See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/265350870

Coal Desulfurization by Solvent Leaching Methods

Article

CITATIONS READS
3 429

5 authors, including:

Mahmood Saleem
University of the Punjab
57 PUBLICATIONS   186 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Flue gas Treatment using ESP View project

Production of Iron Free Aluminium Sulfate View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mahmood Saleem on 26 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Faculty of Engineering & Technology, 2007-2008, pages 47-56

Coal Desulfurization by Solvent Leaching Methods

1
Ali Ahmed, Naseer Ahmad, Rizwan Shah, M. Naeem Bhatti, Mahmood Saleem

ABSTRACT

Coal desulfurization prior to usage is a preprocessing in order to achieve clean fuel and reduce
environmental impacts such as acid rain. Desulfurization of Lakhra (Pakistan) coal was
conducted with different solvents. Coal was leached with different solvents like hot water,
H2O2/H2SO4 and HNO3. It was found that the effects of the leaching temperature, agitation time
and particle size on the removal of different forms of sulfur are very significant. Sulfur recovery
increases with agitation time, temperature and mesh number up to a certain optimum value and
then have a different trend.

1
Institute of Chemical Engineering & Technology, University of the Punjab, 54590-Lahore
[email protected]
 Journal of Faculty of Engineering & Technology, 2007-2008

Introduction

Coal is the most important nonrenewable energy source of fossil origin. It is also the most
common fuel in thermal power plants [1].

In recent years, with the rising prices of crude oil and natural gas and shortage of oil and gas
resources, worldwide energy industries have been focusing on accelerating the development of
coal chemical industry [1]. The coal chemical industry can make a significant contribution in the
sustainable development of some countries‟ energy resources in the next twenty years, and will
thereby reduce environmental pollution caused by coal burning. It will also reduce dependency on
oil and gas as energy sources.

Coal usually contains significant quantities (normally more than 10%) of different impurities such
as sulfur, silicates, carbonates etc., [2]. Harmful effects on agricultural products, corrosion of
metal structures and respiratory problems of humans and animals are undesirable effects of sulfur
[1] and its compounds in coal. Therefore, it is essential to reduce sulfur and mineral matter (ash)
from coal prior to usage in many applications.

Pakistan has emerged as one of the leading country - seventh in the list of top 20 countries of the
world after the discovery of huge lignite coal resources in Sindh [3]. Economists say that the
energy demand over the next 5 years is expected to grow at a rate of 7.4 % per annum [3]. It may
be noted that in India the share of coal is as high as 54.5% in the total energy mix [3]. To meet the
future requirements of the country with indigenous resources, domestic exploration would have to
be intensified to increase the share of coal from 5 to 25% by 2020 [3].

Having so much large reserves of coal, Pakistan is facing energy crisis because coal is not being
utilized. The main reason is that during coal incineration in power plants, high sulfur content of
coal poses serious environmental problems owing to sulfur dioxide emission. Combustion of
fossil fuels such as coal in thermal power plants releases SO2, which is formed by oxidation of
sulfur present in coal. Oxides of sulfur undergo photochemical oxidation in the atmosphere, to be
eventually converted into sulfuric acid. The acids when washed by rain make the rainwater acidic
[1]. Total worldwide SO2 emissions from coal utilization are 90 million ton/year [4].

Negative effects of ‘S’ present in coal:

Combustion of coal produces Pollutants (SOx and NOx) in addition to particulate matter. It
causes acid rain which has harmful effects on lakes and vegetation, and cause corrosion. „S‟
reduces heating value of coal. SOx reduce adiabatic flame temperature

Need for ‘S’ removal:

Sulfur is removed to sell coal to customers whether they have installed pollution control measures
or not, to reduce transportation and combustion cost, and also to reduce load on flue gas scrubber.

Methods for removing ‘S’:

Demineralization and desulfurization of coal may be achieved by both physical and chemical
methods. Some demineralization can be achieved by simple physical processes based on the
differences in the physical properties of the mineral and carbonaceous parts of the coal [6].

48
 Journal of Faculty of Engineering & Technology, 2007-2008

Physical processes are cost effective methods but not effective in separation of the finely
dispersed minerals and those bound to the coal structure. However, chemical method is known as
being the solution for obtaining clean demineralized and desulfurized coal, which involves
solubilization of inorganic constituents in various solvents [6].

