Review of Technology Requirements of The Coal Preparation Sector in India

LIMITED DISTRIBUTION UK COMPANIES ONLY
REVIEW OF TECHNOLOGY
REQUIREMENTS OF THE COAL
PREPARATION SECTOR IN INDIA
Report No. COAL R191

DTI/Pub URN 00/762
by
S C Frankland
Dargo Associates Ltd

This publication contains information which is commerially valuable to actual or
potential clean coal technology exporters. Permission to lend, give or copy this
publication to any person or organisation, in part or in entirety, is strictly limited to
bono-fide UK exporters.
The work described in this report was carried out under contract as part of the
Department of Trade and Industry's Cleaner Coal Technology Programme, and under
the supervision of ETSU. The views and judgements expressed in this report are those
of Dargo Associates and do not necessarily reflect those of ETSU or the Department of
Trade and Industry.
Crown Copyright 2000

First published March 2000
REVIEW OF TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS OF THE COAL

by
S C Frankland
SUMMARY
The aim of this project was to review the current status and technology requirements of
the coal preparation sector in India and to investigate opportunities for UK companies
to collaborate in future coal preparation development. The report assesses the potential
for increases in the application of coal preparation plant and thereby the market for coal
preparation plant equipment and services. The report goes on to recommend strategies
for UK companies to become involved in the Indian coal market.
India is the third largest producer of coal in the world with an annual production of
>300Mt in 1998. However, because Indias coal is generally low in calorific value
(CV), this converts to 211Mt of coal equivalent (Mtce). India also has large coal
reserves of 159 billion tonnes to a depth of 600m.
Until recently, Coal India Ltd (CIL) mined all coal in India. CIL is a nationalised
company reporting direct to the Ministry of Coal in New Delhi. CIL comprises seven
operating subsidiaries and the Central Mine Planning and Design Institute Limited
(CMPDIL), its engineering subsidiary.
Coal is supplied to power stations, coke works and cement works with minor amounts
to other industries and for domestic consumption. In 1998, coking coal was responsible
for ~23Mt of consumption, with 23mt going to the cement market and the balance
being predominantly power station fuel (PSF).
Power stations in India are generally owned by the State Electricity Boards (SEBs)
which are also responsible for power distribution and sales. Since agricultural is very
largely subsidised and a large consumer of electricity, the SEBs are financially
handicapped. In order to combat this difficulty the Ministry of Power established the
National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) which is now the single largest producer
of electricity in India.
Coal Quality
Indias coal is Gondwanan in origin, of Carboniferous and Permian age. In common
with other Gondwanan coals, India has mineral matter finely disseminated throughout
the coal matrix leading to relatively poor-quality coals and an inability to wash the
coals to very low ashes. In addition, the amount of material reporting to the various
density fractions is very high, making them difficult to wash. Consequently, Indian
coking coals are very poor quality by world standards due to their very high ash
ocntents. However, Indian coals are very low in sulphur, chlorine and trace metals,
and, despite their low CV, they represent a relatively low pollution hazard.
The rank of Indian coals ranges from 200-900 with significant quantities of lignite
deposits of Eocene age. Historically, the higher-rank coals in the more northern
coalfields have been the centres of coal production due to their coking properties.
However, increased production of PSF has broadened the extent of Indian coalfields
and production is now mostly centred on more southerly coalfields where lower-rank
coals are produced for power station consumption.
Mining has developed in India in a similar pattern to European mining where,
originally, most mines were underground mines producing coking coal. The demand
for steam coal, however, has focused increasing attention on low-cost surface-mined
deposits of low rank coal. India currently produces ~70Mtpa of coal from
underground, with the balance is from relatively large surface mines. Opencast mining
techniques have followed a European pattern but technology has been frozen at a 1960s
level with relatively small-scale equipment being employed. Equipment sizes for coal
production are increasing however and the use of 3m3 or 5m3 shovels and 50t dump
trucks is now more prevalent. Even with the use of small coal-winning equipment in
opencast mines, the quantity of ash included in the run-of-mine (ROM) coal is still
considerable. CIL normally extracts all partings <1m thick, with the coal seam and
out-of-seam contamination is also considerable. ROM coal quality has consistently
deteriorated in the last 20 years, largely as a result of the drive for increased production
and the exploitation of poorer quality deposits. With the trend towards the use of
larger-scale equipment, increased mechanisation and the continuing drive for increased
production ROM coal quality is expected to deteriorate further.
Coal Preparation
Until 1998, coal preparation in India was exclusively applied to the production of
coking coal. In 1998, some 43Mt of ROM coal was washed. However, the yield of
coking coal from coal preparation plants is only ~50% on average, making the
production of coking coal only ~23Mtpa. The ROM ash of coking coal mines is
typically 25-30% and the coal is cleaned to ~19% ash before shipping to the coke
works. Even with such a high-ash product, the ash content of coal preparation discard
is typically 45-50%. Coals of this ash content can be burnt in Indian power stations
and, in most cases, discard from coking coal preparation plants is sold as PSF.
The difficult washing characteristics of India coals would tend to favour the accuracy
of dense medium (DM) separation systems. However, the most commonly-applied
coal preparation technology in India is still the jig washer. Most cleaning of coals is
done by Batac jigs with Baum jigs used for deshaling at some plants. There has been
some implementation of DM cyclones and baths but these are not as widespread as one
might expect. One factor that has mitigated against the use of DM systems in India is
the lack of available high-quality magnetite. In addition, suitable wear-resistant
materials for pipelines and chutes are not available in India, to withstand the rigours of
