Page 1 of 1
Information on Anthracite in Alaska - April 2013
Posted: Wed. Apr. 03, 2013 3:13 pm
by Kielanders
I just spoke with Bill Brophy today at the Fairbanks office of Usibelli, I believe he's their PR representative.
He says that the Wishbone hill deposit is still a couple of years out from being repermitted to develop.
I believe they were permitted perviously, but allowed the permit to expire before developing the deposit.
The Wishbone Hill deposit is NOT anthracite. However, it is a high quality bituminous that has tested at about 12K BTU/LB.
Presently, it is my understanding, that there are no anthracite deposits on tap to be developed. He's mailing me some more information - I'll keep you posted if you're interested.
Re: Information on Anthracite in Alaska - April 2013
Posted: Sun. Apr. 07, 2013 1:14 am
by Short Bus
I've been in Fairbanks for three days, so I just saw this.
Always interested in Alaska coal quality Information. There is a region in Alaska called the Anthracite hills, that supposedly has the good stuff in it.
Re: Information on Anthracite in Alaska - April 2013
Posted: Sun. Apr. 14, 2013 3:00 am
by Kielanders
Short Bus wrote:I've been in Fairbanks for three days, so I just saw this.
Always interested in Alaska coal quality Information. There is a region in Alaska called the Anthracite hills, that supposedly has the good stuff in it.
'Anthracite Hills' is a name that's pretty suspicious, I'll give you that.
You don't think they'd be lying to us to keep it all for themselves do you?
Maybe there's a Usibelli private stash, just for Alaskan Royalty?
Re: Information on Anthracite in Alaska - April 2013
Posted: Sun. Apr. 14, 2013 4:56 pm
by Short Bus
In the Anthracite Ridge coal district, the only identified minable bed of anthracite, 4.2–6.6 ft (1.3–2.0 m) thick, underlies an area of no more than 2.5 acres (1 hectare) and totals no more than 22,000 short tons (20,000 metric tons) (Waring, 1936; Merritt and Belowich, 1984). One other reported anthracite occurrence (Merritt and Belowich, 1984), too thin to be mined, is on a large active landslide (Detterman and others, 1976).
Looks like a nice deposit for a small miner, 4-6 foot thick in 2.5 acres. I wish they mentioned how thick the overburden is. This came from this article,
http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-077/dds77text.html and was copied from the Matanuska coal field section.
They also mention the Keni coal fields with coal ranging from 8,000 - 10,000 BTU, and some information about the Homer fields. Sort of hard to read, because it seams to jump around a lot.