The sulfur present in coal appears in pyritic, organic and sulfate forms [7]. The organic and
pyritic sulfur contents are almost equally partitioned in many coals and the sulfate form is usually
very small [7]. Pyritic sulfur refers to ferrous disulfide and is usually removed by physical
separation methods such as froth flotation and gravity separation. Up to 50% of inorganic sulfur
can be removed by the froth flotation process [7].

Organic sulfur is fixed in the chemical structure of coal and often much more difficult to remove
than inorganic sulfur. Organic sulfur is partially removed by breaking its chemical bonds using
chemical methods [7] and [8]. Meyers has summarized the structure of the organic sulfur in the
coal which includes mercaptanes (RSH), disulfides (RS-S-R′), sulfides (R-S-R′) and thiophenes
[7] and [9]. R and R′ represent hydrocarbon groups and for mercaptanes, R denotes aliphatic
groups.

Leaching is one of the most common methods employed for coal desulfurization. Coal is mixed
with acid or alkali and its sulfur is extracted while being heated or stirred. The type of reagent
depends upon the type of sulfur in coal [2] and [10].

Various chemical processes are presently being developed employing agents such as hydrochloric
acid [6] and [10], nitric acid [6], [10] and [2], sodium hypochlorite [7], hydrofluoric acid [11] and
[12], potassium hydroxide [8] and [13] and sodium hydroxide [11] for the extraction of sulfur
from coal.

The Meyers process uses P-cresol as a chemical solvent to reduce organic sulfur [14]. It used 3 h
leaching with P-cresol at 100 °C to achieve 47% (average) organic sulfur removal for Indiana
No.5 coal. Alvarez et al observed that using nitric acid led to rapid reduction of inorganic sulfur
[15]. They reported that at high temperatures the oxidization capacity of coal increased and the
oxygen of nitrate group appeared as carbonyl group in molecular structure of coal, indicating that
the desirable characteristics and appearance of coal could be altered when leaching with nitric
acid.

Bolet et al. studied the chemical demineralization of Turkish coal using different acids alone and
0.5N aqueous NaOH in combination with one or two of the acids [2]. At optimum approach for
chemical cleaning of the coal (extraction with 0.5N NaOH followed by leaching with 10% HCl),
the maximum degree of demineralization obtained being 46.8% [2].

The effect of mineral acids at different concentrations on desulfurization and demineralization of

Indian coal has been investigated by Mukherjee et al. at ambient temperature and at 95 °C [16].
The results showed that HNO3 leads to maximum (40.1%) and H2SO4 leads to minimum
desulfurization of the coal samples. S.Karaca has undertaken leaching with nitric acid on a coal
sample from Askal coal mine. In this experiment, the coal samples were dissolved in nitric acid
and stirred at 25–103 °C for 0–3 h [15]. The highest sulfur reduction was observed at 25% HNO3
concentration and at 103 °C (the boiling point of acid) [17]. Steel et al. investigated the leaching
behavior of the mineral matter in coal toward aqueous HCl and HF [18]. They reported that HCl
can dissolve simple compounds such as phosphates and carbonates, yet it cannot completely
49
 Journal of Faculty of Engineering & Technology, 2007-2008

dissolve the clays. HF reacts with almost every mineral in the mineral matter except pyrite and
most of the reaction products are water-soluble [18].

Experimental work:
As discussed above, there are a lot of methods to remove sulfur from coal, but we selected pre-
combustion desulfurization by solvent leaching method (see figure-1).

Sample: Lakhra (Pakistan) Coal

Table 1: Proximate Analysis

Moisture 7±0.5%

Volatile Matter 36±1%

Ash 37±1%

Fixed Carbon 20±2%

Table 2: Form of sulfur in coal

Form of Sulphur Percentage in Coal

Total 37.5

Elemental 4.5

Pyrite 12

Sulphate 13

Organic 8

Calorific value= 4200cal/g coal

Characteristics of Solvent:
Solvent must be economical, readily available, efficient and easily recoverable for recycling.

General process scheme:

50
 Journal of Faculty of Engineering & Technology, 2007-2008

Figure 1: Block diagram of ´S´ recovery from coal by solvent leaching

Solvent used for Leaching of coal:

For leaching, hot water, H2O2/H2SO4 and HNO3 were used according to their characteristics as
discussed above.

