ANTHRACITE COAL IS 94% PURE AND
THEREFORE, IS ENVIRONMENTALLY SAFE
NOTE WELL:
I asked my stepdad, whose father was a
coal miner, why the mines were closed.
His answer, "In the fifties, the power
companies in New England put pressure
on the Kennedys to lift the embargo against
foreign oil imports. The Kennedys got the
laws changed; the power companies, which
up to then had used coal almost exclusively,
now could buy cheaper foreign oil.
The consequence: the coal mines closed."

Protect 1st & 2nd Amendment, Protect Children, Save America, Let Freedom Ring, United We Stand, We The People
coal needs to be a certain mix due to spewing Sulfur into the air, and that causes cancer concerns. But if the mix is correct, then no problem. I know about it because I used to be on a project to ship coal to Africa in huge ships. Very complicated business.

Anthracite coal is 94% pure and therefore, it is environmentally safe.
As you know, Anthracite coal is not the same
as sulfur-containing sub-bituminous coal or
bituminous coal, or lignite coal.
Perhaps your company wasn't shipping the
most expensive Hi-grade Anthracite coal.
Indeed, the African countries may have been
purchasing a less expensive low-grade coal
instead, which therefore, could be less safe.

Happy with Life...Faith in Our Lord God...Love being outside...Enjoy
Peter Santenello did a video on this location
https://youtu.be/Qj5LjacccJ0?feature=shared

Connie,
Thank you very much for posting this
Centralia video.
I visited the area in 2005. The guide said
the government was going to put out the
fires and they did know how to do it.
In fact, he told us in detail, how it could
be done.
So, twenty years ago, they said the fires
would be put out but in the video said it had been burning for 60 years and it would burn
for 200 more years and the photos were heartbreaking.
I'm wondering why -
if the government said they'd put the fires out and they knew how to do so, what the heck?
Just plain awful.