Search Documents

By James O. Glanville

Ice frozen from a dilute chemical solution is mechanically weaker than ice frozen from pure water. This phenomenon is the basis of a practical method for reducing the strength of a mass of frozen coal. If a chemical additive is applied to moist coal, prior to its shipment during freezing weather, the resulting frozen coal can be more easily broken than in the absence of the chemical additive. This greatly expedites the unloading and handling of coal during winter. There has been considerable research into the nature and mechanical strength of ice frozen from various solutions. The literature relating to this process has been reviewed as has the literature relating to the chemical treatment of coal and mineral particulates. Some important articles are discussed and speculations are made about the nature of the ice-weakening process. A laboratory evaluation of the effects of chemical additives on the mechanical strength of ice and frozen coal has been made. An apparatus designed for this purpose is described, and some results obtained with it are discussed.

Jan 1, 1980

By Thomas F. Evans

Niagara Mohawk, like other northern coal users, has long experienced increased costs during winter months as a consequence of handling frozen coal. These costs include operating labor, maintenance labor and materials, equipment rental, fuel for thawing, demurrage, carrying costs for excess coal inventory and substitution of higher cost electrical generation for lost production capacity. In the winter of 1978-79, limited trials of several coal freeze conditioning agents were made to determine whether these would provide a cost-effective means of reducing the problems of handling frozen coal. Since these trials were generally effective, the Coal Purchasing Department arranged that all rail coal received during the 1979-80 winter from early December to mid March would be treated at the mines during loading. Inasmuch as the treatment costs are themselves appreciable and our various coal suppliers made a variety of choices of chemical supplier and equipment for application, an attempt was made to evaluate the unloading performance of each train received at the two generating stations which use coal as an aid in the future optimization of the use of freeze conditioning agents. These stations also receive coal by truck but this coal is not treated because of the short hauling time. The C.R. Huntley Station in Tonawanda, NY has a capacity of 800MW and burns about 5000 tons of coal per day during the winter months. The coal is primarily from central and western Pennsylvania but one source in southern Kentucky is also used regularly. Most of the Pennsylvania coal is washed and the fines are thermally dried. The coal is delivered in unit trains made up of mixed cars of 60, 75, and 90 ton capacity. Time between loading and arrival at the station averaged five days and ranged from three to eleven during the 1979-80 winter season.

Jan 1, 1980

By M. Allan Holtz

The shipment of coal, ores, and minerals in bulk form during the winter months presents a difficult problem in emptying rail cars. U. S. Steel Research in cooperation with U. S. Steel Coal Operations bas laboratory tested and field monitored the effectiveness of using freeze conditioning agents (FCA) to minimize the frozen coal problem. This report examines, in an overview manner, our experience after four seasons of treatment using different FCA agents on raw and preparation plant products. Our observations indicate that if an FCA is applied correctly it is effective mineral to mineral. Freezing problems still occur at the interface between the coal and the metal of the car sides and bottoms. Leading chemical suppliers have made positive improvements in their FCA formulations with second and third generation products. Further advances are needed to make chemical treatment for the prevention of frozen coal a real full-proof method.

Jan 1, 1980

By S. S. Nadgauda, A. J. Hathaway

Typically, as long as the coal quality is within the specified range, electric utilities have used delivered cost of fuel per million Btu as the primary criteria for qualified coals when making coal-procurement decisions. Such an approach may not fully address the total cost of using different quality coals at a given plant. A practical and easy-to-build model is described for estimating plant-specific utilization costs for coals of different qualities. Examples are included to illustrate the modeling results for plants operated by two utilities. While the model has certain limitations, it does represent an improved method for evaluating coal bids, and, consequently, reducing generation costs.

