v>EPA
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
of
SYNTHETIC FUELS
INDUSTRIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH
LABORATORIES
CINCINNATI, OH 45888
VOL. 3 NO. 4
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK,
Off ICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY NC 27711
WASHINGTON, DC 20460 DECEMBER 1980
INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels is pub-
lished by the Environmental Protection Agency's Industrial
Environmental Research Laboratory in Research Triangle
Park, NC (EPA/IERL-RTP). The Review describes synthetic
fuels production processes, reports environmental and
health effects associated with multimedia discharge
streams, and identifies pollution control technology needs.
Highlights of technology and commercial developments,
major symposia, a calendar of upcoming events, and a list of
publications provide information on domestic and inter-
national developments in synthetic fuels technologies.
This issue of the Environmental Review of Synthetic
Fuels summarizes recent activities in EPA's synthetic fuel
programs. EPA/IERL-RTP coordinates research projects and
environmental assessment programs for aboveground coal
gasification and liquefaction technologies. EPA's Industrial
Environmental Research Laboratory in Cincinnati, OH
(EPA/IERL-Ci) directs RD & D efforts for four synthetic fuels
technologies: in-sltu gasification, oil shale, oil (tar) sands,
and alcohol fuels.
Comments or suggestions which will improve the
content or format of the Review are welcome. Such com-
ments should be directed to the EPA or Radian personnel
identified on page 16 of this Issue.
CURRENT PROCESS
TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND
EPA Research: Recent Findings In In-SItu
Gasification—Groundwater contamination, land subsidence,
and air emissions have been identified as potential environ-
mental impacts of in-sltu coal and lignite gasification. EPA
research to date has combined laboratory experiments and
pilot field studies in an effort to identify environmental
problems prior to commercial development. The information
summarized in this article was taken from a paper entitled,
"EPA Research: In-Situ Gasification Results to Date," by
R. C. Thurnau and E. R. Bates. The paper was presented at
trie Sixth Underground Coal Conversion Symposium, which
was held July 13-17,1980, in Afton, OK.
Qroundwater Contamination
A major environmental impact of In-situ gasification is
potential groundwater pollution. Volatile organics vaporize,
sweep through the gasification zone, and condense on coal,
char, clay, and rock. Trace elements {e.g., Hg, Cd, Pb, and B)
remain In ash or condense on surrounding materials. As
groundwater levels are reestablished after gasification, these
organics and trace elements can pollute groundwater.
A groundwater modeling study performed by the Univer-
sity of New Mexico identlfed absorption coefficients for
trace elements such as Cd. This laboratory study determined
that the distribution coefficient for Cd contamination is a
function of the particle size of the overburden and under-
burden aquifers. In a similar modeling study of ion exchange
rates for Cd, It was determined that Mg, Na, and K ion
systems remain relatively constant until the Cd concentra-
tion begins to exceed 100 mg/l. Since the concentration of
Cd in groundwater rarely exceeds 100 mg/l, ion exchange
was assumed to be constant in model development. A study
Is also being done on the use of coal as a natural filter for
controlling the distribution of trace elements and organics
from gasification; this research will be expanded from static
to dynamic systems.
DOE's Morgantown Energy Technology Center (METC)
has performed organic analysis of product and process
waters from laboratory simulation of in-situ coal gasification.
Actual product water from in-situ processing of Princetown I
coal was also analyzed; concentrations measured were
comparable to laboratory-predicted levels. Table 1 lists the
concentrations of selected organic pollutants obtained in
these analyses, and compares these concentrations with
DMEG values. (DMEG values are defined in "Terminology for
Environmental Impact Anlysis," Environmental Review of
Synthetic Fuels, Vol. 2, No. 4.)
Groundwater contamination studies performed by
Lawrence Livermore Laboratories (LLL) in Wyoming at Hoe
Creek I showed that the concentration of phenolic materials
was substantially reduced in the burn cavity as a function of
time. Phenolics concentrations were reduced to baseline
conditions 15.2 m (60 ft) from the cavity. In later months,
however, organic concentrations increased, probably as a
result of the contaminant plume moving outward from the
burn zone.
-------
Environmental Revicw of Synthetic Fuels
Dscsnther 1880
The University of Texas has performed organic analysis
of groundwater samples from in-situ lignite gasification
studies and found that more than 97 percent of the samples
contained phenolic material. Analysis of samples taken 1
year later showed that phenol concentration had decreased
by a factor of 5000(100 ppm to 0.02 ppm). Concentrations of
polynuclear hydrocarbons measured in these tests dropped
by a factor of 10 (140 ppb to 14 ppb) after 1 year.
Land Subsfdence
Subsidence from in-situ gasification can seriously im-
pact groundwater resources and modify area topography.
Fractures created In overlying strata can decrease ground-
water quality and quantity via contamination and loss. Sub-
sidence followed gasification by a few weeks at LLL’s Hoe
Creek Ill site, producing a crater 9.1 m (30 It) wide and 3.0 m
(10 ft) deep.
Rock fracturing and subsidence may be prevented by
designing the size, shape, and spacing of cavities to provide
adequate natural support, or by providing additional support
to cavities.’ Selective mineral abandonment is the most
promising control option. In conventional coal mining, up to
50 percent of the resources must be left in place to ensure
structural stability.
Air Emissions
Less data is available on air pollution from in-situ gasif I-
cation than on water pollution and land subsidence, It has
been assumed that control technology for cleaning- gas
streams from in-situ gasification processes will be directly
transferable from aboveground gasification technology.
Environmental studies conducted at DOE’s Hanna IV
site Indicated that hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S) concentrations in
gaseous emissions range from 1000 to 3000 ppm; mass emis-
sions rates approached 900 kgld for H 2 S. Carbonyl sulfide
c centrations in off-gases will influence control technology
selection.
TABLE 1. CONCENTRATION OF SELECTED POLLUTANTS IN PRODUCT AND PROCESS WATERS
FROM IN-SITU COAL GASIFICATION (poll)
Compound
METC
Product
Water
METC
Process
Water
Prlncetown I
Process
Water
DMEG (MATE)
Value
Anthracene l
Phenanthrene
92E3a
4.8E3
4.5E4
8.4E5
2.4E4
Chrysene l
Benz(a)anthracene
4.0E3
1.8E3
9.0E3
3.3E4
6 ,7E2
Benzopyrene (perylene)
Benzo(a) pyrene
Benzo(e) pyrene
1 .2E3
1 .0E3
3.7E3
3.OE-1
4.6E4
Dlmethylbenzanthracenes
7-12 Dimethylbenzanthracenes
5.9E4
3.5E4
6 ,6E3
3.9E0
Results are expressed as “aEb” which should be Interpreted a
s ax lOb.
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA ACQUISITION
SOurce Test Evaluation Program Conducted at Koppers-
To(zs& Gasification Plant—Results of an Initial limited
Source Test Evaluation (STE) program indicate that,for the
streams evaluated, the Koppers-Totzek (K-i) process should
be environmentally acceptable for U.S. commercIalization.
The STE program was conducted at the K-T coal gasification
plant in Modderfontein, Republic of South Africa. Sampling
and analysis were performed by TRW Systems, Redondo
Beach, CA, and Krupp-Koppers (GmbH), Essen, Federal
Republic of Germany. The Modderfontein plant converts
bituminous coal to hydrogen synthesis gas for the
production 0111.6 kglsec (1000 tonnesld) of ammonia.
2
-------
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
TRW and Krupp-Koppers used EPA's Source Analysis
Model (SAM/IA) evaluation method for environmental assess-
ment and pollutant prioritization. The following multimedia
wastestreams were sampled:
• Coal Dust Feed,
• Raw Product Gas,
• Tail Gas from H:S Absorber,
• Tail Gas from CO2 Absorber,
• Input Water (Purified Sewage Effluent),
• Input Water (Cooling Water),
• Settling Pond Effluent,
• Compressor Condensate Wastewater, and
• Diluted Rectisol Condensate Wastewater.
The SAM/IA methodology used in STE programs is
described and referenced in the Environmental Review of
Synthetic Fuels, Vol. 3, No. 1.
The feedstock at Modderfontein is bituminous high
volatile B coal. It has very high ash content (20 percent) and
low sulfur content (1.0 percent) compared to most U.S. coals.
The coal dust feedstream was screened for trace element
composition. Analytical data obtained via Spark Source Mass
Spectrometry will be included in the final Modderfontein STE
Report.
After it is water-washed for particulate removal, the raw
product gas stream is primarily composed of H>O, CO, Hi,
and Ni. Data on hydrocarbons (HC) were not collected; low
concentrations of HC are expected due to the high tempera-
ture (2000 °C or 2273 K) of the K-T gasification reaction.
A selective Rectisol unit was used to extract HzS and
CO: from the raw product gas. Analytical data on the com-
position of tail gases vented to the atmosphere from this
unit were used to assess potential health and ecological
impacts. Table 2 lists data on raw gas composition and com-
pounds in the tail gases which are present at levels of poten-
tial concern.
Fifteen elements, including Fe and Mn, were chosen for
priority pollutant metals screening of aqueous streams. It
was determined that process waters (compressor con-
densate and Rectisol unit samples) exceeded the EPA levels
of concern for Se, Zn, Cu, and Hg. The settling pond effluent
was relatively clean compared to the process and input
streams; an overall reduction was apparent in Sb, As, Zn, Pb,
Ni, and Ca after wastewater treatment.
Results of organic priority pollutant analysis indicate
that few of EPA's 116 organic priority pollutants are present
in the aqueous samples tested. Those present are in low
concentrations (<10/tg/l), with the exception of pyrene and
chrysene in condensates from the Rectisol unit and bromo-
methane in the compressor condensates. Analysis of the
Rectisol condensate samples for polynuclear aromatic
material detected 11 distinct compounds. Five compounds
were identified and quantified: fluoranthene; pyrene; 1, 2-
benzofluorene; 1, 2-benzanthracene; and benzo(k)fluoran-
thene. The quantity of these five compounds measured in
the Rectisol condensate did not exceed health- or ecology-
based Discharge Multimedia Environmental Goal (DMEG)
values.
TABLE 2. COMPOSITION OF GASEOUS EMISSIONS FROM KOPPERS-TOTZEK GASIFIER
CO
volume
percent
(dry)
NH> HCN Health-
mg/Nm' mg/Nm' based
(dry) (dry) IDS'
Ecology- Health- Ecology-
based based based
TOS WDS« WOS
Raw Product
Gas 59.1
57
76
NA»
NA
NA
NA
Tail Gas
from H»S
Absorber
Tail Gas
from COi
Absorber
1.gc 390 62C 5.6E20 2.9E2 2.1 E3 1.1 E3
0.3c 3<= 8 7.6E1 3.4E1 1.3E3 4.6E2
•TDS = Total Discharge Severity and WDS=Weighted Discharge Severity. These terms are defined in the Environmental Review of
Synthetic Fuels, Vol. 2, No. 4.
t>NA = Not Available.