using finely-ground magnetite. Furthermore, the present pricing structure for coking
coal does not encourage CIL to maintain highly-efficient coal preparation plants. The
price of coking coal has been regulated on a raw coal basis and the purchaser pays for
the cost of coal preparation. CIL is thus paid for its major cost of mining and its cost of
coal preparation and, therefore, has little concern for the efficiency of its coal
preparation plants.
ii
With a rapidly increasing demand for electricity in India, coal preparation is also
beginning to be used for production of PSF. Most power stations are located
considerable distances from the major coalfields and one of the main drivers has been
the need to minimise the load on Indias transport infrastructure. Coal preparation at
the mine is seen as an effective means of reducing the tonnages of coal to be
transported. In 1997, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry introduced a regulation
forbidding the use of unwashed coal >34% ash in Indias power stations if these are to
be transported >1,000km.
In 1996, the Piparwar project was completed, producing non-coking coal for power
generation in the New Delhi area. The Piparwar project, constructed by White
Industries of Australia to western standards, was funded by the World Bank as a
demonstration project of the application of western technology to Indian mining
conditions. The coal preparation plant is based on Batac jigs cleaning only the coarse
coal with untreated fines being blended in to the final power product. Raw coal ash is
~42-45% and the product coal is 32% ash. More recently, a coal preparation plant has
been constructed at the Dipka mine to supply coal to the Bombay Suburban Electric
Supply Company. The Dipka plant is based on DM cyclone technology and has been
designed and constructed by the CLI Corporation of the USA. The Dipka coal
preparation plant will be operated by private enterprise and will be an interesting
comparison with the Piparwar coal preparation plant, which is operated by CIL.
Additional coal preparation plants are planned, largely for new independent power
projects (IPPs). In particular, the Kalinga plant in the Talcher coalfield is planned for
construction by Roberts and Schaefer (R&S) to supply coal to the Visakhapatnam IPP
owned by Hinduja National Power. In addition, a further plant will be constructed at
the Dipka mine by R&S, also to supply coal to an IPP.
Although CIL has constructed and continues to operate its existing coal preparation
plants, it has little interest in further coal preparation plant construction or operations.
Indeed, CIL would very much like to devolve itself of its existing coal preparation plant
and this, in itself, would provide an opportunity for companies wishing to become
involved in coal preparation in India.
Coal Preparation Opportunities
It is certain that Indias economic growth is totally dependent on increasing its
production of coal for power generation. Pressures from environmental concerns,
limitations on transportation infrastructure and economic utilisation of indigenous
resources will mean that there will be an increase in use of coal preparation for PSFs.
Even pessimistic views of Indias economic growth will mean that additional coal
preparation annual capacity of ~80-90Mt will need to be constructed within the next
20 years. This implies a market value of ~$300-400M, with a similar amount also to be
expected to be invested in coal-handling plant and ancillary equipment.
All areas of expertise in coal preparation will be required to meet the demand for coal
preparation plants in India, including equipment supply, construction, project
management and plant operations. In addition to opportunities for the supply of
equipment and services, there will also be opportunities for ownership of coal
preparation plants and even mines within the new Indian regime. Deregulation of the
Indian coal industry is progressing rapidly and, in the year 2000, all coal prices will be
iii
deregulated and private ownership of coal mines and coal preparation facilities will be
possible.
As CIL has no interest in constructing or operating its own coal preparation plants, all
new plants will be constructed by private enterprise. In addition, existing coal
preparation plants operated by CIL will be available for take-over by private enterprise.
As private enterprise takes an increasing share in the currently publicly-owned coal
preparation industry, commercial relations will become normalised and recognisable to
commercial enterprise.
The optimism of the future market within India for coal preparation plant, however,
must be tempered with a note of caution. India is still a developing nation. As such, it
is a difficult market in which to invest and major infrastructure projects, such as the
provision of IPPs, have been exceedingly slow to develop within India. Concerns on
the part of foreign investors centre around the flow of funds in order to provide loan
repayments and returns on investments. Although infrastructure projects for power
stations costing ~$1 billion have a much greater cause for concern, investors,
contractors and suppliers of coal preparation plant will still be concerned to ensure that
payment for their equipment and services is available before entering into any contract.
Recommendations
UK companies are highly regarded in India and Indian nationalised companies and
private enterprises feel comfortable when dealing with UK businesses. UK experience
in the particular types of coal preparation technology required for the large power
generation market in India will be of particular benefit to companies wishing to supply
goods and services to India. However, international competition is fierce and there is a
need to increase the profile of UK companies in this potentially lucrative market. This
could be done, for instance, through attendance at conferences and active participation
in trade missions and other promotional activities. In particular, the Coal Preparation
India Conference, which is held bi-annually, is a useful forum for suppliers to meet
potential buyers.
UK coal preparation companies also need to be become better informed about the
opportunities available in India. This could perhaps be done through the establishment
of a database of Indian companies involved in or interested in coal preparation.
In addition, future R&D and technology transfer efforts should be directed towards
development of technologies appropriate to India. Key areas are:
Comminution techniques to increase the liberation of mineral matter whilst

