Coal Preparation

4 Coal
Preparation
Chapter
1. SUMMARY
Coal processing technologies play an important role in the electrical power
supply chain by providing high-quality fuel for coal-fired utilities and industrial boilers. At present, more than one-third of the coal tonnage consumed in
U.S. coal-fired power plants is prepared for market by coal processing facilities.
Modern processing plants incorporate a complex array of solid-solid and solidliquid separation processes. These processes remove unwanted impurities such
as ash, sulfur, and moisture from run-of-mine (that is, unprocessed coal) feedstocks in order to improve coal utilization properties. Examples of separation
technologies used by the coal industry include screening, classification, dense
medium separation, gravity concentration, froth flotation, centrifugation, filtration, and thickening. Several of these processes also play an important role
in environmental control for the preparation facility.
This chapter provides a brief overview of some of the technological systems
used in coal processing and discusses the current state of the industry in the
United States. The purpose of this discussion is to provide a fair and balanced
examination of benefits resulting from coal preparation activities as well as
issues associated with the sustained operation of coal processing facilities. The
information provided in this document was compiled from a wide range of
sources, including industrial mining companies, process equipment manufacturers, environmental organizations, governmental agencies, and a variety of
technical reference sources.
106
M eeting P rojected C oal P roduction D emands in the U . S . A .
The analyses performed in this study suggest that

coal preparation will continue to have a significant impact on the cost, recovery, and quality of
coal produced in the United States. However,
these analyses also suggest that improvements in
separation technology and practices are needed
to provide further reductions in waste generation
and downstream environmental impacts. In many
cases, these improvements may also generate revenue from the recovery of usable coal from waste
streams, which could provide a financial incentive
for private companies to pursue these activities.
Recommendations that may lead to these improvements include: (1) development of improved technologies for solid-solid and solid-liquid separations
that impact coal productivity and waste reduction;

(2) development of new and improved methods for
online analysis of coal quality and plant optimization; (3) development of next-generation upgrading systems, including mild conversion processes,
that are suitable for improving the quality of western coals in water scarce regions; (4) streamlining
of permitting protocols for facilities designed to
recover coal and reclaim abandoned refuse and
impoundment areas; (5) support for expanding
and updating the database of cleanability data for
U.S. coal reserves; and (6) support for training
and education of a balanced workforce of laborers,
technicians, and professionals capable of running
sophisticated plant processes.
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Background
2.1.2 Why is Coal Preparation Needed?
2.1.1 What is Coal Preparation?
Coal preparation is required because freshly mined

coals contain a heterogeneous mixture of organic
(carbonaceous) and inorganic (mineral) matter.
The inorganic matter includes noncombustible
materials such as shale, slate, and clay. These
impurities reduce coal heating value, leave behind
an undesirable ash residue, and increase the cost
of transporting coal to market. The presence of
unwanted surface moisture also reduces heating
value and can lead to handling and freezing issues
for consumers. Therefore, essentially all coal supply
agreements with electrical power stations impose
strict limitations on the specific energy (heat), ash,
and moisture contents of purchased coal.
Coal preparation, which is also called washing,

cleaning, processing, and beneficiation, is the
method by which mined coal is upgraded in order
to satisfy size and purity specifications dictated
by a given market. The upgrading, which occurs
after mining and before transport of the cleaned
product to market (Figure 4.1), is achieved using
low-cost, solid-solid and solid-liquid separation
processes that remove waste rock and water from
the mined coal. The processing is driven by a desire
to reduce freight costs, improve utilization properties, and minimize environmental impacts.
C H A P T E R 4 : C O A L P R E PA R AT I O N
107
Mining/Processing
Raw Coal
Stockpile
Overland
Conveyor
Preparation
Plant
Clean Coal
2.1.3 Coal
Washability
The capability of
coal preparation to
Conveyor
Clean Coal
improve coal quality
Slope
Stockpile/
Thickener
Mine
Loadout
varies widely from
Impoundment
site to site. The most
Coarse Refuse
Fine Waste
significant part of
this variation occurs
Rail Transportation
because of inherent
differences in the libStack Gas/
ESP
Limestone
Power Grid
Particulates
Boiler/
eration characteristics
Generator
Stack
of run-of-mine coals.
FGD
The degree of liberaFly Ash
tion is determined by
Disposal
Slurry
the relative proporSettling
Blowdown
Pond
tion of composite
Clean Coal
Bottom Ash
Storage
Crusher/ Pulverizer
particles (i.e., particles
of coal and rock that
Figure 4.1 As the first step in quality control, coal preparation has a large impact on transportation
are locked together)
demands, boiler performance, and emission controls.
that are present in a
particular coal. The
Coal preparation operations make it possible to
presence of composite particles makes it imposmeet coal quality specifications by removing impusible to physically separate all of the organic matter
rities from run-of-mine coals prior to shipment to
from all of the inorganic matter. Consequently,
power stations. Moreover, as the first step in the
plant operators purposely sacrifice coal recovery
power cycle, coal preparation plants improve the
by discarding some composite particles as waste to
environmental acceptability of coal by removing
improve coal quality to a level that can meet cusimpurities that may be transformed into harmful
tomer specifications. This loss often accounts for
gaseous or particulate pollutants when burned.
10 to 15 percent of the heat value contained in the
These pollutants typically include particulates
source coal (Figure 4.2).
(fly ash) and sulfur dioxide (SO2), as well as air
toxins such as mercury. The presence of mineral
2.1.4 Organic Efficiency
impurities can also influence the suitability of
Coal washability has a tremendous impact on how
coal for high-end uses such as the manufacture of
effectively a preparation plant can upgrade a parmetallurgical coke or generation of petrochemiticular run-of-mine coal. Separating densities in a
cals and synthetic fuels. Coal preparation is typiplant are often set in response to changes in coal
cally needed to achieve the levels of coal purity
washability to ensure that product coal continues
demanded by these secondary markets.
to meet quality specifications. However, the types
of processes employed and practices used for operation and maintenance can also greatly influence
Recycled
Water
Generation/Utilization
Contour
Mine
108
The large financial impact

of poor efficiency has
pushed the industry to
abandon old technology and to develop and
adopt new processes and
practices for cleaning
run-of-mine coals. Laborintensive methods such as
manual sorting via hand
picking were employed
by many mine operators
during the early part of
Figure 4.2 Flow diagram comparing in-place heating value to delivered power. (Note that comthe twentieth century in
bined losses for mining extraction and coal preparation exceed that of the delivered power.)
an attempt to deal with
increasing amounts of rock
the performance of the preparation facility. This
in their coal seams. This inefficient approach was
effectiveness is typically reported as organic effisoon replaced by simple mechanical separation
ciency, which is defined as the yield of coal product
processes that reduced misplacement and provided
produced by the separation divided by the theorethigher levels of productivity. These early washical maximum yield of coal that could be achieved
ers typically cleaned only the coarser particles
at the same ash content according to a washability
(usually larger than one fourth inch) and either
analysis. Organic efficiencies may be in the high
recombined the untreated fine particles, or fines,
ninetieth percentile for well-designed and well-run
back into the washed product or discarded the
operations, although lower values are not uncomfines as a waste product. These inefficient systems
mon for problematic plants. These inefficient produmped large tonnages of coal into waste piles,
cesses or practices misplace significant amounts
some of which are being remined and reprocessed
of potentially recoverable coal into waste and rock
today. These historic periods were followed by
into the washed product. Although this misplacemany decades of technology development that ultiment is typically small in comparison to losses
mately led to the design and operation of relatively
created by washability constraints, these ineffiefficient plants that are capable of complete or
ciencies have a large impact on plant profitability
partial upgrading of the entire size range of mined
(Akers and Cavalet, 1988). For example, consider
coals. Many modern coal preparation plants now
a hypothetical perfect plant producing 500 tons
in operation in the United States are as complex
per hour of product coal at a profit of two dollars
as industrial facilities once employed only by the
per clean ton ($40 per ton sales price). A decrease
chemical processing industry.
in organic efficiency of just one percentage point
would reduce the clean tonnage by five tons per
2.1.5 Generic Flowsheet
hour, which would reduce revenue by $200 per
Despite the perception that coal preparation is a
hour (e.g., $40/hr x 5 ton/hr). As such, the loss of
simple operation, it has become far more complijust one percentage point in efficiency lowers the
cated than most realize. Plant flowsheets can be
hourly profit from $1,000 down to $800 per hour
generically represented by a series of sequential
a decrease of 20 percent.
109
Box 4.1 Coal Washability Analysis

The theoretical trade-off between coal recovery and quality can be quantified in the laboratory using floatsink (washability) analysis. An example of experimental data collected from a float-sink analysis is shown
below. The analysis is performed by sequentially passing a coal sample through flasks containing liquids (usually organic) of increasingly higher densities (ASTM International, 1994). The density is normally reported in
specific gravity (SG) units, which is simply the density of the substance divided by the density of water. Pure
coal has a relatively low density (SG 1.3) and is collected as a float product from the first flask, whereas
pure rock is much denser (SG 2.2) and is collected as a sink product from the last flask. Composite particles
report as float products in the intermediate flasks containing liquids with densities between that of the first
and last flasks. After density partitioning, the products from this procedure are then dried, weighed, and
analyzed for quality (e.g., ash, sulfur, mercury). Float-sink data are very useful for predicting and analyzing the
performance of coal preparation plants because most cleaning processes separate coal and rock based on
differences in density.
Example of float-sink (washability) analysis for a 28.4% ash run-of-mine coal.
Cumulative Float
Specific Gravity
Mass
Ash
Float
(%)
1.30
47.8
1.30
1.40
1.40
Mass
Ash
(%)
(%)
(%)
(%)
(%)
4.2
47.8
4.2
100.0
28.4
15.6
14.5
63.4
6.7
52.2
50.5
1.50
6.6
22.8
70.0
8.3
36.6
65.9
1.50
1.60
2.2
31.2
72.2
9.0
30.0
75.4
1.60
1.70
2.1
39.6
74.3
9.8
27.8
78.9
1.70
1.90
5.6
62.5
79.9
13.5
25.7
82.1
100.0
28.4
20.1
87.5
Sink
11 0
C Sink
1.90
20.1
87.5
Totals
100.0
28.4
Mass
Ash
unit operations for particle sizing, cleaning, and

dewatering (Figure 4.3). This sequence of operations, commonly called a circuit, may be repeated
several times. The repetition is needed to maintain
efficiency, because the processes employed in preparation plants each have a limited range of applicability in terms of particle size (Figure 4.4). In the
United States, modern plants may include as many
as four separate processing circuits for treating the
coarse (greater than 10 mm), small (between one
and 10 mm), fine (between one and 0.15 mm), and
ultrafine (less than 0.15 mm) material. Although
many commonalities exist, the final selection of
what number of circuits to use, which types of
unit operations to employ, and how they should
be configured is highly subjective and dependent

on the characteristic properties of the feed coal in
terms of size, composition, and washability.
In a typical plant, feed coal is sorted into narrow particle size classes using vibrating screens
for coarser particles and classifying cyclones for
fine particles (Figure 4.3). The coarse fraction is
usually cleaned using a chain-and-flight dense
medium vessel (DMV), while the smaller fraction is upgraded using dense medium cyclones
(DMCs). These processes use a dense medium
suspension to separate coal from rock based on
differences in particle densities. The fine fraction
is usually cleaned by water-only cyclones, spirals,
Box 4.2 Cardinal Preparation Plant