•Compounds present at levels of potential concern.
"Results are expressed as "aEb" which should be interpreted as ax10b.
-------
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
The wastewater treatment facility at Modderfontein
consists of a clarifier and a settling pond. The settling pond
effluent is the Only wastewater stream discharged by the
plant. Analyses of this effluent Indicate that Its chemical
composition is very similar to that of the input waters used
at the Modderfontein plant; the settling pond Is effective in
removing most aqueous pollutants formed during gasif i.
cation. When compared to the input water, the effluent
shows higher concentrations of trace elements such as Cs,
Sr, Ba, Ga, and Mb, and lower concentrations of elements
such as Al, Fe, and Mn.
Mn, Fe, and P concentratIons In the aqueous input and
discharge streams exceeded health-based DMEG values, and
the P concentratIon also exceeded the ecology-based DMEG
value. If the chemical form of P is phosphate, not elemental
P, Its priority for further consideration Is greatly reduced.
Ecologybased discharge severity values greater than 1 were
also obtained for Cd, Cu, Mn, Ni, Pb, 5, Zn, and phthalate
esters In the input waters, and Cd, Mn, Ni, and S In the
settling pond discharge stream. Discharge severity values
determined for the discharged effluent were lower than
those determined for input and process waters. This in-
dicates that phthaiate esters, P, Cu, Pb, Zn, and other con.
stituents of the ueous streams are transferred to the
settling pond sludge.
The Inftl8l Modderfontein STE program was limited in
scope; sampling and analyses have been completed for only
9 of 25 streams originally designated for analysis to meet
comprehensive STE goals. All samples were collected during
relatively steady state conditions when the plant was
operating at near full-design capacity; these samples are
expected to be representatIve of typical plant effluents.
Wastewater characterIzation and controllability were empha-
sized. No bioassay tests were performed. The STE report, to
be published in Winter 1980, will identity data gaps and will
outline plans for possible future K-T source testing and
evaluatIon.
Chapman STE Report Addendum Presents Results of
DitaRed Study—An addendum to the Source Test and
Evaluation (STE) report for Chapman low-Btu gasification has
identified (1) fused polycyclics (benzo(a)pyrene) in the coal
feeder vent dIscharge and separator tar, and (2) phenols In
the separator vent discharge and separator liquor as the
organic compounds of greatest environmental concern.
Under contract to EPA, Radian Corporation has completed
detailed organic and Inorganic characterization of emissions
from Chapman gasification of Virginia bituminous coal.
Preliminary chemical screening data identified six waste-
streams for detailed organic analysis.
• Coat Feeder Vent Discharge,
• Separator Vent Discharge,
• Gasifier Ash,
• Cyclone Dust,
• Separator Uquor, and
• Separator Tar.
The addendum also includes results from trace element
analysis performed on the feed coal, and It reports results
from trace element and organic analyses of leachates
produced from solid wastes (gasitler ash and cyclone dust).
Detailed organic analyses Indicate that four waste-
streams (coat feeder vent discharge, separator vent
discharge, separator liquor, and separator tar) contained
compounds with total discharge seventies (TDS8) greater
than 1. In general, TDS values reported after detailed organic
analyses were from 2 to 4.5 orders of magnitude lower than
values derived from preliminary data. The relative ranking of
stream severity was similar in both preliminary and detailed
analyses, indicating that TDS values derived from chemical
screening data were valuable in ranking streams for health
and ecological effects.
Detailed organic analysis identified benzo(a)pyrene as
the principal contributing compound to the TDS health value
for the coal feeder vent discharge and the separator tar. For
the other four wastestreams studied, discharge seventies
originally assigned to organics in screening analysis were
lowered by the detailed organic analysis. This increased the
relative significance of inorganics.
Spark Source Mass Spectrometry (SSMS) identified 54
trace elements in the feed coal; Al, Ca, Fe, Mg, P, K, Se, Sr,
S, and Ti had mass flows in excess of 0.03 glsec. Quantita-
tively, most of the trace element mass which left the gasifier
as solid waste was found in the gasifier ash. The 15
elements concentrated In ash samples were Al, Ba, Be, B,
Ca, Co, Cu, Cd, Pb, Mg, Ni, Ru, Sc, Sn, and Ti.
Gasifier ash and cyclone dust were leached using the
RCRA extraction procedure and extraction with deionized
water without the addition of a pH buffer. The leachates had
low potential for harmful health and ecological effects.
Organic analysis indicated an absence of organics in the
leachates. The leachability of trace elements from the solid
wastes was very low; only As in the cyclone dust, and As,
Fe, and S in the gasifier ash had leachabilities greater than
10 percent. All trace elements which had been assigned
RCRA-specified limits had concentrations significantly below
those limits.
- Additional data needs for complete assessment of
Chapman low-Btu gasification Include long term process
monItoring and gasification of a variety of coal types. Ad-
ditional detailed analyses should include characterization of
(1) combustion products of product gas, (2) gaseous
emissions from the quench liquor forced evaporator, (3)
phthalates in the gaslfler ash, and (4) polycyclic hydrocarbon
emissions. For more Information on the Chapman STE report
(EPA.60017.78-202, NTIS PB 289940), see the Environmental
Review of Synthetic Fuels, Vol. 1, No. 2.
Alcohol Plant Characterized—Results of a recent Source
Test and Evaluation (STE) program indicate that alcohol
plants have the potential to cause environmental problems if
liquid effluents and air emissions are not properly treated
and/or controlled. Under contract to EPA, Radian Corporation
conducted the STE program at a commercial-scale alcohol
synthesis plant in Atchison, KS. The plant produces 75,000
m 3 (20 x 10 gal.) anhydrous ethanol yearly from grain feed-
stocks, the anhydrous ethanol is used to produce gasohol.
Characterizations of plant wastestreams after treatment
and/or control indicate that the Atchison plant is in com-
pliance with applicable environmental regulations.
Solid wastes and byproducts from the Atchison plant
contain negligible concentrations of ammonia, benzene, and
trace metals. Pesticides on grain feedstocks were apparently
destroyed during feedstock preparation; no traces of
pesticides were found in solid wastes or wastewaters from
the plant. Solid wastes and byproducts such as distillers’
dried grain (DDG), animal feed, and biosludge may be used or
discharged without major environmental effects.
Untreated distillery wastewaters are high in biological
oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), and
suspended solids. Extended aeration and clarification reduce
the high concentrations of suspended solids, BOD, COD,
total organic carbon (TOC), and ammonia in wastewaters
from distillation to acceptable discharge levels. The un-
treated wastewaters are also very acidic due to the addition
of sulfuric acid during fermentation to retard bacterial
growth. This acidity necessitates neutralization prior to
discharge. A benzene dehydration unit is effective in
reducing benzene concentrations to <60 ppb in the waste-
waters.
Uncontrolled gaseous emissions from the byproduct
DDG dryers are high in particulate loading, but cyclones on
the dryers reduce particulate emissions to levels of com-
4
-------
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
pliance. Condensers on the vent lines provide adequate
hydrocarbon (HG) control. The Atchison plant uses natural
gas for steam generation, so that SO 2 and NO emission
levels are low. Combustion of coal or fuel oil would result in
higher concentrations of SO 2 , NOR, and particulates in
gaseous emissions from the plant.
Recommendations for future Study include:
• Environmental characterization of other alcohol plants
which use different feedstocks, processing equipment,
fuel sources, and wastewater treatment methods;
• Gas chromatographylmass spectroscopy (GCIMS)
analysis of pesticide concentrations in process
streams to determine the fate of pesticides in alcohol
synthesis;
• HG monitoring to ensure worker safety; and
• Analysis of byproducts for priority pollutant trace
metals to determine whether these pollutants might
build up in concentration if byproducts are landfarmed
or landspread.
The STE report, with complete results from the environ-
mental sampling and analysis program, will be published this
winter. The STE report will also list requirements for STE
programs at other alcohol production plants and will include
a conceptual design of a grain-aIcoho plant which uses a
coal-fired boiler for steam generation. The design is
projected to be representative of future plants which will be
needed to support a gasohol industry.
HItlman Reports Preliminary Findings of SRC-li Source
Test—Preliminary results of the Fort Lewis SRC-1I pilot plant
Level I-Level Il source test conducted in March-April 1980
indicate that ammonia, suit ides, and phenols in process
recycle water and some inorganic elements (metals) in
vacuum bottoms may require further environmental con-
sideration. Process sour water was selected as a sampling
stream in the preliminary study, in addition to process
recycle water and vacuum bottoms. Chemical components
from these three process streams have been identified,
screened, and prioritized for more detailed analysis.
Samples of recycle process water were characterized by
extremely high alkalinity with very low hardness and low
levels of alkali metals. Levels of ammonia, sulfide, and
phenols in recycle water would have to be reduced before
this wastestream could be discharged.
The Ft. Lewis SAC-Il plant currently produces a vacuum
bottom residue as a byproduct stream. This residue contains
mineral matter and low-sulfur carbon. In a commercial
facility, this material would be an internal stream fed directly
to a gasifier for production of hydrogen or fuel gas.
The Fort Lewis pilot plant’s wastewater treatment
system averages a 20 to 93 percent reduction in the con-
centration of metals in process sour waters. The treatment
process is also effective in decreasing levels of organics
such as aliphatic hydrocarbons, benzene and substituted
benzenes, and fused polycyclic hydrocarbons. Neither the
plant influent nor effluent wastewater streams demonstrate
toxicity in Ames or rodent bioassay tests.
Hittman will conduct further studies on the Fort Lewis
SRC-ll plant waste streams, results of which will be reported
in future issues of the Environmental Review of Synthetic
Fuels. For more information regarding the Fort Lewis plant,
see the Environmental Review of SynthetIc Fuels, Vol. 2, No.
3.
Gasifier Ash Leachates Characterized—Under contract
to EPA, TRW and Radian Corporation have compared
leachates of ashes from Lurgi, Weliman-Galusha, and Texaco
gasifiers to National Interim Primary Drinking Water Stan-
dards (NIPDWS). None of the wastes are considered
hazardous when compared to 100X the NIPDWS. The
leachates were produced using the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) extraction procedure which simu-
lates rainwater extraction of soluble materials from solid
wastes. Trace element concentrations in the leachates were
compared to NIPDWS for As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Pb, Hg, Se, and Ag.