Jan 1, 1990

By Brook W. H

The history of the reduction of iron from its ores is lost in antiquity. Archreologists state that man has practised it for over four thousand years. Until comparatively recent times charcoal was the principal reducing agent for making metallic iron from its various oxidised ores. Coke was first used by iron founders in England in 1619, and its use spread gradually throughout the civilised world from then onwards. Indeed, the destruction of forests to obtain the requisite charcoal made the iron founders, both in England and America, extremely unpopular, and this hampered the iron industry to a considerable extent, until coal provided the metallurgist with a new and better fuel--coke which is used by most pyro-metallurgists today. The transition from wood to coal products for iron smelting had a profound effect on the location of iron works. Particularly was this the case in America where, in the infancy of the industry, practically each of the early States had its own iron producers, but as coal and coke replaced charcoal, there came about a concentration of the iron and steel industry around the coking coal deposits, and so today there are huge steel plants clustered around the soft coal basins in Pennsylvania and Illinois.The development of the iron and steel industry in Australia, which is comparatively recent by world standards, has been cradled in the coal basins of New South Wales. The first steel works of any consequence in this country were built near Lithgow, close by the mines which produced the coal for coking.Incidentally, these works were rather unique in that the three essential materials for iron and steel manufacture-ore, coal, and limestone-were found virtually at the works' back door.When, in 1912, the location of the proposed steel works for The Broken Hill Pty. Co. Ltd. for smelting ore from Iron Knob in South Australia was considered, the site ultimately chosen was at Newcastle, almost on top of seams of satisfactory coking coal. One of the major factors which had determined the site of the steel works was the fact that, about 1912, three tons of coal were required to produce one ton of finished steel product, and the relative economics of ore and coal haulage were much in favour of bringing ore to the coal.

Jan 1, 1947

By Martin A. Moyers

THE nation's effort to win the war speedily is reflected in current trends in coal utilization, as in all other fields of our lives. In all industries, wherever coal is used for the production of heat and power the emphasis is on getting the most useful result with the least expenditure of matt.ria1. In addition to carrying its own share of the load, increased as it is by the demands of war industry, coal has had to fill in for the other fuels, mainly petroleum products, whose distribution from their more distant sources has been crippled by lack of shipping. Thus, the outstanding note in the utilization of coal this year is not the development of new methods of burning or handling coal but the extraordinary job that the industry has done in producing enough coal to serve all needs.

Jan 1, 1943

By Robert E. Hanes

Coal Perspectives We are the ?Saudi Arabia of Coal Reserves? (Billions of Short Tons) [ ] However, China & India have added approximately one half of the U.S. installed base capacity for electrical generation, in TWO YEARS ? and it took us some 50-60 years to install our coal fleet.

Jan 1, 2008

The Coal Utilization review arrived too late to appear in the May issue. Coal utilization technology is improving due to the urgency with the 1990 Clean Air Act and the incentives provided by the Clean Coal Technology (CCT) program. Advances in the CCT are the subject of this report because of their broad industry application, support and involvement. Clean coal demonstration program Projects in the $5 billion Clean Coal Technology program are jointly funded cooperative agreements - not contracts - between government and industry. The industry participant in each project contributes at least 50% of the total cost. The participant takes primary responsibility for the project and is awarded any patent rights for inventions that may occur during the demonstration. The government, on the other hand, ensures that schedules are met, costs are controlled and project objectives are met.

