DOCSLIB.ORG

PEAT AS a FUEL at the PROPOSED CENTRAL MAINE POWER COMPANY 600 MW PLANT Volume I William J. Jones MIT Energy Laboratory Report N

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PEAT AS a FUEL at the PROPOSED CENTRAL MAINE POWER COMPANY 600 MW PLANT Volume I William J. Jones MIT Energy Laboratory Report N PEAT AS A FUEL AT THE PROPOSED CENTRAL MAINE POWER COMPANY 600 MW PLANT Volume I William J. Jones MIT Energy Laboratory Report No. MIT-EL 79-012 December 1979 Acknowledgment Mr. Robert Doyle, a consulting geologist, Gardiner, Maine, under contract to the Energy Laboratory of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, furnished data that were "folded into" this report. To all others who contributed to the paper, many thanks. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section I A. Introduction 1 B. Executive Summary 6 Background 6 Summary 26 Conclusions 28 Section II C. Peat 32 Peat Classification 32 Peatlands 33 Classification of Peat 33 Plant Communities 41 Chemical Properties 42 Physical Properties 42 Sod Peat 43 Milled Peat 44 Gasification of Peat 44 Exploration and Resource Evaluation Techniques 46 Development of Peat Bogs 50 Preproduction Work 50 Techniques of Drainage 50 iii t'edl Mirlirlg Method,, 53 Peco System 54 Haku System 54 Pneumatic Harvesting/Mining 54 Advantages and Disadvantages 55 Reclamation and Environment 56 D. Peat Requirements for a Sears Island Power Plant 57 E. Fuel Storage 62 Storage Requirements 62 Storage Considerations 65 Peat Stockpile Problem (Fire) 66 Storage at Power Station 67 F. Transportation 69 Introduction 69 Modes of Fuels Transportation 72 Fuel Transport Combinations 72 Slurry Pipelines 74 Barges 77 Rail 78 Rail Transport Considerations 79 System Characteristics 83 Track-Use Fee 87 Loading and Unloading 95 Road 95 iv Trucking 96 System Characteristics 96 Direct Costs (Transportation) Summary 102 Indirect Costs of Transportation 102 General 102 Roadway Structural Problems 103 Maine Bridge Capacities 104 Bridges 104 Traffic Flow 105 Previous Research on Highway Maintenance 106 Indirect Cost Summary 107 G. Labor 112 Introduction 112 Seasonal Labor 115 H. Environmental Impacts 123 Peatland Areas 123 Soil Damage and Erosion 124 Hydrologic Impacts 124 Sediment Transport and Deposition 125 Nutrient Budget Impacts 125 Chemical Water Quality 125 Residual Bog Stand Damage 126 Effect of Mining Techniques 126 Water Quality 126 Ash 130 v Ash Disposal 130 Particulates 130 Air Quality 131 Reject (Waste) Heat 132 Calculations of Waste Heat 132 Environmental Concerns (general) 133 Effects of Vehicle Noise 136 Noise Reduction Alternatives 141 I. Legal Questions 142 "Extraction," "Harvesting" or "Mining" 142 Significance of Word Choice 142 Taxes 143 J. Economics 146 Introduction 146 Peat Price Determination 146 Excerpts from the Montreal Engineering Co. Report 148 K. Other Uses for Peat 158 Utilization of Peatlands for Wood Production 158 111 Section III Glossary 160 References 165 Bibliography 168 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Estimated U.S. Peat Reserve 2 2. Information Sheet on Maine Peat Deposits 3 3a,b Typical Characteristics of Peat 9 4. Average Range of Variations in the Characteristics of Peat 20 5. Comparison of Good Fuel Peats 34 6. Method of Determination of Humification of Raw Peat Samples 35 7. Degree of Decomposition of Peat Related to Fuel Value 36 8. Comparative Fuel Value of Coal, Lignite, and Peat 37 9. Heat Values of Crude Petroleum, Petroleum Products, and Other Fuels (Vol. II,App. XIII) 10. Representative Weights of Petroleum Products (Vol. II, App. XIV) 11. Comparison of Oil, Coal, and Peat-Fired Boilers (Vol. II,App. XVI) 12. Peat Requirements for a 600 MW Power Plant 60 13. Growth in Slurry Pipelines 75 14. Summary of Train