Se in the Texaco gasifier slag is the only element which
approaches but does not exceed the 100X NIPDWS used to
classify wastes as hazardous. Se may present a hazard if
high-Se coals are gasified.
RCRA extraction procedures were used to test the fol-
lowing samples:
• Coarse slag from Texaco gasification of western sub-
bituminous coal,
• Dewatered ash composite from Wellman-Galusha
gasification of North Dakota lignite,
• Cyclone dust from Weliman-Galusha gasification of
North Dakota lignite,
• Unquenched ash from Lurgi gasification of Rosebud
coal,
• Unquenched ash from Lurgi gasification of Illinois No.
5 coal, and -
• Unquenched ash from Lurgi gasification of Illinois No.
6 coal.
Leachates of these samples were compared to leachates
of ashes from a lignite-firec steam boiler. Although the
gasifiers and the boiler operate under different conditions,
results showed that RCRA extract characteristics are
generally quite similar for ashes from the two source types.
TRW and Radian are conducting further tests on ashes
from Lurgi and Koppers-Totzek gasifiers in Yugoslavia and
South Africa. Data on the leachate characteristics of these
and other samples will be included in future issues of the
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels.
Coal Conversion Wastewaters Compared—Under
contract to EPA, Radian Corporation has reported strong
similarities in both gross chemical parameters and con-
centrations of specific organic compounds between aqueous
process condensates from an oxygen-blown, lignite-fired
Lurgi gasifier and an air-blown, bituminous-fired Chapman
gasifier. These aqueous gasifier condensates were also
compared to aqueous condensate from a coke oven by-
product recovery plant. Water quality parameters, phenolic
compound concentrations, and concentrations of refractory
organics in coke oven condensates were generally lower
than those measured for the two gasification aqueous con-
densates.
The following analytical results were used to establish
similarities between the three aqueous process condensates:
Water Quality Parameters—Water quality parameters
(e.g., BOO, COD, TOC, and concentrations of nitrogen
species, phenolic compounds, and oil and grease)
were very similar for the condensates from the Lurgi
and Chapman gasifiers using lignite and bituminous
coals; parameters for the coke oven process con-
densate were generally lower than those measured for
the two gasifier condensates.
• Extractions of Organics— Extraction of the three con-
densates with dilsopropyl ether (DIPE) resulted in 99+
percent removal of total phenols, 75 percent average
removal of total organic carbon (TOG), and significant
reductions in biological oxygen demand (BOD) and
chemical oxygen demand (COD) values. The DIPE
extraction procedure was designed to simulate the
Phenosolvan process used by Lurgi to remove phenols
from wastewaters. Oil and grease concentrations
dropped below a detection level of 10 mg/i.
5
-------
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
• Concentrations of Phenols—The same phenolic
species were identified in alt three process con-
densates. Phenolics concentrations were similar in the
two gasification process condensates; coke oven
phenolics were found at lower concentrations.
• Concentrations of Nitrogen-Containing Organics—All
three process condensates contained the same
nitrogen heterocyclic compounds; the relative con-
centrations of the compounds in each of the con-
densate DIPE extracts were similar.
• Molecular Weight Distribution of Refractory Com-
pounds—The relative amounts of refractory (non-
extractable) organics and their molecular weight dis-
tnbutions were found to be the same (within the limits
of experimental error) for the Lurgi and Chapman
process condensates. Levels of refractory organics in
coke oven process condensate were lower than those
measured for the two gasifler process condensates.
Results of this study led to a number of conclusions
regarding the treatability of coal gasification wastewaters:
• Gasification process condensates may not be suff i-
ciently similar to coke oven process condensates to
justify the use of existing coke oven treatment
methods for treatment of coal gasification waste-
waters.
• Further treatment may be required to reduce the high
residual TOC levels remaining in gasification process
condensates after DIPE extraction and activated
carbon adsorption.
• The Chapman aqueous condensate may be used as a
model for treatment studies of Lurgi process waters.
Additional studies are needed to Investigate the treat-
ability of coal gasification wastewaters and the efficiency of
various wastewater treatment processes. For more informa-
tion on the present wastewater study, see the Environmental
Review of Synthetic Fuels, Vol. 3, No. 2.
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
ASSESSMENT
Alternate Pe a le Group—EPA’s Alternate Fuels Group
(AFG) has formed five working groups to prepare Pollution
Control Guidance Documents (PCGD5) for major synthetic
fuels technologies. The AFG Is developing both EPA’s en-
vironmental control guidance strategy for the synthetic fuels
industry and the resource program to support that strategy.
The PCGDs will provide guidance on available control tech-
nology for multimedia wastestreams. The guidance will
address regulated and nonregulated potential pollutants in
all media. When regulatory actions are finalized, they will
supercede the guidance for that area.
In the early stages of PCGD development, the EPA con-
tractors and the developers of synthetic fuels technologies
worked together to identify the environmental data base. The
data bases for fixed-bed low-Btu gasification and for Indirect
coal liquefaction have been utilized by EPA to draft control
options and preliminary guidance.
The indirect coal liquefaction PCGD has been divided
into separate sections according to the gasification process
used: Lurgi, Koppers-Totzek, and Texaco. Of the indirect
liquefaction systems, the Lurgi-based PCGD is closest to
completion.
Early identificatIon of environmental guidance will (1)
allow Its utilization in technology process desIgn, (2) provide
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and permit reviewers
with Information to ensure that discharges will be reasonably
controlled in a cost effective manner, and (3) expedite EIS
and perffilt application review. These factors should speed
commercIalIzation of emerging synthetic fuels technologies
while providing environmental protection for currently known
environmental effects.
In November 1980, the PCGD for low-Btu gasification
was submitted to the working group, and the PCGD for
Lurgl-based indirect llquefactlpn was submitted to the AFG.
The PCGD for shale oil will be submitted to the AFG this
winter. The PCGDs for direct coal liquefaction, alcohol fuel
from biomass, and geothermal systems are being prepared
for EPA review. After approval by EPA, the PCGD5 will un-
dergo public review.
Oil Shale Retort Wastewatets Studied—Monsanto
Research Corporation is conducting a 3-year, 5-phase study
to: (1) summarize known information on oil shale retort
wastewater sources and characteristics, (2) identify control
technologies for testing the identified wastewater streams,
and (3) design, construct, and operate bench- and pilot-scale
wastewater treatment units to evaluate Identified control
technologies. To date, oil shale retort processes have been
reviewed, wastewater streams have been Identif led, and
wastewater treatment and reuse options have been recom-
mended.
Three wastewater streams from In-situ oil shale retorting
were tested: (1) mine water pumped from the shale formation
prior to IgnitIon, (2) retort water condensed on cool rubblized
shale located In front of the bum zone, and (3) gas con-
densates recovered when gases are cooled prior to purifica-
tion. Three wastewater streams from surface retort
processes were studIed: (1) gas condensates, (2) product
water separated from product oil after oil-gas separation, and
(3) leachates from spent shale piles.
Mine Water
Mine water from insitu retorting exhibits high levels of
alkalinity, chemical oxygen demand (COD), Cl, F, S, B, HaS,
and Na. Trace metals In mine water are of special concern
due to the likelihood that some mine water may be released
to the environment. A number of treatment options have
been recommended for mine waters:
• Aeration to remove dIssolved gases;
• Chemical addition, flocculation, or sedimentation for
clarification;
• Multimedia filtration to remove fine suspended solids;
• Reverse osmosis or ion exchange to remove total dis-
solved solids (TDS);
• Ion exchange to remove residual orgaflics; and
• !°“ addition for disInfection.
Mine water can serve as cooling water or boiler feed
water after partial treatment, or it can be discharged after
treatment tor HaS, volatile organics, F, B, and TDS.
Retort and Product Waters
Retort and product waters are quite similar in composi-
tion; they contain high levels of most pollutants identified in
6
-------
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
wastewaters from oil shale processing. Product waters
contain higher levels of organics than retort waters due to
the presence of emulsified oils.
Treatment options recommended for retort and product
waters include:
• Gravity separation, chemical addition, or ultrafiltration
to separate emulsified oils;
• Stream stripping to remove dissolved gases;
• Aerobic biological treatment, wet air oxidation, or
activated carbon adsorption to remove organ ics;
• Multimedia filtration to remove fine suspended solids;
• Chemical addition for scale control;
• Addition of granulated activated carbon or polymeric
resins to remove trace organics; and
• Reverse osmosis or ion exchange to remove TDS and
trace metals.
Extensive treatment is required prior to discharge of
retort and product waters; a lesser degree of treatment is
required if the retort and product waters are recycled as
cooling waters. Treated water could also be used to generate
steam (via a thermal sludge oxidizer) or to moisten spent
shale.
Gas Condensates
Gas condensates from both in-situ and surface oil shale
retorting are characterized by high ammonia, high alkalinity,
and high organic composition. Trace metals and other
inorganics are found In lower concentrations in gas con-
densates than in retort and product waters. Inorganics are
present in low concentrations with the exception of am-
monia and carbonate species. Treatability studies are being
performed on gas condensates, as well as the other waste-
waters. Treatment options recommended for use on gas con-
densates are the same as those recommended for use on
retort and product waters, excluding chemical addition for
scale control.
Leachates from Spent Shale Piles
Leachates from spent shale piles generated in surface
retorting are high in organic composition, TDS, sulfates, and
Na No treatability studies on leachates are available, but it
is likely that TDS and trace metals will require treatment
prior to leachate disposal.
Future Study
Four potential sources of mine water, retort water,
andlor gas condensates have been Identified for bench scale
testing. Conventional wastewater treatment methods will
probably be used.
Data gaps identif led in the oil shale wastewater data
base include:
• Insufficient data on composition and flow rates of
wastewaters due to inadequate analytical techniques
and lack of information from tests at commercial-scale
oil shale retorts;
• Insufficient data on water quality requirements for
recycle applications; and
• Insufficient data on wastewater treatability.
Monsanto Research Corporation recommends additional
bench-scale testing prior to design of a pilot-scale waste-
water treatment system.
SUet ford Sulfur Removal Process Recommended for
Direct-Retort Application—A recent study of control tech-
nology for removing sulfur compounds from gases produced
by direct-fired oil shale retorts identified the Stretford
process as the most cost-effective in reducing sulfur
emissions (see Recent Major Papers and Publications,
“Control of Sulfur Emissions from Oil-Shale Retorts”). IT
Enviroscience screened 31 commercial gas-sweetening
processes based on the H 2 S composition of gases produced
by the Paraho direct-retort method (for a description of the
Paraho method, see the Environmental Review of Synthetic
Fuels, Vol. 3, No. 3).
