Just for some cool coal autism, as I suspected, the Illinois Basin probably does in fact have more bituminous coal than even the Appalachian Basin. I love the Illinois Basin: so pure and simple. All bituminous, medium to high heating value, cakable but not metallurgical coal by today's industry standards, in the middle of America, and frankly, where I was born and where my family hail from since the 1800s.
>The Illinois Basin coal assessment area includes parts of Illinois, southwestern Indiana, and western Kentucky, containing thelargest reserve base of bituminous coal of any basin in the United
States.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/p1625d/Chapter_E.pdfI suspected the Illinois Basin has even more bituminous coal than Appalachia just by adding up each state's reserve estimates and comparing the totals for the states in the two basins. And the Illinois Basin is only some 80,000 square miles (207,000 square kilometers), whereas the Appalachian Basin is some 185,000 square miles (479,000 square kilometers). So Illinois, western Indiana, and western Kentucky are incredibly rich in carbon fuels; there is even some petroleum down there. And the Illinois Basin is a geologic formation that runs 15,000 feet deep (4500 meters) and has many other minerals in it. It's about as resource-rich as Appalachia.
Illinois, I have read, holds more carbon energy in the form of coal than Saudi Arabia has in petroleum. So here's to the great state of Illinois. Sure, your government sucks, but get outside of Chicago or Springfield and it's a great place!
