Coking Coal Supply: Its Role in the Expansion of the Soviet Steel Industry

Clark University

Coking Coal Supply: Its Role in the Expansion of the Soviet Steel IndustryAuthor(s): Allan RodgersSource: Economic Geography, Vol. 40, No. 2 (Apr., 1964), pp. 113-150Published by: Clark UniversityStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/142193 .

Accessed: 08/05/2014 10:57

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Clark University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic Geography.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 10:57:29 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=clark

http://www.jstor.org/stable/142193?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


COKING COAL SUPPLY: ITS ROLE IN THE EXPANSION OF THE SOVIET STEEL INDUSTRY

Allan Rodgers

Dr. Rodgers is Professor and I-ead of the Department of Geography at the Pennsylvania State University. His article is the result of library research in the USSR in 1960 and subsequently in the United States. A preliminary report was read at the International Geographical Congress, in Stockholm in 1960.

T THE current Soviet seven-year plan and recently released goals for 1980, demonstrated in Table

I, forecast a remarkable growth for steel production in the USSR. If these goals are achieved and if production in the United States continues in the relatively static condition that has been main- tained during the past few years, then the Soviet Union will undoubtedly overtakee and surpass" this country in steel output with all of the iriplj-)ica- tions, both economic and political, that would follow from such an achievement.

An appraisal of the possibilities for such growth would appear in order at this moment; yet such an evaluation would require exhaustive analysis of such critical elements as the Soviet Unions raw material and fuel base, the availability and allocation of investment funds, transportation facilities and. re-

quirenilents, labor supply, etc. This paper proposes to examine only one facet of the problem, that is the availability of coking coal, a product which serves as both a raw material and fuel in the production of pig iron, a key element in steel manufacture.1 Produc-

1 According to Koks i Khimiya, No. 11, 1962, as reported in International Coal Trade, \ol. 32 No. 1, Jan. 1963, p. 22, 81 per cent of the coke output of the USSR in 1961 (over 25 mini in size) was consumed in the production of pig iron, about 11 per cent in the prodluctioni of metal alloys aind for other uses in ferrous metallurgy, 4 per cent

tionl of this comllmodity is programmed to rise to a level of nearly 151 million tons in 1965 (see Table II). The ability to meet this immediate target and the vastly more ambitious long ruIn goal of 285 million tons in 1980, and the present and possible future patterns of production and consumiption of this basic commodity are the subjects of this study.

In 1962, the USSR I)roduced 117 mil- lioi tons of coming coal, thus achieving first rank in world production; the United States' consumption of coking coal ini 1961 was nearly 74 million tons.2 So- viet output had risen about twenty-fold since 1913 and is over three times the pre- war level. At present, coking coal ac- counts for nearly one-fourth of the nation's over-all coal production in toni- nage and a far higher precentage when equated on a calorific basis. TFable III shows the trends in the distribution of this output by field, from 1913 to 1965, and the location of each of these deposits is indicated in F-igure 1.

2 jljinerals Yearbook 1961 (Bituminous Coal 'reprint), U.S. Bureau of MVinues, Washington,

1962, p. 93.

in non-ferrous metallurgy, and 4 per cent in the chemical industry\ and other sectors. The relatively high consumltion of coke in the Soviet chemical industry is a result of inefficient use of natural and manufactured gas; with the current rapid expansion of natural gas production in the UISSR, this uise should decrease signifi- Ca ltly.



14 ECONomIC GEOGRAPHY

TABLE I

PRODUCTION OF PIG IRON AND STEEL INGOTS IN THE

UNITED STATES AND THE SOV7IET UNION, 1958-1980

(Millions of tonsa)

Pig iron and ferroalloys Steel ingols

USA b USSRc USAc USSRd

1958 ...... 53.3 39.6 77.4 54.9 1959 ...... 56.3 43.0 84. 7 60.0 1960 ...... 62. 2 46.8 90.1 65.3 1961 ...... 60.4 50.9 88.9 70. 7 1962 ...... 60.3 55.3 89.1 76.3 1965 plan. . 72.0-73.0 .... 95.0-97.0 1980 plan.. 188.0 (estimate) .... 250.0

All tonnage data in this paper are expressed in metric tons.

b Iron Age, Jan. 3, 1963, pp. 158 and 163. Maximum steel production in the USA occurred in 1955 with 106 million tons of steel ingots. American steel ingot capacity is, however, about 136 million tons (1961).

e Ts. S.U. pri Sov. Min., SSSR v Tsifr akh v I961 gods, Moscow, 1960, pp. 109-110, and 122.

d Pravda, Jan. 26, 1963.

Two fields, the Donets I3asin of the eastern Ukraine and the Kuznetsk Basin of central Siberia, accounted for 85 per cent of the total output in 1958. The remainder was distributed among five smaller fields: the Pechora Basin of northern European Russia, the Tkvar- cheli and Tkibuli centers of the western Caucausus (Georgia), the Kizel field of the central Urals, and the Karaganda Basin of central Kazakhstan.

COKING COAL RES ERV ES

Although the Soviet Union may lead the world in coal reserves, her claims include resources that have not been verified by field investigation. Soviet sources assert that in 1956 the USSR possessed known geological reserves of coal totaling 8670 billion tons; of these 7765 billion tons were said to be "'balanced, " i.e., mineable.3 She thus, by her own estimate, accounted for 53 per cent of the world's coal resources.4 This claim cannot be dismissed sum-

IN. Shabarova and A. Tyzhnova, Editors, Zacpasy Uglei i Goryuchikh Slantsev SSSR, Moscow, 1958, pp. 12 and 18.

4Ibid., p. 9.

TABLE II

PRODUCTION OF COAL IN THE USSR, 1958 TO 1980

(Millions of tons)

Coking coal Coal Share of Year p production production cokpeg coal

1958 ....... .. 9494a 496h- 19.0 1959 ......... 100.83 506.6b 19.9 1960 . ...... .. 110. 2a 513.T 21.5 1961 ......... 112. Od 510.5h 21.9 1962 ......... 117.Cc 517. Oc 22.6 1963 plan .... 122.6c 522.le 23.5 1965 plan .... 150. 7 600.0-612.Ob 24. 9 (av.) 1980 plan . 285.OR 1180.0-1200.Ob 23. 9 (av.)

a Ts. S.U. pri Sov. Min., Narodnoye Khozyaistvo SSSR, V 160 Godn, Moscow, 1961, p. 259.

b Tsifrakh I96I, op. cit., pp. 109-110 and 122. c Pravda, Jan. 26, 1963. d Pravda, Jan. 23, 1962. e Ugol, No. 1, 1962, p. 2. f B. Bratchenko, Editor, PersPektivy Razvitiya Ugolnoi

Pronyshlennosti SSSR, Moscow, 1960, p. 228. The original goal was 150-156 million tons.

n Ugol, No. 1, 1962, pp. 1-6.

marily; it is, however, based on standards that are not comparable with those used in the West. Table IV summarizes the Soviet system of classification of reserves as of the late thirties, as reported by Shimkin. He indicated that the Soviet A +B reserves (called industrial reserves in this paper) correspond closely to the United States Bureau of Mtines category "Measured Reserves "; the C1 resources could be equated to our " Indicated Reserves"; and the C2 group corresponds to this country's "Inferred Reserves" category.

However, the Soviet reserve classification now includes a C3 category termed " Vozmozhniye " or " Possible Reserves " which accounted for 86 per cent of the mineable reserves in 1956. These are estimated on the basis of geological investigations mainly by analogy with neighboring areas; this group also includes widespread highly discontinuous deposits within the better known regions and very deep deposits within existing shafts and shafts under construction.5 A survey of the Soviet mining literature

a Ibid., p. 7.



