EPA-600/R-96-06 5
June 1996
EVALUATION AND ANALYSIS OF GAS CONTENT AND
COAL PROPERTIES OF MAJOR COAL BEARING REGIONS
OF THE UNITED STATES
by
Sushma Masemore, Stephen Piccot, and Eric Ringler
Southern Research Institute
6320 Quadrangle Drive, Suite 100
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
William P. Diamond
U.S. Bureau of Mines
Pittsburgh Research Center
P.O. Box 18070
Pittsburgh, PA 15236
EPA Contract 68-D2-0062
EPA Project Officer: David A. Kirchgessner
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared for:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
NOTICE
This document has been reviewed in accordance with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorse
ment or recommendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by Congress with pro-
tecting the Nation's land, air, and water resources, tinder a mandate of national
environmental laws, the Agency strives to formulate and implement actions lead-
ing to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability of natural
systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA's research
program is providing data and technical support for solving environmental pro-
blems today and building a science knowledge base necessary to manage our eco-
logical resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect our health, and pre-
vent or reduce environmental risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory is the Agency's center for
investigation of technological and management approaches for reducing risks
from threats to human health and the environment. The focus of the Laboratory's
research program is on methods for the prevention and control of pollution to air,
land, water, and subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public water
systems; remediation of contaminated sites and groundwater; and prevention and
control of indoor air pollution. The goal of this research effort is to catalyze
development and implementation of innovative, cost-effective environmental
technologies; develop scientific and engineering information needed by EPA to
support regulatory and policy decisions; and provide technical support and infor-
mation transfer to ensure effective implementation of environmental regulations
and strategies.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-
term research plan. It is published and made available by EPA's Office of Re-
search and Development to assist the user community and to link researchers
with their clients.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
iii
-------
Abstract
This report presents a compilation of quality assured data on gas content and coalbed reservoir
properties for eleven major coal bearing regions in the United States. The primary source of
these data is the U.S. Bureau of Mines (BOM) gas content measurements program conducted
during the 1970's and 1980's. In order to enhance the utility of the BOM data, an evaluation was
conducted to compile and quality assure the original data, and to make adjustments to the data
as needed to improve quality and representativeness. This document was compiled to provide
access to these improved data at the basin level. Under this effort, the original raw data records
for the core samples were provided by the BOM. The raw data were digitized to allow a
computer to accurately and consistently perform routine quality assurance checks, consistently
determine lost gas and total gas contents for each sample, and examine various corrections to
the data. In addition, desorption constants for each coal sample were determined from time
series desorption curves generated from the original data. Additional data presented include
the results of equilibrium adsorption isotherm tests performed by the Department of Energy
(DOE) in 1983 for approximately 100 of the BOM coal samples. These results give important,
basin level information on the capacity of various coalbeds to store and release methane. In
order to provide context and background, this report also characterizes the geology and coal and
coalbed methane resources in each major U.S. coal basin.
iv
-------
Contents
Abstract ii
Figures iv
Tables vi
Abbreviations and Symbols viii
Unit Conversions ix
Acknowledgements x
SECTION 1. Overview and Summary 1-1
SECTION 2. Arkoma Basin 2-1
SECTION 3. Black Warrior Basin 3-1
SECTION 4. Central Appalachian Basin 4-1
SECTION 5. Illinois Basin 5-1
SECTION 6. Northern Appalachian Basin 6-1
SECTION 7. Uinta Basin 7-1
SECTION 8. Coal Basins of The Western United States 8-1
Greater Green River Basin 8-1
Piceance Basin 8-3
Powder River Basin 8-4
Raton Mesa Basin 8-6
San Juan Basin 8-7
APPENDIX A Proximate and Ultimate Analysis Data A-1
APPENDIX B Sorption Data B-1
APPENDIX C Langmuir Adsorption Isotherms C-1
v
-------
Figures
Number Page
1-1 Key data elements for RGC coal samples - example output 1-12
1-2 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for high, medium,
and low volatile bituminous coals 1-13
1-3 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for eastern basins .... 1-13
1-4 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for western basins ... 1-14
1-5 Average sorption time for U.S. coal basins 1-14
2-1 Arkoma basin and other major coal bearing regions of the United States .... 2-1
2-2 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for low-volatile
coals of the lower Hartshorne coalbed 2-3
2-3 Langmuir adsorption isotherm curves and constants for Hartshorne
coals at selected depth ranges 2-4
3-1 Black Warrior basin and other major coal bearing regions in the United States 3-1
3-2 Generalized stratigraphic column of coalbeds in the Warrior coal field 3-5
3-3 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for the
Black Warrior basin 3-6
3-4 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for high volatile coals
in the Black Warrior basin 3-6
3-5 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for high volatile coals
in Tuscaloosa county, Alabama 3-7
3-6 Langmuir adsorption isotherm curves and constants for the Mary Lee
coalbed at selected depth ranges 3-7
4-1 Central Appalachian basin and other major coal bearing regions
of the United States 4-1
4-2 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for the
Central Appalachian basin 4-4
4-3 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for low volatile
bituminous coals from the Central Appalachian basin 4-5
4-4 Langmuir adsorption isotherm curves and constants for selected
coalbeds and depths for the Central Appalachian basin 4-5
5-1 Illinois basin and other major coal bearing regions of the United States 5-1
5-2 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for high volatile
coals of two counties in Indiana 5-4
5-3 Isotherm curves for Briar Hill (5A) and Harrisburg (5) coals of the
Illinois basin 5-4
vi
-------
FIGURES (Continued)
Number Page
6-1 Northern Appalachian basin and other major coal bearing regions
of the United States 6-1
6-2 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for high volatile
coals in Washington county, Pennsylvania 6-5
6-3 Relationship between gas content and coalbed depths for the Pittsburgh,
Freeport and Waynesburg coals 6-5
6-4 Langmuir isotherm curves for selected coalbeds in the
North Appalachian basin 6-6
7-1 Uinta basin and other major coal bearing regions of the United States 7-1
7-2 Relationship between total gas content and coalbed depth for high
volatile A coals in the Uinta Basin 7-4
7-3 Adsorption isotherm curves for selected coalbeds in the Uinta basin 7-4
8-1 Coal basins of the western United States 8-1
C-1 An example of adsorption isotherm C-1
C-2 Linearization of isotherm data to determine Langmuir constants C-3
vii
-------
Tables
Number Page
1-1 Summary of origin and types of data used to develop the RGC database .... 1-15
1-2 Summary of data availability 1-16
1-3 Significance of corrections to RGC gas content data 1-16
1-4 Gas content data representation 1-17
1-5 Distribution of gas content values and sample depth 1-18
1-6 Coalbeds with gas content ranging between selected values 1-19
1-7 Coalbeds with sorption time less than 20 days 1-21
2-1 County specific coal production and distribution of available gas content data . 2-4
2-2 Gas content and related data for the Arkoma basin 2-5
2-3 County and coalbed specific gas contents of the Arkoma basin 2-6
3-1 County specific coal production and distribution of available gas content data . 3-8
3-2 Gas content and related data for the Black Warrior basin 3-9
3-3 Gas content and coalbed depth ranges for major coal groups of the
Warrior coal field 3-14
3-4 County and coalbed specific gas contents of the Black Warrior basin 3-15
3-5 Sorption times for major coal groups in the Warrior coal field 3-16
4-1 County specific coal production and distribution of available gas content data . 4-6
4-2 Gas content and related data for the Central Appalachian basin 4-8
4-3 Gas content and coalbed depth ranges for coalbeds in the Central
Appalachian basin 4-11
4-4 County and coalbed specific summary of gas content data 4-12
4-5 Sorption time for coalbeds in the Central Appalachian basin 4-13
5-1 County specific coal production and distribution of available gas content data . 5-5
5-2 Gas content and related data for the Illinois basin 5-7
5-3 Total gas content and coalbed depth ranges for coalbeds in the Illinois basin . 5-9
5-4 County and coalbed specific summary of gas content data 5-10
5-5 Sorption times for coalbeds in the Illinois basin 5-11
6-1 County specific coal production and distribution of available gas content data . 6-7
6-2 Gas content and related data for the Northern Appalachian basin 6-9
6-3 Total gas content and coalbed depth ranges for selected coalbeds
in the Northern Appalachian basin 6-20
6-4A County and coalbed specific summary of average gas content data
for Pennsylvania 6-21
viii
-------
TABLES (Continued)
Number Page
6-4B County and coalbed specific summary of average gas content data
for West Virginia 6-23
6-4C County and coalbed specific summary of average gas content data
for Ohio 6-24
7-1 County specific coal production and distribution of available gas content data . 7-5
7-2 Gas content and related data for the Uinta basin 7-6
7-3 Total gas content and coalbed depth ranges for selected coalbeds
in the Uinta basin 7-12
7-4 County and coalbed specific summary of average gas content data 7-13
8-1 Gas content and related data for western basins 8-9
A-1 Proximate analysis data by basin A-2
A-2 Ultimate analysis data by basin A-15
C-1 Isotherm data and Langmuir constants by basin C-4
ix
-------
Abbreviations And Symbols
AF Ash Free
APPCD Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
AR As Received (includes coal matter, moisture and ash content)
BOM Bureau of Mines
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
DOE Department of Energy
DM Direct Method
ft feet
ft3 cubic feet
ft3/ton gas volume per unit weight of coal at site conditions
std. ft3/ton gas volume per unit weight of coal corrected for stand, conditions (60° F & 1 atm)
MDM Modified Direct Method
MF Moisture Free
Mcf thousand cubic feet
MMcf million cubic feet
Mcfd thousand cubic feet per day
MMcfd million cubic feet per day
RGC Refined Gas Content
Tcf tera (1012) cubic feet
Coalbed
GRP Group
FM Formation
UNC Uncorrelated
(U) Upper
(M) Middle
(L) Lower
R Rider coal
Rank
APP Apparent rank as determined from coal analysis data by the method described in
ASTM standards D388
M-Ant Meta-anthracite
Ant Anthracite
Semi-Ant Semianthracite
LV Low volatile bituminous
MV Medium volatile bituminous
HV-A High volatile A bituminous
HV-B High volatile B bituminous
HV-C High volatile C bituminous
Sub-A Subbituminous A
Sub-B Subbituminous B
Sub-C Subbituminous C
Lig-A Lignite A
Lig-B Lignite B
x
-------
Unit Conversions
1 ft3 =
1 tori =
1 ft3/ton
1 ft
1 psi =
1 Btu/lb
0.02832 m3
907.1848 kg
3.1218 x 10~5 m3
0.3048 m
51.715 mm Hg
0.5557 kcal/kg
-------
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the U.S. Bureau of Mines for their support in providing the original
data and for their continued dedication to enhancing our understanding of U.S. coalbed methane
resources. Gratitude is also extended to Mr. Ron Henderson of the Gas Research Institute for
providing assistance in conducting literature searches.
xi i
-------
-------
Section 1
Overview And Summary
Introduction
This document presents a compilation of quality assured data on gas content and coalbed
reservoir properties for major coal bearing regions in the United States. The primary source of
these data is the U.S. Bureau of Mines (BOM) gas content measurements program. During the
1970's and 1980's the BOM obtained gas content data for 1511 coal core samples representing
the major coal producing regions in the U.S. The BOM published partial results (representing
583 samples) in a 1985 document (Diamond and Levine 1985) and published results for the
complete data set in 1990 (Diamond et al. 1990).
In order to enhance the utility of the BOM data, a joint evaluation was conducted by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
(APPCD) and the BOM to compile and quality assure the original data, and to make adjustments
to the data as needed to improve the quality and representativeness of the results. Under this
effort, the original raw data records for the core samples were provided by the BOM. The raw
data were digitized to allow a computer to accurately and consistently perform routine quality
assurance checks, consistently determine lost gas and total gas contents for each sample and
examine various corrections to the data. In addition, desorption constants for each coal sample
were determined from time series desorption curves generated from the original data. This
document was compiled to provide access to these improved data at the national and basin
level.
The result of this multi-tiered quality assurance and computational effort is a database
titled the Refined Gas Content (RGC) database. This database is used throughout this report
to document and examine basin level trends in gas content data and to identify changes in the
original BOM data resulting from various corrections and adjustments. Additional data presented
include the results of equilibrium adsorption isotherm tests performed by the Department of
Energy (DOE) in 1983 for approximately 100 of the BOM coal samples. These results give
important, basin level information on the capacity of various coalbeds to store and release
methane. In order to provide context and background, this report also characterizes the geology,
coal and coalbed methane resources, and utilization in each major U.S. coal basin.
The EPA's APPCD has undertaken a study to identify the most practical and cost
effective means to use coalbed methane degasification and utilization technologies to reduce
methane emissions to the atmosphere. An initial phase of this study was to characterize
methane reservoirs in minable coalbeds in active coal producing regions across the country, in
terms of the potential for coalbed methane production associated with active mining. These data
provided input to an engineering and economic analysis of coalbed methane recovery and
utilization options for the various coalbed methane reservoirs across the U.S. This report is an
outgrowth of this data compilation effort. The data and results presented in this report may also
1-1
-------
Overview And Summary
be of use in evaluating mine ventilation designs, and in examining the performance of enhanced
methane management options (e.g., pre-mine and post-mine degasification).
Section 1 of this report describes the development of the RGC database and the
significance of corrections and modifications to the published BOM gas content data. It also
presents an analysis and discussion of the gas content data in terms of representativeness and
trends in gas content, sorption time, and gas storage capacity. The remaining sections (2-8)
present the data for each of the eleven major coal basins and summarize the results of basin
level trend analyses of relationships between coal properties and gas content. These sections
summarize the geological properties within a basin, and provide county and coalbed specific gas
contents, depths, time constants, and coal production rates for major coal bearing regions in the
country. Note that Section 8 presents data on 5 of the 6 Western coal basins. Appendix A
presents complete results of proximate and ultimate analyses data for a subset of the BOM
samples for which coal analyses are available (762 samples). Appendix B presents a brief
discussion on derivation and application of sorption time constants. Appendix C discusses
Langmuir adsorption isotherm curves and presents procedures for calculating Langmuir
adsorption isotherm constants. Appendix C also includes the raw tabular data of adsorbed gas
volume versus pressure for 98 coal samples as published by the DOE.
Direct Method Determination of Gas Content
In 1972, the United States Bureau of Mines (BOM) developed the "Direct Method" (DM)
for determining the gas content of coal cores. The DM is based on measurements of the gas
volume evolved from coal cores sealed in air-tight canisters. In the DM, the total gas content
is obtained as the sum of three gas volume determinations identified as desorbed gas, residual
gas, and lost gas. The desorbed gas volume is determined from cumulative volume
measurements made over time as gas desorbs from the coal surfaces and microporous
structure. A desorption rate curve may be developed from the cumulative desorbed gas volume
versus time. This curve initially increases rapidly and eventually flattens out as gas sorbed onto
the coal reaches equilibrium with atmospheric pressure and methane concentration. The
residual gas content is defined as the gas volume that is released when the core is crushed to
a fine powder. Lost gas is defined as the gas that evolves from the core samples from the time
that the coalbed is first encountered by the drill to the time the sample is sealed in the desorption
canister.
Since the development of the DM, several shortcomings have been identified that have
raised questions about the quality of the original data.
¦ The DM assumes that all gas released is methane. Ethane and higher carbon number
compounds, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen have been identified, sometimes in significant
quantities in desorbed and residual gas. Trace amounts of carbon monoxide, and
1-2
-------
Overview And Summary
hydrogen sulfide have also been observed. In a few cases, non-methane compounds
may comprise up to 15 percent of the desorbed gas, and concentrations of non-methane
compounds of 30 to 50 percent of the residual gas have been observed (Ulery and
Hyman, 1991).
¦ The DM also assumes that no gas is re-absorbed or reacts with the coal. In fact, oxygen
introduced into the canisters during sampling readily sorbs to many coals. This
effectively cancels out a similar quantity of methane that was actually released from the
coal. This effect can be very significant when the volume not occupied by coal in the
canisters (the free space) is large relative to the desorbed volume. The BOM estimates
that in some low gas content samples that were sealed in containers with large free
space volumes, the error due to oxygen sorption could amount to 100 percent or more.
The BOM states that errors of 50 to 100 percent probably occurred frequently and errors
of 10 to 50 percent were probably common (Ulery and Hyman, 1991).
¦ The original BOM DM gas volumes are not corrected to standard conditions.
Atmospheric conditions deviating from standard at the sample collection point and at the
laboratory can create errors of up to about 20 percent in gas content determinations.
¦ The BOM DM results are not corrected for the ash and moisture content of the samples.
This creates a degree of uncertainty in comparing gas content among samples with
differing ash and moisture contents. The BOM recognized the significance of this in the
original publication of the DM data. Ash contents of about 15 percent (generally ranging
from 5 to 50 percent) and moisture contents of about 4 percent (ranging from 0.5 to 30
percent) are typical for the core samples analyzed by the BOM.
¦ Most of the original DM data were compiled manually and calculations and extrapolations
were performed by hand. This introduced some quality and consistency problems. In
particular, the lost gas derivations were conducted somewhat inconsistently by different
investigators and technicians over the years.
In response to some of these shortcomings, the BOM developed and tested a modified version
of the DM known as the "Modified Direct Method" (MDM). The MDM was presented at the 1991
Coalbed Methane Symposium in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (Ulery and Hyman, 1991). The primary
change in the MDM is that the composition of the desorbed and residual gas is determined and
used to quantify the actual volume of methane released, and to correct for the oxygen sorption
effect. This change accounts for most of the differences between DM and MDM results.
Corrections are also made for ambient atmospheric conditions during sampling and testing, and
for the ash and moisture content of the samples. The currently published BOM data are based
on the DM results only, and do not include MDM data. Regardless of the shortcomings of the
original method, the large and geographically representative data set compiled using the DM is
1-3
-------
Overview And Summary
valuable for conducting mine ventilation analyses, coal mine degasification analyses, coalbed
methane development assessments, and methane emission inventory development studies.
Development Of The RGC Database
The following data processing, screening, and calculational steps were completed to
assure the quality of the data, make necessary corrections and modifications, and develop total
gas content and sorption time information for the samples. The RGC data do not correct the gas
content for oxygen sorption and desorption of other gas species because compositional data
were not collected in the original measurements program.
(1) The data were digitized to allow automation of error checking and calculations.
(2) The data were screened for completeness of information necessary for calculation of total
gas content.
(3) Time series desorption curves were developed and additional graphical data screening
was conducted to identify outliers that might indicate errors in the original data. Possible
errors were investigated manually and corrections were made when possible.
(4) Lost gas values were calculated using a standardized, computer assisted routine to
ensure consistent results.
(5) Gas content on an ash/moisture free basis was calculated for samples where coal
analysis data were available.
(6) The effect of corrections for site barometric pressure and temperature conditions was
examined using available national weather service data for a substantial subset of the
samples.
(7) Sorption time values were derived from the desorption curves.
(8) Langmuir adsorption isotherm constants were determined from the DOE adsorption
isotherm data.
A discussion of the details and significance of key modifications to the original BOM data
is given below. Table 1-1 summarizes the data sources, raw data elements available and
parameters estimated from the data.
Data Availability and Completeness
The BOM published gas content data for 1511 coal samples. Original raw data files were
available for 1100 of these samples. However, many of the available BOM files were
incomplete. Missing data included coring time parameters required to calculate lost gas, sample
weights required to calculate gas content, and incomplete or missing pages from the records of
the desorption experiment. Due to the lack of pertinent data required to determine total gas
content, complete calculations could not be performed with confidence on 423 of the samples.
1-4
-------
Overview And Summary
That is, complete data necessary for RGC analysis were available for 677 of the original 1511
BOM samples (about 45 percent).
Results for the remaining (non RGC) samples are reported and analyzed in this document
"as published" by the BOM (Diamond, et al 1990). The BOM conducted coal analyses on about
half (762) of the original samples. Of these, 479 are among the 677 complete RGC samples.
Finally, national weather service data for the time and place of core extraction were obtained for
395 of the RGC samples. Figure 1-1 illustrates a complete RGC data set for total gas and
desorption rate determination, with corrections for ash and moisture content and for atmospheric
conditions. Table 1-2 summarizes the overall data inventory.
Initial Corrections to BOM Gas Content Data
In developing the RGC database, the original BOM data forms were digitized to allow
automation of error checking and calculations. Desorption rate curves were generated and
analyzed graphically to identify outliers that might represent data entry errors. Each of these
were investigated and corrections were made when possible. Some errors and inconsistencies
were found in the original desorbed and lost gas values. Residual gas results were determined
directly from BOM laboratory experiments, and there was no need for corrections in the RGC
data. Errors in the original desorbed gas values resulted from incorrect data entry, calculation
errors, and failure to include all of the incremental desorbed gas volumes in the cumulative
result. Errors in original lost gas values resulted mainly from imprecise application of DM
procedures used to determine lost gas values.
Since the lost gas volume cannot be quantified directly, it is inferred from an empirical
relationship between time and desorbed volume. This relationship is that, within the first hours
after a core is exposed, the desorbed volume is a linear function of the square root of time.
Thus, the lost gas volume is derived by linear extrapolation from the desorbed volume
measurements made within the first few hours back to the time that the core was exposed. In
the DM, the "lost time" is defined as the difference between the time when the sample was
sealed in the desorption canister and the time when the coalbed was encountered by the drill.
If water is used as the drilling medium, a correction is made to account for the fact that the core
is not exposed to air during the entire time after the coalbed was encountered. Some errors in
lost time calculations were found and corrected. In the original results, the linear extrapolation
was made using a line fitted manually to the first few desorption results. In addition, the number
of data points fitted varied between samples, affecting the slope of the line. In the RGC analysis,
lost time calculations were automated, and a computerized linear regression was executed on
the first ten desorbed gas volumes to determine lost gas. When the resulting lost gas value was
found to be negative (i.e., the regression curve crossed the positive y-axis), the lost gas
determination was inconclusive. For the samples exhibiting this characteristic, the lost gas value
1-5
-------
Overview And Summary
was recalculated using a seven data point linear regression fit. This procedure effectively
eliminated negative lost gas values.
The impact of the corrections and refinements that were made is most significant for the
lost gas values. On average, RGC lost gas values are about 24 percent less than the published
BOM values. RGC lost gas values are lower in each of the basins, ranging from -37 to -4
percent at the basin level. The largest differences were for the Arkoma and Raton Mesa basins
(-35 and -37 percent, respectively); however, the overall average is driven by the large number
of samples from the Northern Appalachian basin where the average difference was -22 percent.
RGC desorbed gas values range from -9 to +19 percent at the basin level, but the overall
average difference is zero. The relatively large increase evident for samples from the Greater
Green River basin (+19 percent) is notable. With the exception of samples from the Greater
Green River basin, there is little overall difference in total gas content between the published
BOM and RGC samples. Since lost gas values typically make up less than five percent of total
gas, relatively small increases in the corrected desorbed gas values tend to offset the larger
decreases in lost gas values. Overall and basin level differences are given in Table 1-3.
Ash/Moisture Free Gas Content
The BOM conducted coal analyses on a selected number of the original coal samples.
The BOM's original publication presented ash content and apparent coal rank for each sample,
and the remaining data were not published. These data are presented in full in Appendix A.
Since it is generally true that methane is not adsorbed onto non-coal material, ash and moisture
values can be used to make appropriate corrections on the total measured gas contents.
Corrections to total gas values for ash and moisture content were made for RGC samples. The
ash and moisture weight percent distribution for the RGC samples is used to determine changes
in total gas content when ash and moisture corrections are applied. Ash/moisture free gas
contents are higher than the as received gas content by +9 to +34 percent at the basin level with
an overall average of +21 percent. Basin level results for this correction are also given in Table
1-3.
Corrections for Ambient Temperature and Pressure
It has been recommended that the volume of gas measured at ambient or atmospheric
conditions in the field should be corrected for standard temperature and pressure (Kidd et at.,
1992 and Ulery and Hyman 1991). Such standardization exercises are useful to conduct
comparison studies in gas contents of coal samples extracted from different geographic regions
under varying atmospheric conditions. In the original BOM data, only the volume of gas at
ambient conditions was used to determine total gas content of coal cores. Unfortunately,
temperature and pressure at the sampling sites and during desorption analysis were not
recorded, so the corrections for standard conditions were not conducted in the original BOM publication.
1-6
-------
Overview And Summary
In order to examine the effect of ambient pressure and temperature variations on gas
content data, temperature and pressure for the BOM sampling sites and sampling dates were
obtained from National Weather Service data. For many coal samples, the core extraction time
dated back to the 1970's and the required weather data were not available; however,
temperature and pressure data for 395 of the RGC coal samples were obtained, and conversion
from actual conditions to standard conditions (defined as 60 degrees F and 1 atmosphere) was
applied to these samples. The analysis may be limited somewhat by the fact that ambient
conditions during desorption testing may not be reflected if the samples were transported away
from the site for testing. However, during the BOM sampling program, samples often remained
at or near the site during much of the desorption testing. Thus, these corrections may be
considered reasonably representative overall. The corrections to total gas content values ranged
from -3 to -21 percent at the basin level with an overall average of -6 percent. Basin level
results are presented in Table 1-3.
Determination of Sorption Time, and Lanqmuir Sorption Isotherm Constants
Desorbed gas volume versus time plots (defined as desorption curves) can be used to
determine rate constants such as sorption time. Time constants are important in defining
coalbeds which have the potential to quickly outgas the largest quantities of gas. Sorption time
is defined as the amount of time required to release 63 percent of the total gas contained in the
coal at atmospheric pressure. Sorption time has been identified as an effective measure of the
diffusion rate and is used in coalbed methane reservoir simulator modeling (Kidd et al. 1992).
Sorption rate constants are useful to both coal mining and coalbed methane recovery operations.
A more detailed discussion on the derivation and use of these values is provided in Appendix
B.
Adsorption isotherm data were generated by the United States Department of Energy
(DOE 1983) for approximately 100 coal samples collected by the BOM. These results are based
on laboratory experiments which determined the total volume of methane adsorbed into coal
matrix at constant temperature and at increasing pressures. The volume of gas adsorbed was
reported at five different pressure stages ranging between 5 to 50 atmospheres. In this report,
the DOE data were used to develop adsorption isotherms (a plot of total gas adsorbed as a
function of pressure) according to the Langmuir adsorption model. The isotherm curve relates
the gas storage capacity as a function of coalbed reservoir pressure and is used to predict gas
production potential as reservoir pressure is reduced. The Langmuir adsorption isotherm is the
most widely known model which describes such a relationship between sorbed volume and
pressure. The equation for this isotherm curve is described by two constants: Langmuir volume
and Langmuir pressure. The methodology used to determine the Langmuir constants is well
documented and is discussed in Appendix C (Paul et al. 1993).
1-7
-------
Overview And Summary
Data Summary And Trends
The BOM/RGC database was reviewed and analyzed to examine (1) representativeness
of the data in terms of U.S. coal production and (2) basin level trends in terms of gas content,
gas content relationships (e.g., with depth, coal rank), and reservoir properties (sorption time,
and gas carrying capacity).
Database Coverage and Representativeness
The BOM/RGC database provides broad geographic coverage of major coal producing
regions in the United States. Nearly 90 percent of 1992 U.S. coal production is in the eleven
major coal basins that are the focus of this report (Keystone, 1994). The BOM samples
represent coals from 81 counties in 17 states. Some of the counties represented in the original
data are no longer producing coal. In 1992, only 59 of the 81 counties represented in the
original data were still producing coal. In 1992, there were 247 counties producing coal in the
U.S. Approximately 55 percent of 1992 production is in counties represented by BOM/RGC
samples. Table 1-4 shows the number of RGC samples and percentage of total production at
the basin and county levels. Within each of the basins, gas content data for many different
coalbeds are available.
Gas Content Summary
The aggregated RGC and "as-published" BOM data were used to develop a range of
commonly encountered gas content values for each of the eleven basins. The data were
grouped into five categories: 500 to 709 ft3/ton, 300 to 499 ft3/ton, 100 to 299 ft3/ton, 50 to 99
ft3/ton and less than 50 ft3/ton. Table 1-5 presents the number of coal samples within each of
these ranges in each basin. The average sample depth is also given. Table 1-6 identifies
coalbeds associated with samples in each gas content range in each basin.
Total gas content can vary widely across a given basin and within a given coalbed
depending on depth, rank, and other factors; however, some trends are evident. Coalbeds in
theArkoma, Black Warrior, Central Appalachian, Northern Appalachian, GreaterGreen Riverand
Raton Basins can contain very high levels of gas. Within these basins, the Mary Lee coalbed
in Black Warrior, the Pocahontas No. 3 coalbed in Central Appalachian, the Williams Fork
coalbed in Greater Green River, and the Peach Mountain coalbed in Northern Appalachian basin
have coals which contain the highest gas contents; over 600 ft3/ton. The Arkoma and Black
warrior basins exhibit the most consistently high gas contents. Samples from the Central
Appalachian basin are evenly distributed across the full range of gas contents. Most Northern
Appalachian basin samples have gas contents less than 300 ft3/ton, with the majority between
100 and 300 ft3/ton. Most Illinois Basin coal samples have gas contents less than 100 ft3/ton.
Samples from the Greater Green River basin also exhibit the full range of gas contents, including
1-8
-------
Overview And Summary
some of the highest values represented; however, many samples have low gas content and are
associated with relatively shallow coal. San Juan and Raton basin samples generally contain
less than 300 ft3/ton, and are more concentrated at the lower gas content levels (less than 100
ft3/ton). Piceance basin samples cover a broad range, but with most samples containing less
than 100 ft3/ton. Powder River Basin coalbeds contain the least gas (generally less than 50
ft3/ton).
The relationship of total gas content to coalbed depth and coal rank was examined based
on the complete RGC/BOM data set. In general, gas content is thought to increase with both
depth and coal rank. Higher rank coals are associated with increased gas generation, and
deeper coalbeds are associated with increased methane adsorption (due to higher pressures)
and a higher probability of gas containment. Gas content has been observed to increase more
rapidly at lower depths, then level off with increasing depth. A logarithm curve (i.e., Gas Content
= a * In (depth) + b, where a and b are constants) provides a simple mathematical description
of this general relationship. This functional form is used to represent the relationship of gas
content with depth throughout this report.
The relationship of increasing gas content with coalbed depth and rank is evident in the
RGC/BOM data. Figure 1-2 illustrates this relationship for low, medium, and high volatile
bituminous coal samples represented in the overall data set. Gas content is seen to increase
with depth, and low volatile coals are associated with the highest gas contents, followed by
medium and high volatile coals. In addition, the logarithm model appears to provide a
reasonable description of the data. There are also clear differences at the basin level in the
relationship of gas content and depth, both in overall gas content and in the rate of increase of
gas content with depth. Figures 1-3 and 1-4 show curves of gas content versus depth for
eastern and western basins (respectively) that are examined in this report. The gas content
values represented in the figures were not corrected for ash/moisture content since these data
were not available for all of the samples.
While the increasing trend of gas content with depth and coal rank is evident in the data,
this simple relationship does not fully explain the variability observed in the RGC/BOM gas
content data. Regression (using the logarithm model) of total gas content versus depth is
generally weak (r2 < 0.5), even when the data are segregated by rank. More robust relationships
are sometimes observed locally within specific coalbeds or counties, indicating that changes in
local coal properties are important. For example, it has been found that the microporous
structure of coal is related to methane storage capacity. This is discussed in more detail below.
Local relationships of gas content with depth are examined in the sections of this report on
specific basins.
1-9
-------
Overview And Summary
Reservoir Properties
Sorption Time —
Sorption time was computed from the time series desorption curves for each RGC coal
sample, as illustrated earlier in Figure 1-1. Sorption time can vary significantly within a given
basin; however, there are clear differences in sorption time among basins. The median sorption
time across all basins is about 30 days, and this value can be used as a benchmark for
identifying regions with high, low, and average sorption times. By this measure, Northern
Appalachian and San Juan basin coals can be characterized as slow desorbers, while Powder
River and Raton Mesa coals desorb most rapidly. Coals in the remaining basins can be
considered "average" desorbers. Figure 1-5 compares average sorption time for each basin.
Within each basin, there are coalbeds containing coal thatdesorbs more rapidly. Table 1-7 lists
coalbeds in each basin with coalbed average sorption times less than 20 days.
Sorption time indicates how rapidly initial desorption from coal takes place, but does not
describe diffusion through the coal matrix. Thus, sorption time alone cannot be used as an
indicator of coalbed gas production. However, sorption time is a useful indicator of direct gas
emissions from a coal mining operation, and from post-mining coal handling operations. Mines
producing coal with high gas content and low sorption time will likely produce significant
quantities of gas as coal is continually exposed by mining operations. Run of mine coal
emerging from such mines will continue to emit significant quantities of gas to the atmosphere
during storage, handling and transport operations prior to consumption.
Gas Storage Capacity --
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) conducted a study of methane adsorption as a
function of coal petrology and chemistry (DOE 1983). DOE made detailed gas adsorption
measurements and chemical and petrological characterizations for approximately 100 BOM coal
samples. Adsorption isotherm data were evaluated relative to proximate and ultimate analysis,
maceral composition, vitrinite reflectance, porosity, coal seam identity and geographic location.
DOE found that variations in methane adsorption are closely related to the microporous structure
of the coal and that small differences in carbon content can have a significant effect on methane
adsorption. Methane adsorption first decreases with coal rank, and then increases with a
minimum at about 85 percent total carbon. DOE also found that methane adsorption is not
systematically related to coal petrology or chemistry, although moisture content is also known
to inhibit gas adsorption.
The Langmuir adsorption isotherm is a model describing the gas storage capacity of coal
as a function of pressure at a constant temperature. Generally, gas storage capacity increases
with increasing pressure; increasing rapidly at first, and then leveling off to a maximum. For this
report, Langmuir adsorption coefficients (Langmuir volume and pressure) were calculated from
the DOE results. These data are summarized in Appendix C. Appendix C also presents a
1-10
-------
Overview And Summary
description of the Langmuir isotherm model. Representative Langmuir curves are presented with
the results for each basin. In short, the Langmuir volume represents the maximum adsorptive
capacity of coal at infinite pressure. The Langmuir pressure represents the pressure at which
half of the Langmuir volume is achieved. The Langmuir coefficients, along with other parameters
such as coal permeability and porosity, are used in reservoir characterizations for the purpose
of analyzing coalbed methane production.
Langmuir volume varies considerably across the samples analyzed (ranging from 300 to
over 3000 ft3/ton), but is symmetrically distributed with an average of about 1075 ft3/ton. There
is some variability among basins; however, variability within basins is equally significant. That
is, there seems to be no clear trend for coals from one basin to have significantly more or less
adsorptive capacity than coals from another basin. Langmuir volume also seems largely
independent of coal rank and depth.
Gas content and desorption data are available for 36 of the 100 samples analyzed by
DOE. DOE did not specifically examine the relationship of gas content and sorption rate to
Langmuir adsorption. Since the Langmuir curve represents the maximum gas storage capacity
at a given pressure, the measured gas content should be less than or equal to the volume
indicated by the Langmuir curve. Based on generalized information on the hydrostatic gradient
(psi/foot) at the basin level and sample depth, it is possible to obtain a rough idea of what
fraction of the volume indicated by the Langmuir curve is represented by the measured gas
content. The gas volume predicted by the Langmuir model appears to be about a factor of 2 to
3 higher than the measured gas volume (corrected for ash/moisture content). This is based on
calculations for a limited number of samples at pressures exceeding 200 psi from the Black
Warrior, Central Appalachian, Northern Appalachian, and Raton Mesa basins, and appears to
be fairly consistent across basins. For some shallow samples from the Northern Appalachian
basin (less than about 200 psi bed pressure, or about 500 feet depth), the measured gas content
is near, and sometimes exceeds the Langmuir model prediction. This may be an artifact of the
pressure gradient being non-representative at shallow depths, or may be related to the rapid
increase of Langmuir model predictions at low pressures.
1-11
-------
US BUREAU OF MINES SAMPLE NUMBER:
1746
Date
Time
Interval
Time
Sqrt
CH4 gas
CH4 gas
Date
Time
Interval
Time
Sqrt
CH4 gas
CH4 gas
Time
Cummul.
(cummul.+lost)
Cummul.
Time
Cummul.
(cummul.+lost)
Cummul.
(min)
(min)
(sqrt(min))
(cm3)
(cm3)
(min)
(min)
(sqrt(min))
(cm3J
(cm3)
19-Jan
03:24 PM
3.39
0
05-Mar
01:00 PM
6069
64656
254.30
0.0035
0.2506
19-Jan
04:33 PM
69
69
8.97
0.0108
0.0108
11-Mar
07:18 AM
8298
72954
270.12
0.0023
0.2529
19-Jan
04:51 PM
18
87
9.92
0.0025
0.0132
15-Mar
10:04 AM
5926
78880
280.88
0.0012
0.2542
19-Jan
05:08 PM
17
104
10.75
0.0011
0.0143
19-Mar
02:31 PM
6027
84907
291.41
0.0025
0.2566
19-Jan
05:22 PM
14
118
11.38
0.0021
0.0164
24-Mar
11:19 AM
7008
91915
303.19
0.0014
0.2580
19-Jan
05:39 PM
17
135
12.10
0.0021
0.0185
31-Mar
01:46 PM
10227
102142
319.61
0.0026
0.2607
20-Jan
12:55 PM
1156
1291
36.09
0.0454
0.0639
05-Apr
09:43 AM
6957
109099
330.32
0.0000
0.2607
21-Jan
03:25 PM
1590
2881
53.78
0.0289
0.0928
07-Apr
02:39 PM
3176
112275
335.09
0.0005
0.2612
22-Jan
05:15 PM
1550
4431
66.65
0.0281
0.1209
09-Apr
02:42 PM
2883
115158
339.37
0.0014
0.2626
25-Jan
03:00 PM
4185
8616
92.88
0.0339
0.1548
12-Apr
03:44 PM
4382
119540
345.76
0.0000
0.2626
26-Jan
07:45 AM
1005
9621
98.15
0.0109
0.1657
19-Apr
12:51 PM
9907
129447
359.80
0.0003
0.2629
27-Jan
01:25 PM
1780
11401
106.83
0.0124
0.1781
23-Apr
11:46 AM
5695
135142
367.63
0.0004
0.2632
29-Jan
02:49 PM
2964
14365
119.90
0.0152
0.1933
17-May
01:54 PM
34688
169830
412.12
0.0016
0.2648
01-Feb
07:19 AM
3870
18235
135.08
0.0116
0.2049
21-May
01:42 PM
5748
175578
419.03
0.0014
0.2662
03-Feb
02:02 PM
3283
21518
146.73
0.0106
0.2155
24-May
09:51 AM
4089
179667
423.89
0.0000
0.2662
04-Feb
02:07 PM
1445
22963
151.57
0.0042
0.2197
04-Jun
01:27 PM
16056
195723
442.42
0.0005
0.2668
05-Feb
09:03 AM
1136
24099
155.28
0.0019
0.2217
16-Jun
03:13 PM
17386
213109
461.65
0.0011
0.2678
09-Feb
08:35 AM
5732
29831
172.75
0.0074
0.2291
21-Jun
10:06 AM
6893
220002
469.06
0.0000
0.2678
17-Feb
04:11 PM
11976
41807
204.50
0.0064
0.2355
23-Jun
02:00 PM
3114
223116
472.36
0.0004
0.2682
19-Feb
11:12 AM
2581
44388
210.71
0.0051
0.2406
25-Jun
01:44 PM
2864
225980
475.39
0.0002
0.2684
23-Feb
03:27 PM
6015
50403
224.53
0.0042
0.2448
28-Jun
08:48 AM
4024
230004
479.60
0.0000
0.2684
25-Feb
07:54 AM
2427
52830
229.87
0.0005
0.2453
02-Jul
10:34 AM
5866
235870
485.68
0.0002
0.2685
26-Feb
11:48 AM
1674
54504
233.49
0.0005
0.2459
07-Jul
11:07 AM
7233
243103
493.07
0.0000
0.2685
01-Mar
07:51 AM
4083
58587
242.07
0.0012
0.2471
CO
S
0
E
o
>
"O
0)
_Q
o
(/)
<1)
Q
X5K X X xrax
0.3
0.25
37*
o.2 7:*
0.15 ! /
0.1 /
0.05 /
0 / - -
-0.05 --
0 100 200 300 400 500
sqrt(cummul.+lost) (minA1/2)
x desorption curve „ regression for lost gas
600
Sample weight =
Coalbed encountered =
Core started out of hole =
Core reached surface =
Core in canister =
Lost time =
Total desorbed gas =
Lost gas =
Residual gas =
RGC total gas content =
Original BOM total gas content =
As received ash content =
As received moisture content =
RGC total gas content corr. for ash and moisture =
Ambient temperature =
Ambient pressure =
RGC total gas content corr. for standard atm. condition
Sorption time =
Sorption rate =
I.51 lb
02:50 PM
03:10 PM
03:15 PM
03:24 PM
II.5 min
353 ft3/ton
5 ft3/ton
22 ft3/ton
380 ft3/ton
385 ft3/ton
30 wt%
1.1 wt%
552 ft3/ton
43 F
756 mm Hg
567 ft3/ton
7.86 days
48.35 ft3/ton/day
Figure 1-1. Key Data Elements for RGC Coal Samples - Example Output
-------
Overview And Summary
Coalbed Depth (ft)
Figure 1-2. Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth for
high, medium, and low volatile bituminous coals.
600
500
400
300
o
O
CD
ra 200
o
1 00
Central A pp.
-
V
Arkoma
-
.—Warrior
^
Northern
A pp.
//
Illinois
/. / Note: dotted lines represent &drapol£ed c/afa
/¦•'/, I , I , I
1,000
2,000
Coalbed Depth (ft)
3,000
4,000
Figure 1-3. Relationship between gas content and coalbed depth
for eastern basins.
1-13
-------
Overview And Summary
Coal bed Depth (ft)
Figure 1-4. Relationship of gas content with coalbed depth
for western basins
100
80
60
g 40
CL
20
7.1
WM
su
3JL
m
21A
m
WA
n
m.
74_
c#
{#-
Figure 1-5. Average sorption time for U.S. coal basins.
1-14
-------
Overview And Summary
TABLE 1-1. SUMMARY OF ORIGIN AND TYPES OF DATA USED TO
DEVELOP THE RGC DATA BASE
SOURCE
RAW DATA BASE ELEMENTS
PARAMETERS ESTIMATED
Raw BOM data
Site Identification
BOM sample identification no.
State
County
Coalbed/Formation
Depth
• Geographic/Stratigraphic
sorting of data
Raw BOM data
BOM 1990
Gas Content Determination
Sample weight
Time coalbed encountered
Time core started out of hole
Time core reached surface
Time core in canister
Table of desorbed gas volume vs. time
Residual gas content
• Lost time1
¦ Lost gas
• Desorbed gas
• Desorption curve
• Total gas content
• Sorption time, rate
• Basin level regression
equation for total gas and
depth
Raw BOM data
Ash and Moisture Correction
Proximate Analysis:
Moisture content (AR)
Volatile matter (AR, MF, AF/MF)
Fixed carbon (AR, MF, AF/MF)
Ash content (AR, MF)
Coal rank
Ultimate Analysis:
H2 (AR, MF, AF/MF) C (AR, MF, AF/MF)
N2 (AR, MF, AF/MF) S (AR, MF, AF/MF)
02 (AR, MF, AF/MF) Ash (AR, MF)
Heating value (AR, MF, MF/AF)
Total gas content (corrected
for ash and moisture
content)
Raw BOM data
National
Weather Service
Standard Temperature and Pressure
Correction
BOM sample location
BOM sample elevation
Date and time of core extraction
Location of nearest weather station
Elevation of nearest weather station
Ambient temperature and pressure
corresponding to core extraction time
Total gas content (corrected
for standard atmospheric
conditions)
DOE 1983
Lanqmuir Adsorption Isotherm Constants
BOM sample identification no. and location
Table of equilibrium adsorbed volume for
various pressure increases
Langmuir adsorption curves
Langmuir volume/pressure
constants
AR: as received AF: ash free MF: moisture free
1 Lost Time = (D-A) if air or mist is used as a drilling media or (D-C) + (C-B)/2 if water is used as a drilling media
where: A = time coalbed encountered C = time core reached surface
B = time core started out of hole D = time core sealed in canister
1-15
-------
Overview And Summary
TABLE 1-2. SUMMARY OF DATA AVAILABILITY
Description
No. Samples/Total
Percent
of Total
BOM Published Gas Content Data
1511/1511
100
Original Raw Data Files Available
1100/1511
73
Complete Raw Data Files - "RGC" Samples
677/1511
45
BOM Samples with Available Coal Analysis
762/1511
50
RGC Samples with Available Coal Analysis
479/677
71
RGC Samples with Site Temperature/Pressure
Corrections
395/677
58
TABLE 1-3. SIGNIFICANCE OF CORRECTIONS TO RGC GAS CONTENT DATA
Raw Data Corrections
Additional Corrections
Lost
Desorb
Total
Standard
Cond.
AFMF Gas
Content
Basin
No. RGC
Samples
Diff (%)a
Diff (%)
Diff (%)
Diff (%)
Diff (%)
Arkoma
12
-35
-1
-3
9
Black Warrior
91
-27
-3
-3
18
Central Appalachian
48
-12
2
0
-3
13
Greater Green River
20
-4
19
15
-12
13
Illinois
56
-42
0
-2
19
Northern
Appalachian
301
-22
0
-1
-3
22
Piceance
26
-18
3
3
-15
23
Powder River
7
-28
5
0
-12
21
Raton
33
-37
-3
-6
-21
34
San Juan
29
-24
5
-1
-15
32
Uinta
54
-19
0
-2
-13
11
Average (Weighted)
-24
0
-1
-6
21
Samples
677
677
677
395
479
Percent difference is calculated as [(RGC-BOMTotal )/BOM]*100
1-16
-------
Overview And Summary
TABLE 1-4. GAS CONTENT DATA REPRESENTATION
BASIN
No. Samples
Percentage of 1992
Production1
Total
RGC
Basin
Producing
Counties
Arkoma
27
12
0.2
0.1
Black Warrior
213
91
2.6
2.2
Central App.
110
48
28.2
14.5
Greater Green River
42
20
3.5
3.1
Illinois
90
56
13.5
4.0
Northern App.
499
299
14.7
7.3
Piceance
78
26
0.6
0.3
Powder River
56
7
20.8
19.9
Raton Mesa
52
33
0.1
0.0
San Juan
44
29
2.4
1.4
Uinta
270
54
2.1
2.1
Total
1481
677
88.7
54.9
fcoal production data from Keystone Coal Industry Manual (Keystone 1994)
1-17
-------
TABLE 1-5. DISTRIBUTION OF GAS CONTENT VALUES AND SAMPLE DEPTH
BASIN
500 - 709 ft3/ton
300 -499 ft3/ton
100 - 299 ft3/ton
50 - 99 ft3/ton
LESS THAN 50
ft3/ton
No.
Samples
(%)'
Average
Depth
(ft)
No.
Samples
(%)
Average
Depth
(ft)
No.
Samples
(%)
Average
Depth
(ft)
No.
Samples
(%)
Average
Depth
(ft)
No.
Samples
(%)
Average
Depth
(ft)
Arkoma
3(11)
1257
15 (56)*
608
8 (29)
1087
1 (4)
175
Black
Warrior
10(5)
1350
64 (30)
1762
108 (50)
1650
20 (9)
689
11 (5)
278
Central
App.
12 (11)
1934
21 (19)
1388
26 (24)
989
19 (17)
709
32 (29)
775
Illinois
6 (7)
827
43 (48)
637
41 (45)
662
Northern
App.
3 (1)
659
8(2)
737
270 (54)
690
130 (26)
540
88 (17)
464
Uinta
4(1)
2751
26 (10)
1684
35 (13)
1353
205 (76)
700
Greater
Green
River
7(17)
4003
6(14)
4085
8 (19)
6183
1 (2)
3948
20 (48)
796
Piceance
11 (14)
3739
15 (19) :
3244
19 (24)
1139
33 (43)
934
Powder
River
1 (2)
619
55 (98)
400
Raton
1 (2)
1158
6(12)
1250
13 (25)
946
12 (23)
822
20 (38)
793
San Juan
5(11)
2823
11 (25)
1603
8 (18)
1043
20 (46)
1116
percentage of total number of samples given in parenthesis
Shaded boxes indicate representative range of gas content for samples from each basin
-------
TABLE 1-6. COALBEDS WITH GAS CONTENT RANGING BETWEEN SELECTED VALUES
BASIN
500 - 709
ft3/ton
300 - 499
ft3/ton
100 - 299
ft3/ton
50 - 99
ft3/ton
less than 50 ft3/ton
Arkoma
Hartshorne
Hartshorne
Booch, Hartshorne
Hartshorne (L)
Black Warrior
Mary Lee (L),
New Castle
American, Black
Creek, Blue
Creek, Cobb,
Gillespie,
Jefferson, Lick
Creek, Mary Lee,
New Castle, Pratt
Alabama (UNC),
American, Black Creek,
Blue Creek, Brookwood,
Carter, Cobb, Curry,
Gillespie, Guide, Gwin,
Hilldale, Jefferson, Lick
Creek, Mary Lee, New
Castle, Pratt, Ream,
Thompson Mill, Utley
Brookwood, Cobb (U),
Curry, Guide, Hilldale,
Mary Lee (U), Pratt,
Utley (Grp)
Alabama (UNC), Mary Lee (U),
Utley Grp
Central App.
Pocahontas No.
3
Beckley, Gulf,
Pocahontas No. 3
Alma, Beckley, Cedar
Grove, Jawbone,
Kentucky (UNC),
Pocahontas No. 3, Pond
Creek, Price FM, Swell
Alma, Bingham, Cedar
Grove (L), Elkhorn No.
