PReseRvatiOn industRy welcOmes all-paRty paRliamentaRy gROup’s RepORt On cOal

Preservation industry figures have welcomed the findings published in the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Heritage Rail’s coal report.

Published on July 18, the report summarises the findings of the APPGHR’s investigation into the dire consequences that Britain’s preservation industry faces should the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs progress with its plans to phase out the sale of coal for household use (see SR495), a scenario the Heritage Railway Association describes as “perhaps the biggest threat to steam traction since British Railways’ 1955 Modernisation Plan.”

HRA chief executive Steve Oates said: “The APPG report highlights the fact that the true scale of Britain’s heritage railway sector simply isn’t fully appreciated. Our members attract more visitors than the UK’s top seven international tourist attractions combined.

“It clearly wasn’t the intention of zero-emissions targets to harm such a large and thriving sector, and the APPG and the HRA are working together to develop a practical solution.”

CoalImp – the Association of UK Coal Importers & Producers – was similarly supportive. CoalImp Managing Director Nigel Yaxley said: “CoalImp warmly welcomes this crucial contribution to the debate around Government proposals to ban house coal.

“As the report makes clear, heritage railways are worth around £400m to the British economy. Steam trains are box office – they attract visitors.

“British-built steam trains were designed to run on British coal. If a draconian ban on house coal causes UK producers to cease production of this high quality coal, our steam railways may no longer be able to source the bituminous lump coal they need from foreign suppliers – or at least not at a price they can afford. This would lead to the demise of these much-loved visitor attractions.

“The report also recognises that new planning permissions for UK opencast sites will be needed to continue supplies to 2024/25 and beyond, also avoiding the five-times-greater carbon emissions in transporting Russian coal to fire British locomotives.”