minimising the production of fine coal.
Application of dry coal beneficiation techniques, such as selective breakage, optical

sorting and air separation in areas of water shortage.
Development of suitable fine coal cleaning and dewatering processes to improve

recovery and quality of fine coal.
Adaptation and implementation of UK-developed control strategies for partial

washing to optimise technical and economic performance of coal preparation plant.
iv
Development and optimisation of integrated coal preparation and minemouth power

schemes, whereby a premium product is produced for sale to a distant power station
and the coal preparation discard is burnt in a locally-sited fluidised-bed combustor.
Page
1.
INTRODUCTION
2.
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
BACKGROUND
Overview of Indias Coal Industry
Indian Planning Cycle
Indian Coal Mining
The Indian Coal Market
Market Trends
1
1
2
4
7
8
3.
3.1
3.2
3.3
CLEANING POTENTIAL OF INDIAN COALS

Washability
Froth Flotation
Effects of washing on coal quality
12
12
15
16
4.
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
STATUS OF COAL PREPARATION IN INDIA

Current Technology
Process Selection
Specific Technology Requirements
Infrastructure Requirements
Organisations Involved in Coal Preparation
Other Organisations Involved/Interested
18
18
22
23
27
30
34
5.
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
ASSESSMENT OF MARKET POTENTIAL

Markets for Washed Coal
Current and Future Market Influences
Factors Influencing Implementation of Coal Preparation Technologes
Commercial Options
International Activities in India
Financing Coal Preparation Developments
36
36
37
42
44
47
49
6.
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
Coal Preparation Options
R&D Specific to India
Potential for Future Collaboration
Review of UK Involvement in India
Future Legislation
49
49
50
53
55
57
7.
7.1
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ISSUES

Coal Preparation
58
59
8.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
61
9.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
64
10.
REFERENCES
64
Tables 1 to 17
Figures 1 to 28
Appendix
Notes of Visits to Indian Organisations
vi
REVIEW OF TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS OF THE COAL