One of the most modern coal preparation facilities in the eastern United States is the Arch Coal Cardinal
Plant. The 2,100 ton/hr plant was commissioned in May 2006 to treat a large reserve block of high-quality
bituminous coal in the vicinity of the town of Sharples in Logan County, West Virginia. The plant incorporates three identical 700 ton/hr modules incorporating a single raw coal/deslime screen, dense medium vessel, dense medium cyclone, and vibratory centrifuge. Fine coal is treated using a bank of classifying cyclones,
spirals, flotation columns, and screen-bowl centrifuge. Coarse waste rock is transferred to a disposal area via
belt conveyor, while the fine waste slurry is passed to a thickener and pumped to an impoundment. To simplify maintenance, all primary unit operations can be accessed using an overhead crane built into the plant
structure. The plant incorporates the latest technology for automatic operation and control, including a
microprocessor-based
controller, automated
batch loadout system,
and nuclear online ash
analyzer. The safety of
the slurry pipeline disposal system is monitored using an array
of cameras, pressure
sensors, and capacity
detectors (Bethell and
Dehart, 2006).
111
Sizing
Plant
Feed
Cleaning
Raw Coal
Screens
D&R2
Screens
D&R2
Screens
Dense Medium
Vessel
D&R2
Screens
Deslime
Screens1
Dense Medium
Cyclones
Spirals
Froth
Flotation
Sizer
Stoker
Centrifuge
(Optional)
D&R2
Screens
Centrifugal
Dryer
Sieve Bend3
(Sieve
Screens)
Dewatering
Screen
Classifying
Cyclones
Deslime
Cyclones
(Optional)
or a combination of these
separators. These waterbased processes exploit
differences in particle
size, shape, and density to
separate coal from rock.
Unfortunately, conventional
density separators cannot
be used to upgrade the
ultrafine fraction because
of the low mass of the tiny
particles. This fraction is
usually upgraded using
a process known as froth
flotation, which separates
coal from rock based on
differences in the surface
wettability of organic and
inorganic matter. In many
cases, the ultrafine fraction
is resized ahead of flotation
to remove particles under
40 microns (called slimes)
that are detrimental to
flotation and downstream
dewatering (Bethell and
Luttrell, 2005). In a few
plants, ultrafine solids may
be uneconomical to recover
and are discarded as waste
slurry without cleaning.
Dewatering
Screen-Bowl
Thickener
Refuse/
Waste
Clean
Coal
Notes: 1 - Raw coal and deslime screen decks may be on the same machine, 2 D&R screens primarily used to recover dense
medium, 3 - Sieve bends may also be combined with clean coal classifying cy clones.
Figure 4.3 Simplified flowsheet for a modern coal preparation plant.
Grizzly
(a) Sizing
Sieve Bend
Vibrating Screens
Frequency Sieves
Classifying Cyclones
Dense Medium Vessel
Coarse Jig
Dense Medium Cyclones
(b) Cleaning
Water -Only Cyclone

Spirals
Teeter Bed
Froth Flotation
Screens
(c) Dewatering
High Frequency Screen
Vibratory Centrifuge
Screen -Scroll Centrifuge
Screen
- -Bowl Centrifuge
Disc Vacuum Filter
0.01
0.1
10
Particle Diameter (mm)

Figure 4.4 Effective range of particle sizes treated by various coal preparation processes.
11 2
100
Finally, the water used

in processing is removed
from the surfaces of coarse
particles using combinations of screens and centrifugal basket-type dryers.
Screen-bowl centrifuges or
vacuum filters are usually
employed to dewater fine
coal that tends to retain
larger amounts of moisture.
Typically, the dewatered coarse waste (refuse) is

transported by overland conveyor or truck to a
disposal area, while the fine waste slurry is pumped
from the plant thickener to a waste impoundment.
The various unit operations used in coal preparation are described in greater detail in the next section of this chapter.
3. COAL PROCESSING OPERATIONS

3.1 Particle Sizing
3.1.2 Vibrating Screens
3.1.1 Overview
Screens are mechanical sizing devices that use

a mesh or perforated plate to sort particles into
fine (particles that pass through the screen openings) and coarse (particles that are retained on the
screen surface). Vibrating screens (Figure 4.5),
which are the most common, use a shaking rotating mechanism to segregate particles and to move
material along the screen surface. High-frequency
screens (Figure 4.6) vibrate very rapidly to enhance
the passage of fine particles and are normally used
for dewatering fine coal or rock.
Run-of-mine coal produced by mechanized mining operations can contain particles as small as
fine powder and as large as several hundred millimeters. After crushing to an acceptable maximum
size, the feed is sized into groups using various
types of equipment. Figure 4.4a shows the typical
sizes of particles that can be produced by common
types of industrial sizing equipment.
3.1.3 Sieve Bends and

Classifying Cyclones
Figure 4.5 Vibrating screen used for feed

coal sizing.
Figure 4.6 High-frequency screen used for

dewatering of fine rock.
Sizing of fine coal is difficult

because of low capacity and
the increased likelihood of
plugging openings in the
screen surface. To overcome
this shortcoming, many operations employ sieve bends
and classifying cyclones for
fine particle sizing. A sieve
bend (Figure 4.7) consists of
a curved panel that slices
material from the flowing
stream by placing slotted
bars perpendicular to the
11 3
Figure 4.7 Sieve bend used to remove fine

slimes from coal.
Figure 4.8 Classifying cyclone used to

hydraulically size fine coal.
flow. Classifying cyclones (Figure 4.8) are used

where conventional screening or sieving becomes
impractical. Classifying cyclones are commonly
applied to size (cut) at 0.10 to 0.15 mm and represent the only practical option for sizing ultrafine
particles (at a cut of 0.045 mm). This sizing device
exploits differences in the settling rates of particles
of different size (i.e., smaller particles settle slower
than larger particles).
3.2 Solid-Solid Separation

3.2.1 Overview
The separation of valuable carbonaceous material from waste rock is typically accomplished
using low-cost processes that exploit differences
in physical properties that vary with mineral
content. Some of the common properties that are
used to separate coal and rock include size, density, and wettability. The effectiveness of different
types of separators is limited to a relatively narrow
size range (Figure 4.4b) to ensure the efficiency
of the process.
11 4
Figure 4.9 Chain-and-flight dense medium

vessel used to separate coarse coal and rock.
3.2.2 Dense Medium Separators

A popular process for cleaning coarse coal
(greater than 12.5 mm) is the dense medium
vessel (Figure 4.9). This density-based separator consists of a large open tank through which a
dense suspension of finely pulverized magnetite
is circulated. Because of the high density of the
suspension, low-density coal particles introduced
into the suspension float to the surface of the vessel where they are transported by the overflow into
a collection screen. Waste rock, which is much
denser, sinks to the bottom of the vessel where it is
collected by a series of mechanical scrapers called
flights. The washed coal and rock products pass
over drain-and-rinse (D&R) screens to wash the
magnetite medium from the surfaces of the products and dewater the particles. Magnetite is used
since it can be readily recovered and reused using
magnetic separators.
DMCs are commonly used to treat particles of
coal and rock that are too small (usually 0.5 to
12.5 mm) to float or sink in a static vessel. These
high-capacity devices (Figure 4.10) make use of
Figure 4.10 Dense medium cyclone used to

separate small coal and rock.
Figure 4.11 Bank of twin water-only

cyclones used to separate fine coal and rock.
the same basic principle as dense medium vessels

(i.e., an artificial magnetite-water medium is used
to separate low-density coal from high-density
rock). In this case, however, the rate of separation is greatly increased by the centrifugal effect
created by passing medium and coal through
one or more cyclones.
3.2.3 Water-Based Density Separators

A variety of density-based separators are available
for separating coal and rock in the particle size
range between 0.2 and 1.0 mm. The most common
methods include water-only cyclones and spirals.
A water-only cyclone (WOC) is similar to a classifying cyclone, but typically has a broad wideangled conical bottom (Figure 4.11). Separation
of coal and rock occurs because of the formation
of dense suspension created by the natural fines
already in the feed slurry. A spiral (a) consists of a
corkscrew-shaped device that sorts coal from rock
by selective segregation that occurs as particles
move in the flowing film along the helical trough.
Because of the low unit capacity (two to four tons
per hour), spirals are usually arranged in groups
Figure 4.12 Bank of spirals used to separate

fine coal and rock.
that are fed by an overhead distributor. WOCs

and spirals are often employed in two stages or in
combination with other water-based separators to
improve performance.
3.2.4 Froth Flotation

Froth flotation is currently the only viable process
for treating very fine coal (< 0.20 mm). This process exploits inherent differences in the surface
wettability of coal and rock. During flotation, air
bubbles are passed through a pulp containing coal
and rock. Coal particles selectively attach to air
bubbles and are buoyed to the surface for collection, while common mineral impurities are easily
wetted by water and remain in the waste slurry.
A chemical, called a frother, is added to promote
the formation of small bubbles. The addition rates
are very small and typically on the order of 0.1 to
0.5 pound of reagent per ton of coal feed. Another
chemical additive, called a collector, may be added
to improve adhesion between air bubbles and coal
particles. Collectors are commonly hydrocarbon
liquids such as diesel fuel or fuel oil. In some cases,
clay slimes (< 0.03 mm) may be removed before
11 5
Figure 4.13 Conventional flotation bank

used to clean ultrafine coal.
Figure 4.14 Column-type flotation cell

used to clean ultrafine coal.
flotation using classifying cyclones to improve

separation performance. In the United States,
industrial installations use either mechanical
stirred-tank flotation machines (Figure 4.13) or
column flotation cells (Figure 4.14).
3.3 Solid-Liquid Separation

3.3.1 Overview
Solid-liquid separators are used downstream of
coal cleaning processes to remove unwanted surface moisture that lowers heating value, leads to
handling/freezing problems, and increases transportation costs. As shown in Figure 4.4c, several
different types of mechanical dewatering methods
are required, depending on the size of particles
to be treated. The removal of water from the surfaces of coarser (> 5 mm) coal is predominantly
carried out using simple screens. Fine particles,
which have a higher surface area and tend to have
correspondingly higher moisture content, are
typically dewatered using centrifugal methods or
filtration systems.
11 6
Figure 4.15 Vibratory centrifugal dryer used

to dewater small/fine coal.
3.3.2 Centrifugal Dewatering

Centrifugal dewatering systems, which use centrifugal force to pull water away from the surfaces
of coal particles, operate in much the same fashion
as the spin cycle in a home washing machine. For
coarse particles, centrifugal dryers that use either a
rotating scroll or vibratory action (Figure 4.15) to
transport solids are commonly used. For fine particles (< 1 mm), another popular design, known as a
screen-bowl centrifuge (Figure 4.16), may be used.
These units are capable of providing low moisture
products, although some ultrafine solids can be
lost as waste effluent with the bulk of the water.
3.3.3 Filtration Dewatering

Filtration processes may be used to dewater fine
coal in cases where high coal recovery is desirable. Filtration involves the entrapment of fine
solids as a cake against a porous filtering medium.
Traditionally, flotation concentrates have been
dewatered using some form of vacuum filtration. These units are capable of maintaining high
coal recoveries (greater than 97 percent) while
Figure 4.16 Screen-bowl centrifuge used to

dewater fine coal.
Figure 4.17 Disc vacuum filter used to

dewater fine coal.
generating product moisture contents of approximately 20 to 30 percent. The most popular type of
vacuum filter used in the United States is the disc
filter (Figure 4.17).
3.3.4 Thermal Dryers

Thermal dryers can be used to reduce coal moisture to very low levels if dictated by market
demands. The most popular design is the fluidized
bed dryer (Figure 4.18), which uses coal, oil, or
coalbed methane as the fuel source (Miller, 1998).
Thermal dryers can reduce coal moisture to less
than six percent by weight at a cost of about $10 to
$15 per ton of water evaporated (Meenan, 2005).
Unfortunately, thermal dryers require high capital
costs (approximately $250,000 per ton per hour
of evaporative load) and can suffer from emission
problems associated with fugitive dust and poor
opacity. Emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) may
also present issues in some cases. Moreover, thermal drying of combustible particles such as coal
can present safety hazards resulting from accidental fires or dust and gas explosions.
Figure 4.18 Thermal dryer used to dry coal

to low moisture contents.
3.3.5 Clarification and Thickening

Thickening is an essential solid-liquid separation
process used to treat the process water so that it
can be recycled and reused within the plant. A
thickener (Figure 4.19) consists of a large tank
(50 to 200 feet in diameter) in which particles are
forced to settle, thereby producing a clarified overflow and thickened underflow (20 to 35 percent
solids). The thickened sludge is typically pumped
to an appropriate disposal area or is further dewatered before disposal. Chemicals such as coagulants and flocculants are usually introduced before
the thickener to promote the aggregation of ultrafine particles to increase settling rates.
3.4 Waste Handling and Disposal

