Search Documents

Jan 1, 1923

Jan 1, 1881

By Harry K. Ihrig

Jan 1, 1947

By Harry K. Ihrig

Jan 1, 1947

Jan 1, 1896

By Howard N. Eavenson

FROM the Pittsburgh coal bed in the four states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Maryland and West Virginia has been produced an output that, at mine prices, represents a greater value than any other single mineral deposit in the world has yielded.12 While this distinction may in a few years pass to the gold reef of the Witwatersrand, it is possible that eventually, owing to the tremendous reserves still remaining, the ultimate yield of the Pittsburgh bed will be greater than that of any other known single deposit. Considering its importance, not a great deal has been written of its early history and development as a whole; most of the accounts have been of limited localities, or, at the most, of the area within a single state. In "Coal through the Ages" the writer mentioned some references to its early history, but this study will deal not only with its history but with the character of the bed, where and why it was first developed, and its effect upon the states in which it is found. It has not been the intention to write a detailed history of the development of the seam in each locality, as neither time nor inclination were available for doing such work, but only to show the influences that tended to hasten or retard such development. In general the historical matter ends about 1830, when geological surveys began to be made. Some of the maps show data available only since that time, and the sections about coal preparation and coking have been extended to the present time to show the changing conditions. It is believed that the early history includes all published records, and many more sources than those shown in the bibliography were consulted. It is quite likely that some references to coal in this area may be found in the unpublished papers of some of our early soldiers and colonizers, which exist in several libraries, and it is hoped that some future

Jan 1, 1938

ALABAMA Alabama City.-Eddy, L. Altoona.-Cain, J. America.-Foreman, J. T. Anniston.-Foster, R. N. Ashland.-Sturdevant, J. C. Bessemer.-Ball, E. M. Calhoun, F. W. Maschmeyer, W. L. McKenzle, W. C., Jr. Birmingham.-Abbott, C. E. Aldrich, T. H. Aldrich, T. H, Jr. Ashton, J J.

Jan 1, 1923

By Robert B. Coleman

The recent surge in demand for uranium in the US, accompanied by a significant increase in price, has stimulated the search for and development of lower grade ore bodies. At the mill, this translates into much larger throughputs and-compounded by many recently enacted environmental considerations-has made the cost of milling a critical factor in today's uranium production economics. The three conventional milling methods employed in the extraction of uranium ores are reviewed in the following sections.

Jan 10, 1978

By H. A. Guess

For a number of years I have used for the commercial wet assay of lead generally the ammonium molydate, and occa-sionally the ferrocyanide method. These well-known methods need no detailed description here. In the ore-selling and ore-buying establiahments of the West, 90 per cent. of all wet lead-assays are made by one or the other, and at least nine-tenths of this proportion by the molybdate method. A procedure so well-established must have merit; and, in

Jan 1, 1905

By Richard H. Sprute, Dennis J. Kelsh

Slow-settling, fine-grained suspensions can often be dewatered and densified by applying direct current between buried electrodes. Although water removal rates and power expenditures depend on physical and chemical properties of the treated slurries, metal mine tailings from Idaho, Colorado, and Mexico have responded well in laboratory testing, as have 29 samples of ultrafine coal waste from mines in nine states. This Bureau of Mines report reviews field tests at two Idaho metal mines and describes the recent installation at the Henderson molybdenum mine near Empire, Colorado, and the treatment of coal sludge at a Clinchfield Coal Co. preparation plant near Dante, Virginia.

Jan 1, 1980

By A. A. Janke, G. J. Vogel, W. M. Swift

The combustion of fossil fuels in a fluidized bed of calcined limestone particles is a potentially efficient and economically attractive process for the generation of steam for electric power production and other uses. The process results in greatly reduced emissions of both sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide pollutants. Development work, evaluations, and design studies are being carried out by various organizations under contract with the Department of Interior (Office of Coal Research, OCR) and with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA). The Atomic Energy Commission's Argonne National Laboratory is one of the principal participants in the development program under interagency agreements with EPA and OCR. The principal reasons for developing fluidized-bed combustion, its advantages and disadvantages over conventional combustion methods, and some of the potential applications of the process are covered in this paper. The participants in the multiorganizational program, the sponsoring agencies, the general status of development of the overall project, and the chief program areas that still require resolution are discussed. The main features of the program of work at Argonne National Laboratory and the results achieved so far are also included.

Jan 1, 1976

By Harold R. Wampler, John L. Bolles, Adrian J. Broderick

Phelps Dodge's 60,000 tpd Morenci Concentrator has been in operation since 1942. The integrating of process control applications into the concentrator began in 1972. A process control system is presently on-line controlling 30 primary grinding circuits and all reagent additions. The system consists of a centralized control room process control Computer, on-stream X-ray analyzer, on-stream particle size analyzers and an operator interface. This paper describes the process control system's development, control concepts and its influence on the concentrator performance.

Jan 1, 1978

By Samuel B. Christy

Jan 1, 1889

By B. M. Larsen

Jan 1, 1965

Jan 1, 1888

Jan 1, 1920

NORTH AMERICA Number Members Alaska 31 Canada 302 Mexico 175 Newfoundland 3 United States Alabama 52 Arizona 131 Arkansas 9 California 723 Colorado 184 Connecticut 98 Delaware 19 District of Columbia 133 Florida 16 Georgia 6 Idaho 61 Illinois 241 Indiana 57 Iowa 7 Kansas 32 Kentucky 33

Jan 1, 1932

Jan 1, 1881

Jan 1, 1898