1.
INTRODUCTION
Coal preparation is used extensively in coal mines in developed nations to make the
coal from mines accaptable for the market or the increase its value. For coking coals,
there is a technical requirement to reduce the ash content of the coal to make a stronger
coke and reduce the amount of heat needed in blast furnace operations. Preparation is
usually applied to steaming coal applications to reduce the bulk of the coal to be
transported long distances, and hence the cost of transport per heat unit delivered to the
power plant. In some cases, where the sulphur content of the coal is high, coal
preparation is used to reduce the content of sulphur in the coal, either by direct remove
of sulphur conatining minerals or by increasing the heating value of the coal.
In India, the need for coal preparation for coking coal production has long been
recognised, but it is only recently that there has been serious consideration given to
preparaing steam coals. The long overland transportation routes for coal in India, seem
to offer an ideal opportunity for the application of coal preparation, giving substantial
benefits to the Indian economny and to the environment. This is being taken up and
encouraged by the Government of India (GOI) and it is the evaluation of this market
that this report addresses.
This Report presents a review of the Indian Coal Preparation industry. The report will
outline the historical reasons for coal preparation and examine the techniques applied to
achieve the desired product qualities. In addition, the Report will review future needs
and product requirements and present views on the likely technology required to meet
future product requirements. The Report will identify areas for potential involvement
of British companies and estimate the likely size of the coal preparation market in
India. This will include a review of, not only opportunities for coal preparation
construction, but also for equipment supply, management skills and technology
transfer.
2.
BACKGROUND
2.1
Overview of Indias Coal Industry(1,2,3,4,5, 6,7,8)

As shown in Table 1, India is the third largest producer of coal in the world with an
annual production of 300Mt in 1998. Based on a tonne of coal equivalent (tce) having
29,300KJ/Kg, this amounts to 211Mtce. India also possesses large reserves of
bituminous coal as indicated in Table 1 and Table 2.
At present, virtually all coal mining is carried out under the auspices of Coal India Ltd
(CIL) whose headquarters are in Calcutta. In addition to CIL, the Neyveli Lignite
Corporation operates the Neyveli mines in Tamil Nadu State, Singareni Collieries Ltd
operate bituminous mines in Andhra Pradesh and Tata Iron and Steel Company
(TISCO) operate mines in Bihar to supply coking coal to their own steel plants(9).
CIL is divided into a number of subsidiaries for operational purposes. These are
Eastern Coalfields Ltd (ECL), Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (BCCL), Central Coalfields Ltd
(CCL), Northern Coalfields Ltd (NCL), South Eastern Coalfields Ltd (SECL),
Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd (MCL) and Western Coalfields Ltd (WCL). There is also
another principal subsidiary of CIL, the Central Mine Planning and Design Institute Ltd
(CMPDIL).
Each subsidiary of CIL operates as an individual unit, entering into sales contracts for
its products. Funding for new projects, however, must be approved by the CIL Board
for values >50,000. Projects >500,000 must be approved by the Ministry of Finance
in Delhi.
As each business unit is responsible for its own projects and financing, the construction
and management of coal preparation plant is the responsibility of each business unit.
Each unit, however, relies heavily on the local division of CMPDIL for feasibility
studies and coal preparation plant design. Financing is on a project-by-project basis
and follows a predetermined pattern for approval
Production from CIL has increased dramatically over the last five years and, as
Figure 1 and Figure 2 show, the trend for production and consumption is planned to
continue to rise. The majority of CILs production is for so-called non-coking coal,
which is for power generation and cement making. Figure 1 shows that power
generation is by far the largest consumer, followed by coking coal and then, the cement
industry. It is also significant that imports are growing for reasons that will be
explained later in this Report.
2.2
Indian Planning Cycle