Jan 1, 1991

By Gene M. Handel

Today the world is heavily dependent on petroleum for its energy. In the United States, over 75% of the primary energy used comes from petroleum. Other developed countries are similar. The less developed countries have a lower dependence on petroleum just as the United States did through the early 20th Century. However, these less-developed countries look upon petroleum as one of the primary energy sources for the economic growth required to improve their standard of living. So everyone considers petroleum an essential ingredient in the recipe for the good life. But there is a substantial problem with this recipe, and it is finally getting general recognition. Petroleum is a finite resource, and the world is using it up at a rapid, accelerating rate. Though it won't be exhausted for many decades, the early warnings of ultimate limits have already appeared. The suppliers of the incremental production in the Middle East have threatened to restrict increases in their production rates. And, of course, the short term embargo of four years ago clearly demonstrated the economic impact of reduced access to petroleum as a primary source of energy. World petroleum production will probably peak in. 10 to 15 years and then start declining. When that happens, economics--the allocation of scarce products (also known as the dismal science for obvious reasons)--indicates that the price of petroleum will escalate in real terms. So that's the situation today. We have a serious and growing problem facing us that could substantially alter the quality of our life over the next 25 years. Recognition that the society may face a period of lowered expectations after a long period of upward mobility will be a painful experience, but it is certainly not the moral equivalent of war. And, besides, we have time to take positive actions to avert the most serious consequences. When we consider alternate energy sources, the possibilities are almost endless: coal, oil shale, tar sands, solar, fission, fusion, wind, tides, biomass, etc. Actually, the list is endless because new possibilities are continually being proposed. Of these possibilities, coal uniquely stands out as an attractive substitute for petroleum. Coal can be, and is, burned to generate electricity and provide heat. It can be liquefied to supplement the liquid fuels from petroleum, and it can be gasified for use as synthetic natural gas. Unlike exotic alternate energy such as solar and fusion, coal has successfully been used commercially to produce synthetic fuels. But, the technology does need to be refined and modernized. Thus, coal's role is not to be "America's Ace in the Hole," but to bridge the transition from primary dependence on petroleum for energy to the utopia of renewable sources of energy. But don't be mislead by the prophets--those renewable sources of energy are going to be very, very expensive when they are invented.

Jan 1, 1978

By J. Keith Haddock

"Introduction The Coal Valley Mine is operated by Luscar Stereo (1977) Ltd. with the Alberta Energy Company having a minority interest. The mine produces 2.0 million tonnes of bituminous thermal coal per year. Deliveries include 1.5 million tonnes to Ontario Hydro and 0.5 million tonnes to the export market via bulk handling facilities on the west coast near Vancouver, B.C. There are a number of mining methods utilized at the mine including open-pit by truck and shovel, strip mining with large draglines and stripping with scrapers. The mine is located 100 km south of Edson, Alberta. Geology The coal measures are concentrated within a 210-metre int~rval of the Paleocene section. The coal seams were originally named by the mining companies in the earliest days of development of the area and these names continue to be used today. Of the five main seams, only three are presently economic to mine based on quality, thickness and depth of cover. These are the Val d'Or, Upper Silkstone and Mynheer. The Coal Valley Mine is located in the structurally deformed foothills area of Alberta and the structure of each mining area is therefore very complex. The general bedding strike is 305 degrees azimuth but major thrust faulting and folding has extensively deformed the natural seams as a closer examination will show. The Mynheer Seam, located at the base of the coal measures, ranges in thickness from 5 m to 10 m and has numerous bentonite and shale partings. Because of inherent geological features, the Mynheer Seam has been subdivided into two zones, the Mynheer 'A' and the Mynheer 'B', and the mining of coal in these zones has necessitated the utilization of distinctly different mining methods. The structural regime of the Mynheer 'A' zone consists of an overturned asymmetrical anticline crest containing a steeply dipping major thrust fault which has raised the seam above the present topographic level. Further extensive shearing and rotation of the coal has resulted in the coal taking a 'pod' shape. The Mynheer 'B' Zone is a continuation to the southeast along strike from the Mynheer 'A' Zone. The bedding dips to the southwest at an average of 12 degrees and is interrupted at the south end by a transverse fault and to the north by its outcrop at the surface."