COKING COAL SUPPLY IN THE SoviE~T STEEL INDUSTRY 115

V 0 0 0 0

-J w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

-IC

0 VI~~2

CZ C

~~~~~~~~Vt ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t

if /C

U 9.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

co\ 0



116 ECONOMIC GEO(;RAPHY

TABLE III

PERCENTAGEI PRODUCTION OF COKING COAL BY FIELD IN THE USSR, 1913-1965

Field I 93 940b I 958 b I 96 I b I r65 plane

Donets . ........................................... 100.0 74. 7 57.7 58.4 53. 7 Kuznetsk .......................................... ..... 19.9 2 7. 2 26.9 26.3 Karaganda ................ 3.1 7.0 7. 2 12.6 Pechora ............................................ ..... 2.8 3.5 4.4 Kizel .............................................. ..... 2.3 2.4 2.0 1.3 Georgia ............................................ ..... ..... 2.5 1.9 1.7 Norilsk ............................................0 ..... ..... .4 0.1 .....

Total .............................................. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Thousand tons ...................................... 5,870 35,333 94,407 110,198 151,0001

a B. Filipova, Editor, Koksokhimicheskoye Proizvodslvo, MOSCOW, 1959, p. 20. b Ts. S.U. pri Sov. Min., Narodnoye Khozyaislvo SSSR, Ir6I godit, MOSCOW, 1962, p. 216. c Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 228. I Derived from Ugol, No. 3, 1962, pp. 2-3.

indicates that these resources play no role in Soviet economic planning except possibly on an extremely long range basis. ITherefore, in this paper which focuses its attention on the immediate and medium range availability of coking coal resources for the Soviet steel industry, the C3 category will receive minimal attention. One cannot, however, state positively that such reserves are figments of the Soviet imagination. It would appear that insufficient evidence exists to warrant their inclusion in a study of this nature. With this limita- tion in view then, the mineable coal resources of the USSR in the proved (ABC,) and probable (C2) categories were approximately 465 billion tons in 1958; of these four-fifths were found in the Asiatic portion of the country, over two-thirds in central and eastern Siberia. I

ITurning to the coking coal reserve

pattern, here again there is the problem of definition. It is standard practice in the steel industry, both in the Soviet Union and in the west, to mix various grades of coal in the coke oven charge, usually a combination of low and medium volatile varieties. Soviet tech ni- cal specifications classify three major

6 Ya. Zeilkis, Ugolniye Bazy dlya Koksovaniya, Moscow, 1960, p. 15.

grades of coal as " spekayushchisya " or coking quality. These are: the K grade or prime coking coals; PS (sometimes OS) or steam coals similar to our low volatile bituminous; and ZPZh (sometimes Zh) or fatty steam coals like our medium volatile bituminous. To these are sometimes added anl intermedi-ate category called KZh or fatty coking coals. In this analysis of Soviet coking coal reserves,

TABLE IV

CLASSIFICATION OF COAL RESERVES IN TIlE USSR"

Type of Description Reserve

Ai Fully studied and surveyed reserves ready for immediate extraction in an existing mine.

A2 Fully studied and surveyed reserves on the basis of which final development plans can be prepared.

B Geologically studied reserves in which seam dimensions and quality have been established by drilling and for which cleaning techniques have been developed. This is the basic type of reserve for general economic planning and for preparing preliminary development projects.

Ci Geologically established reserves confirmed by scattered drilling and sampling. This type of reserve is usable for preliminary economic planning and for the establishment of targets for detailed investigations.

C2 Reserves hypothesized from strong geological indications. Usable only for long range preliminary estimation on a national scale.

a Dernitri Shirnkin, Minerals a Key to Soviet Power, Cambridge, Mass., 1953, pp. 19-20. The A, B and C1 categories, as a group, are termed "Deistvitelniye" or Proved Reserves, whereas the Cs category is called " Vero- yatniye" or Probable Reserves.



COKSING CORAL SUPPLY IN THE SOVIET STEEL INi)USTrRY 117

all of these grades are considered to be of coking quality. However, it will be stressed later that a rapidly increasing proportion of G (gas) coals is being utilized in the coke oven mix aLs the availability of higher grade coals has deteriorated. This decline and the need to substitute lower qualities of coal is the most serious technological problem facing the industry today.

Soviet reserves of mineable coking

quality coals in the proved and probable categories in 1958 totaled 69 billion tons with 31 billion tons in the proven group. These resources could last for over 500 years at the present rate of production and more than two centuries at the levels planned for 1980. However, a simple division of reserves by rates of production ignores locational anld quality

problems whose dimensions require detailed analysis.

Table V shows the distribution of these resources in terms of the fields

currently under exploitation and those that may be developed in the future. It is apparent from these dlata that two fields dominate the reserve pattern as they (1o the production structure. The Kuznetsk Basin of central Siberia and the Donets lBasin of southern European Russia account for over half of the proved and probable coking coal resources of the USSR and nearly three- fourths of the reserves of the fields currently producing coal for coking purposes. It is also evident that nearly 70 per cent of these resources lie in central and eastern Siberia far from the present centers of population concen- tration and markets. Tbhis contrasts strongly with the production pattern where nearly two-thirds of the output is concentrated west of the Urals. In the materials that follow, these fields will be evaluated and compared with respect to their location, resource structure, quality, mining characteristics, and cost.

TABLE V

COKING COAL REISE-RVES OF THlE USSR, 1958, FIELI)S CURRENrLY MINHID, AND POSSIBLEl NV DE.V1RLOIME4NTSr

(Millions of tons)

ABCi Per cent ABCiC2 Per cent

Fields Currently Mined Donets .6,821 22.2 11,320 16.3 Kuznetsk .10,507 34.2 22,143 31.9 Karaganda .3,336 10.9 3,823 5.5 Pechora .2,555 8.3 6,155 8.9 Kizel .650 2.1 800 1.2 Tkibuli .234 0.8 460 0.7 Tkvarheli .65 0.2 67 0.1 Norilsk .71 0.2 141 0.2

Sub total .(24,239) (78.9) (44,909) (64.8)

Possible Newv Developmients Bukachachinskb .50 0.2 50 0.1

Suchan .. 158 0.5 318 0.5 Sakhalin' .265 0.9 1,630 2.4 Southern Yakutsk. 614 2.0 2,510 3.6 Bureya .1,940 6.3 10,320 14.8 Ulukhemsk .677 2 . 2 2,438 3.5 Sayan Partizan .1,270 4.1 1,500 2.2 Novo-Metelkinsk . ,101 3.6 4,500 6.5 Uzgensk .42 0.1 472 0.7 Fan Yagnobsk .353 1.2 619 0.9

Sub total .(6,470) (21.1) (24,357) (35.2) Total .. 30,709 100.0 69,266 100.0

a Bratchenko, op. cit., pp. 135-170 (only reserves i n the K, KZh, PZh and PS categories). b Currently mined but resulting coal not utilized for the production of coke.



118 ECONOMIC GEO(;RAPHY

TABLE VI

SELECTED CHARACTEIRISTICS OF COAL MINING OPERATIONS IN THIE USSR

Proportion of Mean depth of Mean thickness Coefficient of inclined and steep

Field shaft operations of seams mined coal bearing seams currently mined (I960)a (I 958) c density (I 958) c

in meters in meters per cent (over 25? pitch) per cent

Donets ...................... 300 0.93 0.65 28.5 Kuznetsk .................... 178 2.21 1.70 60. 2 Karaganda ........ .......... 279 1.85 4.00 5.6 Pechora ..................... 274 1.53 2.50 28.8 Kizel ....................... 370b 1.39 low 72. 8f Georgia ........... 55b 2.42 high 58.4f USSR (mean) ................ 245 1.32 .... 30.0

a A. Boiko and B. Lernera, Editors, Karagandinski Ugolny Bassein, Spravochnik, Moscow, 1962, p. 38 (1960 data). b Ugolnaya Promyshlennosti' SSSR, Statisticheskii Spravochnik, Moscow, 1957, p. 24 (1955 data). c M. Bagashev, Spravochnik po Ekonsomike Urolnoi Promyshlennosti, Moscow, 1961, p. 60. d L. Ultiski, Voprosy Ekonomiki Koksokhimicheskoi Promyshlennosti, Moscow, 1960, p. 191. (No date given for these

materials.) The coefficient of coal bearing density is determined by dividing the total thickness of the coal seams and over- burden by the thickness of the coal seams themselves.

e Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 72. f Ugolnaya Promyshlennost' SSSR, op. cit., pp. 56-57, 1955 data.

Tables VI, VII, and VIII present an inter-field comparison of the deposits with respect to the depth and thickness of the coal seams, quality, mining operations, and costs of production.

THE DONETS BASIN

The Donets Basin, the most important single coal field in the USSR, is located in southern European Russia (see Fig. 2). This location is excellent, for the field lies within relatively short distances from the iron ore deposits of the South (roughly 300 miles from Krivoy Rog and from the Kursk field), from the centers of the Ukranian steel industry, and from markets in the Center (less than 375 miles from the Tula and Lipetsk mills). Although the field was discovered in 1721, exploitation on a significant scale was delayed until the beginning of the nineteenth century. Production expanded at a rapid pace during the latter part of the century, stimulated by the growth of markets in the railroad sector and by the expansion of demands for coal in the Ukrainian iron and steel industry. In 1913, when production reached 25 million tons, the field pro-

duced 90 per cent of the nation's output of coal. At that time, the Donets Basin was the sole producer of coking coal in Russia, and one-fourth of its output was utilized in the production of coke. By 1958, the field's production had expanded over sevenfold to a level of 182 million tons; of that total nearly one-third, or 55 million tons, was choking coal. However, with the rise of coal

TABLE VII

QUALITY OF COKING COALS BY FIELD IN TH1-E, USSR, 1958

Coking coal Ash Sulphur concentrate

Field content content5 after per cent per cent cleaningC

per cent

Donets............ 19. 7 2.0-5.0 69.9 Kuznetsk .13.5 0.5-1.5 81.4 Karaganda .19.4 0.7-1.0 56.1 Pehora .16.5 0.8-1.0 70.6 Kizel. 21.4 6.0-7.0 69.0 Georgia .34.0 1.0-1.5 32.21 Norilsk .21.5 0.2-1.5 46.8d

a Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 122. b L. Ulitski, Voprosy Ekonomiki Obogshcheniya Uglei,

Moscow, 1960, p. 31. e Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 122. Comparable figures for

Pennsylvania and West Virginia were 78.5 and 81.6 per cent, respectively, in 1961 (all coal mechanically cleaned), Minerals Yearbook 1961, Vol. 11, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C., 1962, p. 119.

d Ugolnaya Promyshlennost SSSR, op. cit., p. 82 (1955 data).



COKING COAL SUPPLY IN THE SOVIET STEEL INDUSTRY 119

TABLE VIII

PRODUCTIVITY, COST, AND CAPITAL INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS IN COAL MINING OPE RATIONS, BY FIELD, INT THE USSR

Mining cost Mining and Capital investment required Yearly output Monthly outpst per ton of beneflciation per ton of coking coal capacity

Per shasfa per production unprocessed cost per tou of (shaft operations)f FIeld IoI'8 workerb nokicge Ockng coal 93I s rubles

thousand tons 1959 19055 conentrated . _ tons rubles .95

rubles All costs Industrial costs

DonSCts s........... 227 26.4 109.0 146.3 240.0-280.0 150.0-175.0 Kuznetsk .804 46.9 64.0 86.6 172.0-194.0 140.0-152.0 Karaganda ........ 534 47.8 61.6 96.1 150.0-196.0 96.0-125.0 PeChora .525 36.5 98.1 141.4 351.0 220.0 Kizel .409 33.2 91.1e ? 310-0-319.R0 ? Tk eIrC eli . 104.3 127.3 349.0-3500 O Tkibuli .......... 231 33.4 79.9 263.1 ? ? USSR (meant). 298 33.2 ? ? ? ?

a agashev, op. cit., p. 60. b Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 344. c Ugolnaya Promyshelennost', op. cit., pp. 235 and 237. dI Zenkis, op. cit., pp. 77, 82 and 101-102. Costs are in rubles before 1960-1961 revaluation. e luternational Cool Tr'de, U. S. Bureau of Mines, No. 12, 1947, p. 20. I Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 344. All costs include costs of housing for workers. Costs are in rubles before 1960-1961 re-

vraluation. E Voprosy Koksoksinmicheskaya Proisvodstvo, op. cit., p. 191, and A. Zvorkin, D. Kirzhyer, and M. Kutldin, Ekononlika

Gornoi Pronmyshlennosti, MosCow, 1961, p. 155.

<- ; Gor

SM0~~~~~~~~~~~~

1ons ..ZI 0 - 4 \II5I Kof MikJ Alsk

. Pishe

.oic aa 20 Rsilustd _, OerOvr ;

FIG, 2. The regIollal settlulg of the Donlets Coal field.



120 ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

MODIFIED FROM

AND|EEV Coking Coals Anthracite Coals

etstGas and Long Semi-Anthracite Flame Cools and Leon Coals

0 30 60

Lugans ~ ~~scale: miles

Konstantinovka adev~aLgas

0 60)t amensk-Shakhtinsk

1 9 ~~~~~G rIvk

V~~~~~~~~~ Krasny -Luch

. ... . .

Don'eFso

VelII kona doIs k

FIG. 3. The Donets coal field.

production in other fields, the share of the Donbas had declined to less than three-fifths of the Soviet output of coking coal.

The basin, as presently defined, oc- cupies an area of over 23,000 square miles in the southeastern portion of the Ukrainian SSR and Rostov Oblast of the RSFSR. Its shape is that of a rough quadrilateral with an east-west dimension of roughly 250 miles and a north- south extent of approximately 100 miles (see Fig. 3). The so-called "Great Donbas, " which has received so much attention in the Soviet literature, is much larger, with an area of about 37,500 square miles, and stretches to the Dnepr region.

The proved and probable reserves of coal in the Donbas were estimated in 1958 as 66 billion tons; and, of these, 46 billion tons or roughly 70 per cent were allocated to the proved group (see Table IX). About one-fifth of the latter, or nine billion tons, were classified as of

coking quality. The best quality grade (K) accounted for only 5 per cent of the proved resources. Table X indicates the distribution of the proved and probable coking coal resources by district, and the key areas are located on Figure 3. It can be seen that the main coking coal beds are located in the western, northern, and northeastern sections of the basin. Five of the districts accounted for over 84 per cent of the proved resources, and three of them Donetsk-Makeyevka, Tsentralny, and Almaznom-had two- thirds of the proved resources. A large share of the deposits lie at considerable depths. As of 1956, it was estimated that about half of the proved coking coal reserves lay below 600 meters. There have been discoveries in recent years of quality coking and gas coals in the western part of the Donets Basin in Dnepr- petrovsk Oblast. Soviet geologists have reportedly found five to twelve low pitch seams ranging in thickness from two to six feet; these are apparently low in




TABLE IX

PROVED COAL RESE RVES (A BCI) OF THIE I)ONETS BASIN. 1958, 1BY QUALITY AND AVAILABILITY STATUSa

Gas Cooking coals coals Other

_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - coals T otal

K Zh PS(OS) Gc

