Coalpail.com Forum

Just wanted to know if some of you have experience different brands of anthracite that have different ash content. I currently use Blashak nut with 17% ash. I've also used the same brand nut at 11%. I have read in this form that nut comes in at 9%. Why the difference? I've asked the dealer, all I get is the shoulders go up, like they don't know. Cheaper for them? Other companies ash content, please tell what you know. Thanx, George

Storm wrote: Just wanted to know if some of you have experience different brands of anthracite that have different ash content. I currently use Blashak nut with 17% ash. I've also used the same brand nut at 11%. I have read in this form that nut comes in at 9%. Why the difference? I've asked the dealer, all I get is the shoulders go up, like they don't know. Cheaper for them? Other companies ash content, please tell what you know. Thanx, George

I've only used Blaschak, Stockton, and Harmony, and I can vouch that my current Harmony has half or less the ash content of the other two.

I say the ash content is much higher this year than last.

How do I determine ash content percentage? By weight?

I''ve been burning Blaschak pea for at least 15 years, I really don't notice any difference in the amount of ash.

63roundbadge wrote:How do I determine ash content percentage? By weight?

I''ve been burning Blaschak pea for at least 15 years, I really don't notice any difference in the amount of ash.

Divide ash lbs. out by coal lbs. in, and then multiply by 100 to convert it to a percentage.

For example, 15 lbs of ash out for 120 lbs of coal in would be:

15/120 x 100 = 12.5% ash

I don't understand why ash content is important. What difference does it make?

Half the ash means you empty the ashpan half as often.
and you are not paying for ash by weight,

So a ton of coal with 15% ash has 300# of ash say $200/tone = $30 worth of ash
So if you have only 7.5% ash, you have only $15 worth of ash

Personally, I like not having to empty the ash pan every day, during the cold weather.

Greg L

mdrelyea wrote:I don't understand why ash content is important. What difference does it make?

More ash=less coal actually burned and less BTUs produced. I see it as a measure of efiiciency.

63roundbadge wrote:More ash=less coal actually burned and less BTUs produced.

I don't know if that's a fact or not. The deep mined coal I am burning (Superior brand from 2008) I was told (and the price reflected it) was the highest BTU per pound of any anthracite coal mined that year, yet, I make far more ash than my buddy that's burning Kimmel. I jokingly say it's the same size and weight coming out as going in!

Freddy wrote:

63roundbadge wrote:More ash=less coal actually burned and less BTUs produced.

I don't know if that's a fact or not. The deep mined coal I am burning (Superior brand from 2008) I was told (and the price reflected it) was the highest BTU per pound of any anthracite coal mined that year, yet, I make far more ash than my buddy that's burning Kimmel. I jokingly say it's the same size and weight coming out as going in!

That's what I was wondering about too. When I buy coal, I don't think I necessarily care about the amount of ash in it but instead care about the number of BTUs. It seems to me that the only reason I might care about the % ash is that it determines how frequently I have to empty the ash pan. Since my ash pan is large, I generally only have to empty it once a week. It doesn't matter to me if it's 10% or 30% because I still have to empty it once a week.

Am I wrong?

You would think the more ash the less BTU's but like Fred said is it true? and Gregg has a point about paying for ash,but I like having less ash with a hand fired stove and I know that my trash man likes low ash coal whether he knows it or not Keepaeyeonit

Coal is a natural material and will vary in BTU content and ash content from one mine to another. I guess it depends on what the plant material was to start. It takes dead plants, time, pressure and heat to form coal. I don't know what type of forests and plants grew in NEPA 300 million years ago but it must have been some good stuff. Less ash is what I like. This year I'm burning Harmony and the ash is about half what I had been burning. Much less work.

mdrelyea wrote:

Freddy wrote: I don't know if that's a fact or not. The deep mined coal I am burning (Superior brand from 2008) I was told (and the price reflected it) was the highest BTU per pound of any anthracite coal mined that year, yet, I make far more ash than my buddy that's burning Kimmel. I jokingly say it's the same size and weight coming out as going in!

That's what I was wondering about too. When I buy coal, I don't think I necessarily care about the amount of ash in it but instead care about the number of BTUs. It seems to me that the only reason I might care about the % ash is that it determines how frequently I have to empty the ash pan. Since my ash pan is large, I generally only have to empty it once a week. It doesn't matter to me if it's 10% or 30% because I still have to empty it once a week.

Am I wrong?

Most of the time the ash% are pretty close to each other 7-10 percent. You empty your ash once a week with 10% ash. If it was 30% ash, you would be emptying your pan 3 times as much you would think. The tricky part is sometimes the ash is light and fluffy so the volume of ash is large. Sometimes it has a lot of unburned coal/shale in it so its really heavy by volume. For instance; I burned coal from Hudson several years ago. Burned real nice, a lot of heat. Had to empty the ash pan every day and a half. Burned Harmony several years ago. Burned real nice, a lot of heat. But,,,, I emptied the ash pan every 3-4 days. I burned Jeddo last year. Burned nice., a lot of heat. Emptied the ash pan every 3-4 days. The difference between all three; They all heated extremely well. The Hudson I could take the ash pans out with one hand because they were so light. All the time. The harmony had all ash with no unburned and the pans were solid. The Jeddo burned as well as the other two. Had the same amount of ash by volume as the Harmony but the pans weighed much more than the others. They would be trouble if I was older.

Scottscoaled wrote:... the pans weighed much more than the others. They would be trouble if I was older.

You will be. I speak from experience.