3 (U), Hagy, Kentucky
(UNC), Pond Creek,
Price FM, Sewanee
Alma, Amburgy, Beckley, Cedar
Grove (L), Coalburg, Pond Creek,
Sewanee
Illinois
Seelyville, Harrisburg,
Herrin, Survant
Danville (VII),
Harrisburg (5), Herrin
(6), Houchin CK (IVA),
Indiana (VA), Seelyville
(III, L, U), Springfield
(V), Survant (IV)
Briar Hill (5A), Carbondale (9),
Danville (7, VII), Fire Creek,
Harrisburg (5), Herrin (6), Hymera
(VI), Lisman FM (13), Seelyville
(III, L, U), Springfield (V)
Northern
Appal.
Peach Mountain,
Tunnel
Tunnel, Seven Ft.
Leader,
Kittanning
Bakerstown, Brookville,
Brush Creek, Clarion,
Freeport, Harlem,
Kittanning, Mahoning,
Mercer, Pittsburgh,
Redstone, Sewickley,
Uniontown, Washington,
Waynesburg
Big Bed, Brookville,
Clarion, Fishpot,
Freeport (L, U),
Jollytown, Kittanning
(M, U), Mahoning, New
County (U), Pittsburgh
(R, R2), Swell,
Sewickley, Ten Mile,
Uniontown,
Washington (A, R),
Waynesburg (A, B, R,
L, U)
Big Bed, Clark, Fish Creek,
Freeport (U), Jollytown, Kittanning
(L, M, U), Mammoth, Mercer, New
County (L), Orchard, Pittsburgh
(R, R1), Primrose, Sewickley, Ten
Mile, Uniontown, Washington (U),
Waynesburg (B, L, U)
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 1-6. CONTINUED
BASIN
500 - 709
ft3/ton
300 - 499
ft3/ton
100 - 299
ft3/ton
50 - 99
ft3/ton
less than 50 ft3/ton
Uinta
Castlegate C,
Kenilworth,
Utah
Subseam 1
Castlegate (A, B, D),
Fish Creek, Gilson,
Kenilworth, Rock
Canyon (L), Sunnyside
(L, U), Utah (D, G),
Utah Subseam (1, 2),
Utah (UNC)
Castlegate(A,B,C,D),
Gilson, Kenilworth,
O'Connor(L.U), Rock
Canyon(U), Sunnyside
(L), Utah(A,C,C-D,D,l),
Utah, Subseam(2,3),
Utah(UNC)
Bald Knoll, Ballard (L, U), Bear
Canyon, Beckwith, Blind Canyon,
Carbonera, Castlegate (A, B, C,
D), Chesterfield, Cnristensen,
Emery, Ferron (L, U), Flat
Canyon, Gilson, Hiawatha (U), Ivie
(U), Kenilworth, McKinnon, Muddy
(No.1), O'Connor (L,U), Palisade,
Rees, Rock Canyon, Smirl,
Sunnyside, Utah (A,C,D,G,L,I-
J,J,K), Utah Subseam(2,3), Utah
(UNC)
Greater
Green
River
Williams
Fork,
Mesaverde
Mesaverde
Grp, Williams
Fork
Almond, Fox Hills,
Williams Fork
Williams Fork
Mesaverde Grp, Wadge, Williams
Fork, Wolf Creek (L, U), Almond
Piceance
Anderson,
Cameo Zone,
Mesaverde
Grp, Wheeler
Grp (U)
Anderson, Cameo
Zone, Cameo(U),
Mesaverde Grp,
Palisade Zone,
Wheeler Grp (L,M),
Williams Fork
Cameo Zone,
Mesaverde (B, C, D, E,
F, Grp), Palisade Zone
Cameo Zone, Laramie FM,
Mesaverde (A,B,C,D,E,F,Grp),
Williams Fork(J)
Powder
River
Anderson
Anderson, Canyon, Cook/Wall,
Dietz, Montana (UNC), Smith
(L,U), Tongue River MB, Wall
Raton
Vermejo
FM
Vermejo FM
Morley, Raton FM,
Vermejo FM
Boncarbo, Colorado
(UNC), Morley, Raton
FM, Vermeio FM
Delagua, Raton FM, Vermejo FM
San Juan
Fruitland FM
Fruitland
Fruitland (L, U)
Fruitland (J, L, U), Menefee FM,
Picture Cliffs |
-------
Overview And Summary
TABLE 1-7. COALBEDS WITH SORPTION TIME LESS THAN 20 DAYS
Basin
Coalbed
Arkoma
Hartshorne (L)
Black Warrior
Black Creek, Black Creek Grp, Blue Creek, Curry, Jefferson, Lick
Creek, Mary Lee (J), Mary Lee (L), Mary Lee (U), Mary Lee Grp,
Ream, Utley Grp
Central Appalachian
Beckley, Cedar Grove (L), Coalburg, Elkhorn No.3, Pocahontas No.3,
Swell
Greater Green River
Fox Hills, Mesaverde Grp, Wolf Creek (L)
Illinois
Danville (VII), Hymera (VI)
Northern
Appalachian
Brush Creek, Peach Mountain, Swell
Piceance
Cameo Zone, Palisade Zone, Wheeler Grp (M)
Powder River
Canyon, Dietz, Smith (L), Smith (U), Wall
Raton Mesa
Colorado (UNC), Morley, Raton FM, Vermejo FM
San Juan
Fruitland (J)
Uinta
Bald Knoll, Bear Canyon, Castlegate C, Castlegate D, Chesterfield,
Emery, Flat Canyon, Hiawatha, O'Connor, Palisade, Utah Subseam 1
References
Diamond, W.P. and J.R. Levine, 1985, Direct Method Determination of the Gas Content of Coal:
Procedures and Results. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, Report of
Investigations 8515.
Diamond, W.P., LaScola, J. C., and D. M. Hyman, 1990, Results of Direct-Method Determination
of the Gas Content of U.S. Coalbeds. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines,
Information Circular, 9067.
Keystone Coal Industry Manual. 1994, Mining Information Services of the Maclean Hunter Mining
and Construction Group, Chicago, Illinois.
Kidd, J., Camp, B., Lottman, L., Osborne, T., Smith, J., Saulsberry, J., Steidl P., and Paul
Stubbs, 1992, Geologic Manual for the Evaluation and Development of Coalbed Methane, Gas
Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
Paul, G.W., Cox, D.O., and B.S. Kelso, 1993, Coalbed Methane Reservoir Engineering,
Proceedings of the 1993 Coalbed Methane Symposium, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, May 17-21.
1-21
-------
Overview And Summary
Ulery, J.P. and D.M. Hyman, 1991, The Modified Direct Method of Gas Content Determination:
Applications and Results, Proceedings of the 1991 Coalbed Methane Symposium, University of
Alabama/Tuscaloosa, May 13-16, pg. 489-500.
U.S. Department of Energy, 1983, Variation in the Quantity of Methane Adsorbed by Selected
Coals as a Function of Coal Petrology and Coal Chemistry, USDOE, Morgantown Energy
Technology Center.
1-22
-------
Section 2
Arkoma Basin
Geology and Resources
The Arkoma Basin is a 13,488
square mile area located in the states
of Arkansas and Oklahoma. Total
minable coal resources have been
estimated to be 7.89 billion tons, and
total gas resources have been
estimated to range from 1.4 to 3.14
Tcf (Rightmire etal 1984, GRI 1980).
A large portion of Arkoma Basin coals
are bituminous and semi-anthracites
contained in Pennsylvanian age rocks.
An illustration of the approximate size
and location of this basin relative to
other major coal bearing regions in
the United States is presented in
Figure 2-1.
Coal has been mined in
Arkansas since 1870. Underground
coal production exceeded surface production until 1958, but more recently, large-scale surface
mines have accounted for most of the production (Keystone 1994). Coal reserves in Arkansas
are concentrated in Crawford, Franklin, Johnson, Logan, Pope, Scott and Sebastian counties.
About 20 coalbeds in Arkansas have been investigated extensively by state and federal
agencies, but according to the U.S. Geological Survey, only four of the 20 are considered to be
of economic importance: The Lower Hartshorne, Upper Hartshorne, Charleston and Paris
coalbeds. The Lower Hartshorne has been the most extensively mined and the most productive
coalbed in the basin, and has a history of large methane emissions from underground mines.
Oklahoma contains the largest coal reserve area in the Arkoma Basin. The recoverable
coal is Middle and Late Pennsylvanian in age, and is ranked from low to high volatile bituminous.
Although a total of 25 bituminous coalbeds are present and have been mined in Oklahoma, the
majority of coal production has been through underground mining in the Hartshorne, McAlester
and Croweburg coalbeds. The production from underground operations has declined in recent
years due to the lower cost and safer mining conditions offered by surface operations. In 1992,
99 percent of the total coal production was at surface mines. In addition, an estimated reserve
of over 680 million tons of Oklahoma's coal resources identified as strippable has encouraged
the growth of surface mining operations (USDOE 1991).
COAL BASINS OF THE UNITED STATES
Figure 2-1. Arkoma Basin and other Major Coal
Bearing Regions of the United States
2-1
-------
Arkoma Basin
The Hartshorne coalbed has been identified by various coalbed methane researchers as
a prime target for coalbed methane production (Friedman, 1974 and GRI, 1980). In this basin,
thick coalbeds which are located in synclines contain significant quantities of methane.
Approximately 65 percent of the coal in the basin is located in these types of synclines
(Rightmire et at. 1984). Measured gas contents as high as 570 ft3/ton are associated with coals
located in synclines, and it is estimated that a large percentage of this type of gas-in-place can
be recovered (GRI 1980).
Overview of Available Gas Content Data
In 1992, the Arkoma Basin represented 0.2% (1.78 million tons per year) of the total coal
produced in the United States (Keystone 1994). Most of this is from surface mining operations.
This level of coal production represents a sharp decline from the level of mining which occurred
in the Arkoma Basin earlier this century. Two counties in Arkansas and 10 counties in Oklahoma
are currently contributing to coal production in the basin.
Table 2-1 presents the distribution of available gas content data by county. Hartshorne
coals in LeFlore county, Oklahoma were the most frequently sampled (20 of 27 samples), the
remaining samples were taken in Pittsburg county, Oklahoma in which coal was no longer
produced in 1992. In 1991, about 13% of Oklahoma and nearly all of Arkansas' coal production
was from Hartshorne coals (Keystone 1994). Since most coal is currently surface mined, and
many BOM samples were extracted from lower horizons, the match of samples to currently
mined areas may be poor. Table 2-2 presents the available gas content data for the Arkoma
Basin. None of the Arkoma gas content data were corrected to standard conditions because
barometric pressure and temperature data for the times and locations where samples were
collected were not readily available. Ultimate and proximate analysis data for the coal samples
analyzed in this basin are presented in Appendix A.
Table 2-3 shows average gas content and depth range by county and coalbed. Gas
content in the Hartshorne coal group ranges from 80 to 537 ft3/ton at depths ranging from 175
to 1440 feet. One sample was extracted from the Booch coalbed with a total gas content of 219
ft3/ton at a depth of 3651 feet. Little work has been conducted to identify gas contents of
remaining coalbeds in the Arkoma Basin. However, a small number of wells drilled in Oklahoma
indicate that the gas content of the Booch coalbed is between 200-211 ft3/ton at a depth of 2,128
ft (GRI 1980). These gas content values are in the same range as the gas content for the single
sample available in the data base.
Gas Content Trends and Reservoir Properties
The majority of the coal samples available for this basin are ranked low to medium
volatile bituminous. Samples from the lower Hartshorne coalbed exhibit a good fit to the
2-2
-------
Arkoma Basin
logarithmic model of gas content versus depth (P= 0.87). Figure 2-2 illustrates this relationship.
Sorption time data for the 12 RGC samples represented in the data are provided in Table 2-2.
The average sorption time for these samples is about 18 days, ranging from less than 1 to about
35 days. Hartshorne coals are among the fastest desorbers represented in the data. Le Flore
county coals appear to desorb more rapidly than Pittsburg county coals from the same coalbed
(Lower Hartshorne).
A total of three Arkoma Basin samples were analyzed by DOE to determine adsorption
capacity of methane in the coal matrix (DOE 1983). These samples were extracted from the
Hartshorne coalbeds. Figure 2-3 illustrates the Langmuir adsorption isotherm curves and
Langmuir volume and pressure constants for these coalbeds.
o
O
03
e>
j2 200
o
I-
Combined RGC & BOM data
1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600
Coalbed Depth (ft)
Figure 2-2. Relationship Between Gas Content and Coalbed Depth for
Low Volatile Coals of the Lower Hartshorne Coalbed
2-3
-------
Arkoma Basin
Pressure (Psia)
Figure 2-3. Langmuir Adsorption Isotherm Curves and Constants for Hartshorne Coals
at Selected Depth Ranges
TABLE 2-1. COUNTY SPECIFIC COAL PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF
AVAILABLE GAS CONTENT DATA
State
County
1992 Coal Production
(1000 tpy)
Total No. of
Samples
No. of RGC
Samples
Surface
Underground
AR
Johnson
28
0
0
0
AR
Sebastian
18
0
0
0
OK
Craig
113
0
0
0
OK
Haskell
329
0
0
0
OK
Latimer
312
0
0
0
OK
Le Flore
531
0
20
6
OK
Muskogee
52
0
0
0
OK
Nowata
175
0
0
0
OK
Okmulgee
0
59
0
0
OK
Pittsburg
0
0
7
6
OK
Rogers
140
0
0
0
OK
Wagoner
23
0
0
0
TOTAL
1721
59
27
12
2-4
-------
TABLE 2-2. GAS CONTENT AND RELATED DATA FOR THE ARKOMA BASIN
i-o
I
cn
At Actual TemDerature and Pressure
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
fft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
fft3/tonl
fft3/ton)
fstd. ft3/ton)
Davs
1060
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE
LV
196
10
267
38
315
217
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE
823
41
433
19
493
216
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE
892
124
385
25
534
27
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
175
0
70
6
76
26
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
252
3
150
29
182
20
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
LV
318
22
229
22
273
29
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
356
13
309
22
344
21
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
488
35
299
22
356
25
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
489
32
293
22
347
22
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
516
25
328
22
375
33
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
553
51
357
10
418
28
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
556
19
306
22
347
23
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
561
22
318
22
362
24
BOM
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
571
16
338
25
379
1699
RGC
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
LV
771
10
300
22
332
393
7.9
1700
RGC
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
LV
772
9
357
22
388
425
10.7
1701
RGC
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
LV
773
14
380
13
407
426
6.6
1702
RGC
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
LV
774
11
320
13
344
388
6.1
31
RGC
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
1439
102
409
25
536
0.7
32
RGC
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
1440
95
384
29
508
0.6
1059
RGC
OK
PITTSBURG
BOOCH (U)
HV-A
3651
12
178
29
219
243
28.0
1724
RGC
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (J)
HV-A
870
6
248
29
283
298
34.9
1726
RGC
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (L)
HV-A
912
8
254
25
287
308
25.5
1727
RGC
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (L)
HV-A
913
0
134
19
153
165
47.2
1728
RGC
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (L)
HV-A
914
10
282
16
308
324
21.1
1729
BOM
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (L)
HV-A
916
13
245
29
287
1725
RGC
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (U)
HV-A
869
6
239
32
277
300
24.8
-------
Arkoma Basin
TABLE 2-3. COUNTY AND COALBED SPECIFIC GAS CONTENTS
OF THE ARKOMA BASIN
State
County
Coalbed
Sample Depth
Range (ft)
Average Total Gas
Content (ft3/ton)
OK
Le FLore
Hartshorne
196-892
448
Hartshorne (L)
175-1440
352
OK
Pittsburg
Booch (U)
3651
219
Hartshorne (J)
870
283
Hartshorne (L)
912-916
258
Hartshorne (U)
869
276
References
Friedman, S.A., 1974, Investigation of the Coal Reserves in the Ozarks of Oklahoma and their
Potential Uses: Final Report to the Ozarks Regional Commission, July 1974: Oklahoma
Geological Survey Special Publication 74-2, (5th Printing, 1981).
Gas Research Institute, 1980, Summary of Geologic Features of Selected Coal-Bearing Areas
of the United States, Final Report.
Keystone Coal Industry Manual, 1994, Mining information Services of the Maclean Hunter Mining
and Construction Group, Chicago, Illinois.
Rightmire, C.T., G.E. Eddy, and J.N. Kirr, 1984, Coalbed Methane Resources of the United
States - AAPG Studies in Geology Series #17, American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Tulsa, Oklahoma.
United States Department of Energy, 1983, Variation in the Quantity of Methane Adsorbed by
Selected Coals as a Function of Coal Petrology and Coal Chemistry, USDOE, Morgantown
Energy Technology Center.
USDOE Energy Information Administration, 1991, Demonstrated Reserve Base of Coal (in 1991)
in Coal Production 1990, DOE/EIA - 0118 (90), pg 70, Table A1.
2-6
-------
Section 3
Black Warrior Basin
Geology and Resources
The Black Warrior Basin is a
35,000 square mile area in Mississippi
and Alabama bounded by the
Appalachian Mountains on the
southeast. The basin's coal is
Pennsylvanian in age and is ranked
as high-volatile A bituminous, with
moderate amounts of low and medium
volatile coals. The basin occurs in the
Pottsville Formation and contains an
estimated 35 billion tons of coal
resources (Rightmire et al. 1984).
Most of the coal is located in 20
coalbeds forming seven groups. An
illustration of the approximate size and
location of this basin relative to other
major coal bearing regions in the
United States is presented in Figure
3-1.
For over 100 years, Alabama has been the site of coal mining, typically strip mining of
near-surface deposits. Coal mining ranks as the largest mining industry in Alabama, producing
an average of 20 million tons annually (Rightmire et al. 1984). No coal is produced in
Mississippi. In 1992, nearly 26 million tons of coal valued at more than $1 billion were mined
in Alabama (Keystone 1994). These mined deposits are located in the northern half of the state
and are divided into three coal fields: The Warrior, Cahaba and Coosa fields. Of the 23,461
million tons of surface and underground minable coal reserves found in these three fields, the
Warrior field contains 86 percent of the total reserves (Keystone 1994).
The Coosa coal field covers approximately 280 square miles in Alabama. Due to its
location in a deep syncline, there is limited knowledge of the thickness and extent of its 15
coalbeds (GRI 1980). It is known that the Pottsville Formation attains thickness up to 7,000 feet
with the upper 2,000 feet of the formation containing the majority of the coalbeds. Because of
its complex structure, the Coosa field is not mined extensively (Keystone 1994). The Cahaba
coal field encompasses about 350 square miles in Alabama (GRI 1980). In this region, the
Pottsville Formation attains thickness as high as 9,000 feet and includes approximately 60
coalbeds. Individual coalbed thicknesses up to five feet have been encountered in this field
3-1
COAL BASINS OF THE UNITED STATES
Figure 3-1. Black Warrior Basin and other Major Coal
Bearing Regions in the United States
-------
Black Warrior Basin
(Keystone 1994), but although this field contains many coalbeds, commercial development has
not been as extensive here as in the Warrior coal field.
The Warrior coal field is the largest field in both size and production, encompassing an
area of 3,500 square miles. Figure 3-2 illustrates a generalized columnar section of the
coalbeds located in the field's major coal groups (Keystone 1994). Since this coal field contains
the largest coal reserves, and represents the basin's highest coalbed methane gas reserves, a
significant quantity of coal production and gas recovery occurs in the counties encompassed in
this region. This large interest has made the Warrior coal field the most extensively researched
region in the basin, and substantial data are available for identifying the coal properties, geologic
characteristics and in-situ methane gas content of its coalbeds. It contains over 20 different
coalbeds in seven major coal groups (GRI 1986).
The Black Warrior Basin presents an opportunity to recover and utilize methane gas
contained in coalbeds. Based on known coal reserves of 35 billion tons, it is estimated that the
basin contains a maximum of 10 trillion cubic feet of high-quality methane, 5 trillion cubic feet
of which could potentially be extracted (GRI 1980). Since 86 percent of the basin's coal reserves
are contained in the Warrior coal field, this region accounts for much of the basin's gas reserves
(GRI 1986). Due to the large quantities of gas contained in relatively thick coalbeds, many
mines in the Black Warrior Basin are required to implement active methane degasification
programs to maintain safe working conditions and constant coal production. The use of gob area
and pre-mining degasification techniques have successfully provided saferworking environments
with very little loss in mine productivity. In fact, the large volume of gas recovered has enabled
several coal mines to profitably use the recovered gas (Mills and Stevenson 1991). In addition
to employing methane degasification techniques at underground coal mines, the Warrior coal
field has been the site of many exploratory methane activities. It is anticipated that coalbed
methane recovery projects will eventually progress into the other regions of the basins such as
the Coosa and Cahaba coal fields.
Since 1980, approximately 3,800 gas production wells have been drilled by 24 different
operators into coal seams of the Black Warrior Basin. Most of these wells were drilled in 1989-
1990 to qualify for the special nonconventional fuel tax credit mandated by the U.S. Congress
(GRI 1992). As of October 1991, a total of 2,714 wells were drilled and operating in full
production. Although many of the wells were not yet dewatered, daily production of 221 million
cubic feet and cumulative production of 184 billion cubic feet had been achieved as of
November 1, 1991. After all the wells are fully dewatered, peak production has been projected
to be about 525 million cubic feet per day (Hobbs and Winkler 1990). Due to the relative ease
of recovery and abundance of gas resources contained in its coalbeds, the Black Warrior Basin
will continue to remain one of the nation's leading regions of unconventional gas recovery
activities.
3-2
-------
Black Warrior Basin
Overview of Available Gas Content Data
In 1992, the Black Warrior Basin represented 3% (25.72 million tons per year) of the total
coal produced in the United States (Keystone 1994). During this year, surface mining accounted
for 37 percent and underground mining accounted for 63 percent of the total production in the
basin. Three counties in Alabama produced about 85 percent of the surface and underground
coal extracted: Tuscaloosa County, Walker County, and Jefferson County. These counties are
also the sites for the majority of coalbed methane recovery activities in the basin.
Table 3-1 presents the distribution of available gas content data by county. About 95
percent of the coal samples extracted by the BOM were taken from Jefferson and Tuscaloosa
counties. Production in these counties made up about 55 percent of the 1992 coal production
for the Black Warrior Basin. Thus, the coverage of the gas content data base is fairly
representative of the key mined areas in this basin. In addition, a large portion of current
coalbed methane exploratory activities are occurring in these two counties and the available gas
content data also represent methane recovery activities in this area. Only four of the 213
samples for the Black Warrior Basin are available for Walker County, and no samples are
available for Fayette County. These two counties represented 29 percent and 8 percent of the
1992 coal production, respectively. Table 3-2 presents the available gas content data for the
Black Warrior Basin.
Coalbeds found in the Pottsville Formation of the Warrior coal field are categorized into
seven major groups: Brookwood, Utley, Gwin, Cobb, Pratt, Mary Lee, and Black Creek. About
90 percent of the BOM coal samples were collected from coalbeds located in these groups.
Table 3-3 summarizes gas content for these coal groups. Samples from the Mary Lee group
have the largest average quantity of gas content, followed by the Black Creek, Pratt, and Cobb
groups. Due to high gas contents and closely spaced seams (the total aggregated coal
thickness is about 100 feet), the Mary Lee group hosts the largest amount of coal mine
degasification and gas recovery activities in the basin. There is large variability in depth range
and gas content for each of the major coal groups. Clearly, gas content in this basin can vary
significantly from one location to another, with the greatest variation occurring in the Mary Lee
group.
In addition to identifying group specific gas content ranges, county specific data were
extracted to examine regional variations in gas contents. Table 3-4 summarizes coalbed depths,
and average total gas content for the coalbeds analyzed in Jefferson, Pickens, Tuscaloosa, and
Walker Counties. The Mary Lee coalbed in Jefferson County, the Gillespie coalbed in Pickens
County and the Blue Creek coalbed in Tuscaloosa County contain the highest gas content coals
with average values of 402, 303, and 326 ft3/ton, respectively.
3-3
-------
Black Warrior Basin
Gas Content Trends And Reservoir Properties
Samples from the Black Warrior basin exhibit the familiar trend of increasing gas content
with depth, though there is significant scatter in the data (r2 = 0.23). Figure 3-3 illustrates the
overall relationship for all available samples from the basin. The corrected RGC and the original
BOM results follow the same trend as there is little difference in total gas content between the
RGC and original results (see Section 1). All of the coal samples analyzed in this basin are
ranked low, medium, or high volatile bituminous. When the data are segregated by rank, the
relationship between gas content and depth is stronger (r2 = 0.47) for high volatile coals. This
is illustrated in Figure 3-4. A similar improvement in the fit was not observed for the low and
medium volatile coals, primarily because few data points remained for analysis. For samples
in Tuscaloosa county (where the bulk of samples were obtained), the relationship improves still
further (r2 = 0.61). This is illustrated in Figure 3-5.
For the RGC coal samples, sorption time was determined directly from desorption curves.
Sorption time can be used to identify the coalbeds which have the highest potential to quickly
outgas the largest quantities of methane. Available sorption time data for 91 samples are given
in Table 3-2. The average sorption time for the RGC samples in the Black Warrior Basin is
about 27 days, which is near the median value for sorption time across U.S. coal basins. Table
3-5 presents the average values for the seven major coal groups in the Warrior Field. Coals
from the Brookwood, Utley, Gwin and Cobb groups outgas more slowly while the coals from the
Pratt, Mary Lee and Black Creek groups outgas more quickly (by almost a factor of three).
The data published by DOE for 16 Warrior coal samples were used to develop Langmuir
isotherm pressure and volume constants. All of the 16 samples for which isotherm constants
were obtained were taken from the Mary Lee coalbed at three depth ranges: 1100, 2000, and
2357 feet. Figure 3-6 shows the average Langmuir adsorption volume and pressure constants
for the three depth ranges for the Mary Lee coalbed.
3-4
-------
Black Warrior Basin
Coalbed
Guide
Brookwood
Milldale
Upper Carter
Lower Carter
Johnson
Unnamed
Gwin
Thompson Mill
Cobb Upper
Cobb Lower
Thomas
Pratt
Nickle Plate
American
Curry
Gilespy
New Castle
Mary Lee
Blue Creek
Jagger
Ream
Lick Creek
Jefferson
Black Creek
Thickness
Brookwood Group
90-160 ft
150-300 ft
130-360 ft
120 - 190 ft
220 - 400 ft
140 - 400 ft
Utley Group
150 ft
Gwin Group
45 ft
Cobb Group
70- 200 ft
Pratt Group
60 - 290 ft
Maiy Lee Group
150- 290 ft
) - 130 ft
Black Creek Group
45 - 160 ft
Figure 3-2. Generalized Stratigraphic Column of Coalbeds in the
Warrior Coal Field (Keystone, 1994)
3-5
-------
Black Warrior Basin
Coalbed Depth ft)
Figure 3-3. Relationship Between Total Gas Content and Coalbed Depth
for the Black Warrior Basin
Coalbed Depth ft)
Figure 3-4. Relationship between total gas content and coalbed depth
for high volatile coals in the Black Warrior Basin.
3-6
-------
Black Warrior Basin
COALBED DEPTH (ft)
Figure 3-5. Relationship between total gas content and coalbed depth
for high volatile coals in Tuscaloosa county, Alabama.
Figure 3-6. Langmuir Adsorption Isotherm Curves and Constants
for Mary Lee Coalbed at Selected Depth Ranges
3-7
-------
Black Warrior Basin
TABLE 3-1. COUNTY SPECIFIC COAL PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF
AVAILABLE GAS CONTENT DATA
State
County
1992 Coal Production
(1000 tpy)
Total No. of
Samples
No. of RGC
Samples
Surface
Underground
AL
Bibb
239
0
0
0
AL
Cullman
680
0
0
0
AL
Fayette
27
2026
0
0
AL
Jackson
32
0
0
0
AL
Jefferson
1711
4870
46
17
AL
Marion
462
21
0
0
AL
Pickens
0
0
8
0
AL
Shelby
128
91
0
0
AL
Tuscaloosa
1581
5986
155
72
AL
Walker
4408
2951
4
2
AL
Winston
507
0
0
0
TOTAL
9,775
15,945
213
91
3-8
-------
TABLE 3-2. GAS CONTENT AND RELATED DATA FOR THE BLACK WARRIOR BASIN
At Actual Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/tonJ
(ft3/ton)
{std. ft3/ton)
(days)
225
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
810
13
188
0
201
226
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
1130
6
108
35
149
227
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
ALABAMA (UNC)
MV
1224
10
146
16
172
229
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
ALABAMA(UNC)
MV
1514
29
226
13
268
223
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
BLACK CREEK
HV-A
537
6
89
22
117
1058
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
BLACK CREEK GRP
MV
1429
13
306
38
357
461
12
219
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
BLUE CREEK
HV-A
297
3
99
25
127
221
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
JEFFERSON
HV-A
481
29
83
38
150
1179
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
MV
521
0
67
25
92
1180
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
MV
525
0
73
19
92
215
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
LV
1089
46
660
3
709
790
3
1053
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
1056
16
255
19
290
1054
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE GRP
MV
1067
16
293
54
363
1055
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE GRP
MV
1068
16
223
57
296
1056
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE GRP
MV
1080
57
274
19
350
1057
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE GRP
MV
1085
32
427
38
497
241
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (J)
LV
1111
35
408
3
446
527
3
254
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1053
14
498
6
518
753
41
264
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1056
127
357
3
487
246
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1073
25
446
6
477
249
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1074
25
424
3
452
245
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1076
38
462
0
500
250
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1076
22
439
10
471
263
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
1078
13
271
16
300
24
262
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
MV
1080
19
284
16
319
360
24
261
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
MV
1082
21
314
6
341
396
24
248
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
MV
1086
24
228
13
265
298
2
251
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1092
48
433
3
484
255
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
MV
1099
5
286
22
313
345
34
260
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
1099
16
226
16
258
259
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
MV
1102
19
325
13
357
256
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1103
6
337
16
359
398
23
244
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1120
22
487
10
519
243
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
MV
1123
19
488
10
517
578
9
242
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
MV
1125
27
469
10
506
554
5
239
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1126
32
464
6
502
551
11
238
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1127
26
456
3
485
528
5
240
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1130
41
452
3
496
1126
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
LV
1172
0
350
51
401
252
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (U)
LV
1047
70
271
0
341
253
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (U)
LV
1047
67
468
6
541
247
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (U)
LV
1077
32
471
0
503
49
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (U)
1086
30
180
10
220
0
51
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (U)
1099
18
382
22
422
3
218
BOM
AL
JEFFERSON
NEW CASTLE
HV-A
191
13
99
19
131
1165
RGC
AL
JEFFERSON
REAM
1264
13
90
10
113
493
2
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 3-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
Countv
Coalbed
Coal
Coaibed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
234
BOM
AL
PICKENS
AMERICAN
HV-A
1495
19
111
6
136
230
BOM
AL
PICKENS
BROOKWOOD
HV-A
683
10
67
83
160
232
BOM
AL
PICKENS
COBB
1173
13
76
3
92
235
BOM
AL
PICKENS
GILLESPIE
HV-A
1663
13
Is-
co
153
303
231
BOM
AL
PICKENS
HILLDALE
HV-A
741
6
73
92
171
237
BOM
AL
PICKENS
MARY LEE (L)
HV-A
2231
6
76
105
187
236
BOM
AL
PICKENS
MARY LEE (U)
HV-A
2185
10
92
96
198
233
BOM
AL
PICKENS
PRATT
HV-A
1428
6
80
6
92
2021
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
172
0
3
3
6
2022
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
173
3
19
0
22
1775
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
175
3
19
0
22
2023
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
200
0
22
16
38
1776
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA(UNC)
HV-A
233
0
3
3
6
1777
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
235
0
3
10
13
1778
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
246
0
6
13
19
2024
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
359
0
0
22
22
1779
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
429
0
29
86
115
2031
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
854
0
127
45
172
2032
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
921
3
153
0
156
2033
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
ALABAMA (UNC)
HV-A
946
3
143
25
171
1845
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
AMERICAN
HV-A
729
0
204
73
277
1908
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
AMERICAN
HV-A
1577
3
185
0
188
1907
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
AMERICAN
HV-A
1577
3
210
22
235
1909
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
AMERICAN
HV-A
1592
3
223
35
261
2039
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
AMERICAN
HV-A
1616
3
121
73
197
2040
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
AMERICAN
HV-A
1622
6
280
6
292
1912
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
AMERICAN
HV-A
1825
3
175
45
223
2005
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
AMERICAN
HV-A
2071
6
267
48
321
1884
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK
HV-A
1436
10
210
41
261
1883
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK
HV-A
1488
10
213
38
261
1500
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK
HV-A
2596
13
169
32
214
1501
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK
HV-A
2597
19
338
22
379
1502
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK
HV-A
2649
16
373
22
411
1503
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK
MV
2673
25
385
29
439
2054
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK
HV-A
2857
2
184
25
211
18
1928
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK
HV-A
2862
10
248
16
274
2020
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK
HV-A
3339
3
143
0
146
10
1497
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK GRP
HV-A
2508
10
159
29
198
1498
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK GRP
2510
13
137
13
163
1499
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLACK CREEK GRP
HV-A
2543
13
271
67
351
2045
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLUE CREEK
HV-A
2362
6
336
32
374
28
2046
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLUE CREEK
HV-A
2364
10
143
25
178
1922
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLUE CREEK
HV-A
2389
7
267
32
306
10
2014
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BLUE CREEK
HV-A
2819
4
424
19
447
18
2027
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BROOKWOOD
HV-A
525
0
51
3
54
2028
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BROOKWOOD
HV-A
527
0
61
16
77
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 3-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
1780
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BROOKWOOD
HV-A
605
3
96
29
128
1992
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
BROOKWOOD
HV-A
606
0
39
25
64
91
2030
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
CARTER
HV-A
584
0
109
32
141
66
1995
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
CARTER
HV-A
653
1
76
22
99
50
1842
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
COBB
HV-A
448
3
57
22
82
1478
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
COBB GRP
HV-A
969
0
63
115
178
42
1479
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
COBB GRP
HV-A
970
3
57
89
149
1904
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
COBB (L)
HV-A
1137
2
86
45
133
23
2035
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
COBB (L)
HV-A
1256
2
146
54
202
116
2000
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
COBB (L)
HV-A
1655
4
284
61
349
53
2001
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
COBB (L)
HV-A
1656
4
242
105
351
116
1783
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
COBB (U)
HV-A
1099
3
54
45
102
2034
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
COBB (U)
HV-A
1225
6
92
61
159
1999
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
COBB (U)
HV-A
1630
6
153
67
226
1846
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
CURRY
HV-A
832
16
115
35
166
1784
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
CURRY
1674
3
81
13
97
6
1785
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
CURRY
HV-A
1675
4
167
48
219
33
2007
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
CURRY
HV-A
2731
13
159
38
210
1786
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
GILLESPIE
HV-A
1826
5
178
80
263
51
2041
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
GILLESPIE
HV-A
1852
3
182
51
236
2008
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
GILLESPIE
HV-A
2275
0
232
76
308
42
2025
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
GUIDE
HV-A
493
3
38
51
92
2026
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
GUIDE
HV-A
494
0
45
70
115
1991
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
GUIDE
HV-A
561
0
33
48
81
61
1782
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
GWIN
HV-A
835
3
29
76
108
1997
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
GWIN
HV-A
1363
2
180
22
204
51
1476
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
GWIN GRP
HV-A
692
2
61
57
120
46
1477
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
GWIN GRP
HV-A
738
1
68
48
117
46
2029
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
HILLDALE
555
0
70
41
111
1993
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
HILLDALE
HV-A
620
3
41
57
101
1994
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
HILLDALE
HV-A
621
3
48
35
86
1851
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
JEFFERSON
HV-A
1488
6
312
25
343
2051
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
JEFFERSON
HV-A
2773
7
238
19
264
19
2052
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
JEFFERSON
MV
2775
54
115
0
169
2053
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
JEFFERSON
HV-A
2803
1
237
13
251
21
1926
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
JEFFERSON
HV-A
2816
8
417
6
431
4
1927
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
JEFFERSON
HV-A
2826
6
194
16
216
2017
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
JEFFERSON
HV-A
3214
3
333
0
336
9
2019
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
JEFFERSON
HV-A
3272
2
177
70
249
27
1850
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
LICK CREEK
HV-A
1414
3
226
25
254
2049
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
LICK CREEK
HV-A
2723
3
242
6
251
22
1925
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
LICK CREEK
HV-A
2766
10
406
10
426
5
2016
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
LICK CREEK
HV-A
3156
3
286
32
321
18
1874
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
1172
4
313
54
371
432
78
1886
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
1318
3
274
32
309
1885
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
1504
0
560
35
595
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 3-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Pressure and Temperature |
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
lft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
1891
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
1589
3
374
19
396
485
27
1887
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
1590
3
406
38
447
491
43
1487
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2122
6
204
22
232
1488
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2129
5
280
32
317
8
1489
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2134
6
328
45
379
8
1490
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2145
10
277
22
309
1491
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2152
7
138
25
170
209
2
1492
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
2153
10
115
22
147
1919
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2316
9
193
32
234
6
1918
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2344
13
327
25
365
6
1920
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2350
3
144
32
179
14
2043
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2352
1
197
25
223
39
1921
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2358
2
177
32
211
24
2044
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2360
4
171
13
188
22
2009
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2771
3
239
38
280
2010
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2798
6
403
35
444
13
2011
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
HV-A
2799
9
448
38
495
15
2013
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
2810
2
169
19
190
30
1484
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
2016
15
224
32
271
10
1485
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
2059
6
57
64
127
1486
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
2079
0
199
25
224
6
1914
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
2214
3
162
48
213
1787
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
2257
19
242
80
341
1789
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
2308
3
206
35
244
15
1496
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
2322
6
153
38
197
1493
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
2341
5
195
13
213
292
3
1494
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
2357
12
315
29
356
2
1495
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
HV-A
2379
6
446
41
493
1849
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE (L)
HV-A
1215
6
118
19
143
57
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE (L)
MV
2185
51
452
51
554
58
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE (L)
MV
2285
32
366
45
443
1848
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE (U)
HV-A
1208
3
239
16
258
50
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE (U)
1701
8
385
19
412
6
52
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE (U)
1704
23
424
22
469
2
53
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE (U)
1705
11
330
13
354
4
54
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE (U)
1706
11
348
13
372
4
55
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE (U)
1913
3
292
19
314
19
56
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE (U)
1935
19
476
3
498
5
1873
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NEW CASTLE
HV-A
1148
10
318
48
376
437
72
1847
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NEW CASTLE
HV-A
1169
10
318
13
341
34
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NEWCASTLE
MV
2132
36
451
61
548
629
2
1788
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NEW CASTLE
HV-A
2283
13
134
19
166
2042
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NEW CASTLE
HV-A
2297
3
140
29
172
2006
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NEW CASTLE
HV-A
2729
0
174
6
180
34
2037
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NICKEL PLATE
HV-A
1606
4
230
45
279
42
2038
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NICKEL PLATE
HV-A
1610
1
226
38
265
43
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 3-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
Cou n ty
Coal bed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/IVIF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
2004
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NICLEL PLATE
HV-A
2038
6
182
76
264
98
209
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT
1365
97
355
32
484
673
0
1905
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT
HV-A
1524
1
169
38
208
35
1906
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT
HV-A
1532
4
140
0
144
9
2036
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT
HV-A
1597
3
242
57
302
2002
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT
HV-A
2016
5
277
48
330
31
2003
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT
HV-A
2025
5
325
38
368
31
1480
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT GRP
HV-A
1316
3
70
41
114
1481
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT GRP
HV-A
1408
3
134
73
210
31
1482
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT GRP
HV-A
1480
13
102
67
182
1483
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT GRP
HV-A
1597
4
155
89
248
35
1843
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT (U)
HV-A
710
3
162
16
181
1844
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT(L)
HV-A
711
48
127
16
191
2047
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
REAM
HV-A
2551
13
191
19
223
1790
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
REAM
HV-A
2611
5
191
29
225
8
1791
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
REAM
HV-A
2617
22
140
64
226
2015
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
REAM
HV-A
3044
3
204
10
217
1902
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
THOMPSON MILL
HV-B
903
3
108
54
165
1998
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
THOMPSON MILL
HV-A
1425
35
185
76
296
1898
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
UTLEY
HV-A
389
0
45
35
80
92
1781
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
UTLEY
HV-A
395
0
38
32
70
1996
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
UTLEY
HV-A
917
1
111
64
176
104
1474
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
UTLEY GRP
HV-A
229
0
6
13
19
1475
BOM
AL
TUSCALOOSA
UTLEY GRP
HV-A
320
0
3
13
16
1900
RGC
AL
TUSCALOOSA
UTLEY GRP
HV-A
465
0
49
19
68
19
1181
BOM
AL
WALKER
MARY LEE
HV-A
520
6
29
22
57
1182
BOM
AL
WALKER
MARY LEE
HV-A
522
3
67
16
86
47
RGC
AL
WALKER
MARY LEE (U)
639
1
58
19
78
17
48
RGC
AL
WALKER
MARY LEE (U)
724
1
20
29
50
25
-------
Black Warrior Basin
TABLE 3-3. GAS CONTENT AND DEPTH RANGES FOR MAJOR COAL GROUPS
OF THE WARRIOR COAL FIELD
Major Coal
Group
Total No.
Samples3
Sample Depth
Range
(ft)
Gas Content
Range
(ft3/ton)
Average Total
Gas Content
(ft3/ton)
Brookwood
10
493 - 683
54 - 160
101
Utley
6
229 - 917
16 - 176
72
Gwin
4
692 - 1363
108 - 204
137
Cobb
13
448 - 1656
82 - 351
191
Pratt
33
710 - 2731
92 - 484
236
Mary Lee
100
191 - 3044
50 - 709
325
Black Creek
27
481 - 3339
117 - 439
276
a Samples from Alabama (UNC) and Hilldale Coalbeds are not included.
3-14
-------
Black Warrior basin
TABLE 3-4. COUNTY AND COALBED SPECIFIC GAS CONTENTS
OF THE BLACK WARRIOR BASIN
State
County
Coalbed
Sample Depth
Range (ft)
Average Total Gas Content
(ft3/ton)
AL
Jefferson
Alabama (UNC)
810 - 1514
198
Black Creek
537 - 1429
237
Blue Creek
297
127
Jefferson
481
150
Mary Lee
521 - 1172
402
New Castle
191
131
Ream
1264
113
AL
Pickens
American
1495
136
Brookwood
683
160
Cobb
1173
92
Gillespie
1663
303
Hilldale
741
171
Mary Lee
2185 - 2231
193
Pratt
1428
92
AL
Tuscaloosa
Alabama (UNC)
172 - 946
64
American
729 - 2071
249
Black Creek
1488 - 3339
276
Blue Creek
2362 - 2819
326
Brookwood
525 - 606
81
Carter
584 - 653
120
Cobb
448 - 1656
193
Curry
832 - 2731
173
Gillespie
1826 - 2275
269
Guide
493 - 561
96
Gwin
738 - 1363
137
Hilldale
555 - 621
99
Jefferson
1488 - 3272
282
Lick Creek
1414 - 3156
313
Mary Lee
1172 - 2810
217
New Castle
1148 - 2729
297
Nickel Plate
1606 - 2038
269
Pratt
710 - 2025
247
Ream
2551 - 3044
223
Thompson Mill
903 - 1425
231
Utley
229 - 917
72
AL
Walker
Mary Lee
520 - 724
68
3-15
-------
Black Warrior Basin
TABLE 3-5. SORPTION TIMES FOR MAJOR COAL GROUPS
IN THE WARRIOR COAL FIELD
Major
Coal Groups
Average
Sorption Time
(days)
No. Samples
Brookwood
91
1
Utley
72
3
Gwin
51
1
Cobb
70
5
Pratt
25
7
Mary Lee
16
43
Black Creek
13
3
References
Gas Research Institute, 1980, Summary of Geologic Features of Selected Coal-Bearing Areas
of the United States, Final Report.
Gas Research Institute, 1986, A Geologic Assessment of Natural Gas from Coal Seams in the
Warrior Basin. Alabama, September 1985 - 1986, Gas Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
Gas Research Institute, 1992, Geologic Manual for the Evaluation and Development of Coalbed
Methane, Gas Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
Hobbs, G.W. and R.O. Winkler, 1990, Economics and Financing of Coalbed Methane Ventures.
Paper presented at the Eastern Coalbed Methane Forum, The University of Alabama,
Tuscaloosa, AL.
Keystone Coal Industry Manual, 1994, Mining Information Services of the Maclean Hunter Mining
and Construction Group, Chicago, Illinois.
Mills, R.A. and J.W. Stevenson, 1991, History of Methane Drainage at Jim Walter Resources,
Inc., Presented at the 1991 Coalbed Methane Symposium, University of Alabama/Tuscaloosa,
May 13-16.
Rightmire, C.T., G.E. Eddy, and J. N. Kirr, 1984, Coalbed Methane Resources of the United
States -AAPG Studies in Geology Series #17, American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Tulsa, Oklahoma.
3-16
-------
Section 4
Central Appalachian Basin
Geology And Resources
Central Appalachian coals can
be found in a 22,850 square mile area
located in eastern Kentucky, western
Maryland, eastern Tennessee,
southwestern Virginia, and southern
West Virginia. The majority of the
basin's coal reserves occur in Virginia,
West Virginia, and Kentucky. Total
minable coal resources in the basin
have been estimated to be 37 billion
short tons (Keystone 1994) of high,
medium, and low volatile bituminous
coals. An illustration of the
approximate size and location of this
basin relative to other major coal-
bearing regions in the United States is
presented in Figure 4-1.
There are three main coal-bearing formations in the Central Appalachian Basin, from
deepest to shallowest: the Pocahontas Formation, the Lee/New River Formation, and the
Kanawha/Norton Formation. All of these formations are Pennsylvanian in age and are part of
the Pottsville Group (GRI 1980, GRI 1988). The Pocahontas No. 3 coalbed has been perceived
by both the mining and coalbed methane recovery industry as one of the most economically
important coalbeds in the basin. It has been described as the second gassiest seam in the
United States (Rightmire etal. 1984), and has been identified as a prime target area for methane
recovery activities (GRI 1991). According to the methane emissions data available from the U.S.
Department of Labor Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), nine of the top 25 coal
mines liberating more than 3 million cubic feet methane per day were operating in the
Pocahontas and Beckley coalbeds of the Central Appalachian Basin (Grau 1987). The
Pocahontas No. 3 coalbed is medium to low volatile bituminous in rank and ranges in thickness
from 1.7 to 11 feet. A large fraction of its coal production is from shaft mines in Buchanan
County (Keystone 1994).
Coal has been continuously mined in Virginia for 245 years from three widely separated
coal fields: the Richmond coal field, the Valley coal field, and the Southwest Virginia coal field.
The first coal mining in the United States was in 1748, and occurred in the Richmond coal field
in Virginia. The coal bearing areas mined in the basin have changed since these early days and
COAL BASINS OF THE UNITED STATES
Figure 4-1. Central Appalachian Basin and Other Major
Coal Bearing Regions of the United States
4-1
-------
Central Appalachian Basin
the Southwest Virginia coal field now accounts for almost all of current production in Virginia
(42.5 million short tons in 1992). Its coal ranges from high to low volatile bituminous in rank and
is Pennsylvanian in age. Interest in coalbed methane exploration and development has
increased significantly in Virginia during the past few years. In 1992, 43 vertical wells were
drilled to extract methane gas from coal, accounting for 50 percent of all the gas wells drilled
in Virginia. More than 100 permits were issued in 1992 to convert vertical ventilation holes
(initially drilled as a safety measure to vent methane gas from underground mines) into coalbed
methane production wells that capture the gas for utilization (Keystone 1994).
In the southern portion of West Virginia, a total of 117 Central Appalachian coalbeds have
been defined, and about 62 are considered minable (depths range between 200 to 1,200 feet).
Due to the relative thickness of minable seams and the quality of the coal produced, commercial
mining has been favored in this state for many decades. Approximately 37 counties contain
Central Appalachian coal fields in Eastern Kentucky. This area contains up to 5,000 feet of coal
bearing strata in 80 seams, and has estimated resources of 55 billion tons (Keystone 1994).
Eastern Kentucky has been one of the nation's leading coal-producing regions for many years,
utilizing shaft, slope, drift, contour, area, mountaintop removal, and auger mining methods.
The Gas Research Institute has estimated that the Central Appalachian Basin contains
5 trillion cubic feet of coal seam methane in place (GRI 1991). Despite the presence of these
methane resources, coalbed methane activity has largely been restricted to de-gassing of coal
seams as a safety measure prior to underground coal mining. The lack of interest in coalbed
methane development may be due to the relatively thin coalbeds found in Central Appalachian
Basin as compared to the western basins and the complex issue of gas ownership rights that
exist between gas developers and land owners (Hobbs and Winkler 1990). However, Virginia
has recently enacted legislation which provides mechanisms that allow for continuation of
coalbed methane projects when ownership is unclear or contested. In these situations,
payments of costs or proceeds from the methane are deposited into an escrow account until the
ownership is decided by the justice system. Following Virginia, West Virginia has passed similar
legislation. For the remaining states, future development of the coalbed methane resource is
dependent upon their actions. It is estimated that the proximity of the gas resources to the high
demand markets of the northeast and the existing pipeline infrastructure may favor coalbed
methane development in this basin (Hunt and Steels 1991).
Overview of Available Gas Content Data
In 1992, the Central Appalachian Basin represented about 28% (277.03 million tons per
year) of the total coal produced in the United States (Keystone 1994). Nearly two-thirds of coal
production in this basin comes from underground mining while the remaining one-third comes
from surface mining. While the Central Appalachian Basin includes more than 60 counties in five
different states, ten counties located in three states account for more than 61 percent of the total
4-2
-------
Central Appalachian Basin
coal production, (see Table 4-1). These counties are: Harlan, Knott, Martin, Perry, and Pike in
Kentucky; Buchanan and Wise in Virginia; and Boone, Logan, and Mingo in West Virginia. All
of these counties had annual coal production in 1992 greater than ten million tons.
