4.7 Article

Evaluation of trace elements in US coals using the USGS COALQUAL database version 3.0. Part II: Non-REY critical elements

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COAL GEOLOGY
Volume 192, Issue -, Pages 39-50

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.coal.2018.04.005

Keywords

Coal quality; COALQUAL database; Critical elements; Trace elements; US coals

Funding

  1. U.S. Department of Energy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Coal is a potential source of some valuable elements. In this work, concentrations of 25 critical elements in U.S. coals were evaluated using the COALQUAL Database Version 3.0 aiming to identify best coal sources for potential recovery of critical element. A method was proposed to calculate the mean concentrations of critical elements in U.S. coals, including Li (11.5 ppm), Be (1.9 ppm), Ti (721 ppm), V (21.6 ppm), Mn (50.8 ppm), Co (4.5 ppm), Ga (5.1 ppm), Ge (7.2p pm), Se (2.4 ppm), Zr (30.4 ppm), Nb (3.3 ppm), Sn (1.8 ppm), Sb (1.0 ppm), Ba (266 ppm), Hf (0.77 ppm), and Ta (0.19 ppm).Based on the calculated mean concentrations, a rough estimate indicates that U.S. coals contain a large amount of critical elements that are enough to meet U.S. demands for many years to come, if these elements can be commercially extracted. By comparing with the suggested cut-off grades, we found that 5.8% of the coal samples have Ga concentrations higher than the suggested cut-off grade. The percentages of promising coal samples (higher than cut-off grades) of other elements are below 3%. Results further indicate that despite some variations among elements, bituminous coals from the Appalachian region are likely to have high concentrations of Li, Ga, Be, Se, and Sb which make them a potential source of these critical elements. Bituminous coals from the Interior Coal Province, both Eastern and Western, were found to have relatively high probabilities of having high Ge concentrations. Very limited coal samples were found from mixed regions to have V and Zr concentrations higher than the corresponding suggested cut-off grades.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available