3.4.1 Refuse Piles
The final step in coal preparation involves the
disposal and permanent storage of large volumes
of waste rock and slurry in various types of surface or underground repositories. Refuse piles are
designed to receive coarse particles of waste rock
11 7
that can be easily dewatered by

screens or sieves and stacked
in piles. This material is relatively easy to handle and can
be transported by truck or
belt haulage systems to the
disposal area.
3.4.2 Slurry
Impoundments
Because fine coal wastes are
difficult to dewater, typically,
they are discarded in slurry
form. The waste slurry conFigure 4.19 Conventional thickener used
Figure 4.20 Active slurry impoundment used
tains water, coal fines, silt,
to clarify process water and thicken solids.
for fine waste disposal (before reclamation).
clay, and other fine mineral
particles from the processing
plant. In most cases, the slurry is discarded into
thickened underflow from the plant thickener
an impoundment (Figure 4.20). An impoundthrough a pipeline. The volume of the impoundment is an engineered structure consisting of a
ment must be sufficiently large to ensure that fine
large-volume earthen settling basin formed behind
particles settle by gravity before the clarified water
a manmade dam or embankment. The dam or
at the surface is recycled back to the plant for
embankment is usually constructed from comreuse. In some cases, chemical additives may be
pacted coarse refuse material. The waste slurry
used to promote settling and to control pH.
is transferred to the impoundment by pumping
4. INDUSTRY OVERVIEW, ANALYSIS,

AND ASSESSMENT
4.1 Industry Status

4.1.1 Regional Differences
The United States produces coal from three major
coal regions located in the eastern, interior, and
western regions of the country (see Chapter 2).
11 8
The western deposits are largely comprised of thick

seams of subbituminous compliance coal that has
an inherently low sulfur content. These reserves
have traditionally required little coal preparation
other than simple crushing and screening. On the
other hand, increased levels of contamination from
out-of-seam dilution have begun to generate some
interest in developing preparation facilities for

these coals and some of the other higher-rank coals
in the western United States (Bethell, 2007). Much
recent attention has focused on the development of
dry coal cleaning technologies, because low-rank
coals tend to disintegrate when exposed to water.
In addition, the high cost of transporting lowrank coal has pushed the processing industry to
consider nontraditional approaches for upgrading
western coals such as mild conversion processes.
These technologies, which typically involve thermal treatment, decrease the moisture and increase
the specific heating value of low-rank coals so they
can be more efficiently transported and burned by
the existing fleet of coal-fired power stations.
The eastern coalfields are largely dominated by
high-rank bituminous coals in the Appalachian
and Illinois coal basins. These coal seams have
a high specific heat value that makes them very
attractive for transportation and power generation.
Also, nearly all of the metallurgical coking coal
consumed in domestic steel production is mined
from this region. Unfortunately, most eastern coal
seams occur as thin bands of coal-bearing sediments mixed with sedimentary rock. Hence, these
seams often require coal preparation facilities to
separate marketable coal from unwanted waste
rock. The Department of Energy (DOE) estimates
that more than three-quarters of all coal mined
in the eastern United States are subjected to coal
cleaning operations (DOE, 1993). In addition, eastern coals typically contain more sulfur than western coals because of differences in their geologic
deposition. This is a particular problem for Illinois
Basin coals that typically have high sulfur content
(approximately three to seven percent) (Walker,
1993). Although coal preparation plants reduce the
sulfur content of these coals, sulfur reduction is
usually considered to be a secondary benefit since
ash reduction is the primary focus of coal preparation in this region (Anon, 2007).
4.1.2 Plant Census

According to the annual census of coal preparation plants conducted by Coal Age (Fiscor, 2007),
the United States operates 270 coal preparation
plants in 12 states. This number is relatively small
by comparison to number in the rest of the world,
which is estimated to be 2,283 plants (Kempnich,
2003). U.S. plants are primarily concentrated in
the eastern coalfields for the reasons cited previously (Figure 4.21). Kentucky and West Virginia
have the largest number of coal processing facilities, with 74 and 73 plants, respectively. When
combined with the plants in Pennsylvania (35) and
Virginia (24), these four states represent more than
three-quarters of all coal preparation facilities in
the United States.
Because of gaps in the survey data reported by
Coal Age, the total capacity of the U.S. fleet cannot be calculated exactly. However, available data
suggest that the average plant has a capacity of
849 tons per hour, with about 20 percent of the
fleet exceeding 1,000 tons per hour and 20 percent
under 500 tons per hour. The state-by-state averages suggest that the total feed capacity for the fleet
is in the range of 229,147 tons per hour. This production level equates to a total maximum capacity of just over two billion tons of feed annually
(assuming around-the-clock operation). An estimate compiled from company production records
suggests that about half this tonnage is washed
coal product. Based on this value, the theoretical maximum production of washed coal product
from the current fleet of plants is estimated to be
approximately one billion tons annually. More than
85 percent of this capacity is available in Kentucky,
West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Illinois.
However, the actual production capability is probably much smaller than this upper limit because of
constraints associated with plant availability. An
availability correction accounts for losses in production because of mechanical failures, weather
11 9
Tennessee, 675
Maryland, 1
Maryland, 1800
Tennessee, 3
Colorado, 2333
Colorado, 4
Utah, 3000
Utah, 5
Alabama, 7120
Alabama, 5
Ohio, 8933
Illinois, 14
Kentucky,
74
Ohio, 15
Indiana,
17
Indiana, 8952
West Virginia,
70733
Illinois,
14915
Virginia,
19800
Virginia,
24
Pennsylvania,
35
West Virginia,
73
Pennsylvania,
34084
Kentucky,
56801
Number of Plants
(270 Total)
Ton/Hour Capacity
(229,147 TPH Total)
Fleet Size
State
Plant Feed Capacity
Number
percent
Average (TPH)
Total (TPH)
Total (%)
Kentucky
74
27.4
768
56,801
24.8
West Virginia
73
27.0
969
70,733
30.9
Pennsylvania
35
13.0
974
34,084
14.9
Virginia
24
8.9
825
19,800
8.6
Indiana
17
6.3
527
8,952
3.9
Ohio
15
5.6
596
8,933
3.9
Illinois
14
5.2
1,065
14,915
6.5
Alabama
1.9
1,424
7,120
3.1
Utah
1.9
600
3,000
1.3
Colorado
1.5
583
2,333
1.0
Tennessee
1.1
225
675
0.3
Maryland
0.4
1,800
1,800
0.8
Totals
270
100.0
849
229,147
100.0
Figure 4.21 Distribution of coal preparation plants in the United States. SOURCE: After Fiscor, 2007.
problems, power outages, or other shutdowns

attributed to the operation of the preparation facility. Although this factor is highly site specific, an
average availability of 85 percent is attainable based
on production records provided by many of the
12 0
larger producers. This correction reduces the total

washed coal product capacity for the U.S. fleet to
about 850 million tons per year. Another problem
is that preparation plants are typically located at
the mine site in order to keep haulage costs as
low as possible. As such, many of the older plants

are in locations that have been depleted of large
blocks of coal reserves, thereby making full use of
plant capacity unrealistic. One-third to one-half of
the current fleet may be subject to this limitation.
Therefore, based on these factors, the maximum
annual production capability of the existing fleet of
coal preparation plants is estimated to be only 430
to 570 million tons of washed coal product.
are responsible for nearly 90 percent of operational costs (Figure 4.22). These figures may vary
significantly from site to site depending on the
characteristics of the coal, scale of the plant, types
of processes used, and intensity of the cleaning.
Cleaning to lower levels of ash and sulfur typically
increases the total cost per cleaned ton produced,
since this process lowers the yield of recoverable
coal and increases the rate of waste generation.
Cost also affects the production capability of preparation plants. The cost of constructing and operating facilities must be kept low to remain profitable
in the very competitive U.S. markets. Capital costs
for construction of a modern preparation facility
(excluding external materials handling facilities)
are typically $10,000 to $15,000 for each ton per
hour of feed capacity, while the costs for operation
of the facility are typically $1.50 to $2.50 per raw
ton processed (Bethell, 2007). However, operating
costs as high as $4.40 per ton have been reported
for intensive cleaning (Anon, 2007). Operating
costs typically include expenses associated with
personnel labor, wear parts replacement, and
consumables such magnetite, chemical reagents,
and electrical power. A cost breakdown reported
by Laurila (2000) for an average plant shows that
labor, maintenance, and electrical power charges
4.2 Beneficial Impacts of Coal Preparation
Other, 0.4
Coal preparation provides several attractive economic and environmental benefits, including
increased coal reserves, lower transportation costs,
improved utilization properties, and abatement of
pollution. These factors are discussed in the following sections.
4.2.1 Coal Reserves

Perhaps no other technology has had a greater
impact on expanding the reserve base of economically recoverable coal than coal preparation. Preparation plants employ low-cost physical
separation processes to convert run-of-mine coal
resources into marketable coal reserves. The percentage of washed coal tonnage generated from
Maintenance,
42.6
Flotation
Reagents, 1.9
Fuel &
Lubricants, 1.9
Magnetite, 3.1
Thickener
Reagents, 3.9
Power, 14
Cost Element
Percent
Maintenance
42.6
Labor
32.2
Power
14.0
Thickener Reagents
3.9
Magnetite
3.1
Fuel & Lubricants
1.9
Flotation Reagents
1.9
Other
0.4
Labor, 32.2
100.0
Figure 4.22 Breakdown of operating costs for a coal preparation plant. SOURCE: After Laurila, 2000.
121
each ton of run-of-mine coal is commonly referred

to as plant yield. This parameter is difficult to
estimate when evaluating the reserve base for a
previously undefined coal property. The yield can
be influenced by several factors, including (1) the
quality of the in-place coal, (2) the washability
(separating characteristics) of the run-of-mine
coal, (3) the efficiency of the separation processes
used by the preparation facility, and (4) the strictness of the quality demands imposed by the coal
consumer. The quality of the in-place coal can be
affected by small changes to mining practices that
directly influence out-of-seam dilution. Variations
in washability, which reflect the selective liberation
of composite particles of intermixed coal and rock,
can also make estimations of coal yield unreliable
when coal is subjected to size reduction.
The average yield produced by coal preparation
plants has steadily declined over the years because
of depletion of lower ash feeds and less-selective
mining due to mechanization. For example,
Figure 4.23 shows the yield of washed coal product
currently obtained from a random survey of several major plants operating in the eastern United
States. It is not uncommon for eastern operations
to experience yields under 30 percent, thereby producing only one ton of washed coal product from
three or more tons of mined product. An estimate
compiled from production records supplied by coal
producers suggests that the average yield is now
less than 50 percent (49.8 percent +3.5 percent, to
be exact) for the total United States. This situation
is expected to worsen as eastern reserves become
thinner and more challenging to mine (Milici,
2000). A study reported by Weisenfluh et al. (1998)
indicated that nearly 52 percent of the remaining
eastern Kentucky coalfield resources are located in
coal seams that are 14 to 28 inches thick, while 31
percent are in 28 to 42 inch thick seams. Likewise,
a study of Virginia coalfields found that 30 percent
of the total reserve base (203 million tons) exists
in seams with a thickness less than 28 inches (Sites
12 2
60%
77%
PENNSYLVANIA
WEST
VIRGINIA
39% 34%
45%
59% 45%
44%
KENTUCKY
40%
46%
44%
44%
47%
52%
46%
39%
41%
54%
55%
39%
24%
49% 43%
VIRGINIA
38%
Figure 4.23 Examples of coal yield for a random sampling of

eastern plants.
and Hostettler, 1991). Consequently, ever increasing amounts of rock from out-of-seam dilution are
being mined, loaded, and hauled to preparation
plants for removal and disposal.
4.2.2. Coal Transportation

