Southern Coal Supplies

[USS ALASKA]

Did the majority of non-intraregional and overseas shipping into and out of major antebellum Southern ports, (New Orleans / Norfolk / Charlestown / Savannah / Pensacola / Mobile / et al ), originate from Northern ports? Was cotton shipped direct to ports in France and England or was it taken to say New York for trans-shipment? The reason I ask is the thread posted by DaveBrt about CSS Virginia's coal capacity. Given the pre-war South's dearth of indigenous anthracite steam coal supplies, it would appear that it would have to be supplied from the North or maybe even the UK. Were there stockpiles stored at these ports for the provisioning of steamers or were the ships loaded with enough coal to make a round trip? Those ports with USN bases - did the USN have their own resources or did they rely upon commercial suppliers? How much steam coal was on hand in the South when secession was declared? And then as a secondary line of questioning - how much was then seized for other, non-sea going, needs. I would have no idea where to even start with this line of inquiry...Still's book does mention that large supplies were confiscated at New Orleans and Norfolk but doesn't go into amounts - if such a fact is recorded or known.


Thanks!
USS ALASKA

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

According to David Surdam in Northern Naval Superiority and the Economics of the American Civil War, most cotton as shipped north to New York and then distributed to foreign ports, but some was also shipped direct from New Orleans. William Still says in Confederate Shipbuilding that "Although the South, with the exception of the trans-Mississippi West, had an abundant supply of coal in its mines, naval squadrons and facilities were continually short of this fuel"; that the problem was not abundance of coal supplies, but transportation within the Confederacy (pp.56-7). As for anthracite coal, he makes no distinction, so it's unclear were this was coming from.
Not sure if this helps answer the question at all, but that's what I recall.

 

[USS ALASKA]

Indeed sir - that is about the same as my recollections of those books.

USS ALASKA

 

[DaveBrt]

Transportation of coal was A problem, not THE problem in providing coal for Confederate naval and industrial purposes. Other problems were: shortage of manpower to mine the coal, loss of the eastern Tennessee coal mines (around Chattanooga), loss of the northern Georgia coal mines, small size of the coal industry (especially around Richmond) compared to the demand for coal, undeveloped state of the Alabama coal industry, and yes the railroad transportation problem.

I don't recall seeing a quantity of coal captured at Norfolk, but it may be out there. I wonder if the Mississippi River steamers used hard or soft coal. Stone coal may have been reserved for naval and transoceanic shipping and therefore not required in quantity in the south.

 

[Story]

Here's a few maps of coal-mining regions in the US - you'll see that the only anthracite mine areas within the reach of the CSA are in SW VA. I did look for a mid-19th century map I'd see before on the interwebz, but since natural resources don't move around much these two give you the general idea where the fields are located.
http://www.coaleducation.org/lessons/MII/doc3.htm
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/Us_coal_regions_1996.png

As a footnote on foreign sources of coal, I've read accounts where CSN raiders routinely attempted to loot the coal found aboard prizes. This was problematic in that the only way to transfer it was in sacks, carried across in small boats. The other problem seems to have been that the coal hatches were meant for intake, and not off-loading.

 

[georgew]

Did the majority of non-intraregional and overseas shipping into and out of major antebellum Southern ports, (New Orleans / Norfolk / Charlestown / Savannah / Pensacola / Mobile / et al ), originate from Northern ports? Was cotton shipped direct to ports in France and England or was it taken to say New York for trans-shipment? The reason I ask is the thread posted by DaveBrt about CSS Virginia's coal capacity. Given the pre-war South's dearth of indigenous anthracite steam coal supplies, it would appear that it would have to be supplied from the North or maybe even the UK. Were there stockpiles stored at these ports for the provisioning of steamers or were the ships loaded with enough coal to make a round trip? Those ports with USN bases - did the USN have their own resources or did they rely upon commercial suppliers? How much steam coal was on hand in the South when secession was declared? And then as a secondary line of questioning - how much was then seized for other, non-sea going, needs. I would have no idea where to even start with this line of inquiry...Still's book does mention that large supplies were confiscated at New Orleans and Norfolk but doesn't go into amounts - if such a fact is recorded or known.