and Time Requirements 86 15. Cost Estimates of Truck-Railcar Transfer Equipment at Peat Bog 89 16. Cost Estimates for Railroad Car Unloading Equipment at Power Plant 90 17. Comparative Cost Estimates for Buying and Leasing Railcars and Locomotives 91 18. Rail Tariffs in Vermont and Maine 91 19. Comparative Cost Estimates for Buying and Leasing Trucks 92 20. Owned Truck Maintenance Costs 93 21. Cost Estimates for Independents and Privately Contracted Trucks 98 vii 22. Cost per Year of Contracting Private Truckers 99 23. Cost Calculations--Fuel, Wages, Registration 100 24. Annual Costs of Owning and Operating a 1200 Truck Fleet 101 25. Factors Affecting Road Maintenance Costs 108 26. Comparison of Transportation Indirect Costs 109 27. Minimum Traffic Volumes for Consideration of Climbing Lanes 110 28. Truck Speed Reductions Caused by Grade Percent and Length 1ll 29. Productivity in Bituminous Coal Mining Industry 113 30. Hours and Earnings in Bituminous Coal Industry 114 31. Maine (Calais-Eastport) Labor Market Area 116 32. Average Work Week and Average Hourly Earnings of Production Workers 117 33. Maine Statewide Wage Rates 118 34. Calais-Eastport Labor Market Area 122 35. Indicative Cost Estimates for Specific Environmental Measures 135 36. Worksheet for Indicative Cost Estimates for Specific Environmental Measures 137 37. Illustrative Noise Levels and Consequences 138 38. Design Noise Level/Land Use Relationships 139 39. Example of Recommended Maximum Noise Levels 140 40. Estimated Average Severance Tax Paid per Year in 1975 (Coal) 145 41. Equipment Operating Cost 151 42. Estimated Cost of Fuel Peat 153 43. Capital Cost Estimate for 2 x 60 MW Steam Electric Units 154 44. Annual Genera ing Costs 157 viii ix x LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 a-d World and U.S. Peat Distribution 10 e State of Maine by Counties 14 f State of Maine Mileage Diagram 15 g State of Maine Transportation Map 16 h State of Maine Minor Civil Divisions 17 2 Maine, Peat Deposits in Production or Have Produced in the Past 18 3 Principal Peat Deposits, No Known Production, Maine 19 4 Peat Land Formation a Paludification 39 b Lakefill 40 5 Typical Bog Layout, Milled Peat Production 45 6 a-c References to Peat Gasification Technologies 47 7 Schematic Flow Diagram for SNG Production from Peat 49 8 Peat Gasification Energy Distribution 49 9 Relation Between Moisture Content Expressed on Dry and Wet Basis (Vol. II,App. XIV) 10 Weight/Moisture Content of Fuel Peat (Vol. II,App. XIV) 11 BTU Value/Lb Based on Canadian Fuel Peat Analysis 12 Effects of Fuel Moisture on Boiler Efficiency (Vol. II, App. XIV) 13 Comparison Between Flame Temperature and Varying Fuel Moisture Content (Vol. II,App. XIV) 14 Hot Gas Suction (Vol. II, App. XV) 15 Comparison of Peat and Oil-Fired Boilers (Vol. II, App. XVI) 16 a Detail of Rail Lines in Maine 80 b Detail of Rail Lines in Maine 81 17 General Maine Rail Line Illustration 82 18 Fuel Transport Costs (Vol. II,App. XXIII) xi I Section I A. INTRODUCTION The Central Maine Power Co., Augusta, Maine, is planning to construct a 600-megawatt electricity-generating plant at Sears Island, Maine. The plant, as presently conceived, is to employ coal as the input energy fuel form. It has been suggested that peat, which is present in sizeable quantities within the boundaries of the state (see Tables 1 and 2), be considered instead of coal which has to be imported from other states. This report contains the findings and recommendations resulting from an exploratory assessment of the technical feasibility of using peat instead of coal, and of the economic and institutional issues that may be involved as a result of such a substitution. It is intended for a broad spectrum of readers, including legislators, government personnel