Most coal consumed in the United States is used
for the production of electricity. The cost of
transporting coal to the power station is usually
borne by the utility and paid based on the delivered tonnage. The mine operator is also paid by
the utility based on tonnage, although the unit
price is typically adjusted up or down to account
for the actual heat content of the supplied coal
fuel. In most cases, this simple pricing structure provides the base economic justification for
the operation of coal preparation facilities. The
high-ash rock rejected by coal preparation plants
contains insufficient heating value to justify its
shipment to the utility. The savings in transportation costs are directly proportional to the increase
in heating value.
This study stresses the importance of coal washability and organic efficiency in determining
profitability.
Cost-benefit studies suggest that the economics of

coal production are more sensitive to transportation cost than to any other factor. For example,
Norton (1979) was one of the first to demonstrate
how unfavorable changes in the cost of mining,
processing, and transportation affect profitability.
The study (Figure 4.24) concluded that coal transportation costs had the greatest overall impact on
total revenue. The study also indicated that the
yield of washed coal was second only to transportation cost in determining revenues. Increases in
capital and operating costs of the coal preparation plant had only a minor impact on revenue.
Therefore, any steps taken to reduce preparation
costs (such as fewer capital improvements, less
maintenance, and workforce reductions) need to
be closely examined to ensure that coal yield is not
adversely impacted by these cost-cutting measures.
4.2.3 Utility Performance
100
Prep Cost (Capital)
Prep Cost (O&M)
Revenue Remaining (%)
80
Mining
Cost
Clean
Yield
60
Transport
Cost
40
20
10
15
Unfavorable Change (%)
Figure 4.24 Effect of various factors on revenue for the coal production cycle. SOURCE: After Norton, 1979.
20
a) Thermal Efficiency
The thermal efficiency of a power station is very
important. A higher efficiency is obviously economically beneficial, because it provides a proportional improvement in generated revenue for
the power station. Moreover, higher efficiency also
reduces the production of greenhouse gases and
other environmental pollutants, because less coal
fuel needs to be burned per unit of electrical power
generated. One method for improving thermal efficiency is to use washed coals of higher quality that
can significantly improve the thermal efficiency of
a boiler (Harrison and Hervol, 1988; Davidson et
al., 1990; Kehoe et al., 1990; Harrison et al., 1995).
Higher-quality coals are more reactive and require
less excess air for effective combustion, thereby
improving efficiency via a reduction in heat lost
with the flue gas. Higher-quality coals also improve
efficiency by avoiding fouling/slagging problems in
the boiler, which tend to raise flue gas temperature
and increase heat loss (Skorupska, 1993).
The extent to which the proper application of coal
preparation technology improves thermal efficiency is highly case specific and difficult to predict
from purely theoretical considerations. Therefore,
the most reliable data for quantifying efficiency
improvements are typically based on actual plant
studies. One such study (Smith, 1988) monitored
improvements to boiler performance that resulted
from switching from run-of-mine coal (15 percent
ash and 3.5 percent sulfur) to washed coal (nine
percent ash and 2.8 percent sulfur) from the same
mine. Despite modest improvement in coal quality,
boiler efficiency increased from below 88 percent
to about 89.5 percent as a result of burning better
12 3
quality coal. Capacity also rose by almost 10 percent because of fewer fouling/slagging problems.
The use of coal preparation technologies to
improve boiler efficiency has also been a major
focus for the coal industry in other nations. The
International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that
coal-fired power plants in India can increase thermal efficiency up to 10 percent by switching from
unwashed to washed coal (Bhaskar, 2007). China
also expects to make greater use of coal preparation technology to improve thermal efficiencies
and environmental performance (Glomsrod and
Taoyuan, 2005). Average thermal efficiency in
China has been reported to be less than 29 percent
(Blackman and Wu, 1999), compared to around
38 percent in OECD (Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development) countries such as
Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, and United
States. As such, coal preparation is expected to
continue to have a large impact on the international community.
b) Operation and Maintenance

Another benefit of coal preparation is that it
removes impurities that have a significant influence on the operation and maintenance costs of
coal-fired boilers. Studies have demonstrated that
the removal of abrasive mineral impurities such
as pyrite and quartz can substantially reduce wear
rates and increase the throughput capacity of utility
pulverizers (Corder, 1983; Scott, 1995). The impacts
associated with the abrasive wear and slagging/fouling of boiler tubes can also be mitigated to a large
extent by using washed coals that have been properly cleaned to remove unwanted mineral matter
(Raask, 1983; Couch, 1994; Hatt, 1995). Vaninetti
and Busch (1982) provide a detailed description of
these problems and have developed empirical formulae that can be used to assist in the evaluation of
changes to coal quality in specific types of boilers.
124
c) Coal Handling and Storage

The handling characteristics of solid coal are an
important issue. A poor-handling coal may hang
in railcars, plug chutes, and bins, and stick to
conveyor belts (Hatt, 1997). These problems may
result in unscheduled shutdowns, thereby reducing power station availability. Washed coals from
preparation plants typically have superior handling characteristics to run-of-mine coals, especially if all or a portion of the ultrafines have been
removed. These coals also typically present fewer
problems in terms of unwanted dust generation,
solids run-off during precipitation events, and
freezing problems during colder months (Jones,
1998).
4.2.4 Pollution Abatement

Coal preparation plays an important role in reducing the emissions of pollutants that associate with
the mineral matter contained in coal (Davidson,
2000). These emissions normally include solid
particulate emissions such as fly ash as well as
gaseous emissions of precursors associated with
acid-rain and air toxins. These emissions are
strictly regulated for coal-fired utilities through
various legislative acts such as the 1990 Clean Air
Act Amendment (CAAA) and 2005 Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR). Moreover, coal preparation
has a beneficial impact on reducing greenhouse gas
emissions by increasing the thermal efficiency of
coal-fired boilers. These benefits are described in
more detail in the following sections.
a) Sulfur Emissions
Although scrubbers and fuel switching have been
used with great success in the United States to
reduce SO2 emissions, coal preparation has also
played an important role by reducing the sulfur
contained in coal feedstocks prior to combustion (Couch, 1995). Sulfur occurs in coal as three
distinct forms (sulfate, organic, and pyritic).

Sulfate sulfur is present in very small quantities
and is not considered a serious problem. Organic
sulfur, which is part of the basic structure of coal,
is not removable by conventional cleaning. The
precombustion removal of organic sulfur is possible using chemical cleaning methods; however,
these elaborate processes are not economically
competitive with flue gas scrubbing. Pyritic sulfur
is present as discrete inclusions of iron sulfides
distributed within the coal matrix. As such, this
form of sulfur can be removed by physical cleaning
processes such as coal preparation (Kawatra, 2001).
Fortunately, many of the high-sulfur coals in the
United States also contain a high proportion of
pyritic sulfur (Figure 4.25).
Coal preparation plants have been reported to
remove up to 90 percent by weight of pyritic sulfur, although rejections are typically in the 3070
percent range because of liberation constraints
(Cavallaro and Deurbrouck, 1977; Kawatra and
Eisele, 2001). When compared to the postcombustion control of sulfur, coal preparation offers
several distinct advantages, including improved
Northern
Appalachia
Southern
Appalachia
Organic
Pyritic
Alabama
Eastern
Midwest
Western
Midwest
Combined
0
2
3
4
Sulfur Content (%)
Figure 4.25 Distribution of sulfur types typically in U.S. coals.

SOURCE: After Cavallaro et al., 1976.
market flexibility, lower scrubber loading, and concurrent removal of other impurities (e.g., ash, trace
elements, and moisture). Although coal preparation does not directly affect the nitrogen content of
coal, washing has been shown to help reduce NOx
emissions by providing a consistent high-quality
fuel that provides for ease of control of the combustion environment (Couch, 2003).
b) Particulate Emissions
Noncombustible impurities present in the feedstocks supplied to coal power stations generate
waste streams as either bottom ash/slag or fly ash.
Of these, the finest particles of fly ash emitted to
the atmosphere are considered to be of greatest
environmental concern because of their potential adverse impact on human respiratory health
(Smith and Sloss, 1998). Power stations make
use of several types of effective control technologies to minimize fine particulate emissions. These
postcombustion technologies include efficient
processes such as electrostatic precipitators (ESPs),
fabric filters (FFs), cyclones, and wet scrubbers.
Modern control systems typically achieve better
than 99.5 percent removal of all particulates and
exceed 99.99 percent in some cases. However, standards for particulate emissions continue to become
increasingly stringent as reflected in expanded
regulations by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to include particles smaller than
2.5 microns in new ambient air quality standards
(EPA, 1997). As such, there is continued interest in removing greater amounts of particulates
upstream of other emission controls using coal
preparation technologies.
The separation processes used in coal preparation
plants remove noncombustible minerals that ultimately affect the amount and type of particulate
matter (PM) that passes downstream to emission
control systems. For these systems, proper levels
of coal washing can be identified that effectively
12 5
reduce ash loading and improve removal efficiencies. A recent presentation by American Electric
Power to the Asia Pacific Partnership (Doherty,
2006) concluded that Consistent and proper quality coal is best tool to improve plant operating
performance and reduce PM and SO2 emissions.
Removal of some of the coal ash (includes rocks) at
the mine is more economic than in the pulverizer,
boiler, precipitator and scrubber. Washing also
minimizes the total amount of high-surface-area
fly ash that is more hazardous to dispose because of
its high reactivity. In cases where particulate controls are currently deemed adequate, greater use of
coal preparation may be required in the future to
compensate for deterioration in feedstock quality
as higher-quality coal reserves become depleted.
c) Hazardous Air Pollutants