Jan 1, 1985

By Franklin P. Wood

Unnumbered ages have passed since the time when nature's laboratories were working without the aid of capital or labor unions assisted only by earth's cooling crust and old Sol's rays, to lay the prodigious coal beds of the earth and distil the oils which now furnish the basis for the world's great industries. Strangely enough rays from the same old sun probably somewhat diminished in intensity are still drawing from earth to clouds the water that will run down hill and through man-made devices produce energy to compete with that made with the products created in ages past. So now we find that within the past century vast human industries have grown up around the products of these agencies and here we are today discussing the many problems connected therewith and among the others the subject of this paper, which is essentially the relation of COAL to OIL in industry. The problems involved are those of human relationship and are not fundamentally unsolvable when engineering skill and knowledge is properly applied. The last few years has developed a brand of pessimism that is especially prevalent in the coal industry, at any rate in the west where we come in contact with it. In any general discussion with coal men, a very short time only is required to bring out the feeling or expression that the coal business is on the rocks and the reasons run the gamut of human deviltry. We have heard that in the not far distant past corn was so cheap that the farmers were compelled to burn it and thus deprive the coal mines of their well earned right to sell coal for this purpose. We have heard that the flood of oil is so vast that it was being burned in preference to coal, and to heap insult on injury that the rail- road locomotives were burning oil in order to pull coal away from the mines. We have heard that the union was responsible for all the woes to which the industry is subjected. We have heard that the family tin lizzie is so depleting the family exchequer that coal could not be purchased and if purchased could not be collected for. We have heard that producing mines are so numerous that the profits are a negligible quantity. These are but a few of the reasons assigned for making the coal producers a class of pessimists which is not good for the industry. All these reasons given and all the others must be taken collectively and these are not the cause but the effect of a rapidly changing civilization. An analogy may be found in the experience of many of us in the electric industry a few years ago. You may remember that less than 20 years ago the high efficiency Tungsten electric globe was introduced. It was so much more efficient than the old carbon lamp that only one-third of the current previously required was needed to produce the same illumination. Consternation seized the ranks of electrical men who had little or no vision, for the out- look was that so little current would be sold that everyone would be bankrupt. This limited vision, however, did not prevail, for all engaged in the industry spurred on by necessity, accomplished many of the things that we are now enjoying the fruits of be- cause the electric industry has grown and is growing by leaps and bounds and every highly efficient improvement is greeted with rejoicing. It is well known that when the old type of carbon arc lamp began to be replaced by modern units the manufacturer of carbon rods thought his doom was sealed and yet these same manufacturers have so adjusted them- selves to conditions that the dry battery business of today is of vastly greater volume and profit than was the carbon rod business of the past. Of course, there are industries that should not have survived anyway that have gone down and out to makeway for vastly improved conditions and can

Jan 1, 1925

By George Scott

MANY requests for information as to the possibility of washing coals to some predetermined percentage of ash or sulfur have suggested that the producers aim to satisfy some degree of purity set by the user of the fuel, rather than to attain the greatest economic benefit to all concerned. This paper is written to show that the highest economic purity of washed coal can be determined from washability studies of the raw coal, costs of mining and washing coal, and data on the effect of ash and sulphur on the value of the coal for the particular use for which it is intended. COKE FOR BLAST-FURNACE USE For purposes of illustration, we take the case of coal washed for coke to be used in the iron blast furnace. The method outlined can be made general in its application by substituting for the figures used here the actual operating figures for the particular case under consideration. In general, it costs the blast-furnace operation from 8 to 25 c. per ton of pig iron to slag out each 1 per cent. of ash introduced into the blast furnace by the coke. This figure depends on which one per cent. of ash is removed, and decreases with decrease in ash: When blast furnaces and coal mines are considered as a whole, the figure decreases to zero and then becomes negative, on account of low recovery of washed coal. Various figures1 have been given by different investigators: These figures necessarily differ, not only on account of the differences in operating costs but on account of the difference in the respective fuels as well. For the purpose of this paper, which, as explained, is to point out a method of attacking a certain problem, the figures used in the exposition of the method are of secondary importance. It is apparent that no universally applicable figures can be used, because there are none. Each plant has its own coal,2 its own operating cost, and its own conditions.

Jan 1, 1929

By George Scott

MANY requests for information as to the possibility of washing coals to some predetermined percentage of ash or sulfur have suggested that the producers aim to satisfy some degree of purity set by the user of the fuel, rather than to attain the greatest economic benefit to all concerned. This paper is written to show that the highest economic purity of washed coal can be determined from washability studies of the raw coal, costs of mining and washing coal, and data on the effect of ash and sulfur on the value of the coal for the particular use for which it is intended.