in the energy and environmental fields, highway and waterway officials, regulatory officers, biologists, natural resources workers, professionals in several other technologies, as well as policy makers and the public at large. It is not a definitive "technology assessment," "economic analysis," or "environmental impact statement." It can be used to determine whether the scheme to use peat as a fuel at the proposed 600 MW Sears Island Power Plant is sufficiently feasible to merit the investment of the considerable necessary time, effort, and money to arrive at a conclusion to burn peat, to restrict the exploitation of peat for other end-uses, preserve the bogs in their natural state, or to accomplish some combination of the above. 2 Table 1 ZSTIATED U.S. PUEAT RESERVS* AD POTETAL EZRMGY** .I. AIIcresI I Percentof~~~ I Acres Quantity Percnt of Potential nerrgy Geotraphic Area (Millions) (Billion tons) U.S. Total Available (BTU's I Alaska 27,0 61.7 512S 741 x 10l 1 Minnesota 7.2 16.5 14Z 198 1015 Michigan 4.5 10.3 92 123 X 1015 norida 3.0 6.9 61 82 X 1013 Wisconsin 2.8 6.4 52 77 X oil5 Louisiana 1.8 4;1 32 49 x 101s North Carolina 1.2 2.7 22 33 X 1015 .77 1.8 1S 21 1015 ew York .65 1.5 12 18 I 1015 .48 1.1 .92 1213 1x los1015 Georgia .43 1.0 .82 12 X 1015 Massachusetts .35 s.8 .72 10 x loS All other states 2.4 5.5 4.62 66 x 1015 TOTAL 52.58 120.3. 99.02+ 1,433 X 1015 * Data from U.S. Dpartment of Agricultura Soils Conservation Service, Conservation Needs Inventory, 1967. ** Basis of potential energys peat contains 35 moisture, bulk density equals 15 lbs/cu. ft., caloric value equals 6,000 Btu's/lb., and oe acre of peast 7 ft. deep equals 2,287 tons or 27.44 x 10 Btu's of energy, per Dr. Rouse S. Faranhm, Professor of Soils Science, University of Minnesota. 3 Table 2 INFORMATCi SHEET C MAINE PEAT DEPITSM PRINCIPAL KNCN DEPCSIS ESTIMATED CCTENT i. Great Sidney Bog 2,000,000 tons Just east of West Sidney in towns of Augusta and Sidney on Routes 11-24-27, Kennebec County 2. Pushaw Lake Bog 5,700,000 tons On east shore of Pushaw Lake in towns of Old Town and Orono. Just west of Stillwater, Penobscot County 3. Cherryfield Bog 3,000,000 tons 35 miles northeast of Cherryfield on west side of road to Schoodic Lake, Washington County 4.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Investigation of the Gasification Performance of Lignite Feedstock and the Injection Design of an E-Gas Like Gasifier
    Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, October 15 - 18, 2012 Investigation of the Gasification Performance of Lignite Feedstock and the Injection Design of an E-Gas like Gasifier Yan-Tsan Luan and Yau-Pin Chyou* Ting Wang Chemistry Division Energy Conversion & Conservation Center Institute of Nuclear Energy Research University of New Orleans Atomic Energy Council New Orleans, Louisiana 70148, USA Longtan, Taoyuan, Taiwan (R.O.C.) ABSTRACT CO2 capture among the four reference power plants: coal In the last three years, the Institute of Nuclear Energy combustion, integrated gasification combine cycle (IGCC), Research (INER) has been developing the E-GAS gasification oxy-combustion, and natural-gas combustion. In the second numerical model and analyzing the gasification performance column, coal pre-combustion carbon capture has the lowest by conducting several parametric studies. A preliminary cost of CO2 avoided, which makes it more competitive and a numerical model considering coal particles tracking, two-step welcoming choice when it comes to low-carbon electricity volatiles thermal cracking, and nine chemical reactions has generation. With its inherence of low emissions and cost been established. In last year’s results, the single lateral including CCS, IGCC has the potential to replace traditional injector design in the 2nd stage of E-GAS gasifier is found PC plants. Therefore, conducting research in coal gasification non-ideal for the gasificaiton process. Therefore, one of the and CO2 capture technology to improve its availability, objectives in this study is to modify the 2nd stage injection increase its efficiency, and reduce the cost is essential for and investigate its effect on gasification performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan I
    Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan i ii Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This volume is based on papers presented at the two-day national conference on the topical and vital theme of Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan held on May 15-16, 2013 at Islamabad Hotel, Islamabad. The Conference was jointly organised by the Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI) and the Hanns Seidel Foundation, (HSF) Islamabad. The organisers of the Conference are especially thankful to Mr. Kristof W. Duwaerts, Country Representative, HSF, Islamabad, for his co-operation and sharing the financial expense of the Conference. For the papers presented in this volume, we are grateful to all participants, as well as the chairpersons of the different sessions, who took time out from their busy schedules to preside over the proceedings. We are also thankful to the scholars, students and professionals who accepted our invitation to participate in the Conference. All members of IPRI staff — Amjad Saleem, Shazad Ahmad, Noreen Hameed, Shazia Khurshid, and Muhammad Iqbal — worked as a team to make this Conference a success. Saira Rehman, Assistant Editor, IPRI did well as stage secretary. All efforts were made to make the Conference as productive and result oriented as possible. However, if there were areas left wanting in some respect the Conference management owns responsibility for that. iv Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan ACRONYMS ADB Asian Development Bank Bcf Billion Cubic Feet BCMA
    [Show full text]
  • Voice 2012 01Febmar.Pdf
    AppalachianThe February / March 2012 VOICE Forty years ago, a wave of coal slurry swept away Then communities along Buffalo Creek, killing 125. Some problems from our past have improved — others & Now seem stuck in time. Have we learned our lesson? ALSO INSIDE: The Habits of Hibernating Bears • Georgia’s Historic Blood Mountain • Standing Up for Clean Water TheAppalachian VOICE Yesterday and Today: Defending the Clean Water Act A publication of A Note From Our Executive Director By Jamie Goodman AppalachianVoices TOP: Councilmen from Cleveland, Forty years ago, it took a Ohio, examine a white cloth that came 191 Howard Street • Boone, NC 28607 There’s a common saying in Appalachia: what we do to the land, 1-877-APP-VOICE flaming river to spur our nation up dripping with oil after being dipped we do to the people. www.AppalachianVoices.org to protect its waterways. in the Cuyahoga River in 1964. The [email protected] What the coal industry is doing to the citizens in our region is river notoriously caught fire in June The river that played a promi- unforgivable. In the last several years, 21 peer-reviewed studies have 1969, bringing it national attention nent role in the creation of the EDITOR ....................................................... Jamie Goodman confirmed the worst of our fears -- that mountaintop removal coal min- and leading to renewed efforts toward MANAGING EDITOR ........................................... Brian Sewell Clean Water Act and the Envi- ing is destroying not only the land, but also the people of Appalachia. improving water quality (Photo ASSOCIATE EDITOR ............................................Molly Moore ronmental Protection Agency is by Jerry Horton).