The 1990 CAAA contained provisions that established new emission standards for a variety of air
toxins known as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs).
Many of the HAPs identified in the CAAA are
present as trace elements in coal (Obermiller et
al., 1993; Meij and Winkel, 2007). Some of the
most noteworthy of these are antimony, arsenic,
beryllium, cadmium, chlorine, chromium, cobalt,
fluorine, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, and radionuclides. Concentrations of these
elements are known to vary considerably from
seam to seam, and in some cases within the same
seam (Zubovic, 1966; Swaine, 1990). During combustion at electrical utilities, these elements may
be released to the atmosphere as solid compounds
with the fly ash and in the vapor phase with the
flue gas. Existing post-combustion control technologies, such as electrostatic precipitators, can be
reasonably effective in reducing the concentration
of trace elements associated with fly ash. These
elements commonly include antimony, beryllium,
cadmium, cobalt, lead, and manganese. Capture
efficiencies greater than 97 percent have been
reported for electrostatic separators (Fonseca et al.,
12 6
1993). On the other hand, trace elements such as

arsenic, chlorine, mercury, and selenium have the
potential to volatilize and are less-effectively controlled by postcombustion methods.
Studies have shown that many of the hazardous
air pollutant precursors identified in CAAA are
associated with mineral matter commonly rejected
by coal preparation plants. This approach to trace
HAP control is attractive, because the waste rock
rejected by coal preparation plants is coarser and
has a lower reactivity than the high-surface-area
ash generated by power stations (Jacobsen et al.,
1992). In-plant sampling campaigns conducted
by various researchers (Ford and Price, 1982;
Fonseca et al., 1993) suggest a good correlation
between the rejection of mineral matter and the
removal of trace elements during physical cleaning. These findings are also supported by laboratory float-sink tests performed using a variety of
eastern coals (Akers, 1995, 1996; Akers et al., 1997;
Palmer et al, 2004). These data suggest that trace
elements are typically rejected at levels of 40 to 70
percent by weight using conventional preparation
technologies. These values appear to be in good
agreement with earlier values reported by Fonseca
et al. (1993), which showed an average trace element removal by conventional coal preparation
of approximately 64 percent for six different coals
(Figure 4.26). On the other hand, the large degree
of variability observed in the data from these and
other studies suggest that the rejections of trace
elements by coal preparation are very site specific
and need to be quantified on a case by case basis.
d) Mercury
Mercury is the trace element in coal of greatest
environmental concern (Swaine, 1990). Mercury
can be released during coal combustion and subsequently deposited in the environment. Ecological
studies have shown that mercury bioaccumulates in the food chain as higher species consume
on COALQUAL data). This comparison is shown

in Figure 4.27 for the primary eastern coal producing states. Based on this study, Quick et al. (2002)
concluded that selective mining and more extensive coal washing may accelerate the current trend
towards lower mercury content in coal burned
at U.S. electric utilities, and that since recent
reductions of sulfur emissions from coal-burning
electric utilities are largely because of a declining
sulfur content of delivered coal, rather than from
scrubbing combustion gases, these simple, lowcost approaches to reduce Hg emissions should
not be overlooked.
Ash
Sulfur
As
Be
Cd
Co
Cr
F
Hg
Mn
Northern App.
Southern App.
Illinois Basin
Ni
Pb
Sb
Se
0
20
40
60
Reduction (%)
80
100
Figure 4.26 Reduction in trace element content after coal

preparation. SOURCE: After Fonseca et al., 1993.
lower life forms exposed to mercury contamination (Trasande et al., 2006). Data reported by
EPA indicate that coal-fired utilities are currently
the largest human-generated source of mercury
releases in the United States. It is estimated that
these plants release approximately 48 tons annually (EPA, 2001). To curb these emissions, EPA
issued the worlds first-ever rule to cap and reduce
mercury emissions for coal-fired power plants
in March 2005. Compliance options available
to utilities include postcombustion capture of
mercury by existing or new flue gas scrubbing
technologies as well as precombustion control of
mercury by coal preparation and coal switching
(Pavlish et al., 2003).
A recent study by Quick et al. (2002) showed that
the mercury content of coal delivered to utilities
(based on ICR data) was lower than that of the inground coal resources in the United States (based
According to Alderman (2007), cleaning can

reduce mercury by more than 50 percent in many
eastern and western coals and lignites, excluding southern Powder River Basin (PRB) coals.
Greater rejections of mercury by coal preparation
appear to be limited by inadequate liberation and
the presence of organically associated mercury.
Several studies have suggested that mercury has
some degree of association with the iron sulfides
All
AL
COALQUAL
ICR
KY
OH
PA
25 th 50th 75 th
VA
10 th
WV
0
10
20
30
Mean 90 th
40
Mercury Content (lb Hg / 10 12 BTU)

Figure 4.27 Comparison of mercury contents for delivered (ICR)
and in-ground (COALQUAL) coals. SOURCE: After Quick et al., 2002.
127
present in many run-of-mine coals (Tkach, 1975;

Finkelman et al., 1979; Minken et al., 1984). In
fact, Figure 4.28 suggests that the concentration of
many metallic elements found in coal often correlate well with the presence of sulfide minerals.
As a result, the rejection level for mercury is often
in the same range as the pyritic sulfur rejection for
coals subjected to coal preparation. Although liberation can be improved by reducing the topsize of
the feed coal (Hucko, 1984; Cavallaro et al., 1976,
1991), this approach is difficult to justify in todays
marketplace because of the high costs associated
with fine grinding (Kawatra and Eisele, 2001). Fine
particles are also difficult and costly to upgrade,
dewater, and handle in existing coal preparation
facilities. The development of new and improved
technologies for fine coal processing is needed to
overcome this limitation. It should also be noted
that thermal processing (e.g., K-Fuel process) can
Coal preparation reduces emissions of greenhouse

gases through an improvement in thermal efficiency; that is, less CO2 is produced per unit of
electricity generated. Calculations indicate that
a one percentage point improvement in thermal
efficiency provides a two to three percentage
point reduction in CO2 emissions for a typical
coal-fired utility. An investigation conducted by
Couch (2000) indicated that there are more than
4,000 coal-fired boilers worldwide that could
improve thermal efficiencies and reduce CO2 emissions by using coal preparation to improve coal
quality. Moreover, Von Hippel and Hayes (1995)
10.0
1.0
10.0
Sulfides (%)
1000.0
1.000
0.100
1.0
10.0
Sulfides (%)
1.0
10.0
Sulfides (%)
100.0
1.0
10.0
Sulfides (%)
100.0
10.0
1000.0
1.0
10.0
1.0
1.0
10.0
Sulfides (%)
100.0
100.0
Mercury (ppm)
Nickel (ppm)
Lead (ppm)
1.0
0.1
0.1
100.0
100.0
0.1
0.1
10.0
0.010
0.001
0.1
100.0
100.0
Cobalt (ppm)
100.0
1.0
0.1
e) Greenhouse Gases
10.000
Cadmium (ppm)
Arsenic (ppm)
1000.0
achieve high (up to 70 percent) mercury reductions for many western coals, including southern
PRB coals (Alderman, 2007).
10.0
1.0
0.1
1.0
10.0
Sulfides (%)
100.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
Figure 4.28 Effect of sulfide mineral content on the concentration of trace metals in a sample of Pittsburgh seam coal.
SOURCE: After Luttrell et al., 1998.
12 8
have noted that coal preparation

reduces the amount of energy consumed (and CO2 generated) during
coal transportation by increasing
the specific heating value of the
delivered coal. Smith (1997) also
found that freshly mined coals subjected to coal preparation processes
tended to display slower releases of
methane, another greenhouse gas.
250
240
230
220
It is interesting to note that U.S.

sulfur legislation appears to have
210
210
inadvertently contributed to
increased production of greenhouse gases by spearheading the
200
6500
8500 10500 12500 14500 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
shift from high-sulfur coal reserves
Heat Value (BTU/lb)
Fixed Carbon (%)
in the east to low-sulfur coals
Figure 4.29 CO2 emissions for different rank coals. SOURCE: After Quick and Glick, 2000.
located in the west (primarily
Wyoming). Western coals, which
the actual value is slightly higher after power conare of lower geologic rank, can produce up to
sumption is factored in.
seven to14 percent more CO2 when burned than
high-rank bituminous coals mined in the east
(Winschel, 1990). Figure 4.29 provides a graphi4.3 Issues and Concerns for Coal
cal comparison of the amount of CO2 produced by
Preparation
different rank coals. For one midwestern utility, it
Coal preparation offers many attractive benefits
is estimated that CO2 emissions increased by six to
eight percent by switching from a nearby supply of
for coal-fired power generation. These typically
high-sulfur bituminous coal to a western supply of
include lower transportation costs, improved proplow-sulfur subbituminous coal (Quick and Glick,
erties for coal utilization, and reduced emissions
2000). Moreover, this calculation did not take into
of particulate and gaseous pollutants. However,
account the additional CO2 generated by transthe industry also faces several challenges that
porting the coal over the long haulage distance
need to be resolved to ensure that preparation
from the western mine. These considerations proplants can continue to operate at a profit without
vide an incentive for the continued use of eastern
damage to the environment. These concerns can
coals that are often subjected to coal preparation
be generally classified as either (1) technical facto provide high specific heat fuels. For sulfur contors that relate to shortcomings in current protrol, the alternative to coal switching is to use flue
cessing systems, (2) environmental factors that
gas desulfurization. Unfortunately, the chemical
involve improving waste handling and disposal, or
reaction used by scrubbers to convert and capture
(3) health and safety factors that may affect worksulfur generates CO2 as a byproduct (Dhir et al.,
ers or citizens in the surrounding area. Each of
2000). In theory, one ton of CO2 is generated for
these concerns is discussed in greater detail in the
each ton of SO2 captured by the scrubber, although
following sections.
12 9
4.3.1 Technical Issues

a) Fine Coal Cleaning
Run-of-mine coals that are fed to coal preparation
plants are typically crushed to liberate rock before
washing and to limit the size of particles that enter
the plant. Operators prefer to keep particle topsize as large as possible (e.g., greater than 50 mm)
because fine coal processes are considerably less
efficient and substantially more costly (Osborne,
1988). Theoretically, crushing can increase the
amount of high-quality recoverable coal within a
given reserve. Size reduction improves liberation
by reducing the population of intermixed composite particles of coal and rock. A study conducted
by DOE (Cavallaro et al., 1991) indicates that the
reserves of compliance coal in central Appalachia
could be nearly doubled by efficient cleaning at
a particle size of 1 mm (Figure 4.30). Although a
systematic assessment has not been performed to
date for trace elements, size reduction would also
be expected to substantially improve the removal
10
14 Mesh
Coal Availability (Billion Tons)
9
8
7
3/8 Inch
6
5
4
3
1-1/2 Inch
2
1
0
10
100
Particle Top Size (mm)

Figure 4.30 Effect of decreasing top size on low-sulfur coal availability. SOURCE: After Cavallero et al., 1991.
13 0
of coal-related pollutants other than just ash and

sulfur. Unfortunately, inefficiencies associated with
existing fine coal upgrading processes make size
reduction for liberation purposes uneconomic in
industrial practice.
In industrial practice, the solid-solid separation
processes used to treat fine coal represent the
single greatest loss of potentially recoverable coal
in a preparation facility (Bethell, 1998). Field studies indicate that the froth flotation process, which
is normally used to recover coal that is smaller
than 0.2 mm, typically recovers only 60 to 80 percent of the organic matter in this size range. This
surface-based separation is inherently less effective
in removing pyritic sulfur than density-based processes used to treat the coarser sizes of coal (Adel
and Wang, 2005). As such, the desulfurization of
fine particles is also often poor in many operating preparation facilities. Therefore, the continued
development of effective, low-cost processes for
treating fine coal is a major need for the preparation industry. Effective solutions need to be found
for improving the recovery, selectivity, and capacity of froth flotation processes. This goal may be
achieved through fundamental and applied studies that seek to understand and improve flotation
chemistry, equipment design, and process control.
In addition, new types of density separators need
to be developed for treating fine coal. Centrifugal
separators such as enhanced gravity concentrators,
which have been successfully applied in the gold
industry, may prove useful for this purpose. These
devices have the potential to reject significantly
greater amounts of pyritic sulfur (and mercury)
that is not efficiently removed using surfacebased separators such as froth flotation (Honaker,
1998; Honaker et al., 1996, 2000). However, these
machines need to operate with higher throughputs, improved separation efficiencies, lowerdensity cut-points (i.e., higher-purity coal), finer
particle size cutoffs, and lower operating and
maintenance costs.
b) Fine Coal Dewatering

