Search Documents

By F. Freme

Coal production in the United States in 2008 reached a record level of 1.06 Gt (1,171.5 million st), according to preliminary data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (Table 1). This is an increase of 2.2 percent, or 22.5 Mt (24.8 million st) above the 2007 level and 7.9 Mt (8.7 million st) above the prior record level set in 2006. Although coal production was higher in 2008, U.S. total coal consumption decreased in all sectors for the year. Coal consumption in the electric power sector in 2008 was lower by 0.3 percent, while coking coal consumption decreased by 2.8 percent and the other industrial sector declined by 3.7 percent. The commercial and institutional sector, that had been called the ?residential and commercial? sector prior to 2008, declined by 0.6 percent in 2008. It is the smallest of all the coal-consuming sectors. (Note: All percent-age change calculations are done at the short-tons level.) U.S. coal exports were significantly higher in 2008, while coal imports decreased during the year. Total coal stocks increased in 2008, as some consumers added to their stockpiles. The coal synfuel industry, which grew throughout most of this decade, disappeared from the scene due to the expiration of the available federal tax credits at the end of 2007. The decline in coal consumption during the year was the consequence of slowing domestic economic growth, particularly in the latter half of the year, combined with the weather conditions in 2008, resulting in lower demand for electricity. Preliminary data show that total generation in the electric power sector (electric utilities and independent power producers, including useful thermal output) in the U.S. decreased in 2008. Coal-based generation also decreased, resulting in a 3.2-Mt (3.5-mil-lion st) drop in coal consumed in the electric power sec-tor. Coal use in the non-electricity sector decreased by 3.3 percent to a level of 72.6 Mt (80.1 million st). The international coal markets in 2008 were the driv-

Jan 1, 2009

By William Watson

Coal production in the United States in 2010 increased to a level of 960 Mt (1,085.3 million st), according to preliminary data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), an increase of 1 percent, or 9.43 Mt (10.4 million st) above the 2009 level of 975 Mt (1,074.9 million st) (Table 1). In 2010, U.S. coal consumption increased in all sectors except commercial and institutional, while total coal stocks fell slightly for the year. Coal consumption in the electric power sector in 2010 was higher by 4.5 percent, while coking coal consumption increased by 37.9 percent and the other industrial sector increased by 7.1 percent. The commercial and institutional sector, which prior to 2008 had been called the ?residential and commercial? sector and is the smallest of all the coal-consuming sectors, declined by 3.1 percent in 2010. (Note: All percentage change calculations are done at the short tons level.) U.S. coal exports increased from the 2009 levels due mostly to higher demand for metallurgical coal, while coal imports decreased for a third year in a row. The increase in coal consumption for electric generation during the year was the consequence of improving domestic economic conditions further bolstered by a cold winter and warm summer in important coal-consuming regions. Preliminary data show that total generation in the electric power sector (electric utilities and independent power producers, including useful thermal output) in the U.S. increased in 2010 by 4.2 percent. Coal-based generation also increased, resulting in a 38-Mt (42-million st) increase in coal consumed in the electric power sector. Coal use in all the sectors other than the electric power sector increased by 13.9 percent to a level of 65.9 Mt (72.7 million st).

Jan 1, 2011

By F. Freme

Coal production in the United States in 2009 de-creased to 972.8 Mt (1,072.8 million st), according to preliminary data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). This is a decline of 8.5 percent, or 90 Mt (99.1 million st) below the 2008 record level of 1.06 Gt (1,171.8 million st) (Table 1). In 2009, U.S. coal consumption decreased in all sectors while total coal stocks increased for the year. Coal consumption in the electric power sector in 2009 was lower by 10 percent, while coking coal consumption decreased by 30.6 percent and the other industrial sector declined by 16.6 percent. The commercial and institutional sector (which prior to 2008 had been called ?residential and commercial?) is the smallest of all the coal-consuming sectors and it declined by 8.4 percent in 2009. (Note: all percentage change calculations are done at the short tons level.) U.S. coal exports fell from the 2008 levels, while coal imports decreased for a second year in a row. The decline in coal consumption during the year was the consequence of the domestic economic conditions combined with the weather in 2009, which resulted in lower demand for electricity. Preliminary data show that total generation in the electric power sector (electric utilities and independent power producers, including useful thermal output) in the U.S. decreased in 2009. Coal-based generation also decreased, resulting in a 94-Mt (104-million st) drop in coal consumed in the electric power sector. Coal use in the non-electricity sector decreased by 20.1 percent to a level of 57.9 Mt (63.9 million st). The international coal markets for most of 2009 were reflective of a worldwide economic slowdown. U.S. coal exports and imports both declined for the year. U.S. coal exports totaled 53.6 Mt (59.1 million st). This is a decrease of 20.3 Mt (22.4 million st) from the 2008 level.

