ChiefPlanner
Established Member
As I understand it, both anthracite and smokeless fuel burn too fiercely for the majority of British locos - maybe with the exception of GWR designs. You'd run the risk of burning out the firebox and grate - and with reduced ash you may have problems controlling the fire anyway as there would be no inert "bed" for the hot coals to rest on. That's why "steam coal" is high grade bituminous coal and not anthracite.
As for smokeless fuel.........that will only be available as long as someone mines the coal its made from, and is prepared to run a coking plant, with all the environmental hassles that brings. Of course you can make smokeless fuel by carbonizing heavy oil, but that is just totally wasteful.
But the reality is if the import demand for coal disappears, so will that for processed coals.
A very good point about the very hot capability of anthracite coal.
Sorry to be boring about this - my (Cockney) grandfather was a fireman in South Wales for a local colliery company which had a steam raising plant , burning the local product , - anthracite - for power generation. They used "Lancashire Boilers" - which I think had low PSI capabilty , and relied on a very thin bed , frequently fired on sparingly. The job must have been a nightmare as he spend the entire shift working his way down the stokehold , no doubt firing little and often - so despite my "good idea" - probably a non starter for main line operation.
I only know what my father told me , and he was a very young man when he observed his Dad as fireman - there is , no doubt good evidence on why anthracite (best used for slow burning) is a non starter.
Wonder if the "new" planned coking coal from Cumbria if that mine comes off , (it has planning permission) , might be an option.