Existing shafts .............................. 832 1,485 707 1,568 3,513 8,107 Shafts under construction .................... 240 869 519 1,059 1,002 3,689 Shafts to be sunk, 1958-1965 ................. 226 601 304 1,432 72 2,635

Total expected shaft ........................ 1,298 2,955 1,530 4,059 4,587 14,431 capacity (1965)

Proved reserves .......... ................... 2,335 4,510 2,402 15,409 21,783 46,439 Percentage of proved reserves ................. 0 5. 9. 7 5. 2 33. 2 46.9 100.0 Share of shaft capacity to proved reserves ...... 55.6 65.5 63.7 26.3 21.1 31.1

a Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 146.

ash and sulphur content and amenable to coking (the first shaft went into operation in December of 1962). There have also been further discoveries of quality coking coals in the north, in the Kamensk-Shakhtinsky area and in the Tatsinsk district on the eastern edge of the Donbas.

The field's general geological structure is that of a broad synclinoriuni, whose coal beds are of lower Carboniferous and upper Permian age. Rejuvenation during the Tertiary period with accom- panying faulting and folding has frag- mnented the coal beds in many areas. Nevertheless, the coal seams are pre- dominately level or gently dipping, far

more favorable, for example, than the Kuzbas, but not as advantageous as the pattern in Karaganda. Compared to the other major fields, the Donbas seams are remarkably thin (Soviet reserve estimates for this field include seams down to 0.3 meters, whereas the minimum elsewhere for bituminous and anthracite coals [not including lignite] is 0.4 meters). Another problem is the depth of operations which is far greater than that for the Kuzbas but: not appre- ciably greater than that for Karaganda or Pechora. However, these depths are not unusual: for example, mining operations are common at greater depths in some regions of western Europe. How-

TABLE X

COKING COAL RESERVES OF 'TH1E DONETS BASIN, 1956, BY DISTRICTIL

(Millions of tons)

Proved Probable EIconomic ABCIC2

region ___ __

Amount Per cent Amnount Per cent

Donetsk-Makeyevka .Dolletsk 2 23 2 23.9 2435 32. 1 Tsentralny (Gorlovka) .Dolsetsk 1998 21 .4 832 11 .0 Velikonadolsk . Donetsk 686 7.3 1451 19.2 Almaznorn (Kadevka) ...Lgansk 2100 22.5 868 11.5 Krasnodon .Lugansk 866 9.3 881 11.6 Otherb....................................1469 15.6 1107 14.6

Total .9351 100.0 7574 100.0

a Shabarova, op. cit., pp. 47-53 [K, PS(OS), Zh (PZh) reserves]. E Eight scattered districts of the Donetsk, Lugansk and Kamensk economic regiolls.



122 IXCONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

ever, averages in this instance are misleading, for the coking quality coals are mined at much greater depths (up to 950 mineters compared to the average of 300 meters, with new shafts being built below the 1200 meter level). There are also difficulties with underground water and noxious coal gases in the mines. Capital investment requirements in the 1)onbas are quite high, notably greater than those for the Kuznetsk Basin and for the Karaganda field; and productivity levels are markedly inferior to those of the other major fields, whether measured on the basis of output per shaft or worker productivity (see Fable VIII). All of these elements are reflected in high mining costs, much higher, for example, than those at Karaganda or in the Kuznetsk Basin. Costs in these competing areas are less than three- fifths of those in the Donbas. The region is even at a cost handicap with respect to the Pechora field, despite the difficulties under which mining operations take place in that area.

Another element of the Donbas mining pattern which is of serious concern to Soviet planners is the deterioration of the quality of its coals. This problem has two facets: the first is the increasing proportion of u ndesirable impurities in the coals currently mined; and the second is the rapid depletion of the better grades of coking coals.

The impurity problem has always been a serious one in the use of Donbas coals for coking purposes, for the coals contain roughly 20 per cent ash and between 2 and 5 per cent sulphur (see Table IX). High ash content in a coking coal is undesirable because it reduces the calorific power of the resulting coke and increases the consumption of coke and limestone in the production of pig iron. One source reports that each per cent of ash lowers the productivity of

the blast furnace by at least 2 per cent.7 It should also be noted that unless the ash content is reduced, unnecessary transportation costs are incurred in the shipment of coal containing this waste material to the coking plant. High ash content in a coking coal may also result in a brittle coke, and in the USSR where coke is shipped long distances, such as the movement from Ukraine to Lipetsk and Tula, or Kemerovo to the central Urals, the coke may break and be rendered unsuitable for blast furnace operations. Obviously, a coking coal with a low ash content is highly desirable, yet the share of such coals in the output of the Donbas is extraordinarily low and steadily decreasing. Of the total coking coal used in the South's coking industry in 1950, only 13 per cent was classified in the low-ash category, and by 1959 that share had been reduced to 6 per cent.8 The ash of raw coking coals produced in the Donbas increased from an average of 9.5 per cent in 19319 to 13.8 per cent in 194010 and 19.6 per cent in 1958. This has necessitated cleaning to reduce this impurity to tolerable levels. However, despite the fact that practically all coking coals produced in the Donbas are now cleaned, the ash content of coals used in Ukrainian coke ovens increased from 11.9 per cent in 1940 to 13.4 per cent in 1959.11 The sulphur problem is an even more serious one, for Donbas coals rank among the world's highest in their sulphur content, and it is extremely difficult to reduce the level of this impurity even by the most intricate cleaning operations. High sulphur increases the consumption of coke

7 R. Livshits, Razmeshcheniye Chernoi Metal- lurgii SSSR, Moscow, 1958, p. 36.

8 Ulitski, Obogashcheniye Uglei, op. cit., p. 61. 9 Bolshaya Sovetskaya Entsiklopediya, First

Edition, Moscow, 1931, Vol. 23, p. 199. 10 Ulitski, Obogashcheniye Uglei, op. cit., p. 12. "1 Ibid., p. 60. Cleaned West Virginia and

Pennsylvania coking coals in recent years have averaged 4.5 to 6.0 per cent ash.




and limestone in the blast furnace and lowers the quality of the pig iron by reducing its tensile strength, requiring an increased consumption of manganese in the steel making process.

Ulitski reports that the reduction of sulphur content by 0.5 per cent. can increase pig iron production by 10 to 15 per cent. Coking coals currently mined in West Virginia and Pennsyl- vania contain less than 1 per cent sulphur, yet over nine-tenths of the industrial reserves (AB) of coking coal in the Donbas contain more than this proportion, and two-thirds of these reserves contain over 2.5 per cent sulphur.12 It should also be noted thatthe increased ash and sulphur contents of Soviet coking coals have resulted from a sharp rise in the level of mechanization of mining operations, similar to experience in this country.

To cope with the problems of high ash and sulphur content in the coals of the South and the other coal mining regions of the nation, the Soviet Union has invested large sums in the building of coal preparation and cleaning plants, duplicating experience in western E urope and in the United States. While such cleaning operations improve the quality of the coal, they necessarily reduce *the amount of coal available for consumption in coke plants. Thus, the concentrate yield of Donbas coals is only 70 per cent of the raw coal input.

Another vexing problem facing tech- nicians and planners in the Donbas is the depletion of the better grades of cooking coal. Despite the construction of deeper shafts and the increasing use of thin and complicated seams to tap such supplies, the available industrial reserves of high grade coals are very restricted. This has forced the coking industry to utilize coals that were largely avoided before the war, such as those in the G

12 Ibid., p. 32.

category, whose high volatility causes them to shrink drastically in the coking process. fable XI demonstrates the changes in the quality pattern since 1935. It can be seen that the share of K grade coal used for coking has declined from one-third to less than one-fifth. Less impressive declines have been registered for the PS and PZh coals, which are not as desirable as the K grade. In the reverse sense, there has been a spectacular increase in the importance of the gas coals which now account for one-fourth of the coke oven mix. How pleasing this shift has been to consumers in the Soviet steel industry is debatable. Certainly, technology has improved significantly in the post-war period, and there has not been any noticeable decline of productivity in the blast furnaces of the Ukraine which could be attributed to this change. If such a decline has taken place it has been masked by the spectacular results of oxygen enrichment. Nevertheless, this transformation is a recognition of the reserve and quality status of Donbas coal deposits, and it will undoubtedly continue to the limits that technology permits.

TABLE XI

A PERCENTAGE, COMPARISON OF RESERVES AND PRODuCTION

OF COKING COALS, BY GRADE, IN THEl.

DONBAS, 1935 TO 1965

Share of Share of coals used for the proved production of cokeb

reserves" Grade

I 958 1935 1940 1950 I 958 i965 plait'

K. 5. o 32.1 22.2 22.3 21.2 18.3 PZh. ... . 9.7 44. 7 51.3 45.6 41.0 40.3 PS..... 5.2 21.2 19.0 17.5 15.2 17.0 G ..... 33.2 1.5 7.5 14.2 21.8 24.0 Other ... 46.9 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.4

Total. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Bratchenkoop. cit., p. 146. b Koks i Khimiya, No. 12, 1959, p. 4. c V. Khllebnikov, Sovetskaya Cherumaya Metallurgii,

I1959-I965, Moscow, 1960, p. 80.




rasnoyars|

kR ods emNovosi bis a ; s l

FIG. 4. The regional setting of the KUZNETSK COAL FIELD

k~~~~~~~~~~~o ev

emiXelti_ _ _ Railroad scale : miles

FIG. 4. The regional setting of the Kuznetsk coal field.

THE KUZNETSK BASIN

The Kuznetsk Basin of central Siberia ranks as the second most important coking coal field of the Soviet Union. It is the main supplier for the steel and chemical industries of the Urals and Siberia. Coal was first discovered in the Kuznetsk Basin in 1721, but it was not until the first decade of this century that mining developed on a significant scale. The construction of the Trans- Siberian Railroad, which reached Novo- sibirsk in 1895 and Irkutsk in 1900, and the building of a branch line to Novo- kuznetsk in the Kuzbas in 1915, all acted as spurs to mining activity. Nevertheless, the major period of mining development in the basin came during the early thirties with the development of the Ural-Kuznetsk complex. The requirements for coking and energy coals both in the southern Urals and in the Kuzbas, itself, stimulated a rapid increase in the mining of coal. Produc-

tion rose nine-fold from 1928 to 1940 to a level of over 21 million tons. Of this total, roughly one-third was coking coal. By 1958, the beginning of the current plan, the output of the Kuzbas had reached 75 million tons, and of this amount nearly 26 million tons were used for coking purposes.

The Kuznetsk Basin, which is shown in Figure 4, is located in Kemerovo Oblast of south-central Siberia (small portions lie in Novosibirsk Oblast and Altay Kray). The field lies roughly midway between the eastern and western borders of the Soviet Union, about 2360 miles east of Moscow and 1275 miles east of the Urals. It has an area of over 10,000 square miles and forms an irregular quadrilateral bounded by the Salairsk Ridge on the southwest, the Kuznetsk Ala-Tau on the east, and the Gornaya Shoria on the south. On the northwest, the basin merges with the Western Siberian Lowland. Unlike conditions prevailing in several of the other



COKING COAL SUPPLY IN THE SOVIET STEEL INI)USTRY 125

OUTLINE OF COAL MINING DISTRICTS BEDS FROM ANOREEV nzhero- Sudzhensk 1, Anzhersk 5. Prokopevsk -Kiselevsk

2. Kemerovo 6. Kuibishev 3. Leninsk 7 Ossiniki 4. Belovo 8. Toam-Ussinsk

Major Quality Coking Cool Reserves

COAL BEDS T c

Boalokhonsk (Caking) Prokapek . ,

0 Yerunokovsk ( Caking) Novo-Kuznets

Conglomerate (Lignite)

0 15 30

scale: miles

FIG. 5. The Kuznetsk coal field.

major coal basins of the Soviet Union, the climate presents no major obstacle to mining development. The region's temperatures resemble those of northern Minnesota and Wisconsin. Although the winters are relatively long and severe, mining operations are carried out on a

year-round schedule, and permafrost is not a problem.

The layout of the field is shown on Figure 5. Geologically, the basin is a closely folded geosyncline, whose coal beds are of Upper Carboniferous and Permian age. Two hundred and sixty-



126 ECONoMic GEOGRAPHY

TABLE XII

COAL RESERVES OF THE KUZNETSK BASIN, BY QUALITY, IN 1958a

(Millions of tons)

A B C1 ABCi C2 Total

Coking coalb .......................... 2,563 2,772 4,772 10,507 11,636 22,143 Other coals .......................... 5,342 5,171 15,147 25,260 139,059 164,319

Total .............. ............ 7,905 7,943 19,919 35,767 150,695 186,462

a Kuznetsk Ugolny Bassein, Statisticheskii Spravochnik, Moscow, 1959, pp. 44-45. b K, KZh, Zh and PS coals.

one coal seams are recognized, of which 90 are currently under exploitation. These seams are grouped geologically in three major coal series: the Balak- honsk, Yerunakovsk, and the Conglom- erate. The latter contain lignite deposits currently undeveloped. The most pro- ductive coking coal bed is the Balak- honsk, located on the margins of the field, although both it and the Yeru- nakovsk contain coking coals.

This field must be rated as the largest coking coal deposit in the USSR, for it possesses about one-third of the proved and probable quality coals of the nation and roughly half of the reserves in those fields that are currently mined for coking purposes (see Table V). The Kuzbas was credited in 1958 with 22 billion tons of quality coking coals out of a total of 186 billion tons of coal in the proved and probable categories. Nearly one-

half of these coking coals were rated as proved deposits and one-fourth were classified as industrial resources. To these, of course, must be added the reserves of less desirable grades such as gas coals, which, as indicated earlier, are also used in the coke oven mix. Table XIII presents an analysis of the basin's proved coal resources by quality category and mining status. It should be noted that the share of quality coals in these reserves totals nearly 30 per cent, whereas the comparable figure for the Donbas is only 20 per cent. Perhaps more significant is the fact that the share of K and KZh coals in the Kuzbas is far higher (17 per cent of the total) than the Donbas proportion (5 per cent).

Figure 5 also shows the division of the field into mining districts, and the categorization of the reserves of these districts by grade is indicated in Table