Jun 1, 2010

By Morgan M. Sears, Mark Van Dyke, Gamal Rashed, John Rusnak, Khaled Mohamed

"In 2016, room-and-pillar mining provided nearly 40% of underground coal production in the United States. Over the past decade, rib falls have resulted in 12 fatalities, representing 28% of the ground-fall fatalities in U.S. underground coal mines. Nine of these 12 fatalities (75%) have occurred in room-and-pillar mines. The objective of this research is to study the geomechanics of bench room-and-pillar mining and the associated response of high pillar ribs at overburden depths greater than 1,000 ft. This paper provides a definition of the bench technique, the pillar response due to loading, observational data for a case history, a calibrated numerical model of the observed rib response, and application of this calibrated model to a second site. INTRODUCTION Bench mining is a an underground mining technique typically applied to room-and-pillar mines where full seam extraction on development presents an unacceptably high risk of injury from high pillar ribs or where the mining equipment is not designed to extract the full seam thickness. To mitigate the increased risk associated with high ribs and slender pillars, a more modest thickness is extracted from the top of the seam on development. This is followed by grading the floor and recovering the bottom of the seam with or without extraction of the pillars during retreat mining. A mine located in Eastern Kentucky extracts two seams at depths ranging from outcrop to 2,000 ft. In some areas of the mine, Seam A and Seam B are close enough together to be mined simultaneously. Seam A (top) is mined on development 7 to 9 ft. high for the entire length of the panel. On retreat, as each pillar is extracted, the continuous miner is ramped down into the floor (Seam B), two pairs of Mobile Roof Support (MRS) units are set, and the pillars are extracted at the full mining height of 14+ ft. During the pillar recovery process, the floor is extracted in each entry, from a ramp initiated outby the retreat line, sequentially just prior to extracting the lifts from the pillars (see Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2017

By A. D. Walters

"IntroductionScreens are used in coal preparation plants for four basic functions, namely:I. Scalping off large size run-of-mine coal for initial size reduction;2. Sizing of coal treatment in different process streams;3. Removal of magnetite (dense medium) from clean coal and refuse;4. Dewatering.Canadian coal preparation plants use screens extensively in the above functions. Even plants where no beneficiation takes place, screening and crushing are carried out in the size reduction process.Description of Process UnitsThe type of screen used in coal preparation plants generally falls into the following categories:Fixed Screens and Grizzlies (for large coal)Often a simple rugged construction, either set horizontally above a bin or inclined with the coal flow.Fixed Sieves (for fine coal)They are used for dewatering and/ or size separation of slurried coal or discard. The sieve bend, the Vor-Siv, the Wilmot riffle and the cross flow screen fall into this category. The most commonly used in coal preparation plants is the sieve bend, Figure 1. Coal slurry is fed tangentially onto a fixed curve wedge wire screen deck. The solids are separated at a predetermined particle size, delivering a partially dewatered overproduct and a dilute underflow. The coal slurry is initially delivered to the sieve bend via a feed box. A series of baffles spreads the feed evenly across the width of the deck. The slurry drops from the last baffle, passes through the feed spout and is fed tangentially to the screen. It is important that the feed should contact the surface immediately at the front end of the sieve bend. It is possible to lose as much as 250Jo of screening area with a poorly fitted screen box.The full stream of coal slurry flowing over the sieve bend decreases in depth, in increments of approximately •;4 the slot width each time it passes a slot. Sieve bends make a size separation at 112 to 2h the slot width. This feature virtually eliminates blinding of the screen surface. Slot sizes are normally quoted in millimetres, available standard slot sizes are from 2 mm to 0.125 mm. The sieve bend is also widely used in coal preparation for preliminary dewatering."