Table 4-1 presents the distribution of available gas content data by county. Most of the
of the coal samples extracted by the BOM (79/110) were taken from four counties: Mingo and
Raleigh counties in West Virginia, and Buchanan and Montgomery counties in Virginia. These
four counties account for slightly less than 20 percent of total 1992 coal production in the Central
Appalachian Basin. There was no coal produced in Montgomery County, VA in 1992. Counties
producing more than 10 million tons (combined surface and underground) in 1992 include;
Harlan, Knott, Letcher, Martin, Perry, and Pike counties in eastern Kentucky, Buchanan, and
Wise counties in Virginia, Boone, Logan, and Mingo counties in West Virginia. Of these, Knott,
Martin, Perry and Pike counties in Kentucky, Buchanan county in Virginia, and Mingo county in
West Virginia are represented by one or more samples in the gas content data. Many mining
regions in the Central Appalachian Basin are not well represented in the data base. This is likely
the result of shifting mining patterns: i.e., the opening of mines in new areas and the closing of
mines in areas where the BOM coal samples were originally extracted. Mines operating in
counties where gas content data are not readily available may be able to utilize the data taken
from adjacent counties where coal properties are considered to be similar.
Gas content data for the Central Appalachian Basin are presented in Table 4-2. Samples
from 17 separate Central Appalachian coalbeds are represented in the data. Table 4-3 identifies
the range of coalbed depths and gas contents represented and the average gas content for each
coalbed. The gassiest coalbeds in the basin are the Beckley, Jawbone and Pocahontas No. 3
seams, with average gas contents of 309, 248, and 482 ft3/ton, respectively.
Table 4-4 summarizes the county and coalbed specific depth ranges, and average gas
contents. Coals from the Pocahontas No. 3 coalbed in Buchanan County, Virginia are the
deepest and contain the high gas content. This is followed by coals from the Beckley coalbed
in Raleigh County, West Virginia. Underground coal mines operating in these coalbeds have
historically encountered high levels of methane emissions in working areas. For example, five
of the top thirty highest methane emitting mines in 1990 were operating in the Pocahontas No.
3 coalbed, and two were operating in the Beckley coalbed. The operators mining the
Pocahontas No. 3 coalbed are currently using gob wells, boreholes, and vertical wells to degasify
underground mining areas to permit safe working conditions and maintain desired coal
production. Large volumes of pipeline quality gas is produced from these mines, and the
recovered gas is sold to nearby gas transmission lines. The success at underground coal mines
has increased coalbed methane exploratory activities in the Central Appalachian Basin.
4-3
-------
Central Appalachian Basin
Gas Content Trends And Reservoir Properties
The combined BOM and RGC gas content data were plotted against coalbed depth as
illustrated in Figure 4-2. The regression reveals the familiar trend of increasing gas content with
increasing depth; however, with considerable scatter (r2 = 0.39). An improvement in this
relationship was noted for low volatile coal bituminous rank samples (r2 = 0.66), as illustrated in
Figure 4-3. No trends were observed for medium and high volatile coals.
Sorption time was determined from the desorption curves for the 498 RGC coal samples
available for the Central Appalachian basin. Sorption times are given for each RGC sample in
Table 4-2. The average sorption time for Central Appalachian samples is about 22 days, which
represents a moderate rate of initial desorption relative to U.S. coals as a whole. However,
there is considerable variability among coalbeds, and many Central Appalachian coals desorb
more quickly than the average. In particular, coals from the Pocahontas No. 3 coalbed desorb
rapidly, and have high gas content. These results are consistent with common knowledge that
Pocahontas No. 3 coals liberate large quantities of methane gas at underground mines. Table
4-5 gives average sorption time for Central Appalachian coalbeds represented by the RGC
samples.
Eleven Central Appalachian samples were analyzed by DOE to determine adsorption
capacity of methane in the coal matrix. These samples were extracted from several coalbeds
which include the Tiller, Beckley, Jawbone, Raven, and Widow Kennedy. Figure 4-4 illustrates
the Langmuir adsorption isotherm curves and Langmuir volume and pressure constants for each
of these coalbeds.
Figure 4-2. Relationship Between Total Gas Content and Coalbed Depth
for the Central Appalachian Basin
4-4
-------
Central Appalachian Basin
Figure 4-3. Relationship Between Gas Content and Coalbed Depth for Low
Volatile Bituminous Coals from the Central Appalachian Basin
Widow Kennedy
Depth = 285 ft
VL« 965 ftA3/ton
Pl=236 Psia
Beckley
Depth = 653 ft
VL=743 ftA3 /ton
Jawbone
Depth = 441 ft
VL= 1021 ftA3/ton
PL= 440 Psia
Raven
Depth = 302 ft
VL= 827 ftA3/ton
PL= 233 Psia
tf/ V
Pl=201 Psia
jiu Tiller
Iff Depth = 800
ft
1 V. = 773 ftA3/ton
«/ Pl= 295 Psia
0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2,000 2,400 2,800 3,200 3,600 4,000 4,400 4,800
Pressure (Psia)
Figure 4-4. Langmuir Adsorption Isotherm Curves and Constants for
Selected Coalbeds and Depths for the Central Appalachian Basin
4-5
-------
Central Appalachian Basin
TABLE 4-1. COUNTY SPECIFIC COAL PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION
OF GAS CONTENT DATA
State
County
1992 Coal Production (1000
TPY)
Total No. of
Samples
No. of RGC
Samples
Surface
Underground
KY
Bell
1459
3108
0
0
KY
Breathitt
2983
0
0
0
KY
Carter
14
0
0
0
KY
Clay
564
480
3
3
KY
Elliott
12
0
0
0
KY
Floyd
3020
3588
3
1
KY
Greenup
960
0
0
0
KY
Harlan
1698
10064
0
0
KY
Jackson
84
0
0
0
KY
Johnson
158
1522
0
0
KY
Knott
4253
6403
7
0
KY
Laurel
13
0
0
0
KY
Lawrence
24
0
0
0
KY
Leslie
1738
6847
0
0
KY
Letcher
3987
4029
0
0
KY
Magoffin
985
84
0
0
KY
Martin
4836
7200
1
1
KY
Mccreary
62
0
0
0
KY
Owsley
92
35
0
0
KY
Perry
9152
4962
1
1
KY
Pike
8522
22405
2
2
KY
Whitley
763
853
0
0
KY
Wolfe
556
0
0
0
TN
Anderson
22
214
0
0
TN
Bledsoe
70
0
0
0
TN
Campbell
574
925
0
0
TN
Claiborne
183
0
0
0
TN
Fentress
30
0
0
0
TN
Marion
0
115
0
0
TN
Morgan
0
92
3
1
(Continued)
4-6
-------
Central Appalachian Basin
TABLE 4-1. CONTINUED
State
County
1992 Coal Production (1000
TPY)
Total No. of
Samples
No. of RGC
Samples
Surface
Underground
TN
Scott
0
266
0
0
TN
Sequatchie
549
362
0
0
VA
Buchanan
1334
16569
24
15
VA
Dickenson
1866
4471
4
0
VA
Lee
304
2601
0
0
VA
Montgomery
0
0
12
9
VA
Russell
364
723
0
0
VA
Scott
0
48
0
0
VA
Tazewell
0
3527
0
0
VA
Wise
4391
6669
0
0
WV
Boone
6746
17962
0
0
WV
Clay
826
373
0
0
WV
Fayette
3503
1308
0
0
WV
Gilmer
0
55
0
0
WV
Greenbrier
183
683
0
0
WV
Kanawha
3140
3586
0
0
WV
Lewis
0
45
0
0
WV
Lincoln
1671
0
0
0
WV
Logan
7745
9201
0
0
WV
Mcdowell
870
5089
0
0
WV
Mercer
146
0
0
0
WV
Mingo
9889
14978
30
8
WV
Nicholas
3682
2538
0
0
WV
Raleigh
226
7132
13
7
WV
Randolph
11
845
0
0
WV
Tucker
217
38
0
0
WV
Wayne
1390
738
0
0
WV
Webster
3041
1035
6
0
WV
Wyoming
170
8261
1
0
Total
96037
180994
110
48
4-7
-------
TABLE 4-2. GAS CONTENT AND RELATED DATA FOR THE CENTRAL APPALACHIAN BASIN
¦
oo
At Actual Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
1815
RGC
KY
CLAY
KENTUCKY (UNC)
HV-A
656
0
28
32
60
65
125.6
1816
RGC
KY
CLAY
KENTUCKY(UNC)
HV-A
741
1
58
48
107
111
126.1
1817
RGC
KY
CLAY
KENTUCKY(UNC)
HV-A
870
1
47
22
70
76
58.8
1655
RGC
KY
FLOYD
BINGHAM
HV-A
186
1
20
45
66
72
42.1
1656
BOM
KY
FLOYD
HAGY
HV-A
276
0
22
73
95
1654
BOM
KY
FLOYD
POND CREEK
HV-A
132
0
6
25
31
2108
BOM
KY
KNOTT
AMBURGY
HV-A
602
0
3
22
25
2107
BOM
KY
KNOTT
AMBURGY
HV-A
603
3
3
22
28
2106
BOM
KY
KNOTT
AMBURGY
HV-A
605
3
3
19
25
2105
BOM
KY
KNOTT
ELKHORN (U)
HV-A
794
3
29
48
80
2104
BOM
KY
KNOTT
ELKHORN (U)
HV-A
795
10
32
54
96
2103
BOM
KY
KNOTT
ELKHORN (U)
HV-A
814
0
25
35
60
2102
BOM
KY
KNOTT
ELKHORN (U)
HV-A
815
3
10
41
54
186
RGC
KY
MARTIN
POND CREEK
400
1
44
45
90
33.0
184
RGC
KY
PERRY
ELKHORN NO.3
400
9
36
16
61
7.0
185
RGC
KY
PIKE
POND CREEK
125
2
35
22
59
17.8
187
RGC
KY
PIKE
POND CREEK
500
1
26
10
37
18.2
1931
BOM
TN
MORGAN
SEWANEE
MV
821
0
25
6
31
1929
RGC
TN
MORGAN
SEWANEE
824
1
54
25
80
244
54.7
1930
BOM
TN
MORGAN
SEWANEE
MV
825
3
35
38
76
1
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1316
65
316
25
406
1.2
19
BOM
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1430
124
306
3
433
2
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1517
50
432
6
488
3.8
3
BOM
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1528
73
376
29
478
4
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1551
75
440
35
550
2.0
5
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1554
76
434
35
545
1.3
6
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1589
60
449
35
544
0.7
8
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1621
53
318
25
396
1.0
7
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1621
54
297
22
373
0.8
9
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1737
31
291
13
335
1.6
10
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1764
46
488
38
572
2.1
11
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1845
14
308
22
344
2.5
973
BOM
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
LV
1864
89
554
41
684
974
BOM
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
LV
1868
70
357
48
475
975
BOM
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
LV
1870
143
287
38
468
12
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
1999
49
451
32
532
1.2
13
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
2022
37
453
35
525
1.3
14
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
2036
55
483
35
573
1.7
16
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
2108
10
384
29
423
5.2
15
RGC
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
2143
8
308
22
338
5.3
978
BOM
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
LV
2205
105
449
38
592
979
BOM
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
LV
2206
121
347
32
500
980
BOM
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
LV
2208
172
439
32
643
981
BOM
VA
BUCHANAN
POCAHONTAS NO.3
| LV
2210
178
338
38
554
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 4-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Sou rce
State
County
Coal bed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gsis
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(fo
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
502
BOM
VA
DICKENSON
JAWBONE
MV
431
16
99
41
156
501
BOM
VA
DICKENSON
JAWBONE
MV
431
41
188
51
280
983
BOM
VA
DICKENSON
JAWBONE
MV
678
25
217
35
277
982
BOM
VA
DICKENSON
JAWBONE
MV
680
16
242
19
277
1933
RGC
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1113
3
136
41
180
70.6
1934
RGC
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1116
7
205
13
225
575
32.6
1935
RGC
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1118
11
204
25
240
732
34.7
1936
RGC
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1121
3
196
83
282
312
57.7
1937
RGC
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1139
2
40
41
83
100
78.7
1938
BOM
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1197
3
86
57
146
1939
RGC
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1199
2
310
80
392
44.4
1986
RGC
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1403
10
211
13
234
20.2
1987
RGC
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1410
34
236
13
283
12.6
1988
BOM
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1426
6
143
25
174
1989
BOM
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1477
6
57
92
155
1990
RGC
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
SEMI-ANT
1830
3
164
61
228
40.3
171
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
754
3
6
0
9
197
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
819
3
29
19
51
195
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
855
3
19
16
38
193
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
869
3
6
3
12
196
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
934
3
22
16
41
192
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
963
3
3
3
9
194
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
969
0
13
10
23
340
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
HV-A
972
0
41
54
95
333
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
HV-A
1005
3
35
76
114
170
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
HV-A
1031
3
29
6
38
332
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
HV-A
1046
3
13
76
92
188
BOM
WV
MINGO
ALMA
HV-A
1059
3
32
73
108
174
RGC
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
684
1
6
0
7
7
7
2.5
205
RGC
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
704
3
52
38
93
15.5
201
BOM
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
819
0
10
6
16
202
RGC
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
833
1
17
16
34
7.5
331
BOM
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
HV-A
842
0
3
3
6
204
RGC
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
842
2
17
16
35
5.0
200
BOM
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
851
3
3
3
9
341
BOM
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
HV-A
862
3
80
61
144
203
BOM
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
878
3
22
16
41
330
BOM
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
HV-A
913
0
13
45
58
339
RGC
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
HV-A
923
4
45
41
90
107
107
34.0
198
BOM
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
936
0
3
3
6
199
BOM
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
943
0
3
3
6
334
BOM
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
HV-A
949
0
32
86
118
175
RGC
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
HV-A
996
4
29
3
36
39
38
10.6
191
RGC
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
HV-A
1037
2
22
86
110
117
117
7.4
208
RGC
WV
MINGO
COALBURG
506
1
2
3
6
5.3
329
BOM
WV
MINGO
POND CREEK R
HV-A
1070
3
19
83
105
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 4-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
[ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(davs)
35
RGC
WV
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
558
0
9
3
12
21.1
36
BOM
wv
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
588
0
143
10
153
37
BOM
VW
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
LV
653
6
143
25
174
38
BOM
VW
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
655
16
293
57
366
45
RGC
VW
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
740
20
396
19
435
7.6
46
RGC
VW
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
830
42
344
25
411
2.2
39
RGC
VW
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
850
25
233
19
277
5.0
40
BOM
wv
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
852
54
303
25
382
43
RGC
VW
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
875
36
379
29
444
5.7
44
RGC
VW
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
990
16
358
29
403
6.9
41
BOM
VW
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
1198
25
283
3
311
42
BOM
VW
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
1200
41
303
0
344
183
RGC
VW
RALEIGH
SEWELL
680
47
228
16
291
2.9
1312
BOM
VW
WEBSTER
FIRE CREEK
705
0
35
0
35
1313
BOM
VW
WEBSTER
FIRE CREEK
706
0
25
0
29
1314
BOM
VW
WEBSTER
FIRE CREEK
707
0
13
0
13
1315
BOM
VW
WEBSTER
FIRE CREEK
708
0
16
0
16
1316
BOM
VW
WEBSTER
FIRE CREEK
709
0
19
0
19
1317
BOM
VW
WEBSTER
FIRE CREEK
711
0
6
0
10
18
BOM
VW
WYOMING
POCAHONTAS NO.3
778
10
229
41
280
-------
Central Appalachian Basin
TABLE 4-3. GAS CONTENT AND COALBED DEPTH RANGES FOR COALBEDS
IN THE CENTRAL APPALACHIAN BASIN
Coalbed
Total No.
Samples
Coalbed
Depth Range
(ft)
Total Gas
Content Range
(ft3/ton)
Average Total
Gas Content
(ft3/ton)
Alma
12
754 - 1059
10 - 115
53
Amburgy
3
602 - 605
22 - 29
26
Beckley
12
558 - 1200
12-444
310
Bingham
1
186
65
65
Cedar Grove (L)
16
684 - 1037
6 - 143
51
Coalburg
1
506
6
6
Elkhorn No. 3
1
400
61
61
Elkhorn (U)
4
794 - 815
54 - 96
73
Fire Creek
6
705-711
10-35
20
Hagy
1
276
96
96
Jawbone
4
431 - 680
156 - 280
248
Kentucky (UNC)
3
656 - 870
61 - 107
79
Pocahontas No. 3
25
778 - 2210
283 - 685
482
Pond Creek
5
125 - 1070
32 - 102
64
Price Formation
12
1113 - 1830
83 - 391
219
Sewanee
3
821 - 825
32 - 80
63
Sewell
1
680
291
291
4-11
-------
Central Appalachian Basin
TABLE 4-4. COUNTY AND COALBED SPECIFIC SUMMARY OF GAS CONTENT DATA
State
County
Coalbed
Sample
Depth
Range (ft)
Gas Content
Range
(ft3/ton)
Average Total
Gas Content
(ft3/ton)
KY
Clay
Kentucky (Unc)
656-870
61-107
79
KY
Floyd
Bingham
186
65
65
KY
Floyd
Hagy
276
96
96
KY
Floyd
Pond Creek
132
32
32
KY
Knott
Amburgy
602-605
22-29
25
KY
Knott
Elkhorn (U)
794-815
54-96
73
KY
Martin
Pond Creek
400
89
89
KY
Perry
Elkhorn No.3
400
61
61
KY
Pike
Pond Creek
125-500
37-59
48
TN
Morgan
Sewanee
821-825
32-80
63
VA
Buchanan
Pocahontas No.3
1316-2210
334-685
491
VA
Dickenson
Jawbone
431-680
156-280
248
VA
Montgomery
Price Fm
1113-1830
83-391
219
VW
Mingo
Alma
754-1059
10-115
53
VW
Mingo
Cedar Grove (L)
684-1037
6-143
51
VW
Mingo
Coalburg
506
6
6
VW
Mingo
Pond Creek R
1070
102
102
VW
Raleigh
Beckley
558-1200
12-444
310
VW
Raleigh
Sewell
680
291
291
VW
Webster
Fire Creek
705-711
10-35
20
VW
Wyoming
Pocahontas No.3
778
283
283
4-12
-------
Central Appalachian Basin
TABLE 4-5. SORPTION TIME FOR COALBEDS IN THE CENTRAL APPALACHIAN BASIN
Coalbed
Average
Sorption Time (Days)
No. Samples
Beckley
8
6
Bingham
42
1
Cedar Grove (L)
12
7
Coalburg
5
1
Elkhorn No.3
7
1
Kentucky (UNC)
103
3
Pocahontas No.3
2
15
Pond Creek
23
3
Price FM
44
9
Sewanee
55
1
Sewell
3
1
References
Gas Research Institute, 1980, Summary of Geologic Features of Selected Coal-Bearing Areas
of the United States. Final Report.
Gas Research Institute, 1988, A Geologic Assessment of Natural Gas from Coal Seams in the
Central Appalachian Basin, Gas Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
Gas Research Institute, 1991, Coalbed Methane Technology Development in the Appalachian
Basin, Gas Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
Grau, R.H., 1987, An Overview of Methane Liberations from U.S. Coal Mines in the Last 15
Years, Proceedings of the Third U.S. Mine Ventilation Symposium, Chapter 38.
Hobbs, G. W. and R. Winkler, 1990, Economics and Financing of Coalbed Methane Ventures.
Ammonite Resources, New Canaan, CT.
Hunt, A.M. and D.J. Steels, 1991, Coalbed Methane Development in the Northern and Central
Appalachian Basins - Past. Present and Future, Presented at the Coalbed Methane Symposium,
Tuscaloosa, Alabama, May 13-16, pp. 127-141.
4-13
-------
Central Appalachian Basin
Keystone Coal Industry Manual. 1994, Mining Information Services of the Maclean Hunter Mining
and Construction Group, Chicago, Illinois.
Rightmire, C.T., G.E. Eddy, and J. N. Kirr, 1984, Coalbed Methane Resources of the United
States -AAPG Studies in Geology Series #17, American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Tulsa, Oklahoma.
4-14
-------
Section 5
Illinois Basin
COAL BASINS OF THE UNITED STATES
[V^-n
Geology And Resources
The Illinois Basin is a
broad, spoon-shaped structural
depression encompassing
approximately 53,000 square
miles in Illinois, southwestern
Indiana, and western Kentucky.
Total minable coal resources
have been estimated to be
approximately 183 billion tons
and total gas resources have
been estimated to range from 5
to 21 Tcf (Rightmire et at. 1984).
When compared to gas contents
of coalbeds in other basins of
the country, the Illinois Basin
coals are considered to be less
"gassy". Although the specific
gas content of its coals is quite
low, the magnitude of the coal
resources produces large in-place gas resource estimates for the basin. Herrin and Springfield-
Harrisburg coals have been estimated to contain 2.5 to 3.4 Tcf and 2.2 to 9.9 Tcf, respectively
(GRI 1980). An illustration of the approximate size and location of this basin relative to other
major coal-bearing regions in the United States is presented in Figure 5-1.
Figure 5-1. Illinois Basin and Other Major Coal Bearing
Regions of the United States
The majority of coals located in the basin are not continuous and do not maintain
constant thickness. Most Illinois basin coals are ranked high volatile bituminous. Individual
seams range from a few inches to 15 feet in thickness over large areas. It has been reported
that Illinois has the largest total bituminous coal resources and the largest strippable bituminous
coal resources of any state in the United States. The state also has the third largest total coal
resources in the United States, and is second only to Montana in terms of demonstrated reserve
base (Keystone 1994). Approximately 11 percent of the Illinois coal resources have been
classified as strippable (coalbeds with less than 150 feet of overburden and greater than 18
inches in thickness). Two coalbeds, Herrin and Springfield (No. 5), are of major importance from
a coal production standpoint. The Herrin coalbed maintains an average thickness in excess of
eight feet and is the most extensive and uniformly thick coalbed in the basin. The Springfield
(No. 5) coalbed is the most extensively surface-mined coal in western Illinois.
5-1
-------
Illinois Basin
The coalfields of Indiana cover an area of 6,500 square miles encompassing 20 different
counties. Indiana's total coal resource has been estimated to be about 35 billion tons, of which
two billion are considered surface minable and 16 billion recoverable by underground mines.
The Springfield No. 5 coalbed in Indiana has been defined as the most extensive and uniformly
thick coal in the state (GRI 1980). It has been mined by both surface and underground mines
in more than seven counties. The western Kentucky region contains approximately 6,400 square
miles of Pennsylvanian age coal-bearing strata ranging in depths up to 4,000 feet. It has been
estimated that this region contains approximately 37 billion tons of coal. Its coal is found in 30
distinct coalbeds lying within 20 counties. (Keystone 1994). Of these, the Springfield No. 9 has
been considered the most extensive and uniformly thick coal in the region (GRI 1980).
Based on mine ventilation records available from the U.S. Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA), active coal mines operating in the Illinois Basin have encountered
methane liberation levels on the order of four to seven times greater than the gas estimated to
be present in the mined coalbeds. In 1987, about 11 percent of total methane liberated by coal
mines emitting more than 100,000 ft3/day were operating in the Illinois Basin (Grau and LaScola
1984 and Trevits et al. 1993). Although Illinois Basin coals are not considered gassy, a
significant portion of the methane emitted into a mine may come from adjacent strata (Rightmire
et al. 1984).
Overview of Available Gas Content Data
In 1992, the Illinois Basin represented 14 percent (134,606 thousand tons) of total coal
produced in the United States (Keystone 1994). Production was almost evenly split with surface
mining accounting for 44 percent and underground mining consisting of 56 percent of total
production. The Illinois Basin includes about 44 counties in three different states. The three
highest coal-producing counties were Franklin and Perry counties in Illinois and Webster county,
Kentucky with coal production of 7,658, 10,635, and 12,593 thousand tons, respectively.
Although approximately 20 individual coal seams have been mined in Illinois, most of the state's
coal production comes from eight different coalbeds with 85 to 90 percent of the total production
occurring in the Herrin and Springfield coalbeds (Keystone 1994). In 1992, approximately 94
percent of Indiana's coal production was from 65 surface coal mines, and 6 percent was from
three underground mines (Keystone 1994).
County level coal production data are presented in Table 5-1 along with a count of the
number of coal samples available. Counties where samples were obtained account for about
29 percent of the 1992 production for the basin. Vanderburg county, Indiana has the largest
number of samples (32); however, there was no production in Vanderburg county in 1992. Other
well represented counties include: Clay, Marion and Wayne county in Illinois; Posey, Sullivan,
and Warrick counties in Indiana, and Webster county in Kentucky. There was no 1992
production in Marion and Wayne county, Illinois. The largest producing counties in 1992 were
5-2
-------
Illinois Basin
Perry and Saline counties in Illinois, and Hopkins and Webster counties in Kentucky. Of these,
only Webster county, Kentucky is represented in the gas content data. Overall, current
production in the Illinois Basin is not well represented in the gas content data. The lack of
coverage is most likely due to opening of new coal mines and depletion of older coal mines since
the time when the BOM coal samples were extracted.
The available gas content data for the Illinois Basin are presented in Table 5-2. Samples
from a total of 14 different coalbeds were extracted by the BOM from the areas contained in the
Illinois Basin. Table 5-3 presents the total number of samples, sample depth, range of total gas
content, and average total gas content for each coalbed. Gas content data from six counties in
Illinois, five in Indiana and one in Kentucky are available. These data were grouped to identify
typical depth and gas content values for the major coalbeds analyzed in each of these counties.
Table 5-4 presents the county and coalbed specific depth ranges and average gas content
values.
Gas Content Trends And Reservoir Properties
The available gas content data for the Illinois basin do not clearly show the familiar
increasing trend with depth. All of the coal samples were ranked as high volatile A, B and C
bituminous. There was no improvement in the relationship between gas content and depth when
the data were segregated by rank. However, when the data were grouped for specific county
and rank, a noticeable improvement was observed. As shown in Figure 5-2, the high volatile B
coals in Posey County and high volatile A and B coals in Vanderburg County do show the trend
of increasing gas content at increasing depths. In fact, the relationship is relatively strong at this
level with r2 values of 0.66 and 0.69, respectively, for Posey and Vanderburg counties, Indiana.
A trend between gas content and depth was not observed for other counties in the Illinois Basin
due to the small number of samples available.
For the 56 RGC samples, sorption time was determined from the desorption curves. This
value can be used to identify the coalbeds which have the highest potential to quickly outgas
the largest quantity of methane. Sorption time is included in Table 5-2. The average sorption
time for samples from the Illinois basin is about 37 days which is relatively slow compared to
other basins. Sorption time appears to be relatively consistent across coalbeds, as shown in
Table 5-5. Four Illinois Basin coal samples were analyzed by DOE to determine adsorption
capacity of methane in coal matrix. These samples were extracted from the Harrisburg and Briar
Hill coalbeds. Figure 5-3 illustrates the Langmuir adsorption isotherm curves and Langmuir
volume and pressure constants for these coalbeds.
5-3
-------
Illinois Basin
Coalbed Depth ft)
Figure 5-2. Relationship Between Total Gas Content and Coalbed Depth
for High Volatile Coals of Two Counties in Indiana
PRESSURE (Psia)
Figure 5-3. Isotherm Curves for Briar Hill (5A) and Harrisburg (5)
Coals of the Illinois Basin
5-4
-------
Illinois Basin
TABLE 5-1. COUNTY SPECIFIC COAL PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF
AVAILABLE GAS CONTENT DATA
State
County
1992 Coal Production
(1000 tpy)
Total No. of
Samples
No. of RGC
Samples
Surface
Underground
IL
Christian
0
1605
0
0
IL
Clay
0
0
6
3
IL
Clinton
0
3076
0
0
IL
Edgar
16
0
0
0
IL
Franklin
0
7658
3
0
IL
Fulton
408
0
0
0
IL
Gallatin
366
3182
0
0
IL
Jackson
12
0
0
0
IL
Jefferson
0
4461
2
0
IL
Logan
0
1148
0
0
IL
Macoupin
0
4242
0
0
IL
Marion
0
0
5
4
IL
McDonough
316
0
0
0
IL
Perry
8058
2577
0
0
IL
Randolph
777
5522
0
0
IL
Saline
2227
7014
0
0
IL
Schuyler
631
0
0
0
IL
St. Clair
0
635
0
0
IL
Wabash
0
2112
0
0
IL
Washington
0
1630
0
0
IL
Wayne
0
0
7
4
IL
White
0
1888
2
0
IL
Williamson
0
216
0
0
IN
Clay
1826
0
0
0
IN
Daviess
4955
0
0
0
IN
Dubois
455
0
0
0
IN
Gibson
0
821
0
0
IN
Greene
2419
445
0
0
IN
Knox
523
259
2
2
IN
Pike
4883
0
0
0
(Continued)
5-5
-------
Illinois Basin
TABLE 5-1. CONTINUED
State
County
1992 Coal Production
(1000 tpy)
Total No. of
Samples
No. of RGC
Samples
Surface
Underground
IN
Posey
0
0
15
12
IN
Spencer
982
0
0
0
IN
Sullivan
4028
1116
5
0
IN
Vanderburg
0
0
32
27
IN
Vigo
861
0
0
0
IN
Warrick
6889
0
7
2
KY
Butler
26
0
0
0
KY
Caldwell
182
0
0
0
KY
Christian
1257
97
0
0
KY
Daviess
1446
0
0
0
KY
Henderson
2450
1169
0
0
KY
Hopkins
6240
2907
0
0
KY
Knox
562
591
0
0
KY
Mclean
199
0
0
0
KY
Muhlenberg
2108
1674
0
0
KY
Ohio
2528
353
0
0
KY
Union
296
7689
0
0
KY
Webster
1357
11236
4
2
Total
59283
75323
90
56
5-6
-------
TABLE 5-2. GAS CONTENT AND RELATED DATA FOR THE ILLINOIS BASIN
en
¦
-v|
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
849
BOM
IL
CLAY
BRIAR HILL (5A)
HV-B
78
3
13
16
32
844
RGC
IL
CLAY
DANVILLE (7)
HV-B
995
0
24
16
40
51
174.7
845
RGC
IL
CLAY
DANVILLE (7)
HV-B
997
1
28
10
39
50
55.6
850
RGC
IL
CLAY
HARRISBURG (5)
HV-B
1090
0
22
10
32
40
98.8
846
BOM
IL
CLAY
HERRIN (6)
HV-B
1036
3
16
10
29
847
BOM
IL
CLAY
HERRIN (6)
HV-B
1037
3
16
16
35
1305
BOM
IL
FRANKLIN
HERRIN (6)
990
3
64
22
89
1306
BOM
IL
FRANKLIN
HERRIN (6)
992
3
61
22
86
1307
BOM
IL
FRANKLIN
HERRIN (6)
993
3
57
19
79
152
BOM
IL
JEFFERSON
HARRISBURG (5)
793
6
19
6
31
154
BOM
IL
JEFFERSON
HERRIN (6)
733
22
35
3
60
951
RGC
IL
MARION
BRIAR HILL (5A)
HV-B
728
1
14
10
25
30
105.3
949
RGC
IL
MARION
DANVILLE (7)
HV-B
666
1
23
3
27
34
36.0
953
RGC
IL
MARION
HARRISBURG (5)
HV-B
734
0
29
0
29
35
28.8
954
RGC
IL
MARION
HARRISBURG(5)
HV-B
733
1
18
10
29
36
94.6
950
BOM
IL
MARION
HERRIN (6)
HV-B
699
0
29
6
35
151
RGC
IL
WAYNE
HARRISBURG (5)
1013
22
74
29
125
2.5
150
RGC
IL
WAYNE
HARRISBURG (5)
1069
14
47
22
83
4.7
159
BOM
IL
WAYNE
HERRIN (6)
902
6
32
6
44
153
BOM
IL
WAYNE
HERRIN (6)
972
6
57
22
85
155
RGC
IL
WAYNE
SEELYVILLE
1293
1
38
13
52
16.5
156
RGC
IL
WAYNE
SEELYVILLE
1295
5
53
19
77
25.4
851
BOM
IL
WAYNE
SEELYVILLE
HV-B
1352
6
29
13
48
864
BOM
IL
WHITE
HARRISBURG (5)
HV-B
909
6
70
16
92
865
BOM
IL
WHITE
HERRIN (6)
HV-B
782
10
102
13
125
158
RGC
IN
KNOX
DANVILLE (7)
343
3
51
29
83
16.3
157
RGC
IN
KNOX
HYMERA (VI)
364
2
35
13
50
11.5
1135
RGC
IN
POSEY
DANVILLE (7)
HV-B
469
1
32
3
36
45
18.1
1140
RGC
IN
POSEY
DANVILLE (7)
HV-C
505
0
61
6
67
84
24.5
1187
BOM
IN
POSEY
HERRIN
HV-C
564
3
76
6
85
1136
RGC
IN
POSEY
HOUCHIN CK(IVA)
HV-B
730
1
43
13
57
69
35.7
1142
RGC
IN
POSEY
HOUCHIN CK(IVA)
HV-B
774
2
56
16
74
91
36.2
1138
BOM
IN
POSEY
SEELYVILLE (III)
HV-B
881
0
10
16
26
1139
RGC
IN
POSEY
SEELYVILLE (III)
HV-B
894
2
66
13
81
96
16.1
1189
RGC
IN
POSEY
SEELYVILLE (III)
HV-B
935
2
86
16
104
122
29.1
1190
RGC
IN
POSEY
SEELYVILLE (III)
HV-B
937
2
107
29
138
163
27.8
1022
BOM
IN
POSEY
SPRINGFIELD (V)
HV-B
619
3
10
13
26
1141
RGC
IN
POSEY
SPRINGFIELD (V)
HV-B
667
1
34
10
45
56
45.7
1191
RGC
IN
POSEY
SPRINGFIELD (V)
HV-B
669
1
66
0
67
82
7.4
1192
RGC
IN
POSEY
SPRINGFIELD (V)
HV-B
669
1
64
13
78
99
17.4
1137
RGC
IN
POSEY
SURVANT (IV)
HV-B
787
2
46
16
64
79
47.5
1188
RGC
IN
POSEY
SURVANT (IV)
HV-B
830
1
87
13
101
119
35.0
1024
BOM
IN
SULLIVAN
DANVILLE (VII)
HV-B
148
0
22
6
28
1026
BOM
IN
SULLIVAN
HYMERA (VI)
HV-B
181
0
35
6
41
1023
BOM
IN
SULLIVAN
INDIANA (VA)
HV-B
240
0
57
10
67
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 5-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residua!
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
1027
BOM
IN
SULLIVAN
SEELYVILLE (III)
HV-B
432
0
70
10
80
1025
BOM
IN
SULLIVAN
SPRINGFIELD (V)
HV-B
266
0
67
10
77
1736
BOM
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
453
0
29
19
48
1737
BOM
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
454
3
25
16
44
1738
BOM
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
455
3
32
19
54
1669
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-A
471
0
29
19
48
55
79.1
1670
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-A
472
0
43
16
59
69
38.5
1671
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-A
473
1
44
3
48
56
13.2
1672
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
474
0
36
10
46
55
27.3
1680
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
581
1
63
10
74
91
22.6
1681
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
583
1
54
16
71
83
39.7
1706
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
591
1
53
3
57
65
36.9
1707
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
592
1
54
6
61
68
41.0
1708
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
595
1
50
6
57
72
40.1
1662
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
221
28
6
37
44
21.9
1733
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
443
1
54
6
61
69
50.2
1734
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
445
1
55
3
59
68
46.8
1663
BOM
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
464
3
45
6
54
1664
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
465
1
37
13
51
57
47.8
1665
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
466
0
35
13
48
55
44.9
1666
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-A
467
3
43
3
49
55
12.2
1668
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
468
0
31
38
69
77
63.1
1667
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-A
468
2
35
6
43
49
27.4
1678
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
576
2
72
3
77
92
13.2
1679
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
578
2
56
19
77
86
45.9
1703
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
579
0
52
16
68
77
56.5
1704
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
581
1
44
16
61
71
70.2
1705
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
583
1
49
3
53
61
39.4
1735
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE(U)
HV-B
447
1
52
16
69
77
66.1
1657
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
HV-A
217
1
18
0
19
24
20.0
1659
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
HV-B
218
0
23
3
26
30
28.1
1658
BOM
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
HV-A
218
3
25
3
31
1660
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
HV-A
219
0
22
6
28
33
27.5
1661
RGC
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
HV-A
220
1
33
0
34
41
14.2
1839
RGC
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
464
0
17
10
27
32
24.2
1840
BOM
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
466
3
57
13
73
1841
BOM
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (L)
HV-B
467
3
80
29
112
1835
BOM
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
452
0
54
10
64
1836
RGC
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
453
0
18
6
24
33
16.3
1837
BOM
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
455
0
54
6
60
1838
BOM
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (U)
HV-B
457
3
51
6
60
1110
BOM
KY
WEBSTER
CARBONDALE (9)
HV-A
1306
0
19
25
44
1111
BOM
KY
WEBSTER
CARBONDALE (9)
HV-A
2310
0
19
29
48
1108
RGC
KY
WEBSTER
LISMAN FM (13)
HV-A
1201
0
19
25
44
55
51.0
1109
RGC
KY
WEBSTER
LISMAN FM (13)
HV-A
1205
0
24
19
43
57
51.01
Note: Some coalbeds found in Indiana are designated with roman numerals due to regional variations in coal seam identifications.
-------
Illinois Basin
TABLE 5-3. TOTAL GAS CONTENT AND COALBED DEPTH RANGES FOR
COALBEDS IN THE ILLINOIS BASIN
Coalbed
Total No. of
Samples
Sample Depth
Range
(ft)
Total Gas
Content Range
(ft3/ton)
Average Total
Gas Content
(ft3/ton)
Briar Hill (5a)
2
78 - 728
25 - 32
29
Carbondale (9)
2
1306 - 2310
44 - 48
46
Danville (7)
7
148 - 997
19 - 83
46
Springfield-
Harrisburg (5)
17
217 - 1090
19 - 125
49
Herrin (6)
11
564 - 1037
29 - 125
68
Houchin CK (4A)
2
730 - 774
57 - 74
66
Hymera (6)
2
181 - 364
41 - 50
46
Indiana (5A)
1
240
67
67
Lisman FM (13)
2
1201 - 1205
43 - 44
44
Seelyville
3
1293 - 1352
48 - 77
59
Seelyville (3)
5
432 - 937
26 - 138
86
Seelyville (L)
15
453 - 595
27 - 112
59
Seelyville (U)
19
221 - 447
24 - 77
57
Survant (4)
2
787 - 830
64 - 101
83
5-9
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please raid Instructions on the reverse before compl
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/R-96-065
2.
PB96-185491
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Evaluation and Analysis of Gas Content and Coal
Properties of Major Coal Bearing Regions of the
United States
7.author(s> Masemore, S. Piccot, and E. Ringer (SoRl);
and W. Diamond (U. S. BOM)*
s. report oxrt
June 199o
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Southern Research Institute
6320 Quadrangle Drive, Suite 100
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-D2-0062
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final; 9/93-2/96
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME ANO ADORESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
16.supplementary notes APPCD project officer is David A. Kirchgessner, Mail Drop 63.
919/541-4021. (*) U.S. Bureau of Mines.
EPA/600/13
16. abstractrepOI.^ a compilation of quality assured data on gas content and coal-
bed reservoir properties for 11 major coal bearing regions in the U. S. The primary
source of these data is the U. S. Bureau of Mines (BOM) gas content measurements
program conducted during the 1970s and 1980s. In order to enhance the utility of the
BOM data, an evaluation was conducted to compile and quality assure the original
data, and to adjust the data as needed to improve quality and representativeness.
The report was compiled to provide access to these improved data at the basin level.
Under this effort, the original raw data records for the core samples were provided
by the BOM. The raw data were digitized to allow a computer to accurately and con-
sistently perform routine quality assurance checks, consistently determine lost gas
and total gas contents for each sample, and examine various corrections to the data.
In addition, desorption constants for each coal sample were determined from time
series desorption curves generated from the original data. Additional data presentee
include the results of equilibrium adsorption isotherm tests performed by the U. S.
Department of Energy (DOE) in 1983 for approximately 100 of the BOM coal samples.
These results give important, basin level information on the capacity of various
coalbeds to store and release methane.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. descriptors
b. 1DENTIF1ERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Gioup
Pollution Evaluation
Coal Deposits Analyzing
Coal Gas Quality Assurance
Properties
Methane
Geology
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Gas Content
13 B
08G 14 B
21D 13 H, 14D
14G
07C
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21.
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------
Illinois Basin
TABLE 5-4. COUNTY AND COALBED SPECIFIC SUMMARY OF GAS CONTENT DATA
State
County
Coalbed
Sample Depth
Range
(ft)
Average Total Gas
Content
(ft3/ton)
IL
Clay
Briar Hill (5A)
78
32
Danville (7)
995 - 997
40
Harrisburg (5)
1090
32
Herrin (6)
1036 - 1037
32
Franklin
Herrin (6)
990 - 993
85
Jefferson
Harrisburg (5)
793
31
Herrin (6)
733
60
Marion
Briar Hill (5A)
728
25
Danville (7)
666
27
Harrisburg (5)
733 - 734
29
Herrin (6)
699
35
Wayne
Harrisburg (5)
1013 - 1069
104
Herrin (6)
902 - 972
65
Seelyville
1293 - 1352
59
White
Herrin (6)
782
125
Harrisburg (5)
909
92
IN
Knox
Hymera (6)
364
50
Danville (7)
343
83
Posey
Danville (7)
469 - 505
52
Herrin (6)
564
85
Houchin CK (4A)
730 - 774
66
Seelyville (3)
881 - 937
87
Springfield (5)
619 - 669
50
Survant (4)
787 - 830
83
Sullivan
Danville (7)
148
28
Hymera (6)
181
41
Indiana (5A)
240
67
Seelyville (3)
432
80
Springfield (5)
266
77
(Continued)
5-10
-------
Illinois Basin
TABLE 5-4. CONTINUED
State
County
Coalbed
Sample Depth
Range
(ft)
Average Total Gas
Content
(ft3/ton)
IN
Vanderburg
Seelyville (L)
453 - 595
56
Seelyville (U)
221 583
58
Springfield (5)
217 - 220
28
Warrick
Seelyville (L)
464 - 467
71
Seelyville (5)
452 - 457
52
KY
Webster
Carbondale (9)
1306 - 2310
46
Lisman FM (13)
1201 - 1205
44
TABLE 5-5. SORPTION TIMES FOR COALBEDS IN THE ILLINOIS BASIN
Coalbed
Average Sorption Time
(days)
No. of Samples
Briar Hill (5A)
105
1
Danville (7)
54
6
Harrisburg (5)
46
5
Houchin CK (4A)
36
2
Hymera (6)
12
1
Lisman FM (13)
51
2
Seelyville
21
2
Seelyville (3)
24
3
Seelyvile (L)
36
10
Seelyville (U)
41
15
Springfield (5)
23
7
Survant (4)
41
2
5-11
-------
Illinois Basin
References
Gas Research Institute, 1980, Summary of Geologic Features of Selected Coal-Bearing Areas
of the United States Final Report, Chicago, IL.
Keystone Coal Industry Manual, 1994, Mining Information Services of the Maclean Hunter Mining
and Construction Group, Chicago, IL.
Rightmire, C.T., G.E. Eddy, and J.N. Kirr, 1984, Coalbed Methane Resources of the United
States - AAPG Studies in Geology Series #17, American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Tulsa, OK.
Grau, H.R. and J. LaScola, 1984, Methane Emissions from U.S. Coal Mines in 1980. United
States Bureau of Mines.
Trevits, M.A., G.L. Finfinger, and J. LaScola, 1993, Evaluation of U.S. Coal Mine Emissions.
Presented at the SME Annual Meeting, Reno, Nevada, February 15-18.
5-12
-------
Section 6
Northern Appalachian Basin
Geology And Resources
The Northern Appalachian
Basin covers approximately 30,300
square miles of area and
encompasses five states:
Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio,
Kentucky and Maryland. Most of the
basin's coal is ranked as low to high
volatile bituminous with some
anthracites present. Total minable
resources have been estimated to be
approximately 69,028 million short
tons, and total gas resources have
been estimated at 61 Tcf (Keystone,
1994 and Rightmire et al., 1984). An
illustration of the approximate size and
location of this basin relative to other
major coal bearing regions in the
United States is presented in Figure
6-1.
Coals of the Northern Appalachian Basin occur in five major groups (in ascending order):
Pottsville, Allegheny, Conemaugh, Monongalia, and Dunkard. The Pottsville Group can reach
100 to 150 feet in depth and are often irregular in thickness. Some Pottsville coal has been
mined in the region, but coalbeds in this group do not generally have adequate thickness, areal
distribution, or quality to be of economic importance (Rightmire et al. 1984). The Allegheny
Group reaches maximum depths of 200 to 300 feet in western Maryland and thins westward to
150 to 200 feet in Ohio (GRI 1980, GRI 1988). It consists primarily of sand stone and gray shale
with lesser amounts of clay, coal and limestone, and includes several high quality coals
(Keystone 1994). The Allegheny coals can reach 2 to 12 feet in thickness, are relatively
extensive, and contain the Kittanning and Freeport coalbeds. Both coalbeds are extensively
mined in the basin.
The Conemaugh and Dunkard groups reach 350 and 1200 feet in depth, respectively, and
are not mined extensively due to relatively thin and inconsistent coalbeds. The Monongalia
group contains the heavily mined Waynesburg, Sewickley and Pittsburgh coals of the basin.
These coalbeds range in thickness from 3 to 20 feet and contain relatively high gas content coals
(Keystone 1994). A study performed by the Gas Research Institute identified the Kittanning and
6-1
COAL BASINS OF THE UNITED STATES
Figure 6-1. Northern Appalachian Basin and Other
Major Coal Bearing Regions of the United States
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
Freeport coals of the Allegheny Group, and the Pittsburgh coals of the Monongalia Group as
having the best potential for coalbed methane gas development in the basin (GRI 1988).
Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania contain most of the basin's coal reserves. In Ohio,
coal is the most valuable mineral resource, and has contributed substantially to the state's
economy. About 60 coalbeds have been identified in Ohio of which 14 are considered to be
minable. In West Virginia, 62 minable coal seams have been identified from a total of 117
seams in the state. Of these seams, the coals in the Monongalia group have been considered
most valuable due to their regular thickness. A large portion of coal mining in the basin occurs
in Pennsylvania (1,173 coal mines operate in the state). The Waynesburg, Sewickley,
Pittsburgh, Freeport and Kittanning coalbeds are the most frequently mined seams in the area.
Historically, coal mines operating in the Northern Appalachian Basin have encountered
large volumes of methane during coal production. In 1980, the BOM reported that 71 of the top
200 emitting mines [i.e., emissions greater than 100,000 cubic feet of methane per day (ft3/day)]
were located in the Northern Appalachian Basin (Grau and LaScola 1984). During this year, the
total volume of methane emitted was over 109,000 ft3/day, which represented over 40 percent
of the total emissions from all U.S. coal mines producing greater than 100 million ft3/day. In
1990, methane emissions from Northern Appalachian mines dropped to about 90 million ft3/day.
Nevertheless, they represented over 30 percent of the total U.S. methane emissions from
underground mines. The reduction in measured methane emissions may be due to the capturing
and utilization of coalbed methane by some large coal mines operating in this Basin.
Coalbed methane production in the Northern Appalachian Basin has been active since
the 1970's. A majority of the early exploration activities occurred in southwestern Pennsylvania
(Greene County) and north central West Virginia (Wetzel County). Many of these projects were
carried out by, or in conjunction with coal mining companies. The Pittsburgh coalbed was the
primary target of the early gas production projects because complete information was available
for its coal and reservoir properties (GRI 1991). The early production work employed a single
well completion into the mined coalbed, and resulted in low production rates. Since then,
coalbed methane production technology has improved in this area by better characterizing
reservoir conditions and applying proper stimulation and completion practices (Hunt and Steels
1991).
Recent surveys indicate that the best area for coalbed methane development is in
southwest Pennsylvania and adjoining counties of West Virginia (Hobbs and Winkler 1990). In
addition, it is expected that gas recovery of over 150 million cubic feet per day may be
achievable with multiple zone completions in the Pittsburgh group coals, Freeport coals and
Kittanning coals (GRI 1991). Similar to the Central Appalachian Basin, commercialization of
coalbed methane production in the Northern Appalachian Basin has been slow due to the
6-2
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
complicated issues of mineral and gas ownership rights and the priority given to coal mining over
gas production.
Overview of Available Gas Content Data
In 1992, the Northern Appalachian Basin represented nearly 15% (146.43 million tons per
year) of the total coal produced in the United States (Keystone 1994). The 1992 production
favored underground mining (69 percent of total production) over surface mining (31 percent of
production). The Basin includes over 80 counties in five different states. In 1992, the two
highest coal producing counties were Greene County, Pennsylvania and Monongalia County,
West Virginia, representing 16 percent and 11 percent of total production in the basin,
respectively.
Table 6-1 presents the distribution of available gas content data by county. With nearly
500 samples, the Northern Appalachian basin is the most well represented basin in the data set.
Sixty one percent of the samples were obtained from Greene and Washington Counties,
Pennsylvania. Other counties that are well represented include: Harrison county, Ohio,
Allegheny, Armstrong, Indiana, Lackawana, Schuykill and Westmoreland counties in
Pennsylvania, and Barbour, Braxton, Marion, Monongalia, and Upshur counties in West Virginia.
All of these counties produced coal in 1992. In sum, they represented about 50 percent of the
total production in the basin. Some important mining regions in the Northern Appalachian Basin
are not well represented in the data. Lack of coverage in some areas is likely the result of
shifting mining patterns: i.e., the opening of mines in new areas and the closing of mines in
areas where BOM coal samples were originally extracted.
The available gas content data for the Northern Appalachian Basin are presented in Table
6-2. Samples from 47 different coalbeds are available. Table 6-3 identifies the range of coalbed
depths and gas contents which are found in the data. The gassiest coals in the basin are
contained in the Tunnel coalbed followed by the Clarion, Pittsburgh, Brookville, Freeport and
Kittanning coalbeds. Note, however, that gas content values can be highly variable within a
coalbed.
