A few times the question has been posed if there is a difference in the quality of anthracite found in the various fields ? I came across this info from a book I found on google books.

Analysis of Pennsylvania anthracite, run of mine coal by field (in percent)

Northern field:
Moisture = 2.00
Vol. matter = 6.00
Fixed carbon = 84.40
Ash = 7.00
Sulphur = 0.60

Eastern middle field:
Moisture = 3.90
Vol. matter = 3.10
Fixed carbon = 86.40
Ash = 6.00
Sulphur = 0.60

Western middle field;
Moisture = 3.30
Vol. matter = 3.80
Fixed carbon = 81.50
Ash = 10.65
Sulphur = 0.75

Southern field: ( Panther creek )
Moisture = 3.00
Vol. matter = 4.00
Fixed carbon = 88.00
Ash = 5.00
Sulphur = 0.60

Southern field : (West Schuylkill)
Moisture = 3.00
Vol. matter = 2.00
Fixed carbon = 85.00
Ash = 10.00
Sulphur = 0.80

*** Source Saward’s annual 1922

OK, so how about explaining the differences.

The only big difference I see is the Ash content.

What determins good product compared to poor quality product.

With bituminus coal, the companies would blend good and bad to get the level required by the customer. Do they do this with anthracite?

Ash content = Impurities consisting of silica,alumina, iron, and other incombustable matter contained within coal. This is the material that forms " klinkers" when soft coal is burned. This is one figure that determines the ease to which anthracite will start to burn, and how steadily.
Sulphur = self explanatory. Again a low number would be most desireable.
Volatile matter = gasses givin off when anthracite is heated to 950 degrees centrigrade.

To sum it up- you would want antharcite with lower numbers, except carbon content it is most desireable. As it burns cleaner, easier, slower, and contains more BTU's. The less moisture ( turns to steam when heated, not flame) and other impurities is desireable.

Almost forgot. Most deep mined anthracite is pretty consistant as far as the fields are concerned. But deep mined anthracite is always superior to strip mined anthracite as less rock is mixed with it. So at the breaker deep mined anthracite would be mixed with strip mined anthracite. This was one reason why anthracite breakers were abandoned up in the northern field. so early compared to the other fields Yes lack of demand played a major part. But also the quality of coal mined in the last years was equally detrimental. As 97% of the anthracite used in the northern field after 1966 was strip mined, or taken from the culm banks in the area. Either anthracite was inferior to deep mined .The breakers were operational, but lacked a good product to process.

thanks for the reply

how about different veins?

i'm sure there is significant variation there.

_________________
-Thou shalt not little vein-

After the anthracite is processed at the breaker, and all raw impurities are removed ( rock, slate, etc) its all pretty much consistent. Although the yield from each vein if different. Generally in the Northern field the Big, Clark & New County veins had the least impurities ( sulpher, rock) and was also usually only one spilt. The Five foot , Four foot & Rock veins usually were spilt. ( seperated by a thin layer of rock a few feet thick).It was inevitable that some rock ( that seperated the spilt) would get mixed into the car coming out of the mine. Where as veins without a spilt wouldnt. Also the Dunmore veins were notarious for having impurities mixed in. And this made drilling in them extremely difficult A good example of this can be seen at the end of the Lackawanna coal mine tour. ( Dunmore No 2 vein ) .

Also one of those nasty little rumors or myths that spread thoroughout the anthracite fields over the years was the lower veins were superior ( older, and therefore had more preassure longer)That is a myth. Actually its quite the opposite. And there isnt much variations between the veins. By looking, or examining scientifically you could not figure out what anthracite came from which veins.