Jan 1, 1989

By Pramod C. Thakur

In This Chapter [Origins of coalbed methane Reservoir properties of coal seams Thresholds for coal seam degasification Methane emissions in mines Methane drainage techniques How to transport gas safely in mine pipelines and Economics of coal seam degasification Recommended publications on coal seam degasification are Gas Control in Underground Coal Mining [Creedy et al. 1997], Coalbed Methane Extraction [Davidson et al. 1995], and Methane Control for Underground Coal Mines [Diamond 1994].] ORIGINS OF COALBED METHANE AND RESERVOIR PROPERTIES OF COAL SEAMS Origins of coalbed methane. Coal seams form over millions of years by the biochemical decay and metamorphic transformation of plant materials. This coalification process produces large quantities of byproduct gases, such as methane and carbon dioxide. The amount of these byproducts increases with the rank of coal. It is the highest for anthracite, where for every ton of coal nearly 1,900 lb of water, 2,420 lb (20,000 ft3) of carbon dioxide, and 1,186 lb (27,000 ft3) of methane are produced [Hargraves 1973]. Most of these gases escape to the atmosphere during the coalification process, but a small fraction is retained in the coal. The amount of gas retained in the coal depends on a number of factors, such as the rank of coal, the depth of burial, the type of rock in the immediate roof and floor, local geologic anomalies, and the tectonic pressures and temperatures prevalent at that time. The gases are contained under pressure and mainly adsorbed on the surface of the coal matrix, but a small fraction of gases is also present in the fracture net-work of the coal. Methane is the major component of gases in coal, comprising 80%–90% or more of the total gas volume. The balance is made up of ethane, propane, butane, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, oxygen, and argon.

Jan 6, 2006

By Barro L

Very large reserves of gas are contained in coal. Because of the low permeability of the coal gas flow rates are very low. Fracturing of the coal can be achieved by use of the nitrogen - foam frac techniques described but the flow rates after fracturing are not sufficient to support economic development. Fracturing of the seams in the Bowen Basin was as predicted but in the Sydney Basin no trace of the fracture could be found when development proceeded past the fractured well. Testing of coal samples has provided some insight into parameters affecting desorption Rates.

Jan 1, 1982

By S Hayton

While coal seam gas is considered to be an unconventional gas, the proliferation of areas under exploration and development mean that it is rapidly becoming main stream. The potential of New Zealand's coals to produce coal seam gas has been recognised for some time. However, key market drivers have not been suitable for the progression of this potential into reality. Kenham Holdings Ltd and CRL Energy Ltd, recognising the potential for the gas in New Zealand have initiated what is the largest ever assessment of New Zealand's coal seam gas potential. The premature demise of the giant Maui field has raised the focus of new gas developments and has increased interest in what we are doing. Over the past couple of years Kenham Holdings Ltd and CRL Energy Ltd have approached the assessment of the coal seam gas potential in a staged programme. Preliminary assessment of the data on the permit areas indicates that the potential resource may be up to 500 PJ. To date, preliminary appraisals have been completed or are underway on a significant number of fields. Exploratory drilling has been completed or initiated on several of those fields, with results from this work being fed into the preliminary modelling as it has become available. Given that in many of these areas there is no pre-existing information concerning their gas potential and world wide experience with lignite is practically nonexistent, it has been a steep learning curve with many surprises. However, initial gas content results and preliminary gas flow models have been on the whole, rather pleasing, with the commerciality of some developments already apparent.

Jan 1, 2003

By M Blanch

Gas management practices across the Australian underground coal industry have evolved significantly since the early nineties with the introduction of hazard management plans, directional drilling techniques, surface gas predrainage methods, and the widespread use of ventilation and gas reservoir simulation software.The improvements are evidenced by a substantial reduction in the occurrence of outbursts and gas related delays during a period where coal production rates have increased three to four fold. The development of effective gas predrainage strategies have been afforded by the use of reservoir simulators and a significant increase in the availability of measured gas reservoir data, in particular gas content and composition, adsorption isotherms and permeability. That said significant opportunities remain to optimise gas drainage designs and increase certainty in the gas predrainage design process through an enhanced understanding of coal seam permeability and how it is applied in the gas drainage design process.This paper describes the discrepancies between measured and actual seam permeability found during the recent assessment of two pilot predrainage programs executed in the coal measures of Queensland’s Bowen Basin. The results of those programs illustrate the need to better understand the validity of measured permeability data. The history match method employed in the pilot well assessments is proposed as an integral step in the routine gas drainage design processes that will ultimately lead to increased certainty and flexibility in gas predrainage practices.CITATION:Blanch, M, 2017. Coal seam gas predrainage optimisation through an enhanced knowledge of coal seam permeability, in Proceedings Australian Mine Vent Conference 2017, pp 73–78 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Aug 28, 2017

By F. W. Metzger

Coal quality control in mining and mine planning has always been important and has become even more essential in recent years due to environmental considerations. The primary consumers of the sub-bituminous coals found in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming are electric utilities that require low sulfur coals to meet government air quality regulations. Electric generating plants are designed to burn coal of a specific quality, and the supplier of that coal must be able to guarantee shipments within specified quality tolerances. Over the past several years, Exxon Coal USA and, more recently, The Carter Mining Company, a division of Exxon Coal USA have established an evaluation and development program to accurately define the geology and quality of their coal properties. This requires an adequate drill hole density so that detailed correlations of the coal seam and the lithologic sub-units, of the coal seam can be made. These units must be recognizable in the core and also on geophysical logs.