Gas content data representing eight counties in Pennsylvania, six in West Virginia and
two in Ohio are available in the data base. Tables 6-4A through 6-4C identify depths and gas
content values for the major coalbeds and counties in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio,
respectively. Three coalbeds (Peach Mountain, Seven Ft. Leader and Tunnel) located in
Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania may contain the highest gas content coals ranging from 395 to
668 ft3/ton. The Kittanning and Pittsburgh coalbeds in Barbour and Marion Counties of West
Virginia and the Brookville, Freeport, Kittanning, and Mahoning coalbeds in Indiana and
Westmorland Counties of Pennsylvania contain the next highest gas content coals with
approximate values ranging from 200 to 300 ft3/ton.
6-3
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
Gas Content Trends And Reservoir Properties
The overall gas content data for the Northern Appalachian basin do not show a clear
relationship with depth, even when segregated by rank. High volatile and medium volatile
bituminous and anthracite coal samples are represented. However, when local variation is
removed by segregating the data by county or by coalbed, the familiar relationship sometimes
emerges. Figure 6-2 shows the relationship of gas content with depth for Washington county,
Pennsylvania (r2 = 0.45). Similar improvements in the trend were not observed for other counties.
Figure 6-3 shows the relationship for three Northern Appalachian coalbeds: the Pittsburgh (r2 =
0.64), Freeport (r2 = 0.45), and Waynesburg (r2 = 0.64). Note that individual data points are not
shown for clarity in the figure. The Pittsburgh coalbed contains the highest gas content coals
followed by Freeport and Waynesburg at similar depths.
Sorption time was determined from the desorption curves for the 301 RGC samples.
Sorption time is given for each sample in Table 6-2. Sorption time varies widely across the
basin, ranging from a low of just hours to a high of more than 500 days. Overall, however,
Northern Appalachian coals tend to have longer sorption times than coals from other basins.
The average sorption time for samples from the Northern Appalachian basin is about 74 days,
which is the longest basin average sorption time among the eleven basins treated in this report.
Samples from the Peach Mountain, Brush Creek, and Sewell coalbeds desorbed the most
rapidly, with average sorption times less than 20 days.
A total of 22 samples were analyzed by the DOE to determine adsorption capacity of
methane in a coal matrix (DOE 1983). These samples were extracted from eight different
coalbeds including Fishpot, Kittanning, Pittsburgh, Primrose, Sewickley, Uniontown, Washington
and Waynesburg. Figure 6-4 illustrates the Langmuir adsorption isotherm curves and Langmuir
volume and pressure constants for four of these coalbeds.
6-4
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
COALBED DEPTH (ft)
Figure 6-2. Relationship Between Total Gas Content and Coalbed Depth
for High Volatile Coals in Washington County, Pennsylvania
Figure 6-3. Relationship Between Gas Content and Coalbed Depths
for the Pittsburgh, Freeport and Waynesburg Coals
6-5
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
PRESSURE (Psia)
Figure 6-4. Langmuir Isotherm Curves for Selected Coalbeds
in the North Appalachian Basin
6-6
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
TABLE 6-1. COUNTY SPECIFIC COAL PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION
OF AVAILABLE GAS CONTENT DATA
State
County
1992 Coal Production
(1000 tpy)
Total No. of
Samples
No. of RGC
Samples
Surface
Underground
MD
Allegany
723
0
0
0
MD
Garrett
309
2265
0
0
OH
Belmont
1655
3665
0
0
OH
Carroll
350
103
0
0
OH
Columbiana
582
559
0
0
OH
Coshocton
1125
0
0
0
OH
Guernsey
570
0
0
0
OH
Harrison
1443
884
12
10
OH
Hocking
113
0
0
0
OH
Holmes
224
0
0
0
OH
Jackson
1441
0
0
0
OH
Jefferson
1863
157
0
0
OH
Lawrence
227
0
0
0
OH
Meigs
0
5202
0
0
OH
Monroe
0
1462
0
0
OH
Muskingum
2505
0
0
0
OH
Noble
1236
0
3
3
OH
Perry
262
0
0
0
OH
Stark
269
0
0
0
OH
Tuscarawas
2079
0
0
0
OH
Vinton
2266
0
0
0
PA
Allegheny
334
249
17
12
PA
Armstrong
1216
5221
4
0
PA
Beaver
137
0
0
0
PA
Blair
136
0
0
0
PA
Butler
692
109
0
0
PA
Cambria
2204
1705
0
0
PA
Carbon
87
0
0
0
PA
Centre
195
0
0
0
PA
Clarion
1607
0
0
0
PA
Clearfield
5401
60
0
0
PA
Clinton
77
0
0
0
PA
Columbia
45
63
0
0
(Continued)
6-7
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
TABLE 6-1. CONTINUED
State
County
1992 Coal Production
(1000 tpy)
Total No. of
Samples
No. of RGC
Samples
Surface
Underground
PA
Elk
502
0
0
0
PA
Fayette
666
0
0
0
PA
Fulton
18
0
0
0
PA
Greene
167
23501
192
110
PA
Indiana
725
5799
9
6
PA
Jefferson
752
740
0
0
PA
Lackawanna
18
0
19
9
PA
Lawrence
325
0
0
0
PA
Luzerne
564
0
0
0
PA
Lycoming
267
0
0
0
PA
Mercer
235
0
0
0
PA
Northumberland
223
25
0
0
PA
Schuylkill
1913
135
11
6
PA
Somerset
3248
2686
0
0
PA
Sullivan
43
0
0
0
PA
Venango
138
0
0
0
PA
Washington
762
4595
112
65
PA
Westmoreland
620
0
29
19
WV
Barbour
570
1792
31
29
WV
Braxton
16
1085
19
11
WV
Brooke
74
1665
0
0
WV
Grant
737
3408
0
0
WV
Harrison
193
3153
0
0
WV
Marion
0
2830
11
4
WV
Marshall
0
8327
0
0
WV
Mason
79
0
0
0
WV
Mineral
110
73
0
0
WV
Monongalia
849
15883
18
13
WV
Ohio
90
0
0
0
WV
Pendelton
0
264
0
0
WV
Preston
355
1915
0
0
WV
Ritchie
0
0
8
0
WV
Taylor
25
0
0
0
WV
Upshur
375
821
4
4
Total
46032
100401
499
301
6-8
-------
TABLE 6-2. GAS CONTENT AND RELATED DATA FOR THE NORTHERN APPALACHIAN BASIN
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature I
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
2061
RGC
OH
HARRISON
FREEPORT(U)
403
3
25
0
28
9.3
2060
BOM
OH
HARRISON
FREEPORT(U)
404
3
25
0
28
2058
RGC
OH
HARRISON
FREEPORT(U)
405
4
28
0
32
19.0
2059
RGC
OH
HARRISON
FREEPORT(U)
405
3
27
0
30
29.1
2057
RGC
OH
HARRISON
FREEPORT (U)
406
4
27
0
31
20.9
2056
RGC
OH
HARRISON
FREEPORT (U)
407
4
27
0
31
17.6
853
RGC
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
585
3
42
41
86
112
135.3
852
RGC
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
586
4
51
54
109
129
155.3
854
RGC
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
587
4
66
54
124
139
135.8
840
BOM
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
599
3
48
38
89
841
RGC
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
600
2
44
41
87
101
94.9
842
RGC
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
602
3
51
61
115
126
94.9
1434
RGC
OH
NOBLE
FREEPORT (L)
HV-A
629
0
94
38
132
149
115.8
1435
RGC
OH
NOBLE
FREEPORT (L)
HV-A
631
0
91
38
129
145
65.3
1433
RGC
OH
NOBLE
FREEPORT (U)
HV-A
551
1
56
70
127
141
135.1
936
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
BROOKVILLE
1020
1
83
0
84
91.3
937
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
BROOKVILLE
1020
2
76
0
78
39.6
935
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
CLARION
970
1
91
0
92
106.3
933
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT
695
2
10
0
12
26.0
932
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT
695
3
52
0
55
42.8
515
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT(U)
488
5
55
73
133
145
142
66.1
516
BOM
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT(U)
HV-A
489
6
48
57
111
517
BOM
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT(U)
HV-A
490
3
3
45
51
518
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
HV-A
491
10
74
73
157
170
165
67.1
519
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
HV-A
492
8
72
76
156
167
163
67.1
520
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
HV-A
493
9
70
70
149
162
157
68.1
521
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
HV-A
494
24
17
57
98
144
142
68.1
934
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
KITTANNING (M)
801
4
151
0
155
81.3
190
BOM
PA
ALLEGHENY
KITTANNING (U)
834
6
99
3
108
133
BOM
PA
ALLEGHENY
KITTANNING (U)
834
6
105
3
114
179
BOM
PA
ALLEGHENY
MAHONING
703
6
45
0
51
938
RGC
PA
ALLEGHENY
MERCER
1110
2
46
0
48
166.6
1336
BOM
PA
ARMSTRONG
KITTANNING (L)
HV-A
324
3
3
6
12
1337
BOM
PA
ARMSTRONG
KITTANNING (L)
325
3
3
19
25
1338
BOM
PA
ARMSTRONG
KITTANNING (L)
326
3
3
6
12
1339
BOM
PA
ARMSTRONG
KITTANNING (L)
327
3
6
13
22
1089
BOM
PA
GREENE
BAKERSTOWN
HV-A
890
3
83
57
143
1094
BOM
PA
GREENE
CLARION
HV-A
1294
0
96
45
141
1570
BOM
PA
GREENE
FISH CREEK
HV-A
150
3
6
16
25
1588
RGC
PA
GREENE
FISH CREEK
HV-A
213
1
7
25
33
47
46
55.8
1443
RGC
PA
GREENE
FISHPOT
422
7
15
38
60
129
130
55.2
1470
BOM
PA
GREENE
FISHPOT
HV-A
510
6
29
54
89
1304
RGC
PA
GREENE
FREEPORT
1414
3
143
73
219
117.1
1303
RGC
PA
GREENE
FREEPORT
1415
2
112
41
155
83.2
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 6-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
ID
Source
State
County
Coaibed
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Gas
Residual
Gas
Total Gas
Content
AF/MF Total
Gas Content
AF/MF Total
Gas Content
at STP
(std ft3/ton)
Sorption
Time
APP
-------
TABLE 6-2. CONTINUED
At Aetna! Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coaibed
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
at STP
(std. ft3/ton)
Time
L_ APP
-------
TABLE 6-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
ID
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Gas
Residual
Gas
Total Gas
Content
AF/MF Total
Gas Content
AF/MF Total
Gas Content
at STP
(std. ft3/ton)
Sorption
Time
APP
(m
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(days)
1589
RGC
PA
GREENE
TEN MILE
HV-A
266
11
17
29
57
73
72
55.1
1508
BOM
PA
GREENE
TEN MILE
HV-B
446
0
3
19
22
1509
BOM
PA
GREENE
TEN MILE
HV-A
447
3
3
25
31
1439
RGC
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
280
0
32
80
112
134
133
57.0
1440
RGC
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
281
1
34
64
99
121
121
57.0
1441
BOM
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
282
3
67
38
108
1641
RGC
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
381
0
37
57
94
120
119
85.7
1677
BOM
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
425
0
35
35
70
1569
RGC
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
672
2
36
67
105
154
151
129.1
1541
RGC
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
762
0
51
64
115
140
140
144.1
1523
RGC
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
951
0
50
29
79
128
125
84.1
1437
BOM
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
HV-A
54
0
19
38
57
637
BOM
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
HV-A
69
0
32
29
61
1637
RGC
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
HV-A
184
2
12
54
68
84
83
28.9
1576
RGC
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
HV-A
465
10
49
19
78
143
138
63.9
1563
RGC
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
HV-A
486
2
5
118
125
145
145
38.2
1590
RGC
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
HV-A
545
2
61
10
73
129
119
56.5
1538
BOM
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
HV-A
552
0
32
29
61
1591
BOM
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
HV-A
558
3
48
51
102
1555
RGC
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
HV-A
632
1
22
38
61
92
90
91.8
1556
RGC
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
HV-A
682
1
41
41
83
106
103
140.2
1572
RGC
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON A
HV-A
417
0
25
38
63
94
91
128.9
1537
RGC
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON A
HV-A
506
2
7
57
66
97
95
61.1
1436
BOM
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON R
HV-A
47
0
32
38
70
1551
BOM
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON (U)
HV-A
412
0
3
35
38
1562
RGC
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON (U)
HV-A
457
4
46
64
114
153
148
84.1
1082
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
150
3
51
38
92
1083
RGC
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
155
1
35
35
71
86
86
121.0
277
RGC
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
257
1
50
10
61
82
86
85.1
1467
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
305
3
13
10
26
1468
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
306
3
19
29
51
1638
RGC
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
310
1
26
57
84
98
97
86.7
1639
RGC
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
311
0
36
29
65
95
94
178.0
1640
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
312
0
35
54
89
278
RGC
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
346
2
61
16
79
97
98
69.5
279
RGC
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
350
1
78
13
92
118
118
129.6
1675
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
358
0
29
38
67
1676
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
360
0
35
32
67
639
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
432
0
45
35
80
640
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
434
0
35
64
99
87
RGC
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
458
1
36
83
120
110.7
883
RGC
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
489
2
45
48
95
121
118
74.2
1951
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
602
0
57
54
111
1953
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
602
0
76
45
121
1954
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
602
0
54
41
95
1952
BOM
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
602
0
76
35
111
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 6-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
ID
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Gas
Residual
Gas
Total Gas
Content
AF/MF Total
Gas Content
AF/MF Total
Gas Content
at STP
-------
TABLE 6-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Teniperatu
e
BOM
Source
State
Countv
Coalbed
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std ft3/ton)
(days)
977
RGC
PA
INDIANA
FREEPORT (L)
MV
398
3
180
41
224
239
229
16.4
143
BOM
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING
624
3
16
6
25
898
RGC
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (L)
MV
575
1
268
41
310
362
1.9
897
BOM
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (L)
MV
576
57
150
41
248
896
RGC
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (L)
MV
579
24
155
51
230
262
1.3
895
RGC
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (L)
MV
579
18
35
70
123
145
20.0
1810
BOM
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (L)
MV
758
6
38
3
47
1811
RGC
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (L)
MV
759
22
423
0
445
504
512
6.9
1808
RGC
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (M)
MV
656
6
290
10
306
358
31.4
2092
BOM
PA
LACKAWANNA
BIG BED
ANT
102
3
10
41
54
2091
BOM
PA
LACKAWANNA
BIG BED
ANT
104
0
19
25
44
2090
BOM
PA
LACKAWANNA
BIG BED
ANT
105
0
13
16
29
2089
BOM
PA
LACKAWANNA
BIG BED
ANT
107
0
29
35
64
2088
BOM
PA
LACKAWANNA
BIG BED
ANT
109
0
6
19
25
2087
BOM
PA
LACKAWANNA
BIG BED
ANT
111
0
19
13
32
2074
RGC
PA
LACKAWANNA
CLARK
ANT
196
1
3
6
10
11
11
35.9
2063
RGC
PA
LACKAWANNA
CLARK
ANT
197
1
2
6
9
11
11
35.9
2072
RGC
PA
LACKAWANNA
CLARK
ANT
199
1
3
13
17
19
35.9
2066
RGC
PA
LACKAWANNA
CLARK
ANT
200
1
2
10
13
15
14
35.9
2076
RGC
PA
LACKAWANNA
CLARK
ANT
202
1
4
10
15
18
18
35.9
2067
RGC
PA
LACKAWANNA
NEW COUNTY (L)
ANT
555
0
35
13
48
60.9
2064
BOM
PA
LACKAWANNA
NEW COUNTY (L)
ANT
556
0
16
10
26
2062
RGC
PA
LACKAWANNA
NEW COUNTY (L)
ANT
559
0
32
10
42
63.3
2069
BOM
PA
LACKAWANNA
NEW COUNTY (L)
ANT
560
0
19
13
32
2070
BOM
PA
LACKAWANNA
NEW COUNTY (L)
ANT
561
0
13
13
26
2071
BOM
PA
LACKAWANNA
NEW COUNTY (L)
ANT
562
0
3
13
16
2065
RGC
PA
LACKAWANNA
NEW COUNTY (U)
ANT
128
0
50
19
69
76.9
2075
RGC
PA
LACKAWANNA
NEW COUNTY (U)
ANT
129
1
35
16
52
81.5
286
BOM
PA
SCHUYLKILL
MAMMOTH
ANT
1719
0
6
6
12
288
RGC
PA
SCHUYLKILL
ORCHARD
ANT
1359
0
7
0
7
12
12
126.4
289
BOM
PA
SCHUYLKILL
ORCHARD
ANT
1373
0
13
16
29
210
BOM
PA
SCHUYLKILL
PEACH MOUNTAIN
ANT
685
118
468
13
599
211
RGC
PA
SCHUYLKILL
PEACH MOUNTAIN
ANT
685
72
561
35
668
792
792
3.8
287
BOM
PA
SCHUYLKILL
PRIMROSE
ANT
1541
0
13
0
13
1321
RGC
PA
SCHUYLKILL
SEVEN FT LEADER
817
6
338
54
398
67.5
189
RGC
PA
SCHUYLKILL
SEVEN FT LEADER
817
3
338
54
395
69.8
212
BOM
PA
SCHUYLKILL
TUNNEL
ANT
604
25
401
22
448
213
RGC
PA
SCHUYLKILL
TUNNEL
ANT
606
13
352
22
387
445
446
15.2
214
RGC
PA
SCHUYLKILL
TUNNEL
ANT
608
5
505
61
571
707
706
38.9
1507
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
FISHPOT
HV-A
200
3
16
51
70
1719
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
336
0
25
80
105
118
74.0
1720
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
337
0
17
70
87
93
81.0
1721
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
338
0
48
0
48
54
42.0
1722
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
339
0
50
48
98
108
158.8
1723
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
340
0
49
0
49
56
31.3
65
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
427
19
51
51
121
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 6-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
ID
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Gas
Residual
Gas
Total Gas
Content
AF/MF Total
Gas Content
AF/MF Total
Gas Content
at STP
(std. ft3/ton)
Sorption
Time
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ftj/ton)
(days)
1163
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
467
7
80
38
125
131
127
77.1
1164
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
471
8
80
32
120
128
123
64.5
1130
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
520
1
91
64
156
169
164
178.5
1131
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
521
3
70
64
137
1132
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
523
1
68
67
136
148
144
179.0
1133
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
524
0
66
57
123
142
138
179.0
1753
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
555
3
51
32
86
1752
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
556
6
57
70
133
1751
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
557
3
64
48
115
1750
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
559
0
67
41
108
123
125
160.9
1749
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
560
0
37
35
72
91
93
159.9
1156
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
627
3
74
73
150
155
153
143.7
1157
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
628
3
83
73
159
1158
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
630
6
97
76
179
192
187
142.7
1159
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
631
6
86
76
168
181
177
142.7
1166
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
647
6
132
48
186
83.7
1167
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
649
5
30
67
102
112
110
75.0
1175
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
660
2
67
67
136
146
142
133.8
1176
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
661
5
94
76
175
185
180
133.8
1177
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
663
5
84
67
156
182
176
133.8
1178
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
665
5
82
64
151
169
163
133.7
2118
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
675
3
48
64
115
2119
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
676
3
54
70
127
2120
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
677
10
45
86
141
1183
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
715
3
16
76
95
1184
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
717
4
103
76
183
197
189
126.8
1185
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
718
5
91
57
153
172
164
126.7
1186
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
720
5
88
67
160
179
173
126.7
2084
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
729
3
67
67
137
2085
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
731
6
70
64
140
2086
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
732
3
51
73
127
1171
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
790
3
106
64
173
183
175
149.4
1172
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
798
5
117
45
167
124.4
1160
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
459
2
80
35
117
144
140
71.3
1161
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
460
4
88
19
111
146
141
27.8
1162
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
464
1
78
64
143
161
157
134.2
1128
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
517
2
67
41
110
154
148
177.5
1129
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
518
4
59
70
133
161
158
91.0
1748
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
538
3
25
10
38
1755
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
539
6
19
41
66
1754
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
540
0
52
35
87
115
117
160.9
1154
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
624
3
76
67
146
1155
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
625
3
82
86
171
188
143.7
1173
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
655
10
45
99
154
1174
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
657
2
44
89
135
158
156
52.9
2122
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
672
3
45
105
153
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 6-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperatu
e
BOM
Source
State
Countv
Coalbed
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
at STP
Time
APP
(m
(ft.l/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft.i/ton)
{ft3/ton)
(std ft3/ton)
(days)
2121
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
673
3
22
38
63
2082
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
725
3
38
80
121
2083
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
726
6
51
83
140
1168
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
760
4
110
35
149
188
177
24.0
1169
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
761
11
112
16
139
188
175
8.3
1170
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
HV-A
791
6
121
64
191
1718
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R1
HV-A
332
0
32
13
45
1717
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R2
HV-A
329
1
37
19
57
75
141.1
149
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
450
0
3
32
35
1550
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
539
0
51
61
112
1545
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
639
3
61
61
125
1531
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
660
0
53
99
152
180
179
84.8
1454
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
779
0
6
61
67
1471
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
TEN MILE
HV-A
207
8
14
10
32
44
43
0.1
1464
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
340
6
76
57
139
1587
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
342
1
2
41
44
67
67
42.1
1549
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
416
1
2
105
108
134
134
47.2
1453
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
465
3
86
38
127
1544
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
512
1
55
51
107
139
136
144.2
1530
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
537
0
68
38
106
143
142
162.5
1449
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
657
3
10
48
61
1506
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
HV-A
675
0
60
48
108
137
136
168.8
1458
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
100
1
5
38
44
42.8
1739
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
HV-A
146
3
3
3
9
1740
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
HV-A
148
0
3
0
3
1547
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
HV-A
186
1
41
19
61
110
106
140.1
1524
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
HV-A
285
0
13
16
29
1535
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
HV-A
298
0
40
22
62
96
94
80.7
1473
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
HV-A
469
0
25
6
31
1546
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON A
HV-A
146
3
19
38
60
1534
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON A
HV-A
247
1
16
35
52
84
83
78.8
1472
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON (U)
227
1
4
16
21
44
44
33.9
1716
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
52
3
3
0
6
1460
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG A
HV-A
164
2
50
38
90
142.8
1584
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG A
HV-A
165
0
16
38
54
65
64
43.9
1446
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG A
HV-A
488
19
56
32
107
132
129
74.2
1459
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG B
HV-A
138
0
45
16
61
107.5
1583
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG B
HV-A
141
1
13
19
33
48
48
71.9
1548
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG B
HV-A
218
3
48
48
99
123
120
82.9
1536
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG B
HV-A
323
3
45
51
99
1462
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
274
6
64
48
118
1463
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
275
6
64
41
111
1586
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
282
3
51
32
86
1451
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
399
2
70
38
110
138
135
273.7
1452
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
400
6
57
41
104
1543
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
441
3
57
32
92
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 6-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
ID
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Gas
Residual
Gas
Total Gas
Content
AF/MF Total
Gas Content
AF/MF Fotal
Gas Content
at STP
(std. ft3/ton)
Sorption
Time
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(days)
1527
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
472
2
11
41
54
76
77
68.2
1528
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
474
5
47
35
87
109
110
153.1
1529
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
475
0
52
45
97
123
123
163.2
1448
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
594
4
5
41
50
51.4
1505
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
603
0
51
35
86
111
112
129.9
I 1461
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG(U)
HV-A
270
3
64
54
121
j 1585
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG(U)
HV-A
278
3
3
41
47
1450
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG(U)
HV-A
394
3
44
48
95
120
117
133.9
1542
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG(U)
HV-A
437
6
41
51
98
138
137
60.2
1525
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (U)
HV-A
469
0
49
41
90
108
109
153.1
1526
RGC
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG(U)
HV-A
470
2
51
32
85
108
108
155.7
1447
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG(U)
HV-A
590
3
38
35
76
1504
BOM
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG(U)
HV-A
601
3
41
45
89
1715
BOM
PA
WESTMORELAND
BAKERSTOWN (U)
HV-A
440
3
89
32
124
1767
BOM
PA
WESTMORELAND
BROOKVILLE
MV
994
0
182
57
239
1731
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
BRUSH CREEK
HV-A
627
2
158
19
179
290
15.4
893
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
CLARION
HV-A
691
6
149
41
196
238
230
14.4
894
BOM
PA
WESTMORELAND
CLARION
HV-A
691
3
80
83
166
880
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
CLARION
HV-A
835
3
189
61
253
294
280
26.2
882
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
CLARION
HV-A
835
3
135
99
237
275
267
71.8
881
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
CLARION
HV-A
835
4
187
80
271
289
276
40.3
1764
BOM
PA
WESTMORELAND
CLARION
HV-A
955
0
64
70
134
1765
BOM
PA
WESTMORELAND
CLARION
957
0
19
32
51
1766
BOM
PA
WESTMORELAND
CLARION
HV-A
966
0
105
57
162
886
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
FREEPORT (L)
HV-A
490
2
42
57
101
119
117
56.8
887
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
FREEPORT (L)
HV-A
490
3
39
45
87
102
99
56.8
1741
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
FREEPORT (U)
HV-A
728
7
198
38
243
266
266
11.8
1730
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
HARLEM
HV-A
372
0
72
73
145
166
124.9
134
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (L)
LV
1060
13
318
16
347
379
378
1.5
890
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
637
4
100
70
174
226
221
55.0
889
BOM
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
637
3
124
61
188
892
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
640
3
32
67
102
113
111
54.9
891
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
641
6
135
57
198
222
216
21.1
878
BOM
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
790
6
89
61
156
879
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (M)
HV-A
790
5
197
64
266
316
303
28.0
1744
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (M)
MV
866
2
185
38
225
264
272
31.3
888
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (U)
HV-A
570
3
93
83
179
211
203
56.9
877
BOM
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (U)
HV-A
780
3
134
111
248
1742
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (U)
MV
786
3
212
25
240
332
336
12.7
1743
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
KITTANNING (U)
MV
806
5
213
61
279
349
358
52.7
1732
BOM
PA
WESTMORELAND
MAHONING
MV
674
3
207
45
255
1768
RGC
PA
WESTMORELAND
MERCER
MV
1042
0
135
41
176
233
236
39.4
176
RGC
WV
BARBOUR
CLARION
HV-A
819
7
148
10
165
12.0
177
RGC
WV
BARBOUR
CLARION
HV-A
822
3
101
10
114
6.5
503
RGC
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
HV-A
546
4
160
61
225
254
247
32.3
489
RGC
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
HV-A
535
4
119
61
184
44.2
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 6-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
C ounty
Coalbec
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
at STP
Time
APP
(fl)
(ft.Vton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/tonJ
(davs)
490
RGC
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
536
4
113
61
178
46.8
491
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
537
3
93
41
137
37.1
493
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
539
5
137
45
187
202
194
28.4
494
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
540
5
123
45
173
206
197
24.1
507
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
592
6
3
0
9
11
61.9
508
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
594
7
122
54
183
212
206
41.3
509
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
595
10
126
45
181
234
228
26.8
510
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
596
12
214
67
293
312
303
25.0
511
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
597
15
54
61
130
144
142
64.1
795
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
651
8
163
32
203
305
303
15.9
796
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
652
8
187
41
236
318
317
20.7
797
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
653
9
214
38
261
304
303
17.5
798
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
654
11
226
57
294
319
317
20.1
132
BOM
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
806
3
32
10
45
485
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
486
5
19
61
85
84.7
486
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
487
2
67
70
139
54.7
487
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
489
3
99
89
191
54.7
488
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
490
3
72
86
161
54.7
504
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
547
10
31
64
105
120
119
57.9
505
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
548
3
121
80
204
225
220
61.9
506
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
549
5
53
19
77
126
122
31.7
793
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
612
4
146
54
204
249
248
34.3
792
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
612
4
145
38
187
229
228
26.0
794
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
612
4
134
48
186
213
212
37.7
131
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
708
3
74
6
83
15.8
1792
RGC
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
HV-A
742
2
118
48
168
195
183
105.3
1794
BOM
wv
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
U)
MV
745
3
143
51
197
522
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
76
1
5
10
16
23
23
48.9
523
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
77
0
11
13
24
48.9
524
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
78
3
2
19
24
27
27
48.0
525
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
92
1
2
10
13
19
19
47.8
526
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
93
2
6
22
30
32
32
48.7
527
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
94
3
6
22
31
33
32
48.7
528
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
146
4
2
0
6
8
8
47.9
529
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
149
2
1
0
3
3
3
48.9
530
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
151
2
8
0
10
11
11
9.8
531
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
154
2
3
13
18
20
19
47.9
679
BOM
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
405
0
3
3
6
680
BOM
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
MV
407
0
3
13
16
681
BOM
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
408
0
3
10
13
682
BOM
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
409
0
3
3
6
683
BOM
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
410
0
6
13
19
I 684
BOM
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
411
0
10
19
29
685
BOM
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
413
0
10
10
20
686
BOM
wv
BRAXTON
KITTANNING
L)
HV-A
414
0
6
19
25
181
RGC
wv
BRAXTON
SEWELL
931
2
75
6
83
2.7
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 6-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressur e and Temperatu
e
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Rank
Depth
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
Af/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
; id
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
at STP
Time
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ftj/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std ft3/ton)
(days)
66
BOM
wv
MARION
PITTSBURGH
850
16
108
83
207
67
BOM
wv
MARION
PITTSBURGH
850
16
124
83
223
2142
BOM
wv
MARION
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
699
0
54
16
70
2136
BOM
wv
MARION
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
779
10
134
38
182
2137
RGC
wv
MARION
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
784
5
138
41
184
210
200
134.2
2099
BOM
wv
MARION
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
397
3
67
32
102
2100
BOM
wv
MARION
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
400
3
35
25
63
2101
BOM
wv
MARION
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
402
3
92
25
120
2135
RGC
wv
MARION
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
403
1
66
22
89
113
108
146.3
2134
RGC
wv
MARION
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
405
1
43
32
76
89
85
220.1
2133
RGC
wv
MARION
WAYNESBURG (U)
HV-A
402
0
45
32
77
91
88
220.1
1061
BOM
wv
MONONGALIA
PITTSBURGH
HV-A
841
0
61
86
147
145
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
REDSTONE
HV-A
738
6
97
10
113
125
119
27.4
144
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
REDSTONE
HV-A
746
4
113
6
123
151
153
15.0
77
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
575
5
134
10
149
164
157
18.1
78
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
672
4
131
32
167
188
177
37.3
2126
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
828
2
66
41
109
123
118
260.0
2127
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
829
3
67
38
108
130
124
222.5
2128
BOM
wv
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
831
6
29
41
76
2138
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
HV-A
848
2
6
38
46
53
54
165.0
90
BOM
wv
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
401
16
64
10
90
91
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
402
1
74
10
85
109
103
24.1
2139
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
576
2
71
32
105
133
129
164.6
2140
BOM
wv
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
579
3
13
29
45
2141
BOM
wv
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
581
3
57
45
105
2131
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
583
2
71
35
108
124
118
170.5
2132
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
HV-A
584
4
49
48
101
132
127
210.8
2130
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG (L)
HV-A
582
3
95
32
130
169
161
129.3
2129
RGC
wv
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG (U)
HV-A
579
1
87
41
129
157
150
166.5
1080
BOM
wv
RITCHIE
KITTANNING (M)
1436
0
22
0
22
1079
BOM
wv
RITCHIE
KITTANNING (M)
1455
6
76
0
82
1081
BOM
wv
RITCHIE
KITTANNING (M)
1457
3
61
0
64
1074
BOM
wv
RITCHIE
KITTANNING (U)
1424
0
45
0
45
1075
BOM
wv
RITCHIE
KITTANNING (U)
1427
0
54
0
54
1076
BOM
wv
RITCHIE
KITTANNING (U)
1428
0
45
0
45
1077
BOM
wv
RITCHIE
KITTANNING (U)
1429
0
35
0
35
1078
BOM
wv
RITCHIE
KITTANNING (U)
1431
0
35
0
35
128
RGC
wv
UPSHUR
KITTANNING (M)
909
2
42
29
73
45.9
129
RGC
wv
UPSHUR
KITTANNING (M)
911
3
43
32
78
45.9
130
RGC
wv
UPSHUR
KITTANNING (M)
912
2
42
29
73
45.9
127
RGC
wv
UPSHUR
KITTANNING (U)
839
0
23
16
39
46.1
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
TABLE 6-3. TOTAL GAS CONTENT AND COALBED DEPTH RANGES FOR SELECTED
COALBEDS IN THE NORTHERN APPALACHIAN BASIN
Coalbed
Total No. of
Samples
Sample
Depth Range
(ft)
Total Gas
Content Range
(ft3/ton)
Average Total
Gas Content
(ft3/ton)
Big Bed
6
102-111
29 - 64
42
Brookville
3
994 - 1020
78 - 239
133
Clarion
12
691 - 1294
51 - 271
165
Clark
5
196 - 202
9 - 17
13
Fishpot
3
200 - 510
60 - 89
72
Free port
5
695 - 1417
12 - 219
123
Freeport (L)
5
398 - 631
87 - 224
135
Freeport (U)
24
403 - 1307
28 - 243
110
Kittanning (L)
44
76 - 1060
3 - 445
110
Kittanning (M)
22
585 - 1457
22 -306
131
Kittanning (U)
27
486 - 1431
35 - 279
140
New County (L)
6
555 - 562
16 - 48
32
Pittsburgh
92
336 - 1280
48 - 258
163
Pittsburgh R
23
459 - 827
38 - 191
128
Sewickley
36
372 - 1181
35 - 184
123
Ten Mile
5
180 -447
22 - 57
37
Tunnel
3
604 - 608
387 - 571
468
Uniontown
16
280 - 951
44 - 139
99
Washington
17
54 - 682
3 - 125
60
Washington (U)
3
227 - 457
21-114
58
Washington A
4
146 - 506
52 - 66
60
Waynesburg
37
52 - 974
6 - 143
87
Waynesburg (L)
35
274 - 882
34 - 159
98
Waynesburg (U)
20
270 -881
47 - 159
98
Waynesburg A
7
164 - 710
54 -112
91
Wavnesbura B
8
84 - 752
33 - 127
80
a Coalbeds represented by fewer than three coal samples are not included in the above table. These
include: Bakerstown, Bakerstown (U), Brush Creek, Fish Creek, Harlem, Jollytown, Kittanning, Mahoning,
Mammoth, Mercer, New County (U), Orchard, Peach Mountain, Pittsburgh R1, Pittsburgh R2, Primrose,
Redstone, Seven Ft. Leader, Sewell, Washington R and Waynesburg R.
6-20
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
TABLE 6-4A. COUNTY AND COALBED SPECIFIC SUMMARY OF
AVERAGE GAS CONTENT DATA FOR PENNSYLVANIA
Sample Depth
Average Total Gas
County
Coalbed
Range (feet)
Content (ft3/ton)
Allegheny
Brookville
1020
81
Clarion
970
92
Freeport
695
33
Freeport (U)
488 - 494
122
Kittanning (M)
801
155
Kittanninq (U)
834
111
Mahoning
703
51
Mercer
1110
48
Armstronq
Kittanninq (L)
324 - 327
18
Greene
Bakerstown
890
143
Clarion
1294
141
Fish Creek
150 - 213
29
Fishpot
422 - 510
75
Freeport
1414 - 1417
183
Freeport (U)
892 - 1307
136
Jollytown
193 - 574
56
Kittanninq (M)
1239
98
Kittanning (U)
1188 - 1189
183
Pittsburgh
488 - 1280
187
Pittsburgh R
485 - 827
144
Sewickley
372 - 1181
130
Ten Mile
180 - 447
38
Uniontown
280 - 951
98
Washington
54 - 682
77
Washington (U)
412 - 457
76
Washington A
417 - 506
64
Washington R
47
70
Waynesburg
150 - 974
88
Waynesburg (L)
560 - 882
102
Waynesburg (U)
558 - 881
105
Waynesburg A
191 - 710
96
Waynesburg B
84 - 752
85
Waynesburg R
429
54
Indiana
Fropnnrt (L.I
3QR
99 A
(Continued)
6-21
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
TABLE 6-4A. CONTINUED
County
Coalbed
Sample Depth
Range
(ft)
Average Total Gas
Content (ft3/ton)
Kittanninq
624
25
Indiana
Kittanning (L)
575 - 759
234
Kittanninq (M)
656
306
Lackawanna
Biq Bed
102-111
41
Clark
196 - 202
13
New County (L)
555 - 562
32
New County (U)
128 - 129
61
Schuylkill
Mammoth
1719
12
Orchard
1359 - 1373
18
Peach Mountain
685
634
Primrose
1541
13
Seven Ft. Leader
817
397
Tunnel
604 - 608
469
Washington
Fishpot
200
70
Pittsburgh
336 - 798
131
Pittsburgh R
459 - 791
125
Pittsburgh R1
332
45
Pittsburgh R2
329
57
Sewickley
450 - 779
98
Ten Mile
207
32
Uniontown
340 - 675
100
Washington
100 - 469
34
Washington (U)
227
21
Washington A
146 - 247
56
Waynesburg
52
6
Waynesburg (L)
274 - 603
90
Waynesburg (U)
270 - 601
88
Waynesburq A
164 - 488
84
Waynesburg B
138 - 323
73
Westmorland
Bakerstown (U)
440
124
Brookville
994
239
Brush Creek
627
179
Clarion
RQ1 - Qfifi
1RA
(Continued)
6-22
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
TABLE 6-4A. CONTINUED
County
Coalbed
Sample Depth
Range
(ft)
Average Total Gas
Content (ft3/ton)
Westmorland
Freeport (L)
490
94
Freeport (U)
728
243
Harlem
372
145
Kittanninq (L)
1060
347
Kittanninq (M)
637 - 866
187
Kittanninq (U)
570 - 806
237
Mahoninq
674
255
Mercer
104?
17R
TABLE 6-4B. COUNTY AND COALBED SPECIFIC SUMMARY OF
AVERAGE GAS CONTENT DATA FOR WEST VIRGINIA
County
Coalbed
Sample Depth
Range
(ft)
Average Total Gas
Content (ft3/ton)
Barbour
Clarion
819 - 822
140
Kittanninq
546
225
Kittanninq (L)
535 - 806
180
Kittanninq (U)
486 - 745
153
Braxton
Kittanninq (L)
76 - 414
17
Sewell
931
83
Marion
Pittsburgh
850
215
Sewickley
699 - 784
145
Waynesburg
397 - 402
95
Waynesburg (L)
403 - 405
83
Waynesburg (U)
402
77
Monongalia
Pittsburgh
841
147
Redstone
738 - 746
118
Sewickley
575 - 848
109
Waynesburg
401 - 584
91
Waynesburg (L)
582
130
Waynesburg (U)
579
129
Ritchie
Kittanning (M)
1436 - 1457
56
Kittanning (U)
1424 - 1431
43
Upshur
Kittanning (M)
909 - 912
75
Kittanning (U)
839
39
6-23
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
TABLE 6-4C. COUNTY AND COALBED SPECIFIC SUMMARY OF
AVERAGE GAS CONTENT DATA FOR OHIO
County
Coalbed
Sample Depth Range
(ft)
Average Total Gas
Content (ft3/ton)
Harrison
Freeport (U)
403 - 407
30
Kittanning (M)
585 - 602
102
Noble
Freeport (L)
629 - 631
131
Freeport (U)
551
127
References
Gas Research Institute, 1980, Summary of Geologic Features of Selected Coal-Bearing Areas
of the United States Final Report, Gas Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
Gas Research Institute, 1988, A Geologic Assessment of Natural Gas from Coal Seams in the
Central Appalachian Basin. Gas Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
Gas Research Institute, 1991, Coalbed Methane Technology Development in the Appalachian
Basin, Gas Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
Grau, H.R. and J. LaScola, 1984, Methane Emissions from U.S. Coal Mines in 1980. United
States Bureau of Mines.
Hobbs, G.W. and R.O. Winkler, 1990, Economics and Financing of Coalbed Methane Ventures.
Ammonite Resources, New Canaan, CT.
Hunt, A.M. and D.J. Steels, 1991, Coalbed Methane Development in the Northern and Central
Appalachian Basins - Past. Present and Future, Presented at the Coalbed Methane Symposium,
Tuscaloosa, Alabama, May 13-16, pp. 127-141.
Keystone Coal Industry Manual, 1994, Mining Information Services of the Maclean Hunter Mining
and Construction Group, Chicago, Illinois.
Rightmire, C.T., G.E. Eddy, and J.N. Kirr, 1984, Coalbed Methane Resources of the United
States - AAPG Studies in Geology Series #17, American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Tulsa, Oklahoma.
6-24
-------
Northern Appalachian Basin
United States Department of Energy, 1983, Variation in the Quantity of Methane Adsorbed by
Selected Coals as a Function of Coal Petrology and Coal Chemistry, USDOE, Morgantown
Energy Technology Center.
6-25
-------
-------
Section 7
Uinta Basin
Geology And Resources
The Uinta Basin is an east-
west asymmetrical syncline located in
Utah and Colorado and covers
approximately 14,450 square miles.
Total minable coal resources in the
basin have been estimated to be
approximately 12,165 million short
tons and total gas resources in the
basin have been estimated at 0.8 to
4.6 Tcf (Keystone 1994 and Rightmire
et al., 1984). The Majority of the
basin's reserves are contained in 22
coal fields in Utah. Within these coal
fields, numerous coalbeds with
thicknesses in excess of 15 feet are
present. Most of these coalbeds split
into several thinner seams with an
average seam thickness of 6 feet
(Keystone 1994). The majority of coal
found in this basin is bituminous in rank. An illustration of the Uinta Basin relative to other coal
bearing regions in the United States is presented in Figure 7-1.
Coal has been produced in the Uinta Basin since 1870. Most of the coal production has
come from underground mines located in Central Utah. It is projected that considerable
percentage of future production will come from this region. Much of the current coal production
comes from large, highly-productive mines equipped with longwall mining machines. Four of
Utah's mines are ranked among the top 20 of the nation's largest underground coal mines. Of
the 22 coal fields found in the Uinta basin, the Wasatch Plateau and the Book Cliffs fields are
considered most important. There are ten active mines in the Wasatch coalfield which produced
about 90 percent of the state's 1992 production (Keystone 1994). It is expected that the number
of active mines in this field will decrease due to the closure and idle periods experienced by two
large mine operators. The Book Cliffs coal field is the second most important field in the state
and represented over 10 percent of the state's coal production in 1992. Three major groups of
seams dominate coal production in this field: Castlegate, Soldier Canyon and Sunnyside. These
groups range between 2 to 14 feet in thickness (Keystone 1994). Similar to Wasatch Plateau,
the Book Cliffs coals have low ash content, low to moderate sulfur content and high heat content.
7-1
COAL BASINS OF THE UNITED STATES
Figure 7-1. Uinta Basin and Other Major Coal Bearing
Regions of the United States
-------
Uinta Basin
Since the early 1970's, the BOM has conducted investigations to identify underground
mine gas emissions from U.S. coal mines (Grau and LaScola 1984). In 1971, approximately 2.8
million cubic feet per day (MMcfd) of gas was emitted from the ventilation shafts of coal mines
operating in Utah. In 1988, emissions had increased about 157 percent to a total of 7.2 MMcfd.
In fact, the emissions from Utah mines had the second largest increase in emissions during this
period, followed by coal mines operating in Alabama (Trevits et at. 1993).
Due to the high gas emissions experienced by underground coal mines, many mine
operators have implemented methane degasification processes to maintain safe working
conditions. In 1986, the BOM drilled four horizontal holes from the outside entries of an
advancing section, each 780 to 1000 feet in length. These bore holes produced initial flow rates
ranging from 50,000 to 240,000 ft3/day. Cumulative production of over 300 million ft3 of
commercial quality gas was removed from the Sunnyside coalbed. The four holes reduced face
emissions by about 75 percent (Molinda et at. 1986). Another recent application of coalbed
degasification is located in the Soldier Canyon mine in Price, Utah. At this mine, horizontal holes
which extend between 1500 to 2500 feet in length were drilled in advance of mining into the
mined coalbed. This project has recovered and sold approximately 1 billion cubic feet of pipeline
quality gas (Carter 1990).
Overview of Available Gas Content Data
In 1992, the Uinta Basin represented about 2% (21.34 million tons per year) of the total
coal produced in the United States (Keystone 1994). This consisted entirely of underground
mining. The basin includes over six counties in two different states. The two highest coal
producing counties are Carbon and Emery county, Utah, representing 48 percent and 46 percent
of total basin production, respectively. Table 7-1 presents the distribution of available gas
content data by county. Over 75 percent of the coal samples extracted by the BOM were taken
from Carbon and Emery Counties, and all the coal producing counties are represented in the
data base. Several samples were extracted from counties where coal was not produced in 1992.
The available gas content data for the Uinta Basin are presented in Table 7-2. Ultimate
and proximate analysis data for this basin are presented at the end of the report in Appendix A.
Samples from 53 different coalbeds were extracted by the BOM from the Uinta Basin. Table 7-3
identifies the range of coalbed depths and gas contents which are typically found. The gassiest
coalbeds in the basin are the Utah Subseam 1, Kenilworth, Castlegate A, and Gilson (each with
average total gas contents greater than 100 ft3/ton). The measured gas contents of many
coalbeds are less than 50 ft3/ton and quite often had undetectable gas content values (reported
value of 0 ft3/ton). Due to the limitations associated with the direct measurement method, the
samples reported with zero gas contents may have liberated small quantities of gas which can
now be detected using more sensitive instruments.
7-2
-------
Uinta Basin
Gas contents for the three primary counties in Utah are available in the database. These
data were grouped to identify typical depth and gas content values for the major coalbeds in
each county. Table 7-4 presents the county and coalbed specific depth ranges, and average gas
content on a county and coalbed specific basis. Coals in Carbon county may contain the highest
gas content. In particular, Castlegate A, B, C and D, Gilson, Kenilworth, Utah Subseam 1 and
2, and Utah (UNC) all have average total gas contents ranging between 63-282 ft3/ton.
Gas Content Trends And Reservoir Properties
Regression analysis of the overall gas content data versus coalbed depth yields a poor
fit (r2 = 0.17). This may be due to the large number of samples (over 30 percent) with total gas
content reported as 0 ft3/ton and the high variability in gas content values observed in the data
for all depths. Since general trends with combined data were not observed, an attempt was
made to identify relationships between total gas content and coalbed depth for different ranked
coals. A majority of the coal samples analyzed by the BOM were ranked as high volatile A and
B bituminous. The high volatile A coals follow the familiar trend of increasing gas content with
depth (see Figure 7-2); however, there is considerable scatter in the data (r2 = 0.33). High
volatile A coals have the highest gas content with average value of 73 ft3/ton, ranging between
0 to 347 ft3/ton, followed by high volatile B (average of 24 ft3/ton) and high volatile C (average
of 4 ft3/ton) ranging between 0 to 211 and 0 to 26, respectively. Over 20 percent of the high
volatile A coals had a gas content value of 0 ft3/ton and all of these samples were located at
depths less than 900 feet. The remaining 80 percent of the sample with measurable gas
contents were located at depth intervals of 917 to 3355 feet. No trend was observed for high
volatile B coals.
For the 54 coal samples contained in the RGC database, sorption time was determined
from desorption curves. Available sorption time data are included in Tabie 7-2. The average
sorption time for Uinta basin samples is about 24 days. This is near the average value for coals
across the country. Sorption time values range from a few hours to 59 days. Nearly 75 percent
of the samples had a sorption time of less than one month. Seven samples from Sunnyside, two
from Ballard, and one sample each from Gilson and Palisade coalbeds were analyzed by the
DOE to determine the total volume of methane adsorbed into coal matrix at incremental
pressures. Figure 7-3 illustrates the Langmuir adsorption isotherm curves and Langmuir volume
and pressure constants for each of these coalbeds at selected depths.
