Coal - Work of the U. S Geological Survey on Coal and Coal Reserves - Discussion

require both time and money. Any attempt to secure a quick answer will yield a figure that very likely cannot be substantiated, and certainly will not yield information in the detailed form now desired. It will be about 10 years before a completely new estimate can be prepared for the coal reserves of the United States at our present rate of progress, though of course, much information will be available in the interim. We would like to present such information as we obtain in the form most acceptable to the industry, and to that end we are working closely with coal resource committees of the AIME, the National Bituminous Coal Advisory Council, and the Bureau of Mines. DISCUSSION G. H. Cady*—Mr. Averitt's description of the nature of the coal resources investigations of the United States Geological Survey and the progress of this work is very timely in view of the general interest in the subject of coal resources. The Federal Survey is obviously taking the "long view" with respect to the appraisal of the coal resources as part of the preparation of the general geological map of the country and the attendant determination of the quantity of all mineral and fuel resources. It is apparently for regional surveys of the conventional type that the detailed procedures employed by the Federal Survey are applicable. Even if so it is somewhat unexpected to find the same criteria for evaluation will be applied to the country as a whole. The work on coal resources appraisal has been proceeding at various rates in a number of coal producing states for various periods. Undoubtedly since there has been no common practice in the method of appraisal the states each have worked independently and independently of the Federal Survey, and each has adopted certain practices to meet local conditions. I do not know how much consideration has been given by the U. S. Geological Survey to these practices. It seems probable that such consideration might result in important modifications of the standards which apparently have been set up by the Federal group in line with local requirements. It is the practice in some state surveys to present the facts in regard to the occurrence and distribution of coal beds and their variations in thickness down to thicknesses of 1 to 1 1/2 ft in relatively narrow stages up to maximum thickness. It is then possible for any one using such figures to compile quantitative estimates of workable coal at various minimum thickness limits. This is a desirable objective where surveys are detailed and information correspondingIy good. However, vast quantities of coal lie in beds that are relatively thin about which little information is available and the quantity of such coal might affect the final appraisal to the extent of several thousand million, depending upon the minimum limitation observed. Thus in the case of Illinois a difference of 1 ft in average thickness of coal in the coal field would make a difference of approximately 35 billion tons in the estimated quantity present. One is dealing with a very large area and small differences in thicknesses are very irnportant in the overall picture. The estimate of 10 years to accomplish the sort of detailed appraisal outlined by Mr. Averitt is viewed somewhat skeptically and certainly would require many more trained geologists than seem to be available. The requisite detailed mapping and study are very time consuming not only because of the geological field work required, which is difficult in certain seasons, but also in order to assemble data from company and personal files, and to study drill records and cores, and to sample and analyze the coal. Unless the staff of geologists could be increased in the order of several hundred per cent the prospects are that the appraisal of the type suggested will require many decades not just one. The permanent value of such appraisal, however, is not questioned and it should be expedited as rapidly as means allow. Satisfactory appraisal is not easily achieved and will vary from time to time. The main function of a geological survey is to collect and present the facts that will make possible appraisal in terms of existing conditions by individuals, particularly engineers, qualified by training and expcrience for making such estimates. Thickness and character of the coal bed, nature of the overlying and underlying strata, position, thickness, and character of "partings," relationship to other coal beds, and a variety of other factors must be assembled by the geologist in order to present a complete picture of the geological setting. The economic and engineering factors are in general outside the field of geological experience. The geologist should see to it that the pertinent geological facts are available; much more information than simply thickness and depth of the coal beds is essential to meet all the requirements of appraisal in the future as well as at present. With respect to the present demand by engineers and coal mine operators and others for a rapid re-appraisal of the available coal resources, in the light of existing practices and those in immediate prospect, the Federal procedure of systematic mapping and appraisal is scarcely in line. It will be necessary for those particularly interested in having such an estimate made to establish standards with respect to the various factors involved so that the scope of the geological work can be definitely restricted for the various coal fields. There is little use in setting up general standards since no such standards will be applicable to all fields. Thus it is folly to establish a standard minimum thickness to be generally applicable which is one-half to one-third the minimum minable thickness in some fields. The greatest difficulty in appraisal of the presently actually workable coal bed lies in the variation in the importance placed on roof, floor, structural conditions, bedded impurities. sulphur content and other factors that affect judgment relative to the value of a coal bed. It is doubtful whether any appraisal will have universal approval in view of the variable factors involved. For this reason if none other, the facts should be carefully and painstakingly assembled after the manner of a systematic geological survey such as that advocated by Mr. Averitt. Only upon the basis of sucb information can reliable estimates be made in line with selected conditions. Paul AveRitt (author's repty)— In this paper I discussed, but did not define as such, two major phases of our activities on coal, which are closely related, and which normally we in the U. S. Geological Survey see as an integrated whole. It is understandable, therefore, that Dr. Cady should assume that my remarks applied only to the current work on coal reserves with which I am directly concerned. In view of Dr. Cady's discussion, however, I think a brief summary of the two phases of U. S. Geological Survey activities on coal will be appropriate. The long-term function of the U. S. Geological Survey on coal investigations is to make detailed geologic studies, involving the preparation of detailed geologic maps showing the outcrops and correlations of coal beds, direction and dip of coal-bearing rocks, nature and thickness of overburden, location of faults and fold axes, and similar features. Such studies also yield many measured sections of coal and associated strata, which show variations in the thickness of the beds, and the intervals between coal beds. Taken as a whole, detailed geologic studies provide much useful information for mine operators and engineers. As Dr. Cady points out, this type of geologic work is arduous and time consuming, but it provides the basic data that are necessary both in the development of our coal fields, and also in the preparation of coal-reserve estimates, which are discussed in the next paragraph. The U. S.