TABLE XIII

PROVED COAL RESERVES (ABCi) OF THE KUZNETSK BASIN, BY QUALITY AND AVAILABILITY STATUS, IN 1958a

(Millions of tons)

Coking coals Other coals Availability status Total

Zh K, KZh PS(OS) SS G, D Varied

Existing shafts ........................ 976 1,857 310 1,367 995 1,592 7,097 Shafts under construction ............... 228 523 .... 48 286 98 1,183 New shafts (1959-1965) ................ 1,117 800 273 82 1,407 647 4,326

Total expected shaft capacity (1965) 2,321 3,180 583 1,497 2,688 2,337 12,606 Proved reserves .......... .............. 2,915 6,035 1,503 4,956 10,561 9,733 35,703 Percentage of proved reserves........... 8.2 16.9 4.2 13.8 29.6 27.3 100.0 Share of shaft capacity to proved reserves 79.6 52.7 38.8 30.2 25.5 24.0 35.3

a Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 150.



COKING COAL SUPPLY iN THE SOVIET STEEL INDUSTRY 127

TABLE XIV

PROVED RESERVES OF COAL, BY DISTRICT AND GRADE, IN THE KUZNETSK BASIN IN 1958a

(Millions of tons)

Coking coals Other coals

District Total

KKZh Zh PS SS GGZh Varied

Anzhersk ..................... ... 147 356 10 234 747 KemeroVo ........................ 1,065 ..... 202 1,882 96 152 3,397 Leninsk ..... ....................... ..... 427 ..... 2,964 989 4,373 Belovo .............. .......... ..... 327 81 12 420 ProkopeVsk-KiseleVsk .................. 2,538 ..... 121 701 1,223 6,949 Kuibishev ......................... .. 484 ..... 2,366 822 91 1,397 Ossiniki ........................ ..... 928 109 1,038 Tom-Ussinsk ........................ 1,610 326 137 ..... 806 1,452 4,331 Other ............ ............ 618 423 687 698 4,129 6,433 13,051

Total ................ ........ 6,035 2,915 1,503 4,956 9,599 10,695 35,703

a Ksuznetsk Ugolsy Bassein, op. cit., pp. 50-51.

XIV. Four of these districts have large reserves of coming coal: Prokopevsk- Kiselevsk, Ossiniki, Kemerovo, and Tom- Ussinsk. Of these, only the first two were major producers of coking coal in 1957 (30 and 15 per cent respectively of the basin's output)."3 With the major expansion of coking coal output in the Kuzbas envisaged during the current seven year plan, one-third of the shaft capacity under construction has been allocated to the Tom-Ussinsk district, which came into production in 1953.

As indicated earlier, the most pro- ductive coking coal beds lie on the margins of the Kuznetsk Basin. It is on the periphery, however, that the seams are often badly dislocated and sharply pitched, while those in the center are generally more level or gently dipping. Sixty per cent of the seams of the basin are classified as inclined or steeply pitched. In this respect, the Kuzbas is at a decided disadvantage as compared with the other major coking coal fields. However, this drawback is counter- balanced and minimized by other advantageous aspects of the Kuzbas pattern. Although no significant supplies of coking coal are mined by strip opera-

13 Kuznetsk Ugolny Bassein, op. cit., p. 1 1.

tions in this region, its shafts are located at relatively shallow depths, far shallower than those on the Donbas (178 meters on the average as compared with 300 for the latter field). Similarly, it has the advantage of thick easily mined seams which average 2.21 meters, greater than those of its competitors, especially the Donets Basin. These advantages are reflected in the highest productivity per shaft in the nation and one of the best labor productivity records. As a result, mining costs for the production of coking coal are among the lowest in the USSR; and, if one takes into account the costs of cleaning and beneficiation, Kuzbas costs are lower than those for all other Soviet fields (less than 60 per cent of those in the Donbas and two-thirds of those at Pechora).

Aside from the advantages of the Kuznetsk Basin in its mining operations, the quality of its coals is excellent. They are notably low in ash and sulphur content (13.5 per cent and 0.5 to 1.5 per cent respectively). Here, too, however, the level of ash content has risen appre- ciably since the war (it was 11 per cent in 1940). Cleaning is still necessary for the production of an effective metallurgical coke, but the resulting concen-



128 EcONOMic GEOGRAPHY

trate percentage is unusually high; 81 per cent as compared to roughly 70 per cent for both the Donbas and Pechora, and 56 per cent for Karaganda coking coals. While the problem of decline in the quality of coking coals is by no means as acute in the Kuzbas as that in the Donets Basin, there has been an appreciable deterioration since 1940. This is evidenced by the data presented in Table XV which show the relationship between the share of the various grades in the region's proved reserves and the proportions used for the production of coke. It is obvious that the quality coals are being mined and consumed at a rate that is out of proportion to the reserve structure. This has apparently necessitated a greater use of K2 and Zh coals than was the case pre- war. Nevertheless, the share of K1 and K2 coals used in the coke oven mix is more than double the proportion of K coals used in the Donbas mixture. It should also be noted that the share of gas coals is still quite low; but here, too, a relatively rapid increase in their utiliza- tionl is programmed in the current plan.

THE KARAGANDA BASIN

The Karaganda coal field, which covers an area of almost 1200 square miles, is the third most important coking coal producing region of the USSR. It is located in the central portion of Kazakhstan (see Fig. 6). The field was discovered in 1833, and production on a restricted scale began two decades later. However, until 1931 its total cumulative output was less than 2 million tons. In that year a rail line was completed from Karaganda to Petro- pavlovsk on the Trans-Siberian Rail- road; this permitted shipments of coking and steam coals to the southern Urals metallurgical complex at Magnitogorsk. By using a mixture of one-third Kara- ganda coking coal and two-thirds Kuz-

netsk coal, transport costs and the burden on the transport system was considerably reduced over those prevailing when Kuznetsk coal was used exclusively in the Urals. Two years later production reached a level of 1 million tons per year, arid by 1940 it had risen to 6 million tons, of which one-fifth was coking coal. Between 1941 and 1943, a second route was opened via Akmolinsk and Kartaly to Magnitogorsk, which again reduced the rail distance to the southern Urals. In the postwar era, major efforts have been made to raise the production of the Karaganda mines and particularly their coking coal output. Production levels in 1958 were four times those in 1940, but the relative share of coking coal in the total output had only risen to 27 per cent. Mining, coal washing and cleaning, and the operations of the new Karaganda steel complex are plagued by water shortages, for the field is located in a region of semi- desert climate. To solve the ever increasing water supply problems, construction of a canal from the Irtysh River, 320

TABLE XV

A PERCENTAGE COMPARISON OF RESERVES AND PRODUCTION

OF COKING COALS, BY GRADE, IN THE

KUZNETSK BASIN, 1940 TO 1965

Share of Share of coals used for the proved production of coke

reserves Grade

i958a 1940b 1950b 1959b 1 96.5 Plane

K1 .8.7 49.6 31.2 20.5 22.0 K2 ......... 5.1 7.4 20.0 27.0 24.2

KZh....... . 3.1 Zh .8.2 22.9 28.7 30.0 29.0 PS(OS). 4.2 7.2 9.3 6? 8.8 Ss...... 13.8 0.2 36

GGZh . 26.9 12.9 10.3 12.9 16.0 T . 6........ 21.6 .....6 Other. 8.4

Total. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

i Kuznetsk Ugolny Bassein, op. cit., p. 44. b V. Didenko, et. al., Organizatsiya Koksokhimichsekoye

Proizvodstvo, Kharkhov, 1961, p. 31. eKhlebnikov, op. cit., p. 80.



COKING COAL, SUPITY IN THE SOVIEP STEEI JNI)USTRY 129

Sverdlovsk

Novo sibi ris

Chelyobinsk F~~~t opovlovs

Magnitogorsk4

nal

Tsel i Semi I

SEA

0 50 10a

om---Railroad scale: miles

FIG. 6. The regional setting of the Karaganda coal field.

miles long, was begun ill 1961; it is scheduled for completion in 1965 (see Fig. 6).

The Karaganda Basin, shown in detail oln Figure 7, contains coal deposits of the upper and lower CarboniferouLs period. It has the form of a wide syncli- norium stretching approximately 60 miles from east to west, and 30 miles, north to south. \Vithin the basin, five major coal beds are recognized, and there are approximately 60 workable seams. The classification of these coal beds as to their general utility for joking purposes is indicated oln the map.

In comparison with both the Kuznetsk and Donets fields, the coal reserves in

the Karaganda region are quite limited. TFhus, its proved and probable resources of all coals are only 12.5 billion tons. Simnilarly, its coking coal reserves are modest in dimension. Estimates in 1958 credited Karaganda with less than 4 billion tons of proved and probable coking coazl reserves. TFable XVI shows the classification of these resources by quality and availability status. While the classification used at Karaganda differs somewhat from that common for the other fields, it is evident that a large share of its coking coals are in the higher grades.

TFhere are three major districts recognized within the IKaraganda Basin,



130 EcONoMIc GEOGRAPHY

AFTER ANDREEV ET AL

AND MATEEV

Karaganda (Coking Coal: mixed)

LZ Akkudusk ( Steam Coals)

| 0 30 60 ~~ ~~Z 3 AshlIyorsk ( Steam Coals ) scale: miles

FIG. 7. The Karaganda coal field

including the original mining area which bears the same name (see Fig. 7). The Churubai-Nura district was surveyed in 1944 and the Tentek in 1950. As can be seen from Table XVII, the Kara- ganda district contains over half of the proved reserves of the basin. Its share of the coking coal resources is more limited. The extensive quality coking coal resources of the Tentek and Churu- bai-Nura districts coupled with the relatively low ash content of their coals have been reflected in major capital investments in these areas since 1958. Production in the latter district began in 1959; by 1965, eight shafts are to be in operation there. Exploitation of the Tentek deposits is now underway, and seven shafts are to be completed in this

district by the end of the plan period. At that time, it is hoped that over half of the greatly expanded coking coal output of the Karaganda field will be derived from these new mining areas.

As is evident from the data in Table VIII, mining costs at Karaganda for the shaft production of coking coal are lower than those for all competing fields. The reasons for this competitive advantage are not absolutely clear from the published data (see Table VI); for its operations are deeper than those in the Kuzbas; its seams are somewhat thinner; and its productivity per shaft is lower. However, the seams are extremely flat (less than 6 per cent are classified as inclined or steeply pitched), the deposits have a remarkably high




TABLE XVI

COAL RESERVES OF THE KARAGANDA BASIN, 1958-

(Millions of tons)

A B C1 ABCi C2 ABCSC2

Quality Categories KKZh ...................1................. 146 98 136 381 50 431 K ................... 315 237 356 908 214 1,122 K2 .474 325 651 1,451 223 1,674 KZh .............. 244 184 168 596 596

Coking coals .1,179 844 1,311 3,336 487 3,823 Other coals .591 786 4,192 5,569 3,172 8,471

Total .1,770 1,630 5,506 8,904 3,659 12,565

Availability Status

By existing shafts .415 190 226 831 5 836 By shafts under construction .311. 231 334 876 10 886 By reserve holdings .861 778 1,001 2,640 10 2,650 Other .......... .................. 182 431 3,943 4,556 3,650 7,806

Total .1,769 1,630 5,504 8,003 3,675 12,178

I. Shapiro, Kazakhstan, Novaya Baza Chernoi Metallurgii, Moscow, 1959, p. 68.

coefficient of coal bearing density, and capital investment requirements are quite low.

Despite the seemingly high quality of the Karaganda coals reported earlier, and its low mining costs, the deposits have a decided disadvantage for the use in the production of coke. Though the coals have a tolerable sulphur content, their ash constituent is very high

(over 19 per cent) and is slowly increasing. While this level is not higher than that common in Donbas coking coals, the physical structure of the deposits is such that they are extremely difficult to clean and the concentrate yield is very low (56 per cent). These and other technical problems have made it impos- sible to use the coals as the sole corn- ponent in the coke oven mix. The share

TABLE XVII

COAL RESE RVES OF THE KARAGANDA BASIN, BY DISTRICT, IN 1958a

(Millions of tons)

Karaganda Chsrubai Tentek Total

Industrial Reserves (AB) Coking coals ......................................... 796 760 468 2024 Other coals .......................................... 892 356 125 1374

Total ............ ...... 1688 1116 593 3398

Proved Reserves (ABCi) Coking coals .1398 1292 646 3336 Other coals .3651 1611 299 5561

Total ................................................. .5049 2903 945 8897

Mining Status of Proved Reserves Existing shafts. .73 ........739 91 0 830 Shafts under construction .377 499 0 876 Reserve shafts ....................................... 716 1132 793 2641 Other .. 3217 1181 152 4550

Total ................................................ 5049 2903 945 8897

a Shapiro, op. cit., pp. 62-64.



132 E-CONomic GEOGRAPHY

of Karaganda coking coals used in the southern Urals is now 40 per cent; however, experiments are now under way, which, if successful, should make it possible to raise this proportion.

THEl PECHORA BASIN

The Pechora coal field, which embraces an area of approximately 38,000 square miles, is the fourth most important coking coal producing region of the Soviet Union. It lies in the drainage basins of the Pechora and Usa Rivers in the northeastern corner of European Russia (see Fig. 8). Two-thirds of the proved and probable reserves of this field lie in the Korni ASSR and the remainder within Archangel Oblast. The mines lie between latitudes 65 and 68 degrees North on the western margins of the northern Ural Mountains. Here the climate is extremely severe, with average January temperatures of six degrees below zero and minima of 40 to 50 degrees below zero. The snow cover lasts eight months of the year with an average thickness of 28 inches. Summers are short and cool. Eighty-five per cent of the Pechora Basin is affected by perma- frost; and, within the Vorkuta district, the depth of the permanently frozen ground varies from 165 to 426 feet. M/lining operations, then, can only take place under severe handicaps in this region, and this is reflected in heavy capital investment requirements for shaft construction and for the cost of related housing and services.

The Pechora field is the most recently developed of the major coming coal deposits of the USSR. Although coal was discovered in the region at the beginning of the 18th century, exploration was delayed until 1924, and production began only on a limited scale nearly a decade later.14

In 1937, the Soviet government began the constructioH of a single track rail

AFTERAt A ASE

KARA SEA

PECHORA SEA

KHALMER DISTRICT

URUADISTRICT

* ADISTRIT Col Basins