7-3
-------
Uinta Basin
500 1,000
1,500 2,000 2,500
COALBED DEPTH (ft)
3,000 3,500 4,000
Figure 7-2. Relationship between total gas content and coalbed depth
for high volatile A coals in the Uinta Basin
Palisade
Depth = 615 ft
Vt = 1154 ftA3 /ton
PI = 468 Psia
A
Gilson
Depth = 502 ft
VI = 801 ft A3/ton
PI = 166 Psia
/
4
—— ^
Ballard
Sunnyside
// Depth = 514 ft
Depth = 1250 ft
/yyS VI = 747 ft A3/ton
V! = 1033 ftA3 /ton
/// PI » 200 Psia
Pi = 350 Psia
0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2,000 2,400 2,800 3,200 3,600 4,000 4,400 4,800
PRESSURE (Psia)
Figure 7-3. Adsorption isotherm curves for selected coalbeds
in the Uinta basin
7-4
-------
Uinta Basin
TABLE 7-1. COUNTY SPECIFIC COAL PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF
AVAILABLE GAS CONTENT DATA
1992 Coal Production
(1000 tpy)
Total No. of
No. of RGC
State
County
Surface
Underground
Samples
Coal Samples
UT
Carbon
0
10,183
101
33
UT
Emery
0
8,576
98
13
UT
Garfield
0
0
9
4
UT
Grand
0
0
33
3
UT
Kane
0
0
1
1
UT
Sevier
0
2,580
28
0
TOTAL
0
21,339
270
54
7-5
-------
TABLE 7-2. GAS CONTENT AND RELATED DATA FOR THE UINTA BASIN
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
106
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE
1016
13
105
32
150
366
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
194
0
3
0
3
718
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-B
570
4
58
10
72
78
47.7
364
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
591
3
32
48
83
365
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
593
3
29
38
70
762
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
758
3
13
16
32
35
33
16.2
514
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-B
826
1
5
35
41
45
43
9.9
369
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
1004
3
25
41
69
383
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
1197
0
0
124
124
726
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
1217
3
213
10
226
802
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
1335
3
210
13
226
96
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
1646
3
0
3
6
823
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
1939
4
9
73
86
99
98
23.1
95
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
2173
10
172
73
255
345
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
2559
5
156
25
186
201
175
25.4
696
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
2643
2
254
29
285
306
282
41.8
717
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
2656
1
258
6
265
284
251
35.9
720
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
3016
4
19
38
61
66
63
16.8
803
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
3025
3
105
38
146
719
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
HV-A
3355
11
44
29
84
92
26.8
373
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
HV-B
316
0
13
35
48
382
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
HV-A
353
0
10
25
35
495
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
HV-B
441
0
0
38
38
542
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
HV-B
504
1
19
35
55
61
58
39.7
543
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
HV-A
511
0
19
13
32
537
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
HV-A
737
6
32
57
95
513
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
HV-B
776
0
0
45
45
368
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
HV-B
973
3
13
19
35
727
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
HV-A
1234
3
161
25
189
200
174
59.0
371
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE C
HV-B
198
0
6
16
22
362
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE C
HV-B
556
3
16
22
41
363
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE C
HV-B
563
3
19
22
44
367
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE C
HV-B
898
0
6
16
22
747
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE C
HV-A
3292
19
306
13
338
370
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE D
HV-A
149
0
6
16
22
500
BOM
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE D
HV-A
1101
0
0
48
48
697
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE D
HV-A
1136
3
171
25
199
212
192
34.5
538
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE D
HV-A
1308
1
3
89
93
104
6.1
102
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE D
1431
3
27
0
30
29.5
97
RGC
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE D
1953
1
8
6
15
5.3
292
BOM
UT
CARBON
FISH CREEK
1728
19
111
64
194
I 758
BOM
UT
CARBON
GILSON
HV-B
476
0
0
51
51
750
BOM
UT
CARBON
GILSON
HV-A
483
0
0
16
16
1239
BOM
UT
CARBON
GILSON
HV-B
600
0
0
0
0
1295
BOM
UT
CARBON
GILSON
HV-A
2935
61
236
3
300
1297
BOM
UT
CARBON
GILSON
HV-A
3097
67
140
3
210
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 7-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure
and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
Countv
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Ti me
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
1290
BOM
UT
CARBON
KENILWORTH
HV-B
786
61
150
0
211
548
BOM
UT
CARBON
KENILWORTH
HV-A
2821
0
0
70
70
549
RGC
UT
CARBON
KENILWORTH
HV-A
2827
3
26
54
83
91
85
11.7
746
RGC
UT
CARBON
KENILWORTH
HV-A
3177
24
310
13
347
382
311
12.8
1276
BOM
UT
CARBON
MCKINNON
HV-C
200
13
13
0
26
2176
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR
HV-B
500
0
0
0
0
294
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR
628
0
0
0
0
295
RGC
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR
700
0.32
0.39
0
0.71
0.0
296
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR
1016
0
0
0
0
293
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR
1458
0
0
0
0
2175
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
331
3
6
0
9
2174
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
383
0
0
0
0
2173
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-C
520
3
0
0
3
1275
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
660
3
0
0
3
1277
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
997
0
0
0
0
1278
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
1069
3
6
0
9
1287
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
1174
29
29
0
58
1286
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
1182
3
10
0
13
1282
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
1998
3
3
0
6
1294
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (U)
HV-B
605
32
35
0
67
1298
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (U)
HV-B
945
6
32
0
38
1279
BOM
UT
CARBON
O'CONNOR (U)
HV-B
993
0
13
0
13
1248
BOM
UT
CARBON
ROCK CANYON
HV-B
405
3
3
0
6
756
RGC
UT
CARBON
ROCK CANYON
HV-B
436
3
10
29
42
46
44
21.2
310
RGC
UT
CARBON
ROCK CANYON
HV-B
1706
4
60
13
77
85
76
24.6
1293
BOM
UT
CARBON
ROCK CANYON
HV-A
2867
29
29
3
61
808
RGC
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
HV-B
374
3
116
29
148
164
146
26.8
1285
BOM
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
HV-B
396
0
10
0
10
2155
BOM
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
HV-B
855
3
3
0
6
2156
BOM
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
HV-B
858
3
0
0
3
1296
BOM
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE (L)
HV-B
2720
108
61
0
169
344
RGC
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE (U)
HV-A
1000
28
185
45
258
281
254
27.0
1281
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH A
HV-A
964
10
64
3
77
1249
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH A
HV-A
1188
10
22
3
35
1289
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH C
HV-A
725
0
86
0
86
1264
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH D
HV-A
657
0
35
16
51
1272
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH D
HV-A
958
57
92
6
155
372
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM
HV-A
2821
0
0
70
70
698
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 1
HV-A
1394
6
245
25
276
751
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 1
HV-A
1504
3
210
22
235
843
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 1
HV-A
2084
6
292
38
336
376
341
11.8
547
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
HV-A
6
197
64
267
512
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
HV-B
937
2
5
57
64
71
72
13.2
541
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
HV-A
1514
2
32
48
82
89
85
39.5
539
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
HV-A
1742
0
0
48
48
824
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
HV-A
2110
7
25
35
67
73
70
21.5
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 7-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Temperature
BOM
Source
State
Countv
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(davs)
104
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
2187
5
42
32
79
50.5
699
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 3
HV-A
963
0
38
19
57
62
56
49.7
825
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 3
HV-A
1552
0
0
16
16
18
18
16.7
540
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 3
HV-A
1762
0
0
73
73
105
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 3
2222
0
5
6
11
6.2
804
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH (UNC)
HV-B
285
1
76
16
93
102
91
41.5
806
BOM
UT
CARBON
UTAH (UNC)
HV-B
354
0
41
29
70
809
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH (UNC)
HV-A
504
2
51
10
63
72
63
13.6
343
RGC
UT
CARBON
UTAH (UNC)
HV-B
2081
9
176
13
198
216
193
12.3
108
RGC
UT
EMERY
BEAR CANYON
971
0
1
0
1
0.6
728
BOM
UT
EMERY
BECKWITH
HV-A
1075
0
3
0
3
1288
BOM
UT
EMERY
BLIND CANYON
HV-B
191
6
3
0
9
1266
BOM
UT
EMERY
BLIND CANYON
HV-C
1021
3
16
0
19
99
RGC
UT
EMERY
CASTLEGATE C
301
34
31
0
65
0.5
98
BOM ^
UT
EMERY
CASTLEGATE C
1249
0
13
0
13
100
BOM
UT
EMERY
CASTLEGATE D
161
3
19
0
22
101
BOM
UT
EMERY
CASTLEGATE D
170
3
22
0
25
749
BOM
UT
EMERY
FERRON
HV-B
84
0
10
6
16
725
BOM
UT
EMERY
FERRON
HV-A
99
0
0
0
0
731
BOM
UT
EMERY
FERRON
HV-B
240
0
0
0
0
112
RGC
UT
EMERY
FLAT CANYON
1368
1
3
3
7
16.9
115
RGC
UT
EMERY
GILSON
2340
2
22
0
24
27.2
297
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
HV-A
89
0
0
6
6
125
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
357
0
0
0
0
126
RGC
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
449
1
17
0
18
20
17
14.3
124
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
617
0
29
3
32
2178
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
HV-A
719
6
3
0
9
123
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
873
0
0
0
0
2157
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
HV-B
1003
10
3
0
13
1267
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
HV-B
1089
3
3
0
6
2158
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
HV-B
1089
3
10
0
13
2167
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
HV-B
1104
0
0
0
0
2177
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
HV-A
1155
6
19
6
31
2159
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
HV-B
1316
0
6
0
6
2166
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
HV-B
1439
13
6
0
19
1616
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA (U)
1022
0
0
0
0
2164
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA (U)
HV-C
1106
6
0
0
6
2168
BOM
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA (U)
HV-C
1647
0
0
0
0
113
RGC
UT
EMERY
I VIE (U)
82
1
2
0
3
0.0
114
BOM
UT
EMERY
I VIE (U)
277
0
3
3
6
116
RGC
UT
EMERY
KENILWORTH
246
0
22
0
22
22.6
117
RGC
UT
EMERY
KENILWORTH
2450
7
200
99
306
54.2
I 1260
BOM
UT
EMERY
MCKINNON
HV-B
751
0
0
0
0
1274
BOM
UT
EMERY
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
611
0
6
0
6
1261
BOM
UT
EMERY
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
691
0
0
0
0
1262
BOM
UT
EMERY
O'CONNOR (L)
HV-B
1213
0
0
0
0
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 7-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure and Teinperati
re
BOM
Source
State
County
Coal bed
Coal
Coal bed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/IMF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(fi3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(davs)
1259
BOM
UT
EMERY
O'CONNOR (U)
HV-B
515
0
0
0
0
1273
BOM
UT
EMERY
O'CONNOR (U)
HV-C
577
0
0
0
0
119
RGC
UT
EMERY
ROCK CANYON (L)
2353
2
104
45
151
42.4
118
RGC
UT
EMERY
ROCK CANYON (U)
2340
0
52
16
68
27.7
754
BOM
UT
EMERY
SUNNYSIDE
HV-A
917
0
0
10
10
752
BOM
UT
EMERY
SUNNYSIDE
HV-A
926
0
13
0
13
729
RGC
UT
EMERY
SUNNYSIDE
HV-A
1204
3
9
4
0
7
0.0
122
RGC
UT
EMERY
SUNNYSIDE (L)
1799
81
0
90
33.5
1243
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
HV-B
224
3
3
0
6
107
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
390
0
0
0
0
1265
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
HV-A
527
6
29
0
35
1208
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
539
0
0
0
0
1236
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
HV-A
554
3
10
0
13
1217
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
689
0
0
0
0
1205
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
HV-A
702
0
0
0
0
1221
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
702
3
3
0
6
1231
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
749
0
0
0
0
1204
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
755
0
0
0
0
1228
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
HV-A
778
0
0
0
0
1230
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A
860
0
0
0
0
1258
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH A R
HV-B
515
0
0
0
0
1202
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
259
0
0
0
0
1218
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
HV-A
279
6
6
0
12
1222
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
HV-B
294
0
3
0
3
1216
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
HV-A
483
0
0
0
0
1292
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
HV-B
540
6
54
0
60
1219
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
HV-B
598
6
6
3
15
1233
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
HV-A
633
3
10
0
13
1207
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
HV-A
654
0
0
0
0
1865
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
689
0
0
0
0
1234
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
689
0
0
0
0
1214
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
HV-A
706
0
0
0
0
1212
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
815
0
0
0
0
1229
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH C-D
HV-A
834
0
0
0
0
1220
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
HV-B
248
22
13
0
35
1299
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
HV-B
453
16
134
0
150
1301
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
HV-B
518
0
102
6
108
1213
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
HV-B
547
0
0
0
0
1200
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
HV-B
550
0
0
0
0
1206
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
571
0
0
0
0
1245
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
HV-B
642
25
3
3
31
1283
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
HV-B
663
0
22
0
22
1256
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
HV-A
672
0
0
0
0
1300
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
HV-A
685
0
48
0
48
1209
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH G
756
0
0
0
0
1203
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH I
HV-B
143
0
0
0
0
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 7-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure
and Temperati
re
BOM
Source
State
Con nty
Coalbed
Coal
Conlbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/ISIF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(da\s)
1223
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH 1
364
0
0
0
0
1242
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH 1
HV-A
376
0
0
3
3
1201
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH 1
466
0
0
0
0
1244
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH 1
HV-A
495
19
64
0
83
1224
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH 1
585
3
0
0
3
1255
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH 1
HV-B
602
3
3
o jo
i
6
1241
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH 1
HV-B
651
6
6
12
1232
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH 1
HV-B
658
0
0
0
0
1211
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH 1
680
0
0
0
0
1864
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH l-J
680
0
0
0
0
1215
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH J
HV-A
643
6
3
0
9
1210
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH K
665
0
0
0
0
103
RGC
UT
EMERY
UTAH (UNC)
127
1
19
3
23
16.4
2161
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH (UNC)
HV0C
952
0
0
0
0
2165
BOM
UT
EMERY
UTAH (UNC)
HV-B
1435
0
0
0
0
700
BOM
UT
GARFIELD
CHRISTENSEN
SUB-A
713
3
6
0
6
7.8
701
BOM
UT
GARFIELD
CHRISTENSEN
SUB-A
726
3
3
0
6
7.8
6.3
702
BOM
UT
GARFIELD
CHRISTENSEN
SUB-A
780
0
0
0
0
546
BOM
UT
GARFIELD
CHRISTENSEN?
SUB-A
695
0
0
0
0
544
BOM
UT
GARFIELD
REES
SUB-A
607
0
0
0
0
110
RGC
UT
GARFIELD
BALD KNOLL
274
3
6
3
12
10.7
111
RGC
UT
GARFIELD
EMERY
1031
5
3
6
14
12.0
545
RGC
UT
GARFIELD
REES
SUB-A
620
0
2
0
2
3
2
0.0
121
RGC
UT
GARFIELD
SMIRL
443
1
1
0
2
0.0
766
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-B
192
0
0
0
0
770
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-B
198
0
0
0
0
774
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-B
254
0
3
6
9
703
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-B
297
0
0
0
0
704
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-C
336
0
0
0
0
1225
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-B
353
0
0
0
0
776
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-B
371
0
0
6
6
706
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-C
394
0
0
0
0
710
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-B
410
0
3
0
3
713
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-B
416
0
0
0
0
715
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
HV-B
423
0
0
0
0
813
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD (L)
HV-B
530
0
41
6
47
811
BOM
UT
GRAND
BALLARD (U)
HV-B
505
3
13
10
26
748
BOM
UT
GRAND
CARBONERA
HV-B
109
0
0
0
0
764
BOM
UT
GRAND
CARBONERA
HV-B
119
0
0
0
0
817
BOM
UT
GRAND
CARBONERA
HV-B
194
0
19
6
25
818
BOM
UT
GRAND
CARBONERA
HV-B
239
0
32
13
45
819
RGC
UT
GRAND
CHESTERFIELD
HV-B
279
1
34
10
45
49
44
18.4
j 1227
BOM
UT
GRAND
CHESTERFIELD
HV-B
315
0
0
0
0
1280
BOM
UT
GRAND
CHESTERFIELD
HV-B
330
3
10
0
13
781
BOM
UT
GRAND
CHESTERFIELD
HV-B
736
0
0
10
10
783
BOM
UT
GRAND
CHESTERFIELD
HV-B
743
0
0
10
10
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 7-2. CONTINUED
At Actual Baromet
ric Pressure
and Temperatu
re
BOM
Source
State
CoillKv
Coaibed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/to»)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/to»)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
778
BOM
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
HV-B
409
0
0
0
0
1226
BOM
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
HV-B
428
0
0
0
0
1271
BOM
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
HV-B
437
3
10
0
13
721
BOM
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
HV-B
493
0
0
0
0
815
RGC
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
HV-B
618
0
26
10
36
43
40
25.6
722
RGC
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
HV-B
624
0
3
0
3
4
3
0.5
723
BOM
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
HV-B
627
0
0
0
0
724
BOM
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
HV-B
654
0
0
0
0
1291
BOM
UT
GRAND
UTAH (UNC)
HV-B
432
6
22
0
28
1240
BOM
UT
GRAND
UTAH (UNC)
HV-B
569
0
0
0
0
785
BOM
UT
GRAND
UTAH (UNC)
HV-A
861
0
0
16
16
120
RGC
UT
KANE
SMIRL
754
13
1
0
14
55.8
299
BOM
UT
SEVIER
FERRON (L)
585
0
0
0
0
298
BOM
UT
SEVIER
FERRON (U)
344
0
0
0
0
2179
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA
HV-C
546
3
0
0
3
2180
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA
HV-C
619
0
3
0
3
2160
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA
HV-C
1058
3
3
0
6
2170
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA
HV-C
1338
3
0
0
3
2169
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA
HV-C
1678
0
0
0
0
1257
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA (U)
HV-C
792
3
3
0
6
1253
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA (U)
HV-C
794
3
0
0
3
1238
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA (U)
HV-C
841
0
0
0
0
1251
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA (U)
HV-C
880
0
0
0
0
1235
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA (U)
HV-C
886
0
0
0
0
1246
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA (U)
HV-B
908
0
0
0
0
1237
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA (U)
HV-C
947
0
0
0
0
2163
BOM
UT
SEVIER
HIAWATHA (U)
HV-B
1023
0
0
0
0
2172
BOM
UT
SEVIER
IVIE
HV-C
599
0
0
0
0
374
BOM
UT
SEVIER
(VIE
757
0
0
0
0
375
BOM
UT
SEVIER
IVIE
813
0
0
0
0
1269
BOM
UT
SEVIER
MUDDY
HV-C
744
0
13
0
13
2171
BOM
UT
SEVIER
MUDDY NO 1
HV-B
1593
0
0
0
0
1284
BOM
UT
SEVIER
UTAH A
HV-B
781
0
16
0
16
1252
BOM
UT
SEVIER
UTAH A
HV-B
847
0
0
0
0
1270
BOM
UT
SEVIER
UTAH (UNC)
HV-B
549
6
13
0
19
1263
BOM
UT
SEVIER
UTAH (UNC)
HV-C
911
0
0
0
0
1250
BOM
UT
SEVIER
UTAH (UNC)
HV-C
934
0
6
0
6
1247
BOM
UT
SEVIER
UTAH (UNC)
HV-B
937
0
0
0
0
1254
BOM
UT
SEVIER
UTAH (UNC)
HV-C
1162
3
10
0
13
1268
BOM
UT
SEVIER
UTAH (UNC)
HV-B
1176
3
6
0
9
-------
Uinta Basin
TABLE 7-3. TOTAL GAS CONTENT AND COALBED DEPTH RANGES
FOR SELECTED COALBEDS IN THE UINTA BASIN
Coalbed
Total No. of
Samples
Sample
Depth Range
(ft)
Total Gas
Content Range
(ft3/ton)
Average Total
Gas Content
(ft3/ton)
Ballard
11
192 -423
0- 10
2
Carbonera
4
109 - 239
0 - 45
18
Castlegate A
19
194 - 3355
3 - 285
122
Castlegate B
9
316 - 1234
32 - 189
64
Castlegate C
7
198 - 3292
13 - 338
78
Castlegate D
8
149 - 1953
15 - 199
57
Chesterfield
5
279 - 743
0 - 44
15
Ferron
3
84 - 240
0 - 16
5
Gilson
6
476 - 3097
0 - 296
100
Hiawatha
18
89 - 1678
0 - 35
10
Hiawatha (U)
11
792 - 1647
0 - 6
2
Ivie
3
599 - 813
0
0
Kenilworth
6
246 - 3177
23 - 347
173
O'Connor
5
500 - 1458
0 - 1
0
O'Connor(L)
12
331 - 1998
0 - 57
10
O'Connor (U)
5
515 - 993
0 - 64
24
Palisade
8
409 - 654
0 - 36
6
Rock Canyon
4
405 - 2867
6 - 77
47
Sunnyside
7
374 - 1204
3 - 148
28
Utah (UNC)
16
127 - 2081
0 - 198
34
Utah A
17
224 - 1188
0 - 73
12
Utah C-D
13
259 - 834
0 - 64
9
Utah G
11
248 - 756
0 -150
36
Utah I
10
143 - 680
0 - 83
11
Utah Subseam
3
1394 - 2084
235 - 336
282
Utah Subseam
6
937 - 2187
48 - 267
102
Utah Subseam
4
963 - 2222
11-73
39
Data for the following coalbeds are not included in the table due to the small number of samples
analyzed: Bald Knoll, Ballard (L), Ballard (U), Bear Canyon, Beckswith, Blind Canyon,
Castlegate, Christensen, Emery Ferron (L), Ferron (U), Fish Creek, Flat Canyon, Ivie (U),
McKinnon, Muddy, Rees, Rock Canyon (L), Rock Canyon (U), Smirl, Sunnyside (L), Sunnyside
7-12
-------
Uinta Basin
TABLE 7-4. COUNTY AND COALBED SPECIFIC SUMMARY OF
AVERAGE GAS CONTENT DATA
State
County
Coalbed
Sample Depth
Range (ft)
Average Total
Gas Content
(ft3/ton)
UT
Carbon
Castlegate A
194 - 3355
122
Castlegate B
316 - 1234
63
Castlegate C
198 - 3292
93
Castlegate D
149 - 1953
68
Gilson
476 - 3097
115
Kenilworth
786 - 3177
178
O'Connor (L)
331 - 1998
11
O'Connor(U)
605 - 993
40
Rock Canyon
405 - 2867
47
Sunnyside
374 - 858
42
Utah Subseam 1
1394 - 2084
282
Utah Subseam 2
937 - 2187
101
Utah Subseam 3
963 - 2222
39
Utah (UNC)
285 - 2081
106
Emery
Blind Canyon
191 - 1021
14
Castlegate C
301 - 1249
39
Castlegate D
161 - 170
24
Ferron
84 - 240
5
Hiawatha
89 - 1439
12
Ivie (U)
82 - 277
5
Kenilworth
246 - 2450
164
O'Connor (L)
611 - 1213
2
Sunnyside
917 - 1204
10
Utah A
224 - 860
5
Utah C - D
259 - 834
8
Utah G
248 - 756
36
Utah I
143 - 680
11
(Continued)
7-13
-------
Uinta Basin
TABLE 7-4. CONTINUED
State
County
Coalbed
Sample Depth
Range (ft)
Average Total
Gas Content
(ft3/ton)
Utah (UNC)
127 - 1435
8
UT
Grand
Ballard
192 -423
2
Carbonera
109 - 239
18
Chesterfield
279 - 743
16
Palisade
409 - 654
7
Utah (UNC)
344 - 754
5
Hiawatha
546 - 1678
3
Hiawatha (U)
792 - 1023
1
Utah (UNC)
549 - 1176
8
References
Carter, Russell, 1990, Underground Developments in Methane Recovery - Coal, Maclean Hunter
Mining and Construction Group, Chicago, Illinois.
Grau, H.R. and J. LaScola, 1984, Methane Emissions from U.S. Coal Mines in 1980, United
States Bureau of Mines.
Keystone Coal Industry Manual, 1994, Mining Information Services of the Maclean Hunter Mining
and Construction Group, Chicago, Illinois.
Molinda, G.M., T.M. Kohler, and G. Finfinger, 1986, Investigation of Similarities Between
Methane Drainage Potential of Utah's Sunnyside Coalbed and Eastern U.S. Coalbeds, U.S.
Department of Interior, Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations.
Rightmire, C.T., G.E. Eddy, and J.N. Kirr, 1984, Coalbed Methane Resources of the United
States -AAPG Studies in Geology Series #17, American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Trevits, M.A., G.L. Finfinger, and J. LaScola, 1993, Evaluation of U.S. Coal Mine Emissions,
Presented at the SME Annual Meeting, Reno, Nevada, February 15-18.
7-14
-------
Section 8
Coal Basins Of The Western United States
Introduction
This chapter presents and
discusses gas content data for the
remaining five coal basins in the
western United States: Greater Green
River, Piceance, Powder River, Raton
Mesa and San Juan. These basins
are grouped since they are generally
represented by fewer samples than
other basins in the BOM/RGC data
base and are geographically related.
The discussion for each basin
presents an overview of geology and
coal and coalbed methane resources
for each basin and summarizes the
gas content results found in the
BOM/RGC database. Trend analysis
on gas content versus depth was not
conducted for these basins due to shortage of samples. However, sorption time constants,
Langmuir adsorption constants and their typical range of values are presented in the discussion
for each basin. Figure 8-1 illustrates the approximate size and location of the Western basins.
Greater Green River Basin
The Greater Green River Basin incorporates approximately 21,000 square miles of area
in southwestern Wyoming and northwestern Colorado. It contains Wyoming's largest coal-
bearing area covering approximately 15,000 square miles (Rightmire et al., 1984). Coal rank
ranges from sub-bituminous to semi-anthracite, but a significant quantity is bituminous and
sub-bituminous in rank. Total minable resources of the Greater Green River Basin have been
estimated to be 39 billion short tons (Keystone 1994). In 1992, the basin represented 3.5
percent of the total coal produced in the United States. The vast majority of this production was
from surface mines (over 85 percent of the annual production). Virtually all of the coals mined
to date in the basin have come from the Mesaverde Group fields which are principally high
volatile C bituminous in rank and vary in thickness from three to 20 feet (Keystone 1994).
Approximately 29 Tcf of coalbed methane resources have been estimated to be contained
in the coals of the Greater Green River Basin. As of January 1991, cumulative coalbed methane
8-1
COAL BASINS OF THE UNITED STATES
1. Greater Green River Basin
2. Piceance Basin
3. Powder River Basin
4. Raton Basin
5. San Juan Basin
Figure 8-1. Coal basins of the western United States
-------
Coal Basins of The Western United States
production in the Greater Green River Basin was approximately 4,700 million cubic feet (MMcf).
Gas companies are active in the basin, and have drilled wells in the Fort Union Formation and
Mesaverde Group. Average completion depth is about 2,700 feet. Most of these wells have
encountered initial production of 50 to 200 thousand cubic feet per day (Mcfd). However, the
wells which were dually completed in Mesaverde coalbeds and sandstones have experienced
production as high as 2,500 to 5,700 Mcfd (GRI 1991).
Recent interest in coalbed methane gas recovery activities has been prompted due to the
high gas content coals found in the basin. Total gas contents for high volatile A and B coals at
depths of 3,600 to 4,700 feet have been estimated to range between 120 to 376 ft3/ton, and
some have encountered gas contents as high as 500 ft3/ton (GRI 1980). In addition, the
presence often major pipeline companies which service the Greater Green River Basin area has
resulted in one of the best pipeline infrastructures in the western United States. Future
construction of several new pipeline systems has been proposed to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (GRI 1991).
Gas content data for 42 coal samples extracted from the Greater Green River Basin are
presented in Table 8-1. The proximate and ultimate analysis data for each coal sample is
presented at the end of the report in Appendix A. The coalbeds found in Moffat and Routt
counties of Colorado at depths ranging between 150 to 1404 feet contain the lowest gas content
coals and are ranked sub-bituminous A and high volatile C. The Williams Fork, Wadge and
Upper Wolf Creek coalbeds all have values ranging between 0 to 16 ft3/ton. In addition, the
Williams Fork coalbed in Moffat county may contain surface minable coals at depths ranging
between 150 to 298 feet. This coal is ranked Sub-bituminous A, and has low gas content values
ranging between 3 to 13 ft3/ton. The high volatile A and high volatile B coals are found in much
deeper coalbeds located in the Mesaverde coal group of Sublette county, Wyoming and Williams
Fork coalbed of Moffat county, Colorado. These coalbeds have typical depth ranges between
3479 to 4709 feet and contain high gas content coals (approximately 100 - 680 ft3/ton).
Sorption times for the 20 RGC coal samples are also provided in Table 8-1. Adsorption
isotherm data are available for the Williams Fork and Mesaverde Group coals and are presented
in Appendix C. Samples taken at depth intervals of 3653 to 4709 feet from the Williams Fork
coalbed have slower sorption times than the Mesaverde Group coals (depths ranging between
3479 - 3527 feet). Sorption times for samples from the Williams Fork coalbed range between
23 to 158 days while the Mesaverde Group coals require only 7 to 21 days to desorb 63 percent
of the total gas content. In addition to desorbing faster, the Mesaverde Group coals liberate
more gas than the Williams Fork coals.
8-2
-------
Coal Basins of The Western United States
Piceance Basin
The Piceance Basin covers approximately 7,225 square miles in northwestern Colorado.
The basin primarily consists of all or parts of Delta, Garfield, Gunnison, Mesa, Pitkin, Rio Blanco,
and Moffat counties (McFall et al. 1986). Total minable coal resources have been estimated to
be 4 million short tons and total coal resources to be approximately 60 billion tons (Keystone
1994 and GRI 1980). In 1992, the basin represented less than 1 percent of total coal produced
in the United States (Keystone 1994). This consisted only of underground mining with no activity
in surface production. Nearly 94 percent of the total production came from three counties: Rio
Blanco, Delta and Gunnison (note that coal production in Moffat county is accounted for in the
Greater Green River Basin).
Most of the coal found in this region is ranked high volatile A to C bituminous. In many
regions of the basin, coalbed depth exceeds 3,000 feet in a very short distance from the outcrop
resulting in relatively steep, narrow and discontinuous seams. They are often interbedded with
sandstones and shales. Approximately 18 different coalbeds with an aggregate thickness of 30
to 80 feet have been identified in the basin. Individual coalbeds typically vary between four to
20 feet thick. The average is about ten feet.
The Piceance Basin is among the gassiest coal regions in the United States (McFall et
al. 1986). In 1980, the BOM published a report identifying underground coal mines which were
producing methane emissions at a rate greater than 0.1 MMcfd. Of the 200 mines identified in
the country to exceed this emission level, ten were operating in Pitkin, Gunnison and Mesa
counties, with total methane emissions of 8.2 MMcfd (Grau and LaScola 1984). In 1990, eight
mines were identified as producing greater than 0.1 MMcfd and their cumulative emissions were
greater than 10.1 MMcfd (Finfinger 1994 and Trevits et al. 1993).
Coalbed methane drilling and commercialization is underway in Garfield and Mesa
counties, Colorado. The Cameo coal group, with coalbeds ranging from 20 to 35 feet thick, is
a primary target area (GRI 1980). Coalbed methane resources of approximately 84 Tcf have
been estimated for the Black Diamond, Cameo and Coal Ridge coal groups of the basin (GRI
1991). As of 1991, approximately 7,800 MMcf of coalbed methane gas had been recovered from
wells operating in the Piceance Basin. Maximum gas contents ranging from 438 to 569 ft3/ton
have been reported by gas producing companies. It is estimated that initial production rates
ranging from 14 to 1,500 Mcfd may be achievable in the target areas. The availability of pipeline
infrastructure and marketing has been a barrier in the Piceance Basin due to the presence of
existing pipelines which are predominantly constructed to meet intrastate demands. However,
8-3
-------
Coal Basins of The Western United States
several new pipeline systems are planned to be built in the near future which may initiate further
commercialization of coalbed methane in the basin (GRI 1991).
Gas content data for the Piceance Basin are presented in Table 8-1. Total gas content
data for 78 coal samples extracted from Adams, Delta, Garfield, Mesa and Rio Blanco counties
are presented in the table. Of these samples, raw data were compiled for 26 coal samples and
their gas contents were analyzed. The proximate and ultimate analysis data for 26 samples is
presented at the end of the report in Appendix A. High volatile B and C coals extracted from the
Mesaverde and Williams Fork coalbeds in Rio Blanco county and Cameo Zone coalbeds in
Garfield county contain the lowest gas content coals in the basin. For example, the total gas
content of high volatile B and C coals from Rio Blanco's Mesaverde coalbeds at depths of 686 -
1604 feet ranges between 0 to 96 ft3/ton while the high volatile C coals from William Fork
coalbeds (55 - 2250 feet deep) have gas content values of 0 to 39 ft3/ton. The majority of the
samples from the Cameo Zone coalbeds in Garfield county were extracted from depths less than
310 feet (surface minable coals). These high volatile B coal samples had the least gas content
values ranging between 0 to 3 ft3/ton.
The samples with the highest gas contents were all ranked high volatile A, and were
extracted from the Anderson and Wheeler Group coalbeds of Garfield county and Cameo and
Mesaverde Group coalbeds of Mesa county. These samples were taken from depth intervals
of approximately 2700 to 6950 feet, and their gas content values range between 120 to 404
ft3/ton. Sorption time for the 26 RGC coal samples are provided in Table 8-1. Adsorption
isotherm data and Langmuir constants for the "A" seam, "D" seam and the Cameo Zone
coalbeds are given in Appendix C.
Powder River Basin
The Powder River Basin covers approximately 26,000 square miles encompassing
southeastern Montana and northeastern Wyoming. The basin is very large and contains the
greatest concentration of thick coalbeds in the nation. Total minable resources in the basin have
been estimated to be approximately 148 billion short tons (Keystone 1994). In 1992, the Powder
River basin represented about 21 percent of total coal produced in the United States, and all of
the production occurred in surface mining operations. One county in Montana and three in
Wyoming account for all of the production in the basin. Of these counties, Campbell county,
Wyoming produced the largest volume of coal in the basin and the country.
The rank of Powder River coal ranges from lignite A through sub-bituminous A. These
coals generally contain low sulfur with low to moderate ash contents. Most of the basin's coal
8-4
-------
Coal Basins of The Western United States
lies at depths less than 2500 feet, and the coalbeds found near the surface are the thickest
(Rightmire et al. 1984). It is difficult to assess the total number of coalbeds which are typically
found in the basin because the beds split and are sometimes discontinuous (GRI 1980). It is
estimated that 10 to 18 coalbeds may be present in most of the basin. The thickest and most
laterally continuous coalbeds are found in the Tongue River Member of the Fort Union
Formation, where coalbeds exceed 300 feet in net thickness and individual seams exceed 100
feet in thickness. The Wyodak-Anderson coalbed is one of the largest in the basin and averages
50 to 100 feet in thickness.
Though the coals are of low rank, which normally indicates small amounts of adsorbed
methane per unit volume of coal, the great thickness of many of the Powder River coal seams
provides large volumes of methane contained per unit area of land surface (Rightmire et al.
1984). Coalbed methane resources in the Powder River Basin are estimated to range between
16 to 30 Tcf (GRI 1991). As of January 1991, cumulative coalbed methane production exceeded
850 Mcf by wells drilled in Tongue River coalbeds of the Fort Union Formation. Many of these
wells have encountered initial production of 100 to 300 Mcfd at completion depths of only about
500 feet (GRI 1991).
Gas content data for the Powder River Basin are presented in Table 8-1. Total gas
content data for 56 coal samples are listed in the table, and the coal analysis data for seven of
these samples are presented in Appendix A. Relative to the coals from Greater Green River and
Piceance Basin, the Powder River coals have very low gas contents. They are ranked
sub-bituminous to high volatile C. Surface minable coal (less than 300 feet deep), located in the
Anderson, Tongue River, Smith, Dietz and Canyon coalbeds of the Powder River Basin, have
the lowest total gas content values ranging from 0 to 14 ft3/ton (average of 3 ft3/ton). It is
important to note that the original BOM Direct Method for gas content analysis performed poorly
for low gas content coals, and the data presented in the table may be underestimates due to the
limitations offered by the method.
The Anderson coalbed located in Campbell county, WY contains the highest gas content
coals with values ranging between 35 to 42 ft3/ton. This is followed by Anderson coals in
Sheridan county, WY and Big Horn county, MO with gas contents of 28 to 48 ft3/ton and 0 to 6
ft3/ton, respectively. Gas contents for samples taken from the Anderson coalbed in Powder
River county, MT were all reported as 0 ft3/ton. Sorption time for 7 RGC coal samples taken
from the Canyon, Wall, Dietz and Smith coalbeds are provided in Table 8-1. Sorption times for
the Powder River coal samples is less than 16 days (common to 6 out of 7 samples), which is
among the fastest desorption rates represented in the data base.
8-5
-------
Coal Basins of The Western United States
Raton Mesa Basin
The Raton Mesa Basin covers approximately 2,200 square miles in southeastern
Colorado and northeastern New Mexico. Two formations have been identified as containing
significant amounts of coal and gas bearing strata in this basin: Vermejo and Raton Formation
(Rightmire et al. 1984). The Vermejo coalbeds are the thickest in the basin, ranging from 10 to
14 feet in thickness and are less than 2,000 feet deep. Coalbeds in the Raton Formation are
thinner than those of the underlying Vermejo Formation with maximum coalbed thickness of only
6 feet. These coalbeds are relatively shallow, and have an average depth of less than 1,000 feet
in the southern part of the basin and 1,500 feet in the northern part of the basin (GRI 1980).
Coals of the Raton Basin generally range in rank from high volatile C bituminous to low volatile
bituminous.
Coal reserves of 17 billion tons have been estimated for minable beds which are greater
than 14 inches thick and under less than 3,000 feet of overburden (Keystone 1994). In 1992,
the Raton Basin represented less than 1 percent of the total coal produced in the United States
(Keystone 1994). Coal production favors surface mining which accounted for about 70 percent
of the annual production. Las Animas county in Colorado and Colfax county in New Mexico are
where most of the current coal production occurs in the basin. In 1980, more than 1.2 MMcf of
gas was vented daily from two mines operating in this region (Grau et al., 1980). In 1990, the
cumulative emissions from two mines operating in these counties were reported at 6.2 MMcf, a
five fold increase over 1980 levels (Finfinger 1994 and Trevits et al. 1993). One these mines
was ranked as the fifteenth largest methane liberating mine in the country.
It is estimated that the basin contains approximately 18.4 Tcf of coalbed methane
resources (GRI 1991). Currently, most of the coal gas drilling activities occur in the Raton
Formation at depths of 400 to 1,800 feet, and in the Vermejo Formation at depths of 1,400 to
2,500 feet. Coalbeds in these formations have a combined thickness of more than 100 feet.
The Vermejo coalbeds have been estimated to contain gas contents ranging from 115 to 492
ft3/ton, whereas Raton coalbeds contain 23 to 192 ft3/ton of gas (GRI 1991). Despite the
presence of high gas content coals, the Raton Basin has the lowest coalbed methane production
among any of the western basins. This is mainly due to the lack of national transmission lines.
However, new pipeline systems are currently being installed to promote the development of
coalbed methane projects. Maximum initial production from coalbed wells have been estimated
to range from 100 to 200 Mcfd at average completion depth of 1,500 feet (GRI 1991).
The gas content data for the Raton Basin are presented in Table 8-1. Total gas content
data for 52 coal samples are listed in the table, and the coal analysis data for 32 of these
samples are presented in Appendix A. The RGC database includes gas content information for
8-6
-------
Coal Basins of The Western United States
33 of the 52 coal samples. Gas content data for surface minable coals (depths less than 300
feet) in Las Animas and Huerfano county suggest that the total gas content for the Vermejo
Formation coalbeds in these counties ranges between 19 to 119 ft3/ton. This range is higher
than the gas contents observed for surface minable coals in the Powder River Basin. Las
Animas county may have the gassiest coalbeds in the basin, with Vermejo Formation leading (0 -
512 ft3/ton), followed by Raton Formation and Morley coalbeds (19 - 188 ft3/ton and 51 - 146
ft3/ton, respectively). A large number of samples are available for the Vermejo Formation
coalbeds to identify gas content values for different ranked coals. It is apparent that the low
volatile coals have the highest gas content (335 - 512 ft3/ton), followed by medium volatile coals
(23 - 426 ft3/ton), and the high volatile coals have the lowest gas content values (0 -156 ft3/ton).
Many coal samples have reported gas contents of 0 ft3/ton. These results may have been
underestimated due to the lack of sensitivity in the direct method.
Sorption time was determined directly from desorption curves for the 33 RGC samples.
These data are included in Table 8-1. Adsorption isotherm data and Langmuir constants for the
Vermejo Formation coalbed are presented in Appendix C. The sorption time for five out of six
Raton Formation coalbeds indicate relatively short times (1-15 days). However, the Vermejo
coals may desorb the fastest because 16 out of 22 samples have sorption rates less than 7
days.
San Juan Basin
The San Juan Basin is an elliptical structure encompassing 7,500 square miles of area
in northwestern New Mexico and southwestern Colorado. It is estimated that more than 200
billion tons of bituminous and sub bituminous coal is contained in Cretaceous age strata. Coal
is present in five major formations: Fruitland, Menefee, Crevasse Canyon, Gallup Sandstone
and Dakota Sandstone. The Fruitland and Menefee coals contain the largest reserves in the
basin: 200 billion tons and 1 billion ton, respectively. Over half of this coal is present at depths
greater than 2,000 feet. Few individual coalbeds have been named by local mining communities.
Most of San Juan Basin coals are irregular and discontinuous, and individual coalbeds vary from
a few inches to 20 feet in thickness.
in 1992, the San Juan Basin represented 2.4 percent of total coal produced in the United
States (Keystone 1994). This production was almost entirely related to surface mining
operations. Total minable coal resources in the basin have been estimated to be approximately
10,000 million short tons (Keystone 1994). Currently, McKinley and San Juan Counties in New
Mexico produce all of the surface mined coal, and La Plata county of Colorado produces
underground mined coals.
8-7
-------
Coal Basins of The Western United States
The San Juan Basin leads the United States in coalbed methane production. From 1985
to 1990, approximately 1,000 coalbed methane wells were drilled in the basin, and over 65 billion
cubic feet of gas was produced (GRI 1990). It is estimated that coalbed methane resources in
the Fruitland Formation ranges between 43 to 49 trillion cubic feet at depths between 400 and
4,200 feet. Resources in the Menefee Formation are estimated to be 38 billion cubic feet of gas
(GRI 1990 and Hobbs and Winkler 1990). Gas production has been exploited by many
companies in this area due to the already existing oil and gas infra-structure in the region. It is
estimated that initial production rates may vary from 20 to 1,000 Mcfd with peak production rising
from 500 thousand to 3 million cfd over a six month to 4 year period (Hobbs and Winkler 1990).
Gas content data for the San Juan Basin are presented in Table 8-1. About 93 percent
of the coal samples for the San Juan Basin were extracted from the Fruitland coalbeds in New
Mexico and Colorado. The highest gas content coals may exist in La Plata county, CO with
values ranging between 159 to 481 ft3/ton. It is also apparent that the gas contents in Rio Arriba
and San Juan county, NM may be very similar with average values of 46 and 37 ft3/ton,
respectively. All the coal samples extracted at depths greater than 1350 feet in San Juan county
have significantly higher gas content, ranging from 121 to 182 ft3/ton (average of 157 ft3/ton).
Sorption time was calculated from desorption curves for the 29 RGC samples, and are
given in Table 8-1. Adsorption isotherm constants for "B" and "E" Seam in Gunnison county, CO
are presented in Appendix C. Sorption time for San Juan Basin coals is very high compared to
other western basins. For example, four out of five samples taken from Rio Arriba county
required more than one year to desorb 63 percent of its in-situ gas content. Although the
sorption times in San Juan county are not as high, over 85 percent of the samples taken from
this region have sorption times less than three months.
8-8
-------
TABLE 8-1. GAS CONTENT AND RELATED DATA FOR WESTERN BASINS
CXI
CD
At Actual Barometric Pressure And Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coal bed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
GREATER GREEN RIVER BASIN
691
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
SUB-A
150
0
10
0
10
692
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
SUB-A
157
3
10
0
13
688
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
SUB-A
183
3
3
0
6
687
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
SUB-A
197
3
0
0
3
690
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
SUB-A
289
0
3
0
3
693
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
SUB-A
298
0
3
0
3
732
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-C
648
0
3
0
3
733
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-C
724
0
0
0
0
734
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-C
775
0
14
0
14
17
14
4.2
735
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-C
807
0
3
0
3
4
3
0.0
960
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
3653
27
216
16
259
342
301
46.3
899
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
3676
20
223
10
253
310
287
23.6
961
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
3922
13
154
10
177
195
178
72.1
900
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
3930
17
65
35
117
140
132
145.0
901
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
3948
9
64
16
89
100
93
82.5
962
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
4655
16
242
29
287
963
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
4656
19
358
32
409
471
435
65.0
964
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
4657
42
626
16
684
735
678
23.1
965
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
4658
19
264
16
299
966
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-A
4659
39
547
32
618
666
614
22.8
967
BOM
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
4660
16
287
19
322
968
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-A
4708
26
303
19
348
382
345
24.7
969
RGC
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-B
4709
49
613
22
684
735
662
20.4
164
BOM
CO
ROUTT
WADGE
HV-C
340
3
3
0
6
165
BOM
CO
ROUTT
WADGE
HV-C
1289
0
0
0
0
166
BOM
CO
ROUTT
WADGE
HV-C
1404
10
0
6
16
169
RGC
CO
ROUTT
WOLF CREEK (L)
HV-B
1133
2
4
3
9
4.5
167
BOM
CO
ROUTT
WOLF CREEK (U)
HV-C
490
0
0
0
0
168
BOM
CO
ROUTT
WOLF CREEK (U)
HV-B
HV-C
HV-C
HV-C
1109
0
3
3
6
1814
BOM
WY
CARBON
ALMOND
276
0
0
0
0
1812
BOM
WY
CARBON
ALMOND A
190
0
0
0
0
1813
BOM
WY
CARBON
ALMOND B
219
0
0
0
0
925
RGC
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-A
3479
33
452
32
517
551
21.2
926
RGC
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-A
3480
34
442
19
495
540
14.3
924
BOM
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-A
3481
16
401
25
442
923
RGC
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-B
3495
29
489
13
531
569
8.5
921
RGC
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-A
3496
25
495
19
539
575
11.1
918
BOM
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3519
6
29
0
35
919
RGC
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-A
3526
41
418
6
465
554
8.5
920
RGC
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-A
3527
53
451
16
520
556
7.2
1319
BOM
WY
SWEETWATER
ALMOND
13753
16
121
3
140
1318
RGC
WY
SWEETWATER
FOX HILLS
11219
24
84
3
111
432
1.3
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 8-1. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure And Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
atSTP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
PICEANCE BASIN
1069
RGC
CO
ADAMS
LARAMIE FM
SUB-B
314
2
8
0
10
16
13
0.0
359
BOM
co
DELTA
MESAVERDE GRP
-IV-C
584
0
0
0
0
360
BOM
CO
DELTA
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-C
992
0
3
13
16
342
BOM
CO
DELTA
WILLIAMS FORK
-IV-C
531
0
6
0
6
314
BOM
CO
DELTA
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-C
714
41
137
0
178
1028
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
ANDERSON
HV-A
3312
35
312
10
357
1029
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
ANDERSON
HV-A
3316
29
182
0
211
1030
BOM
in1
!o
GARFIELD
ANDERSON
HV-A
3322
67
261
38
366
1031
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
ANDERSON
HV-A
3322
48
217
51
316
1032
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
ANDERSON
HV-A
3323
25
213
48
286
1033
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
ANDERSON
HV-A
3333
32
239
41
312
1427
BOM
i0,
!o!
GARFIELD
CAMEO ZONE
HV-B
293
0
0
3
3
1428
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
CAMEO ZONE
HV-B
295
0
0
0
0
1429
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
CAMEO ZONE
HV-B
299
0
0
(T
0
1430
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
CAMEO ZONE
HV-B
306
0
0
0
0
1431
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
CAMEO ZONE
HV-B
309
0
0
0
0
1432
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
CAMEO ZONE
HV-B
311
0
0
3
3
1039
RGC
CO
GARFIELD
WHEELER GRP (L)
HV-A
3975
8
147
25
180
271
248
28.5
1040
RGC
CO
GARFIELD
WHEELER GRP (L)
HV-A
3976
10
200
41
251
277
255
29.7
1038
RGC
CO
GARFIELD
WHEELER GRP (M)
HV-A
3896
28
128
3
159
287
260
8.2
1035
30M
CO
GARFIELD
WHEELER GRP (U)
HV-A
3879
41
315
29
385
1036
30M
CO
GARFIELD
WHEELER GRP (U)
HV-A
3880
35
334
35
404
1073
30M
CO ~1
GARFIELD
WHEELER GRP (U)
HV-A
3881
38
306
22
366
1037
BOM
CO
GARFIELD
WHEELER GRP (U)
HV-A
3882
41
338
13
392
1600
RGC
CO
VIESA
CAMEO ZONE
4696
4
46
3
53
310
264
18.6
1605
RGC
CO
VIESA
CAMEO ZONE
HV-A
4757
25
273
19
317
397
356
4.7
1609
RGC
CO
MESA
CAMEO ZONE
HV-A
4802
39
240
13
292
351
306
3.6
1610
RGC
CO
MESA
CAMEO ZONE
HV-A
4805
39
265
19
323
366
362
5.1
1866
BOM
CO
MESA
CAMEO (U)
HV-A
2715
3
197
19
219
1867
BOM
CO
MESA
CAMEO (U)
HV-A
2722
6
220
13
239
1696
RGC
CO
MESA
MESAVERDE GRP
2730
5
109
6
120
319
291
19.6
1868
RGC
CO
MESA
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-A
2731
4
224
25
253
292
265
79.6
1869
BOM
CO
MESA
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-A
2752
0
318
16
334
1870
BOM
CO
MESA
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-A
2766
0
232
6
238
1872
RGC
CO
MESA
MESAVERDE GRP
HV-A
2769
1
245
10
256
296
267
49.9
1801
BOM
CO
MESA
MESAVERDE GRP
6946
29
89
6
124
361
BOM
CO
MESA
PALISADE ZONE
HV-A
813
3
41
35
79
358
RGC
CO
MESA
PALISADE ZONE
HV-A
1290
4
204
16
224
241
211
14.9
1117
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE A
HV-C
809
0
35
6
41
1121
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE A
HV-B
1211
0
17
3
20
23
20
121.1
1120
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE A
HV-B
1212
1
27
0
28
33
28
49.5
1148
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE B
HV-C
798
2
60
3
65
76
62
53.9
1151
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE B
HV-C
905
0
3
0
3
1147
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE C
HV-C
796
1
64
3
68
79
64
54.1
1066
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE C
HV-C
882
2
5
0
7
8
7
13.7
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 8-1. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure And Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coatbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residua!