Jan 1, 1929

By John Griffen

THEORY HYDRAULIC classification as explained by Rittinger and others was largely restricted to conditions wherein the free-falling velocities of the particles were conceived as governing the separations effected (see chapter 9). The laws governing classification under free-falling conditions have been summarized by Chapman and Mott as fo1lows:l Nomenclature r represents, in a particle of irregular shape, the round-hole screen through which the particle would pass, or some other linear dimension of the particle equivalent to d, the diameter of a sphere. s, the specific gravity of the particle. 1, the specific gravity of the water used as a medium. K, a constant. W, the velocity of the water. In an Upward Current of water 1. A particle will move upward if [V > K dr(s - 1)] and, by suit- ably regulating the speed of the water current, the larger and heavier particles may be made to fall downward against the current, leaving the smaller, lighter particles in suspension in the current. 2. Particles such that [- = -] cannot be separated in an upward- current classifier with any one velocity of current. Coal particles having a specific gravity of 1.35 cannot be separated from refuse particles of [2.5 - 1 2.5 sp. gr.] unless the ratio of diameters is less than [ 4.3 to 1, 1.35 – 1] and the raw coal must be screened to size limits within this ratio if they are to be separated. Cone-shaped vessels or vessels of other shapes that allow the use of different velocities of current at different points in the flow are used to modify this limitation.

Jan 1, 1943

By John Griffen

HYDRAULIC classification as explained by Rittinger and others was largely restricted to conditions wherein the free-falling velocities of the particles were conceived as governing the separations effected (see chapter 9). The laws governing classification under free-falling conditions have been summarized by Chapman and Mott as follows:

Jan 1, 1943

By John Griffen

THEORY HYDRAULIC classification as explained by Rittinger and others was largely restricted to conditions wherein the free-falling velocities of the particles were conceived as governing the separations effected (see chapter 9). The laws governing classification under free-falling conditions have been summarized by Chapman and Mott as follows: 1 Nomenclature r represents, in a particle of irregular shape, the round-hole screen through which the particle would pass, or some other linear dimen¬sion of the particle equivalent to d, the diameter of a sphere. s, the specific gravity of the particle. 1, the specific gravity of the water used as a medium. K, a constant. W, the velocity of the water. In an Upward Current of Water 1. A particle will move upward if [W > KVr(s-1)] and, by suitably regulating the speed of the water current, the larger and heavier particles may be made to fall downward against the current, leaving the smaller, lighter particles in suspension in the current. 2. Particles such that [T1= s2-1] cannot be separated in an upward-current classifier with any one velocity of current. Coal particles having a specific gravity of 1.35 cannot be separated from refuse particles of 2.5 sp. gr. Unless 2.5-1 the ratio of diameters is less than [1.35-1 or 4.3 to 1,] and the raw coal must be screened to size limits within this ratio if they are to be separated. Cone¬-shaped vessels or vessels of other shapes that allow the use of&apos; different velocities of current at different points in the flow are used to modify this limitation. 3. During the initial stages of motion, coal particles ascend more rapidly than refuse particles of the same size. 4. A particle will ultimately fall if [W < KVr(s-1).] If particles of

Jan 1, 1950

By S. Stutz

COAL, like most other minerals, only exceptionally occurs in a sufficiently pure state to he directly available for general manufacturing purposes. And even where this is the case, the small coal or slack is usually more impure than the lump coal, as the slate, clay, etc., from the roof and bottom of the vein become mixed with it in the handling it undergoes. These impurities often exceed ten or more percent in addition to the impurities of the coal itself. The most common impurities of the coal are slate, or shale, clay, and sulphur. The latter occurs in different forms, but most frequently as bisulphide of iron, or iron pyrites, and as sulphate of lime, or gypsum. In both cases the impurities add greatly to the amount of ash, and where they are present in considerable quantities the raw coal, and still more the coke made from it, is unfit for the, manufacture of iron. Coke will contain on an average at least ;fifty per cent, more ash and sulphur than the raw coal from which it is, made. To the manufacturer of iron every additional per cent. of ash which his coal or .coke contains is a source of additional expense, seemingly small, and yet very important in the aggregate. In the blast-furnace, for instance, the ash must be heated up to the melting-point, and, since it is composed largely of refractory substances, the consumption of carbon in melting it will be equal to at least one-half of its weight ; that is, a certain part of the coke is consumed for the melting and fluxing of the ash and is lost. Besides this, it is well enough known to the-iron-master that coke containing less ash makes the slag or cinder more liquid and less inclined to stick to- the walls of the furnace. Fuel containing much sulphur produces generally a white iron, poor in carbon, while from the same ore and flux, with a pure fuel, a good foundry iron might be obtained. The work of separating slate, sulphur, etc:, from the coal &apos;has as yet only been succesafully accomplished by the washing process. This process depends for its success on the differences in the specific