Leaching with hot water:

Only 1% „S‟ removed and it has no effect on calorific value of coal.

Leaching with H2O2/H2SO4:

H2O2/H2SO4 is for removal of any form of „S‟ in coal. It acts as aqua regia (because this solvent
dissolves all types of sulfur present in coal) for this case.

Experimental Scheme:
50 g coal was taken in beaker and it was leached with 25 ml H2O2 and 60 ml H2SO4 solvents.
The system was agitated and heated for different intervals. After agitation and heating it was
filtered and from where wet coal was separated. Wet coal was dried and same analysis was done.

Leaching with HNO3:

HNO3 is mainly for Pyrite „S‟ and it has no significant effect on Calorific value.

Reactions:
FeS2+4HNO3→Fe(NO3)3+2S+NO+2H2O

2HNO3+S→H2SO4+2NO

6FeS2+3Fe2(SO4)3→3H2SO4+30NO+12H2O

51
 Journal of Faculty of Engineering & Technology, 2007-2008

Results and Discussions:

With H2O2/H2SO4:

Effect of particle size:

To study the effect of particle size on sulfur removal from coal samples of the various particle
sizes (+20, +40, +70, +100 and +200 mesh numbers) were leached at 80 °C for 1 h. Rate of
extraction is proportional to the decrease in particle size.

Figure 2: Effect of mesh size on %age of sulphur

From graph, It is clear that rate of extraction increases as mesh size increases but after specific
mesh size, rate of leaching decreases. Particle size influences the extraction rate in a number of
ways. The smaller the size, the greater is the interfacial area between the solid and liquid, and
therefore the higher is the rate of transfer of material and the smaller is the distance the solute
must diffuse within the solid as already indicated. On the other hand, the surface may not be so
effectively used with a very fine material if circulation of the liquid is impeded, and separation of
the particles from the liquid and drainage of the solid residue are made more difficult. It is
generally desirable that the range of particle size should be small so that each particle requires
approximately the same time for extraction and, in particular, the production of a large amount of
fine material should be avoided as this may wedge in the interstices of the larger particles and
impede the flow of the solvent.

Effect of mixing time:

To study the effect of mixing time on sulfur removal from coal samples of +70 mesh size
(optimum size) were leached at 80 °C for 5min, 10min, 15min, 20min and 25min. Rate of
extraction is proportional to the mixing time.

52
 Journal of Faculty of Engineering & Technology, 2007-2008

Figure 3: Effect on mixing time on %age of ‘S’ removed

From graph, It is clear that rate of extraction increases as mixing time increases but after specific
mixing time, rate of leaching decreases. As agitation time increases, size of particles decreases
due to collision of impeller of agitator with particles, since, rate of leaching increases. But after
optimum mixing time, particles get smaller size as mixing time increases, since cause same effect
as discussed above, so rate of leaching decreases.

Effect of Temperature:
To study the effect of temperature on sulfur removal from coal samples of +70 mesh size
(optimum size) were leached for 20 minutes at (15, 50, 80 and 100)°C. Rate of extraction is
proportional to the temperature.

As the temperature of the system increases, rate of leaching increases due to more easy diffusion
of solvent into coal particles to extract sulfur from coal.

Figure 4: Effect of temperature on %age of ‘S’ removed

So, at optimum temperature (80°C), mixing time (20min) and mesh size (+70); results carried out
are as follows:

53
 Journal of Faculty of Engineering & Technology, 2007-2008

Table 4: Percentage of sulfur removed

Form of Sulphur Percentage of Sulphur removed

Total 65.2

Elemental 90

Pyrite 50

Sulphate 43.44

Organic 5

Calorific Value:
Before Treatment: 4200 cal/g coal

After Treatment: 3688 cal/g coal

This method is quite effective for removal of „S‟ from coal but this cause reduce in calorific value
of as shown above and also not favourable for pyrite „S‟ removal. There are some areas where
pyrite „S‟ is in large amount. Since this solvent is not suitable for that coal. So, other alternative
solvents are used to remove „S‟ from coal, having no affect on calorific value of coal.

With HNO3:
Approximately same effect of different factors as discussed above, on percentage of „S‟ removed.