The solid-solid separation processes employed
by modern coal preparation plants require large
amounts of process water. After cleaning, the
unwanted water must be removed from particle
surfaces using mechanical dewatering equipment. Inefficient removal of moisture lowers the
heating value, increases transport costs, and creates handling/freezing problems for the cleaned
coal. Coarse particles can be readily dewatered
using simple screening systems, while fine particles require more complicated unit operations
such as centrifuges and filters. Unfortunately, the
mechanical systems used to dewater fine coal are
inefficient and costly (Le Roux et al., 2005). Fines
often represent as little as 10 percent of the total
run-of-mine feed; however, this size fraction may
contain one-third or more of the total moisture in
the delivered product.
The availability of low-cost mechanical dewatering
equipment that can efficiently remove moisture
from fine coal is widely considered to be an important need for the U.S. coal preparation industry.
Existing technologies for fine coal dewatering tend
to produce unacceptably high moistures, exceeding 25 to 35 percent by weight, or intentionally
sacrifice half or more of the ultrafines as waste
in an attempt to lower the product moisture. In
addition, these processes are typically the most
energy-intensive used in coal preparation, often
consuming six to 12 kilowatt (kW) per ton per
hour of dry solids processed (Yoon et al., 2006).
Thermal dryer systems can effectively reduce moisture; however, these massive units require very
large capital expenditures that are difficult to justify
in the coal industry. Also, indirect thermal drying
systems (e.g., Holoflite and Torus Disc) typically
require 200 to 400 kW per ton per hour of product
for drying fine coal solids to single-digit moistures
(Van den Broek, 1982). Moreover, stringent air
quality standards make it impossible in many cases
to obtain new operating permits for thermal dryers. Therefore, the coal preparation industry needs
to develop new mechanical solid-liquid separation
processes that are substantially more efficient in
terms of removing moisture and less expensive
to purchase, operate, and maintain. Innovative
systems are critically needed, which may require
fundamental studies to identify controlling mechanisms that can lead to the development of breakthrough technologies.
c) Dry Coal Processing

Low-sulfur coal reserves in the western states have
become the most important supply of domestic
fossil fuel in the United States during the past few
decades. Historically, the majority of coal mined
in this region was of sufficient quality such that
it did not require any coal preparation except
for simple crushing and sizing. More recently,
however, increased levels of rock dilution have
been noted for coals mined in this region, largely
because more challenging reserves are being mined
and larger mining equipment that is less selective
is being used (Bethell, 2007). This trend is pushing some coal producers to consider coal washing
for the first time. In addition, new federal and
state clean air quality requirements are pressuring
utilities and coal companies to use precombustion
cleaning as a means of reducing SOx and trace element emissions (Honaker et al., 2007). One example is the proposed Springerville power plant in
New Mexico, which has been tentatively approved
contingent upon the use of precombustion cleaning to improve the quality of the coal feedstock.
There are many challenges in using precombustion
cleaning to upgrade western coals. The processes
traditionally used to wash eastern coals cannot be readily adopted in the west because water
resources are lacking and low-rank coals often
disintegrate in water. As a result, current R&D
efforts focus on the development of dry cleaning
131
processes to upgrade these lower-rank reserves.

Dry coal separators, such as pneumatic jigs and air
tables, are already finding applications at selected
mine and utility sites (Kelley and Snoby, 2002; Lu
et al., 2003; Weinstein and Snoby, 2007). Other
developing technologies that may be applicable
for this purpose include various types of electrostatic (Yoon et al., 1995; Stencel et al., 2002) and
magnetic separators (Oder, 2005a, 2005b). The
continued development of these low-cost units is
important for upgrading many of the western coal
reserves where water is scarce. The development
of automated sorters, which use optical, electromagnetic, or x-ray detection to identify and extract
rock from coal, also show considerable promise for
dry coal concentration (Jong et al., 2003). Optical
sorters are used for separating particles that are
liberated at relatively large sizes (greater than about
5 mm). These devices are already being used for
separating diamond, gold, uranium, and sulfide
ores as well as for separating plastic bottles in the
recycling industry. Such devices are particularly
useful for pre-concentration, which can increase
throughput and result in energy savings for other
types of solid-solid separators.
Continued R&D is necessary to improve separation efficiency (particularly for fine sizes), increase
reliability, and lower costs for this new generation
of coal preparation technology. The United States
currently lags behind other countries in this area
and needs to work more aggressively to ensure
that the lack of dry cleaning technology does not
become a barrier to the continued availability of
good-quality western coals.
d) Online Analysis and Control

Tremendous strides have been made in the automation and control of coal preparation plants during the past several decades (Couch, 1996). The
application of online sensors together with programmable logic controllers has allowed modern
132
plants to operate more efficiently and to improve

safety by reducing manpower requirements. On
the other hand, the industry continues to struggle
with the real-time determination of the quality
of coal products (Belbot et al., 2001). Analyzers
are commercially available for real-time analysis
of many quality parameters for coal, including
ash, sulfur, and moisture, although measurement
accuracy is often poor because of sampling and
calibration issues (Yu et al., 2003). Analyzers cannot be used to determine important data such as
particle size distributions and real-time washability. Therefore, improving automation, control,
and sensor technologies is a key challenge for the
industry to overcome. Advances in real-time analysis will enhance the industrys ability to maximize
the recovered energy in a marketable product and
minimize the generation of unwanted wastes.
e) Particle Sizing
There are many technical challenges for the coal
preparation industry that relate directly to sizesize separations. Size-size separations are required
before solid-solid separations because these units
are only effective within a narrow particle size
range. Vibrating screens are generally efficient and
cost effective for sizing and dewatering coarser
particles. On the other hand, screening systems
for fine particles, particularly those smaller than
0.5 mm, tend to bind easily, wear quickly, and suffer from low throughput and low efficiency. The
misplacement of incorrectly sized particles into
equipment not designed to handle such sizes can
have a large adverse impact on both the separating performance and maintenance requirements
for a preparation plant. Another important issue
with screening is the desliming of coal products
to remove ultrafine mineral sediments that are
detrimental to quality and moisture. Many in the
industry believe that the ability to screen ultrafine particles at sizes of 0.15 mm and smaller is
particularly important. Efficient methods for dry
screening, usually in the size range of five to 10

mm, are also needed to complement the dry coal
cleaning processes that are being developed for
upgrading lower-rank coals or coals in waterscarce regions. Decreasing noise, vibrations, maintenance costs, and energy consumption are also
factors of interest in improving screening systems.
In addition to new screening systems, breakthrough
technologies in ultrafine sizing are also needed
in the coal preparation industry (Mohanty et al.,
2002). Classification is the separation of particles
by differences in settling velocities, which depends
not only on particle size, but also on particle density and shape. Firth and OBrian (2003) noted that
while existing classification systems were adequate
for the coal preparation industry of the past, it is
apparent that further improvements in yield/ash/
moisture relationship achieved by coal preparation
plants will require increased efficiency in this size
separation step. The ability to classify and better utilize ultrafine particles will increase industry
productivity and reduce the generation of wastes.
Many in the industry believe that there is currently
a lack of efficient ultrafine sizing and desliming
technologies for separating below 0.1 mm. The use
of advanced analytical tools, such as computational
fluid dynamics, may prove useful in the redesign of
existing classifiers and in the development of new
types of classification processes.
f) Coarse Coal Cleaning

Modern coal preparation plants make use of
density-based separators to upgrade coarse particles. Dense medium processes, such as vessels
and cyclones, have become nearly standard in new
or newly renovated plants for treating particles
coarser than 0.51.0 mm. These processes are typically very efficient and provide a high feed capacity
per unit of cost. As such, revolutionary improvements in the design of dense medium separators
may not be required; however, their efficiencies
can be increased substantially by improving online

instrumentation and control. Also, there is a need
to find alternative sources of affordable magnetite
in view of a recent closure of the only domestic
magnetite source and a growing demand from
the Chinese coal industry that is exhausting supplies on the international market (Honaker, 2006).
Better methods for minimizing losses of magnetite
within the plant and recovering magnetite from
waste streams would also help companies cope
with the dwindling supply of magnetite.
The coal preparation industry needs to find new
alternatives to float-sink analysis for quantifying
the performance of their dense medium separators. Current float-sink analysis methods use
high-density organic liquids to partition coal
particles according to density. This type of analysis is routinely used to characterize the potential
cleanability of coal and to assess the efficiencies of
coal cleaning processes. Unfortunately, the halogenated organic solvents used in float-sink testing,
such as naphtha, perchloroethylene, and tetrabromoethane, are likely to be phased out because of
toxicity concerns (Galvin, 2006). Therefore, new
methods need to be developed for conducting
float-sink analysis. Alternatives may include new
non-toxic dense liquids/suspensions (Callen et al.,
2002; Koroznikova et al., 2007) and the development of new methods such as computed tomography (Lin et al., 2000) or gas pycnometry (Cameron,
2004). Moreover, because float-sink testing is labor
intensive and time consuming, a fast, automated
system for laboratory and online washability
analysis is needed.
g) Water Clarification and Thickening

Thickening is a method by which particulates are
allowed to settle by gravity in a large settling tank
so as to provide a high-solids underflow that can
be discarded, and clarified overflow that can be
reused as process water. Gravity thickeners require
13 3
large areas and significant capital funds to install.

Although these units are typically very effective,
there continues to be great interest in finding
methods to increase the specific capacity (tons or
gallons treated per unit area) of a thickener. This
may be achieved by improving the chemical additives, optimizing the mode of reagent addition,
or improving thickener design. Advanced design
tools, such as computational fluid dynamics, are
also recommended as a means of developing a better understanding of how thickeners operate and
how performance may be improved. Future work
needs to include fundamental studies on the effect
of surface chemistry and water chemistry on thickener performance.
Considerable interest is also growing in the application of technologies such as deep-cone thickeners, which can produce a paste of 45 to 55 percent
solids as underflow in waste coal applications
(Parekh et al., 2006). Ideally, the paste can be discarded as a stacked pile, thereby avoiding the need
for impoundments to handle waste slurry. This
approach has already been implemented as demonstration projects at two mining sites in the eastern
United States (Bethell et al., 2008). Further studies
in this area, and utilization of the new technology
to eliminate fine coal impoundments (discussed
later), is of great interest to those working in the
coal preparation industry.
4.3.2 Environmental Issues

Effective environmental controls are essential to
the long-term success of any coal mining operation. Although environmental issues and controls
are discussed in greater detail elsewhere in this
study, several of them are very specific to preparation plant operation and have been highlighted in
this chapter. Potential environmental issues associated with coal processing projects have been classified by the World Bank to include air emissions,
wastewater, hazardous materials, solid wastes, and
13 4
noise (IFC, 2007). Subsets of these of particular

concern to U.S. operators are described in greater
detail in the following sections.
a) Coarse Waste Disposal

Of the various challenges facing the coal preparation industry, perhaps none are as significant as
those which relate to waste handling and disposal.
This importance can be attributed to the fact that
coal cleaning operations produce large volumes
of waste that must be discarded into refuse piles
or impoundments. Refuse piles are designed to
receive coarse particles of waste rock that can be
easily dewatered. This material is relatively easy
to handle and can be safely transported by truck
or belt haulage systems to the disposal area with
little or no potential for environmental damage.
On the other hand, the waste contains solid and
liquid components that may present long-term
disposal problems depending on the sizes, types,
and quantities of minerals present and the conditions under which the wastes are stored (e.g., dry
vs. wet, loose vs. compacted). These factors play
a key role in establishing the structural integrity
(e.g., slope stability, surface water runoff, sediment
containment, and seepage) and chemical nature
(e.g., acid generation and metal dissolution) of the
wastes. Solid sediments and dissolved ions may be
transported by rainwater where they can pollute
streams or groundwater. Many of these issues can
be effectively managed via proper disposal practices and monitoring programs. On the other hand,
uncertainties related to the intricate biochemistry
and complex hydrology of the waste warrant continued investigation to fully assess the potential for
negative effects associated with long-term disposal
of coarse waste. Overall, improved waste characterization, including better methods to define the
nature of wastes from coal preparation operations,
is considered by many to be a high-priority need
for the coal industry.
b) Slurry Handling and Disposal

