Reading / Blaschak Comparison

Post Reply
 
Dave
New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu. Sep. 01, 2011 12:38 pm
Location: Lebanon, PA

Post by Dave » Sun. Nov. 16, 2014 4:31 pm

The last 4 days, I used 2 different coal brands, one from this years Reading Coal company, 40 LB bags, and last years Blaschak 40 lb
see the pictures. IMO, they were a identical burn.
I picked up both at the bagging plants, Reading is much easier, quicker..
At both places, the coal was bagged that day, important to me, the coal is moist and not drenched in water
From the look of the ashes ( see picture), it might seem the coal is from the same vein..
Like I said, it is much easier getting the coal from Reading..I plan on going back there next year

anybody care to add what I might be missing to my analysis?
IMG_2762.jpg
.JPG | 400.3KB | IMG_2762.jpg

 
coldinmaine
Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Sun. Sep. 14, 2014 11:28 am
Hand Fed Coal Furnace: old- green furnace
Coal Size/Type: nut mostly
Other Heating: pellet, wood

Post by coldinmaine » Sun. Nov. 16, 2014 4:49 pm

Although it would require quite a bit of work, it would be interesting to see if there is a difference in BTU value. Do you have a boiler, a furnace or or a stove?

 
User avatar
davidmcbeth3
Member
Posts: 8505
Joined: Sun. Jun. 14, 2009 2:31 pm
Coal Size/Type: nut/pea/anthra

Post by davidmcbeth3 » Sun. Nov. 16, 2014 5:01 pm

I've burned both ... they both have variance batch to batch in nut size.

They both burned fine.

 
Starting Out
Member
Posts: 157
Joined: Thu. Feb. 20, 2014 5:33 pm
Location: Ringtown, PA
Other Heating: Burnham Oil Boiler with Beckett Gun

Post by Starting Out » Sun. Nov. 16, 2014 5:04 pm

Might be right about the same vein. Blaschak gets coal hauled to the breaker from the same general area Reading is digging at. Blaschak is mining from multiple areas of Schuylkill and Luzerne Counties.


 
Dave
New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu. Sep. 01, 2011 12:38 pm
Location: Lebanon, PA

Post by Dave » Sun. Nov. 16, 2014 5:19 pm

coldinmaine wrote:Although it would require quite a bit of work, it would be interesting to see if there is a difference in BTU value. Do you have a boiler, a furnace or or a stove?
I use a stoker stove

 
User avatar
mdrelyea
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Thu. Mar. 08, 2012 12:36 pm
Location: Victor, NY
Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: Alaska 140 Auger
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Russo #2
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Rice/Nut

Post by mdrelyea » Tue. Nov. 18, 2014 12:57 pm

I compared the two a year or two ago. At that time, I found that Reading had more BTUs per pound.
Automatic Coal Consumption Tracking

 
User avatar
ChrisS
Member
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu. Oct. 09, 2014 1:48 pm
Location: Bethlehem, PA
Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: Keystoker Koker
Coal Size/Type: Rice, Blaschak, Lehigh Anthracite
Other Heating: Heat Pump (set to "OFF" now), Propane FP insert

Post by ChrisS » Tue. Nov. 18, 2014 1:31 pm

Is bagged coal more cost-effective if you get it from the source directly?

 
User avatar
Rob R.
Site Moderator
Posts: 17980
Joined: Fri. Dec. 28, 2007 4:26 pm
Location: Chazy, NY
Stoker Coal Boiler: EFM 520
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Chubby Jr

Post by Rob R. » Tue. Nov. 18, 2014 1:48 pm

ChrisS wrote:Is bagged coal more cost-effective if you get it from the source directly?
It is less expensive compared to retail, but still $50-60 per ton more than bulk.


 
User avatar
SMITTY
Member
Posts: 12520
Joined: Sun. Dec. 11, 2005 12:43 pm
Location: West-Central Mass
Stoker Coal Boiler: EFM 520 Highboy
Coal Size/Type: Rice / Blaschak anthracite
Other Heating: Oil fired Burnham boiler

Post by SMITTY » Tue. Nov. 18, 2014 6:28 pm

Dave wrote: ........... At both places, the coal was bagged that day, important to me, the coal is moist and not drenched in water ............
Forum member LsFarm mentioned a tour he took of the Blaschak bagging operation - he said the coal coming off the line is BONE dry. Guess they're fed on a conveyor through ovens to eliminate all the moisture. Whatever wetness is in the bag when you open it is from storage and transport after the bagging process.

On that note, I must say my Blaschak bags are WETTER THAN EVER this season ... :x

 
Dave
New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu. Sep. 01, 2011 12:38 pm
Location: Lebanon, PA

Post by Dave » Thu. Nov. 20, 2014 6:20 pm

mdrelyea wrote:I compared the two a year or two ago. At that time, I found that Reading had more BTUs per pound.
Automatic Coal Consumption Tracking
Thank you for that link....somehow I missed that topic. I found it quite interesting and a good read.
I always find it interesting how brainiac's can hook gadgets up and get data.

with that being said, it still seems both coal brands are burning the same, even in this ugly cold weather!!!

again, thanks for sharing the link

 
Dave
New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu. Sep. 01, 2011 12:38 pm
Location: Lebanon, PA

Post by Dave » Thu. Nov. 20, 2014 6:25 pm

Rob R. wrote:
ChrisS wrote:Is bagged coal more cost-effective if you get it from the source directly?
It is less expensive compared to retail, but still $50-60 per ton more than bulk.
last year I paid $195, while I'm thinking loose ton was $165 - $170.
This year I paid $215.00

I live 30 miles from the coal mines, and retailers are still marking it up $100 to $150 per ton....

 
Dave
New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu. Sep. 01, 2011 12:38 pm
Location: Lebanon, PA

Post by Dave » Thu. Nov. 20, 2014 6:29 pm

SMITTY wrote:
Dave wrote: ........... At both places, the coal was bagged that day, important to me, the coal is moist and not drenched in water ............
Forum member LsFarm mentioned a tour he took of the Blaschak bagging operation - he said the coal coming off the line is BONE dry. Guess they're fed on a conveyor through ovens to eliminate all the moisture. Whatever wetness is in the bag when you open it is from storage and transport after the bagging process.

On that note, I must say my Blaschak bags are WETTER THAN EVER this season ... :x
I didn't see the ovens..

Post Reply

Return to “Coal News & General Coal Discussions”