Indias economy is to some degree planned by the GOI. Since independence in 1948,
the government has produced a plan for the economy in five-year periods. The current
period is the Ninth Plan that extends from 1997-2002. The basis of all projections is
the figure for growth in GDP produced by the Indian Planning Commission. This leads
to projected power demand figures and hence to coal requirements. Growth in GDP is
based on projected population growth, an increase in individual wealth and currency
inflation. As with most governments, India likes to portray a healthy growing economy
and this leads to over-optimistic growth forecasts.
Each five-year plan predicts growth and thereby produces estimates of power, steel and
cement requirements. The cost of meeting the planned objectives is determined by the
state-owned industries (SOIs), such as the State Electricity Boards (SEBs), National
Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) and CIL. GOI uses these cost estimates to
determine debt requirement and the degree of GOI funding as well as project specific
funding from outside agencies such as the World Bank (WB) and Asian Development
Bank (ADB). Having produced the five-year plan, the SOIs are given production
targets as well as spending limits.
NTPC and CIL carry out their own demand analysis and formulate five-year plans
based on their own estimates. SEBs, on the other hand, tend to adopt the plans
provided for them by the State Government. Consequently, NTPCs building of new
power stations tends to follow actual demand rather than the five-year plan demand.
Cement production is largely in the hands of private enterprise and their demand
forecasts and coal consumption are determined internally and closely match market
forces.
Steel production also follows actual market demand although GOI does provide Steel
Authority of India Ltd. (SAIL) with production targets. However, SAIL is constrained
to follow market forces since they must compete with the very large, although smaller,
TISCO.
Because of its own demand forecasts, CIL is able to track actual demand more closely
than the five-year plan. The five-year plan, however, forms the basis of government
funding as well as external agency funding. Since 1998, CIL has had to raise its own
funds when the central government discontinued any financial support or loans to CIL.
Therefore, CIL has had to obtain commercial loans and soft loans from the WB. They
have recently negotiated a $1 billion loan from the WB(10) and Japanese Export Import
(JEXIM) Bank, which is being used to fund higher capacity equipment purchases for
modern opencast mines in MCL, WCL and SECL.
CIL is, however, fully aware that, in spite of Planning Commission estimates of future
power demand, its customers will only burn coal as required by actual demand.
Correspondingly, they have reduced their projections for coal demand to a level they
believe consistent with electricity and other coal use demands. Nevertheless, CIL is
convinced that coal demand will increase substantially.
In addition to optimistic growth forecasts, the Planning Commission does not take into
account improvements in productivity. In particular, in relation to power generation,
no account is taken of improved power station availability or heat rate. During the
period of the Ninth Plan, Indian power stations have increased their availability
considerably and hence their generating capacity, mostly as a result of better coal
availability due to improved performance by India Railways (IR). In the future,
improvements in power station heat rate, resulting from improved coal quality, will
lower the demand for coal from the current official projections.
From Figure 1, it can be seen that projection for coal requirement shows a 200Mtpa
increase over the next twenty years. The vast majority of this increase will be in the
power generation sector and this demand will largely be met from within CIL. A major
concern for the availability of coal at Indian power stations, however, will be IRs
ability to transport the required volume of coal. IR have already stated that they do not
have sufficient capacity to support this increase in coal volume.(11) Ways must
therefore be sought to meet the demand for increased coal utilisation but at the same
time living within the constraints of the existing rail infrastructure.
In considering the electrical and coal infrastructure in India, one must bear in mind the
very large size of the Indian land mass. Clearly, transporting coal over long distances
is an economic drain on the country and a strain on the rail infrastructure. Coal
production is concentrated in the north-eastern part of the country with some
production in the more central areas. Power is required, however, throughout the
country and particularly in those areas where industrial development is the highest.
Each state wishes to increase the economic wealth of its population and, therefore, is
attempting to increase the industry in its own area. In particular, Gujarat, Maharastra
and areas around Mumbai and in Tamil Nadu, in areas around Chennai,
industrialisation is moving apace and coalfields are more remote.
Part of the development of industrialisation is the development of a power supply
infrastructure and once again, each state wishes to have its own power supplies and the
associated employment. The construction of railways is a relatively low technology
industry and can readily be undertaken by indigenous Indian resources. The
construction of very long distance power distribution systems, however, is rather more
specialised and requires the importation of expertise and special materials. Despite the
fact that there are 500kV DC lines installed particularly that from Chandrapore to
Mumbai (installed by Maharastra State Electricity Board), their use for distances over
400km has not been extensively tried in India. The transmission of electricity over
1000km would require much higher voltage and consequently, higher technology.
Such systems are difficult to contemplate within the Indian context.
It is, however, the political aspirations of each state that is the major driving force
behind the construction of power stations in areas remote from coal supplies. Given
this political will it is highly probable that new power stations will continue to be built
in areas remote from coal supplies requiring the transportation of energy over long
distances.
Ministries are currently considering the future in order to develop the Tenth Plan, for
the years 2002-7. Figure 2 shows the planned production of coal for the period of the
Ninth Plan and by the end of that period, it is expected that coal production would be
350Mtpa. Projections beyond 2004 are still based on figures produced for the Ninth
Plan. Even if increased demand does not entirely meet expectations, it is certain that
there will still be a demand for a further 100Mtpa of steam coal by 2010, in order to
fuel additional power demand which is required for Indias development.
By contrast with the power sector, the production of coking coal will not increase
during the Ninth Plan or indeed, into the Tenth Plan. This is due to a lack of coking
coal reserve in India. Figure 3 shows a map of India identifying and locating its
coalfields. The majority of coking coal is located in the Jharia Coalfield in the
Damodar Valley where the seams of coal currently being worked, by TISCO, ECL,
BCCL and CCL, are considered to be prime coking coal. Much of the current
production is from the largest of the coking coals seams in the sequence and when this
seam is exhausted, lower seams will be extracted which have lower coking potential.
The areas of ECL, BCCL and CCL are the oldest coalfields in India. Much of the
production is underground, often by hand winning methods with very poor
productivity, poor labour relations and considerable union militancy. By contrast, in
the areas for development for power station fuel (PSF) in SECL, MCL and WCL,
production is mainly opencast with higher productivity and better labour relations.
2.3
Indian Coal Mining
2.3.1 Underground Mining