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
PICEANCE BASIN (Cont'd)
! 1119
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE C
-IV-B
1150
3
16
6
25
1118
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE C
HV-C
1150
6
19
6
31
1063
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE C
HV-C
1352
6
48
0
54
1115
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
HV-C
766
6
70
3
79
1116
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
HV-C
773
13
73
3
89
1123
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
HV-C
1200
1
38
0
39
46
38
40.7
1152
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
HV-C
1206
4
31
0
35
56
47
21.3
1113
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
HV-C
1332
3
61
3
67
1114
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
HV-C
1334
2
54
10
66
76
65
87.6
1144
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
HV-C
1337
1
48
10
59
68
58
121.5
1146
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE E
HV-C
760
2
66
3
71
85
73
53.8
1067
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE E
HV-C
1189
5
26
0
31
37
31
15.6
1143
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE E
HV-C
1326
1
57
6
64
79
71
71.7
1042
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE F
HV-C
742
10
6
3
19
1145
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE F
HV-C
745
61
67
0
73
1044
POM
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE F
HV-C
912
0
0
0
0
829
30M
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
686
61
32
3
96
830
30M
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
698
0
19
25
44
833
30M
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
HV-B
760
29
25
25
79
832
30M
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
771
13
13
0
26
831
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
774
29
25
0
54
835
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
HV-B
803
38
22
19
79
836
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
805
25
19
6
50
837
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
HV-B
987
10
29
38
77
1122
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
HV-B
1224
3
19
3
25
791
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
HV-B
1584
1
21
3
25
29
26
18.1
790
RGC
CO
RIO BLANCO
VIESAVERDE GRP
HV-B
1604
2
7
0
9
10
9
11.1
335
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
WILLIAMS FORK
2115
0
3
0
3
336
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
WILLIAMS FORK
HV-C
2134
13
10
6
29
337
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
WILLIAMS FORK
2231
0
16
0
16
338
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
WILLIAMS FORK
2250
29
10
0
39
312
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
WILLIAMS FORK J
HV-C
55
0
0
0
0
313
BOM
CO
RIO BLANCO
WILLIAMS FORK J
HV-C
515
0
0
0
0
POWDER RIVER BASIN
987
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
ANDERSON
3UB-A
426
0
0
0
0
988
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
ANDERSON
HV-C
433
3
3
0
6
989
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
ANDERSON
HV-C
450
3
3
0
6
990
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
ANDERSON
3UB-A
457
3
3
0
6
991
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
ANDERSON
HV-C
480
3
3
0
6
992
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
ANDERSON
3UB-A
492
0
0
0
0
993
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
ANDERSON
3UB-A
503
0
0
0
0
"6
994
RGC
MT
BIG HORN
CANYON
HV-C
589
1
4
0
5
5
0.1
995
RGC
MT
BIG HORN
CANYON
3UB-A
603
1
7
0
8
10
8
4.8
984
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
SMITH
3UB-B
157
0
0
0
0
985
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
SMITH
3UB-B
169
0
0
0
0
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 8-1. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure And Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
{std. ft3/ton)
(days)
POWDER RIVER BASIN (Cont'd)
986
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
SMITH
3UB-B
174
3
3
0
6
1005
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
TONGUE RIVER MB
HV-C
122
0
3
0
3
1006
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
TONGUE RIVER MB
5UB-A
135
0
3
0
3
1007
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
TONGUE RIVER MB
3UB-B
145
3
3
0
6
1008
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
TONGUE RIVER MB
3UB-B
349
0
0
0
0
1009
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
TONGUE RIVER MB
5UB-B
391
0
0
0
0
1010
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
TONGUE RIVER MB
3UB-B
402
0
0
0
0
1011
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
WALL
SUB-A
623
0
0
0
0
1012
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
WALL
3UB-A
632
3
3
0
6
1013
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
WALL
SUB-A
658
0
3
0
3
1014
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
WALL
3UB-A
674
3
3
0
6
996
RGC
MT
BIG HORN
WALL
HV-C
744
0
5
0
5
7
6
1.4
997
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
WALL
HV-C
756
0
6
0
6
998
BOM
MT
BIG HORN
WALL
SUB-A
770
0
13
0
13
999
BOM
MT
POWDER RIVER
ANDERSON
SUB-A
249
0
0
0
0
1000
BOM
MT
POWDER RIVER
ANDERSON
JG-A
267
0
0
0
0
1001
BOM
MT
POWDER RIVER
ANDERSON
3UB-C
292
0
0
0
0
1002
BOM
MT
POWDER RIVER
DIETZ
3UB-B
379
0
3
0
3
1003
BOM
MT
POWDER RIVER
DIETZ
3UB-B
386
0
0
0
0
1004
RGC
MT
=OWDER RIVER
DIETZ
3UB-B
401
0
3
0
3
4
3
4.5
636
BOM
VIT
ROSEBUD
ANDERSON
SUB-C
62
3
3
0
6
630
BOM
VIT
ROSEBUD
DIETZ
SUB-C
162
3
0
0
3
635
30M
VIT
ROSEBUD
MONTANA (UNC)
SUB-B
424
3
3
0
6
1369
30M
WY
ANDERSON
3UB-A
625
6
35
0
41
1370
30M
WY
SMITH
3UB-B
313
0
10
0
10
1363
30M
wy
CAMPBELL
ANDERSON
3UB-A
686
6
29
0
35
1365
BOM
WY
CAMPBELL
ANDERSON
3UB-A
724
10
35
0
45
1364
BOM
WY
CAMPBELL
ANDERSON
SUB-A
743
13
29
0
42
736
BOM
wy
CAMPBELL
CANYON
3UB-C
224
0
0
0
0
737
BOM
wy
CAMPBELL
CANYON
3UB-C
225
0
0
0
0
738
BOM
WY
CAMPBELL
CANYON
3UB-C
227
0
0
0
0
739
BOM
WY
CAMPBELL
CANYON
SUB-C
228
0
0
0
0
740
BOM
WY
CAMPBELL
CANYON
3UB-C
229
0
0
0
0
741
BOM
wy
CAMPBELL
CANYON
JG-A
230
0
0
0
0
742
BOM
wy
CAMPBELL
CANYON
3UB-C
254
0
0
0
0
631
BOM
WY
CAMPBELL
COOK OR WALL
3UB-C
303
3
0
0
3
632
BOM
WY
CAMPBELL
COOK OR WALL
3UB-C
309
3
6
0
9
633
BOM
wy
CAMPBELL
COOK OR WALL
3UB-C
339
3
0
0
3
634
BOM
wy
CAMPBELL
COOK OR WALL
3UB-C
400
0
3
0
3
1368
BOM
WY
SHERIDAN
ANDERSON
3UB-A
595
3
25
0
28
1889
BOM
WY
SHERIDAN
ANDERSON
3UB-B
619
3
45
0
48
1892
BOM
wy
SHERIDAN
ANDERSON
3UB-B
635
3
45
0
48
1371
RGC
wy
SHERIDAN
SMITH
3UB-A
272
0
6
0
6
7
29.4
1367
RGC
WY
SHERIDAN
SMITH (L)
3UB-A
301
1
13
0
14
16
2.7
I 1366
RGC
WY
SHERIDAN
SMITH (U)
3UB-A
207
1
13
0
14
16
7.1
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 8-1. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure And Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton >
(ft3/ton)
_(ft3/ton]
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton}
(days)
RATON MESA BASIN
667
BOM
CO
HUERFANO
BONCARBO
HV-A
677
32
19
3
54
669
BOM
CO
HUERFANO
DELAGUA
HV-A
898
35
13
0
48
162
BOM
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
HV-C
115
16
0
13
29
163
BOM
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
HV-C
161
19
3
13
35
1125
RGC
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
870
1
16
22
39
53
49
27.0
666
RGC
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
1009
1
3
0
4
4
4
0.2
670
RGC
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
1017
1
3
0
4
5
4
0.1
1153
BOM
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
1028
0
35
29
64
662
BOM
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
1076
13
6
0
19
668
RGC
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
1142
33
8
25
66
80
79
6.3
651
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
COLORADO (UNC)
MONE
1054
8
65
0
73
242
2.9
789
BOM
CO
LAS ANIMAS
MORLEY
HV-A
872
6
127
13
146
743
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
MORLEY
HV-A
872
10
95
16
121
20.2
787
BOM
CO
LAS ANIMAS
MORLEY
HV-A
879
3
83
16
102
660
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
MORLEY
HV-A
1030
0
13
38
51
62
13.6
661
RGC
CO
_AS ANIMAS
MORLEY
HV-A
1032
5
11
35
51
65
15.2
745
BOM
CO
_AS ANIMAS
MORLEY
HV-A
1032
13
57
19
89
1043
BOM
CO
_AS ANIMAS
RATON FM
HV-A
227
3
16
0
19
663
RGC
CO
_AS ANIMAS
RATON FM
_V
311
2
74
6
82
130
14.6
1150
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
HV-A
346
1
77
10
88
103
46.8
533
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
WON FM
VIV
484
4
61
0
65
102
4.2
665
30M
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
VIV
501
45
111
0
156
655
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
MONE
811
1
42
3
46
193
9.3
532
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
MONE
829
6
22
0
28
158
0.6
652
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
WON FM
MONE
1064
14
174
0
188
453
10.0
535
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
VIV
101
7
6
10
23
38
4.9
536
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
VIV
168
52
61
6
119
171
0.1
671
BOM
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
718
3
3
45
51
654
BOM
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
VIV
733
61
185
10
256
672
BOM
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
813
3
3
0
6
673
BOM
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
825
0
0
0
0
788
BOM
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
859
10
127
19
156
656
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
MONE
870
1
16
19
36
84
11.7
744
BOM
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
873
0
6
6
12
657
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
963
3
11
19
33
41
17.4
658
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
966
2
8
22
32
41
16.9
659
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
1006
4
21
13
38
44
7.2
689
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
HV-A
1014
6
18
61
85
98
13.9
1643
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
VIV
1094
28
245
13
286
437
1.1
1644
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
_V
1095
36
285
22
343
502
2.5
1645
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
SIONE
_V
1100
33
273
6
312
645
1.8
1595
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
1109
1
318
16
335
444
370
2.0
1798
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
_V
1158
1
508
3
512
768
17.1
1511
BOM
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
MONE
1185
19
108
3
130
1512
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
MONE
1191
18
159
3
180
461
1.4
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 8-1. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure And Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
RATON MESA BASIN (Cont'd)
1646
RGC
o
n
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
MONE
1192
2
118
3
123
407
3.3
1149
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
VIV
1195
84
339
3
426
533
1.3
1647
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
_V
1209
27
315
16
358
663
5.8
1513
BOM
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
MONE
1219
3
16
3
22
1514
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
\IONE
1220
1
21
0
22
241
0.3
653
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
VIV
1692
15
284
0
299
341
2.7
664
RGC
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
VIV
1793
23
334
3
360
429
2.0
SAN JUAN BASIN
2093
BOM
CO
LA PLATA
FRUITLAND FM
_v
2771
89
290
6
385
2094
BOM
CO
LA PLATA
FRUITLAND FM
2807
38
118
3
159
2095
BOM
CO
LA PLATA
FRUITLAND FM
_v
2815
121
322
6
449
2096
BOM
CO
LA PLATA
FRUITLAND FM
.V
2841
108
236
3
347
2097
BOM
CO
LA PLATA
FRUITLAND FM
_v
2843
121
223
6
350
2098
BOM
CO
LA PLATA
FRUITLAND FM
.V
2845
156
322
3
481
160
RGC
CO
LA PLATA
MENEFEE FM
HV-A
304
1
3
3
7
33.3
161
BOM
CO
LA PLATA
MENEFEE FM
HV-A
318
3
3
3
9
1361
RGC
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
3035
2
4
10
16
44
40
59.8
1360
RGC
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
3041
2
3
16
21
52
51
59.8
1770
RGC
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
-IV-B
3045
1
12
6
19
30
28
386.7
1362
RGC
NM
RIO ARRIBA
-RUITLAND
3052
3
4
0
7
16
16
0.2
1772
30M
NM
RIO ARRIBA
-RUITLAND
HV-A
3066
10
57
19
86
1771
RGC
NM
RIO ARRIBA
-RUITLAND
HV-B
3073
0
60
64
124
177
166
444.2
1688
RGC
MM
SAN JUAN
rRUITLAND
HV-C
687
1
23
0
24
30
39.6
1689
RGC
MM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-C
700
0
23
0
23
29
88.1
1690
RGC
MM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-C
716
0
28
0
28
37
37.5
1691
RGC
MM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-C
752
1
34
0
35
48
33.8
1692
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-C
760
3
27
0
30
39
38.7
1875
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-B
1351
0
127
0
127
187
26.4
1876
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-B
1353
6
170
6
182
211
91.6
1878
RGC
MM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-B
1396
0
159
10
169
206
67.5
1879
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-B
1404
11
158
10
179
230
44.3
1880
BOM
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-B
1407
6
162
10
178
1881
BOM
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-A
1419
3
143
16
162
206
BOM
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
HV-A
1475
16
92
29
137
207
BOM
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
1485
6
61
54
121
675
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (J)
3UB-A
318
3
8
0
11
17
2.0
499
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
HV-B
587
4
76
0
80
96
82
20.9
497
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
HV-C
737
1
56
3
60
76
63
44.8
1329
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
844
2
50
13
65
67.0
1330
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
847
1
39
13
53
71.0
1331
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
849
1
39
3
43
13.0
1332
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
850
0
4
6
10
115.8
1333
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
854
0
1
6
7
115.7
1334
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
855
2
59
19
80
78.4
676
BOM
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (U)
HV-C
280
0
3
0
3
(Continued)
-------
TABLE 8-1. CONTINUED
At Actual Barometric Pressure And Temperature
BOM
Source
State
County
Coalbed
Coal
Coalbed
Lost Gas
Desorbed
Residual
Total Gas
AF/MF Total
AF/MF Total
Sorption
ID
Rank
Depth
Gas
Gas
Content
Gas Content
Gas Content
Time
No.
at STP
APP
(ft)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(std. ft3/ton)
(days)
SAN JUAN BASIN (Cont'd)
674
BOM
NM
SAN JUAN
rRUITLAND (U)
SUB-A
295
6
10
0
16
498
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (U)
HV-C
465
3
120
0
123
153
127
107.6
496
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
-RUITLAND (U)
HV-C
642
4
64
0
68
97
83
20.9
1322
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (U)
769
2
62
6
70
18.3
1324
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (U)
792
1
10
0
11
1.1
1325
BOM
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (U)
794
0
13
0
13
1335
RGC
NM
SAN JUAN
PICTURE CLIFFS
883
3
17
29
49
114.9
-------
Coal Basins of The Western United States
References
Finfinger, G.L, 1994, 1990 Emissions from Mines Producing at Least 0.1 MMcfd of Methane,
Data obtained at the Methane Emissions from Coal Handling Workshop, Washington, D.C. April.
Gas Research Institute, 1980, Summary of Geologic Features of Selected Coal-Bearing Areas
of the United States, Final Report.
Gas Research Institute, 1990, Geologic and Hydrologic Controls on the Occurrence and
Producibility of Coalbed Methane, Fruitland Formation, San Juan Basin, Topical Report August -
July.
Gas Research Institute, 1991, Coalbed Methane Potential of the Greater Green River, Piceance,
Powder River and Raton Basins. Topical Report January - July.
Grau, H. R. and J. LaScola, 1984, Methane Emissions from U.S. Coal Mines in 1980. United
States Bureau of Mines.
Hobbs, G. W. and R. Winkler, 1990, Economics and Financing of Coalbed Methane Ventures,
Ammonite Resources, New Canaan, CT.
Keystone Coal Industry Manual, 1994, Mining Information Services of the Maclean Hunter Mining
and Construction Group, Chicago, Illinois.
McFall, K., D. Wicks, U. Kuuskraa and K. Sedwick, 1986, A Geologic Assessment of Natural Gas
From Coal Seams in the Piceance Basin. Colorado, Gas Research Institute.
Rightmire, C.T., G.E. Eddy, and J. N. Kirr, 1984, Coalbed Methane Resources of the United
States -AAPG Studies in Geology Series #17, American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Trevits, M.A., G. L. Finfinger, and J. LaScola, 1993, Evaluation of U.S. Coal Mine Emissions.
Presented at the SME Annual Meeting, Reno, Nevada, February 15-18.
8-16
-------
Appendix A
Proximate And Ultimate Analysis Data
Coal analyses performed on cores provide data to (1) determine the apparent rank of
coal, (2) determine the potential of coal to adsorb and desorb gas, (3) facilitate the
standardization of gas content values by adjusting for ash content, and (4) predict gas production
potential (GRI 1992 and 1993). Coal analysis data are typically grouped into two categories:
proximate and ultimate. The proximate analyses data contains volatile matter, fixed carbon,
moisture and ash content of coal, and are used to determine coal rank. The degree of
coalification is defined by coal rank, and is related to coal quality, gas sorption capacity, coal
cleat development and desorption rates. The procedures used for conducting proximate
analyses are routine and have been standardized throughout the industry according to the
American SocietyforTesting and Materials Standard D3172-89 (ASTM 1989). Ultimate analyses
conducted on coal samples provide detailed information on weight percent distribution of
hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, sulfur and oxygen content.
The U.S. Bureau of Mines conducted coal analyses on a selected number of core
samples from the original samples. The original BOM publication (Diamond and Levine 1985,
Diamond et al. 1990) only presented ash content and apparent rank for each sample; the
remaining data were not published. To present all the data available from ultimate and
proximate analyses, the original laboratory results were obtained from the BOM and digitized.
Tables A-1 and A-2 summarize the proximate and ultimate analyses data, respectively, by
sample number and geographic location of each of the eleven major basins treated in this report.
The data provided in the tables can be used to further develop and identify potential relationships
between coal properties and gas contents on a regional basis.
References
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1989, Standard Practice for Proximate Analysis of
Coal and Coke, D3172-89 in 1989 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Philadelphia, PA, p. 289.
Diamond, W.P. and J.R. Levine, 1985, Direct Method Determination of the Gas Content of Coal:
Procedures and Results, United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, Report of
Investigations 8515.
Diamond, W.P., J.C. LaScola, and D.M. Hyman, 1990, Results of Direct-Method Determination
of the Gas Content of U.S. Coalbeds, United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines,
Information Circular, 9067.
Gas Research Institute, 1992, Geologic Manual for the Evaluation and Development of Coalbed
Methane - Topical Report, Gas Research Institute, Project 305.
Gas Research Institute, 1993, Development of Formation Evaluation Technology for Coalbed
Methane - December 1990 to 1992, Gas Research Institute, 5090-214-2098.
A-1
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
ARKOMA
i 1699
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
0.5
15.3
69.1
15.1
15.4
69.4
15.2
18.1
81.9
1700
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
0.6
16.4
74.9
8.1
16.5
75.3
8.2
18
82
1701
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
0.3
20.1
75.5
4.1
20.2
75.7
4.1
21.1
78.9
1702
OK
LE FLORE
HARTSHORNE (L)
0.5
16.5
72.2
10.8
16.6
72.5
10.9
18.6
81.4
1059
OK
PITTSBURG
BOOCH (U)
1.1
36
54.3
8.6
36.4
54.9
8.7
39.9
60.1
1724
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (J)
1.3
34.6
60.3
3.8
35.1
61
3.9
36.5
63.5
1726
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (L)
1
37.8
55.4
5.8
38.2
56
5.8
40.6
59.4
1728
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (L)
1.3
35
60.1
3.6
35.5
60.9
3.6
36.8
63.2
1727
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (L)
1.2
35.4
57.5
5.9
35.9
58.1
6
38.1
61.9
1725
OK
PITTSBURG
HARTSHORNE (U)
1.3
35.9
56.3
6.5
36.3
57.1
6.6
38.9
61.1
BLACK WARRIOR
1058
AL
JEFFERSON
BLACK CREEK GRP
0.6
25.3
52.1
22
25.5
52.3
22.2
32.7
67.3
215
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
0.5
20.2
69.6
9.7
20.3
69.9
9.8
22.5
77.5
241
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (J)
0.8
19.6
65.1
14.5
19.7
65.7
14.6
23.1
76.9
254
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
1
16
52.8
30.2
16.1
53.4
30.5
23.2
76.8
261
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
0.7
21.2
65
13.1
21.3
65.5
13.2
24.6
75.4
256
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
0.7
20.1
70.2
9
20.2
70.7
9.1
22.3
77.7
255
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
0.6
21.2
69.4
8.7
21.4
69.8
8.8
23.4
76.6
248
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
0.5
21.2
67.8
10.5
21.3
68.2
10.5
23.8
76.2
238
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
0.7
20.7
71.1
7.5
20.8
71.6
7.6
22.6
77.4
243
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
0.6
21.2
68.3
9.9
21.3
68.8
9.9
23.6
76.4
242
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
0.6
20.8
70.5
8.1
20.9
70.9
8.2
22.8
77.2
239
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
0.7
20
71.1
8.2
20.1
71.7
8.2
21.9
78.1
262
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE (L)
0.6
21.9
66.7
10.7
22
67.2
10.8
24.7
75.3
1165
AL
JEFFERSON
REAM
0.7
11.6
11.3
76.4
11.7
11.4
76.9
50.7
49.3
1874
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
0.64
35.45
50.37
13.54
35.68
50.69
13.63
41.31
58.69
1491
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
0.7
27.2
54.3
17.8
27.4
54.6
18
33.3
66.7
1887
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
0.58
34.33
56.62
8.47
34.53
56.95
8.52
37.75
62.25
1891
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
0.91
32.58
49.14
17.37
32.88
49.59
17.53
39.87
60.13
1493
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
0.6
28
44.9
26.5
28.2
45.2
26.6
38.4
61.6
34
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NEW CASTLE
0.8
23.5
63.6
12.1
23.7
64.1
12.2
27
73
1873
AL
TUSCALOOSA
NEW CASTLE
0.84
34.24
51.85
13.07
34.53
52.29
13.18
39.77
60.23
209
AL
TUSCALOOSA
PRATT
1.4
22
49.9
26.7
22.3
50.6
27.1
30.6
69.4
CENTRAL APPALACHIAN
1746
NC
LEE
GULF
1.1
16.9
52
30
17.1
52.6
30.3
24.5
75.5
1817
KY
CLAY
KENTUCKY(UNC)
1.24
41.94
50.58
6.24
42.47
51.21
6.32
45.33
54.67
1816
KY
CLAY
KENTUCKY(UNC)
1.83
37.74
58.75
1.68
38.44
59.84
1.72
39.11
60.89
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
CENTRAL APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
1815
KY
CLAY
KENTUCKY (UNC)
1.18
40.38
52.3
6.14
40.86
52.93
0.21
43.56
56.44
1655
KY
FLOYD
BINGHAM
1
40.3
50.8
7.9
40.7
51.3
8
44.2
55.8
1929
TN
MORGAN
SEWANEE
0.6
13
19.8
66.6
13.1
19.8
67.1
39.6
60.4
1936
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
0.7
10.1
80.2
9
10.1
80.9
9
11.1
88.9
1937
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
0.4
10.2
73
16.4
10.3
73.2
16.5
12.3
87.7
1935
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
0.3
21.9
10.9
66.9
22
10.9
67.1
14
86
1934
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
0.4
28.6
10.5
60.5
28.7
10.5
60.8
14.8
85.2
174
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
2.6
43.3
51.5
2.6
44.4
52.9
2.7
45.6
54.4
175
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
2.5
39.1
53
5.4
40.1
54.3
5.6
42.5
57.5
191
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
2.6
39
55.1
3.3
40.1
56.5
3.4
41.5
58.5
339
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
2.2
33
51
13.8
33.7
52.2
14.1
39.3
60.7
GREATER GREEN RIVER
734
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
12
34.8
49.1
4
39.6
55.9
4.5
41.5
58.5
966
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
3.9
41.3
51.5
3.3
42.9
53.7
3.4
44.4
55.6
963
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
3.7
38.5
48.4
9.4
39.9
50.3
9.8
44.3
55.7
968
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
3.6
39.3
51.9
5.2
40.7
54
5.3
43
57
964
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
4.1
39.4
53.6
2.9
41
56
3
42.3
57.7
969
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
4
39.8
53.3
2.9
41.5
55.4
3.1
42.8
57.2
961
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
6.8
38.1
52.6
2.5
40.9
56.4
2.7
42
58
901
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.5
39.3
50
5.2
41.6
52.9
5.5
44.1
55.9
960
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.6
35.1
40.6
18.7
37.2
43
19.8
46.4
53.6
900
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.1
39
44.7
11.2
41.1
47.1
11.8
46.6
53.4
899
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
6.7
35.7
45.9
11.7
38.2
49.3
12.5
43.7
56.3
735
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
9.2
42
43.6
5.2
46.2
48.1
5.7
49
51
926
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3.4
43.4
48.2
5
44.9
49.9
5.2
47.4
52.6
925
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3.3
45.8
48.1
2.8
47.4
49.7
2.9
48.8
51.2
921
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3.6
42.3
51.4
2.7
43.9
53.3
2.8
45.1
54.9
923
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3.5
43.4
50
3.1
44.9
51.8
3.3
46.5
53.5
920
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3.6
42.5
51
2.9
44
53
3
45.4
54.6
919
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3.4
38.1
45.8
12.7
39.4
47.4
13.2
45.4
54.6
1318
WY
SWEETWATER
FOX HILLS
1.2
10.6
15.1
73.1
10.7
15.3
74
41.2
58.8
ILLINOIS
844
IL
CLAY
DANVILLE (7)
8.8
34.6
44.5
12.1
37.9
48.8
3.3
43.7
56.3
845
IL
CLAY
DANVILLE (7)
8.7
36
42.6
12.7
39.4
46.7
13.9
45.8
54.2
850
IL
CLAY
HARRISBURG (5)
6.8
35.8
44.9
12.5
38.4
48.2
13.4
44.4
55.6
951
IL
MARION
BRIAR HILL (5A)
5.8
43.4
40.7
10.1
46.1
43.2
10.7
51.6
48.4
949
IL
MARION
DANVILLE (7)
8.4
37.4
41.9
12.3
40.9
45.7
13.4
47.2
52.8
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
! BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
ILLINOIS (CONT'D)
953
IL
MARION
HARRISBURG (5)
6.7
37.7
45.8
9.8
40.5
49
10.5
45.2
54.8
954
IL
MARION
HARRISBURG(5)
6.5
40
41.4
12.1
42.8
44.2
13
49.2
50.8
1135
IN
POSEY
DANVILLE (VII)
7.2
36.1
43.7
13
38.9
47.1
14
45.2
54.8
1140
IN
POSEY
DANVILLE (VII)
8.9
36.1
44
11
39.6
48.3
12.1
45
55
1136
IN
POSEY
HOUCHIN CK(IVA)
5.6
35.9
46.9
11.6
38.1
49.6
12.3
43.4
56.6
1142
IN
POSEY
HOUCHIN CK(IVA)
6.6
38.5
43.1
11.8
41.2
46.2
12.6
47.1
52.9
1190
IN
POSEY
SEELYVILLE (III)
7.7
36.7
48
7.6
39.8
52
8.2
43.4
56.6
1139
IN
POSEY
SEELYVILLE (III)
6.5
36.9
47.5
9.1
39.5
50.8
9.7
43.8
56.2
1189
IN
POSEY
SEELYVILLE (III)
6.3
38.1
47
8.6
40.7
50.1
9.2
44.8
55.2
1141
IN
POSEY
SPRINGFIELD (V)
7
38.4
41.5
13.1
41.3
44.7
14
48
52
1192
IN
POSEY
SPRINGFIELD (V)
8.7
36.9
42.1
12.3
40.4
46.2
13.4
46.7
53.3
1191
IN
POSEY
SPRINGFIELD (V)
8.3
37.8
44.1
9.8
41.3
48
10.7
46.2
53.8
1137
IN
POSEY
SURVANT (IV)
6.2
38.5
42.8
12.5
41
45.7
13.3
47.3
52.7
1188
IN
POSEY
SURVANT (IV)
8
37
48.1
6.9
40.2
52.3
7.5
43.4
56.6
1707
Tn
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
4.2
34.8
55.1
5.9
36.3
57.5
6.2
38.7
61.3
1681
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
4.3
34.9
50.3
10.5
36.5
52.4
11.1
41
59
1708
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
3.5
32.3
47.3
16.9
33.5
49
17.5
40.6
59.4
1706
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
4.1
34.7
52.9
8.3
36.2
55.1
8.7
39.7
60.3
1669
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
2.1
37.1
49.5
11.3
37.9
50.6
11.5
42.8
57.2
1680
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
4.4
32.5
48.5
14.6
34
50.7
15.3
40.2
59.8
1671
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
2.5
32.7
52.6
12.2
33.5
54
12.5
38.3
61.7
1670
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
2.9
36.4
48.8
11.9
37.4
50.3
12.3
42.7
57.3
1672
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
3.5
35.7
47.4
13.4
37
49.1
13.9
42.9
57.1
1679
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
6.4
38
51.6
4
40.6
55.2
4.2
42.4
57.6
1734
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
6.4
32.2
54.7
6.7
34.4
58.4
7.2
37.1
62.9
1733
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.4
33.1
55.5
6
35
58.7
6.3
37.3
62.7
1705
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
4.6
35.2
51.7
8.5
36.9
54.1
9
40.5
59.5
1703
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
6
36.5
51.5
6
38.8
54.8
6.4
41.5
58.5
1704
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.6
33.8
52.4
8.2
35.8
55.5
8.7
39.2
60.8
1678
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.9
31.7
52.1
10.3
33.7
55.4
10.9
37.9
62.1
1668
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
3.9
36
54
6.1
37.4
56.2
6.4
40
60
1666
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
3.4
34.7
54.4
7.5
35.9
56.4
7.7
38.9
61.1
1665
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
4.1
34.6
53.3
8
36.1
55.5
8.4
39.4
60.6
1664
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
4.3
35.2
54.3
6.2
36.8
56.7
6.5
39.3
60.7
1662
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
6.4
31.9
52.5
9.2
34.1
56.1
9.8
37.8
62.2
1667
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
3
36.1
52.4
8.5
37.2
54
00
CO
40.8
59.2
1735
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE(U)
6.2
33.4
56.3
4.1
35.6
60
4.4
37.2
62.8
1661
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
3.6
36
46.9
13.5
37.3
48.7
14
43.4
56.6
1657
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
2.9
34.4
44.8
17.9
35.5
46
18.5
43.5
56.5
1660
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
3.6
36.9
49
10.5
38.2
50.9
10.9
42.9
57.1
1659
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
2.9
38.4
49.4
9.3
39.6
50.8
9.6
43.8
56.2
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
! BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free j
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
ILLINOIS (CONT'D)
1839
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (L)
4.9
35.8
49.2
10.1
37.7
51.7
10.6
42.1
57.9
! 1836
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.5
29
44.8
20.7
30.7
47.4
21.9
39.3
60.7
1108
KY
WEBSTER
LISMAN FM (13)
2.4
37.6
42.1
17.9
38.6
43.1
18.3
47.2
52.8
1109
KY
WEBSTER
LISMAN FM (13)
3.1
30.6
45.5
20.8
31.6
46.9
21.5
40.3
59.7
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN
854
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
3.3
39.6
49.7
7.4
40.9
51.5
7.6
44.3
55.7
853
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
2.7
35.6
40.9
20.8
36.5
42.2
21.3
46.5
53.5
852
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
3.2
38.6
46.2
12
39.9
47.7
12.4
45.5
54.5
841
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
2.5
40.3
46.1
11.1
41.3
47.3
11.4
46.6
53.4
842
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
2.7
43.1
48.4
5.8
44.3
49.7
6
47.1
52.9
1435
OH
NOBLE
FREEPORT (L)
2.1
32.4
56.8
8.7
33.1
58
8.9
36.4
63.6
1434
OH
NOBLE
FREEPORT (L)
1.3
37.2
51.5
10
37.7
52.1
10.2
41.9
58.1
1433
OH
NOBLE
FREEPORT (U)
2.2
33.5
56.7
7.6
34.2
58.1
7.7
37.1
62.9
515
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
1.1
39.4
52.2
7.3
39.8
52.8
7.4
43
57
518
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
1.4
36.8
55.5
6.2
37.4
56.3
6.3
39.9
60.1
519
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
1.5
37.5
56
5
38.1
56.8
5.1
40.1
59.9
520
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
1.7
34.5
57.2
6.6
35.1
58.2
6.7
37.7
62.3
521
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
1.3
25.7
42.2
30.6
26
42.9
31.1
37.7
62.3
1588
PA
GREENE
FISH CREEK
1.3
28.7
41.6
28.4
29
42.2
28.8
40.7
59.3
1443
PA
GREENE
FISHPOT
1.11
22.33
24.09
52.47
22.58
24.36
53.06
48.1
51.9
1090
PA
GREENE
FREEPORT (U)
1.1
31
38.5
29.4
31.3
39
29.7
44.6
55.4
1571
PA
GREENE
JOLLYTOWN
0.9
31.6
37.3
30.2
31.9
37.6
30.5
45.9
54.1
1092
PA
GREENE
KITTANNING (U)
1
30
45.1
23.9
30.3
45.5
24.2
40
60
1091
PA
GREENE
KITTANNING (U)
1
28.3
41.2
29.5
28.6
41.6
29.8
40.8
59.2
885
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.1
41.4
52.7
4.8
41.9
53.3
4.8
44
56
863
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.2
37.6
52.4
8.8
38.1
53
8.9
41.8
58.2
867
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.3
38.5
53.5
6.7
39
54.2
6.8
41.8
58.2
884
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1
38.8
45
15.2
39.2
45.4
15.4
46.3
53.7
959
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
0.9
39.4
48.2
11.5
39.7
48.7
11.6
44.9
55.1
908
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.9
35.6
48.7
13.8
36.2
49.8
14
42.1
57.9
957
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
0.8
42.1
49.8
7.3
42.5
50.1
7.4
45.8
54.2
1085
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.3
38.1
52.3
8.3
38.6
52.9
8.5
42.2
57.8
1086
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.5
37.6
54.3
6.6
38.2
55.1
6.7
41
59
861
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
2
37.1
51.3
9.6
37.9
52.4
9.7
42
58
859
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.5
32.9
42.7
22.9
33.4
43.3
23.3
43.6
56.4
270
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
0.8
37.9
46
15.3
38.1
46.4
15.5
45.1
54.9
271
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1
37.8
49.7
11.5
38.2
50.1
11.7
43.3
56.7
62
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
3.4
36.9
55
4.7
38.2
57
4.8
40.1
59.9
266
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.6
36.6
55.7
6.1
37.2
56.6
6.2
39.6
60.4
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
860
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.5
38.4
53
7.1
39
53.7
7.3
42.1
57.9
858
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.3
39.6
50.8
8.3
40.1
51.5
8.4
43.8
56.2
267
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
2.2
32.3
53.9
11.6
33
55.1
11.9
37.5
62.5
285
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.3
36.6
57.4
4.7
37.1
58.1
4.8
39
61
820
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.8
34.6
56.6
7
35.2
57.6
7.2
37.9
62.1
855
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.9
35.8
54.5
7.8
36.5
55.5
8
39.6
60.4
857
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
1.9
35.5
55.2
7.4
36.2
56.2
7.6
39.2
60.8
1088
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH R
1.3
34.1
45.8
18.8
34.5
46.4
19.1
42.6
57.4
1442
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.64
35.35
43.15
19.86
35.94
43.87
20.19
45.04
54.96
1573
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.2
32
41.5
25.3
32.4
42
25.6
43.5
56.5
930
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.5
35.7
47.7
15.1
36.3
48.4
15.3
42.9
57.1
1611
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.4
23.1
29.8
45.7
23.4
30.3
46.3
43.7
56.3
1642
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
0.8
34.3
51.5
13.4
34.5
51.9
13.6
40
60
1084
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.3
40.2
46.1
12.4
40.7
46.7
12.6
46.6
53.4
281
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.9
37.4
52.3
8.4
38.1
53.4
8.5
41.7
58.3
928
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.3
40.8
46.8
11.1
41.4
47.4
11.2
46.6
53.4
927
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.4
39.1
46.4
13.1
39.7
47
13.3
45.8
54.2
876
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.3
39.2
46
13.5
39.7
46.6
13.7
46
54
875
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.3
40.5
47.9
10.3
41
48.6
1.4
45.8
54.2
282
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
1.7
34.5
52.4
11.4
35
53.4
11.6
39.6
60.4
280
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
2
38.1
50.9
9
38.8
52j
9.2
42.8
57.2
1561
PA
GREENE
TEN MILE
2.4
35.8
42
19.8
36.7
43.1
20.2
46
54
1589
PA
GREENE
TEN MILE
1
38.7
39
21.3
39.1
39.4
21.5
49.8
50.2
1541
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
1.3
33.1
49
16.6
33.5
49.7
16.8
40.2
59.8
1569
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
1.2
29.8
38.6
30.4
30.2
39
30.8
43.6
56.4
1641
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
0.8
29.9
48.6
20.7
30.2
48.9
20.9
38.1
61.9
1523
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
1.7
25.1
36.5
36.7
25.5
37.2
37.3
40.6
59.4
1439
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
1.42
37.19
46.65
14.74
37.73
47.31
14.96
44.36
55.64
1440
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
1.43
37.06
44.6
16.91
37.6
45.24
17.1S
45.38
54.62
1637
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
1.2
32.3
49
17.5
32.7
49.6
17.7
39.8
60.2
1590
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
0.9
23.3
33.1
42.7
23.5
33.4
43 1
41.3
58.7
1576
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
1
22.6
32
44.4
22.9
32.3
44.8
41.4
58.6
1563
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
2.1
32.7
53.6
11.6
33.4
54.8
11.8
37.9
62.1
1556
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
1.2
30.8
47.8
20.2
31.2
48.3
20.5
39.2
60.8
1555
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
1.4
28.9
37.2
32.5
29.3
37.7
33
43.7
56.3
1537
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON A
1.8
29.7
38.3
30.2
30.2
39
30.8
43.7
56.3
1572
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON A
1.1
28.6
38.2
32.1
29
38.6
32.4
42.9
57.1
1562
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON (U)
1.1
30.4
44.3
24.2
30.7
44.8
24.5
40.7
59.3
1083
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
1.9
33.6
49.4
15.1
34.2
50.4
15.4
40.4
59.6
906
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
1.8
35.7
51
11.5
36.4
51.9
11.7
41.2
58.8
1638
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
1.1
35.5
50.5
12.9
35.9
51.1
13
41.3
58.7
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
1639
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
1
28.8
36.7
30.5
29.1
40.1
30.8
42.1
57.9
971
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
1.8
36.6
47.8
13.8
37.2
48.8
14
43.3
56.7
279
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
2.2
33.2
44.9
19.7
33.9
46
20.1
42.5
57.5
905
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
1.6
35.9
48.5
14
36.5
49.2
14.3
42.6
57.4
278
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
1.2
36.4
44.7
17.7
36.8
45.3
17.9
44.9
55.1
277
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
2.1
30.2
43.8
23.9
30.9
44.7
24.4
40.8
59.2
| 89
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
1.8
34.6
42.7
20.9
35.2
43.5
21.3
44.7
55.3
883
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
1.5
35.7
42.7
20.1
36.3
43.3
20.4
45.5
54.5
1578
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG A
1.1
30.1
43.6
25.2
30.5
44
25.5
40.9
59.1
1564
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG A
1
31.3
42.6
25.1
31.6
43.1
25.3
42.4
57.6
1520
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG B
1.5
29.1
48.7
20.7
29.5
49.5
21
37.4
62.6
1577
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG B
1
32.9
47.2
18.9
33.3
47.6
19.1
41.1
58.9
2153
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.3
29.3
51.8
17.6
29.7
52.5
17.8
36.1
63.9
2152
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.3
28.7
48
22
29
48.7
22.3
37.4
62.6
2150
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.3
29.4
52.2
17.1
29.8
52.9
17.3
36
64
2149
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.3
32.4
57.1
9.2
32.8
57.8
9.4
36.2
63.8
2146
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.2
31.6
51.7
15.5
32
52.3
15.7
37.9
62.1
1560
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.2
32.5
48.2
18.1
32.9
48.8
18.3
40.2
59.8
1522
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.6
26.1
39.1
33.2
26.5
39.8
33.7
40
60
2145
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.3
31.4
50.6
16.7
31.9
51.2
16.9
38.4
61.6
1540
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.3
30.1
46.2
22.4
30.5
46.8
22.7
39.4
60.6
1559
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1
29.3
40.9
18.8
29.6
41.4
29
41.7
58.3
2148
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.3
27.8
48.9
22
28.2
49.5
22.3
36.3
63.7
1593
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
0.9
32.2
46.9
20
32.4
47.5
20.1
40.6
59.4
1580
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
1
30.6
53.6
18.8
33.1
47.4
19.35
41
59
1521
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
1.5
34
47.6
16.9
34.5
48.4
17.1
41.7
58.3
1539
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
1.5
33.5
47.9
17.1
34
48.6
17.4
41.2
58.8
1565
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG(U)
0.9
31.9
45.6
21.6
32.2
46
21.8
41.2
58.8
1558
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
1.1
31.8
47.9
19.2
32.1
48.5
19.4
39.9
60.1
2147
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG(U)
1.6
30.4
53.8
14.2
30.9
54.6
14.5
36.2
63.8
2144
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
1.1
35.8
48.7
14.4
36.2
49.3
14.5
42.3
57.7
1579
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
0.9
32.2
46.9
20
32.5
47.3
20.2
40.8
59.2
977
PA
INDIANA
FREEPORT (L)
0.9
26.4
67.3
5.4
26.6
68
5.4
28.1
71.9
1811
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (L)
0.4
24.19
64.11
11.3
24.28
64.37
11.35
27.39
72.61
896
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (L)
1.1
24.9
62.9
11.1
25.2
63.6
11.2
28.4
71.6
898
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (L)
0.8
22.9
62.8
13.5
23.1
63.3
13.6
26.7
73.3
895
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (L)
1.1
24.3
60.6
14
24.6
61.3
14.1
28.6
71.4
1808
PA
INDIANA
KITTANNING (M)
0.5
24.48
61.09
13.93
24.6
61.4
14
28.61
71.39
2076
PA
LACKAWANNA
CLARK
3.7
5.4
79.9
11
5.6
83
11.4
6.3
93.7
2074
PA
LACKAWANNA
CLARK
4.6
4.6
85.9
4.9
4.8
90.1
5.1
5
95
2072
PA
LACKAWANNA
CLARK
4.6
4.8
85.6
5
5.1
89.6
5.3
5.4
94.6
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
i BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
2066
PA
LACKAWANNA
CLARK
4.1
5
80.8
10.1
5.3
84.2
10.5
5.9
94.1
2063
PA
LACKAWANNA
CLARK
3.9
4.5
80.4
11.2
4.6
83.7
11.7
5.3
94.7
288
PA
SCHUYLKILL
ORCHARD
1.4
5.9
54.1
38.6
5.9
54.9
39.2
9.8
90.2
211
PA
SCHUYLKILL
PEACH MOUNTAIN
3.6
6.3
78
12.1
6.5
81
12.5
7.4
92.6
213
PA
SCHUYLKILL
TUNNEL
5.1
6
81
7.9
6.3
85.4
8.3
6.9
93.1
214
PA
SCHUYLKILL
TUNNEL
11.7
5.8
75
7.5
6.6
84.9
8.5
7.2
92.8
1720
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.2
35.6
57.5
5.7
36.1
58.1
5.8
38.3
61.7
1186
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.6
34.1
55.1
9.2
34.6
56.1
9.3
38.2
61.8
1185
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
35.1
53.8
9.6
35.7
54.6
9.7
39.5
60.5
1719
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.2
35.1
54.2
9.5
35.6
54.8
9.6
39.3
60.7
1178
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
34.7
54.9
8.9
35.2
55.8
9
38.7
61.3
1721
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
31.5
56.7
10.3
32
57.6
10.4
35.7
64.3
1722
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
32.9
58
7.6
33.4
58.8
7.8
36.2
63.8
1723
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
31
55.9
11.6
31.4
56.9
11.7
35.6
64.4
1749
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
30.3
49.2
19
30.7
50
19.3
38.1
61.9
1750
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
33.1
54.5
10.9
33.7
55.3
11
37.8
62.2
1184
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.4
37.3
55.4
5.9
37.8
56.3
5.9
40.2
59.8
1133
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
35.3
51.4
11.8
35.9
52.1
12
40.8
59.2
1177
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.4
34
51.9
12.7
34.5
52.6
12.9
39.6
60.4
1175
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
37.8
55.4
5.3
38.4
56.2
5.4
40.6
59.4
1163
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1
38.2
57.3
3.5
38.6
57.9
3.5
40
60
1130
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.4
39.5
52.7
6.4
40.1
53.4
6.5
42.9
57.1
1132
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
36.5
55.3
6.7
37.1
56.1
6.8
39.8
60.2
1156
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1
36.6
60
2.4
37
60.6
2.4
37.9
62.1
1176
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.8
34.5
60
3.7
35.1
61.2
3.7
36.5
63.5
1159
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
0.9
35.7
57.3
6.1
36.1
57.7
6.2
38.4
61.6
1158
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1
34.4
58.7
5.9
34.7
59.4
5.9
36.9
63.1
1164
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.1
36.7
57.3
4.9
37.1
57.9
5
39.1
60.9
1167
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.1
33
57.8
8.1
33.3
58.5
8.2
36.3
63.7
1171
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH
1.5
38.1
56.2
4.2
38.7
57
4.3
40.4
59.6
1174
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
1
35
50.3
13.7
35.4
50.8
13.8
41
59
1168
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
0.9
32.8
46.6
19,7
33
47.1
19.9
41.3
58.7
1754
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
1.3
29.5
46
23.2
29.9
46.6
23.5
39.1
60.9
1169
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
0.8
30.5
43.6
25.1
30.7
44
25.3
41.1
58.9
1129
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
1
34.5
48
16.5
34.8
48.6
16.6
41.8
58.2
1162
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
1.2
34.7
54.3
9.8
35.2
54.9
9.9
39.1
60.9
1161
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
0.9
30.1
46.1
22.9
30.4
46.5
23.1
39.6
60.4
1160
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
0.9
33.9
47.2
18
34.2
47.6
18.2
41.8
58.2
1155
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
0.8
35
56.2
8
35.3
56.6
8.1
38.4
61.6
1128
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R
1.4
31.7
39.5
27.4
32.1
40.1
27.8
44.4
55.6
1717
PA
WASHINGTON
PITTSBURGH R2
1.4
30.5
45.5
22.6
30.9
46.2
22.9
40.1
59.9
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
BOM ;
ID j State
No.
County
Coalbed
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
Moisture
(wt%)
Volatile Matter
(wt%)
Fixed Carbon
(wt%)
Ash
(wt%)
Volatile Matter ; Fixed Carbon
(wt%) I (wt%)
Ash
jwt%)
Volatile Matter
(wt%)
Fixed Carbon
(wt%)
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
1531
PA
WASHINGTON
SEWICKLEY
2
34
50.4
13.6
34.7
51.5
13.8
40.3
59.7
1471
1549
PA
WASHINGTON
TEN MILE
1.6
30.4
42.2
25.8
30.8
43
26.2
41.8
58.2
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
1.9
31.6
48.7
17.8
32.2
49.7
18.1
39.4
60.6
1587
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
1.8
26.9
38.3
33
27.4
39
33.6
41.2
58.8
1544
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
1.3
31
46,1
21.6
31.4
46.7
21.9
40.2
59.8
1506
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
1.4
32.4
46.7
19.5
32.8
47.5
19.7
40.9
59.1
1530
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
1.3
30.1
43.8
24.8
30.5
44.4
25.1
40.7
59.3
1535
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
1.2
26.7
37.9
34.2
27.1
38.2
34.7
41.4
58.6
1547
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
1.3
23.2
32.3
43.2
23.5
32.7
43.8
41.8
58.2
1534
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON A
2.3
24.9
36.8
36
25.5
37.6
36.9
40.4
59.6
1472
PA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON (U)
1.3
27.2
20.2
51.3
27.5
20.6
51.9
57.2
42.8
1584
PA
WASHINGTON -
WAYNESBURG A
1.9
31.3
51.4
15.4
31.9
52.4
15.7
37.8
62.2
1446
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG A
1.58
35.73
45.11
17.58
36.3
45.84
17.86
44.19
55.81
1583
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG B
1.1
28.8
40.2
29.9
29.2
40.5
30.3
41.9
58.1
1548
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG B
1.5
29.3
51.1
18.1
29.7
51.9
18.4
36.4
63.6
1505
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.6
30.2
47.2
21
30.6
48
21.4
39
61
1527
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.7
30.1
40.8
27.4
30.7
41.4
27.9
42.5
57.5
1451
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.4
30.9
48.6
19.1
31.4
49.2
19.4
38.9
61.1
1528
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.3
33.7
46.2
18.8
34.1
46.8
19.1
42.1
57.9
1529
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.3
32.1
47
19.6
32.5
47.6
19.9
40.6
59.4
1542
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG(U)
1.8
28.1
42.9
27.2
28.6
43.7
27.7
39.6
60.4
1525
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG(U)
1.4
32.4
50.8
15.4
32.8
51.6
15.6
38.9
61.1
1450
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG(U)
1.4
32
47
19.6
32.4
47.7
19.9
40.5
59.5
1526
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (U)
1.3
31.4
47
20.3
31.8
47.6
20.6
40
60
1731
PA
WESTMORELA
BRUSH CREEK
0.7
22.3
39.4
37.6
22.4
39.8
37.8
36.1
63.9
881
PA
WESTMORELA
CLARION
1.2
34.3
59.6
4.9
34.7
60.4
4.9
36.5
63.5
893
PA
WESTMORELA
CLARION
0.9
31.8
50.7
16.6
32.1
51.1
16.8
38.6
61.4
880
PA
WESTMORELA
CLARION
0.9
33.4
52.8
12.9
33.8
53.2
13
38.8
61.2
882
PA
WESTMORELA
CLARION
1.1
32.4
53.7
12.8
32.8
54.2
13
37.6
62.4
887
PA
WESTMORELA
FREEPORT (L)
1
33.9
51.2
13.9
34.2
51.8
14
39.8
60.2
886
PA
WESTMORELA
FREEPORT (L)
1.1
34.1
50.5
14.3
34.5
51.1
14.4
40.3
59.7
1741
PA
WESTMORELA
FREEPORT (U)
0.6
30.6
60.7
8.1
30.8
61.1
8.1
33.5
66.5
1730
PA
WESTMORELA
HARLEM
0.6
29.9
57.2
12.3
30.1
57.5
12.4
34.4
65.6
134
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (L)
0.3
21.2
70.4
8.1
21.3
70.5
8.2
23.2
76.8
1744
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (M)
0.3
24.5
60.8
14.4
24.6
61
14.4
28.7
71.3
892
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (M)
1.1
33.4
57
8.5
33.8
57.6
8.6
36.9
63.1
879
891
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (M)
1
30.6
53.6
14.8
30.9
54.2
14.9
36.3
63.7
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (M)
1
34.5
54.5
10
34.8
55.1
10.1
38.7
61.3
890
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (M)
1.1
28.8
48.1
22
29.1
48.6
22.3
37.5
62.5
1742
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (U)
0.4
22.2
50
27.4
22.3
50.2
27.5
30.7
69.3
1743
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (U)
0.3
23.9
56.1
19.7
24
56.2
19.8
29.9
70.1
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
BOM
ID
No.
