Coal Mining - The Classification of Coal (with Discussion)

The object of all classification is to group together things which are alike, and separate those which are unlike. This object is essentially a practical one, enabling us to apply past experience to new conditions. Many costly large-scale experiments lose half their importance for want of proper description of the coal used, and the consequent impossibility of predicting that other coals will behave in the same way. I do not, therefore, make a fundamental distinction between "scientific'' and "use" classifications, except in so far as use depends on conditions, such as size or impurities which are not related to the nature of the coal substance itself. The characters chosen to define the classes of coal must be such as are accompanied by as many other properties as possible. It is not to be expected that any system of classification will enable us to predict every property of coal, since all specimens have an individuality of their own. But specimens can be grouped by a number of resemblances into species. Further, species which resemble each other can be grouped into genera. Elementary Composition as a Basis of Classification There can be little doubt that the ultimate or elementary composition of "pure coal" is the best basis of classification. It was soon after the perfection of the method of elementary analysis of organic substances by Liebig that Regnault, the distinguished chemist and physicist, laid down the principle that coals of the same kind vary only between narrow limits of elementary composition. This is still the widest generalization that can be made about coal. Upon it the metallurgist Gruner based his classification. In some quarters the value of the ultimate composition was denied, Stein going so far as to say that it teaches us nothing of importance about coal. One still hears statements that it is like crushing a work of art in a mortar and analyzing the powder, or like counting the number of times a given letter occurs in a sentence. Such comparisons are misleading, and the criticism might be applied to organic chemistry as a whole. Nor is the existence of isomerism, or of entirely different substances which