c/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
 430F98081
Air and Radiation
6202J
Draft
April 1998
     EPA Coalbed Methane Outreach Program Technical Options Series
  ENRICHMENT OF MEDIUM QUALITY COAL MINE GAS
     Gas Enrichment Using Pressure Swing Adsorption at the Abandoned Nelms No. 1 Mine, Ohio
          (Process development co-funded by Northwest Fuel Development, Inc. and U.S. DOE)
SOME FACTS CONCERNING ENRICHMENT OF MEDIUM QUAUTY GAS.
+ Technology for enriching gas containing as little as 50% methane is now feasible
4  Coal mine gas enrichment can be profitable, especially for large projects
* Many mines have gob gas flows that would support financially attractive projects
* Recovery and use of gob gas reduces emissions of methane, a greenhouse gas

-------
     gas enrichment
 requires rejection of
  nitrogen, oxygen,
 carbon dioxide, and
    water vapor
   Gas processing
vendors soon expect
 to offer integrated
gob gas enrichment
      systems
At natural gas prices
 of $2.00 per mmBtu,
 enrichment projects
  that self upgraded
gob gas may be cost-
effective if feed gas is
available in flows of 5
  mmcffd or higher
Why Consider Enrichment of Medium Quality Cool Mine Gos?

Gas  drained from gob areas (collapsed rock over mined-out areas) typically
contains 30-90 percent methane.  Although gob gas is a potentially valuable fuel
source, many mines vent it to the atmosphere, primarily because it does not meet
quality specifications for injection into natural gas pipelines, which typically require
a minimum of 95 percent methane. The coal mine methane industry has been
searching for a proven and affordable solution to upgrading gob gas so they can
take  advantage  of  new markets now  accessible through deregulation of the
natural gas industry.

For years, enrichment facilities have been successfully upgrading medium-quality
gas from natural gas wells, but none had been able to  economically remove
nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and water vapor in the same integrated facility.
Gob gas enrichment has made great progress in recent years, however, and a
full-scale  integrated  gob  gas  enrichment project is currently in operation  in
Pennsylvania.

In  1997,  EPA's Coalbed Methane Outreach  Program  prepared  a report  titled
Technical and Economic Assessment of Potential to Upgrade Gob Gas to Pipeline
Quality.  The report examined average costs that enrichment projects would incur
in a typical mine setting for a variety of feed gas qualities and daily flows.  The
most critical and expensive component of any enrichment system is the nitrogen
rejection unit (NRU).  Suppliers of  three major nitrogen rejection  technologies affirm
that a gob gas enrichment plant is technically feasible and free of unacceptable
risks.  Below is a brief overview of the major nitrogen rejection technologies whose
suppliers are willing to make firm proposals for integrated enrichment plants.

Cryogenics Process.  The cryogenics  process pressurizes and flashes the feed
gas stream and then uses a series of heat exchangers to liquefy the gas mixture.
A distillation  separator vents a  nitrogen-rich  stream, leaving the  methane-rich
stream.   BCCK Engineering supplied the  cryogenics  technology used in the
integrated gob gas enrichment project underway in Pennsylvania.

Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA) systems repeatedly pressurize the gob gas and
use various adsorbents  to selectively adsorb  nitrogen and methane in different
concentrations and/or rates.  During successive cycles,  the process preferentially
adsorbs methane in favor of nitrogen until the output attains the desired methane
proportion. BOC Gases  demonstrated a PSA process on gob gas and reported
good methane recovery; however, in order to achieve the required gas quality, it
was necessary to use feed rates  lower than the nominal rating of the system.

Selective  absorption  uses  specific  solvents  that have different  absorption
capacities with respect to different gas species.  The petroleum refining industry
commonly uses this method to enrich gas streams.  One firm  rnai  offers selective
absorption to reject nitrogen from methane, Advanced Extraction Technologies, is
ready to offer the system to interested mine owners.

Other nitrogen rejection technologies are under development, as discussed on
the following page.