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Final Programmatic
    Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Final Programmatic Biological Opinion and Conference Opinion on the United States Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement’s Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act Title V Regulatory Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Program Division of Environmental Review Falls Church, Virginia October 16, 2020 Table of Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................3 2 Consultation History .........................................................................................................4 3 Background .......................................................................................................................5 4 Description of the Action ...................................................................................................7 The Mining Process .............................................................................................................. 8 4.1.1 Exploration ........................................................................................................................ 8 4.1.2 Erosion and Sedimentation Controls .................................................................................. 9 4.1.3 Clearing and Grubbing ....................................................................................................... 9 4.1.4 Excavation of Overburden and Coal ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • COAL CONFERENCE University of Pittsburgh · Swanson School of Engineering ABSTRACTS BOOKLET
    Thirty-Fifth Annual INTERNATIONAL PITTSBURGH COAL CONFERENCE University of Pittsburgh · Swanson School of Engineering ABSTRACTS BOOKLET Clean Coal-based Energy/Fuels and the Environment October 15-18, 2018 New Century Grand Hotel Xuzhou Hosted by: The conference acknowledges the support of Co-hosted by: K. C. Wong Education Foundation, Hong Kong A NOTE TO THE READER This Abstracts Booklet is prepared solely as a convenient reference for the Conference participants. Abstracts are arranged in a numerical order of the oral and poster sessions as published in the Final Conference Program. In order to facilitate the task for the reader to locate a specific abstract in a given session, each paper is given two numbers: the first designates the session number and the second represents the paper number in that session. For example, Paper No. 25.1 is the first paper to be presented in the Oral Session #25. Similarly, Paper No. P3.1 is the first paper to appear in the Poster Session #3. It should be cautioned that this Abstracts Booklet is prepared based on the original abstracts that were submitted, unless the author noted an abstract change. The contents of the Booklet do not reflect late changes made by the authors for their presentations at the Conference. The reader should consult the Final Conference Program for any such changes. Furthermore, updated and detailed full manuscripts, published in the Conference Proceedings, will be sent to all registered participants following the Conference. On behalf of the Thirty-Fifth Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, we wish to express our sincere appreciation and gratitude to Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommendation of the Council on Coal and the Environment 8
    Recommendation of the Council on Coal and the Environment 8 OECD Legal Instruments This document is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. It reproduces an OECD Legal Instrument and may contain additional material. The opinions expressed and arguments employed in the additional material do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD Member countries. This document, as well as any data and any map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. For access to the official and up­to-date texts of OECD Legal Instruments, as well as other related information, please consult the Compendium of OECD Legal Instruments at http://legalinstruments.oecd.org. Please cite this document as: OECD, Recommendation of the Council on Coal and the Environment, OECD/LEGAL/0173 Series: OECD Legal Instruments © OECD 2021 This document is provided free of charge. It may be reproduced and distributed free of charge without requiring any further permissions, as long as it is not altered in any way. It may not be sold. This document is available in the two OECD official languages (English and French). It may be translated into other languages, as long as the translation is labelled "unofficial translation" and includes the following disclaimer: "This translation has been prepared by [NAME OF TRANSLATION AUTHOR] for informational purpose only and its accuracy cannot be guaranteed by the OECD. The only official versions are the English and French texts available on the OECD website http://legalinstruments.oecd.org" _____________________________________________________________________________________________OECD/LEGAL/0173 3 Background Information The Recommendation on Coal and the Environment was adopted by the OECD Council on 8 May 1979 on the proposal of the Environment Committee (now called Environment Policy Committee).
    [Show full text]
  • Coal Resources of the United States, January 1, 1974
    Coal Resources of the - United States, " January 1,1 * GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1412 > Coal Resources of the ' - % United States,y January 1,1974 By PAUL AVERITT GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1412 <- /4 summary of information concerning the quantity and distribution of coal in the United States. Supersedes Bulletin 1275 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1975 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Averitt, Paul, 1908- Coal resources of the United States, January 1, 1974. (Geological Survey Bulletin 1412) "Supersedes Bulletin 1275." Bibliography: p. Includes index. Supt.ofDocs.no.: 119.3:1412 1. Coal-United States. I. Title. II. Series: United States Geological Survey Bulletin 1412. QE75.B9 No. 1412 [TN805.A5] 557.3'08s [553'.2'0973] 75-619188 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington, D. C. 20402 Stock Number 024-001-02703-8 CONTENTS Page Abstract........................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction.................................................................................................................... 2 Conversion to metric system ................................................................................... 4 Acknowledgments........................................................................................................... 4 Distribution of coal in the United States......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Time Rate of Consolidation and Undrained Shear Strength of Hydraulically Placed Fine Coal Refuse