~~~~~~~~~~#4 . t Coal Fields

A 0 t ? *?..... ................... **. Southern Boundory of

) ! *,2 _s ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Railroad

FIG. 8. The Pechora coal field.

line from Konosha on the Moscow- Archangel Railroad, via Kotlas, 970 miles to Vorkuta in the northeastern part of the basin. The line was completed at the end of 1941 despite the exigencies of World War II. By 1945, coal production was over tenfold that four years earlier, reaching a level of well over 3 million tons. As of 1958, its output had reached nearly 17 million tons, of which less than one-sixth was consumed in the production of coke, although a far larger share was of coking quality.

If one places credence in the C3 or " possible" category of Soviet reserves discussed earlier, then the over-all resources of the Pechora Basin are huge. As indicated in Table XVIII, these reserves total 262 billion tons. However, only 2 per cent of these resources, or

I For details of the history of geological exploration and mining (levelopinent in the IPechora region see: Khokhlov et al, Razrabotka Uaolnikh Alestorozhdeni Pechorskovo Basseina, Moscow, 1960.



COKING COAL SUPPLY IN THE SOVIET STEEI, IND)USTRY 133

TABLE XVIII

COAL RE.SEIRVEIS OF THE PECHORA BASIN-

Reserve Categories (I958)a

AB C1 ABCi C2 C3 Total

Millions of tons ......................... 2,400 2,690 5,090 6,310 251,000 262,400 Per cent ............. ............ 0.97 0.98 1.95 2.40 95.60 100.00

Quality Categories, ABCiC2Cs (U956)1.

Coking coals Other coals Total

District Millions Per Millions Per Millions Per of tons cent of tons cent of tons cent

Khalmer ......................... 33,900 41.1 12,700 7.0 46,600 39. 2 Vorkuta ............. ............ 46,400 56.2 56,600 31.5 103,000 17.8 Inta and others ......................... 2,200 2.7 110,600 61.5 112,800 43.0

Total .......... ............... 82,500 100.0 179,900 100.0 262,400 100.0

a Computed from Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 139 and Khokhlov, op. cit., pp. 34-49. h Shabarova, op. cit., Table 26, opposite p. 26.

5 billion tons, were classified as proved in 1958. Since that date, further exploration and drilling has resulted in an increase in this estimate to 8 billion tons (1960).15 Not only are the reserves of this field massive in dimension, but a large share is rated as quality coking coal; thus, almost one-third of the over- all reserves were classified in the quality group and over half of the proved resources were in this group (see Tables XVIII and XIX). Later data indicate that the proved and probable choking coal resources of the Pechora field total over 12 billion tons, although no detailed breakdown by grade is available in the published statistics."6 Thus, this region's

15 Koks i Khimiya, No. 2, 1962, p. 13. 16 Khlebnikov, op. cit., p. 79.

coking coal reserves may be larger than those of the Kuzuetsk Basin.

Mining in the Pechora field has developed on deposits laid down during the Permi ian period. Tectonically, these deposits form a synclinal basin trending from north-east to south-west. The seams are relatively unconmplicated, and their dip is comparable to that of the Donbas with only 28 per cent of the beds classified as inclined or steep. In comparison with the other key coking coal fields, the Pechora deposits are moderate in thickness (1.85 meterss, and the average depth of operations is somewhat shallower than is common in the Ukraine. About half of the proved and probable reserves lie above depths of 300 meters and nearly nine-tenths

TABLE XIX

PROVED COAL RlE'SlE'RVElS OF THIl lECHORA BASINN, BY QUALITY CATEGORY, IN 1958a

Quality Categov'ies

K +KZh Zh G +D PS +SS Total

Millions of tons .............................. 250 230 234 200 5090 Per cent .................................... 4.9 45.2 45.9 4.0 100.0

- A. F. Zasyadko, TopliVmo-Eelergeticheskaya Pronmyshlemnosti SSSR, 1959-I965, Moscow, p. 90.




above the 600 meter level.17 Despite the difficulties of mining in this region, the productivity data (Table VIII) are not unusually low, although production per worker and per shaft are, of course, inferior to those of the Kuzbas. Never- theless, the over-all mining cost is second only to that of the Donbas among the major fields.

The Pechora deposits are by no means free from undesirable impurities; however, their ash content is considerably lower than that of the Donbas or the Karaganda deposits, and their share of sulphur is within technical bounds. They do require cleaning, and the resulting concentrate yield (71 per cent) is much higher than that at Karaganda, but again considerably below that of the Kuznetsk Basin.

It should also be noted from Table XVIII that practically all of the quality coals of the Pechora field are found in the Vorkuta and Khalmer districts of the Vorkuta mining region. These areas are shown in detail on Figure 9. The Vorkuta region covers about one-fifth of the area of the Pechora Basin. It produces about three-fourths of the coal output of the basin and all of its coking coal. However, as can be seen from the same table, the coking coal resources of the Khalmer district are quite large, yet they are virtually untapped. In addition, it should be noted that the Khalmer coals contain a moderately high proportion of K and PS coals which when mixed with those of Vorkuta form an excellent coke oven charge. As a result, the current plan calls for major investments in the construction of shafts in this district, so that by 1965 a significant share of the expanded output of the Pechora Basin should come from this area.18

17 Zenkis, op. cit., p. 31. 18 According to Ugol, No. 9, Sept. 1962, p. 5,

one shaft was in operation in the Khalmer district as of that date.

AFTER RAR9T2u0N.

BASSEINA, p,35 ./ 2 I KHALMER DISTRICT

N32N2

A_\ I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

VORKUTA DISTRICTtR~ R~R~It~

f X IJ .~ ~~~~~~~~~ Existing Shafts

< (gl ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Rail Lines

> L t ~~~~~~~~~~~scale: miles

FIG. 9. The Vorkuta coal mining region.

THE REMAINING FIELDS

Four fields complete the present pattern: Kizel in the Urals, Tkvarcheli and Tkibuli in the Caucausus, and Norilsk in north-central Siberia. Of these, only the latter does not produce coking coal for use in the steel industry.

The Kizel Basin, which has an area of roughly 8000 square miles, is located on the western flanks of the central Ural Mountains (see Fig. 1). It is the oldest coal field in the Urals, for mining began at the end of the 18th century. However, by 1913, annual production was less than 900,000 tons, and none of its output was used for the manufacture of coke. Production levels prior to World War II reached 4.5 million tons, about half of its output being used in the coke industry. Two decades later, in 1958, the basin's production was 12 million tons. It was still the only coking-coal- producing area in the Urals, but its



COKING COAL SUPPLY IN THE SOVIET STEEL INDUSTRY 1.35

output of this quality coal had remained constant, accounting for only one-fifth of its production.

Soviet estimates in 1958 credited Kizel with over-all reserves of 1100 million tons; of this total, 652 million tons were in the proved category (ABC,), with about 400 million tons accessible to existing shafts.1" The average depth of mining operations, which are all shaft, is 370 meters, and over 70 per cent of the proved reserves lie above 600 meterss.0 These data, however, mask the major problems in the utilization of the Kizel coals for coking purposes. Although practically all of the coals of this field are rated as coking quality, they are extremely high in ash and sulphur content and very difficult to clean. Ash content averages over 21 per cent and sulphur front 6 to 7 per cent. About one-third of the coal is "lost" in cleaning operations. As a result of these problems, only a minor share of the field's output is currently used for the production of metallurgical coke; 18 per cent went to the steel industry in 1957,21 and no appreciable increase is anticipated in the future.

There are two coking-coal-producing areas in the Caucausus, both in the Georgian SSR. One is located at Tkvar- cheli, in the southeastern part of the Abkhaz ASSR, about 56 miles south- east of Sukhumi; and the other, at Tkibuli, is situated 25 miles northeast of Kutaisi in the western part of Georgia. The latter was opened in the nmid- nineteenth century (between 1845 and 1905 it produced only 28,000 tons of coal).22 In the case of Tkvarcheli, which was discovered at the end of the last century, industrial production was de-

19 Bratcheriko, op. cit., pp. 161-163. 20 Shabarova, op. cit., p. 75. 21 Kizelovski Kamennugolny Bassein, Bermn,

1958, p. 5. 22 V. Andreyev and D. Kravchenko, Kamen-

nugolniye Basseiny SSSR, Moscow, 1958, p. 152.

layed until 1935. By 1958, the combined annual production of these fields had reached 3 million tons. The use of coal from both these deposits for coking purposes began in 1954 with the opening of production at the Rustavi steel mill (near Tblisi). Today, over 80 per cent of their output is used for this purpose.