-------
Key Conclusions from Technical and Economic Assessment of Potential to Upgrade Gob Gas to
Pipeline Quality...

   EPA's report included a technical assessment of cryogenic, PSA, and selective absorption NRU processes as
   the key components of their respective integrated gob gas enrichment facilities. The report also estimated
   capital and operating costs for a range of feed gas flows (3-6 mmcf/d) and qualities (50-90%). Following is
   a summary of some of the report's key findings:

   •  All of the three nitrogen rejection techniques evaluated could successfully operate as the  principal
      component of an integrated plant to enrich gob gas. In some instances, a cryogenics unit could be
      risky, given the presence of oxygen and carbon dioxide and the compositional and flow rate variations
      inherent with gob gas.  In the selective absorption process, oxygen removal must be the first step.
      Systems that carry oxygen through the process units (such as PSA) would have to provide designs that
      remove the risk of explosion in certain combinations of oxygen and methane.
   •  Several  companies  are  developing
      other nitrogen rejection technologies
      that  are potentially applicable to an
      integrated gob  gas  cleanup system.
      These include alternative PSA systems
      (improved   adsorbents,   continuous
      PSA), alternative absorption technolo-
      gies, and  membrane units. Northwest
      Fuel  Development Inc. has successfully
      demonstrated  both  PSA  and  CPSA
      nitrogen rejection units at the Nelms
      Mine in Ohio (see cover photo). These
      systems appear to be economic with
      flow  rates as low as 1  mmcf/d.

   •  Enrichment projects that sell upgraded gob gas into the natural gas transmission or distribution market
      may be cost-effective relative to  current natural gas prices if 80% methane feed gas is consistently
      available in daily gas flows of 5 mmcf/d or higher.  This conclusion is based on conservative estimates
      of capital and operating costs for typical plants operating under an assumed set of conditions.

        Comparison of Nitrogen Rejection Enrichment Units in integrated Systems
         Vendor        UOP    Nitrotec     BOC      AET       Darnell       Schedule A
Enrichment  may work well with  a broader,
integrated strategy that includes one or more
of the following:  1)  improving gas recovery
systems to enhance  gas quality;  2) blending
gob gas with higher quality gas; and 3) spiking
gob gas with propane.   EPA has  prepared a
user-friendly computer program that helps gas
project  developers   identify   cost-effective
combinations  of  these  various  upgrade
options.
Technology
Phase Change
Methane Recovery
First Stage
Deoxygenation
Ready to design and
build an integrated
gob gas plant?
PSA*
No
Up to
95%
No
Yes
PSA
No
Up to 95%
No
Yes
PSA
No
98%
No
Yes,
possibly
Selective
Absorption
No
96-98%
Yes
Yes
Cryogenic
Liquefy
98%
Yes
Yes
Cryogenic
Liquefy
98%
Yes
Yes, after trials
Vendor list is not complete; includes only vendors that supplied technical and cost details of their systems.
Contact information for these and other suppliers is available in the EPA report described above.
Minimum plant size available from most vendors is 3 mmcf/day of feed gas; all are capable of processing at least 6
mmcf/day of feed gas.

-------
 For More Information.
  The EPA report Technical and Economic
  Assessment of Potential to Upgrade Gob
  Gas  to  Pipeline  Quality provides more
  detailed   information   on  enrichment
  technologies   and  average costs that
  enrichment projects would incur.

  To obtain a  copy of the report, and a
  computer program that helps gas project
  developers identify cost-effective combina-
  tions of enrichment, blending, and spiking
  options,  contact:

  Coalbed Methane Outreach Program
  U.S. EPA
  401 M Street,  SW (6202J)
  Washington, DC 20460 USA
        (202) 564-9468 or (202) 564-9481
  Fax:   (202) 565-2077
  e-mail: fernandez.roger@epamail.epa.gov
        schultz.karl@epamail.epa.gov
  http://www.epa.gov/coalbed
       M       HAN
       OUTREACH
        1 R  O  C.  R A M
The mention of products or services in this case study does not constitute an endorsement by EPA.

-------