Very interesting! Is anthracite and other high-sulfur coals more acidic wet than lignite, bituminous or other western, low-sulfur coal?
I'm not sure about that Hemi. Anthracite has a low sulfur content averaging 0.6% to 0.7%. Bituminous sulfur content ranges from 0.7% to 4.0% and Lignite 0.4%. Carbon content in anthracite is 81 - 88% of weight, while Bituminous averages 45 - 78% and Lignite 31%. Despite its higher carbon content, anthracite has a higher ash content (what's left after it's burned) than the others. I'm not sure how this might translate into acidity, but it's interesting. I was a coal buyer at one time in my career and every car had to be sampled and tested for all kinds of things, many related to environmental requirements. We could not unload a car if the testing papers were not in hand and all data points were in prescribed range. I somehow recall that NP and perhaps other northwestern roads burned lignite in their locomotives, which much have been a design challenge given it's low heat content. I wonder if stationary lower plants on the MILW or GN burned the stuff?
NP indeed burned lignite. Rosebud coal, so named from the mine it was obtained, if my memory serves correctly. The fireboxes of NP engines were absolutely enormous so they could burn this glorified dirt. As for MILW? They long touted their reliance on "white coal" or hyrdoelectric power in the mountains, so I doubt they burned actual coal for their power plants. Boxcab should have better data.