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 5-2019 EVALUATION OF TIME RATE OF CONSOLIDATION AND UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH OF HYDRAULICALLY PLACED FINE COAL REFUSE Cyrus Jedari Sefidgari University of Tennessee, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Recommended Citation Jedari Sefidgari, Cyrus, "EVALUATION OF TIME RATE OF CONSOLIDATION AND UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH OF HYDRAULICALLY PLACED FINE COAL REFUSE. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2019. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/5408 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Cyrus Jedari Sefidgari entitled "EVALUATION OF TIME RATE OF CONSOLIDATION AND UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH OF HYDRAULICALLY PLACED FINE COAL REFUSE." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Civil Engineering. Angelica M. Palomino, Eric C. Drumm, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Khalid A. Alshibli, John S. Schwartz Accepted for the Council: Dixie L. Thompson Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) EVALUATION OF TIME RATE OF CONSOLIDATION AND UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH OF HYDRAULICALLY PLACED FINE COAL REFUSE A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Cyrus Jedari Sefidgari May 2019 Copyright © 2019 by Cyrus Jedari Sefidgari All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Nittany Mineralogical Society Bulletin
    THE SOCIETY FOR ORGANIC PETROLOGY NEWSLETTER Vol. 22, No. 2 June, 2005 ISSN 0743-3816 2005 Annual Meeting, September 11 - 14: Louisville, Kentucky Early registration discount ends July 31 Accommodation deadline is August 19 2005 TSOP Meeting September 11 - 14 Louisville, Kentucky, USA Early registration discount ends July 31 Accommodation deadline is August 19 - see page 10. Conference themes will include Planned schedule includes CO2 sequestration Sunday, September 11 coal utilization CO2 Sequestration Workshop (a.m.) coalbed methane Field Trip: Falls of the Ohio (p.m.) coal petrography Monday, September 12 organic geochemistry Technical Sessions Reception, Louisville Slugger Museum Tuesday, September 13 Technical Sessions Wednesday, September 14 Post-meeting coal mine field trip And mark your calendars now for the 23rd Annual TSOP Meeting Beijing, China September 15 - 22 , 2006 See page 19 The Society for Organic Petrology TSOP is a society for scientists and engineers involved with coal petrology, kerogen petrology, organic geochemistry and related disciplines. The Society organizes an annual technical meeting, other meetings, and field trips; sponsors research projects; provides funding for graduate students; and publishes a web site, this quarterly Newsletter, a membership directory, annual meeting program and abstracts, and special publications. Members may elect not to receive the printed Newsletter by marking their dues forms or by contacting the Editor. This choice may also be reversed at any time, or specific printed Newsletters may be requested. Members are eligible for discounted subscriptions to the Elsevier journals International Journal of Coal Geology and Review of Paleobotany and Palynology. Subscribe by checking the box on your dues form, or using the form at www.tsop.org.
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT January 1, 2012 Through December 30, 2014
    FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT January 1, 2012 through December 30, 2014 Project Title: INFLUENCE OF MACERAL AND MINERAL COMPOSITION ON OHD PROCESSING OF ILLINOIS COAL ICCI Project Number: 12/7A-3 Principal Investigator: Sue M. Rimmer, Southern Illinois University Carbondale Other Investigators: Ken B. Anderson, Southern Illinois University Carbondale John C. Crelling, Southern Illinois University Carbondale Project Manager: Francois Botha, ICCI ABSTRACT Oxidative Hydrothermal Dissolution (OHD) is a coal conversion technology that solubilizes coal by mild oxidation, using molecular oxygen as the oxidant and hydrothermal water (liquid water at high temperature and pressure) as both reaction medium and solvent, producing low-molecular weight organic acids, which are widely used as chemical feedstocks. The primary objectives of this proposal were to determine how maceral composition and rank influence the OHD process, and to determine if OHD could be applied successfully to high-ash (clay-rich) waste products, including slurry pond deposits and beneficiation plant wastes. Our results show that OHD of all Illinois Basin lithotypes studied produced the same suite of compounds. Examination of residues from pulse OHD runs (different timed oxidant pulses) showed that OHD preferentially attacks the vitrinites and liptinites over the inertinites. Collotelinite ("band" vitrinite) develops reaction rims relatively quickly, whereas collodetrinite ("matrix" vitrinite) develops vacuoles before the collotelinite. Liptinites ultimately develop reaction rims and loose fluorescence. Fusinite shows only minimal alteration. OHD of maceral concentrates showed that vitrinite and inertinite macerals produced products similar to those seen for the lithotypes. However, liptinite maceral concentrates (sporinite and cutinite) produced very different compounds including long-chain aliphatic acids, in addition to some of those seen previously in the other lithotypes.