The handling and disposal of fine slurry waste is
widely considered to be one of the most difficult
challenges facing the coal preparation industry.
Fine wastes have historically been discarded into
earthen impoundments for permanent disposal.
An impoundment is an engineered structure consisting of a large-volume settling basin formed
behind a manmade dam or embankment. The
waste, which is difficult to dewater, is normally
pumped from the preparation plant thickener to
the impoundment as slurry. The slurry contains
water, coal fines, silt, clay, and other fine mineral
particulates from the processing plant. In most
cases, the slurry is retained behind a manmade
embankment (earthen dam) constructed from
compacted refuse material. The impoundment
is designed to have a volume that is sufficiently
large to ensure that fine particles settle by gravity before the clear water at the surface is recycled
back to the plant for reuse. In some cases, chemical additives may be used to promote settling and
control pH. According to the National Research
Council (NRC, 2002a), the coal industry discards
70 to 90 million tons of fine wastes each year into
existing impoundments. In 2001, the Mine Safety
and Health Administration (MSHA) reported that
there were 713 active impoundments and ponds,
most of which are located in central Appalachia
(NRC, 2002a). Impoundments, like any body of
water contained behind a dam, can pose safety and
environmental risks if not properly constructed,
monitored, and maintained. Potential problems
include structural failures, seepage/piping, overtopping, acid drainage, and accidental discharges
of process water containing particulates. Since the
well-known Buffalo Creek dam failure in 1972,
strict engineering standards have been mandated
by government agencies to regulate the design and
operation of impoundments. EPA (1994b) published a detailed report on the design and evaluation of impoundments for the mining industry.
No failures of impoundment dams or overspills

have occurred since this legislation was enacted.
However, several breakthroughs of slurry into
old mine workings beneath impoundments have
occurred. The most notable was the Martin County
incident, which released about 309 million gallons of slurry into streams and rivers in late 2000.
A number of accidental releases of slurry have
also been reported at various plant sites. A listing
of slurry release incidents from coal preparation
facilities and impoundments is maintained the on
the Web by the Coal Impoundment Location and
Information System (www.coalimpoundment.
org). More than 90 percent of the volume of slurry
accidentally released can be attributed to five spill
events (Figure 4.31).
Several alternatives to impoundments have been
employed by the coal industry in an attempt to
avoid any future potential for environmental damage. Gardner et al. (2003) extensively examined
these alternatives. For example, some mines use
new modes of slurry disposal such as slurry cells
and underground injection wells. Slurry cells
have been used successfully in some cases (albeit
at higher cost), but limitations associated with
maintaining less than 20 acre-feet of settling area
make this alternative difficult to apply in all cases.
Likewise, the use of injection wells has raised
public concerns about groundwater contamination and well water quality (Breen, 2007; Wilcox,
2007). To overcome these problems, various types
of mechanical solid-liquid separators have been
investigated as a means of more fully dewatering the fine solids prior to disposal. Notable
examples include paste thickeners and different
types of filters (pressure, vacuum, belt press, and
plate-and-frame). Unfortunately, these systems
have specific problems, such as high costs, large
chemical demand, poor performance, high energy
consumption, and safety concerns. Consequently,
it is not surprising that the Committee on Coal
Waste Impoundments that recently examined the
135
350
Total Volume (Million Gallons)
water. The effects of

these components on
300
separating performance
and plant maintenance
250
(e.g., rusting and scal200
ing) are not well understood. Deterioration of
Martin
150
County
process water quality
is known to reduce siz100
ing efficiency, lower
Buffalo
Martin
Creek
County
flotation recovery, and
50
Montcoal
increase magnetite
Eastover
0
losses (Osborne, 1988).
1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002 2006
Year
Evidence also suggests
Figure 4.31 Accidental Releases from Coal Slurry Impoundments.
that dissolved ions
SOURCE: www. coalimpoundment.org.
adversely impact the
performance of dewaissue of slurry disposal concluded that, although
tering processes (Yoon et al., 2007). Detailed studthere are alternatives to disposing of coal waste in
ies are needed to better understand these problems
impoundments, no specific alternative can be recso that effective solutions can be identified and
ommended in all cases. Therefore, in the absence
implemented before they impede preparation plant
of a preferred disposal method, continued developoperations.
ment of new and improved processes and practices
for slurry disposal is critically needed in the coal
d) Residual Processing Chemicals
preparation industry.
There are growing concerns by the public that
chemicals used in coal processing may be harmc) Process Water Quality
ful to the environment. The vast majority of coal
The overwhelming majority of cleaning processes
is upgraded without being in contact with any
used in coal preparation require large amounts
chemical additives using density-based separation
of process water. Nearly all of the process water
processes. On the other hand, fine coal particles
is supplied by thickening units, which settle out
(typically less than 0.2 mm) are processed using
ultrafine suspended solids and recycle clarified
froth flotation circuits, which require small doswater back into the plant. A small amount of fresh
ages of reagents known as collectors and frothmake-up water from an external source is usually
ers. Collectors consist of oily hydrocarbons, such
required to satisfy the balance between moisture
as diesel fuel, kerosene, and fuel oil, which are
contents of solids entering and exiting with the
insoluble in water and coat fine coal particles.
plant. The clarification and recycling of process
If required, dosages are typically less than 0.32
water provides an effective means of reducing fresh
pounds of collector per ton of fine coal processed.
water demands and lowing environmental impacts.
Likewise, frothers are added to all flotation systems
On the other hand, plant operators are faced with
to promote the formation of small air bubbles and
the difficulty of avoiding the buildup of suspended
to create a stable froth. Frothers are typically varisolids and dissolved substances in the process
ous types of alcohol and polyglycol surfactants
13 6
(Laskowski, 2001). Addition rates for frothers are

typically less than 1015 parts per million (ppm)
in the process water. In addition, plants add water
treatment chemicals into their thickening circuits
to enhance settling rates and improve water clarity.
These reagents commonly include various types of
natural and synthetic coagulants and flocculants.
Polymer flocculants, which are added in very small
amounts, are diluted in strength to 0.010.05 percent solutions with water to improve performance.
These chemical are also widely employed in the
purification of drinking water and food as well
as in the treatment of sewage, paper-making, oil
recovery, storm water runoff, and many other types
of industrial wastewater (Gregory and Bolto, 2007).
Finally, coal operations may occasionally use small
amounts of dust suppressants or freeze inhibitors to address seasonal problems that may arise
at the plant site.
Several studies have been carried out in recent
years to assess the ecotoxicological effects of
chemicals used by processing plants. Although
most of these studies have demonstrated that current disposal practices are not harmful and pose
no risk to the public or environment, some studies
have raised concerns that seepage from impoundments containing mine-influenced waters (e.g.,
residual chemicals, particulates, and acid drainage)
may be impacting the population of freshwater
mussels/mollusks in tributaries around coal mining and processing facilities (B. Beaty, The Nature
Conservancy Clinch Valley Program, pers. comm.,
2007). Many of these issues were addressed in
a recent symposium on the coexistence of coal
mining and healthy aquatic ecosystems (Nature
Conservancy, 2007). On the other hand, another
recent study commissioned by the New Zealand
Auckland Regional Council (ARC) examined the
effects of residual coagulants and flocculants on
natural waters (ARC, 2004). The study concluded
that the negative impacts of these chemicals were
low level and not likely to be significant in relation
to other factors which govern the health of aquatic

communities. The benefit of reduced sediment
levels in discharges is considered to outweigh
the risk of any low level impacts attributable to
residual flocculants. However, the study notes that
improper application, such as misusage or overdosing, may create an environmental risk. Therefore,
the development of new technologies that eliminate or significantly reduce the additions of process
reagents is recommended as a way to address any
potential concerns by the public. In the near-term,
it is recommended that chemical manufacturers
continue to develop green reagents for use in coal
preparation facilities. Many plants that dispose of
waste slurry via underground injection have successfully switched to natural flotation collectors,
such as blends of canola oil, vegetable oil, and
soybean oil, as environmentally friendly replacements for petroleum-based hydrocarbon collectors
(Skiles, 2003).
e) Air Quality and Dust

EPA promulgated standards of performance for air
quality for all new and modified coal preparation
plants under the 1976 Clean Air Act. These New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) address
all types of particulate emissions, including fugitive dust, which may result from producing, handling, transporting, and storing coal. Operations
impacted by this regulation include crushers and
breakers, sizing equipment, cleaning systems, thermal dryers, conveying systems, coal storage areas,
and coal transfer/loading systems that are part of
the coal preparation facility. For some processes,
such as thermal dryers, opacity less than 20 percent
must be maintained (Stationary Sources Branch,
1998). Dusting problems are not uncommon
around material handling transfer points where
ultrafine particles have the opportunity to become
airborne. These locations may include truck and
railcar load-outs as well as conveyor and chute
transfer points in and around the preparation
137
plant. Many operations use water trucks and

water sprays with additions of various chemical
and crusting agents to lower dusting problems. In
addition, some operations make use of enclosures,
such as silos and bins, to avoid exposure of coal to
the environment. The use of inflatable structures
over coal storage piles have also been attempted
with limited success (Bowling, 2003). Despite these
efforts, fugitive dust still seems to be an issue for
many plant sites, often leading to disputes with the
public and creating concerns for worker health.
Therefore, work is needed to develop better practices and control technologies for reducing dust
emissions. The reconstitution of fines via agglomeration and briquetting technologies can substantially reduce dust emissions, but these processes are
currently too expensive to be practical in the coal
industry. Additional R&D in this area is warranted
to ensure that this environmental issue does not
become a barrier to coal storage and production.
reducing the waste load in the environment. This

win-win situation may be promoted by initiating
demonstration projects for various stakeholder
groups to prove the applicability of new technologies and practices. The knowledge base can be used
to better inform decision-makers and enable them
to reinterpret regulations that may be preventing
remining/reprocessing operations for the cleanup
of waste piles and impoundments. In addition,
research and demonstration projects focused on
new ways to process materials from remining
should be pursued. The development of new equipment to allow remining of tailings and piles will
increase the amount of materials that can potentially be remined. Technologies from other industries that can be used in remining for extraction
and processing should be explored.
4.4 Future Considerations

4.4.1 Conversion Processes
f) Permitting of New Facilities

Environmental compliance in the U.S. coal mining
industry is strictly controlled by government regulations. History has proven that these regulations
were necessary in many cases to ensure uniform
environmental stewardship across the industry as a
whole. Many mining companies now accept these
environmental standards as good business practice
and, in some cases, may go beyond simple compliance to promote goodwill and to set an example for
others. On the other hand, many in the industry
believe that regulatory constraints that act as barriers to the introduction of new technologies and
practices into the industry need to be reexamined.
For example, the additional liability associated with
reclamation of abandoned coal waste piles and
impoundments is constraining the extent of remining activity that the industry is willing to pursue.
The application of new coal processing technologies has the potential to provide a financial return
on remining operations, while simultaneously
13 8
Coal preparation activities have traditionally been

limited to those processes that involve physical separations. These processes include unit operations
for particle sizing, concentration of organic matter,
and dewatering/disposal of plant products. These
processes are generally considered to be inherently benign because they do not alter the chemical structure of the individual particles contained
in the coal. Conversion processes, which include
carbonization, gasification, and liquefaction operations, are by this definition not considered to be
part of the coal preparation industry. However, a
new generation of coal preparation technology is
being developed and commercialized that bridges
the gap between traditional coal cleaning and coal
conversion processes. These gateway technologies have the potential to reduce transportation
costs and improve utilization properties for many
of the low-rank coals located in PRB. Under this
expanded definition, conversion processes that are
geared to the production of enhanced solid fuels
may also be included as coal preparation. The best