Jan 1, 1981

By F. W. Metzger

INTRODUCTION Coal quality control in mining and mine planning has always been important and has become even more essential in recent years due to environmental considerations. The primary consumers of the sub-bituminous coals found in the Powder River Basin are electric utilities that require low sulfur coals to meet government air quality regulations. Electric generating plants are designed to burn coal of a specific quality, and the supplier of that coal must be able to guarantee shipments within specified quality tolerances. Over the past several years, Exxon Coal USA and, more recently, The Carter Mining Company, a division of Exxon Coal USA, have established an evaluation and development program to accurately define the geology and quality of their coal properties. This requires an adequate drill hole density so that detailed correlations of the coal seam and the lithologic units, or benches, within the coal seam can be made. These units are recognizable in the core and also on geophysical logs. Like any systematic approach, geologic modeling has been refined and improved through new technologies. Today, coal seam properties are mapped using computer applications. Rapid access and manipulation of these data allow for optimization of mining efforts. This presentation will demonstrate how a detailed mapping program can be important in both pre-mine development and in-pit quality control.

Jan 1, 1983

Geological hazards such as faulting, basement ridges, and zones of "thin" (

Jan 1, 1998

By Joseph W. Leonard

By combining statistical methods with specialized coal technology, novel and widely applicable procedures are developed which are useful for making important decisions based on coal seam structure. By analyzing such properties as ash in visual coal types of seam cross sections and by processing the ash data to 100 gram increments of coal ranging from the top to the bottom of the seam, intraseam comparisons between data populations of samples from a given seam and a reference seam can be made. Moreover, illustrations are presented for estimating the number of drill cores required to purchase a specified level of sampling accuracy together with procedures for determining the probability that different coal scan cross sections are not unlike and by inference are therefore comparable. Such comparisons can be valuable when making important, costly and long prevaling decisions involving coal exploration, mining, preparation and utilization.

Jan 1, 1969

By M. E. Holter

"Five main lignite seams occur in the Tertiary Ravenscrag Formation in the Eastevan area, at depths of 100 feet or less. They are named, in ascending order: the Boundary, Estevan, Souris, Roche Percee and Short Creek seams. A total sequence of approximately 250 feet is represented by the coal beds and interstratified clays, silts and sands. Strata dip to the southeast at 25 feet per mile or less and trike northeast. Large areas underlain by coal seams at shallow depths are delineated. Reserve calculations are dependent on detailed information on seam thicknesses and feasible stripmining depths. The stratigraphically higher seams are thinner on the average than lower seams and this, together with the increase in elastic size fractions in higher strata, suggests a retreat of a Tertiary marine margin to the south during the closing depositional history of coal seams and associated strata."

Jan 1, 1972

By V 7. 0 / 300 dpi

In the last ten years the U.S. coal industry has experienced the collapse of several large silos. In addition, other problems such as extensive structural damage, small "live" capacities, inadequate feed rates, arching, coreholes, and particle segregation have been common to the industry. This paper explains the relationship between those problems and stored material properties, silo hopper configuration, silo structural design, and granular flowability. Methods of identifying, repairing, and/or modifying damaged silos, and designing new silos are given.

Jan 1, 1989

By Partridge AC

In order to provide a'valid description of the performance of size classifying equipment it is necessary that a standard procedure be established for testing and for the subsequent expression of results. Such a standard would permit the valid comparison of alternative equipment and may provide a basis for the prediction of performance. An Australian Standard (AS 1634-1974) has been used as the starting point for an International Standards Organisation-(ISO) working group (of which the authors are members) charged with the preparation of an ISO Standard for the expression and presentation of the results of tests on coal size classifying equipment. The approach taken is applicable to all types of sizing equipment (cyclones, screens, dedusters, etc.) and should be suitable for adoption in the minerals industry as well as by coal preparation engineers. The background to the proposed Standard, is given,including a critical review of other frequently quoted performance measures, the procedures described in the draft are discussed, and an example given.