    [Show full text]
  • Demonstration of Upgraded Brown Coal (UBC ) Process by 600 Tonnes
    Demonstration of Upgraded Brown Coal (UBC) Process by 600 tonnes/day Plant Shigeru KINOSHITA＊1, Dr. Seiichi YAMAMOTO＊1, Tetsuya DEGUCHI＊1, Takuo SHIGEHISA＊2 ＊1 PT UPGRADED BROWN COAL, INDONESIA, ＊2 Technical Development Group Utilization of low rank coal has been limited so far, due and a demonstration project in the same country. The to its high moisture content, low calorific value and demonstration has been an ongoing project since spontaneous combustibility. In Indonesia, more than 2006, subsidized by the Ministry of Economy, Trade half of the minable coal is low rank coal such as lignite and Industry (METI) and Japan Coal Energy Center or brown coal. Some lignite in Indonesia has the feature (JCOAL). This paper introduces the outline of the of low sulfur and low ash content. Therefore, it can be project. turned into an attractive fuel coal if it is upgraded using an economical dewatering method. Kobe Steel has been 1. Process for dewatering low rank coal developing upgraded brown coal (UBC) technology since the early 1990s. Currently, a UBC demonstration 1.1 Conventional process for dewatering low rank plant project is underway in Indonesia, and operation coal 3) of the plant has already commenced. Among conventional processes for dewatering Introduction low rank coal, the heating of low rank coal above the boiling point of water to vaporize fluid does not Bituminous coal with a high calorific value is the accompany thermal reforming at a high temperature. fuel coal mainly used in Japan for the sake of Thus, the process is characterized by having little of efficiency in power generation, cost, and safety in the thermal loss associated with thermal cracking logistics such as transportation and storage.
    [Show full text]
  • Coal in a Changing Climate (Pdf)
    NRDC ISSUE PAPER February 2007 Coal in a Changing Climate Natural Resources Defense Council Authors Daniel A. Lashof Duncan Delano Jon Devine Barbara Finamore Debbie Hammel David Hawkins Allen Hershkowitz Jack Murphy JingJing Qian Patrice Simms Johanna Wald About NRDC The Natural Resources Defense Council is a national nonprofit environmental organization with more than 1.2 million members and online activists. Since 1970, our lawyers, scientists, and other environmental specialists have worked to protect the world’s natural resources, public health, and the environment. NRDC has offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Beijing. Visit us at www.nrdc.org. NRDC President: Frances Beinecke NRDC Director of Communications: Phil Gutis NRDC Publications Director: Alexandra Kennaugh NRDC Editor: Lisa Goffredi. Copyright 2007 by the Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. Table of Contents Introduction 1 Background 3 Coal Production 3 Coal Use 5 The Toll from Coal 6 Environmental Effects of Coal Production 6 Environmental Effects of Coal Transportation 10 Environmental Effects of Coal Use 12 Air Pollutants 12 Other Pollutants 14 Environmental Effects of Coal Use in China 16 What Is the Future for Coal? 17 Reducing Fossil Fuel Dependence 17 Reducing the Impacts of Coal Production 18 Reducing Damage From Coal Use 24 Global Warming and Coal 28 Conclusion 34 Natural Resources Defense Council I iii Introduction oal is abundant and superficially cheap compared with the soaring price of oil and natural gas. But the true costs of conventional coal Cextraction and use are very dear. From underground accidents, mountain top removal and strip mining, to collisions at coal train crossings, to air emissions of acidic, toxic, and heat-trapping pollution from coal combustion, to water pollution from coal mining and combustion wastes, the conventional coal fuel cycle is among the most environmentally destructive activities on earth.
    [Show full text]