An Overview Of The Use Of Coal Cleaning To Reduce Air Toxics

Introduction The geological processes that form coal can also concentrate trace elements in the coal. For example, the average concentration of arsenic in bituminous coal (20 ppm) is ten times the average concentration found in all the other rocks that make up the earth's crust (2 ppm). Similarly, other elements, such as antimony, cadmium, mercury and selenium, are more concentrated in coal than in the earth's crust. When coal is burned, trace elements can be further concentrated. Although no new constraints on trace clement emissions were placed on the power generation industry under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, the act does mandate a three-year study of air toxics. Any new regulations aimed at electric utilities as a result of this Federally-mandated study will almost assuredly be very costly-an estimated $1 billion per year. Many trace elements in coal are associated with mineral matter. For example, arsenic is commonly associated with pyrite, cadmium with sphalerite, chromium with clay minerals, mercury with pyrite and cinnabar, nickel with millerite, pyrite and other sulfides, and selenium with lead selenide, pyrite and other sulfides (Finkelman, 1980). There are also cases in which some of these elements are organically bound. Just as both organic and pyritic sulfur can be found in the same coal, the same trace element may be both organically bound and present as part of a mineral in the sane coal. Physical coal cleaning techniques are effective in removing mineral matter from coal and can potentially remove at least some of the trace elements associated with specific minerals, thereby reducing the release of these elements into the atmosphere. Conventional coal cleaning to remove trace elements As part of a project funded by the Electric Power Research Institute, CQ Inc., a wholly-owned EPRI subsidiary located in western Pennsylvania, has demonstrated that large reductions in the concentration of many trace elements are possible if conventional coal cleaning techniques are properly applied. Four examples are given in Tables 1 to 4. In each example, the results shown were generated by cleaning the coal at CQ Inc.'s commercial-scale cleaning test facility. Cleaning results for Upper Freeport Seam coal from Northern Appalachia are provided in Table 1. Data are presented in the table in two ways: as a weight-based concentration (parts per million) and as a concentration per heat unit (grams per billion Btu). Grams per billion Btu is analogous to pounds per million Btu, but avoids the use of numbers with many decimal places. The heat-based concentration provides a better measure of boiler impacts, because the increased heating value obtained through coal cleaning reduces the number of tons that must be burned to produce a given thermal output. Reducing the quantity of coal burned reduces the quantity of trace elements entering the boiler. This raw coal is relatively high in several trace elements of environmental concern, including arsenic, cadmium and chromium. Cleaning provided large reductions in the quantity of arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, fluorine, lead, mercury, nickel, silver and zinc. The results for tests with a Powder River Basin coal, Rosebud/McKay, are presented in Table 2. Large reductions in arsenic, barium, cadmium, fluorine, mercury, nickel, selenium and zinc were observed with cleaning. The concentration of chromium increased with cleaning, while lead concentration increased in one test and decreased in another. Table 3 presents test results for Croweburg Seam coal from Oklahoma. Large reductions in arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium and zinc were obtained with cleaning. Smaller reductions were obtained with lead and nickel, while chromium, fluorine and mercury increased in at least one of the tests. Table 4 presents cleaning test data for Kentucky No.11 Seam coal. In this case, large reductions were obtained with all elements measured. In general, these data indicate that physical coal cleaning is effective in reducing the concentration of many trace elements, especially if they are present in the coal at relatively high concentrations. The degree of reduction achieved is coal-specific, relating in part to the degree of mineral association of the specific trace element and the degree of liberation of the trace element-bearing mineral. The extent of trace element removal also depends on the method of cleaning the coal. Figure 1 is a washability plot, by size fraction, of arsenic vs. ash content for Upper Freeport