COAL IN ANTARCTIC

Southland Times, Issue 22485, 21 January 1935, Page 8

COAL IN ANTARCTIC

BYRD’S DISCOVERY NOT NEW.

COMMERCIAL VALUE NEGLIGIBLE. Reports from Little America that members of the Byrd expedition have discovered entensive deposits of coal and fossilized plants do not convey much to geologists beyond confirming what has already been known for more than 20 years. Professor R. Speight, curator of the Canterbury Museum, said on Tuesday that the presence of coal in carboniferous measures in the Antarctic wastes had been reported by the first and second Scott expeditions, but it had always been considered by explorers and geologists that these deposits of coal would have little, if any, commercial value, (states the Press). Dr. T. H. Ferrar, of the Scott expedition, had written of the discovery of coal and the presence of plant beds and fossil leaves. These were covered with a tremendous thickness of volcanic rock similar to formations in Tasmania and South Africa. The discoveries were subsequently confirmed and extended by the second expedition, which recorded the presence of thick tree stems, bright ’ coal, and shale. There was no evidence, however, of the coal being there in commercial quantities. Similiarity to Australia. A special feature of the Antarctic plant beds was their similarity to those discovered in the coal measures of New South Wales and belonging to the permo-carboniferous age. Evidence of the existence of this flora was to be found in the countries encircling the South Pole, South America, South Africa, and Australia, but strangely enough ,New Zealand was not included. Therefore it had been suggested that the coal measures in Antarctica might be the same as those in Australia. Sir Douglas Mawson had found similar plant beds in Adelie Land, some hundreds of miles to the west, but, said Professor Speight, there was no definite indication of a continuous area of deposits between the parts investigated. Admiral Byrd’s reported discovery seemed to indicate that the beds extended further to the east than the Scott expedition had thought, but it offered nothing different from what had been reported by other scientific expeditions. There was a bare possibility, however, that Byrd had definite evidence of coal in commercial quantities, but even if this were so, and it was extremely doubtful, conditions of living and transport problems were so difficult that it was questionable if it could be successfully exploited. It would certainly not repay exploitation while present coalfields were not exhausted, but, in the distant future, if deglaciation made Antarctica more accessible, it might be feasible to work the coal if it were there in sufficiently large quantities. Plants in Antarctic. Professor Speight found one of the most interesting features of the reports from the south in the presence of plants indicating luxurious vegetation in a region now covered with perpetual ice and snow, and dark for a great part of the year. This was a geological problem which still awaited solution. It was analogous in part to the discovery in the tropics of glacial beds belonging to various geological periods. The flora found in Antarctica was a cold climate flora, although it was found even today in tropical Australia. Its occurrence was another link in the evidence of the resemblance of the Australian and Antarctic continents. Coal beds of a much later date had been discovered in the Shetland Islands and in Graham Land. These were cretaceous and tertiary beds, similar to those found in New Zealand, and fossils and plants had also been reported comparing closely with those overlying coal measures in this country. The beds reported by the Byrd expedition, however ,no doubt belonged to a coal formation of the same age as that of New South Wales.