known of these processes includes the K-Fuel process (Collins, 2007), Encoal process (Federick and
Knottnerus, 1997), and SynCoal process (Sheldon,
1997). Some of these solid fuel production facilities may also produce gaseous or liquid byproducts
that are of value in the synthetic fuel market. The
upgrading of low-rank coals, which are abundant
in the United States, is believed to be an attractive
means of producing low-emission coals capable of
meeting the 2010 Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
standards. This approach is particularly attractive if
the process simultaneously produces syncrude oil
as a byproduct (Skov et al., 2007).
a) K-Fuel Process
One of the most widely publicized methods for
upgrading low-rank coal is the K-Fuel process
(Alderman, 2004). This technology is a decarboxylation process that uses heat and pressure to
modify the structure of subbituminous coals. By
driving off moisture and oxygen, the process has
been shown to be capable of reducing emissions of
nitrous oxides by 10 to 20 percent, carbon dioxide
by eight to 12 percent, and mercury by as much
as 70 percent (Wingfield, 2007). A commercialsize demonstration plant owned by Evergreen
Energy is currently being operated in Gillette,
Wyoming. Specific concerns associated with this
technology include the high cost of thermal processing and problems related to disposal of process wastewater and spontaneous combustion of
the treated products.
b) Encoal Process
The Encoal process was developed by SMC Mining
Company and SGI International. The technology uses a two-step thermal treatment process to
produce an enhanced solid coal fuel (char) as well
as some derived liquid fuel. In the first processing step, the low-rank feed coal is heated until a
completely dry solid is produced. The temperature

is then increased in a second processing step to
promote decomposition and drive off gases via
mild gasification. According to published reports
(e.g., DOE, 2003), the Encoal process generates
about one-half ton of solid fuel and one-half barrel of condensed liquids from each ton of feed coal
supplied to the thermal reactor. The products, as
alternatives to existing fuel sources, are capable
of lowering sulfur emissions in coal-fired boilers nationwide (DOE, 2002). The gaseous products that are not condensed into useful liquid are
burned to supply thermal energy for the process.
A 1000-ton-per-day demonstration plant was successfully operated between 1992 and 1998 under
DOE sponsorship near Gillette, Wyoming. A
commercial-scale plant is now under contract for
design and construction. Concerns associated with
this process include high treatment costs, excess
fines production, dusting problems, wastewater
generation, and the need for coal-char stabilization
(to prevent spontaneous combustion).
d) SynCoal Process
SynCoal technology couples thermal upgrading
with physical cleaning to upgrade low-rank coals
into high-quality coal products. In this process,
high-moisture coal is processed through vibrating
fluidized bed reactors in three sequential stages
two heating stages followed by an inert cooling
stage. These reactors remove chemically bound
water, carboxyl groups, and volatile sulfur compounds. After thermal upgrading, the coal is put
through a deep bed stratifier cleaning process to
separate the pyrite-rich ash from the coal. When
fed a typical low-rank western coal, the SynCoal
process can provide a product with a heating value
of up to 12,000 BTU/lb with moisture and ash
contents as low as one percent and 0.3 percent,
respectively (DOE, 1997). A demonstration plant
(45 ton per hour) was successfully operated near
Western Energy Company`s Rosebud coal mine
13 9
near Colstrip, Montana. Although the plant closed

in 2001, the facility generated more than two million tons of products during its lifespan (DOE,
2006a). Similar to the other mild conversion technologies, concerns associated with this process
include high treatment costs, dusting problems,
and product instability.
4.4.2 Human Resource Shortages

Another looming issue for the coal preparation
industry is the shortage of skilled labortrained
technicians and graduate engineers. As in other
sectors of the mining community, human resource
managers are finding it increasingly difficult to
hire suitable replacements for their rapidly aging
workforce. The severity of this problem can be
demonstrated by examining workforce statistics
compiled in this study from major coal producers in the Appalachian coalfields. These data
indicate that the average age of employees who
manage, operate, and maintain the preparation
plant is 52 years. Of these, more than half will have
30 years of service and may be eligible to retire in
the next two to five years. Although specific details
were not available on the types of positions occupied by these employees, it was generally believed
that highly skilled personnel, such as electricians,
make up a larger percentage of the aging workforce
than general laborers. Fortunately, labor demands
for the plant complex are low because productivity (tons per man-hour) for plant workers is an
order of magnitude greater than for underground
miners (Carty, 2007) because of the high capacity
and extensive automation of processing systems.
On the other hand, the sophistication associated with processing equipment often requires a
higher level of technical skill than can be filled by
high school graduates.
As recommended by Watzman (2004), new partnerships in education and training need to be
undertaken between government and industry to
14 0
help supply skilled workers and engineers to an

industry transformed by technology and mechanization. Support of programs in higher education
is also essential to ensure a supply of well-trained
engineers that are needed to address new technical
issues that face the industry. It is this group that
often brings new technology to the forefront. As
pointed out by the Western Australia Technology
& Industry Council (2004), While R&D is a major
factor producing new knowledge, a knowledge hub
requires a strong university sector to complement
these investments by transferring the knowledge to
students. These sorts of complementary functions
create a highly skilled environment for transferring
knowledge between the university and business.
Moreover, this new generation of engineers must
have a broad interdisciplinary education in order
to tackle the wide range of technical issues facing
the mining industry. Instruction is needed in both
basic and applied studies that span several disciplines in engineering and science.
4.4.3 Research and Development

Coal mining is often perceived by outsiders as a
mature industry that can offer only small returns
on investments in basic research and technology
development (NRC, 1995). Consequently, only
0.2 percent of the $538 million spent in 2005 by the
federal government on coal-related R&D was dedicated to coal mining and processing (NRC, 2007a).
For coal preparation, this widespread belief stems
from the misconception that the benefits of new
technology can only be measured by increased coal
production or reduced environmental impact. This
viewpoint fails to account for the large financial
effect of new processing technology on economically recoverable coal reserves. A recent study
(Luttrell, 2004) demonstrated that many R&D
projects in coal preparation have payback periods
of less than a few months, and some less than a few
weeks. A single percentage point improvement in
plant efficiency can often provide double digit or
greater improvement in profitability. The increased

margins resulting from the adoption of new technology makes it possible to extend the reserve base
of economically recoverable coal. This broader
viewpoint suggests that continued coal processing R&D efforts are justified, particularly when
environment and utilization benefits of cleaner

coal fuels are also considered. One such example
would be to develop technologies for recovering ultrafine particles, which are currently discarded as waste by many modern coal preparation
facilities (Bethell and Lutrell, 2005).
5. CONCLUSIONS
There are several barriers associated with coal
preparation that may limit future coal production
in the United States. These barriers differ in the
eastern and western states because of regional variations in the characteristics of the coal resources
and industry activities in these regions.
Technological Barriers
The steady decline in the quality of U.S. coal
reserves will require processing of feed coals with
increasingly difficult washing characteristics.
Therefore, continued development of improved
solid-solid and solid-liquid separation technologies for coal preparation is needed to help offset
the adverse effects of these changes to coal quality
and recovery. The technological developments may
require both incremental enhancements to existing
processes as well as evolutionary technology that
are more efficient, less costly, and environmentally
attractive. Examples of incremental improvements may include the development of advanced
processes for fine coal cleaning, dewatering, and
reconstitution or the stepwise integration of some
coal preparation functions within mine extraction
operations (e.g., underground removal of coarse
rock to minimize environmental footprint and
reduce haulage costs). Potential examples of evolutionary technology may include the construction
of small-scale gasifiers that obviate the need for

dewatering by utilizing fine coal slurry at existing
preparation plant sites as well as nontraditional
processing strategies at end-user sites (e.g., dry
removal of well-liberated impurities after pulverization at coal-fired utilities to reduce moisture,
dusting, and waste disposal issues). A new generation of online systems for real-time characterization of coal size, density (washability), and quality
will also be advantageous to deal with future
declines in feedstock consistency.
Western coal operations face even greater challenges from a decline in reserve quality, because
coals in this region have traditionally not required
preparation other than size reduction. Increasingly
stringent customer demands coupled with an
overburdened railway infrastructure will pressure these operations to improve quality via the
application of new coal processing technologies.
Dry cleaning processes, such as pneumatic separators and electronic sorters, which can efficiently
upgrade coals over a wide range of particle sizes,
need to be developed for use in western states
with scarce water resources. The remoteness of
western resources may also dictate the need for
next-generation upgrading facilities, such as mild
conversion plants, which can reduce moisture
and increase the heating value of low rank coal
1 41
so the existing energy transportation system can

be better utilized. Another option would be the
construction of mine-mouth power plants close
to coal production facilities, which would eliminate transportation barriers and improve the cost
effectiveness of utilizing the large reserve base of
low-sulfur western coals.
Unfortunately, most coal preparation technology
now used in the United States is either adapted
from other industries in a patchwork manner or
produced by a relatively small group of manufacturers with very limited R&D resources. Moreover,
coal producers are generally not capable of technology development because of the lack of internal
technical personnel with the process engineering
skills necessary for equipment development, testing, and manufacturing. Therefore, cost-shared
government support for processing R&D, with
industrial guidance and oversight, is recommended
to ensure that the United States remains competitive in coal technology development.
Environmental Barriers
Several environmental issues represent significant
challenges to expanded utilization of U.S. coal
preparation facilities. Although these impediments vary from state to state, the most significant
challenge facing the industry is the management
of coal wastes. The declining quality of reserves
has contributed to the expansion of waste storage
repositories such as slurry impoundments. Wellpublicized events, such as impoundment failures,
have raised serious questions as to whether new
regulations, better practices, and improved technologies are needed to eliminate the possibility of
future disasters. New methodologies need to be
developed for dewatering, handling, and permanently disposing waste slurry. New techniques are
also needed for locating and assessing the stability
142
of impounded slurry over abandoned workings. In

addition, the development of new processing technology that is specifically designed to re-treat and
recover coal resources from existing or abandoned
impoundment areas is an attractive approach for
reducing waste.
Issues are also being raised regarding the environmental effects of chemical additives used in coal
preparation. Although these reagents are safe when
applied in accordance with manufacturer recommendations, proponents argue that the long-term
effects and complex interactions that may occur
when these chemicals are released to the environment are not well understood. To address these
concerns, new processes or chemical additives
need to be developed that minimize, and preferably eliminate, the use of processing reagents that
have potential risk to the ecosystem.
First Steps in Removing the Barriers

The following are recommended as first steps in
removing these barriers.
Establish a national coal washability database.
Detailed data related to the cleaning characteristics of much of the nations coal resources do
not currently exist; what does exist is not readily
usable. Therefore, the establishment of a detailed
database of coal washability information that
fully defines the cleanability of U.S. coal reserves
at different liberation sizes is recommended. In
particular, detailed data regarding the potential
removals of ash, sulfur, mercury, radionuclides,
and other elements of environmental concern
are needed. This information can provide the
framework for developing effective and realistic policies for the optimum usage of the
nations valuable coal resources by producers,
consumers, government agencies, and other
interested stakeholders.
Provide support for new and improved technologies for upgrading coal quality. The commitment by government and industry for
cost-shared support of basic and applied R&D
programs in areas related to coal preparation is
recommended. Specific technical areas requiring additional R&D support include fine particle
cleaning, fine particle dewatering, dry separation processes, advanced instrumentation, lowrank coal upgrading, particle reconstitution,
and waste disposal and handling. Cross-cutting
initiatives, which may combine the functions of
coal extraction, processing, transportation and
utilization, also warrant continued investigation
as revolutionary approaches to enhancing the
performance of coal-based energy systems.
Address environmental issues associated with
waste disposal. Environmental impacts associated with preparation wastes continue to be a
source of concern for the environmental community. Therefore, continued support is recommended for environmental studies designed to
quantify the long-term and complex effects of
preparation operations on human health and the
environment. In addition, the development of
new technologies for remining and reprocessing
valuable coal contained in existing and abandoned waste impoundments is recommended.
143

Coal Preparation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coal Preparation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coal Preparation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are some of the processes used in coal preparation and what do they do?

What are some of the processes used in coal preparation and what do they do?

What are some recommendations for improving coal preparation?

What are some recommendations for improving coal preparation?

4 Coal

M eeting P rojected C oal P roduction D emands in the U . S . A .

The analyses performed in this study suggest that

that impact coal productivity and waste reduction;

2.1.2 Why is Coal Preparation Needed?

2.1.1 What is Coal Preparation?