Underground mining production in India is currently ~55Mtpa, comprising ~23% of the
total Indian coal production. Despite this, some 300 mines of a total of >450 are
underground. The greatest concentration of underground mines is in ECL and BCCL.

These two areas produce the majority of the coking coal mined in India.
Coal seams in the northern areas of ECL, BCCL and CCL, typically have thinner
seams. Underground mining methods are very largely conventional room and pillar,
that it is to say, undercut and fire, with hand loading of mine tubs. Some mechanisation
of room and pillar working has taken place where power loaders are used to fill mine
cars. Longwall methods are currently being considered and are likely to increase in
utilisation. Figure 4 shows the breakdown by percentage of underground mining
methods.
CIL is planning to construct additional underground mining capacity, particularly in
WCL and SECL. In these areas, seam thickness is somewhat greater than in the
northern coalfields and presents considerable challenges to underground mining
techniques. In many cases, seam thickness can be 10-15m at depths of ~200-300m.
Conventional longwall mining techniques are capable of extracting a maximum of 5m
sections, and the extraction of 10-15m sections requires more than one pass of longwall
machinery. CIL is also considering the use of sub-level caving to extract additional
coal thickness through apertures in the shield supports. This method has been
extensively used in China but is, as yet, untried in India.
Dilution (out-of-seam rock added to the coal during the mining process) from sub-level
caving can be expected to be higher than conventional longwall mining.
Additional causes for concern with thick-seam, underground extraction in India is the
presence of aquifers above the coal seam. In many coalfield areas local water supplies
are from aquifers in the Kamthi series, which overlies the Barakar coal bearing series.
With typical mining depths of 200-300m and extraction of 5m or more, surface level
subsidence will be considerable. With rock breakage to the surface, loss of aquifer into
the coal working will have significant effect on local water supplies. In some instances,
the quantity of water entering the workings by this method may be considerable and
local dewatering will be required, to avoid inundation of the workings.
In considering the use of longwall mining techniques, CIL must take into account its
capacity for capital expenditure. Longwall mining faces and, indeed, the construction
of underground mines is highly capital intensive and, in general, India lacks foreign
exchange and tends to use equipment which is locally manufactured wherever possible.
The lack of foreign exchange will limit the application of modern high capacity
equipment. CIL will be considering the use of BOT or contractor-type operations for
the construction and operation of underground mines in the future. As more working
faces become mechanised, either using longwall shearers or continuous miners, it is to
be expected that dilution will increase and run-of-mine (ROM) quality will deteriorate
as a result. As has been the experience in the UK and elsewhere in the world, the
quantity of fines (<0.5mm) will also increase.
2.3.2 Opencast Mining
Opencast mining methods are generally by smaller capacity equipment in comparison
with European, US, Australian or South African mines. To date CIL has favoured the
use of truck and shovel operation for its opencast mines although some use has been
made of draglines of up to 20m3 where stripping ratios are high, to make use of the
lower operating costs of these systems.
Truck and shovel operations typically use 7m3 electric rope shovels and 35-50t off-road
haulage trucks for overburden removal. Larger mines are being converted to use 85t
dump trucks for overburden removal. In the future, new coal mines will largely be
constructed using 10m3 hydraulic shovels and 120t dump trucks for overburden
removal. The use of even larger equipment with 20m3 shovels and 170t dump trucks is
under consideration by CIL for use at some time in the future.
Coal winning in opencast mines is usually by means of 2m3 or 3m3 wheel loaders and
10-14t on-road dump trucks. The use of larger equipment for coal production is being
considered by CIL and utilised wherever possible.
In many of the opencast mines coal is loaded and removed from the pit by contractors
who employ ex-military personnel. Replacement of these contractors or their
equipment is a politically sensitive issue and will need to be handled carefully by CIL.
The use of the smaller equipment currently employed offers the opportunity to improve
ROM coal quality by more careful or selective mining. However, ROM quality has
deteriorated in spite of the use of the smaller equipment. Future developments are
likely, therefore to be in improving productivity by using larger equipment. ROM coal
quality is unlikely, therefore to improve.
2.3.3 Coal Mining Trends
Despite the use of relatively small equipment particularly for coal production, the
quality of ROM coal from Indian mines is decreasing.
Figure 5 shows the trend of raw coal quality in the kcal/kg GAR and it is clear that, as
opencast mining has proliferated, the average quality of raw coal has deteriorated. This
trend will continue into the future as larger and larger equipment is used in opencast
mines.
Also, opencast mining will increase in proportion to underground mining to meet the
future demands for the power generation sector. ROM coal quality will, therefore,
continue to deteriorate.
Figure 6 shows the proportion of coal mined from underground and opencast in India
over the last 5 years. It can be seen that underground production has remained largely
the same with virtually all increases in production coming from opencast mines, which
currently produce 77% of all output. Coking coal is largely produced from
underground mines and new underground mines tend to be for coking coal production
rather than steam coal. The steam coal reserves are generally located in very large, low
stripping ratio deposits, amenable to high-capacity production techniques and low-cost
operation. Underground mining is very low productivity, very high cost and, generally,
cannot compete with opencast production for PSF.
2.4
The Indian Coal Market