Direct-fired oil shale retorts, reporting gaseous CO,IH ,S
ratios ranging from 75:1 to 165:1, require a sulfur removal
process which selectively removes the smaller amounts of
H 2 S. The Stretford process, which directly oxidizes sulfur
compounds to elemental sulfur, is most applicable at low
concentrations of H ,S in the gaseous stream. The GO,
content of the gas has little effect on the Stretford process.
Indirect sulfur recovery processes in which acid-gas
components are removed from the fuel gas as a con-
centrated acid-gas stream are usually followed by the Claus
sulfur removal process. The Claus process is commercially
feasible when the H ,S concentration in the acid gas stream
is 25 percent or higher. In this study, only the MDEA process
with three stages of absorption produced an acid gas accept-
able for a Claus sulfur recovery process.
Based on the State of Colorado’s SO, emission
limitation of 857 glm’ (0.3 Ib/bbl) of oil produced, the Stret-
ford direct-recovery process would cost approximately
$3.45/rn’ ($0.55/bbl) of oil produced, about half that projected
for the best indirect sulfur removal system.
Experimental Vapor/Liquid Equilibrium Data Compared
to Model Predictions—Test results from an experimental
equilibrium cell compare favorably with values predicted by a
thermodynamic model.
Via a cooperative agreement with EPA, researchers at
North Carolina State University (NCSU) are analyzing an acid
gas removal system which uses physical absorption in refrig-
erated methanol to clean gases produced by coal gasifica-
tion. A thermodynamic model is used to predict the
equilibrium behavior of mixtures of methanol and three
selected constituents of crude coal gas: GO,, N 2 , and H,S.
Values predicted for equilibrium pressures and vapor mole
fractions are compared to data obtained in experiments
conducted in an equilibrium cell equipped with sampling
devices and a gas chromatograph.
Vaporiliquid equilibrium data are obtained for
CO,IH S/N lmethanol mixtures at temperatures of 258.15 K
and 273.15 K and pressures ranging from 0.6 to 4.1 MPa (6 to
40 atm). Experimental values for equilibrium pressures and
vapor mole fractions of CO 2 and N 2 correlate strongly with
predicted values. Correlation between experimental and
predicted H 2 S vapor mole fractions is not as strong due to
reduced chromatographic sensitivity at low H ,S concentra-
tions.
NCSU’s thermodynamic model allows the prediction of
equilibrium pressures and vapor compositions for mixtures
of CO,, HS, N , and methanol over a limited temperature
range. Additional research is needed to adapt the model to
bubblepoint, dewpoint, and flash calculations. Other key
constituents of crude coal gas are scheduled for testing.
A report describing the NGSU study is available (EPA-
60017-80-116 (NTIS PB 80-212236), “Solubilities of Acid Gases
and Nitrogen in Methanol”). The study is underway at
NCSU’s coal gasification gas cleaning pilot plant in Raleigh,
NC. For more information on the NCSU pilot plant, see the
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels, Vol. 3, No. 1.
7
-------
Eo*oism.ntal Rev sw of Synthstlc Fuses
DsGlalbor 1990
PROJECT TITLES, CONTRACTORS, AND EPA PROJECT OFFICERS
IN EPA’S SYNTHETIC FUEL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROGRAMS
Project Title Contractor EPA Project Officer
Asa e ssme n t
of Low- S W
lerch 1976-March 1682)
Radbo O orefton
8500 Scoal 21 Bled.
Austin, TX 78766
(512)454-4797
83ordon C. Page)
William J. Rhodes
IERL.RTP
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
(91 541-2853
of HIgh-Scu Gasification
fApdl 1977 -Maivh 1961)
TRW, Inc.
1
Redondo Beech, CA 90278
( 913)5364105
hunt Nen
William J. Rhodes
IERL-RTP
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC27711
(9195541-2353
Evakudlon
of Coal Liquefaction
1676-Joly 1062)
Hlttman Aasoclatea, Inc.
9100 Red Branch Road
Colwnbla. MD21043
(301) 1 06-7680
$fackOV erm.
D. Bruce Henachel
IERL -RTP
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park. NC 27711
(9195541 .4112
MMGcle.n l eg
Bench Scal Unit
(Octcherl9lluptembsr 1681)
North Carolina Stat. University
Department of Chemical Engineering
Raleigh, NC 27607
(9195 1 01-2324
— Foffe95
N. Dean Smith
IERL-RTP
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
(919)541.2768
.rTreelment Bench
Sc s i. Unit
;_ .. _ . 1978.Octeber 1961)
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
(9195966-1023
(Philip Singer)
N. Dean Smith
IERURTP
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
(9195541.2708
FromaBench Scale Unit
nO& l9l5Cctober 1181)
Research Trlengle Institute
P.0. Box 12194
Reaearctr Triangle Park, NC 27709
(91955418000
f oreet NIxon)
N. Dean Smith
RL P
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC27711
(919)541-2108
Gecuedwef e r and
ERects of Underground Coal
Ge. l lk .. a tHoeGae k ,WY
haesUYW7SJenUWy 1981)
U.S Dept. of Energy
Washington, DC 23545
(301)3634516
harieaSm
Lawrence LMum ,.e Laboratory
Li vrmoes , CA 04550
(41 ( 94 6483
(&W. Need)
Edward R. Bates
IERL.Cl
Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45238
(513)684-4353
- --‘ .& kiatrumuntatlon for
U.S. Dept of Energy
hington. DC 23545
( 301)3534516
h ad e eGn
Lawrence Uvermor. Laboratory
Livermore , CA 94550
E415)422 -6483
(S W. Need)
Edward A. Bates
tEAL -Cl
Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513)684-4353
snt Oil Simle
1WS hit ’ 1181)
Colorado State University
Fort CoiIln CO 80523
(303)491-8356
(Wftliam Be
Edward A. Bates
IERUCI
Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513)504-4353
Field LIedhing Study of Now Mined
Oil Shale
( 4ud 1986-April 16633
Colorado State University
Foil Collins. CO 80623
(303)4918058
(Sndd McWaoder)
Edward A. Bates
IERL -CI
Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513)684-4353
$
-------
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
Development of Monitoring Methodology General Electric Center for Leslie G. Mc Million Edward R. Bates
for Modified In-Situ Oil Advanced Studies EMSL-LV IERL-Ci
Shale Development Santa Barbara, CA 93102 Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Protection Agency
(May 1978-August 1981) (805)965-0551 Las Vegas F V 89114 Cincinnati, 0 1-I 45268
(702) 783-2258 (513) 684-4353
Environmental Perspective on the EPA Oil Shale Research Group Edward R. Bates Terry L. Thoem
Emerging Oil Shale Industry Office of Research and IERL-CI Region VIII
(August 1978-January 1981) Development Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268 Denver, CO 80295
(513)684-4353 (303)837-5914
Trace Elements in Naval Reserre Laramle Energy Technology Center Edward R. Bates
Oil Shale Cores Laramie, WY 82071 IERL-CI
(June 1918-December 1980) (301) 721-2011 Environmental Protection Agency
(interagency Agreement) (Richard Poulson) Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513)684-4353
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
University of California
Bldg. 70, Room 143
Berkeley, CA 94720
(415) 4 1-6898
(Phyllis Fox)
Assessment of 502 and Hydrocarbon Laramle Energy Technology Center Edward R. Bates
Emissions from Old In—Situ Laramle, WY 82071 IERL-Ci
Oil Shale SItes (307)721-2011 EnvIronmental Protection Agency
(November 1978-December 1980) (RIchard Poulson) Cincinnati, OH 45268
(Interagency Agreement) (513)684-4353
Pollution Control Guidance Document Denver Research Institute Edward R. Bates
for Oil Shale Denver, CO $0208 IERL-Ci
(November 1979-September 1961) (303)153-2912 Environmental Protection Agency
(Cooperative Agreement) (Andrew Jovanovich) Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513)684-4353
Laboratory Study on Spent Shale Laramle Energy Technology Center Edward R. Bates
from the Geokinetica Process Laramle, WY 82071 IERL-Cl
(April 1960-AprIl 1982) (30?) 721-2011 Environmental Protection Agency
(Interagency Agreement) (GF. Dane) Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513)684-4353
Assessment of OIl Shale Retort Monsanto Research Corporation Walter Llberlck
Wastewatar Treatment and Control P0. Box 8, Station B IERL-CI
Technology Dayton, OH 45407 Environmental Protection Agency
(May 1979-May 1982) (513)268-3411 CincinnatI, OH 45268
(Gary Rawllngs) (513)684-4353
Air Pollution InvestIgatIons from Monsanto Research Corporation Robert Thumau
Oil Shale Retorting: In-Situ and P.O. Box 8, Station B IERL-CI
Surface Dayton, OH 45407 EnvIronmental Protection Agency
(April 1919-AprIl 1982) (513)268-3411 Cincinnati, OH 45268
- (Gary Rawllngs) (513)684-4353
OveMew of the Environmental Denver Research Institute Robert Thumau
Problems for Oil Shale Development 2390 So. York Street IERL-CI
(May 1919-December 1980) UnIversity of Denver Environmental Protection Agency
Denver, CO 80210 CincinnatI, OH 45268
(303)153-2911 (513)684-4353
(Andrew Jovanovich)
Analytical Methods Manual for Denver Research Institute Robert Thumau
Oil Shale Effluents Unlverstiy of Denver IERL-Ci
(Apill 1979-April 1982) Denver, CO80210 Environmental Protection Agency
(303)753-2911 CincinnatI, OH 45268
(Andrew Jovanovlch) - (513)684-4353
Distribution of Trace Elements Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Robert Thumau
DurIng Simulated In-Situ Oil Universtly of CalifornIa IERL-Ci
Shale Retorting Berkeley, CA 94720 Environmental Protection Agency
(Cctober 1978-September 1981) (415)451-6698 Cincinnati, OH 45268
(Phyllis Fox) - (513)684-4353
9
-------
Envkonmsntal R.vlew of Synthetic Fuels
D*cemler 180
TECHNOLOGY ANDIOR
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
DOE Will Distribute First Synthetic Fuels Corporation
Funds—Congress has authorized the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) to spend or commit $5 billion on synthetic
fuels commercialization projects. The money is part of the
$20 billion appropriated for the U.S. Synthetic Fuels Corpora-
floe (SFC) for the fIscal year starting October 1, 1980. DOE
Assistant Secretary for Resource Applications Ruth Davis
will oversee the synfuels subsidy program until members of
the SEC are confirmed.