Jan 1, 1881

By J. D. Price, W. M. Bertholf

In preparing a paper on coal washing in Colorado and New Mexico, it is difficult to refrain from entering into a discussion of the historical aspects of this subject, for the story of coal washing in these states goes back well into the last century. This phase of the subject could well make a complete paper in itself, and of necessity this present discussion must be limited to current operations. Therefore, we are taking into consideration only those washing plants which have operated for some period during the years of 1947 and 1948.

Jan 1, 1949

By M. R. Geer

Coal washing assumed an important role in the mining industry of the Pacific Northwest long before washing practice became firmly established in the Appalachian field. A Scaife washer was operated in the state of Washington in 1887; and by 1927, the fist year for which complete statistics were compiled, nearly a third of the state&apos;s coal production was washed, in comparison with only about 5 pct for the country as a whole. Mechanical preparation was adopted in Alaska in 1922 in a plant constructed by the United States Navy at Chickaloon to provide bunker coal for naval forces operating in northern waters. Many of the coal beds mined in Washington and Alaska contained more impurities than those mined elsewhere, and this circumstance contributed to the early interest in mechanical cleaning. A much more important factor, however, was the inclination of the coal beds. With steeply pitching beds, hand sorting by the miner at the face is impossible; consequently, all material must be loaded and dealt with on the surface, just as is now proving the case with mechanical mining of flat beds. Thus "full-seam" mining afforded the same stimulus to the early development of coal washing in the Northwest that - it is providing under mechanization in the rest of the country today.

Jan 1, 1949

By H. S. Greismer

Alabama washes a larger percentage of its total coal output than any state in the Union. For producing coking coal, three-compartment jigs are favored; mines providing, steam and commercial coal use single-compartment jigs exclusively. Chemists are as necessary to washing plants as recording gages are to power plants. Experiments in Alabama indicate that the sludge released by coal-washing plants can be deposited in streams and on agricultural lands without disastrous results. CAMPBELL, 1 in 1896 said: "The Birmingham district in Alabama has certain great advantages for there are few places in the world where fuel and ore are so near together, although, unfortunately, both are of inferior quality; the ore being low in iron and high in phosphorus and the coal giving a weak and impure coke." This statement could not have been, questioned in 1894, but by 1896 several Robinson-Ramsay washers had been put into operation and weak and impure coke was a thing of the past. The Warrior coal field of Alabama contains six seams that yield coking coal of excellent quality. In descending- order, they are Brookwood, Milldale, Pratt, America, Mary Lee, and Black Creek. In each of these, however, bands of rock and bone coal of varying thickness are stratified with the coal; and while some of these impurities can be separated from the coal by the miner, much of it must be loaded out with the coal: Consequently, unless the coal is washed before being coked, it will yield a coke of varying ash and sulfur content quite unsatisfactory, for blast-furnace use. At present, the Gulf States Steel Co. is producing run-of-mine coal at its Virginia mine, from the America seam, that is uniformly low enough in ash to permit of coking without washing, but this is the only exception to the above statement. Alabama was the first state to experiment seriously with coal washers, was the first to install washers on a large scale and, up to the present, has maintained the lead. The Alabama State Mine Inspector reports that during 1923 20,919,303 tons of bituminous coal were mined in Alabama; 12,858,499 tons of which were delivered to coal washers for treatment.

Jan 9, 1924