Thanks!
USS ALASKA

I think you need to be careful about distinguishing the types of coal available. Blockade runners and naval vessels had a valid reason for wanting anthracite. It ignited rapidly and produced a lesser volume of smoke. Most of the coal accessed by the south after the capture of what is now West Viriginia had a high content of pollutants, produced very large volumes of black smoke and did not ignite rapidly. The most common "quality" coal used in blockade running was Welsh Steamer Coal. Some of the British merchants tried to run a "racket", delivering goods to Union ports like New York, filling up with anthracite, sailed to a neutral port like Halifax, Bermuda, the Bahamas or Havana and sold the anthracite with a high markup to the runners, then used an inferior grade of coal on their commercial voyage. Federal authorities soon caught on and tried to limit coal sales of this type. At Galveston, about 300 tons of Union coal were captured by Magruder's forces in January of 1863. A letter describing this cache was sent to Richmond by Lt. Joseph Barney who implies that the coal was disappearing, probably for heating purposes. The Confederate Army at Galveston was know to have dismantled fences and unoccupied buildings for firewood. Even major ports like Mobile had shortages. It isn't generally known that the Tennessee (II) went into its final shoot-out with the Union fleet when it had only four to six hours of coal left in its bunkers. Incidentally, Union forces also had a distribution problem on the blockade, especially in the Gulf. A Union naval officer once expressed an opinion that if Lee had used his Army to interdict the railroads in Pennsylvania, the supply line for the Union Navy's coal would have been cut and their coal piles used up within two months. Inferior grades of coal or using wood in a coal burning firebox created maintenance problems. Three of the King-Kenedy steamers used by Union forces in Texas and Louisiana had wood-burning fireboxes and required constant maintenance when using Union coal. The QM department report on this implies concern that their operation for prolonged periods in this mode might actually be dangerous. The capture of Confederate coal piles at New Orleans and near the forts was rapidly depleted. There were post-war lawsuits about compensation by civilians claiming ownership. Most of this coal came from upriver, usually shipped from Pittsburgh. This source was cut off until the fall of Vicksburg reopened the river.

 

[USS ALASKA]

- you'll see that the only anthracite mine areas within the reach of the CSA are in SW VA.

Were those VA anthracite beds known prior to the ACW?

Thanks,
USS ALASKA

Think I answered my own question - doesn't look like they were mined till the 1880s or so...

http://www.virginiaplaces.org/geology/coal.html

 

[Story]

Think I answered my own question - doesn't look like they were mined till the 1880s or so...

http://www.virginiaplaces.org/geology/coal.html

Spinoff reading from your link, looks like there were (soft stinky smokey) coal mines around Richmond VA since the mid-18th century.
http://www.abandonedcountry.com/201...e-pits-and-the-beginning-of-a-burning-legacy/

https://www.dmme.virginia.gov/commercedocs/PUB_85.pdf

&
http://www.chesterfieldobserver.com...hesterfields_black_gold_in_the_early_day.html

 

[USS ALASKA]

Thank you sir!

The pdf has some great info in it.

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

Stumbled across the attached a few minutes ago and thought it might be of some help for this discussion of coal supplies and sources. It's from the ORN Ser.2 Vol 2, p.754- hope it helps muddy the waters sufficiently LOL.

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

 

[DaveBrt]

Stumbled across the attached a few minutes ago and thought it might be of some help for this discussion of coal supplies and sources. It's from the ORN Ser.2 Vol 2, p.754- hope it helps muddy the waters sufficiently LOL.


View attachment 117898

Since this is a November '64 or later report, it really does not help us much. This would have been after the Union raids that shut down almost all the coal and iron mines in Virginia not in the Richmond area.

I wonder if any pre-war USN records or pre-war articles in New Orleans or Portsmouth/Norfolk newspapers would have the best answer of what was on hand to start with?

 

[DaveBrt]

I checked the New Orleans 1861 newspapers for coal and ship (searching for just coal brings up hundreds of coal oil ads) showed the importation from Liverpool of 2 loads, total of 250 tons of coal and an export of 350 tons to Mexico. Looks like a dead end here.

 

[USS ALASKA]

University of Richmond
UR Scholarship Repository
Master's Theses Student Research
1949

A history of the Midlothian coal mines
Charles Ray Routon

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact
[email protected].

Abstract
This thesis attempts to tell the story of the coal mining industry in the northwestern part of Chesterfield County, Virginia, The coal deposits in this area are only a part or a larger coal basin lying west or Richmond and covering several counties, but as the title suggests, this paper is confined entirely to the mines in the vicinity of Midlothian. It is a history of the mines, and no attempt has been made to deal with the technique or mining except where such remarks have been included because of the historical interest; tor example, the layout of the mines and mining methods used in the early days.

https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2081&context=masters-theses

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

 

[Sheltowee]

A side track- so it would appear that anthracite was preferable due to less impurities = less smoke. Ideal for steamships.
What about sources for the southern steel mills? Locally mined bituminous?

 

[USS ALASKA]

What about sources for the southern steel mills? Locally mined bituminous?

Sir - some of the information you seek is here...