The SFC will help plan and fund commercial projects to
produce fuels from coal, oil shale, and tar sands. The SFC
does not have Jurisdiction over projects involving wood,
biomass, and renewable resources. However, DOE and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture will spend $12 billion to aid
new industr$ós producing fuels from crops, wood, and urban
waste.
In September 1980, DOE committed $450 million of the
SEC funds. A $250 mIllion loan guarantee will aid the Great
Plains Gasification Associates to construct the Beulah, ND,
coal gasification plant. DOE reviewed 971 proposals and
selected 110 projects for awards totaling over $200 million.
Halt of this money will be used to sponsor 99 selected feasi-
bilIty studies; the remaining $100 million will be spent for 11
cooperative agreements with industries ready to start work
on commercial energy projects.
Synthetic fuels projects in 48 states were selected for
funding. The greatest number of awards were for small-scale,
commercial alcohol plants. These alcohol plants would have
a combined potential production capacity of 0.12 m 3 /sec
(1.0 x 10 gai/y ,) and will receive awards totaling $56 million.
A total of $100 million will be used for coal gasification and
liquefactIon projects.
DOE will consider proposals and select projects for an
edditlonal $300 million recently appropriated by Congress.
DOE will also solicit bids for the $5 billion provided by
Congress for loan guarantees, price guarantees, and pur.
chase agreements. For more information on the SFC, see the
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels, Vol. 3, No. 3.
Synthetic Fuels Storage Stability Studies—A study of
the storage stability of nine synthetic gasolines and jet fuels
reported that high levels of gum deposits were found in
most of the synthetIc fuels after 32 weeks of storage.
Petroleum-derived fuels studied for comparison showed
good storage stability.
Higher gum formation in synthetic fuels was attributed
to higher total heteroatom concentrations in fuels refined
from coal liquids, shale oil, and tar sands bitumen. The gums
formed during storage resulted primarily from oxidation
reactions. Some polymerization reactions may also have
occurred; high-molecular weight species (170 to 5000) were
present In the gums. In addition, nitrogen and sulfur com-
pounds tended to concentrate in gums formed during
storage.
High performance liquid chromatography and gas
chromatography were used to analyze samples before and
after the 32-week storage period to detect changes in fuel
composition. Both analytical techniques indicated that ap-
proximately 25 percent of the lighter gasoline components
were lost during the 32-week test. This loss increased the
percent of aromatics in the gasolines. The less volatile jet
fuels showed no loss of fuel and little compositional change.
The synthetic fuels studies included SASOL coal-derived
gasoline, tar sands-derived naphtha, Paraho shale oil-derived
JP-5 jet fuel, Athabasca tar sands-derived JP-5 jet fuel, coal
syncrude (COED process)-derived JP-5 jet fuel, and Paraho
shale oil-derived Jet A fuel. For comparison, petroleum-
derived JP.5 jet fuel, and commercial unleaded and leaded,
regular-grade gasolines were also studied.
Endangered -SpecIes Fish Affect Dam Construction—
Fish of a species protected by the federal government’s
Endangered Species Act have delayed permitting required for
construction of a dam on Utah’s White River. The dam is
considered essential to synthetic fuels development in north-
eastern Utah, an area with extensive deposits of tar sands,
oil shale, and coal. U.S. Fish and Wildlife officials fear the
dam would interfere with the Colorado squawfish’s spawning
and migration patterns by decreasing water temperatures
and depleting water flow in the White River. Additional
studies of tt.: quawfish’s migration and reproductive
patterns are proposed.
Shell Announces New Process Developments, Plans for
Two Gasification Plants—Shell Internationale Petroleum
Maatschappy has developed a high-pressure slagging gasifi.
cation process to be tested at two 11.5 kg/sec (1100 ton/d)-
prototype coal gasification plants ii Europe. The first plant
Is to be built at Moerd k in the Netherlands and Is scheduled
for operation in 1984. The second, in West Germany, is to
start operation in 1985. Larger units, with capacities up to
28.9 kg/sec (2750 ton/d), are scheduled to come on line in the
late 1980’s.
Shell began operating a 0.06 kg/sec (6 tonld) pilot plant
in 1976 in Amsterdam. This successful pilot operation led to
construction of a 1.7 kg/sec (165 ton/cl) plant by Krupp-
Koppers in 1978. The Shell-Koppers process developed at
these two plants will be tested at the two commercial-scale
plants.
The Shell-Koppers process can be used for gasifying
most types of coals and petroleum coke; it can accom-
modate ash contents up to 40 percent and sulfur contents
up to B percent. Shell has also developed a method to gasify
vacuum residues of direct liquefaction processes so that
liquids containing unconverted coal can be gasified without
removal of ash or coal solids.
In the Shell-Koppers process, ground coal feed enters
the reactor through two opposed burners in a high-pressure
shell, protected from hot gases by a tube wall. In the tube
wall, saturated steam is generated at 5.0 MPa (725 psi). Slag
exits through a hole In the bottom of the reactor. It is
quenched, with waler, crushed in a submerged mill, and then
passed through a pressure lock to atmospheric conditions.
Gases leave the reactor at 1773 K (1500°C) and 3.0 MPa (435
psi). They are quenched with cool recycle synthesis gas at
373 K (100°C), reducing the net temperature to below 1173 K
(900°C), at which temperature any entrained slag is
solidified. Next, the gases pass through a waste heat boiler
where the temperature drops below 593 K (320°C). Remain-
ing solids are separated from the gases by a cyclone and/or
a water scrubber, while the gas cools to 313 K (40 ’C). High
reactor temperatures result in product gas which is primarily
composed of carbon monoxide and hydrogen (93 to 96
percent by volume).
The medium-Btu product gas may be used as feedstock
for combined-cycle power generation. It has potential use in
iron ore direct reduction or may be catalytically converted to
methane.
10
-------
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
Environmental impacts of the Shell-Koppers process are
reported to be negligible. Solid waste products include
elemental sulfur and ash in the form of inert slag. Little or no
wastewater is discharged. Thermal efficiencies are high (79
to 82 percent) and depend on coal feedstock and quenching
medium. The raw product gas has a heat content of about
11.8 MJ/Nm 3 (300 Btu/scf).
Dow Coal Liquefaction Process Conceptualized— Dow
Chemical has designed a commercial coal liquefaction
process which includes cryogenic separation for hydrogen
recovery. The conceptual design proposes a mine-mouth, 105
kg/sec (10,000 tonld) coal liquefaction plant to produce high-
Btu (332 MJ/Nm 3 or 845 Btu/scf) gas, liquefied petroleum
gas, and naphtha. An economic study of design feasibility
estimates that the products will cost approximately $132 to
$180 per m ($20.90 to $28.50 per bbl).
In the Dow liquefaction process, crushed dried coal is
slumed with process oils and an emulsified ammonium
molybdate catalyst. The preheated slurry Is mixed with
hydrogen and flashed in two stages in the reactor. Gases
and light liquids are collected and separated to produce
recycle hydrogen, hlgh-Btu gas, and light naphtha Cryogenic
hydrogen recovery is reported to be 76 percent efficient. The
nonvolatile byproducts of two-stage flashing include ash,
unreacted coal asphaltenes, and heavy oils. Ash is removed
in the underfiow of a hydroclone and subsequently
deasphalted; the overflow is recycled as slurry oil.
Research and pilot plant studies were performed using
Pittsburgh No. 8 seam coal containing 4 percent sulfur.
Lummus Process May Cut Direct Coal Liquefaction
Costs—At its New Brunswick, NJ, test plant, C-E Luthmus is
testing a new two-stage direct liquefaction process which
researchers believe will greatly enhance the efficiency of
hydrogen use in the direct coal liquefaction process. Depart-
ment of Energy studies show that up to one-third of the
capital cost of a direct liquefaction plant results from
hydrogen requirements. The two-stage direct liquefaction
process could reduce hydrogen plant size, thus decreasing
the cost of direct coal liquefaction.
The Lummus two-stage direct liquefaction process
combines two concepts developed by Air Products and
Chemicals and by Mobil Oil Co. At the bench-scale level, Air
Products and Chemicals has demonstrated that a blend of
up to 50 percent (by weight) of dissolved solvent-refined coal
(SRC) can be catalytically hydrocracked. Mobil Oil has shown
in laboratory studies that a two-stage process can cut
hydrogen requirements. Integrating these ideas, Lummus has
modified the RC I process and has been testing its version
since April.
In the conventional SAC I process, coal is preheated in a
reactor, and then sent to a separate dissolver where it loses
hydrogen. The Lummus-modifued process eliminates the
dissolver and uses only the preheater coil. The modified
process liquefies over 90 percent of the coal, and uses only
0.8-1.6 percent hydrogen, rather than the 2.5 percent
hydrogen required in the one-step process.
After the primary hydrogenation step, the product still
contains sulfur, ash, and some unreacted coal. In the
second, or deashing, stage, an antisolvent (a paraffin) is
added to the liquid coal extract, causing solids to drop out.
The extract Is then hydrocracked in the Lummus LC Finer,
producing a liquid fuel.
Approximately 536 kg (1,180 Ib) of distillate in the C 5 ,
728 K (850F) boiling range is produced from every ton of dry
ash-free coal that enters the process. Some of the heavier
byproducts are returned to the first hydroliquefaction stage
to provide reactor solvent. The remainder is cycled to a
partial-oxidation unit for hydrogen generation.
The two-stage direct liquefaction process has several
advantages over one-stage processes. The higher tempera-
tures used to ensure direct liquefaction in a one-step
process produce excessive amounts of hydrogen-consuming
C,-C 4 gases. These high temperatures also result in more
coking, which decreases catalyst life. The two-step process,
however, permits moderate reaction conditions, thus con-
suming less hydrogen, producing fewer C 1 -C 4 gases, and
causing fewer coking problems.
The primary disadvantages of the Lummus two-stage
direct liquefaction process are that the reactor product is
more difficult to deash than that from the one-step version,
and that the extract is more difficult to hydrocrack than
typical petroleum liquids.
Utah Oil Shale Commercial Feas/bility Study Receives
Industry Support—Ten industrial sponsors have joined the
Paraho Development Corp. to study the feasibility of the
commercial-scale Paraho oil shale module design and
demonstration project in Vernal, UT. The companies are
Chevron Research Co., Phillips Petroleum Co., Conoco, Inc.,
Davy Mckee Corp., Mobil Research and Development Corp.,
Mono Power Co., Sohio Shale Oil Co., Sunoco Energy Devel-
opment Co., Texas Eastern Synfuels, Inc., and Cleveland-
Cliff S Iron Co.
