scholarly journals Coprocessing consortium - year 1 final report - sub-unit 07 development of an oil agglomeration coal preparation process for coprocessing using light oils

1991 ◽  
Author(s):  
R D Coleman ◽  
F N Toll ◽  
T McCraken ◽  
C E Capes ◽  
M Ikura
Keyword(s):  
Final Report ◽  
Preparation Process ◽  
Coal Preparation ◽  
Oil Agglomeration

Effect of the Coal Preparation Process on Mercury Flows and Emissions in Coal Combustion Systems

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daiwei Ouyang ◽  
Kaiyun Liu ◽  
Qingru Wu ◽  
Shuxiao Wang ◽  
Yi Tang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Coal Combustion ◽  
Preparation Process ◽  
Coal Preparation ◽  
Combustion Systems

Introduction

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph D. Witt
Keyword(s):  
Elementary School ◽  
Coal Mining ◽  
Labor Unions ◽  
Processing Plant ◽  
Preparation Process ◽  
Coal Preparation ◽  
Political Pressure ◽  
Earthen Dam ◽  
Mountaintop Removal ◽  
Strip Mine

In the summer of 2009, I participated in a rally against mountaintop removal coal mining in Appalachia. The rally was held on the grounds of Marsh Fork Elementary, a school situated between the Coal River and Route 3 in Raleigh County, West Virginia. Sitting immediately below a slurry impoundment (a giant reservoir of toxic coal sludge produced by the coal preparation process and retained by an earthen dam), Marsh Fork Elementary also sat at the center of many debates surrounding the safety and justness of mountaintop removal. Activists cited increased health problems for Marsh Fork students due to their proximity to an active strip mine, such as abnormally high rates of asthma, and worried about the potentially disastrous consequences of any stresses or failures in the earthen dam retaining the slurry. The nearby mine and processing plant were owned and operated at the time by Massey Energy, one of the most controversial coal companies in the region. It was led by Don Blankenship, an outspoken and active opponent of labor unions and environmental regulations. Both Blankenship and his company were frequent targets for environmentalist outrage, and for his part, Blankenship seldom passed an opportunity to denounce “tree huggers” and others who, so he claimed, would destroy the jobs of hard-working Appalachian miners. In 2012 a new elementary school was built several miles from the original site, thanks to donations and ongoing political pressure; but in June 2009 these issues remained unsettled....

scholarly journals Electromagnetic De-Shaling of Coal

2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 223-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. P. R. de Jong ◽  
M. B. Mesina ◽  
W. Kuilman
Keyword(s):  
Sensor Array ◽  
Size Range ◽  
Ash Content ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Preparation Process ◽  
Coal Preparation ◽  
Industrial Glass ◽  
Simple Construction ◽  
Coal Product ◽  
Electromagnetic Sensor

The efficiency with which an electromagnetic sensor array is able to distinguish density and ash content of coal and shale mixtures was determined experimentally. The investigated sensor was originally designed for automatic metal detection and sorting in industrial glass recycle processing, where it is widely applied. In coal preparation, the results indicate good possibilities to remove automatically the remaining shale from the coal product, or to recover the remaining coal from the waste rock. Compared to alternative methods, the system has advantages of simple construction, insensitivity to fluctuating dust or moisture levels and a proven industrial reference. Applications can be either sorting of lump-sized coal or coal separation in the 10–50mm size range in a dry preparation process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document