After treatment,

Calorific value: 4000cal/g coal

Table 5: Percentage of sulfur removed

Form of Sulphur Percentage of Sulphur removed

Total 57.33

Elemental 44.44

Pyrite 83.33

Sulphate 55.38

Organic 21.25

This solvent has not much effect on calorific value of coal as well as much favourable to remove
pyrite „S‟ present in coal. Its also favourable for other types of „S‟ but it is also not used to
remove organic „S‟ rich coal.
54
 Journal of Faculty of Engineering & Technology, 2007-2008

Conclusions:
The rate of sulfur recovery increased with increasing temperature, mesh number (decrease in
particle size) and agitation time.

Table 6: Comparison of sulfur recovery by different solvents

Form of Percentage of Sulphur Percentage of Sulphur Percentage of Sulphur

Sulphur removed by hot water removed by removed by HNO3
H2O2/H2SO4

Total 1 65.2 57.33

Elemental -- 90 44.44

Pyrite -- 50 83.33

Sulphate -- 43.44 55.38

Organic -- 5 21.25

Coal was leached with different solvents like hot water, H2O2/H2SO4 and HNO3. It was found that
the effects of the leaching temperature, agitation time and particle size on the removal of different
forms of sulfur are very significant. Sulfur recovery increases with agitation time, temperature
and mesh number up to a certain optimum value and then have a different trend.

Particle size influences the extraction rate in a number of ways. The smaller the size, the greater
is the interfacial area between the solid and liquid, and therefore the higher is the rate of transfer
of material and the smaller is the distance the solute must diffuse within the solid as already
indicated. On the other hand, the surface may not be so effectively used with a very fine material
if circulation of the liquid is impeded, and separation of the particles from the liquid and drainage
of the solid residue are made more difficult.

As agitation time increases, size of particles decreases due to collision of impeller of agitator with
particles, since, rate of leaching increases. But after optimum mixing time, particles get smaller
size as mixing time increases, since cause same effect as discussed above, so rate of leaching
decreases.

As the temperature of the system increases, rate of leaching increases due to more easy diffusion
of solvent into coal particles to extract sulfur from coal

According to the experimental results obtained, more suitable solvent is HNO3 as discussed
above. For organic „S‟, microbial methods may be employed because we have used inorganic
solvents which are more efficient for inorganic forms of sulfur.

Acknowledgement:
The support by Centre for Coal Technology, University of the Punjab is acknowledged.

55
 Journal of Faculty of Engineering & Technology, 2007-2008

References:

[1] Kawatra, S.K., “Coal Desulfurization-High Efficiency Preparation Methods,” pp.1-60.

[2] E. Bolat, S. Saglam and S. Piskin, Fuel Processing Technology 57 (1998), pp. 93–99.
[3] www.gsp.gov.pk
[4] UNDP 2008 report.
[5] Couch, G.R. (1995), “Power from Coal-Where to remove impurities,” IEA Coal Research
Report No. IEACR/82g, pp.1-87.
[6] S. Mukherjee and P.C. Borthakur, Fuel 80 (2001), pp. 2037–2040.
[7] W. Li and E.H. Cho, Energy Fuels 19 (2005), pp. 499–507.
[8] M. Abdollahi, A.Z. Moghaddam and K. Rami, Fuel 85 (2006), pp. 1117–1124.
[9] R.A. Meyers, coal desulfurization, Marcel Dekker, New York (1997).
[10] S. Mukherjee and P.C. Borthakur, Fuel Processing Technology 85 (2003), pp. 157–164
[11] K.M. Steel and J.W. Patrick, Fuel 80 (2001), pp. 2019–2023.
[12] K.M. Steel and J.W. Patrick, Fuel 82 (2003), pp. 1917–1920.
[13] S. Mukherjee and P.C. Borthakur, Fuel 82 (2003), pp. 783–788.
[14] R.A. Meyers, coal desulfurization, Marcel Dekker, New York (1997).
[15] R. Alvarez, C. Clemente and D.G. Limon, Fuel 82 (2003), pp. 2007–2015.
[16] S. Mukherjee and P.C. Borthakur, Fuel 85 (2003), pp. 157–164.
[17] S. Karaca, M. Akyurek and S. Bayrakceken, Fuel Processing Technology 80 (2003), pp. 1–
8.
[18] K.M. Steel, J. Besida and D.G. Wood, Fuel Processing Technology 70 (2001), pp. 171–
192.

56

View publication stats