The $9 million, 18-month feasibility study was funded by
DOE earlier this year. The proposed plant is expected to cost
$200 million, and could be operational by 1984.
Paraho and Superior Oil Company designed the project
for DOE. The plans call for a single, aboveground oil shale
retort, a mine, and support facilities. The design under study
would process 189 kg/sec (1.8 x 10 tons/d) of oil shale to
produce over 0.018 m 3 /sec (1.0 x 10 bblid) of crude shale oil
and a product gas to be used to generate electricity.
Paraho Development Corp. has successfully produced
over 17,480 m 3 (4.6 x 10 gal.) of crude oil from oil shale at
Its Anvil Points plant near Rifle, CO.
Riley Stoker Demonstrates s. umni rcw,- cdw
Atmospheric Fixed-Bed Coal Gasifier—Using a full range of
U.S. coals, Riley Stoker Corp. (Worchester, MA) has demon-
strated that an atmospheric, fixed-bed, commercial-scale
coal gasifier can produce low-Btu gas at cold gas eff I-
clencles of 71 to 78 percent and hot gas efficiencies of 87
percent or more. In its commercial 3.15 m (10 ft 6 in.) l.D.
unit and a smaller development unit, Riley Stoker studied
fuels ranging from sized anthracites to sized and run-of-mine
coals with swelling indices up to 8.5. DependIng on the type
of coal used, net heat output was in excess of 14.6 MJ/sec
(5.0 x 10’ Btu!hr).
The Riley Stoker gasifier is designed for simple, on-site
coal gasification, and features a thin-bed, variable-heat
process in which the fuel bed slowly rotates. The bed, up to
140 m (55 in.) in height, permits variation in the particle
heating rate, which is an essential element in managing
swelling coals. The rotation of the bed ensures even fuel dis-
tribution, which allows different coal sizes to be used. The
bed is agitated to prevent large particles and channels from
forming inside.
In addition to the design features, the following factors
were cited as important to the successful operation of a
fixed-bed gasifier (1) maintaining a smooth, vertical tempera-
ture transition between zones; (2) achieving a level fuel bed
at startup; and (3) controlling temperature and particle heat
rate to avoid caking.
MRS Refines Shale Oil for Use as Jet Fuel—Hydrocarbon
Research, Inc. (HRI) has successfully refined shale oil into
jet fuel. At its Research and Development Center in Trenton,
NJ, HRI produced 42.9 m 3 (11,300 gal.) of synthetic JP-4 avia-
tion fuel which met or exceeded all JP-4 military specifica-
tions. The shale oil was refined as part of a U.S. Air Force
Systems Command program.
11
-------
EnvIronmental RevIew of Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
Connecticut Plant Turns Garbage into Energy—Eco-fuel
I I, a low-sulfur, powdered, refuse-derived fuel, is produced at
the Connecticut Resource Recovery Authority’s Bridgeport
recycling plant. The Authority claims that Eco-fuel Ills the
most hi9hly. processed garbage-derived fuel in the U.S. It
also maintains that Eco-fuel I I could replace up to 1.1 x 10
m 2 (7.0 x 10 bbl)oI imported oil per year at 70 percent of
the cost of the oil. Use of garbage for fuel could also
alleviate landfill and other disposal problems.
Connecticut’s Department of Environmental Protection
adopted a 120-day emergency regulation in May to allow Eco-
fuel I I to be burned. The garbage-based fuel currently con-
tains more sulfur than the state usually allows. The plant
operators, Combustion Equipment Associates of New York,
maintain that the sulfur content will decrease when more
garbage Is processed. A conversion rate of 0.91 Gg (1,000
tons) of garbage per day was set for October 1980.
Various delays have put the proJect 2 years behind
schedule. The Bridgeport plant Is to eventually convert 1.6
Gg (1$00 tons) of garbage per day from nine nearby towns.
Total cost of the plant was originally set at $53 million;
recent cost estimates exceeded $100 million.
The Bridgeport plant Is a larger versIon of a plant at
East Bddgewalpr, MA, that has been converting 0.45 to 0.54
Gg 00 to 600 tons) of garbage per day for 2 years.
The Authority is also planning to construct a major plant
at Hartford and one at New Haven. as well as two or three
smaller plants at other locations, within the next 5 years.
Eleven plants were originally planned.
The major plant at Hartford will generate steam for a
utility company. Ills modeled after a Saugus, MA, steam-
generating plant operated by Refuse Energy Systems Co.
(RESCO), a Wheelabrator-Frye subsidiary. The Saugus plant
has generated the steam equivalent of more than 2.0 x 10’
m’ (1.3 x 106 bbl) of oil since 1975.
Three New Ethanol Plants Proposed—Plans have been
announced for three ethanol plants using corn and other
agricultural crops as feedstock. Texaco, Inc. and CPC Inter-
national will convert CPC’s corn wet-milling plant in Pekin,
IL., to produce up to 0.0072 m ’Jsec (60 x 10 gal.Iyr) of
ethanol from corn. Oregon plans a $60 million agricultural!
industrial energy complex at Boardman, OR. Sunrise Farms,
Inc. is the developer of the Oregon energy complex, which
centers around an ethanol plant capable of producing 0.0024
m 3 lsec (2.0 x 10 gal.Iyr) of ethanol from corn and other
crops. A newly formed corporation in Delaware, the U.S.
Ethanol Corp., will construct a $150 million plant at a site on
the Mississippi River to derive ethanol from corn. The
product, 0.012 m 3 !sec (tO x 10 gal.!yr) of ethanol, will be
used in automotive fuels.
The Texaco-CPC and Boardman plants will supply their
own power for producing ethanol. The Texaco-CPC plant
already has a coal co-generation plant providing both electric
power and steam; the Boardman, OR, complex will include a
wood- or coal-fired power plant.
Engineering and design studies for the Texaco-CPC
plant have L .n in progress for several months; construction
Is expected to be completed late in 1981. Construction of the
Oregon complex, including an alcohol fuel plant, a power
plant, and crop processing, storage, and shipping facilities,
Is scheduled to begin this tall, with completion expected in
Summer 1982. The U.S. Ethanol project is planned to go
onstream late In 1982.
MEETING CALENDAR
Sc p”e and Třehaology Bridging the Frontiers, Jan. 3-8,
1981, Toronto, Canada Contact American Association for
the Advancement of Science, Dept. H, 1515 Massachusetts
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20005.
En.,gy-Sowces Technology Conference and EzhlbWon, Jan.
18-21, 1961, Houston, TX. Contact Frank 0. Demarest, ETCE,
P.O. Box 59489, Dallas, TX 75229; telephone (214) 247.1747.
5th Annual Symposium on Energy from Biomass and
Wastes, Jan. 26-30, 1981, Lake Buena Vista, FL Contact:
Kathy Fisher, lGT, 3424 S. State St., Chicago, IL 60616; tele-
phone (312) 567-3650.
3rd international Conference on Future Energy Concepts,
Jan. 27-29, 1981, London, England. Contact: Conference
Dept., Institution of Electrical Engineers, Savoy Place,
London WC2R OBL, England.
Workshop on Instrumentation and Control for Fossil Energy
Pruce u , Feb. 2-3, 1981, Houston, TX. Contact: Diane
Weltzel, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, MS 125-138, 4800 Oak
Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91103; telephone (213) 354-3303,
FTS 792-3303.
84th National Western Mining Conference and Exhibition,
Feb. 4-6, 1981, Denver, CO. Contact: D. R. Cole, Colorado
Mining Assoc., 330 Denver Hilton Office Building, 1515
Cleveland Place, Denver, CO 80202.
8th Energy Technology Conference and Exoositlon (ET8),
Mar. 9-11, 1981, Washington, DC. Contact: Martin Heavner,
Goy. Inst., P. 0. Box 5918, Washington, DC 20014; telephone
(301) 656-1090.
6th International Technical Conference on Slurry Trans porta-
lion, Mar. 23-26, 1981, Las Vegas, NV. Contact: Donald N.
Beck, Slurry Transport Association, 490 L’Enfant Plaza East
SW, Suite 3210, Washington, DC 20024; telephone (202) 554-
4700.
18th ACS National Meeting, Mar. 29-Apr. 3, 1981, Atlanta, GA.
Contact: ACS, 1155 16th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036;
telephone (202) 872-4600.
3rd InternatIonal Symposium on Coal-Oil Mixtures Combus-
tion, Apr.. 1-3, 1981, Orlando, FL Contact: Daniel Bienstock,
Science Applications, Inc., St. Clair BuIlding, 1725 Washing-
ton Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15241; telephone (412) 831-3535.
Energy and the Third World, Apr. 6-8, 1981, Oslo, Norway.
Contact: Charles F. O’Connor, Council for Energy Studies,
P. 0. Box 3122, Tulsa, OK 74101; telephone (918) 585-5152.
14th Annual Oil Shale SymposIum, Apr. 22.24, 1981, Golden,
CO. Contact: Dr. Harry W. Emrick, Colorado School of Mines,
Golden, CO 80401; telephone (303) 279-0300.
3rd Annual Industrial Coal Utilization Symposium, May 14-15,
1981, Nashville, TN. Contact: Daniel Bienstock, Science
Applications, Inc., St. Clair Building, 1725 Washington Road,
Pittsburgh, PA 15241; telephone (412) 831-3535.
12
-------
Environmental Review ci Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
1981 Symposium on Instrumentation and Control for Fossil
Energy Processes, Jun. 8-10, 1981, San Francisco, CA.
Contact: M. L. Holden, ANL, Building 362-H309, 9700 S. Cass
Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439; telephone (312) 972-5585, FTS
972-5585.
1981 Lignite Symposium, Jun. 14.17, 1981, San Antonio,
Texas. Contact: Gordon H. Gronhovd, GFETC, Box 8213, Uni-
versity Station, Grand Forks, ND 58202; telephone (701) 795-
8131.
2nd International Energy Symposium—World Fair Energy
Expo 81, Jun. 16-19, 1981, Knoxville, TN. Contact: Sheila
McCullough, Energy Opportunities Consortium, P. 0. Box
2229, Knoxville, TN 37 O1; telephone (615) 637-4554.
Coal Conference and Expo IV: Dollar-Saving Strategies for
the Coal Industry, Oct. 27-29, 1981, Louisville, KY. Contact:
McGraw-Hill Conference and Exposition Center, 1221 Avenue
of the Americas, Suite 3677, New York, NY 10020; telephone
(212) 997-3610.
