NORTHERN ADVOCATE DAILY Registered for transmission through the post as a newspaper. FRIDAY, AUGUST 14, 1925. COAL AND ITS BY-PRODUCTS

Northern Advocate, 14 July 1925, Page 4

NORTHERN ADVOCATE DAILY Registered for transmission through the post as a newspaper. FRIDAY, AUGUST 14, 1925. COAL AND ITS BY-PRODUCTS

, Investigations. into the situation of the British coal industry are to be made, at the instance of the Government. In these it is likely that a good deal, of attention will be given to the I idea of carbonising the raw product, ! and thereby extracting a much greater J proportion of its fuel value. As it is row used in Great Britain—and everywhere else, for that matter —a large proportion of the energy contained in coal goes away in ?moke. Some of the more thoughtful Labour leaders agree with many scientific men and publicists that in stopping that waste the main salvation of the industry must be sought, alike in the interests of em- J pjoyer, employed, and consumer. Manifestly, if a ton of coal when burned in the ordinary factory furnace yields only a small precentage of harnessed energy, the price which the factory owner can afford to pay for it must be ' much smaller than if the percentage j were largely increased by improved I methods. The return that the miner | can expect for working coal is conditioned by that which in practice the coal yields inl aid to the processes of trade and industry. If the yield in that respect is low/the wages of those ' engaged in the coal industry will be ; low—unless, of course, the Government continues to subsidise the industry—an unlikely contingency. Raise the yield, and there is not merely hope for a higher standard of remuneration, but the wherewithal to pay that standard permanently. In October last Mr Frank Hodges, M.P., a notable Labour leader, when he was Civil Lord of the Admiralty, specially directed attention to this question in an address which he delivered at Wigan. Britain was then raising coal ait the rate of 260,000,000 tons annually, and of that quantity 195,000,000 tons were consumed at home. Of this 40,000,000 . tons were carbonised in gas and coke works, and the balance of 155,000,0p0 tons consumed as raw coal. Mr, Hodges calculated that if the Quantity were properly treated, bfeing large-!, ly HbjerateQ into., the in the;' form of ' smoke, ,it '"would; produce 4^,(^0 j00"0. gallonso£lfat^|( (or twice, fja- xnufeh' as Britain' then imi porting at a cost} of afo&ut forty-ftve .millions/ sterling, a^nually) ?; ' 62,000,000 barrels of crude oil (half of ' which would <be Diesel oil, and |5,500, 000 gallons lubricating oil), 1,900,000 tons of sulphate of ammonia, and 101,500,000 tons of smokeless fuel. The prospect was a very pleasing one. Here was a raw product much enhanced in value, ■ and consequently capaible of returning: those who worked in it a great deal mora than at present. Also it was evidently a cheaper and more flexible power generally, with a consequent stimulation of enterprise; and an abatement of the smoke nuisance throughout industrial Britain.

| Mr Hodges was not able/ howeyer, [ to point to a commercial demonstration j of a method by means of which tfc.ese results could be achieved, although ho appeared to be satisfied that the consummation is not impracticable. With the coming of the recent crisis in the coal industry a new interest in his speech was created, liowever, and the | subject has recently been much can- | vassed in the British Press. With a<i optimism which we hope is well founded, the editor of tihe "Spectator," for example, has concentrated on the idea of treating coal in this wav, and an expert correspondent , in Mr David Brownlie, has asserted t'hait "we are i very near practical success with more than one method." Mr Brownlie enumerates a large number of method's that are being tried on large-scale p\-- ' perimental lines, and goes on to say: "The whole question of national fuel "economy in this country is really an appalling one, and although some of us have been shouting about it for years from the housetops, it is only just beginning to receive adequate attention. I will simply say that if Great Britain were to adopt scientific methods in the utilisation of raw eoal alone, evert | apart from low-itemperature carbonisation, we could save certainly over 40,000,000 tons of coai per annum." It is not, however, a reduction in the quantity of coal consumed that is now the desideratum but rather an increase of it so as to afford employment to the large .number of miners who have been displaced by the trade depression Notable contributions to the discussion have been made in the "Daily News," the Labour correspondent of which points out that the problem is the construction of efficient plants which would be remunerative after meeting operating costs and capital charges. He admits that if the outstanding scientific and technical difficulties in the way of low-temperature carbonisation could be overcome, the way would be opened to n new era in the coalfields, but then goes on to observe: "The testimony of the experts, including those in the service of the Fuel Research Board, is to the effect that, while great and encouraging progress has been made in scien-

tific and technical research, the main economic problem of carbonisation on a national scale has not yet been solved." The developments in England will be watched in New Zealand with an interest not altogether unselfish, for this country, too, wastes most of the fuel energy of the coal consumed.