The reserves of the five seams in Tkvarcheli field are limited. In 1958, its over-all reserves were estimated to be only 80 million tons, with 65 million tons in the proved category.23 These were practically all accessible to existing shafts or to those under construction. By any standards, these coals are exceptionally low in quality. They have ash contents varying from 24 to 48 per cent, and a sulphur content as high as 7 per cent. In the case of the Tkibuli deposits, its three seams had much higher reserves. The field had over- all resources of 460 million tons, with 290 million tons in the proved category. About 45 million tons of the reserves are accessible to existing shafts. Here, too, the coals are very poor. They vary from 20 to 45 per cent ash, but their sulphur content of 1.5 per cent is considerably lower than that of the Tkvar- cheli coals. Balancing, in part, the low quality and resulting losses inl cleaning of the Georgian coals is their relatively low mining cost. Both fields are charac- terized by thick coal seamns at compara- tively shallow depths. Capital investment costs are, however, remarkably high, reflecting, perhaps, the problems of mining development in highland areas. Because of their low quality, coals from these deposits must be mixed with higher grades from the Donbas to produce metallurgical coke. Here again, Soviet plans call for no significant increase in the output of coking coal from Georgia.

As noted earlier, the Norilsk coals 23 Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 163.



136 ECONOmIC GEOGRAPHY

are not used for the production of coke for the steel industry. The field is part of the huge Tunguska Basin. It is located in Krasnoyarsk Kray of north-central Siberia and lies 70 miles, by narrow- gauge rail line, east of Dundinka on the Yenisei River. Operations began in the 1950s; and, by 1958, its total output was 2.5 million tons, with about one- sixth categorized as coking coal. Its output is apparently utilized in the nonferrous metallurgical industry at Norilsk. The field has five known seams with an over-all thickness of 65 feet; however, only the upper seam is considered to be of coking quality. Ash content varies from 15 to 27 per cent, and the sulphur content is as high as 3.7 per cent. The proved reserves of this seam were estimated at 71 million tons in 1958, with probable reserves of 70 million tons.24 Although one Soviet source25 indicated that metallurgical coke would be produced in 1961 by new techniques, it is not anticipated that there would be significant increases in production because of limited reserves, relatively low quality, and poor location with respect to potential markets in the steel or chemical industries.

In sum, the Soviet pattern is a repeti- tion of that found time and again in the mining industry. Despite relatively high- cost operations and serious quality problems, the Donets Basin dominates the production pattern of the Soviet coal mining industry. In contrast, the Kuzbas, the finest coking coal field, whether measured in terms of the character of its mining operations and costs, the quality of its product or the size of its reserves, produces an output only half that of the Donbas. Explania- tions for this phenomenon must be sought in the realm of location advantage, measured in terms of transfer

24 Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 65. 24 Ibid., p. 164.

costs. The proximity of the Donbais to the key markets of European Russia has overshadowed its apparent deficiencies.

THE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION OF

COKING COAL IN 1958

It is apparent from the preceding analysis that there is a high proportion of undesirable impurities in Soviet coking coals, and that there has been a deterioration in the quality of the coals available for use in the coking industry. These factors coupled with an expansion of demands for quality coals in the steel and chemical industries have necessitated massive investments in the development of coal-washing and cleaning facilities in the Soviet Union in the postwar period. In these processes, the coals are improved markedly in quality, but there is a significant reduction in tonnage outputs when one compares raw coking coal production with coals consumed inl coking operations. Wide variations are also present in the yields of coal from the individual basins. Therefore, it is not possible to utilize the data on raw coking coal production, without modification, in any analysis of regional flows and consumption patterns. Figure 10 and Table XX show the estimated volume of coking coal consumed in coking for each of the major fields in 1958, taking into account the share of coal cleaned and losses in such operations; these reduced the available supply front 94 to 70 million tons. The sharp reduction ill the Donets, Karaganda, Kizel, and Georgian outputs should be noted. This reduced volume of processed and unprocessed coking coal was then available for consumption in the coke industry and for export.

With respect to the latter, the available published data on Soviet foreign trade for 1958 are precise for the volume and destination of exports and imports




0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

0~~~~~~~~0 0l. 11

06

< < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0~ 0

0

0

L~~~~~ ~0

0 c

C-\

/ 2~~~~~~~~~~4-

0~~~~~~~~~~

0~~~~~~~~~~

o 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0

0

0 ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~b0 0

U)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




TABLE XX

COKING COAL PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION IN 1958

Coking coal Coking coal Concentrate Coking coal Field production" cleanedb yield available ford

consumption

Donets ............ .................... 54,515 49,900 34,900 39,435 Kuznetsk ................................ 25,726 22,900 18,700 21,467 Karaganda ................................. 6,594 5,500 3,100 4,180 Pechora .............. .................. 2,547 3,100 2,200 2,200 Kizel .......................................... 2,216 2,000 1,400 1,400 Georgia .. ................................ 2,374 2,400 800 800 Norilsk ......................................... 435 ...... ...... 435

USSR .......... ...................... 94,407 85,800 61,100 69,917c

a Narodnoye Khozyaistvo SSSR, 1960, op. cit., p. 259. b Computed from Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 122, and Voprosy Ekonoiniki Obogshcheniya Uglei, op. cit., p. 10. The 3.1 million

tons noted for Pechora is based on Bratchenko. e D. Maslokov, Toplivny Balans SSSR, Moscow, 1960, p. 36, indicates that 71.1 Inillion tons of joking coal were consumed

in the coke-chemical industry in 1958. The two figures could not be reconciled, but the difference may be attributable to stockpiling or storage.

(I Cleaned coal concentrate plus uncleaned coal.

of bituminous coal, but they are not so with respect to the distinction between coking and non-coking coals involved in such movements. In that year, the Soviet Union exported approximately 8 million tons of bituminous coal, nearly three-fourths of which went to destina- tions in eastern Europe, the remainder going predominantly to Yugoslavia and Finland.26 Soviet sources indicate that, aside from the Finnish shipments, a significant share of these coals were coking varieties destined for the steel industry in these areas. The coking coals destined for export, apparently, were derived almost exclusively from mines in the Donbas, although there are reports that Pechora shipments moved to Fin- land and that Kuznetsk coals were exported to Japan. Any estimate made of the export of coking coals by field is subject to a wide margin of error. In this study, exports have been estimated using both bituminous coal trade statistics and data on the coking coal requirements of the various centers consuming Soviet coals. Another questionable element in the pattern is the problem of imports of bituminous coal from Poland

26 Vneshnyaya Torgovlya SSSR za 1958 god, Moscow, 1959, passim.

into the Soviet Union, which amounted to nearly 4 million tons in 1958. However, all available evidence indicates that this was a paper transaction and that these coals were shipped, for the credit of the USSR, to East Germany.27 On this basis, no value for imported coking coal has been included in the consumption patterns for 1958.

Figure 11 and Table XXI show the production of coke by region in the USSR in 1958. From these data and statistics on regional variations in the consumption of coking coal per ton of coke produced, estimates were made of the coking coal requirements of each of the coke-producing regions. These estimates, coupled with a wide variety of quantitative and qualitative data on the movements of coal, were used to arrive at the patterns depicted in Figure 12; this shows the estimated flows of coking coal, after cleaning, between producing fields and consuming regions in 1958.

The key elements in the flow patterns were as follows:

1. Of the coking coal available for 27 Impact of Oil Exports from the Soviet Bloc,

National PetroleLIum CouLcil, Washington, 1962, Vol. II, pp. 47--48.



COKING COAL SUPPLY IN THE SOVIET STEEL INDUSTRY 139 00 40 50 60 90 too Ito 20

/ I ;% 2 L//vV ~~~) < ~ @LFN AG

LAK FKotood $ JK~f BAYKAL

0ALTIE SEA'

/- -! < >,f

N~~~~~~s (rs \

W4& KuKosokoBdsi9

0g o !center>g4-- *- x

LAKE

Lh - yC C \ 8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ALKHASH < BLACK SEA

.T

flyl 5 > Nr; 9555

S1AS 25

No SEA It t 1o

_ ~~ : | L 1 u - | ;- r s ~~~ - g * Z 1 _= - v # 030,009_ FIS 1.0gol c{ odci atr ith ieUno19 co m---W0 550-

00 I (.3400 0 00 ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o t o

PIG. 1 1. Regional coke production patterns in the Soviet Union 1958 and 1965 (Plan).

consumption from the Donbas field, which totaled nearly 40 million tons, seven-eighths were consumed in coke plants in the Ukraine; at least 3 million tons were exported, 1 million tons were shipped to Moscow for consumption in its coke-gas plant, and a small fraction wras consumed in the coke ovens of the Rustavi steel mill in Georgia. It should also be noted that Ukrainian coke was shipped to steel mills in the Lipetsk and Tula areas (of the order of 2 million tons), but these are not indicated on this map.

2. The Caucausus coking coals were all used internally at the Rustavi mill in conjunction with receipts from the Donbas.

3. Coals from the Pechora Basin were shipped to the Cherepovets steel mill in northern European Russia (1186 miles) and to the Leningrad coke-gas plant (1470 miles).

4. The Kizel field shipped its low grade output, which was not suitable for metallurgical coke, to the Gubakha coke- chemical plant a few miles away and to the M\oscow coke-gas plant.

5. Coals from the Karaganda Basin were all delivered to the southern Urals where they comprised one-third of the charge at the Magnitogorsk steel com-

TABLE XXI

COKE PRODUCTION IN TIHE USSR IN 1958a

Region Thousand Per cen

North and Northwest .......... 1,629 3.2 Center .................... 1,323 2.6 Ukraine ........... 27,228 53.5 Georgia .... 763 1.5 Urals .... . . . 14,964 29.4 Western Siberia....... 4,733 9.3 Eastern Siberia. ...... 254 0. 5

USSR . 50,894 100.0

a Voprosy konormiki Koksokhnimceskoi Promyshlez- nosti, op. t., p. 70.




K~~~~~~

< <~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~Ii

I Z

0 z~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

10~~~~~~~~~~~

* 1. c~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~II / 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Izc

* II ) 0 11 -~~~~~~~~~~~~ ( 0~~~~~l

7E

0) *A.* ,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~) ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~.



COKING COAL SUPPLY IN THE SOVIET STEEL INDUSTRY 1.41

bine (730 miles) and three-fifths of the input at the Orsk-Khalilovo mill (about 800 miles).

6. Nearly one-third of the Kuznetsk output was used within the local industrial area, in the Novoktiznetsk mill and the Kemerovo coke chemical plant; the remainder was sent to the central Urals, particularly to plants at Nizbniy T.1,agil and Chelyabinssk (roughly 1200 miles), where it served as the sole component in the coke oven charge, and to mills in the southern Urals at liag- nitogorsk and Orsk (roughly 1400 miles), where it was used in conjunction with Karaganda coals. A minor share of the Kuznetsk output was shipped about 2200 miles to the Cherepovets plant, where it was used in conjunction with Pechora coals (one-fifth of the coke oven mixture). In addition, it should be noted that considerable quantities of coke from Kemerovo (well over 2 million tonls) were shipped to the Urals.

TIlE JPROJECTYED PRODUCTI()N ANI) (CON-

SUMPTION OF COKING COAxL IN 1965

Soviet plans for 1965 call for an output of 72 to 73 million tons of pig iron. The attainment of this goal, plus the satis- faction of rapidly growing requirements in the nonferrous metallurgy and chenii- cal sectors, and the increasing demands for Soviet coking coal and coke in the markets of eastern Europe, all. will require a major increase in cooking coal output by 1965. The original goal of 150 to 156 million tons cited earlier wIas first lowered to 151 million tons ili 1960; since that date it has probably l)een reduced again, but the new target has not been released. Ail average annual growth rate of 8 to 9 per cent was needed to meet the earlier target, yet the average increment from 1958 to 1962 was only 6 per cent per year. One indication of a cutback is the announced goal for 1963, which calls for a 5 per cent increase over

the previous year (see Table 1l). Another indication is the recently published reduction of the target for coke production from the original goal of 80 million tons in 1965 to a new level of only 74 million tons. The reasons for this cutback are not perfectly clear, for the target for pig iron production has been revised upward from a previous level of 65 to 70 million tons. In part, the decision to reduce the goal for coke production may have resulted from recent technical developments in the Soviet steel industry. Through oxygen enrichment and the increased use of natural gas in blast furnace operations, there has been a significant reduction in coke consumption. This has been documented by both Soviet and western experience. Thus, it may be possible to achieve the planned output of pig iron and steel ingots with a far lower consumption of coking coal than had been originally envisaged. In addition, as noted earlier, the relatively high consumption of coke in the Soviet chemical industry may be diminishing with the increased use of natural gas in this sector. Finally, there has been an evident lag in coal mine construction; however, it should be stressed that there may be a time lag before new shafts enter into production, so that there conceivably could be a sharp spurt in the final years of the plaan.