RECENT MAJOR MEETINGS
Second Chemical Congress of the North
American Continent
The Congress was held on August 24-29, 1980, in Las
Vegas, NV. Its sponsors were the American Chemical
Society (ACS), Asociaci6n Farmaceutica Mexicana, the
Chemical Institute of Canada, Instituto Mexicano de
Ingenleros Qufmicos, and Sociedad Qulmica de Mexico.
More than 4000 papers were presented in about 550 tech-
nIcal sessions. Environmental Issues were included in
several symposia. Presentation topics Included organic
pollutants in wastewaters, residual fuels characterization, oil
shala, tar sands, and performance and modeling of fluidized-
bed reactors.
Three divisions of the ACS and the American Institute of
Chemical Engineers (AIChE) sponsored symposia on syn-
thetic fuels sources. In the Fuels-trom-Blomass sessions,
papers were presented on chemical processes for production
of fuel, alcohol production, organisms for biomass conver-
sion, and environmental effects of blomass-to-energy con-
version. A four-session symposium was held on refining,
stability, pyrolysis, and retorting of oil shale and upgrading
of tar sands.
The symposium on alternative feedstocks for petro-
chemicals focused on the uses of synthesis gas from coal
and catalytic hydroprocessing of syncrudes. The emphasis in
several sessions was on distillates and feedstocks obtained
from biomass, oil shale, and tar sands. The role of the
federal government— including academic research funding,
production of transport fuels from coal, and future funding
of coal research—was also included in this symposium.
Coal gasification and liquefaction research was empha-
sized in a symposium on the thermodynamics of coal con-
version processes, sponsored by the ACS Division of Indus-
trial and Engineering Chemistry and the Division of
Petroleum Chemistry. The thermodynamic aspects discussed
in presentations included vapor pressure estimations for
high-boiling components in liquid fossil fuels, vapor/liquid
equilibria of light oil, and properties of materials from coal
liquefaction and gasification. The performance and modeling
of fluldized bed reactors were subjects of several presen-
tations In another symposium jointly sponsored by the ACS
Division of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry and the
AIChE.
The ACS Division of Environmental Chemistry spon-
sored symposia on energy and environmental chemistry,
specifically dealing with oil shale, tar sands, coal gasifica-
tion, and the identification of organic pollutants in water.
Chromatographic techniques and extraction of pollutants for
analysis were described in several presentations. One group
of papers dealt with analyses of organic pollutants by gas
chromatography/mass spectroscopy (GCIMS). The energy
and environmental chemistry symposium, jointly sponsored
with the ACS Committee on Environmental Improvement,
reported on the impacts of oil shale and tar sands develop-
ment on the environment. The factors potentially affecting
the environment were polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons,
alkylpyridines, and trace elements in oil shale. Air emissions
from coal gasification plants, such as the Kosovo, Yugo-
slavia, Lurgi gasification complex, were discussed. Two
presentations were concerned with the impact of tar sands
development on the aquatic environment and on archaeo-
logical resources.
Methods and techniques used in environmental sam-
pling were subjects of papers in other symposia. The ACS
Division of Analytical Chemistry held a symposium on gas
chromatography in which a quantitative study of coal tar
compounds was presented. In other general analytical
chemistry symposia, the effect of organic ligands on trace
element mobility in oil shale wastes and the loss of com-
ponents during evaporation/reconstitution of organic environ-
mental samples were examined. The use of synthetic ad-
sorbents in air and water sampling was also described in two
papers.
The Analytical Chemistry Division also sponsored a
symposium on techniques for characterization of residual
fuels. The aspects of the techniques presented in papers
were comparison of porphyrins, separation and characteriza-
tion of alkyiphenols, and characterization of acids in shale
oil residues and distillates.
More information on the Congreds can be obtained by
contacting: A. T. Winstead, American Chemical Society, 1155
16th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036; telephone (202) 872-
4600.
Symposium on Environmental Aspects
of Fuel Conversion Technology V
The Environmental Protection Agency’s Industrial En-
vironmental Research Laboratory at Research Triangle Park,
NC (IERL-RTP), sponsored the Fifth Symposium on Environ-
mental Aspects of Fuel Conversion Technology. The meeting
was held In St. Louis, MO, September 16-19, 1980. The
General Chairman was William J. Rhodes, IERL-RTP Syn-
thetic Fuels Technical Coordinator, Gasification and Indirect
Liquefaction Branch. The Technical Chairman was N. Dean
Smith, also of IERL-RTP, Gasification and Indirect Lique-
faction Branch.
1
-------
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels
Decenther 1980
Stated objectives of the symposium were: (1) to provide
a colloquium for discussion of environmentally related in-
formation on coal gasification and liquefaction; (2) to discuss
the development and status of EPA’s Pollution Control
Guidance Documents (PCGD’s) for coal Indirect liquefaction,
for direct liquefaction, and for low-Btu gasification; and (3) to
present results from environmental assessment source tests,
laboratory and pilot-scale studies on pollutant formation and
control, and fuel conversion projects sponsored by other
agencies and organizations.
Speakers reported on the IERL-RTP research programs
In gasification, direct and indirect liquefaction, synfuel
product use, and EPA’s environmental assessment
methodology. Permitting, control options, and the status of
the WA and Great Plains projects were discussed. A session
on environmental assessment of direct liquefaction included
reports on Ft. Lewis SAC-li test results, chemical and bio-
logical characterization of SAC-Il products and byproducts,
and combustion techniques for controlling environmental
Impacts of synfuels.
Several papers reported results from environmental
assessment studies of commercial gasification plants in
Yugoslavia and South Africa, and laboratory- and pilot-scale
gasif lore In AmerIca. Sulfur-containing chemical species in
fiuldized bed gMitication and COSIH 2 S relationships in low-
tomed lum Btu gas from coal were discussed. Two other
presentations focused on characterization and comparison
of coal conversion wastewaters and coal gasification ash
leach tea.
Environmental control was the theme of the final group
of presentations. Reports on the development of PCGD’s for
low-Stu coal gasification and direct and Indirect coal lique-
factIon were presented. Pollutants from gasification were
ranked, the treatability of coal conversion wastewaters was
discussed, and methods for sulfur removal from gaseous
emissions were described In other papers in this session.
Synthetic Fuels: Status and Directions
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and the
Federal Republic of Germany’s Ministry of Energy (KFA)
jointly sponsored the conference, “Synthetic Fuels: Status
and Olrectlone,” held October 13-16, 1980, in San Francisco,
CA. The conference was attended by representatives of the
electric power industry, developers of synthetic fuels tech-
nologies, and administrators of energy policy.
The introductory session of the conference included
presentations on the role of synthetic fuels in the Federal
Repubiic of Germany’s and DOE’s energy programs, the
effect of synthetic fuels on Middle East oil Supplies and
price dynamics, and the use of alternative fuels by oil-
burning utilities. Other speakers emphasized clean liquid and
solid fuels, clean gaseous fuels, and power generation.
Status reports and updates on various conversion
processes were presented in three sessions on clean liquid
and solid fuels. Papers described the status of several coal
conversion processes: the Exxon Donor Solvent Coal Lique-
faction process, the i-f-Coal process, the two Solvent Refined
Coal (SAC-I and SRC-ll) processes, the Mobil Methanol-to-
Gasoline process, and the Dow coal liquefaction process.
Representatives of Union Oil Corp. and Occidental Petroleum
Corp. reported on shale oil demonstration plants and the
commercialization of modified in-situ shale oil recovery
processes. A Chevron Research Co. paper presented results
of studies on the upgrading of synthetic crude oils to
distillate fuels. Speakers from Germany reported on the coal
hydrogenation plant in Bottrop, coal liquefaction in Saarburg,
and the liquefaction of brown coal in Rheinbraun.
In the session dealing with power generation, speakers
discussed gas turbines for future coal-based power genera-
tion systems, coal gasIfication-combined cycle power
generation, and the VEW coal conversion plant in the Federal
Republic of Germany.
Coal gasification was the main topic In the three
sessions on the production of clean gaseous fuels. German
gasification was the topic of several papers on Lurgi coal
gasification, the Rheinbraun High-Temperature Winkler
process, the SaarburglOtto gasifier, and the use of the Shell-
Koppers process in power generation. Papers were
presented on coal gasification programs coordinated by
Texaco, Southern California Edison, Westinghouse, and the
British Gas Corp. Other papers described commercial ap-
plications of the KILNGAS process and the Combustion
Engineering coal gasification process.
More information on the conference can be obtained by
contacting: S. B. Aipert, Advanced Power Systems Division,
Electric Power Research InstItute, 3412 HilIview Avenue,
P. 0. Box 10412, Palo Alto, CA 94303, (415) 855-2000.
RECENT MAJOR PAPERS
AND PUBLICATIONS
Bo.gly, W. .1., Jr., at al., Exporlm.s,tal Studies on the Land
Disposal of Coal GasificatIon Residues. In: Solid Waste
Research and Development Needs for Emerging Coal Tech-
nologies Workshop, San Diego, CA, Apr. 22, 1979. CON F-
7904130—1. Oak Ridge, TN, Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
1979.
Bonbaugh, K. J., at 1., Final Report Ambient Air Sampling
and Analysis 1 Atmospheric Emissions from a Coat Gasifi-
cation Plant The Kosovo Lurgi Gasification Facility.
Presented at the Fifth Symposium on Environmental Aspects
of Fuel Conversion Technology, St. Louis, MO, Sep. 1&19,
1980.
Bracco, F. V.. et al., Formation and Control of Fuel-Nitrogen
Pollutants In Catalytic Combustion of Coal-Derived Gases,
Quarterly Technical Progress Report, December 15, 1978-
March 15, 1979. FE.—2762-7. Princeton, NJ, Princeton Univer-
sity, Dept. of Mechanical and Aerospace EngineerIng, Apr.
1979.
Clausen, J. F., and C. A. Zee, Modderfonteln Koppe,s Totzek
Source Test Results. Presented at the Fifth Symposium on
Environmental Aspects of Fuel Conversion Technology, St.
Louis, MO, Sep. 16-19. -1980.
14
-------
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
Faist, M. B., R. A. Magee, and M. P. Kllpatrick, COS-H 2 S Rela-
tionships in Processes Producing LowlMedium-Btu Gas.
Presented at the Fifth Symposium on Environmental Aspects
of Fuel Conversion Technology, St. Louis, MO, Sep. 16-19,
1980.
