Mineralogical and elemental variation of coal from Alberta, Canada: an example from the No. 2 seam, Genesee Mine

Mineralogy and elemental contents were determined on 18 samples from a vertical profile of the No. 2 seam, Genesee mine, AB. The samples analyzed consist of coal, coaly shale, shaly coal, carbonaceous shale, shale, mudstone and siltstone. Proximate analysis was determined on all samples. Elemental analyses were determined by instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA) for all elements except As, B, Cd, Hg, Mo, Pb, Se (Atomic Absorption) and B, Ba, Be, Co, Cr, Cu, Li, Mn, Nb, Sr and V (inductively coupled plasma-emission spectroscopy, ICP-ES). Samples were low temperature ashed (LTA), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and X-ray fluorescence (XRF) were used to determine quantitative major mineralogy. Accessory mineralogy was determined with Scannining Electron microscope/energy dispersive X-ray analyzer (SEM/EDX) on four samples. In general, the coals in the Genesee mine are within the low end of the range for trace element contents given by Swaine [Swaine, D.J., 1990. Trace Elements in Coal. Butterworths, London, 278 pp.] for most coals. High contents of Cr (9-2620 ppm) and Ni (1-1440 ppm) can be related to an increased amount of a Cr-Ni-Fe oxide (chromite-magnetite?) likely derived from ultrabasic diatremes in the Golden-Columbia Icefields, BC area. The No. 2 seam of the Genesee mine can be divided into two geochemical cycles on the basis of mineralogy, trace element contents and rare earth element (REE) behavior. Cycle I consists of quartz, calcite and kaolinite, lower trace element contents, REE slightly enriched in high rare earth elements (HREE), and thick coal with few partings. Cycle II consists of quartz, calcite, kaolinite, illite, mixed layer and/or expandable lattice clays, feldspar, gypsum, calcium aluminum sulfate hydrate, clinoptilolite, calcite and diopside, higher trace element contents, REE slightly enriched in light rare earth elements (LREE) and thin coal with a greater frequency of partings. The differences between the two geochemical cycles can be accounted for by a decreasing stability of the peat-forming environment resulting from an increasing fluvial influence and volcanogenic input. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.