Jan 1, 1984

Pumping coal to market may help Appalachian coal operators increase their share of the eastern seaboard fuel business. Transporting it by pipeline is already an accomplished fact, but until recently it had to be dewatered to be used in boiler furnaces. The campaign for these eastern markets was begun in earnest last November by the widely publicized announcement of successful plant-scale firing of a central station boiler with coal slurry pumped to the burners. This latest advance makes coal similar to oil and gas in convenience in handling and controlling at the consumption end of the pipeline. Slurry could be considered a new commodity for the fuel market. HUGE POTENTIAL MARKET The heaviest concentration of power plants in the U.S. is along the line Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York and Boston which makes this region the best hunting ground for selling pipelined coal brought from western Pennsylvania and northern West Virginia. Furthermore, if this region is assumed to consume 125 million tons of coal annually, on a comparable basis, the consumption of oil and gas would be about 180 million tons. Even if all of this fuel is not consumed in central stations, it is still a very big market for coal at the right price. Consolidation Coal Co. and Texas Eastern Transmission Co. are trying to line up customers in this area so that a pipeline can be built. This is not to say that there are not many other areas in the U.S. that could not be supplied advantageously by a mine-to-market pipeline.

Jan 1, 1962

By R. G. Gillies, C. A. Shook, W. H. W. Husband

"The current state of knowledge concerning pipeline transport of coal in water slurry form is summarized for the four categories: coal-water fuels, conventional fine coal slurries, coarse coals and stabilized mixtures of coarse and fine particles. Surface chemistry is of dominant importance for coal-water fuels and considerable progress in understanding the role of surfactants has been achieved in recent years. Little generalized research on the flow of conventional fine coal slurries has been done in the past 17years, although innumerable conceptual designs and feasibility studies have been undertaken. Coarse coal slurries are fairly well understood but the model which explains their flow requires more data to be established fully. Stabilized flow mixtures should probably obey the same model as coarse coal slurries but experimental results for stabilized mixtures have not yet been incorporated in a comprehensive theory.IntroductionPipeline transportation of coal in a water vehicle has been employed for many years in coal washeries. It has been used less frequently in hydraulic mining and thermal power station fuel supply systems. The suitability of coal for pipeline transport arises from its moderate specific gravity relative to the carrier fluid and the fact that throughputs are often large and steady over long periods of time."

Jan 1, 1990

By Lynn C. Fister

"Coal is rapidly becoming a major alternative to oil. According to the World Coal Study Final Report, total world coal trade could approach one billion tons annually by the year 2000. To facilitate the increased production and export market potential of the coal producing countries, advancements must be made to improve the transportation systems. Coal slurry pipeline systems could play a significant role in achieving these market forecasts.There are three major components to a coal slurry system the preparation plant, the pipeline and the dewatering plant. The experience and expertise gained from the Consolidation Coal Company system in Ohio, the Black Mesa system in Arizona and ETSI's Coal Evaluation Plant demonstrate that slurry pipeline technology is proven and available to meet the coal transport challenge.The costs of transporting coal by slurry pipeline can offer significant savings, as about 70 per cent of its costs are fixed. The reverse is true for railroads, where 75 to 80 per cent of the costs vary with inflation. All forms of transport-rail, barge and pipeline-will be required to move the massive volumes of coal. Coal slurry systems can provide a viable transport alternative.IntroductionThe importance of coal as a major alternative to oil is now well known and accepted throughout the world. Increasing oil prices over the last eight years have had a serious effect on national economics, particularly in those countries that are heavily dependent on oil. Coal can replace oil as the principal fuel source which could support world economic growth over the next two decades. This is the main conclusion of the World Coal Study (WOCOL) Final Report, published in May 1980.The product of that report was a result of considerable deliberation by key industry leader s and energy experts. The underlying message of the World Coal Study is that our energy and economic problems can be faced with confidence if coal use doubles by the early 1990s and triples by 2000, and if steam coal trade expand s considerably."

Jan 1, 1982

By J. Richard Lucas

The coal industry, one of the great basic industries in the nation, plays a major role in the American economy. Coal is the principal fuel used in generating tremendous quantities of low-cost power so necessary to the nation. Two-thirds of the electrical energy and one-fourth of all energy consumed in the nation is produced from coal. Large-scale production of steel, cement, and chemicals is vitally dependent upon this natural resource. Because of extensive reserves and low mining cost, it is one of the few natural resources in which the United States is a significant exporter. During 1965 in excess of 500 million tons of coal were produced, almost 10% over the previous year; more than 50 million tons were shipped to foreign markets. The utility market gained approximately 8% during the year for a total of 242 million tons.

Jan 2, 1966