Confederate Coal Production | Civil War Potpourri

Hey everyone! I'm sort of on an industrialization binge read right now and I've been looking up coal production statistics in the US for the Civil War, but specifics seem to have been maddeningly difficult to find. As far as I can suss out the United States in 1860 produced roughly 15,000,000...

civilwartalk.com

HTHs,
USS ALASKA

 

[USS ALASKA]

Different Charters, Different Paths: Corporations and Coal in Antebellum Pennsylvania and Virginia
Sean Patrick Adams
Department of History
University of Wisconsin-Madison

This essay compares corporate chartering in Pennsylvania and Virginia during a critical period for the American coal industry - critical because the advantages of the corporate form to the coal trade became apparent in both states at the same time that Pennsylvania and Virginia drafted legislation allowing for general incorporation. It is my contention that the political evolution of corporate chartering in each state forged distinct institutional contexts for the growth of coal mining in Pennsylvania and Virginia, which in turn reinforce divergent paths for each state's coal industry at a time when the corporate reorganization of coal mining was most effective. Whereas other public policies such as internal improvement programs and geological surveys certainly contributed to the regional divergence of the coal trade, the timing and nature of general incorporation played a crucial role in widening the gap between the two states. In Pennsylvania, a system blending special and general charters facilitated corporate investment in the booming anthracite trade and the growing bituminous fields in the west. Sectional dissention and the long-standing reliance upon local political institutions frustrated the same process in Virginia, which exacerbated the stagnation of its strategically important Richmond-area mines as well as the slow development of the Old Dominion's potentially rich bituminous fields to the west.

https://thebhc.org/sites/default/files/beh/BEHprint/v027n1/p0078-p0090.pdf

Sirs, could not find a copyright release so just posted the above link.

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

 

[USS ALASKA]

W&M ScholarWorks
Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects
Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects
1991

An Archipelago of Coal Pits: Predicting Archeological Features in the Richmond, Virginia Coalfield
Jacqueline Louise Hernigle
College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected].

ABSTRACT
Richmond, Virginia contains the sites of the earliest bituminous coal mining in the United States. During three periods of development, the first between 1701- 1794, second between 1794-1850, and third between 1850-1939, numerous coal mines were in operation throughout the Richmond basin. These sites are geologically, temporally, and technologically similar to English coal mining sites. The generation of a predictive model based on English coal mine sites would explain archeological mining features found within the Richmond basin, as well as predict the location and function of features found in future archeological excavations. The predictive model emphasizes four components at the mining sites: 1) types of excavations used to extract coal, 2) mining equipment and buildings, 3) transportation, and 4) attendant manufacturing facilities. The creation and application of the predictive model for the Richmond coalfield is beneficial on two levels. First, as the Richmond mine sites are slated for capping by the Division of Mine Reclamation, the model can assist in ensuring minimal archeological disturbance to mine sites by predicting mining features associated with the industry. Second, on a broader level the predictive model encourages the generation of hypotheses concerning cultural systemics and how the various subsystems involved in the coal industry change through time. This process leads historical archeologists and anthropologist toward a deeper com prehension of the growth of the Industrial Revolution in the Virginia coalfield, as well as the United States in general.

https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4643&context=etd

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

 

[DaveBrt]

W&M ScholarWorks
Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects
Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects
1991

An Archipelago of Coal Pits: Predicting Archeological Features in the Richmond, Virginia Coalfield
Jacqueline Louise Hernigle
College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected].

ABSTRACT
Richmond, Virginia contains the sites of the earliest bituminous coal mining in the United States. During three periods of development, the first between 1701- 1794, second between 1794-1850, and third between 1850-1939, numerous coal mines were in operation throughout the Richmond basin. These sites are geologically, temporally, and technologically similar to English coal mining sites. The generation of a predictive model based on English coal mine sites would explain archeological mining features found within the Richmond basin, as well as predict the location and function of features found in future archeological excavations. The predictive model emphasizes four components at the mining sites: 1) types of excavations used to extract coal, 2) mining equipment and buildings, 3) transportation, and 4) attendant manufacturing facilities. The creation and application of the predictive model for the Richmond coalfield is beneficial on two levels. First, as the Richmond mine sites are slated for capping by the Division of Mine Reclamation, the model can assist in ensuring minimal archeological disturbance to mine sites by predicting mining features associated with the industry. Second, on a broader level the predictive model encourages the generation of hypotheses concerning cultural systemics and how the various subsystems involved in the coal industry change through time. This process leads historical archeologists and anthropologist toward a deeper com prehension of the growth of the Industrial Revolution in the Virginia coalfield, as well as the United States in general.

https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4643&context=etd

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

This is serious research --- far above most Masters level products.

 

[USS ALASKA]

This is serious research --- far above most Masters level products.

Indeed sir - I had to keep stopping and looking up stuff. Learned some new words and ordered a new book because of it...like I need more books...ah, who am I kidding, you can never have too many books...

Cheers,
USS ALASKA