relatively high resource cost in some of the coal fields, represented by the payment of royalties to fee owners. In the case of anthracite the payment averages 32 to 35 cents per ton, and exceptionally runs as high as a dollar per ton. For the bituminous coal the average resource cost is probably not much over five cents a ton. They suggest the possibility of lowering this cost by governmental regulation; and make an especially strong argument for not allowing the government-owned coal lands to go to private owners, who in the future, with the acc.u.mulation of interest on the investment, will feel justified in asking for a large "resource"

return in the way of royalty.

If the resource cost could be lowered, further introduction of conservational methods by the operators would be possible without greatly increasing the cost to the public.

8. To require or allow, by government regulation, a raising of the price of coal to the consumer, thereby allowing wider application of conservational practices. Some of the increased recoveries of coal above noted have been made possible only by increase in the market price. If cooperation were permitted in the manner described in paragraph 6, the same results might be accomplished without increasing the price. Recent high prices caused by the war situation are reflected in the introduction of many conservational changes which were not before possible. However, in some cases the demand for quick results under present conditions has an opposite effect, because of the desire to realize quick profits regardless of conservation.

9. The local conservation of coal at the expense of heavier drafts on coal of other parts of the world, by imposition of export taxes and preferential duties, has been discussed. While the effect of such a measure would doubtless be conservational from the standpoint of the United States, it is doubtful if it could be so regarded from the broader standpoint of world civilization. Under present world conditions such a step would be disastrous.

10. Government owners.h.i.+p has been proposed as a means of facilitating the introduction of conservation measures. In the United States there is yet no major movement in this direction. In England the question of nationalization of coal mines is an extremely live political problem (see pp. 343, 345-347).

Little progress has been made in conservation measures which involve legal enactments of the kinds above listed.

=(D) Distribution, and transportation of coal.= It has been argued that conservational results would ensue from:

1. Cheaper transportation.

2. Larger use of waterways.

3. Improvement in distribution of the product by part.i.tion of the market and by larger use of local coals. For effectiveness this proposition would have to include control of the agencies of distribution, in order to minimize excessive profits of middlemen.

4. Purchasing and storage of coal by consumers during the spring and summer months in antic.i.p.ation of the winter requirements, in order to equalize the present highly fluctuating seasonal demands on the mines and railroads, and to eliminate the recurring shortages of coal in the winter months. This was particularly recommended by the United States Bituminous Coal Commission in a recent report.[57]

5. Where conditions allow it, conversion of coal into power at the mine and delivery of power rather than coal to consuming centers. This type of conservation is being put into practice on a large scale above Wheeling, on the Ohio River, where there has recently been built a two hundred thousand kilowatt installation for steam-generated electric power. Some of the power will be delivered to Canton, Ohio, over fifty miles away. This plant uses local coal and the cost of coal is figured at two mills per kilowatt-hour.

Under this heading of distribution and transportation of coal, might be considered certain international relations. The international movements of coal are summarized in another place (pp. 115-117). Anything in the way of tariffs or trade agreements which would tend to interfere with or to limit the great natural international movements of coal--which in a free field are based on suitability of grade, cost, location, transportation, etc.--would be anti-conservational from the world's standpoint, although they might be of local and temporary advantage. For instance, the coal exported from England, which has heretofore dominated the international trade of the world, is of a high grade.

American coal available for export is on the whole of considerably lower grade, being higher in volatile matter. Unless this coal is beneficiated at home, it can replace the English coal in the export field only at increased cost of transportation and lower efficiency in use. The time may come when it will be desirable to s.h.i.+p lower-grade coals long distances; but when the two factors of conservation are considered--the intrinsic qualities of the coal, and the efforts necessary to utilize it--it would seem to be conservational at this stage to s.h.i.+p to long distances only the coal which nature seems specially to have prepared for this purpose.

=(E) Utilization of coal.= Conservational proposals of this kind are:

1. Subst.i.tution of retort c.o.ke-ovens for beehive ovens, to save not only a larger quant.i.ty of c.o.ke but also valuable by-products (see pp.

118-119). Additional improvements in c.o.king ovens may make possible the manufacture of some sort of c.o.ke from a much wider range of bituminous coals than can be used at present.