Harney, B. M., and Mills, G. A., “Coal to Gasoline via
Syngas,” Hydrocarbon Processing, 59(2):67-71, 1980.
lglar, A. F., Study of the Treatability of Wastewater from a
Coal Gasification Plant, Annual Report, July 15, 1978-July 14,
1979. PETC-0234-T3. Johnson City, TN, East Tennessee State
University, Dept. of Environmental Health, Jul. 1979.
Kelly, R. M., R. W. Rousseau, and J. K. Ferrell, Pilot-Plant
Evaluation of HzS, COS, and C02 Removal from Crude Coal
Gas by Refrigerated MethanoL Presented at the Fifth
Symposium on Environmental Aspects of Fuel Conversion
Technology, St. Louis, MO, Sep. 16-19, 1980.
McMlchael, W. J., and D. G. Nichols, Behavior of a Semibatch
Coal Gasification Unit. Presented at the Fifth Symposium on
Environmental Aspects of Fuel Conversion Technology, St.
Louis, MO, Sep. 16-19, 1980.
Nichols, D. G., and D. A. Green, Ranking of Potential
Pollutants From Coal Gasification Processes. Presented at
the Fifth Symposium on Environmental Aspects of Fuel
Conversion Technology, St. Louis, MO, Sep. 16-19, 1980.
Purdy, M. J., et al., Carbon Conversion, Make Gas Produc-
tion, and Formation of Sulfur Gas Species in a Pilot-Scale
Fluidlzed Bed Gasifler. Presented at the Fifth Symposium on
Environmental Aspects of Fuel Conversion Technology, St.
Louis, MO, Sep. 16-19, 1980.
Sparaclno, C. M., and D. J. Minick, “Determination of
Phenolics on Coal Gasifier Condensate by High-Performance
Liquid Chromatography with Low-Wavelength Ultraviolet
Detection,” Environ. Sd. & Technol., 14(7):880-882, 1980.
Wyatt, J. U., Treatment of Waste Water Effluents from Coal
Gasification Units. In: Ammonia-from-Coal Symposium,
Muscle Shoals, AL, May 8, 1979. pp. 109-129.
Vu, K. V., and G. G. Crawford, Characterization of Coal Gasif i-
cation Ash Leachate Using the RCRA Extraction Procedure.
Presented at the Fifth Symposium on Environmental Aspects
of Fuel Conversion Technology. St. Louis, MO, Sep. 16-19,
1980.
Liquefaction
lyanov, U., B. N. Smetannikov, and Vu. K. Pisarev, “Thermal
Processing of Sludges from the Coal Liquefaction Process,”
Solid Fuel Chem., 12(4):60-67. 1978.
KIm, J. I., and D. D. Woodbridge, Preliminary Results of the
Fort Lewis SRC.ll Source Test. Presented at the Fifth
Symposium on Environmental Aspects of Fuel Conversion
Technology, St. Louis, MO, Sep. 16-19, 1980.
SRI International, Environmentally Based Siting Assessment
for Synthetic.Liquid.Fuels Facilities, Final Report.
DOEIEV—10287. Menlo Park, CA, SRI International, Jan.
1980.
Schmld, B. K., and D. M. Jackson, SRC-ll Process. In:
Discussion Meeting on New Coal Chemistry, London, UK,
May 21, 1980. CONF-800528—1. Englewood, CO, Pittsburg
and Midway Coal Mining Co., 1980.
Shah, V. T., and D. C. Cronauer, “Oxygen, Nitrogen, and
Sulfur Removal Reaction on Donor Solvent Coal Lique-
faction,” Catalysis Rev. Sci. Eng., 20(2):209-301, 1979.
Alcohol Fuels
Abeles, T. P., D. Ellsworth, and J.P. Genereux, Technology
Assessment of Farm Scale Digestion Systems. In: Changing
Energy Use Futures, 2nd International Conference on Energy
Use Management, Los Angeles, CA, Oct. 22-26, 1979. Vol. 4,
pp. 1940-1948.
Crane, T. H., and R. 0. Williams, Energy from Biomass—the
Realities. In: Changing Energy Use Futures, 2nd International
Conference on Energy Use Management, Los Angeles, CA,
Oct. 22-26, 1979. Vol. 4, pp. 1748-1755.
Krochta, J. M., Energy Analysis for Ethanol ‘‘m Biomass. In:
Changing Energy Use Futures, 2nd International Conference
on Energy Use Management, Los Angeles, CA, Oct. 22-26,
1979. Vol. 4, pp. 1956-1963.
Mandia, J. W., and T. J. Powers Ill, Environmental Evaluation
of Gasohol Production and Health Effects. In: Environmental
Evaluation Gasohol Production and Health Effects Seminar,
Kansas City, MO, June 27, 1979. CONF-7906/60. EPA-907/9-79-
005 (NTIS PB 80-146756), Kansas City, MO, EPA, Region 7,
Oct. 1979.
Oil Shale
Baer, A. D., and C. A. DahI, “Simple Semi-Steady-State Model
of the Combustion Retort,” In Situ Oil Coal Shale Miner,
4(1):79-101, 1980.
Branch, M. C., “In-Situ Combustion Retorting of Oil Shale,”
Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 5(3):193-206, 1979.
Chappell, W. R., Environmental Impacts of Oil Shale. In:
Changing Energy Use Futures, 2nd International Conference
on Energy Use Management, Los Angeles, CA, Oct. 22-26,
1979. Vol. 4, pp. A28-A36.
Chappell, W. R., Trace Elements in Oil Shale, Progress
Report, 1979-1980. DOEIEV/10298—1. Denver, CO, University
of Colorado, 1980.
Lovell, R. J., S. W. Dylewskl, and H. C. Thurnau, Control of
Sulfur Emissions from Oil-Shale Retorts. Presented at the
1980 Symposium on Instrumentation and Control for Fossil
Energy Processes, Virginia Beach, VA, Jun. 9, 1980.
McKell, C. M., and G. Van Epps., Vegetative Rehabilitation of
Arid Land Disturbed in the Development of Oil Shale and
CoaL EPA-600/7-80-071 (NTIS PB 80-189541). Logan, UT, Utah
State University, Apr. 1980.
Routson, R. C., R. E. Wildung, and H. M. Bean, “Review of the
Environmental Impact of Ground Disposal of Oil Shale
Wastes,” J. Environ. Quality, No. 1:14-19, Jan. 1979.
Schachter, V., “Gasification of Oil Shale,” Israel J. Technol.,
17(1):51-57, 1979.
Thomson, W. J., and V. Soni, “Oxidation of Oil Shale Char,”
In Situ Oil Coal Shale Miner, 4(1):61-77, 1980.
15
-------
Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels
December 1980
Other
Bowden, J. N., and D. W. Brlnkman, "Stability of Alternative
Fuels," Hydrocarbon Processing, 59(7):77-82, 1980.
Collins, R. V., K. W. Lee, and D. S. Lewis, Comparison of Coal
Conversion Wastewaters. Presented at the Fifth Symposium
on Environmental Aspects of Fuel Conversion Technology,
St. Louis, MO, Sep. 16-19,1980.
DaSllva, E. J., "Biogas: Fuel of the Future?" Ambio, 9(1):2-9,
1980.
Ferrell, J. K., R. W. Rousseau, and J. N. Matange, Solubilities
of Acid Gases and Nitrogen In Methanol. EPA-600/7-80-116
(NTIS PB 80-212236). Raleigh, NC, North Carolina State Uni-
versity, May 1980.
France, D. H., "Polynuclear Aromatic Contamination from
Coal Conversion Processes," J. Inst. Energy, 52(413):169-172,
Dec. 1979.
Menslnger, M. C., et al., Peat Beneficlatton and Its Effects on
Dewaterlng and Gasification Characteristics. CONF-
800303—18. Chicago, IL, Institute of Gas Technology, 1980.
deNevers, N., B. Glenne, and C. Bryner, Analysis of the
Environmental Control Technology for Tar Sand Develop-
ment COO-4043-2. Salt Lake City, UT, University of Utah,
College of Engineering, Jun. 1979.
Pelofsky, A. H. (ed.), Coal Conversion Technology: Problems
and Solutions. ACS Symposium Series No. 110. From the
American Chemical Society, Division of Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Winter Symposium, Colorado
Springs, CO, Feb. 12-13, 1979.
Pitt, W. W., Jr., R. L. Jolley, and G. Jones, "Characterization
of Organics in Aqueous Effluents of Coal Conversion
Processes," Environ. Intl. (England), 2(3):167-171, 1979.
Rogers, K. A., and Hill, R. F., "Synfuels Processing Tech-
nology," Mining Engineering (New York), 32(2):167-170, Feb.
1980.
Singer, P. C., et al., Effect of Sludge Age on the Biological
Treatabllity of a Synthetic Coal Conversion Wastewater.
Presented at the Fifth Symposium on Environmental Aspects
of Fuel Conversion Technology, St. Louis, MO, Sep. 16-19,
1980.
Skinner, Q., Environmental Survey—Tar Sands In-Situ
Processing Research Program (Vernal, Uintah County, Utah).
DOE/LETC/IC—80(1). Laramie, WY, University of Wyoming,
Rocky Mountain Institute of Energy and Environment, Mar.
1980.
Van Meter, W. P., Environmental Effects from Leaching of
Coal Conversion By-Products, Final Report. FE—2019-T1.
Missoula, MT, University of Montana, Jul. 1979.
The Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels is prepared by Radian Corporation under EPA contract 68-02-3137. Contractors listed
in the table of contractors on pages 8-9 contributed to this issue. The EPA/IERL-RTP Project Officer is William J. Rhodes, (919) 541-
2853, the EPA/IERL-Ci contact is Eugene F. Harris (513) 684-4363. The Radian Program Manager is Gordon C. Page, the Project Director
for preparation of this issue is Pamela K. Beekley, (512) 454-4797. Contributors to this issue were Pamela K. Beekley, William E. Robnett,
and Debra K. Harper.
The Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels is distributed, without charge, to recipients interested in synthetic fuels. Comments
on this issue, topics for inclusion in future issues, and requests for subscriptions should be communicated to the EPA/IERL-RTP Project
Officer or the Radian Program Manager or Program Director.
The views expressed in the Environmental Review of Synthetic Fuels do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the
Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use by EPA.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Research and Development
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park. N.C. 27711
(Attn: W. J. Rhodes, Mail Drop 61)
Postage And Fees Paid
Environmental Protection Agency
EPA - 335
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Penalty For Private Use $300
An Equal Opportunity Employer
------- |