Federal Coal Commission's Report on Anthracite

EDITORIAL comments on the anthracite report of the Federal Fact-finding Coal Commission, which became public on July 5, together with an analysis of its more important conclusions, will be found on another page of this issue. In this place, only a few extracts from the report, bearing more directly on technical matters, can be quoted, for lack of space. COST OF MINING Mining cost, as it stands on the books of each mining company, represents the average cost of the total output, all sizes, of anthracite. Egg coal has at least five times the market value of barley, but these' sizes are mined together and their costs can not be separated. Mine costs directly reflect the conditions under which these deposits of coal are recovered. Even within the few counties in which anthracite is found there is a conspicuous range of natural conditions. The distinc-tion between the Northern, Middle, and Southern field, or, as they are also termed, the Wyoming, Lehigh, and Schuykill regions, is primarily geologic and topo-graphic, but the effects of the natural conditions largely control costs. The contrast is great between Some of the level-lying beds of moderate but fairly constant thickness under the broad Wyoming Valley, where mining and underground haulage present relatively simple problems to the engineer, and the steeply pitching or overturned and faulted beds of variable thickness in the Schuykill field, where crushed coal' and treacherous roof multiply the difficulties of mining; and increase the unavoidable waste. Even more direct is the connection between geologic processes and the, differences in the character of the coal as mined, the varying proportions of large and small sizes demanding differences in preparation and resulting in different average prices realized for the product of the mines.