CIRCULAR LETTER TO ALL SELLERS OF COAL
IN THE SEWARD PENINSULA
VANCOUVER ISLAND COALS, LIMITED
VANCOUVER, British Columbia.
Vancouver, B. C., July 15th, 1935
GENTLEMEN:
We are enclosing you a copy of the “Mid-West Coal Retail
er” tables showing the comparative fuel values of Coal. Oil and
Gas which doubtless you will find interesting.
The main tables you will note are in the center and these
serve nearly all practical purposes. It is not suggested that sales
men other than qualified combustion men wander oil' into the tech
nical details which some of the other sheets convey.
We would be glad to get you a supply of these if you
think you could use them. The more you buy the cheaper they
are, but in any case the cost is nominal.
You have also asked me to give you something with re
spect to the use of oil and the advantages of coal in the territory you
serve, and the following thoughts are, I think, worthwhile, and al
though they apply more particularly to the domestic installations
they are sound as applied to heating jobs generally.
1. The use of oil externally fired is wasteful. As a liquid
fuel it is suitable for internal combustion engines and in this form
it is very much more economical than externally tired as the bulk
of the conversion loss in saved. People should not conclude that
because an internally fired unit is economical that it follows that
externally burned oil is also. The degree of economy as compared
with coal or anything else depends entirely on two things. First,
the comparative cost and grade of the respective fuels and the quan
tity of B. T. U.'s made available at the furnace. I recite this as
clause one because the popular illusion is that anything that flows is
of necessity economical, but this does not necessarily follow.
2. PRICES: From the tables we have sent you you can
figure out what the comparative fuel values, efficiency, etc. consid
ered actually are. For example: $10.00 Ladysmith coal which av
erages about 13,000 B. T. U. is the equivalent of oil at 4.8cts per gal
lon; at $20.00 it is the equivalent of oil at 9.Gcts per U. S. Gallon; at
$25.00 it is the equivalent of oil at 12cts per U. S. Gallon. If you go
to the next line on the tables you will note 14.4cts per gollon. This,
I understand, is about the price of domestic fuel oil in Nome, and
this would be the equivalent of $30.00 coal. If you got down into
the stoker grade and figuring on 12,500 B. T. U. coal, $25.00 coal is
equal to 12V2Cts oil and $30.00 coal is equal to 15cts oil. By the use
of tables, and given the cost of the respective fuels, you can easily
advise your customers just where they are going to land in so far
as their cash outlay is concerned.
3. CONVENIENCE: In most cases, fuel oil and fur
nace oil, particularly in the cities, is not sold altogether on a price
basis, in fact, hardly at all. Convenience and the automatic featur
es are the main selling angles, and to a very large extent it is hard
to refute all the oil man's arguments. It is, however, a rather diff
erent proposition in a city like Vancouver or Seattle when compar
ing the conditions with Nome. No machine is absolutely infallible
and oil burners particularly require a certain amount of servicing,
and the oil companies maintain a large department for this purpose.
In an isolated place like Nome it is doubtful if a suitable emergency
service could be maintained, and particularly in that climate if you
are shut down it might spell ruin. Even at Grouse Mountain Chalot
at North Vancouver, where they tried to get by with an oil burner,
they were compelled to discard it and put in a coal stoker because
the power line interruptions were very frequent during snow storms
and when the power was off the entire heating plant was inopera
tive. With a coal stoker, even though the power might be tempor
arily off, it is feasible to hand fire the stoker long enough to cover
the emergency period.
Under this heading of “Convenience” we might refer to
“inconvenience”. Even in the larger cities everybody who has a fur
nace or coal range without exception use their solid fuel furnace unit
as an incinerator to a certain extent. In other words, a very large
proportion of the garbage, particularly in the winter time, goes in
to the fire, and there has never been a single instance of a conver
sion from coal to oil, or for that matter of a new installation, where
the absence of a garbage consuming fire was not felt. Invariably it
leads to the installation of special units for this purpose in the larg
er and more elaborate homes. In a place like Nome this is a point
which should he stressed because if it became oil burner equipped
the scavenger service would have to be increased, or the population
possibly become exposed to the danger of epidemic.