Table XXII shows the planned coking coal output of the individual fields ais of 1965; it is based on the earlier target of 151 million tols. The Donbas and the Kuzbas, of course, continue to dominate the production pattern. Their combined share, however, was scheduled to decline from 85 to 8() per cent, despite a major increase in their over-all output. In the reverse sense, the Pechora and Kara- ganda. operations were to grow very rapidly. Production in the former region was programnmned to double, while the




TABLE XXII

PLANNED COKING COAL PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION

IN 1965

Coking coal Coking coal production consumptionb

Field

Million Per Million Per tons cent tons cent

Donets............. 80.8 53.6 62.8 53.0 Kuznetsk ......... 39.6 26v2 35.8 30.2 Karaganda ......... 19.0 12.6 11.9 10.0 Pechora ............ 6.6 4.4 5.2 4.4 Kizel .............. 2.0 1.3 1.6 1.4 Georgia ............ 2.6 1.7 0.9 0.8 Norilsk ............. 0 .3 0.2 0.3 0.2

USSR .. 150.7 100.0 118.5 100.0

a Bratchenko, op. cit., p. 228. b Based on total from Maslokov, op. cit., p. 36; regional

adjustments based on concentrate yields for 1958 after cleaning.

output of the latter was scheduled to increase three-fold. No growth was planned for the Kizel, Caucausus, or Norilsk fields, and their shares accord- ingly were to be reduced. Finally, it is

noteworthy that no major development of coking coal production was anticipated in any new region.

Table XXII also shows estimates of the projected volume of coking coal available for consumption in the coking industry by 1965, and these are mapped on Figure 13. These data were computed using the 1958 concentrate yields coupled with the original planned production of each field: not only are the planned figures subject to revision, but the yields themselves may conceivably increase or decrease by the end of the plan; thus, there may be a significant margin of error in these estimates. Note again the marked reduction, resulting from cleaning operations, in the available coal for all of the fields other than the Kuzbas. It is anticipated that by 1965 all of the coking coal will be processed in this fashion as compared to 90 per cent in 1958.

LAK ~ ~ U~

* 4 / i Ki(el a ~ utretsk liosl? ~ ~ 1Kz k

/eafa j MT 90/

5 InEA \ ffi D 9 ~~Doels .!,_ <-a m go _t ro

( EBASAIA K~~~~~~~~~~~~~KHS

tL SEA SEA ASK A -ii

8LACK SEA \ g j<EA <a--: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Thousands of

; t )cASP$$ X > v '8 > f ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Metrm Tons

Oy ~ ~ ~ ~~~*o Poh'od ,E AT~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~250 Pand om

-ILES

FIG. 13. Coking coal available for consumption in relation to projected coking coal production, by field, in the Soviet Union in 1965.



COKING COAL SUPP'LY IN THE SOVIET STEEL INDUSTRY 143

Table XXIII shows the original plan for the production of coke by district in 1965. As noted earlier, this goal has been reduced, but no breakdown, by region, of the new target has been released. Utilizing these data it was possible, by the method described for the 1958 period, to determine the coking coal requirements of each of these districts as originally projected. Ani estimate of anticipated flows of coking coal from the various producing fields to these consuming regions is shown on Figure 14. It must be emphasized that the values used in the construction of these flow lines are relatively crude approximations; they are subject not only to errors resulting from data deficiencies, but also to more serious modifications due to plan revisions and failures to meet planned targets. It should also be noted that no statistics were available for planned export levels in 1965.28 With these limitations in view, it is possible to analyze the key elements in the planned production and consumption. of coking coal in 1965.

The forecasted level of production in

TABLE XXIII

PLANNED COKE PRODUCTION IN THE USSR IN 1965a

Region Thousand iPer cent

North and Northwest .......... 2,000 2.5 Center ....................... 5,700 7.1 Ukraine ...................... 36,700 45.9 Georgia ...................... 800 1 .0 Urals ......................... 21,900 27.4 Western Siberia ............... 8,700 10.9 Eastern Siberia ................ 200 0. 2 Kazakhstan ................... 4,000 5.0

USSR ........................ 80,000 100.0

a Based on data in Koks i Khirniya, No. 10, 1959, p. 47, and Khlebnikov, op. cit., p. 82. The apportioninent of tonnage between the North-Northwest and the Center is subject to a relatively wide margin of error. The estimate for the latter is based on N. Ovchininski, et al. Voprosy Razvitiya Chernoi Metallurgii v isentralnikh Raionakh SSSR, Moscow, 1961, p. 103, which gives the planned capacity, first stage, for the Novo-Lipetsk Mill as 8 million tons of pig iron with a coke consumption of 4.4 million tons. It should be stressed that these data are based on the original planned target of 80 million tons; as noted earlier, the revised target is now 74 million tonsl

the Pechora field is over 6.5 million toils, an ambitious target considering the difficulties of mine construction in this region. By 1961, its output was nearly 4 million tons; there was no indication in the literature that mines in this region had failed to meet year to year targets. If the plan for this field is fulfilled, its output should move in roughly equal amounts to the North and Northwest districts and to the Center. In the former region, the key consumers will be the Cherepovets steel mill which is being expanded, the Leningrad coke-gas plant, and the new Kaliningrad coke-gas works. Movements from this field to the Center will be focused on the greatly expanded Novo- Lipetsk steel complex. As a result of the construction of coke ovens in this region, movements of coke from Cherepovets to the Center should be largely dis- continued.

As noted earlier, despite cost and quality problems the absolute level of production in the Donbas is programmed to increase from 54 to 81 million tons. Judging from the results to date, it appears likely that the plan for this region will be fulfilled. As was the case in 1958, the Donbas should continue as the main source of coking coal for export markets, particularly in eastern Europe; however, the precise level of such flows has not been released. The largest share of this field's output will feed the steel mills in the Donbas, Azov, and Dnieper sub-regions. Consumption in the latter district should grow more rapidly than in the others. Most of the remaining coking coal will move to the Novo- Lipetsk mill and a minor share should

28 While such data were not available one Source (I. Popov, Energetiki Str an Narodnoi Demnokratii, Moscow, 1961, p. 294) indicated that the projected reduction of energy coal output in European Russia, engendered by a shift to oil and natural gas, mlay reduce exports of non- coking coals, but it is possible that coking coal exports inay increase.




2 0

8

fQ 0

< <0 fV'CD 8 A

I " IoI

_r o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o

_a....)..

U')~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a

C)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(a 'ra~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c

4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 U ?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a,

IZZ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -0




be consumed in the Rustavi steel mill in Georgia. It is also anticipated that coke shipments from the Ukraine to the Center will be essentially discon- tiniued for the reason noted above.

The plan calls for a marked expansion of coking coal production at Karaganda. However, production since 1958 has been far below planned levels.29 At this stage it appears highly unlikely that the original target will be reached. Neverthe- less, production levels by 1965 should be considerably above those at the beginning of the current plan.

Its shipments should become of increasing importance to the expanding steel industry of the southern Urals, where it is hoped that Karaganda coal may eventually predominate in the coke oven charge. In addition, an increasing share of its output will serve the requirements of the new Karaganda integrated steel mill whose coke ovens went into full scale operation in 1961.3?

Production in the Kuznetsk Basin will expand at a faster pace than that in the Donbas. Here, again, it can be anticipated that the original target will be fulfilled. However, there appears to be some lag in the construction of cleaning facilities. The field's output will continue to serve the central Urals; and, on a far more restricted basis than in the past, it should supply coking coal to the plants of the southern Urals. Kuznetsk coals will also provide at least half of the requirements of the Karaganda mill. The share of coals from this field retained in the Kuzbas industrial region will probably increase with the entry into production of the new West Siberian steel complex at Novo-Kuznetsk, whose first blast furnace will be operative this

29 See Narodnoye Khozyaistvo Kazakhstana, No. 4, 1959, pp. 20-27; and Ugol, No. 4, 1960, pp. 3-8.

30 Koksi Khimiya, No. 8, 1962, According to Shapiro, op. cit., p. 66, Karaganda coals will, ultimately, provide half of the charge in the coke ovens of this complex.

year, and continuing demands for coking coal in the region's older installations.

Finally, production in the Caucausus and the Urals will maintain its present pace. Coals from the Tkvarcheli and Tkibuli deposits will continue to be consumed at Rustavi, while the output of the Kizel field will again be shared by the nearby Gubakha coke-chemical plant and by the Moscow coke-gas facility.

PROSPECT

The Soviet economy is rapidly shifting from an emphasis on coal as its dominant energy source to petroleum and natural gas. This trend of course parallels experience in the United States and more recently inl Western Europe. Neverthe- less, both the USSR and the West antici- pate a major resurgence of coal output in the coming decades as well as the emergence of nuclear energy as a key source of power. Thus, the Soviet plan, reported in Table II, calls for a production of 1180 to 1200 million tons of coal by 1980, doubling the present output. The share of coking coal would remain at its present level of about one-fourth of the total production of 285 million tons. This expanded output of coking coal is designed to serve the needs of the steel industry, whose production is tentatively programmed to rise to a level of 250 million tons, as well as the rapidly growing requirements of the chemical industry.

THE OLDER FIELDS

Table XXIV indicates the projected growth in production for each of the major fields. It is noteworthy that the Donbas will continue to dominate the Soviet production pattern. Though di- minished in relative importance, it will still account for half of the nation's output of coking coal. The growth index (1960 = 100) for the field is 220, requiring an increase in production of about




TABLE XXIV

COKING COAL PRODUCTION IN THE USSR, 1960-1980

Ir96oa 1980 plane b .__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ G ro w th in d ex

Field 1960 = 100

Thousand tons Per cent Thousand tons Per cent

Donets ............................... 64,888 58.9 142,754 50.1 220 Kuznetsk ............................. 28,544 25.9 88,486 31.1 310 Karaganda ............................ 8,283 7.5 32,304 11.3 390 Pechora .............................. 3,799 3.4 14,056 4.9 370 Other ................................ 4,684 4.3 7,400c 2.6 158

Total ................................. 110,198 100.0 285,000 100.0 259

a Narodnoye Khozyaistvo SSSR, 1960, op. cit., p. 259. b Estimated from data in Ugol, No. 3, 1963, pp. 2-3; and Ugol, No. 8, 1962, p. 6. o The other category presumably includes the Georgia, Kizel, Norilsk, and Southern Yakutsk fields, although ISo further

breakdown was available.

78 million tons. Judging from the reserve data presented earlier, this level could be reached only with heavy capital expenditure. It would require the development of deeper shafts, far below present depths, and the exploitation of thin and complicated coal seams. In addition, and perhaps more critical, there must be a rapid expansion in the production and use of gas coals in the coke oven mix. According to Agroskin,31 the share of these low grade coals should be over 40 per cent by 1980 as compared with 25 per cent in 1961. The electrifica- tion of the Ukrainian railroads and the shift to oil and gas in the western areas of the USSR should release large supplies of gas coals for coking purposes. However, the feasibility of such a mixture, in a technical sense, is still to be determined; Soviet scientists have given this prob- lenm top priority in their pilot experi- inents. The coals of the Donbas should continue to serve the needs of the Ukrainian steel and chemical industries as well as the rapidly-growing require- menits of the new steel complexes of the Center, such as those at Novo-Lipetsk and Novo-Tula, plus the demands of markets in the Soviet bloc.

