Coal - Flotation Recovery of Pyrite From Bituminous Coal Refuse

The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers
S. C. Sun K. I. Savage
Organization:
The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers
Pages:
8
File Size:
2009 KB
Publication Date:
Jan 1, 1969

Abstract

This paper describes a process developed to recover coal, clays and pyrite from coal wastes. The process consists of fine grinding followed by coal and pyrite flotation which leaves the clays in the flotation pulp. A bituminous coal refuse containing 10% sulfur and 30% carbonaceous material was treated by this method to yield a coal product containing 4% sulfur, 10% ash; a pyrite product containing 45% sulfur (84% FeS2), 1% carbonaceous material; and a clay product containing 2% sulfur (3.5% FeS2). The coal yield was about 89%. The pyrite yield was about 77%. The process steps may be entirely flotation, or gravity separation (hydrocycloning) may be used to increase the pyrite : coal ratio in the flotation feed. Cost estimates for the process show a profit of $2.28 per ton of low pyrite grade refuse, but these do not include labor, maintenance, overhead and plant depreciation. The development of this process consisted of three parts: (1) exploratory tests, (2) op-timazation tests and (3) confirmatory tests. The objectionable qualities that sulfur imparts to coal have been commented upon from early times, and they have become more objectionable as the uses of coal have grown. In whatever form coal takes — raw, carbonized or gasified —the sulfur content remains objectionable, and therefore its compounds are removed as completely as possible. It has long been known that sulfur occurs in coal in different forms. In 1861, sulfur was said to exist in the state of sulfuric acid in combination with a base; in combination with iron as iron pyrites; as bisulfides of iron; and in combination with the organic elements of coal.' Pyritic sulfur is a term loosely used to cover the sulfur associated with iron in its various forms. The mineralogically recognized forms are pyrite (FeS2), pyrrhotite (Fe 1-x S) and marcasite (FeS2). The particle sizes of pyrites vary widely. Isolated grains of marcasite smaller than 15 microns have been found disseminated through coal.2 Hair-like "veins" of pyrite filling cracks in vitrain have been found. At the other extreme, lumps or nodules of pyrites large enough for removal by hand picking have been encountered. Organic sulfur, unlike pyritic sulfur, does not exist as discrete particles, but is instead intimately associated with the coal structure and thus it is impossible to remove it or reduce its concentration by physical or mechanical means.2 In the preparation of coal for its various markets, the pyrite minerals (pyrites) are separated from the raw coal feed. This separation process concentrates the pyrites in the tailings or other waste products. It would be desirable to recover these pyrites for three reasons: (1) Pyrites are potential sources of sulfur and iron. In 1967, for the fifth consecutive year, Free World consumption of sulfur exceeded production.3 Propelled by the shortage, the domestic price of sulfur has risen from $24 to $38 per long ton (bright). (2) The refuse, when placed in piles, becomes ignited. The pyrites (FeS2) bum, giving off SO,. Thus, the pyrites are a cause of air pollution. (3) Also, the pyrites undergo chemical reaction when exposed to air. The refuse is leached by waters which result in stream pollution due to the water-soluble iron and acidic reaction products. Coal refuse also contains coal minerals and clay minerals. Therefore, any process for recovering the pyrites must successfully separate them from the coal and clay minerals. In the study discussed here, ten different bituminous coal refuse samples were successfully upgraded in pyrite content. These samples represented a wide variety of coal waste materials from Pennsylvania and other states. The variabilities of the sulfur and coal contents are shown in Table I. The extremes are Sample J, a high sulfur-low coal, and Sample B, a low sulfur-high coal. Definitions of some of the symbols or terms used in this report are given below: Mesh size—Tyler standard mesh screen sieves with an opening based on the square root of two. Fe —Indicates iron, as determined by a stannous reduction-dichromatic oxidation method. S—Indicates sulfur, as determined by the ASTM "Eschka" method for sulfur in coal.
Citation

APA: S. C. Sun K. I. Savage  (1969)  Coal - Flotation Recovery of Pyrite From Bituminous Coal Refuse

MLA: S. C. Sun K. I. Savage Coal - Flotation Recovery of Pyrite From Bituminous Coal Refuse. The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, 1969.

Export
Purchase this Article for $25.00

Create a Guest account to purchase this file
- or -
Log in to your existing Guest account