4. RELIABILITY: There is no comparison in the degree
of reliability between a coal fired unit and a liquid fuel unit which
involves a delicate mechanism to apply—particularly in the hands
of ignorant or non-mechanical people, unless an'unusually expensive
installation is made. Individual automatic o'l burners arc contin
ually going out of “whack” and in a country where long, cold spells
of sub-zero weather are experienced this feature cannot be over
looked, although, of course, it is not pointed out by energetic oil
burner salesmen.
5. WEATHER: We might group this under the head of
“Reliability” but it is rather out.«aanding in so far as it applies to
the Seward Peninsula of Alaska. As 1 understand it, temperatures
of from 50 to (it) degrees below zero arc experienced and just how
an individual can keep his fuel o., bom becoming sluggish I do not
know. Doubtless it can be done, out it seem to me that I would
feel anything but safe if 1 was there and felt that my only fuel was
coming from a tank in the ground through a pipe to the oil burn
er unit, knowing that the very ground (except on the surface in
the summer) never thaws. When fuel oil or furnace oil becomes
sluggish the steady or automatic operation of the burner unit is any
thing but dependable and in my opinion would be, during severe
cold spells liable to be a cause of worry far in excess of any possible
benefits which might be derived.
6. POWER: I understand that interruptions to the pow
er line are comparatively rare, but would point out, particularly in
the case of severe weather, that if the “juice” is off for an hour or
two the effect might be disastrous. Disregarding the matter of
supply, the question of cost should be considered. I have not any
oil burner tables in front of me, but on the basis of say V4 H. P. per
burner, and estimating during the winter an operation of say, twen
ty hours per day, if the rate for current is. as I understand it, 25cts
per kilowatt hour, the current to operate burners will amount to
some 87 '/acts per day or $20.00 per month, and this is another of those
little points which the purchaser finds out afterwards. Of course,
on larger burners the cost is proportionately more. If there is say,
one II. P. on the burner and at the rate of 25cts and operating for the
above mentioned time, the power cost alone on a unit of this size
would be $100.00 per month.
7. SAFETY: The fire marshall's records in practically
every place without exception have demonstrated that since the ad
vent of individual automatic oil burners the fire out-breaks have in
creased enormously, and although the Press is generally so taken
care of that the public do not become informed as to the cause of
many fires, it is common knowledge amongst fuel men that automatic
oil is responsible for many, particularly in those districts where grav
ity feed burners are permitted. In Hritish Columbia legislation has
now been passed so that gravity type burners are not allowed, and
the very incidence of such legislation must of necessity infer that
the fire hazard is increased with the use of liquid fuel. Nome only a
year ago experienced a devastating fire and one would imagine af
ter that experience that every fire prevention measure would be
hereafter taken. In passing, it might be interesting to ask how the
fire last year started. If perchance it could be traced to liquid fuel
—the answer as regards the degree of safety, etc., etc., is already
written all over the local landscape.
This letter has turned out to be longer than I anticipated
and even now I have possibly missed some of the points which
might be raised. If there are any other points which occur to you on
which you would like us to obtain you further information, please
do not hesitate to call on us.
Very truly yours,
Signed: H. R. PLOMMER
General Manager
THE ABOVE LETTER SPEAKS FOR ITSELF—IT WAS WRITTEN FOR THE BEN
EFIT OF THE COAL MERCHANTS ALSO FOR THOSE WHO MAY BE CONTEM
PLATING INSTALLING FUEL OIL.
STAY WITH COAL. COAL IS THE SAFEST,
CHEAPEST AND MOST RELIABLE FUEL.
This Advertisement Is Published By The Producers Of The Famous
Ladysmith And Nanaimo-Wellington Coal
INSIST ON LADYSMITH-“THE MOST HEAT PER DOLLAR”