State
County
Coalbed
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
Moisture
(wt%)
Volatile Matter
(wt%)
Fixed Carbon
(wt%)
Ash
(wt%)
Volatile Matter
(wt%)
Fixed Carbon
(wt%)
Ash
(wt%)
Volatile Matter
(wt%)
Fixed Carbon
(wt%)
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
888
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (U)
1.2
31.8
53
14
32.2
53.7
14.1
37.5
62.5
1768
PA
WESTMORELA
MERCER
0.3
21.8
53.7
24.2
21.9
53.8
24.3
28.9
71.1
503
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
0.8
33.5
55.1
10.6
33.7
55.6
10.7
37.8
62.2
798
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
0.8
33.7
58.4
7.1
33.9
58.9
7.2
36.6
63.4
797
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
0.6
33.7
52.1
13.6
33.9
52.5
13.6
39.3
60.7
796
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
0.7
28.8
45.5
25
29
45.9
25.1
38.8
61.2
511
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
0.8
33.9
56.3
9
34.2
56.8
9
37.6
62.4
795
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
0.5
25.4
41.1
33
25.5
41.4
33.1
38.1
61.9
510
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
1
32.8
61.2
5
33.1
61.8
5.1
34.9
65.1
509
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
0.5
29.7
47.6
22.2
29.8
47.8
22.4
38.4
61.6
507
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
0.7
30.4
54.2
14.7
30.6
54.6
14.8
35.9
64.1
494
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
1.1
32.4
51.7
14.8
32.8
52.3
14.9
38.5
61.5
493
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
1
32.9
59.9
6.2
33.3
60.4
6.3
35.5
64.5
508
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
0.7
30.7
55.8
12.8
30.9
56.2
12.9
35.5
64.5
793
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
0.9
29.9
51.9
17.3
30.2
52.4
17.4
36.6
63.4
1792
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
0.7
28.7
57.4
13.2
28.9
57.8
13.3
33.3
66.7
794
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
0.9
32.2
55.2
11.7
32.5
55.7
11.8
36.8
63.2
506
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
1
24.5
36.5
38
24.7
36.9
38.4
40.1
59.9
792
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
0.7
30.8
50.9
17.6
31
51.3
17.7
37.7
62.3
505
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
1
32.2
58.3
8.5
32.5
58.9
8.6
35.6
64.4
504
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
1
32.4
54.9
11.7
32.7
55.5
11.8
37
63
531
WV
BRAXTON
KITTANNING (L)
1.1
33.2
55.3
10.4
33.5
55.9
10.6
37.5
62.5
530
WV
BRAXTON
KITTANNING (L)
1.2
35.4
56.2
7.2
35.9
56.8
7.3
38.7
61.3
529
WV
BRAXTON
KITTANNING (L)
1
35
53
11
35.4
53.5
11.1
39.8
60.2
528
WV
BRAXTON
KITTANNING (L)
0.8
27
43.6
28.6
27.2
44
28.8
38.2
61.8
526
WV
BRAXTON
KITTANNING (L)
0.9
35
59.2
4.8
35.3
59.8
4.9
37.1
62.9
525
WV
BRAXTON
KITTANNING (L)
0.8
27.1
42.1
30
27.3
42.5
30.2
39.1
60.9
524
WV
BRAXTON
KITTANNING (L)
1.1
34.7
53.8
10.4
35.1
54.4
10.5
39.3
60.7
522
WV
BRAXTON
KITTANNING (L)
0.9
27.7
41.6
29.8
27.9
42
30.1
39.9
60.1
527
WV
BRAXTON
KITTANNING (L)
0.9
38.7
56.3
4.1
39
56.8
4.2
40.7
59.3
2137
WV
MARION
SEWICKLEY
0.8
35.8
51.8
11.6
36.1
52.2
11.7
40.9
59.1
2134
WV
MARION
WAYNESBURG (L)
0.9
31.8
53.6
13.7
32.1
54.1
13.8
37.2
62.8
2135
WV
MARION
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.1
29.5
49.5
19.9
29.9
49.9
20.2
37.4
62.6
2133
WV
MARION
WAYNESBURG(U)
1.2
32.9
51.8
14.1
33.3
52.4
14.3
38.8
61.2
144
WV
MONONGALIA
REDSTONE
1.1
34.3
47.1
17.5
34.7
47.6
17.7
42.1
57.9
145
WV
MONONGALIA
REDSTONE
1.1
40.4
49.7
CO
CO
40.8
50.3
8.9
44.8
55.2
2127
WV
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
0.9
33.3
49.6
16.2
33.6
50.1
16.3
40.2
59.8
2138
WV
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
0.9
35.6
50.6
12.9
35.9
51.1
13
41.3
58.7
2126
WV
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
0.7
37.1
51.3
10.9
37.3
51.7
11
41.9
58.1
78
WV
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
1.2
39.9
49.1
9.8
40.4
49.7
9.9
44.9
55.1
77
WV
MONONGALIA
SEWICKLEY
1.3
41.5
49.6
7.6
42.1
50.2
7.7
45.5
54.5
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
i BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
lwt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
91
WV
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
1.6
34.5
43.8
20.1
35
44.6
20.4
44
56
2132
WV
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
1.3
28.2
48.4
22.1
28.6
49.1
22.3
36in
63.2
2139
WV
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
1.1
30.4
48.3
20.2
30.7
48.9
20.4
38.6
61.4
2131
WV
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG
1.5
32.2
55
11.3
32.7
55.8
11.5
36.9
63.1
2130
WV
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG (L)
1.1
29
47.7
22.2
29.3
48.2
22.5
37.8
62.2
2129
WV
MONONGALIA
WAYNESBURG (U)
1.2
32.1
49.9
16.8
32.5
50.5
17
39.2
60.8
PICEANCE
1069
CO
ADAMS
LARAMIE FM
19
30.4
34
16.6
37.5
42
20.5
47.2
52.8
1039
CO
GARFIELD
WHEELER GRP (L)
3
29.7
36.8
30.5
30.7
37.9
31,4
44.7
55.3
1038
CO
GARFIELD
WHEELER GRP (M)
2.2
31.5
23.9
42.4
32.2
24.5
43.3
56.9
43.1
1040
CO
GARFIELD
WHEELER GRP(L)
2.6
42
48.5
6.9
43.1
49.8
7.1
46.4
53.6
1610
CO
MESA
CAMEO ZONE
0.81
31.4
56.94
10.85
31.65
57.41
10.94
35.54
64.46
1600
CO
MESA
CAMEO ZONE
3.68
11.12
5.95
79.25
11.55
6.16
82.29
65.19
34.81
1609
CO
MESA
CAMEO ZONE
0.8
29.5
53.79
15.91
29.74
54.23
16.03
35.42
64.58
1605
CO
MESA
CAMEO ZONE
0.9
29.95
49.86
19.29
30.22
50.32
19.46
37.53
62.47
1696
CO
MESA
MESAVERDE GRP
1.4
19.19
18.44
60.97
19.46
18.7
61.84
50.99
49.01
1868
CO
MESA
MESAVERDE GRP
0.82
37.92
48.78
12.48
38.23
49.19
12.58
43.74
56.26
1872
CO
MESA
MESAVERDE GRP
0.77
35.71
50.9
12.62
35.99
51.29
12.72
41.23
58.77
358
CO
MESA
PALISADE ZONE
1.9
39.4
53.5
5.2
40.2
54.5
5.3
42.4
57.6
1120
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE A
8.1
27.3
57.8
6.8
29.7
62.9
7.4
32.1
67.9
1121
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE A
7.6
27.8
60
4.6
30.1
65
4.9
31.7
68.3
1148
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE B
7.8
35.4
50.3
6.5
38.3
54.6
7.1
41.3
58.7
1147
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE C
10.2
35.2
51.2
3.4
39.2
57
3.8
40.7
59.3
1066
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE C
8.3
36
47.2
8.5
39.2
51.5
9.3
43,2
56.8
1114
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
9
34.1
53.3
3.6
37.5
58.6
3.9
39
61
1152
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
8.6
28.6
33.6
29.2
31.3
36.7
32
46
54
1144
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
8.7
37
50.3
4
40.6
55
4.4
42.4
57.6
1123
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
7.9
34.5
49.9
7.7
37.4
54.3
8.3
40.8
59.2
1067
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE E
7.3
35.2
48.9
8.6
37.9
52.8
9.3
41.8
58.2
1143
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE E
8
36.5
45
10.5
39.7
48.9
11.4
44.8
55.2
1146
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE E
7.1
35.3
48.1
9.5
38
51.8
10.2
42.4
57.6
790
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE GRP
7.2
38.6
49.7
4.5
41.6
53.6
4.8
43.7
56.3
791
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE GRP
6.1
39.8
45.5
8.6
42.3
48.6
9.1
46.6
53.4
POWDER RIVER
995
MT
BIG HORN
CANYON
13.1
35.2
47.7
4
40.5
54.9
4.6
42.5
57.5
994
MT
BIG HORN
CANYON
12.5
35.5
48.8
3.2
40.6
55.8
3.6
42.1
57.9
996
MT
BIG HORN
WALL
11.5
34.7
40.5
13.3
39.2
45.8
15
46.2
53.8
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
POWDER RIVER (CONT'D)
1004
MT
POWDER RIVE
DIETZ
20.6
32.3
42.8
4.3
40.6
54
5.4
43
57
1371
WY
SHERIDAN
SMITH
8.4
35.8
48.2
7.6
39.1
52.7
8.2
42.6
57.4
1367
WY
SHERIDAN
SMITH (L)
7.9
36.6
50.4
5.1
39.8
54.7
5.5
42.1
57.9
1366
WY
SHERIDAN
SMITH (U)
9.9
37.2
48.1
4.8
41.3
53.4
5.3
43.7
56.3
RATON MESA
666
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
1.4
36.2
54.2
8.2
36.7
55
8.3
40
60
668
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
1.1
32.8
50.1
16
33.2
50.6
16.2
39.6
60.4
670
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
1.4
34.6
50.1
13.9
35.1
50.8
14.1
40.8
59.2
1125
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
2
33.4
40
24.6
34.1
40.8
25.1
45.5
54.5
651
CO
LAS ANIMAS
COLORADO (UNC)
3.5
14.5
15.7
66.3
15
16.3
68.7
47.8
52.2
661
CO
LAS ANIMAS
MORLEY
0.7
30.7
47.3
21.3
30.9
47.7
21.4
39.4
60.6
660
CO
LAS ANIMAS
MORLEY
0.7
29
53
17.3
29.2
53.4
17.4
35.4
64.6
1150
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
1.9
33.2
52
12.9
33.9
52.9
13.2
39
61
663
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
0.9
14.3
48.6
36.2
14.4
49.1
36.5
22.7
77.3
655
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
2
7.3
16.5
74.2
7.5
16.8
75.7
30.7
69.3
652
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
2.1
16
25.5
56.4
16.3
26.1
57.6
38.5
61.5
533
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
1.1
21.6
42.1
35.2
21,9
42.5
35.6
33.9
66.1
532
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
3.4
10.6
7.1
78.9
11
7.3
81.7
60.2
39.8
1595
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.73
17.36
58.05
23.86
17.49
58.48
24.03
23.02
76.98
1643
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.6
16.73
48.69
33.98
16.83
48.99
34.18
25.58
74.42
1644
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.56
16.19
52.14
31.11
16.28
52.44
31.28
23.69
76.31
1512
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
1.5
11.79
27.26
59.45
11.97
27.68
60.35
30.2
69.8
1645
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.93
14.08
34.32
50.67
14.21
34.64
51.15
29.09
70.91
1647
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.99
13.92
40.05
45.04
14.06
40.45
45.49
25.8
74.2
1798
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.57
15.59
51.08
32.76
15.68
51.37
32.95
23.38
76.62
1514
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
3.36
6.71
2.42
87.51
6.95
2.51
90.54
73.46
26.54
1646
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
1.21
11.14
19.06
68.59
11.28
19.29
69.43
36.89
63.11
1149
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.8
19.7
60.2
19.3
19.9
60.6
19.5
24.6
75,4
653
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.6
25.2
62.4
11.7
25.4
62.8
11.8
28.8
71.2
536
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.9
21.9
47.6
29.6
22.1
48
29.9
31.5
68.5
664
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.3
20.9
63.1
15.7
21
63.3
15.7
24.9
75.1
535
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.8
18.7
41.5
39
18.9
41.8
39.3
31.1
68.9
689
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
1.2
29.8
56.7
12.3
30.2
57.3
12.5
34.5
65.5
656
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
1.7
18.6
24.1
55.6
18.9
24.5
56.6
43.6
56.4
657
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
1
29.5
51.2
18.3
29.8
51.7
18.5
36.5
63.5
658
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.8
29.3
49
20.8
29.6
49.4
21
37.5
62.5
659
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
0.7
35.8
50.6
12.9
36
51
13
41.4
58.6
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
SAN JUAN
1360
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
2.1
21
19.1
57.8
21.4
19.6
59
52.3
47.7
! 1361
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
2
19.2
16.9
61.9
19.6
17.3
63.1
53.3
46.7
1362
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
1.9
23
20.8
54.3
23.5
21.2
55.3
52.5
47.5
1770
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
2.96
33.06
30.69
33.29
34.07
31.63
34.3
51.86
48.14
1771
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
3.37
35.04
35.12
26.47
36.27
36.33
27.4
49.95
50.05
1878
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
3.64
37.82
44.12
14.42
39.25
45.79
14.96
46.16
53.84
1875
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
2.6
35.94
32.07
29.39
36.9
32.93
30.17
52.85
47.15
1879
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
2.94
39.81
38.1
19.15
41.02
39.25
19.73
51.1
48.9
1876
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
3.13
42.8
43.33
10.74
44.18
44.73
11.09
49.69
50.31
1689
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
9.07
36.12
43.83
10.98
39.72
48.2
12.08
45.18
54.82
1691
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
7.2
32.9
39.89
20.01
35.46
42.98
21.56
45.2
54.8
1692
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
7.39
30.91
45.39
16.31
33.38
49.01
17.61
40.51
59.49
1690
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
8.43
32.64
43.07
15.86
35.64
47.04
17.32
43.11
56.89
1688
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
9.75
36.17
43.69
10.39
40.07
48.41
11.52
45.29
54.71
675
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (J)
12.5
30.9
32.3
24.3
35.4
36.8
27.8
49
51
499
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
8.1
39
44.1
CO
CO
42.4
48
9.6
46.9
53.1
497
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
8.4
37.4
41.2
13
40.8
45
14.2
47.6
52.4
496
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (U)
~67l
33.2
36.8
23.3
35.6
39.4
25
47.4
52.6
498
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (U)
00
CO
38.9
41.5
10.8
42.7
45.5
11.8
48.4
51.6
UINTA
j 823
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
1.8
40.2
47.1
10.9
41
47.9
11.1
46.1
53.9
762
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
2.8
38.8
52.5
5.9
39.9
54
6.1
42.5
57.5
720
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
1.2
50.9
41.3
6.6
51.5
41.8
6.7
55.2
44.8
719
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
1.4
40.8
50.7
7.1
41.4
51.4
7.2
44.6
55.4
717
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
1.2
45
48.3
5.5
45.5
48.9
5.6
48.2
51.8
718
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
3
39.8
52.1
5.1
41
53.8
5.2
43.2
56.8
696
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
1.5
38.4
54.5
5.5
39.1
55.3
5.6
41.4
58.6
514
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
3.7
42.5
48.9
4.9
44.2
50.7
5.1
46.6
53.4
345
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
2.5
41
51.4
5.1
42.1
52.7
5.2
44.4
55.6
542
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
4.1
39.6
50.3
6
41.3
52.5
6.2
44
56
727
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
1.7
45.9
48.5
3.9
46.7
49.4
3.9
48.6
51.4
538
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE D
2.2
46.7
42.7
8.4
47.7
43.7
8.6
52.2
47.8
697
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE D
1.6
40.2
53.8
4.4
40.8
54.8
4.4
42.7
57.3
746
UT
CARBON
KENILWORTH
2
40.9
49.9
7.2
41.7
50.9
7.4
45.1
54.9
549
UT
CARBON
KENILWORTH
2.4
42.6
49
6
43.7
50.1
6.2
46.6
53.4
310
UT
CARBON
ROCK CANYON
4.2
40.1
50.8
4.9
41.9
53
5.1
44.1
55.9
756
UT
CARBON
ROCK CANYON
3.6
40.9
50.7
4.8
42.4
52.7
4.9
44.6
55.4
808
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
3.3
41.1
49
6.6
42.5
50.7
6.8
45.6
54.4
344
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE (U)
2.3
44.3
47.6
5.8
45.3
48.8
5.9
48.2
51.8
-------
TABLE A-1. PROXIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
BOM
As Received
Moisture Free
Ash Free/Moisture Free
ID
State
County
Coalbed
Moisture
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
Ash
Volatile Matter
Fixed Carbon
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
UINTA (CONT'D)
843
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 1
1.7
43.9
45.4
9
44.7
46.2
9.1
49.2
50.8
512
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
2.5
44.4
45.4
7.7
45.5
46.7
7.8
49.4
50.6
824
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
1.6
41.6
50.2
6.6
42.3
51
6.7
45.3
54.7
541
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
1.7
45.7
46.9
5.7
46.5
47.7
5.8
49.4
50.6
699
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 3
2
43.6
48
6.4
44.5
49
6.5
47.6
52.4
825
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 3
1.5
43
45
10.5
43.7
45.7
10.6
48.9
51.1
343
UT
CARBON
UTAH (UNC)
3.7
40.8
51
4.5
42.4
52.9
4.7
44.4
55.6
809
UT
CARBON
UTAH (UNC)
2.8
40.3
47.4
9.5
41.5
48.7
9.8
46
54
804
UT
CARBON
UTAH (UNC)
4.6
39.1
51.7
4.6
40.9
54.3
4.8
43
57
126
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
5.6
43.5
46.1
4.8
46.1
48.8
5.1
48.6
51.4
545
UT
GARFIELD
REES
15
37.1
42.7
5.2
43.6
50.3
6.1
46.4
53.6
819
UT
GRAND
CHESTERFIELD
5.9
39
52.4
2.6
41.5
55.7
2.8
42.7
57.3
722
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
4.8
32
42.3
20.9
33.6
44.4
22
43.1
56.9
815
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
5.1
36.4
47.1
11.2
38.4
49.7
11.9
43.6
56.4
WESTERN WASHINGTON AND WIND RIVER
827
WA
PIERCE
BIG&LITTLE DIRTY
2.4
16.6
30.4
50.6
17
31.1
51.9
35.3
64.7
1359
WY
FREMONT
MESAVERDE GRP
4.3
38.9
53.5
3.3
40.6
55.9
3.5
42.1
57.9
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
>
I
ui
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
s
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
CENTRAL APPALACHIAN
1746
NC
LEE
GULF
4.9
59
1
2.4
3.1
30
10170
4.8
59
1.1
2.4
2.2
30.3
10280
6.9
85
1.51
3.49
3.09
14750
1815
KY
CLAY
KENTUCKY(UNC)
5.4
78
1.5
3.5
5.8
6.1
14029
5.4
78
1.6
3.6
4.8
6.21
14196
5.7
84
1.65
3.81
5.16
15136
1816
KY
CLAY
KENTUCKY(UNC)
5.6
81
1.9
1
8.6
1.7
14657
5.5
83
1.9
1.1
7.1
1.72
14931
5.6
84
1.95
1.07
7.17
15191
1817
KY
CLAY
KENTUCKY(UNC)
5.7
77
1.6
3.8
6
6.2
14095
5.6
78
1.6
3.8
5
6.32
14273
6
83
1.69
4.07
5.33
15236
1655
KY
FLOYD
BINGHAM
6.6
75
1.2
4.8
4.2
7.9
13440
6.5
76
1.2
4.9
3.3
8
13570
7.1
83
1.3
5.3
3.63
14750
1929
TN
MORGAN
SEWANEE
2.5
26
0.4
1.8
3
67
4240
2.4
26
0.4
1.8
2.5
67.1
4270
7.3
79
1.34
5.35
7.51
12950
1934
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
3.5
64
0.7
0.4
2.5
29
10750
3.5
65
0.7
0.4
2.2
28.7
10790
4.8
91
0.97
0.51
3 02
15130
1935
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
3.5
71
0.7
0.3
2.5
22
11980
3.5
71
0.7
0.3
2.2
22
12020
4.5
91
0.94
0.39
2.84
15410
1936
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
4.2
84
0.5
0.3
1.8
9
14170
4.1
85
0.5
0.3
1.2
9.03
14270
4.5
93
0.54
0.35
1.29
15680
1937
VA
MONTGOMERY
PRICE FM
4.6
77
0.6
0.2
1.2
16
12810
4.6
77
0.6
0.2
0.8
16.5
12870
5.5
93
0.71
0.28
0.94
15410
174
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
5.9
79
1.6
0.9
9.6
2.6
5.8
82
1.7
0.9
7.4
2.7
5.9
84
1.7
0.9
7.7
175
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
5.4
78
1.4
0.7
9.1
5.4
13910
5.3
80
1.4
0.7
7
5.6
14270
5.6
85
1.5
0.8
7.4
15110
191
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
5.5
79
1.6
0.8
10
3.3
14075
5.3
81
1.6
0.8
8
3.4
14450
5.5
84
1.7
0.8
8.3
14962
339
WV
MINGO
CEDAR GROVE (L)
4.9
70
1.3
1
9.1
14
12363
4.8
71
1.3
1
7.3
14.1
12648
5.6
83
1.6
1.2
8.5
14726
GREATER GREEN RIVER
734
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.2
64
1.5
0.6
25
4
11126
4.4
73
1.6
0.6
16
4.5
12645
4.6
77
1.7
0.7
16.4
13239
735
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.5
66
1.3
0.7
21
5.2
11443
4.9
73
1.4
0.8
14
5.7
12599
5.2
77
1.5
0.8
15.2
13360
899
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.1
66
1.8
0.5
15
12
11455
4.6
70
2
0.6
10
12.5
12272
5.3
80
2.2
0.7
11.6
14022
900
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.3
67
1.8
0.9
14
11
11973
5
71
1.9
0.9
9.4
11.8
12617
5.6
81
2.1
1.1
10.7
14298
901
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.6
72
1.8
0.8
14
5.2
12861
5.3
76
1.9
0.9
10
5.5
13614
5.6
81
2
0.9
10.6
14408
960
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5
59
1.7
1.7
14
19
10700
4.6
63
1.8
1.8
9.1
19.8
11339
5.7
78
2.3
2.3
11.4
14145
961
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.5
74
1.9
0.5
15
2.5
12917
5.1
80
2
0.5
9.9
2.7
13862
5.3
82
2.1
0.5
10.2
14240
963
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.4
70
1.5
0.5
13
9.4
12489
5.1
73
1.6
0.5
10
9.8
12964
5.7
81
1.8
0.6
11.2
14373
964
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.8
76
1.7
0.5
13
2.9
13510
5.5
79
1.7
0.5
10
3
14088
5.7
82
1.8
0.5
10.4
14530
966
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.8
76
1.7
0.6
13
3.3
13530
5.6
79
1.7
0.6
9.7
3.4
14074
5.8
82
1.8
0.6
10.1
14568
968
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.7
74
1.5
0.6
13
5.2
13281
5.5
77
1.5
0.6
9.8
5.3
13780
5.8
82
1.6
0.6
10.4
14558
969
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
5.7
76
1.5
0.6
13
2.9
13479
5.5
80
1.5
0.6
9.7
3.1
14043
5.6
82
1.6
0.6
10
14487
919
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
5.5
68
1.6
0.8
12
13
12229
5.3
70
1.6
0.8
8.9
13.2
12658
6.1
81
1.9
0.9
10.2
14579
920
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
5.9
76
1.8
0.9
13
2.9
13564
5.7
78
1.8
0.9
10
3
14065
5.9
81
1.9
0.9
10.5
14494
921
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
6
76
1.8
0.8
13
2.7
13809
5.8
79
1.9
0.8
10
2.8
14322
6
81
2
0.8
10.5
14730
923
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
5.8
75
1.8
0.7
13
3.1
13477
5.6
78
1.8
0.7
11
3.3
13965
5.8
81
1.9
0.7
10.8
14435
925
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
5.9
75
1.5
1.5
13
2.8
13671
5.8
78
1.5
1.6
10
2.9
14141
5.9
80
1.6
1.6
10.6
14568
926
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
5.8
74
1.6
1.1
13
5
13348
5.7
76
1.7
1.1
10
5.2
13814
6
80
1.8
1.2
10.7
14566
1318
WY
SWEETWATER
FOX HILLS
1.8
21
0.6
0.3
3.4
73
3478
1.7
21
0.6
0.3
2.4
74
3521
6.6
81
2.4
1.3
9.1
13553
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
>
I
--J
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
c
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
iwt%]
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
ILLINOIS
844
IL
CLAY
DANVILLE (7)
5.4
64
1.4
2.4
15
12
11426
4.9
70
1.6
2.6
7.3
13.3
12530
5.6
81
1.8
3
8.4
14445
845
IL
CLAY
DANVILLE (7)
5.3
64
1.4
2.5
15
13
11333
4.7
70
1.5
2.8
7.5
13.9
12413
5.4
81
1.8
3.2
8.7
14417
850
IL
IL
CLAY
HARRISBURG (5)
5.3
66
1.4
2.6
13
13
11685
4.8
0.6
1.5
2.8
6.9
13.4
12542
5.6
82
1.8
3.2
8
14489
951
MARION
BRIAR HILL (5A)
5.5
67
1.1
4.3
12
10
12190
5.1
71
1.1
4.5
7.7
10.7
12947
5.8
79
1.3
5.1
8.6
14495
949
IL
MARION
DANVILLE (7)
5.2
62
1
5.7
14
12
11307
4.7
68
1.1
6.2
6.7
13.4
12341
5.4
79
1.3
7.1
7.8
14256
953
IL
MARION
HARRISBURG (5)
5.4
67
1.1
2.3
15
9.8
12087
5
72
1.1
2.5
9.4
10.5
12956
5.5
80
1.3
2.8
10.5
14479
954
IL
MARION
HARRISBURG(5)
5.4
64
1.1
2.4
15
12
11903
5
68
1.1
2.5
10
13
12732
5.8
79
1.3
2.9
11.6
14627
1135
IN
POSEY
DANVILLE (VII)
5.7
63
1.4
3.5
13
13
11431
5.3
68
1.6
3.7
7.1
14
12313
6.1
79
1.8
4.3
8.3
14312
1140
IN
POSEY
DANVILLE (VII)
5.3
63
1.4
2.4
17
11
11380
4.8
70
1.6
2.6
9.5
12.1
12486
5.4
79
1.8
3
10.8
14200
1136
IN
POSEY
HOUCHIN CK(IVA)
5.4
67
1.3
3.4
12
12
12039
5
70
1.4
3.6
7.2
12.3
12750
5.7
80
1.6
4.1
8.3
14534
1142
IN
POSEY
HOUCHIN CK(IVA)
5.5
64
1.4
3.9
13
12
11747
5.1
69
1.5
4.2
7.9
12.6
12573
5.8
79
1.7
4.8
9
14390
1139
IN
POSEY
SEELYVILLE (III)
5.5
69
1.4
2.2
13
9.1
12251
5.1
74
1.5
2.3
7.8
9.7
13100
5.6
82
1.6
2.6
8.7
14511
1189
IN
POSEY
SEELYVILLE (III)
5.4
67
1.4
4.7
13
8.6
12248
5.1
72
1.5
5
7.6
9.2
13068
5.6
79
1.6
5.5
8.4
14393
1190
IN
POSEY
SEELYVILLE (III)
5.5
67
1.5
3.2
15
7.6
12252
5
73
1.6
3.5
CO
CO
8.2
13278
5.4
79
1.7
3.8
9.6
14470
1141
IN
POSEY
SPRINGFIELD (V)
5.5
63
1.4
4.1
13
13
11474
5
68
1.5
4.4
7.4
14
12338
5.8
79
1.7
5.1
8.6
14353
1192
IN
POSEY
SPRINGFIELD (V)
5.1
62
1.4
4.6
15
12
11246
4.6
68
1.5
5
7.6
13.4
12321
5.3
79
1.7
5.8
CO
CO
14235
1191
IN
POSEY
SPRINGFIELD (V)
5.6
66
1.5
2.5
15
9.8
11869
5.1
72
1.6
2.7
7.8
10.7
12950
5.7
81
1.8
3.1
8.8
14509
1137
IN
POSEY
SURVANT (IV)
5.3
64
1.4
3.4
13
13
11699
4.9
68
1.5
3.6
8.4
13.3
12470
5.7
79
1.8
4.2
9.7
14382
1188
IN
POSEY
SURVANT (IV)
5.6
68
1.5
3.3
15
6.9
12266
5.1
74
1.6
3.6
8.5
7.5
13330
5.5
80
1.7
3.9
9.2
14405
1669
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
5.7
71
1.1
3.1
7.7
11
12370
5.6
73
1.1
3.1
6
11.5
12640
6.3
82
1.25
3.53
6.76
14280
1670
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
5.3
69
1
2.9
9.6
12
12180
5.1
71
1.1
3
7.2
12.3
12550
5.9
81
1.22
3.42
8.19
14310
1671
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
5.3
71
0.9
6.1
4.5
12
12150
5.2
73
0.9
6.2
2.4
12.5
12450
5.9
83
1
7.13
2.76
14230
1672
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
5.8
68
0.9
3.4
8.2
13
11860
5.6
71
0.9
3.5
5.3
13.9
12290
6.5
82
1.08
4.09
6.1
14270
1680
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
6.8
66
1
3.4
7.8
15
11520
6.6
69
1
3.5
4.1
15.3
12040
7.8
82
1.21
4.15
4.82
14220
1681
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
6.8
70
1
4
7.9
11
12190
6.6
73
1.1
4.1
4.2
11.1
12750
7.4
82
1.18
4.64
4.73
14330
1706
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
7.4
72
1.1
2.8
8.3
8.3
12570
7.2
75
1.2
2.9
4.8
8.68
13120
7.9
82
1.3
3.18
5.24
14360
1707
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
7.8
74
1.1
2.2
CO
CO
I
5.9
13020
7.7
77
1.2
2.3
5.3
6.19
13600
8.2
83
1.27
2.4
5.6
14500
1708
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (L)
7.1
65
1
5
5
17
11220
6.9
67
1
5.2
2
17.5
11620
8.4
82
1.22
6.28
2.41
14090
1662
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.2
66
1.1
2.9
15
9.2
11720
4.7
71
1.1
3.1
10
9.8
12530
5.3
79
1.27
3.39
11.4
13890
1664
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.7
73
1.1
11
6.2
2.6
12840
5.4
76
1.1
2.8
8
6.5
13420
5.8
82
1.17
2.94
8.55
14350
1665
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.6
72
1.2
1.7
12
8
12640
5.4
75
1.3
1.7
8.5
8.37
13180
5.8
82
1.37
1.88
9.32
14380
1666
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.7
73
1.2
1.9
10
7.5
12920
5.5
76
1.2
2
7.5
7.74
13370
6
82
1.35
2.18
8.12
14490
1667
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.5
72
1.1
1.8
11
8.5
12690
5.3
75
1.2
1.8
8.3
CO
bo
13080
5.8
82
1.29
1.99
9.09
14340
1668
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.8
73
1.2
2.3
12
6.1
12860
5.6
76
1.2
2.3
8.6
6.39
13390
6
81
1.31
2.5
9.2
14300
1678
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
6.6
69
1
3.5
10
10
11980
6.3
73
1.1
3.7
5.2
11
12730
7
82
1.24
4.14
5.83
14290
1679
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
7.3
73
1.2
1.6
13
4
12920
7.1
78
1.3
1.7
7.5
4.25
13790
7.4
82
1.32
1.77
7.79
14400
1703
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
7.9
72
1.2
2.9
10
6
12680
7.7
76
1.2
3.1
5.2
6.4
13480
8.2
82
1.32
3.31
5.51
14400
1704
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
7.7
70
1.1
2.4
10
8.2
12380
7.5
75
1.2
2.5
5.5
8.66
13120
8.2
82
1.28
2.78
6.07
14360
1705
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
7.8
71
1.3
2:1
9
8.5
12460
7.6
75
1.3
2.2
5.1
8.95
13060
8.4
82
1.46
2.45
5.61
14340
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
c
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
ILLINOIS (CONT'D)
1733
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
7.4
72
1.2
1.7
11
6
12720
7.2
77
1.3
1.8
6.7
6.34
13450
7.7
82
1.37
1.94
7.18
14360
1734
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE (U)
7.8
72
1.2
1.1
11
6.7
12330
7.6
77
1.3
1.2
5.7
7.2
13180
8.1
83
1.43
1.31
6.12
14200
1735
IN
VANDERBURG
SEELYVILLE(U)
7.6
73
1.3
0.8
13
4.1
12930
7.3
78
1.3
0.9
8.2
4.36
13780
7.6
82
1.39
0.9
8.53
14410
1657
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
5.8
64
0.9
3.1
8
18
11220
5.6
66
0.9
3.2
5.7
18.5
11550
6.9
81
1.14
3.97
6.92
14170
1659
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
5.9
71
1
5.5
7.4
9.3
12410
5.7
73
1
5.7
4.9
9.56
12780
6.4
81
1.12
6.29
5.44
14130
1660
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
5.9
70
1
4
9.1
10
12310
5.7
72
1
4.1
6.1
10.9
12770
6.3
81
1.14
4.6
6.88
14320
1661
IN
VANDERBURG
SPRINGFIELD (V)
5.4
68
1.1
2.2
9.6
14
12040
5.2
71
1.1
2.2
6.6
14
12490
6
82
1.27
2.61
7.71
14520
1839
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (L)
7.3
69
1.1
2.9
10
10
12180
7.1
72
1.2
3
6.1
10.6
12810
7.9
81
1.28
3.35
6.85
14330
1836
IN
WARRICK
SEELYVILLE (U)
5.1
59
1
2.1
12
21
10360
4.7
62
1.1
2.2
7.9
21.9
10960
6.1
80
1.38
2.78
10
14030
1108
KY
WEBSTER
LISMAN FM (13)
4.9
63
1.7
4.8
7.4
18
11599
4.8
65
1.7
4.9
5.4
18.3
11887
5.8
79
2.1
6
6.6
14552
1109
KY
WEBSTER
LISMAN FM (13)
4.6
61
1.8
3.1
8.4
21
11066
4.4
63
1.8
3.2
5.8
21.5
11424
5.6
81
2.3
4.1
7.4
14551
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN
841
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
5.3
70
1.4
2.4
9.8
11
12731
5.1
72
1.4
2.5
7.7
11.4
13062
5.8
81
1.6
2.8
8.7
14741
842
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
5.6
74
1.5
3.3
9.4
5.8
13497
5.5
76
1.6
3.4
7.2
6
13869
5.8
81
1.7
3.6
7.7
14753
852
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
5.2
69
1.3
2.7
10
12
12449
5
71
1.3
2.8
7.7
12.4
12856
5.7
81
1.5
3.2
8.8
14672
853
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
4.8
62
1.1
3.1
8.1
21
11195
4.6
64
1.1
3.2
5.8
21.3
11507
5.9
81
1.4
4.1
7.4
14630
854
OH
HARRISON
KITTANNING (M)
5.3
73
1.3
3.4
9.9
7.4
13159
5.1
75
1.4
3.5
7.2
7.6
13602
5.6
81
1.5
3.8
7.8
14725
1434
OH
NOBLE
FREEPORT (L)
6.5
75
1.2
4.5
3.1
10
13180
6.5
76
1.2
4.5
1.9
10.2
13360
7.2
84
1.32
5.04
2.17
14870
1435
OH
NOBLE
FREEPORT (L)
6.6
75
1
2.4
5.9
8.7
13170
6.5
77
1
2.5
4.1
8.9
13450
7.2
85
1.11
2.69
4.54
14760
1433
OH
NOBLE
FREEPORT (U)
6.4
76
1
1.2
7.8
7.6
13300
6.2
78
1
1.3
6
7.74
13590
6.8
84
1.12
1.37
6.54
14730
515
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
5.7
78
1.7
1.7
6.2
7.3
5.6
78
1.7
1.8
5.3
7.4
6
85
1.8
1.9
5.7
518
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
5.7
79
1.6
1.4
5.8
6.2
14121
5.6
81
1.6
1.4
4.6
6.3
14321
6
86
1.7
1.5
4.9
15278
519
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT(U)
4.3
83
1.6
1.2
5.3
5
14252
4.2
84
1.6
1.2
4
5.1
14471
4.4
88
1.7
1.3
4.2
15244
520
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT(U)
5.4
78
1.5
1.4
6.9
6.6
13942
5.3
80
1.5
1.5
5.5
6.7
14180
5.7
85
1.6
1.6
5.9
15202
521
PA
ALLEGHENY
FREEPORT (U)
3.9
57
1.1
0.9
6.2
31
10060
3.8
58
1.1
0.9
5.1
31.1
10198
5.5
84
1.6
1.3
7.4
14794
1092
PA
GREENE
KITTANNING (U)
4.3
62
1.2
4.6
4.1
24
11242
4.2
63
1.3
4.7
3.2
24.2
11364
5.6
82
1.7
6.2
4.2
14988
1588
PA
GREENE
FISH CREEK
5.6
59
1
2.6
3.3
28
10280
5.6
60
1
2.7
2.2
28.8
10410
7.8
84
1.39
3.75
3.08
14610
1443
PA
GREENE
FISHPOT
2.9
36
0.8
4.6
3.6
52
6566
2.8
36
0.8
4.7
2.6
53.1
6640
5.9
77
1.64
9.97
5.56
14146
1090
PA
GREENE
FREEPORT (U)
4.1
55
1.2
7.3
3.1
29
10259
4
56
1.2
7.4
2.1
29.7
10377
5.7
79
1.7
10.5
3
14770
1571
PA
GREENE
JOLLYTOWN
5.4
57
0.9
4.7
1.3
30
9960
6.3
57
0.9
4.8
0.5
30.5
10050
7.7
83
1.25
6.89
0.7
14470
1091
PA
GREENE
KITTANNING (U)
3.9
55
1.1
6.6
3.6
30
10121
3.9
56
1.1
6.7
2.7
29.8
10225
5.5
80
1.6
9.5
3.9
14574
62
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.5
78
1.5
0.6
9.4
5.5
13840
5.3
81
1.6
0.7
6.5
5.3
14330
5.6
85
1.7
0.7
6.8
15060
266
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.3
78
1.5
1.8
7.6
6.1
13948
5.2
79
1.5
1.8
6.2
6.2
14181
5.5
84
1.6
2
6.7
15120
267
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
4.3
72
1.1
1
CO ;
O)
12
12402
4.2
74
1.1
1
8
11.9
12685
4.7
84
1.2
1.1
9.1
14400
270
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
4.8
68
1.3
7.1
4
15
12458
4.8
68
1.3
7.2
3.3
15.5
12554
5.6
80
1.5
8.5
3
14852
271
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.2
73
1.4
3.2
5.4
12
13223
5.1
74
1.4
3.2
4.6
6 7
11.7
13352
5.8
84
1.6
3.6
5.2
15114
285
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.3
79
1.5
1.4
7.8
4.7
14235
5.2
80
1.6
1.5
4.8
14423
5.5
84
1.6
1.5
7.1
15143
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
c
N2
s
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
c
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
820
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.5
77
1.6
1.2
8.1
7
13765
5.4
78
1.6
1.2
6.6
7.2
14015
5.8
84
1.7
1.3
7.1
15095
855
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.3
76
1.4
2.4
7.4
7.8
13643
5.2
77
1.5
2.5
5.8
8
13911
5.6
84
1.6
2.7
6.3
15113
857
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.3
77
1.6
1.2
7.6
7.4
13580
5.2
78
1.6
1.2
6
7.6
13849
5.7
85
1.7
1.3
6.5
14980
858
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.4
76
1.5
3.9
5.3
8.3
13807
5.3
77
1.5
3.9
4.2
8.4
13985
5.8
84
1.6
4.3
4.6
15274
859
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
4.6
63
1.4
2
6.5
23
11260
4.5
63
1.4
2
5.3
23.3
11427
5.9
83
1.9
2.7
6.9
14893
860
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.5
77
1.5
2.6
6.3
7.1
13763
5.4
78
1.5
2.6
5
7.3
13977
6
84
1.6
2.8
5.4
15071
861
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.1
74
1.6
1.6
CO
CO
9.6
13420
5
75
1.4
1.6
7.2
9.7
13688
5.6
83
1.5
1.8
8
15167
863
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.3
75
1.5
2.7
6.8
8.8
13633
5.3
76
1.5
2.7
5.8
8.9
13794
5.8
83
1.7
3
6 7
15147
867
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.3
75
1.5
2.5
9.4
6.7
13902
5.2
76
1.6
2.5
8.3
6.8
14092
5.6
81
1.7
2.7
8.9
15123
884
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
4.9
67
1.2
6.1
5.2
15
12421
4.8
68
1.2
6.1
4.4
15.4
12542
5.7
81
1.4
7.3
5.2
14819
885
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.5
78
1.4
3.1
7.2
4.8
14267
5.4
79
1.4
3.1
6.3
4.8
14430
5.7
83
TIT1
3.3
6.6
15161
908
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
4.9
70
1.5
2.2
7.4
14
12711
4.8
72
1.5
2 3
5.8
14
12957
5.6
83
1.7
2.6
6.8
15069
957
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.3
76
1.6
3.4
6.2
7.3
13936
5.3
77
1.6
3.5
5.6
7.4
14042
5.7
83
1.7
3.7
6
15164
959
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5
72
1.4
5.3
5.2
12
13102
5
72
1.4
5.3
4.4
11.6
13220
5.6
82
1.6
6
5
14950
1085
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.3
76
1.6
1.8
6.8
8.3
13759
5.2
77
1.6
1.8
5.7
8.5
13936
5.7
84
1.8
1.9
6.3
15223
1086
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
5.2
77
1.5
2.5
7.2
6.6
13897
5.1
78
1.5
2.6
5.9
6.7
14111
5.5
84
1.6
2.8
6.4
15127
1088
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH R
4.7
66
1.3
3.5
6.1
19
11873
4.6
66
1.3
3.6
5
19.1
12025
5.7
82
1.6
4.4
6.2
14855
280
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
5.3
74
1.4
2.2
7.8
9
13376
5.1
76
1.4
2.2
6.2
9.2
13644
5.7
84
h 1.5
2.4
6.8
15027
281
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
5.2
75
1.5
2.5
7.4
8.4
13507
5.1
76
1.5
2.6
5.8
8.5
13766
5.6
84
1.7
2.8
6.4
15052
282
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
5.1
72
1.4
1.9
8.5
11
13008
5
73
1.5
1.9
7.1
11.6
13228
5.7
82
1.7
2.2
8
14959
875
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
5.2
73
1.3
2.9
7.1
10
13290
5.1
74
1.4
2.9
6
10.4
13470
5.7
83
1.5
3.3
6.7
15037
876
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
5.1
70
1.4
2.7
7.8
14
12716
5
70
1.4
2.8
6.7
13.7
12889
5.8
82
1.6
3.2
7.8
14938
927
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
5.1
70
1.3
3.8
6.3
13
12763
5
71
1.3
3.9
5.2
13.3
12938
5.8
82
1.6
4.5
6
14920
928
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
5.3
71
1.3
4.8
6.7
11
13081
5.2
72
1.4
4.9
5.6
11.2
13258
5.8
81
1.5
5.5
6.3
14935
930
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
4.7
68
1.2
2.3
8.3
15
12487
4.6
70
1.3
2.3
7
15.3
12683
5.5
82
1.5
2.7
8.3
14980
1084
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
5.1
72
1.5
4
5.5
12
13016
5
73
1.5
4
4.4
12.6
13186
5.8
83
1.7
4.6
5
15087
1442
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
4.6
63
1.4
3.9
7.3
20
11429
4.5
64
1.4
3.9
6
20.2
11619
5.7
80
1.75
4.91
7.46
14559
1573
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
5.2
61
0.8
4
3.3
25
10820
5.1
62
0.8
4.1
2.2
25.6
10960
6.8
84
1.13
5.47
2.96
14730
1611
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
5.8
43
0.6
1.9
3.4
46
7320
5.7
43
0.6
1.9
2.2
46.4
7420
11
81
1.15
3.55
4.14
13830
1642
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
6.2
71
1.1
3.8
4.2
13
12650
6.1
72
1.1
3.8
3.5
13.6
12760
7.1
83
1.29
4.37
4.01
14760
1561
PA
GREENE
TEN MILE
6.4
65
0.8
5.4
2.6
20
112501
6.3
67
0.8
5.5
0.5
20.2
11520
7.9
84
0.99
6.9
0.61
14450
1589
PA
GREENE
TEN MILE
5.6
65
0.9
4
2.9
21
11480
5.5
66
0.9
4.1
2
21.5
11600
7
84
1.18
5.2
2.6
14780
1439
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
5
68
1.5
2.3
8.1
15
12445
4.9
69
1.5
2.3
6.9
15
12625
5.7
82
1.82
2.74
8.14
14845
1440
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
4.7
64
1.4
5.5
7.4
17
11734
4.6
65
1.3
5.6
6.2
17.2
11904
5.5
79
1.68
6.72
7.48
14369
1523
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
5.6
51
0.8
3.7
1.9
37
8710
5.5
52
0.9
3.7
0.4
37.3
8860
8.7
83
1.36
5.95
0.59
14130
1541
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
6.6
70
1.1
4.1
1.9
17
12210
6.5
71
1.2
4.2
0.8
16.8
12370
7.8
85
1.39
4.99
0.98
14860
1569
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
6.7
57
0.8
4.3
0.6
30
9950
6.6
58
0.8
4.3
30.8
10070
9.6
84
1.14
6.24
14550
1641
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
5.8
66
0.9
3.1
3.7
21
11500
5.7
66
1
3.1
3
20.9
11600
7.3
84
12
3.92
3.83
14660
1555
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
6.2
54
0.8
4.3
2.6
33
9390
6.1
54
0.8
4.3
1.3
33
9520
9.2
81
1.26
6.45
1.98
14220
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
>
I
to
o
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
c
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
iBtu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
_(wt%)
_[Btu/lb)
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
1556
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
6
65
0.9
3.9
4
20
11350
5.9
66
1
4
2.9
20.5
11490
7.4
83
1.2
4.99
3.68
14450
1563
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
6.9
73
1.3
1.7
5.9
12
12960
6.8
74
1.4
1.8
4.1
11.8
13240
7.8
84
1.54
2
4.61
15020
1576
1590
1637
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
4.2
44
0.5
1.2
5.6
44
7540
4.1
45
0.5
1.2
4.7
44.8
7620
7.5
81
0.93
2.18
8.57
13800
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
5.1
45
0.6
1.8
5.1
43
7740
5.1
45
0.6
1.8
4.3
43.1
7810
8.9
79
1.06
3.16
7.53
13720
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
6.1
66
1.1
5.3
3.5
18
11760
6
67
1.1
5.4
2.5
17.7
11900
7.3
82
1.32
6.54
3.06
14470
1562
1537
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON (U)
6.2
62
0.9
4.7
2.3
24
10740
6.2
62
0.9
4.7
1.4
24.5
10860
8.2
83
1.15
6.28
1.81
14390
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON A
5.7
56
1
5
1.9
30
9580
5.6
57
1
5.1
0.3
30.8
9760
8.1
83
1.39
7.39
0.45
14100
1572
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON A
5
54
0.8
3.7
4.2
32
9550
4.9
55
0.8
3.7
3.2
32.5
9660
7.2
81
1.21
5.51
4.7
14310
89
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
4.6
64
1.1
2.2
7.8
21
11414
4 5
65
1.1
2.2
6.3
21.3
11620
5.7
82
1.4
2.8
8
14760
277
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
4.2
59
0.9
6.8
5.6
24
10753
4
60
1
6.9
3.8
24.4
10987
5.3
79
1.3
9.2
5
14537
278
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
4.7
65
1.2
5.2
6
18
11964
4.6
66
1.3
5.3
5
17.9
12103
5.7
80
1.5
6.4
6.1
14747
279
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
4.8
64
1.3
1.3
8.6
20
11682
4.6
66
1.3
1.4
6.8
20.1
11941
5.8
82
1.6
1.7
8.5
14950
883
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
4.7
63
1.3
4.8
5.9
20
11655
4.6
64
1.3
4.9
4.7
20.4
11829
5.8
81
1.6
6.1
5.9
14853
905
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
4.9
70
1.5
2.6
7.4
14
12530
4.8
71
1.5
2.7
6.1
14.3
12735
5.7
82
1.8
3.1
7.1
14853
906
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
5
69
1.5
1.3
12
12
12972
4.9
70
1.5
1.3
10
11.7
13211
5.6
80
1.7
1.5
11.5
14969
971
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
4.9
69
1.6
3.4
7.2
14
12616
4.8
70
1.6
3.5
5.7
14
12843
5.6
82
1.8
4
6.7
14934
1083
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
4.8
69
1.5
1.5
8.4
15
12350
4.7
70
15
1.5
6.8
15.4
12590
5.6
83
1.8
1.8
8.1
14876
1638
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
6.2
70
0.9
4.4
5.3
13
12530
6.1
71
0.9
4.5
4.3
13
12670
7
82
1.07
5.14
4.96
14560
1639
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG
5.4
56
0.7
5
2.1
30
9860
5.3
57
0.8
5.1
1.2
30.8
9960
7.6
82
1.08
7.33
1.69
14400
1522
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
4
53
0.6
4.1
4.8
33
9150
3.9
54
0.6
4.2
3.5
33.7
9290
5.9
82
0.94
6.32
5.23
14030
1540
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
5.9
64
1
4.9
1.5
22
11240
5.8
65
1
4.9
0.3
22.7
11390
7.5
84
1.26
6.37
0.43
14730
1559
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
5.8
59
0.8
3.7
2.3
29
10200
5.8
59
0.8
3.7
1.4
29
10300
8.1
83
1.17
5.24
2.03
14520
1560
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
6.2
68
1
3.9
3.2
18
11850
6.2
69
1
3.9
2.1
18.3
12000
7.5
84
1.24
4.79
2.53
14700
1580
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
6.4
66
1.1
4.1
2.8
19
11650
6.4
67
1.1
4.1
1.7
19.5
11810
7.9
83
1.41
5.13
2.07
14670
1593
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
6.4
66
0.9
4.8
2.4
20
11490
6.4
66
0.9
4.8
1.6
20.1
11590
8
83
1.17
6.02
2.01
14510
2145
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
5.7
70
1.3
2.7
3.5
17
12020
5.6
71
1.3
2.7
2.3
16.9
12190
6.8
86
1.56
3.23
2.79
14660
2146
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
5.6
70
1.1
3
5.1
15
12210
5.6
71
1.1
3
4.1
15.7
12360
6.6
84
1.36
3.57
4.82
14660
2148
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
5.5
64
1
1.4
6
22
11240
5.4
65
1
1.4
4.8
22.3
11390
6.9
84
1.34
1.77
6.21
14660
2149
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
6.3
74
1.4
2.5
6.2
9.2
12890
6.3
75
1.5
2.6
5.1
9.37
13070
6.9
83
1.6
2.84
5.64
14420
2150
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
6.1
68
0.9
2.1
5.9
17
11960
6.1
69
0.9
2.1
4.9
17.3
12120
7.3
83
1.13
2.55
5.87
14660
2152
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
5.9
65
1.1
0.9
5.1
22
11340
5.8
66
1.1
0.9
4
22.3
11490
7.5
85
1.38
1.21
5.2
14790
2153
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (L)
5.8
68
1.2
1
6.4
18
11920
5.7
69
1.2
1
5.4
17.8
12080
6.9
84
1.45
1.26
6.51
14690
1521
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
5
68
0.8
4
5.1
17
11900
4.9
69
0.8
4.1
3.9
17.1
12080
6
84
0.97
4.9
4.68
14580
1539
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
5.9
67
0.8
5.1
3.8
17
11880
5.8
68
0.8
5.2
2.5
17.4
12060
7
83
0.96
6 32
3.01
14600
1558
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
5.8
68
1
5.4
0.6
19
11620
5.7
69
1
5.4
19.4
11750
7.1
85
1.24
6.73
14590
1565
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
5.8
64
0.9
5.8
2.4
22
11240
5.8
64
0.9
5.8
1.6
21.8
11340
7.4
82
1.19
7.44
2.08
14500
1579
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
5.4
60
0.9
5.1
8.6
20
11540
5.3
60
0.9
5.2
7.9
20.2
11650
6.7
76
1.18
6.5
9.87
14600
2144
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
6.2
69
1.2
5.2
4
14
12470
6.1
70
1.2
5.2
3
14.5
12610
7.2
82
1.36
6.12
3.51
14760
I 2147
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG (U)
5.5
70
1.3
2.5
6.3
14
12430
5.4
71
1.3
2.5
5
14.5
12630
6.3
83
1.57
2.92
5.8
14760
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
s
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
>
I
NJ
NJ
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
c
N2
s
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02 !