Plans for the Kuznetsk Basin call

31 A. Agroskin and A. Shelkov, Rasshireniye Ugolnoi Bazy Koksovaniya, MIoscow, 1962, p. 250.

for an even more rapid increase in production. By 1980, if the plan were fulfilled, it would account for nearly one- third of the Soviet output of coking coal. The reserves of the Kuzbas appear more than adequate to support such an expansion. However, here too, the better quality coals are being consumed at a faster pace than the reserves would warrant, although the problem is far less serious than that for the Donbas. Gas coals and other less desirable varieties will apparently become more important in the coke oven mixture. Current investments in the development of previously unexploited deposits, such as those in the Tom-Ussinsk district, should also bear fruit. Soviet plans for the utilization of the coking coals of the Kuzbas in the next two decades call for an expanded consumption within the Kuznetsk industrial region, coupled with increased shipments to traditional markets in the Urals. In addition, the new Karaganda steel mill should consume a larger share of the Kuzbas output. The development of new steel mills, in the so- called "Third Metallurgical Base, " will call for the use of Kuzbas coals in a new plant to be built at a still undetermined location in the Barnaul region; they should also serve as part of the mix at the Tayshet complex of eastern Si-



COKING COAL SUPPLY IN THE SOVIET STEEL INDUSTRY :1.47

beria, whose construction should soon be underway.

Greater relative increases are planned for the Karaganda and Pechora fields. Production in the former area would increase almost four-fold to a level of over 32 million tons, while the output of the Pechora region would reach 14 million tons. The target for Karaganda is predicted on the basis of a major expansion of production in the Churubai- Nura and Tentek districts; it appears extremely ambitious in the light of the field's reserve structure and past per- formiance.

Despite the relative difficulty of mine construction and mining operations in the Pechora field, the quality of its product and the size of its reserves will attract major investments in the next two decades. Currently a large proportion of the Vorkuta coals are used for energy purposes despite the fact that they are of coking quality. It is hoped that the construction of additional cleaning facilities will modify this pattern. Increased production of "fatty" coking coals in the Khalmler district should make it possible to suspend the shipment of Kuzbas coals to Cherepo- vets; and the over-all consumption of Pechora coals at this plant should increase rapidly, when the current plant expansion is completed. It is also anticipated that the field's output should serve at least part of the requirements of the expanded steel industry of the Center. However, the major projected change in its consumption pattern may be the development of markets in the central Urals, particularly at Nizhniy Tagil. Currently, a small share of the Pechora output moves over 1500 miles, via the Kotlas-Kirov line, to this center. Plans for the next decade call for the construction of a Pechora-Urals Railroad which has been long envisaged. Two variants of this line are under considera-

tion: the first, a so-called eastern variant, would run from Vorkuta via Polunoch- naya to Nizhniy-Tagil; and the western variant would lead from Ukhta via Troitsko-Pechorsk to Solikamsk where it would join the present Urals rail system. These routes involve distances of roughly 900 miles with a saving of about one-third in transportation costs. How- ever, the delivered price of Pechora coal at Nizhniy Tagil would still be considerably higher than that for either Kuznetsk or Karaganda coals. Never- theless, as indicated earlier, these supplies will be needed elsewhere so that cost considerations may not be the dominant element. Finally, production at Kizel and in the (Caucausus will probably decline on both a relative and an absolute basis as their limited reserves are exhausted.

POSSIIME New DE)VELOPMENTS

There are a number of fields with extensive reserves of coking coal that are either not currently mined or not used for coking purposes. These deposits may conceivably play a major role in the future supply of coking coal for the Soviet steel industry. While no detailed analysis of their resources is possible here, a limited appraisal is in order.32

According to Table V, which lists such deposits, these fields have proven resources of over 6 billion tons of coking quality coal, with an additional 18 billion tons in the probable category. Although Soviet plans for 1965 do not envisage the exploitation of these supplies for coking purposes, the planned output for 1980 (see Table XXIV) does show an unallocated amount of almost 7.5 million tons. As indicated earlier, the Kizel and Georgian fields (barring new discoveries) will probably decline

32 The discussion of these fields is based mainly on materials in Bratchenko, op. cit. and Zenkis, op. cit.



148 EICONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

in relative and absolute importance; therefore, the bulk of the planned output in the "other" category will presumably be derived from new centers of production.

Of such deposits (all of which are shown on Figure 1) the one which has received greatest attention in the Soviet press is the Southern Yakutsk field; it is destined to provide coking coal for new steel mnills to be constructed on the Baykal region and the Soviet Far East. This field, which has a known area of about 10,000 square miles, is located in eastern Siberia in a region that is isolated, sparsely populated, and plagued by deep perma-frost. Its development will require, at the outset, the building of an extremely costly rail link roughly 300 miles in length south to the Never station on the Trans- Siberian Railroad.

The field's over-all resources, based on incomplete surveys, are rated at 40 billion tons, with proved resources of 600 million tons in two deposits; the (Chul- mnakansk and the Neryunginsk. Their industrial reserves (AB) totaled 367 million tons.33 About three-fourths of the proved reserves were attributed to the Neryunginsk deposit. Both are rated as quality coking coal sources, for about half of their combined resources are of the K category and one- fourth are classified as the Zh type. Plans for the exploitation of these coals call for the mixing of the two grades to produce an optimum metallurgical coke. The coals of both deposits are verve low in sulphur and phosphorus, but their ash is high enough (10 to 36 per cent) to necessitate cleaning. Initial capital investment in the exploitation of the Southern Yakutsk coals will be extremely

33Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Soviet Po Izu- cheniyu Proizvoditelnikh Sil, Problemy Razvitiya Chernoi M etallurgii v Rayonakh Vostochneye Baykal, Moscow, 1960, pp. 56-60.

high because of the costs of rail coin- struction and operations in perma-frost. These will be offset, to a degree, by relatively low mining costs resulting from shallow, thick-seamed deposits amenable in part to strip operations.

The Novo-Metelkinsk deposit is a segment of the Irkutsk Basin. It lies 50 miles southwest of the Zalari station of the Trans-Siberian Railroad, in Ir- kutsk Oblast of eastern Siberia. Its over- all reserves are rated as 4.5 billion tons, of which one-fourth were classified in the proved category; and it is estimated that nearly half of the proved deposits could be mined by strip methods. A portion of these coals are of the GZh type which could be used as a component in the coke oven mlix, but they are inordinately high in sulphur content (6 to 8 per cent). Until technical advances are made which would permit the reduction of this impurity to appropriate levels, the Novo-Metelkinsk coals will probably be used for energy purposes. Ultimately, it is hoped that the output of this field will be used to supply part of the coking coal requirements of the Tayshet steel m-ill.

Another deposit which has excited Soviet planners is the Sayan-Partizan field. It is part of the broad Kansk- Achinsk Basin of the Eastern Sayan Mountains. The field is located 45 miles south of the Zaozernaya station of the Trans-Siberian line in Krasnoyarsk Kray. Its over-all reserves were reported as 1.5 billion tons, with almost 85 per cent of the resources in the proved group. Although the coals are not rated as quality coking coals, they are low in objectionable impurities and can be readily cleaned and mixed with better coals for the production of metallurgical coke. The deposits lie athwart the route of the Abakan-Tayshet rail line. WVhen this railroad is completed, it is anticipated that the Sayan-Partizan coals will



COKING COAL SUPPLY IN TIHE SOVIET STEEL INDUSTRY 149

be used at the Tayshet plant; they may also be utilized at a proposed plant to be built at IKrasnoyarsk.

One of the largest reserves of coking coal in the USSR is provided by the Ulukhemsk deposit, located ill the Tuva Autonomous Oblast of south-central Siberia. Its over-all resources have been rated as over 10 billion tonls, and of these over 676 million tonls were- iil the proved category. Though the coals are not of the most-prized qualities, their impurity content is sufficiently low for cleaning to be feasible, and they could be used as one of the components in the mix for the production of metallurgical coke. However, the exploitation of this field would require the construction of an extremely costly 170 mile rail link over the western Sayan Mounitains to the Altay Region, and the immediate pros- pects for the building of this line are not bright.

The Bulcachachinsk field is located in Chita Oblast of eastern Siberia. It is connected by a 25 mile rail link with the Trans-Siberian. While the field's over-all reserves were rated as over 500 million tonls, its proved and probable resources of coking quality coals were reported as only 50 million tons. Buk-achachinsk presently produces about 1 million tonls of energy coal a year, and it is possible that some of the coal could be used as part of the mixture for coke production. However, the limited reserves of coking coal coupled with high mining costs would appear to limit this possibility.

There are two known deposits of coking coal in Soviet Central Asia. The first of these is the Uzgensk field ill the Alai Mfountains of the Kirghiz SSR: its proved and probable reserves of coking quality coals are rated at nearly 500 million tons. The second is known as the Fan-Yagnobsk deposit: it is located in the Tadzhik SSR and has reported proved resources of 353 million

tons of coking coal. Despite the relatively large resources of these deposits, the likelihood of their exploitation in the immediate future is very slight, for they are both located in isolated mountain regions which would require massive investments both for rail construction and for the development of the mining complexes. They also have the additional handicap of remoteness from iron ore sources and existing market areas.

Finally, Soviet sources indicate that the Bureya, Suchani, and Sakhalin fields contain choking quality coals (see Table V) but are not presently used for that purpose. However, in each instance, despite extensive reserves, particularly ill the case of the Bureya field, their use for the production of metallurgical coke is unlikely without major technological advances. The so-called quality coals are plagued by problems of high ash (Suchan and IBureya) or high phosphorus content (Sakhalin). IIn addition, the utilization of some of these coals is also limited by their physical structure which hampers the production of all acceptable metallurgical coke.

InI sulmlI, though the tabulation of the reserves of coking coal of these deposits is impressive, the results of the analysis of the location and character of the individual fields is not on the whole as imposing. Nevertheless, it would appear thaft some of these deposits, particularly the Southern Yakutsk, the Sayan- Partizan, and the Ulukhemsk, may play major roles in the development of the Soviet steel industry, if sufficient allocation of capital is made for the building of transport connections.

Returning to the question posed at the beginning of this paper, "Are the reserves of coking coal of the USSR adequate to support the massive expansion planned for its steel industry?" the answer must be conditionally affirm- ative. Soviet reserves of joking coal,



150 ECONoMic GEOGRAPHY

particularly if the " possible " category of reserves is included, may be enormous, but further detailed field investigation is needed before such resources can be properly evaluated. In addition, it must be re-emphasized that the size of the reserves is not the only key to the Soviet coking coal supply problem, for the nature of these deposits and their location are of equal if not overriding importance. In the former instance, the previous analysis has shown that future developments will depend on the utilization of inferior grades of coal for coking purposes, mined at greater depths and in thinner and more complicated seams, a pattern not uncommon elsewhere in the coal-mining industry. With respect to the problem of location, an important share of the Soviet Union's coking coal resources lie either in eastern Siberia, far from effective transport to existing or potential markets, or in the Soviet Arctic far from markets in the central Urals. The development of such resources will require massive investments in the construction of new rail facilities such as the proposed Pechora-Urals line

or a link from southern Yakutsk field to the Trans-Siberian Railroad. Never- theless, it is clear that the Donbas, despite its quality deficiencies and relatively limited resources, will continue to dominate the production pattern. There is also the possibility that the demands for coking coal in the coming decades may not be as large as originally anticipated. Technical advances in coke oven efficiency, the use of blast furnace and natural gas in the smelting of iron ore, and oxygen enrichment may all reduce cok-ing coal requirements. Finally, there is also some question whether the long- range plan for steel production itself may be reduced in favor of an expansion of the plastics sector of the chemical industry.34

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The research on which this paper was based has been generously supported by the Pennsyl- vania State University and the Inter-University Committee on Travel Grants. The latter group provided funds for a two-month research period in the Soviet Union in 1960.

34 See Krushchev's speech on "steel blinkers" delivered to the party central committee plenary session, Pravda, November 20, 1962.



Coking Coal Supply: Its Role in the Expansion of the Soviet Steel Industry

Documents

Transcript of Coking Coal Supply: Its Role in the Expansion of the Soviet Steel Industry