Ash
Heating
H2
c
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
c
N2
s
02
Ash
Heating
H2
c
N2
s
02
Ash
Heating
H2
c
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
Iwt%±
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
1768
PA
WESTMORELA
MERCER
5.7
55
0.7
4.9
9.1
24
11450
5.7
56
0.7
4.9
8.9
24.3
11480
7.5
73
0.9
6.45
11.8
15170
1731
PA
WESTMORELA
BRUSH CREEK
4.1
53
0.7
2.2
2.9
38
9210
4
53
0.7
2.2
2.4
37.8
9280
6.5
85
1.15
3.51
3.75
14920
880
PA
WESTMORELA
CLARION
5.2
74
1.6
1.7
4.3
13
13462
5.1
75
1.6
1.7
3.5
13
13586
5.9
86
1.8
2
4
15618
881
PA
WESTMORELA
CLARION
5.4
81
1.5
1.7
5.6
4.9
14615
5.3
82
1.5
1.8
4.6
4.9
14794
5.6
86
1.6
1.9
4.8
15559
882
893
PA
WESTMORELA
CLARION
5
73
1.4
3.1
4.4
13
13245
5
74
1.4
3.1
3.5
13
13390
5.7
85
1.6
3.6
4
15387
PA
WESTMORELA
CLARION
4.9
71
1.3
2.6
4.1
17
12729
4.9
71
1.3
2.6
3.4
16.8
12840
5.9
85
1.6
3.1
4
15430
886
PA
WESTMORELA
FREEPORT (L)
4.8
70
1.4
6.3
3.2
14
12844
4.8
71
1.4
6.4
2.2
14.4
12990
5.6
83
1.7
7.5
2.6
15179
887
PA
WESTMORELA
FREEPORT (L)
5
71
1.3
5
4
14
13022
5
71
1.3
5.1
3.1
14
13159
5.8
83
1.5
5.9
3.6
15309
1741
PA
WESTMORELA
FREEPORT(U)
5.2
80
0.8
3.2
2.8
8.1
14130
5.2
80
0.8
3.2
2.4
8.1
14210
5.6
87
0.9
3.47
2.56
15460
1730
PA
WESTMORELA
HARLEM
5.4
76
0.9
4
1.5
12
13330
5.4
76
0.9
4
1
12.4
13410
6.1
87
1.06
4.55
1.18
15300
134
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (L)
4.6
82
1
2.1
2.4
8.1
14403
4.6
82
1
2.1
2.1
8.2
14453
5
89
1.1
2.3
2.3
15741
879
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (M)
4.8
72
1.4
2.2
4.4
15
12969
4.8
73
1.4
2.2
3.6
14.9
13099
5.6
86
1.6
2.6
4.2
15397
890
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (M)
4.6
65
1.1
1.4
5.5
22
11734
4.5
66
1.2
1.4
4.6
22.3
11860
5.8
85
1.5
1.8
5.9
15258
891
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (M)
5.4
77
1.5
1.8
4.8
10
13755
5.4
77
1.5
1.9
4
10.1
13891
6
86
1.6
2.1
4.4
15449
892
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (M)
5.3
76
1.3
4.9
4.1
8.5
13915
5.2
77
1.3
5
3.2
8.6
14071
5.7
84
1.4
5.5
3.4
15395
1744
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (M)
5
75
1
4.2
14
13180
6.4
74
1
4.2
14.5
13230
7.5
86
1.11
4.96
15460
888
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (U)
4.9
72
1.4
3
5.2
14
12975
4.8
72
1.4
3
4.2
14.1
13134
5.6
84
1.7
3.5
4.9
15295
1742
1743
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (U)
4.6
63
0.7
4.5
27
10860
4.6
63
0.7
4.5
27.5
10900
6.3
87
0.98
5.5
15040
PA
WESTMORELA
KITTANNING (U)
6
70
1
2.1
1.5
20
12220
6
70
1
2.1
1.3
19.8
12260
7.5
87
1.2
2.65
1.56
15290
503
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
5.1
75
1.5
3.8
4.1
11
13599
5
76
1.5
3.8
3.4
10.7
13704
5.6
85
1.7
4.3
3.9
15339
493
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
5.4
79
1.5
2.5
5.1
6.2
14252
5.3
80
1.5
2.5
4.3
6.3
14396
5.7
86
1.6
2.7
4.5
15364
494
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
4.4
68
1.1
7.5
4.5
15
12424
4.4
69
1.1
7.6
3.5
14.9
12566
5.1
81
1.3
8.9
4.2
14774
507
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
4.7
73
1.3
2.5
4
15
12965
4.7
73
1.3
2.5
3.4
14.8
13057
5.5
86
1.5
3
4
15321
508
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
4.7
74
1.4
3.3
4.3
13
13192
4.7
74
1.4
3.3
3.7
12.9
13284
5.3
85
1.6
3.8
4.3
15243
509
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
4.6
66
1.2
2
4.3
22
11775
4.6
66
1.2
2
3.8
22.4
11839
5.9
85
1.6
2.6
4.9
15250
510
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
5.3
81
1.5
2.3
4.7
5
14459
5.2
82
1.6
2.3
3.8
5.1
14610
5.5
86
1.6
2.5
4
15390
511
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
52
77
1.5
2.4
4.8
9
13945
5.2
78
1.6
2.4
4.1
9
14053
5.7
85
1.7
2.6
4.6
15451
795
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
4
56
1
2
4.1
33
10036
3.9
56
1
2.1
3.6
33.1
10089
5.9
84
1.5
3.1
5.5
15092
796
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
4.6
62
1.2
3.9
3.2
25
11286
4.5
63
1.2
3.9
2.6
25.1
11362
6
84
1.7
5.2
3.5
15180
797
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
5.1
73
1.4
3.1
4
14
13320
5.1
73
1.4
3.1
3.5
13.6
13395
5.9
85
1.7
3.6
4.1
15512
798
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
5.3
79
1.5
3.5
4.2
7.1
14178
5.2
79
1.5
3.5
3.5
7.2
14291
5.6
85
1.6
3.8
3.8
15397
504
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
5
74
1.5
2
5.6
12
13327
4.9
75
1.5
2
4.8
11.8
13459
5.5
85
1.7
2.3
5.4
15259
505
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
5
77
1.5
2.5
5.2
8.5
13880
5
78
1.5
2.5
4.3
8.6
14021
5.4
85
1.7
2.8
4.8
15338
506
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
3.4
47
0.8
9.3
2
38
8687
3.3
47
0.8
9.4
1.2
38.4
8771
5.4
76
1.3
15.3
1.9
14241
792
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
69
1.3
4
8.4
18
12485
0.1
69
1.3
4
7.8
17.7
12573
0.1
84
1.6
4.9
9.5
15276
793
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
4.6
70
1.4
3.2
3.2
17
12529
4.6
71
1.5
3.2
2.5
17.4
12638
5.5
86
1.8
3.9
3
15305
794
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
5.2
75
1.5
2
5.1
12
13369
5.1
75
1.6
2
4.3
11.8
13490
5.8
85
1.8
2.2
4.9
15293
1792
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
6
76
0.9
1.4
3
13
13390
6
76
1
1.4
2.4
13.3
13480
6.9
88
1.09
1.57
2.8
15550
522
WV
BRAXTON
KITTANNING (L)
4.2
58
1.1
0.6
6.5
30
10171
4.2
58
1.1
0.6
5.7
30.1
10268
6
83
1.6
0.9
8.2
14683
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
>
I
DO
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
s
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
C
N2
s
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
s
02
Ash
Heating
H2
C
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb}_
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
jwt%j_
(Btu/lb)
PICEANCE (CONT'D)
358
Tl 20
oio
O O
MESA
PALISADE ZONE
5.6
77
1.9
1.5
9.1
5.2
13931
5.5
78
1.9
1.5
7.6
5.3 I
14194
5.8
83
2
1.6
8
14987
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE A
5.3
69
1.5
0.5
17
CD
00
12103
4.8
75
1.6
0.5
11
7.4
13165
5.2
81
1.7
0.5
11.4
14219
1121
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE A
5.8
71
1.5
0.6
16
4.6
12456
5.4
77
1.6
0.6
10
4.9
13488
5.7
81
1.7
0.7
10.7
14189
1148
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE B
6.1
66
1.3
0.5
19
6.5
11740
5.7
72
1.4
0.6
13
7.1
9.3
12730
6.1
77
1.5
0.6
14.5
13702
1066
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE C
5.2
64
1.3
0.5
21
8.5
11135
4.6
69
1.4
0.6
15
12144
5.1
76
1.6
CD jh-
OIO
16.2
13386
1147
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE C
6.2
66
1.4
0.6
22
3.4
11710
5.6
74
1.5
0.7
14
3.8
13034
5.9
77
1.6
15
13553
I 1114
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
6.1
68
1.3
0.4
21
3.6
11883
5.6
75
1.5
0.4
14
3.9
13055
5.8
78
1.5
0.4
14.7
13587
1123
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
5.7
66
1.3
0.5
19
7.7
11442
5.2
71
1.4
0.5
13
8.3
12430
5.7
78
1.6
0.6
14.5
13558
1144
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
5.6
67
1.4
0.5
21
4
11885
5.1
74
1.6
0.5
15
4.4
13013
5.3
77
1.7
0.5
15.3
13610
1152
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE D
4.4
46
1
0.5
19
29
8065
3.8
50
1.1
0.5
13
32
8821
5.6
74
1.6
0.8
18.4
12970
1067
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE E
5.2
65
1.5
0.6
19
8.6
11480
4.7
70
1.6
0.7
14
9.3
12387
5.2
77
1.8
0.7
15.3
13655
1143
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE E
5.2
63
1.2
0.5
20
11
10675
4.7
68
1.3
0.6
14
11.4
11610
5.3
77
1.5
0.6
15.6
13104
1146
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE E
5.4
65
1.4
0.6
19
9.5
11364
5
70
1.5
0.6
13
10.2
12234
5.6
77
1.7
0.7
14.6
13627
790
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE GRP
5.6
72
1.8
0.7
16
4.5
12762
5.2
77
1.9
0.7
10
4.8
13748
5.4
81
2
0.8
10.6
14448
791
CO
RIO BLANCO
MESAVERDE GRP
5.6
68
1.7
1.4
15
8.6
12215
5.2
73
1.8
1.4
9.7
9.1
13009
5.7
80
2
1.6
10.6
14313
994
MT
BIG HORN
CANYON
5.3
64
1.1
0.3
26
3.2
11130
4.5
73
1.3
0.3
17
3.6
12720
4.6
76
1.3
0.3
• 18
13198
995
MT
BIG HORN
CANYON
5.2
63
1.1
0.8
26
4
10915
4.3
72
1.2
0.9
17
4.6
12560
4.5
76
1.3
1
17.7
13171
996
MT
BIG HORN
WALL
4.9
57
0.9
1.3
23
13
10036
4.1
64
1
1.5
14
15
11344
4.8
75
1.2
1.8
16.8
13351
1004
MT
POWDER RIVE
DIETZ
4.9
55
1.2
0.4
34
4.3
9254
3.3
69
1.5
0.6
20
5.4
11651
3.5
73
1.6
0.6
20.9
12323
1367
WY
SHERIDAN
SMITH (L)
4.8
63
1
0.2
26
5.1
10351
4.3
68
1.1
0.2
21
5.5
11244
4.6
72
1.1
0.3
22
11904
1366
WY
SHERIDAN
SMITH (U)
5.1
61
1.2
0.2
28
4.8
10227
4.4
68
1.3
0.2
21
5.3
11352
4.6
71
1.4
0.2
22.4
11993
1371
WY
SHERIDAN
SMITH
4.6
60
1.1
0.3
27
7.6
9802
4
65
1.1
0.4
21
8.2
10703
4.4
71
1.3
0.4
23
11665
RATON MESA
666
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
5.2
75
1.3
0.6
9.5
8.2
13328
5.1
76
1.3
0.6
8.4
8.3
13515
5.6
83
1.5
0.6
9.1
14737
668
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
5.1
69
1.1
0.6
8.6
16
12228
5.1
69
1.1
0.6
7.7
16.2
12363
6
83
1.4
0.7
9.2
14756
670
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
5.1
70
1.3
0.6
8.7
14
12484
5
71
1.3
0.6
7.6
14.1
12663
5.8
83
1.5
0.7
00
CO
14743
1125
CO
HUERFANO
VERMEJO FM
4.9
60
1.1
0.5
9.3
25
10732
4.7
61
1.1
0.5
7.6
25.1
10955
6.3
81
1.5
0.7
10.2
14625
651
CO
LAS ANIMAS
COLORADO (UNC)
2.5
23
0.5
0.4
7.1
66
3888
2.2
24
0.5
0.4
4.1
68.7
4029
7.1
77
1.7
1.2
13.2
12861
660
CO
LAS ANIMAS
MORLEY
4.8
70
1.2
0.9
6.2
17
12338
4.7
70
1.2
0.9
5.6
17.4
12421
5.7
85
1.5
1
6.8
15043
661
CO
LAS ANIMAS
MORLEY
4.8
65
1.2
0.8
6.9
21
11737
4.8
66
1.2
0.8
6.3
21.4
11824
6.1
83
1.6
1
8
15049
532
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
1.6
9.1
1.1
1.6
7.6
79
1708
1.3
9.5
1.2
1.7
4.7
81.7
1768
7.1
52
6.3
9.1
25.7
9667
533
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
3.8
53
1.1
0.5
6
35
9595
3.7
54
1.1
0.5
5.1
35.6
9704
5.8
84
1.7
0.7
7.9
15065
652
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
2.7
33
0.7
0.5
6.6
56
5733
2.6
34
0.7
0.5
4.9
57.6
5854
6
80
1.6
1.2
11.5
13811
655
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
1.5
17
0.5
1.4
5.2
74
2444
1.3
18
0.5
1.4
3.5
75.7
2495
5.2
73
2
5.9
14.2
10265
663
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
3.3
55
1.2
0.5
3.9
36
9305
3.3
55
1.3
0.5
3.2
36.5
9386
5.2
87
2
0.8
5
14772
1150
CO
LAS ANIMAS
RATON FM
5.4
70
1.5
0.6
9.3
13
12665
5.3
72
1.5
0.6
7.7
13.2
12916
6.1
83
1.7
0.7
8.9
14879
535
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
3.3
52
0.8
0.3
4.6
39
9056
3.3
52
0.8
0.3
3.9
39.3
9133
5.4
86
1.4
0.5
6.4
15057
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
>
I
M
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coal bed
H2
c
N2
s
02
Ash
Heating
H2
c
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
c
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
RATON MESA (CONT'D)
536
653
oio
op
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
3.8
59
1
2.5
4.4
30
10507
3.7
59
1
2.5
3.6
29.9
10601
5.3
85
1.5
3.5
5.2
15120
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
4.7
77
1.2
0.7
4.3
12
13517
4.6
78
1.3
0.7
3.7
11.8
13605
5.3
88
1.4
0.8
4.2
15418
656
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
3.1
34
0.7
0.4
6.3
56
6177
2.9
35
0.7
0.4
CO
56.6
6286
6.7
80
1.5
1
11.2
14480
657
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
4.7
67
1.2
0.7
7.6
18
12076
4.7
68
1.2
0.7
6.8
18.5
12193
5.8
84
1.5
0.9
8.4
14960
658
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
4.6
65
1.2
0.7
7.4
21
11710
4.6
66
1.2
0.7
6.7
21
11809
5.8
83
1.5
0.9
8.5
14942
659
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
5.2
72
1.5
0.6
7.7
13
13118
5.2
73
1.5
0.6
7.1
13
13212
6
83
1.7
0.7
8.2
15190
664
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
4.5
74
1
0.6
4 2
16
12955
4.5
74
1
0.6
3.9
15.7
12995
5.3
88
1.2
0.7
4.7
15421
689
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
5.2
73
1.4
0.7
7.2
12
13067
5.2
74
1.4
0.7
6.2
12.5
13220
5.9
85
1.6
0.8
7.1
15108
1149
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
4.5
70
1.1
0.5
4.4
19
12417
4.5
71
1.1
0.5
3.7
19.5
12513
5.6
88
1.4
0.7
4.6
15537
1512
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
2.3
34
0.6
0.3
3.7
59
5666
2.2
34
0.6
0.3
2.4
60.4
5752
5.4
86
1.49
0.69
6.02
14509
1514
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
1.2
5
0.2
0.2
5.9
88
622
0.8
5.2
0.2
0.2
3.1
90.5
643
8.7
55
1.83
2.31
32.3
6804
1595
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
3.9
67
1
0.4
4.2
24
11610
3.9
67
1
0.4
3.5
24
11695
5.1
88
1.34
0.58
4.64
15395
1643
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
3.5
58
0.9
0.4
3.6
34
10005
3.4
58
0.9
0.4
3.1
34.2
10066
5.2
88
1.42
0.65
4.66
15293
1644
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
3.5
60
0.9
0.4
4.1
31
10450
3.5
60
0.9
0.4
3.6
31.3
10509
5.1
88
1.29
0.57
5.25
15293
1645
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
2.9
42
0.8
0.3
3
51
7281
2.8
43
0.8
0.4
2.2
51.2
7349
5.7
88
1.61
0.71
4.41
15044
1646
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
1.9
24
0.4
0.2
4.4
69
4111
1.8
25
0.4
0.2
3.4
69.4
4161
5.7
81
1.43
0.8
11.1
13613
1647
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
3
47
0.8
0.3
3.6
45
8192
2.9
48
0.8
0.3
2.8
45.5
8274
5.3
88
1.43
0.59
5.04
15179
1798
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
3.4
60
1
0.4
2.8
33
10441
3.4
60
1
0.4
2.3
33
10501
5.1
89
1.5
0.63
3.39
15661
SAN JUAN
1360
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
2.9
30
0.6
0.5
8.3
58
5107
2.8
31
0.6
0.6
6.6
59
5214
6.7
75
1.4
1.4
16.1
12733
1361
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
2.6
27
0.5
0.9
7.1
62
4643
2.5
28
0.5
0.9
5.4
63.1
4737
6.7
75
1.3
2.4
14.8
12848
1362
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
3.2
32
0.5
0.4
10
54
5462
3
32
0.6
0.4
8.5
55.3
5568
6.8
72
1.2
1
19
12468
1770
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
4.3
50
0.9
0.9
11
33
8924
4
51
0.9
0.9
8.4
34.3
9196
6.2
78
1.38
1.38
12.8
13998
1771
NM
RIO ARRIBA
FRUITLAND
4.3
56
1
1.1
11
26
9804
4.1
58
1.1
1.1
8.7
27.4
10146
5.7
79
1.47
1.55
12
13975
1688
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
5.5
61
1.2
0.7
21
10
10887
4.9
68
1.3
0.7
14
11.5
12063
5.5
77
1.48
0.84
15.4
13633
1689
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
5.5
62
1.2
0.5
20
11
10990
4.9
68
1.3
0.5
13
12.1
12086
5.6
78
1.44
0.62
14.8
13747
1690
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
5
58
1.1
1.6
18
16
10259
4.4
63
1.2
1.8
12
17.3
11203
5.3
77
1.48
2.14
14.3
13550
1691
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
4.8
56
1.1
1
17
20
9903
4.4
60
1.2
1
11
21.6
10671
5.5
77
1.52
1.33
14.5
13604
1692
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
4.8
60
1.2
0.4
18
16
10434
4.3
64
1.3
0.4
12
17.6
11266
5 2
78
1.56
0.51
14.7
13674
1875
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
4.8
51
0.9
0.6
13
29
9262
4.6
53
0.9
0.6
11
30.2
9509
6.6
75
1.26
0.84
15.8
13619
1876
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
5.4
69
1.4
0.7
13
11
12157
5.2
71
1.5
0.7
10
11.1
12550
5.9
80
1.65
0.75
11.7
14115
1878
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
5.1
64
1.2
0.2
15
14
11490
4.8
67
1.3
0.2
12
15
11924
5.7
78
1.48
0.27
14.2
14022
1879
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND
5.3
61
1.2
0.8
13
19
10864
5.1
63
1.2
0.9
10
19.7
11193
6.4
78
1.51
1.07
12.8
13944
675
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (J)
4.3
47
0.8
3.7
20
24
8279
3.3
54
1
4.3
9.9
27.8
9463
4.6
75
1.3
5.9
13.7
13106
497
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
5.4
62
1.4
1
17
13
11007
4.9
68
1.6
1
11
14.2
12022
5.7
79
1.8
1.2
12.3
14012
499
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (L)
5.7
66
1.4
0.5
18
8.8
11831
5.2
72
1.5
0.6
11
9.6
12876
5.8
79
1.7
0.7
12.6
14240
496
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (U)
4.9
54
1.1
0.9
16
23
9511
4.5
58
1.2
1
10
25
10194
6
77
1.6
1.3
13.9
13587
-------
TABLE A-2. ULTIMATE ANALYSIS DATA BY BASIN
As Received
Moisture Free
Moisture Free/Ash Free
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
H2
c
N2
s
02
Ash
Heating
H2
c
N2
S
02
Ash
Heating
H2
c
N2
S
02
Heating
ID
Value
Value
Value
No.
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
fwt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(wt%)
(Btu/lb)
SAN JUAN (CONT'D)
498
NM
SAN JUAN
FRUITLAND (U) | 5.7
64
1.3
0.3
18
11
11305
5.2
70
1.5
0.4
12
11.8
123991 5.9
79
1.7
0.4
13.1
14057
UINTA
1 345
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
5.5
75
1.5
0.6
13
5.1
13490
5.4
77
1.5
0.6
11
5.2
13842
5.7
81
1.6
0.6
11.3
14599
514
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
5.6
73
1.5
0.4
15
4.9
13108
5.4
76
1.5
0.4
12
5.1
13615
5.7
80
1.6
0.4
12.5
14351
696
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
5.5
76
1.3
0.4
11
5.5
13550
5.5
77
1.4
0.4
9.9
5.6
13762
5.8
82
1.4
0.4
10.5
14581
717
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
6.1
76
1.3
0.3
11
5.5
13761
6
77
1.4
0.3
9.7
5.6
13931
6.4
82
1.4
0.3
10.3
14751
718
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
5.5
74
1.4
0.3
14
5.1
12969
5.4
76
1.5
0.3
12
5.2
13366
5.7
80
1.5
0.4
12.1
14103
719
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
5.4
74
1.5
0.4
11
7.1
13302
5.4
76
1.5
0.4
10
7.2
13492
5.8
81
1.6
0.5
10.9
14536
720
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
6.4
76
1.4
0.5
9.5
6.6
13921
6.4
76
1.4
0.6
8.5
6.7
14089
6.8
82
1.6
0.6
9.2
15094
762
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
5.4
75
1.5
1
12
5.9
13125
5.3
77
1.5
1
9.4
6.1
13498
5.6
82
1.6
1.1
10
14376
823
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE A
5.4
71
1.4
0.4
11
11
12797
5.3
73
1.4
0.4
9.2
11.1
13032
6
82
1.6
0.4
10.3
14654
542
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
5.3
73
1.4
0.4
14
6
12756
5.1
76
1.4
0.4
11
6.2
13294
5.4
81
1.5
0.4
11.7
14179
727
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE B
5.9
77
1.6
0.6
11
3.9
13902
5.8
78
1.6
0.6
9.9
3.9
14140
6
81
1.7
0.6
10
14716
538
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE D
5.9
73
1.3
0.4
11
8.4
13143
5.8
74
1.4
0.4
9.7
8.6
13434
6.3
81
1.5
0.4
10.6
14697
697
UT
CARBON
CASTLEGATE D
5.9
77
1.5
0.5
11
4.4
13749
5.8
78
1.6
0.5
9.6
4.4
13967
6.1
82
1.6
0.5
10
14617
549
UT
CARBON
KENILWORTH
5.6
74
1.5
0.7
12
6
13278
5.5
76
1.5
0.7
10
6.2
13607
5.8
81
1.6
0.8
11.1
14501
746
UT
CARBON
KENILWORTH
5.7
74
1.5
0.7
11
7.2
13346
5.5
75
1.5
0.7
9.7
7.4
13623
6
81
1.7
0.7
10.5
14710
310
UT
CARBON
ROCK CANYON
5.3
74
1.5
0.7
14
4.9
13196
5.1
77
1.5
0.7
11
5.1
13775
5.4
81
1.6
0.7
11.1
14512
756
UT
CARBON
ROCK CANYON
5.6
74
1.5
0.6
13
4.8
13021
5.4
77
1.6
0.6
10
4.9
13500
5.7
81
1.6
0.7
11
14201
808
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
6
72
1.5
0.7
14
6.6
12913
5.8
74
1.5
0.7
11
6.8
13352
6.2
80
1.6
0.8
11.7
14329
344
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE (U)
5.7
74
1.3
0.5
13
5.8
13363
5.5
76
1.4
0.5
11
5.9
13681
5.9
80
1.5
0.5
11.7
14541
343
UT
CARBON
UTAH (UNC)
5.3
74
1.5
0.4
15
4.5
12950
5
77
1.5
0.5
12
4.7
13450
5.3
81
1.6
0.5
12.2
14109
804
UT
CARBON
UTAH (UNC)
5.4
73
1.4
0.6
15
4.6
12807
5.2
77
1.5
0.6
11
4.8
13423
5.4
81
1.6
0.7
11.5
14106
809
UT
CARBON
UTAH (UNC)
5.6
70
1.4
0.7
13
9.5
12644
5.5
72
1.4
0.8
10
9.8
13008
6.1
80
1.6
0.8
11.4
14417
843
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 1
5.6
73
1.7
0.6
11
9
13040
5.5
74
1.7
0.7
9.1
9.1
13268
6.1
81
1.8
0.7
10
14601
512
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
5.6
71
1.4
0.4
14
7.7
12812
5.4
73
1.4
0.4
12
7.8
13139
5.9
79
1.5
0.5
12.8
14257
541
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
5.9
76
1.7
0.6
10
5.7
13792
5.9
77
1.7
0.6
8.7
5.8
14024
6.2
82
1.8
0.6
9.2
14885
824
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 2
5.6
76
1.4
0.6
9.4
6.6
13762
5.5
78
1.4
0.7
8.1
6.7
13990
5.9
83
1.5
0.7
8.7
14993
699
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 3
5.9
74
1.6
0.5
11
6.4
13480
5.8
76
1.6
0.5
9.9
6.5
13750
6.2
81
1.7
0.6
10.5
14710
825
UT
CARBON
UTAH SUBSEAM 3
5.6
71
1.5
0.4
11
11
13045
5.5
73
1.5
0.4
9.4
10.6
13248
6.1
81
1.7
0.5
10.5
14826
126
UT
EMERY
HIAWATHA
5.8
73
1.4
0.4
15
4.8
5.5
77
1.5
0.4
11
5.1
5.8
81
1.5
0.4
11.2
545
UT
GARFIELD
REES
6.1
61
1
0.7
26
5.2
10572
5.2
72
1.2
0.8
15
14
6.1
12438
5.5
77
1.3
0.8
15.9
13243
819
722
UT
GRAND
CHESTERFIELD
5.9
71
1.8
0.6
18
2.6
13236
5.6
76
1.9
0.6
2.8
14073
5.8
78
2
0.6
13.9
14473
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
4.7
59
1.6
0.7
13
21
10449
4.4
62
1.7
0.7
8.9
22
10980
5.7
80
2.1
0.9
11.4
14073
815
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
5.3
68
1.6
0.6
14
11
12015
5
71
1.7
0.6
9.4
11.9
12663
5.6
81
1.9
0.7
10.7
14367
827
WA
PIERCE
BIG&LITTLE DIRTY
2.9
39
0.8
0.5
6.6
51
6609
2.7
40
0.8
0.5
4.5
51.9
6775
5.7
82
1.6
1.1
9.4
14080
1359
WY
FREMONT
MESAVERDE GRP
5.4
71
1.4
0.6
11
3.3
12217
5.2
74
1.4
0.7
16
3.5
12765
5.4
76
1.5
0.7
16.1
13227
-------
-------
Appendix B
Sorption Time
Methane gas is released from coal when equilibrium conditions established in an
underground coalbed reservoir are disturbed as a result of natural erosion, coal mining or water
extraction through vertical wells. The flow of released methane through a coal seam is described
by three main transport phenomena: (1) desorption from internal coal surfaces, (2) diffusion
through the coal matrix and micropores, and (3) fluid flow through the coal seam fracture
systems. When coalbed pressure is reduced, methane begins to desorb from the matrix. Upon
desorption from the coal surface, the methane molecules move by diffusion. That is, molecules
move from a zone of higher concentration near the desorbing surface to a zone of lower
concentration in the cleats. Diffusion controls the overall transport mechanism until the methane
gas intersects an open pathway or cleat system in the coal (Mavor and Schwoebel 1991). The
time series desorption data collected by the Bureau of Mines provides a wealth of information
towards understanding and quantifying the rate of diffusion from U.S. coalbeds.
The rate at which gas desorbs is commonly called "sorption time." Sorption time is
typically given in terms of days, and is defined as the time necessary for a sample to desorb
63% of its total gas content (Sawyer et al. 1987). It is generally calculated after the desorption
experiment is terminated, and results from the residual test are available. The sorption time
provides an effective measure for determining the diffusion coefficient, and is used in simulator
modeling to forecast coalbed methane recovery. In this report, the time series desorbed gas
volumes were digitized (entered into a computer), and sorption times were automatically
calculated by utilizing lost gas, desorbed, and residual gas volumes. These data, combined with
individual sample specific information presented in earlier chapters, may be utilized to generate
desorption curves for each sample. The sorption time may also be used to determine the
diffusion coefficient according to the technique described below.
Diffusion of methane in coal is governed by Fick's law and the fundamental equation
describing this phenomenon in cartesian coordinates is (Paul et al. 1993):
^C+^C+^C^±dC
dx2 dy2 dz2 D
(1)
where d = partial differential
C = concentration (ft3/ton)
x, y, z = distance coordinates (ft)
D = diffusion coefficient (ft2/min)
t = time (min)
B-1
-------
Sorption Time
t is called the sorption time and is defined as the time required for 63% of the
methane molecules to travel from the center of the microporous element to a cleat in
equation 2.
X = \6)
Da
The term a, called the Warren and Root shape factor (Warren and Root 1963), is defined by the
following equations, depending on the coordinate systems:
slab:
3
a2
cylinder:
8
2
a
sphere:
15
2
a
cube:
15
L2
where a = one half width of slab or equivalent radius for slab & cylinder
L = one half the length of the cube
Equations 2 and 3 may be used to determine the diffusion coefficient (D) in any one of
four types of cleat system coordinates. Subsequently, D can be used to determine methane
concentrations at different boundary conditions when Equation 1 is solved. Many of the current
reservoir simulators only require sorption time to be identified by the user. The remaining
calculations for determining the diffusion coefficient and gas concentration as a function of time
and position are automatically determined through numerical analysis of the solution to Fick's
law (King and Ertekin 1983). In general, short sorption times, when coupled with gas-saturated
coals, result in immediate and high initial gas production rate peaks within a few days of putting
wells on production. Similarly, long sorption times tend to generate broad gas production rate
peaks that occur several months later (McElhiney et al. 1989).
References
King, G.R. and T. Ertekin, 1983, Numerical Simulation of the Transient Behavior of Coal Seam
Deqasification Wells, paper SPE 12258 presented at Reservoir Simulation Symposium, San
Francisco, CA, November 15-18.
B-2
-------
Sorption Time
Mavor, M. and J. Schwoebel, 1991, Simulation Based Selection of Underground Coal Mine
Deqasification Methods, presented at the 1991 Coalbed Methane Symposium, Tuscaloosa, Al,
May 13-16.
McElhiney, J.E., R.A. Koenig, and R.A. Schraufnagel, 1989, Evaluation of Coalbed-Methane
Reserves Involves Different Techniques, Oil and Gas Journal, October 30.
Paul, G.W., D.O. Cox, and B.S. Kelso, 1993, Coalbed Methane Reservoir Engineering,
presented at Coalbed Methane Symposium, Tuscaloosa, AL, May 17-21.
Sawyer, W.K., M.D. Zuber, V.A. Kuuskraa, and D.M. Horner, 1987, Using Reservoir Simulation
and Field Data to Define Mechanisms Controlling Coalbed Methane Production, presented at
Coalbed Methane Symposium, Tuscaloosa, AL, November 16-19.
Warren, J.E. and P.J. Root, 1963, The Behavior of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs, SPEJ-
September, Trans, AIME, Vol. 228, p. 245-255.
B-3
-------
-------
Appendix C
Langmuir Adsorption Isotherms
Adsorption isotherms describe coalbed gas storage capacity as a function of reservoir
pressure. They are used in predicting gas production rates as coalbed reservoir pressure is
depleted (McElhiney et at. 1989). Isotherm curves are developed from experimental data to
relate the volume of gas adsorbed per unit weight of coal at various pressures and reservoir
temperatures. The experiment typically begins by placing approximately 100 grams of pulverized
coal in a test well. The pressure in the vessel is increased incrementally, and the sample is
allowed to reach equilibrium before measuring the adsorbed gas quantity. Isotherm data is
collected after each equilibrated stage of increasing pressure and gas volume (GRI 1992).
Figure C-1 illustrates an isotherm curve with adsorbed gas volume being proportional to the gas
pressure.
PRESSURE (psa)
Figure C-1. An Example of Adsorption Isotherm
The isotherm curve represents the saturation gas volume that can exist at a given
pressure. When the in-situ gas content in a coal seam lies directly on the adsorption isotherm,
methane is released immediately upon draw-down of water at the well bore. However, in many
coalbeds, the methane content does not lie on the desorption isotherm. That is, actual
conditions are below the curve, indicating that adsorbed gas quantities are under-saturated. In
this situation, pressure must be reduced in the reservoir through significant de-watering until the
C-1
-------
Langmuir Adsorption Isotherms
conditions reach "desorption pressure" and gas can be produced. A sound knowledge of the
actual conditions and its position relative to the isotherm curve is critical in analyzing the
performance of gas wells. This is especially true where large volumes of water are being
produced with very little gas production (Paul et al. 1993, Sawyer et al. 1987).
The Langmuir adsorption isotherm (shown in Figure C-1) is the most widely known model
which describes the relationship between sorbed volume and pressure. The curve is described
in terms of Langmuir constants where:
VL = maximum adsorptive capacity or the upper limit of adsorption as pressure reaches
infinity
PL = pressure at which adsorbed gas concentration (V) is one-half the maximum; i.e.,
V = Vl/2
The Langmuir constants can be utilized to generate an equation which describes the functionality
between volume and pressure for a particular coal seam, as shown in equation 1.
In this report, adsorption isotherm data reported by the U.S. Department of Energy for
96 BOM coal samples (DOE 1983) were used to calculate basin specific Langmuir pressure and
volume constants. The original data included the results of a linear regression fit of the
experimental adsorption data to the Langmuir isotherm model. The amount of gas adsorbed was
given in a tabular format at five different pressure stages, varying from 5 to 50 atmospheres for
each coal sample, (see Table C-1). The following methodology was used to generate the
pressure and volume constants from this data.
When Equation 1 is rearranged, equation 2 is produced and a straight line plot is
generated as shown in Figure C-2.
(1)
where V = sorbed volume (ft3/ton)
P = absolute pressure (psia)
VL= maximum sorbed volume at infinite pressure (ft3/ton)
PL= constant equal to P when V = VL/2
P = _P +^L
V ~ Vl+Vl
(2)
C-2
-------
Langmuir Adsorption Isotherms
Linearization of isotherm data can be compared to the equation of a straight line, y = mx + b.
In this case, Equation 2 can be restated as:
X=P
P,
b-— (intercept)
m=— (slope)
The Langmuir volume constant (VL) is determined by taking the inverse of the slope of the line,
and the Langmuir pressure constant (PL) is calculated by multiplying the y intercept with the
volume constant. Note, the Langmuir coefficients are strictly derived through an empirical
correlation and may not have a physical meaning. For example, the Langmuir volume for a
significant number of samples is much greater than the actual range of measurements. That is,
the Langmuir volumes are extrapolated beyond the actual data points, and should be used with
caution.
C-3
-------
TABLE C-1. ISOTHERM DATA AND LANGMUIR CONSTANTS BY BASIN
O
4^
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
Depth
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Langmuir Volume
Langmuir Pressure
ID
(P = 73.5 Psia)
(P = 147 Psia)
(P = 294 Psia)
(P = 588 Psia)
(P = 735 Psia)
No.
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(Psia)
ARKOMA
1382
OK
HASKELL
HARTSHORNE
1200
301
461
628
762
798
976
164
1383
OK
HASKELL
HARTSHORNE
1200
359
513
650
756
778
896
110
1384
OK
LE FLORE
HARSHORNE
100
205
336
497
650
692
941
264
BLACK WARRIOR
1390
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
1100
170
288
442
605
653
956
341
1391
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
1100
215
317
416
497
516
611
137
1392
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
1100
263
404
554
679
714
882
174
1393
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
1100
333
474
602
695
718
823
108
1394
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
1100
240
359
474
564
586
697
139
1395
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
1100
253
388
529
647
676
00
CO
__v.
168
1396
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
1100
160
292
490
740
826
1530
626
1397
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
1100
243
324
388
432
442
487
74
1398
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
1100
308
468
634
769
801
975
159
1399
AL
JEFFERSON
MARY LEE
1100
224
340
458
551
577
697
155
1376
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
2150
250
388
535
657
689
855
177
1377
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
2000
250
439
705
1012
1112
1800
456
1378
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
2000
346
497
634
737
759
876
112
1380
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
2150
314
432
529
596
612
683
86
1381
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE
1500
269
378
477
548
564
643
102
1494
AL
TUSCALOOSA
MARY LEE GRP
2357
109
208
381
641
740
2069
1314
CENTRAL APPALACHIAN
1400
VA
DICKENSON
JAWBONE
400
173
292
445
605
653
945
329
1401
VA
DICKENSON
JAWBONE
400
99
179
311
481
541
1077
728
1406
VA
DICKENSON
JAWBONE
481
167
282
429
583
628
907
326
1407
VA
DICKENSON
JAWBONE
481
189
324
506
705
762
1153
376
1404
VA
DICKENSON
RAVEN
302
186
298
432
554
589
777
235
1405
VA
DICKENSON
RAVEN
302
211
340
490
628
666
876
231
1402
VA
DICKENSON
WIDOW KENNEDY
285
221
346
484
605
637
807
196
1403
VA
DICKENSON
WIDOW KENNEDY
285
237
391
580
766
817
1123
275
1408
VA
RUSSEL
TILLER
800
147
247
368
487
522
725
286
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-1. ISOTHERM DATA AND LANGMUIR CONSTANTS BY BASIN (cont. )
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
Depth
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Langmuir Volume
Langmuir Pressure
ID
(P = 73.5 Psia)
{P = 147 Psia)
{P = 294 Psia)
(P = 588 Psia)
(P = 735 Psia)
No.
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(Psia)
CENTRAL APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
1409
VA
RUSSEL
TILLER
800
160
266
404
541
580
821
304
I 37
WV
RALEIGH
BECKLEY
653
199
314
442
554
583
743
201
GREATER GREEN RIVER
965
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
4658
243
375
509
621
650
798
167
924
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3481
151
275
477
746
839
1714
764
960
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
3653
135
240
397
589
653
1144
552
961
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
3922
192
324
490
660
708
1009
312
963
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
4656
250
362
464
541
561
650
117
969
CO
MOFFAT
WILLIAMS FORK
4709
247
394
561
711
750
970
215
919
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3526
151
275
464
714
798
1526
670
923
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3495
170
288
448
621
673
1006
364
925
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3479
138
247
407
605
673
1182
558
926
WY
SUBLETTE
MESAVERDE GRP
3480
205
336
497
650
692
941
264
ILLINOIS
849
IL
CLAY
BRIAR HILL (5A)
78
96
170
275
404
445
747
500
1385
IL
GALLATIN
HARRISBURG (#5)
250
186
301
442
573
612
821
253
1389
IL
MAPASH
HARRISBURG (#5)
800
157
285
487
756
849
1671
713
1386
IL
SALINE
HARRISBURG
300
205
330
471
599
634
825
222
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN
1443
PA
GREENE
FISHPOT
422
51
99
179
324
388
1415
1971
1387
PA
GREENE
PITTSBURGH
760
109
195
327
493
548
996
601
1442
PA
GREENE
SEWICKLEY
409
54
96
157
231
253
428
506
1439
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
280
70
128
250
439
516
1873
1929
1440
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
281
90
151
234
320
346
509
346
1441
PA
GREENE
UNIONTOWN
282
99
179
298
445
493
881
576
1437
PA
GREENE
WASHINGTON
54
86
157
275
442
500
1084
858
1438
PA
GREENE
WAYNESBURG B
84
119
218
362
548
612
1128
621
1422
PA
SCHUYLKILL
PRIMROSE
600
492
605
766
884
910
1020
91
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-1. ISOTHERM DATA AND LANGMUIR CONSTANTS BY BASIN (cont. )
BOM
State
County
Coalbed
Depth
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Adsorbed Gas
Langmuir Volume
Langmuir Pressure
ID
(P = 73.5 Psia)
{P = 147 Psia)
(P = 294 Psia)
(P = 588 Psia)
(P = 735 Psia)
No.
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(ft3/ton)
(Psia)
NORTHERN APPALACHIAN (CONT'D)
1423
PA
SCHUYLKILL
PRIMROSE
600
413
609
801
948
983
1162
133
1418
PA
SOMERSET
KITTANNING
300
327
461
583
670
692
789
104
1454
PA
WASHINGTON
SEWICKLEY
779
99
179
T—
o
CO
458
509
944
626
1449
PA
WASHINGTON
UNIONTOWN
657
86
163
298
519
605
1850
1513
1448
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (L)
594
74
147
285
548
666
6113
5993
1447
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG (U)
590
112
215
400
705
830
2899
1833
1446
PA
WASHINGTON
WAYNESBURG A
488
90
173
282
551
647
2193
1788
492
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING
538
151
253
378
503
538
752
292
490
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
536
138
227
340
448
481
663
281
493
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
539
160
272
420
577
621
916
347
494
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (L)
540
122
202
301
404
432
605
294
486
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
487
90
147
221
292
311
429
279
487
WV
BARBOUR
KITTANNING (U)
489
202
263
308
340
346
376
64
PICEANCE
1420
CO
DELTA
"D" SEAM
600
170
304
509
766
849
1534
592
1421
CO
DELTA
"D" SEAM
600
189
327
513
714
775
1182
385
1605
CO
MESA
CAMEO ZONE
4757
109
199
340
529
593
1175
721
1610
CO
MESA
CAMEO ZONE
4805
64
115
192
282
311
542
543
1412
CO
PITKIN
"A" SEAM
1000
202
343
535
740
801
1198
365
1413
CO
PITKIN
"A" SEAM
1000
263
423
612
785
833
1098
234
RATON MESA
1511
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
1185
77
147
266
455
529
1516
1374
1512
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJOFM
1191
90
163
282
442
500
1020
767
1595
CO
LAS ANIMAS
VERMEJO FM
1109
195
330
506
698
756
1112
348
SAN JUAN
940
CO
GUNNISON
"B" SEAM
395
195
340
541
766
836
1315
421
943
CO
GUNNISON
"B" SEAM
393
167
298
493
734
814
1432
559
946
CO
GUNNISON
"B" SEAM
394
272
413
561
682
711
868
161
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-1. ISOTHERM DATA AND LANGMUIR CONSTANTS BY BASIN (cont. )
BOM
ID
No.
State
County
Coalbed
Depth
Adsorbed Gas
(P = 73.5 Psia)
(ft3/ton)
Adsorbed Gas
(P = 147 Psia)
(ft3/ton)
Adsorbed Gas
(P = 294 Psia)
(ft3/ton)
Adsorbed Gas
(P = 588 Psia)
(ft3/ton)
Adsorbed Gas
(P = 735 Psia)
(ft3/ton)
Langmuir Volume
(ft3/ton)
Langmuir Pressure
(Psia)
SAN JUAN (CONT'D)
1415
CO
GUNNISON
"B" SEAM
1200
250
416
631
852
913
1299
310
1416
CO
GUNNISON
"B" SEAM
1200
208
372
605
891
980
1667
514
1417
CO
GUNNISON
"B" SEAM
1200
275
439
625
791
836
1080
215
1410
CO
GUNNISON
"E" SEAM
900
167
298
487
711
785
1331
511
1411
CO
GUNNISON
"E" SEAM
1100
186
314
481
657
708
1031
335
1414
CO
GUNNSION
"B" SEAM
1200
227
391
618
865
942
1448
396
UINTA
810
UT
CARBON
GILSON
502
247
375
513
625
653
801
166
385
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
1250
208
349
522
695
743
1039
292
390
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
1250
144
253
407
583
641
1036
455
395
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
1250
199
336
503
676
724
1023
303
402
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
1500
179
292
426
554
589
791
251
406
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
1500
154
231
308
365
381
455
143
805
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
283
259
404
557
689
721
899
180
807
UT
CARBON
SUNNYSIDE
352
263
384
506
596
621
732
132
812
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
501
205
314
436
535
561
696
177
814
UT
GRAND
BALLARD
527
199
317
455
580
612
797
222
816
UT
GRAND
PALISADE
615
157
275
445
644
705
1154
468
WESTERN WASHINGTON
827
WA
PIERCE
BIG&LIT. DIRTY
468
90
144
205
263
279
364
225
00
CN
CO
WA
PIERCE
BIG7LIT. DIRTY
485
189
292
397
490
513
634
173
-------
Langmuir Adsorption Isotherms
References
Gas Research Institute, 1992, Geologic Manual for the Evaluation and Development of Coalbed
Methane, Topical Report, GRI, Chicago, II.
McElhiney, J.E., R.A. Koenig, and R.A. Schraufnagel, 1989, Evaluation of Coalbed-Methane
Reserves Involves Different Techniques, Oil and Gas Journal, October.
Paul, G.W., D.O. Cox, and B.S. Kelso, 1993, Coalbed Methane Reservoir Engineering,
presented at Coalbed Methane Symposium, Tuscaloosa, AL, May 17-21.
Sawyer, W.K., M.D. Zuber, V.A. Kuuskraa, and D.M. Horner, 1987, Using Reservoir Simulation
and Field Data to Define Mechanisms Controlling Coalbed Methane Production, presented at
Coalbed Methane Symposium, Tuscaloosa, AL, November 16-19.
U.S. Department of Energy, 1983, Variation in the Quantity of Methane Adsorbed by Selected
Coals as a Function of Coal Petrology and Coal Chemistry. USDOE, Morgantown Energy
Technology Center, January.
C-8
------- |