It must be borne in mind that all of Indias bituminous coal is Gondwanan in origin
and, therefore, has high ash and difficult washability characteristics. This is true for
coking coal and for steam coal and the difficulty of washing extends throughout the
density range. Coals are, however, generally low in sulphur and chlorine, even on an
equivalent CV basis.
Coal is very largely sold as raw coal with only limited preliminary crushing, by feeder
breaker either above or below ground. Typically the top size of products is
200-300mm and sampling of coal is from the top of rail wagons or on-road vehicles.
The source and destination of all coal supplies is determined by the so-called Linkage
Committee. This Committee comprises members from CIL, the Ministry of Coal, the
MOP and NTPC. The Committee examines the demand for coal taking note of the
destination and sources of coal and decides which mines will supply which power
stations. Any new user wishing to buy coal must submit a request to the Linkage
Committee and the Committee will recommend a source for that coal.
The majority of coal produced in India is transported by means of the rail system in rail
wagons of 60t capacity and rakes of 60 wagons. This gives total train weights of 3,600t
with a maximum train speed of 60km/h. 95% of all rail wagons used for coal are side
opening wagons, designated BOX or BOXn by IR. For new projects, bottom-opening
wagons, designated BOBR or BOBRN (an updated version of BOBR) by IR, will be
used which allow continuous unloading, without uncoupling.
As can be seen from Figure 3, which shows locations of coalfields and the larger power
stations, distances travelled by coal can be long. It is not uncommon for coal to be
transported 500km to reach its destination. In some cases, coal must travel >1500km
before arriving at its point of destination. Until recently availability of rolling stock
and the efficiency of IR was such that power stations were continually kept short of
coal. However, improvements in efficiency and major investment in railways have
improved this situation and most power stations now have some coal stocks. The
capacity of the rail system remains a constraint on the development of the use of coal in
power stations distant from mines. For new linkages, it is now often necessary for the
user of the coal to purchase their own wagons under an own your own wagon scheme.
In this scheme, wagons are purchased by the user of the coal and then leased back to
IR. Freight is paid for by the user in the normal way but the leasing arrangement is
such that the user is guaranteed a 16% return on his investment.
Coal prices in India are regulated with prices for various qualities of coal being notified
by the Government on a regular basis in the Gazette of India. Prices for coking coal
and power station coal are quoted separately. It should be noted that this price is the
price for raw coal; the cost of cleaning the coal (as with coking coal) and any losses
involved therein are borne by the buyer, at a negotiated price.
The Indian commercial grading system is based on Useful Heating Value (UHV).
The grade bands are shown in Table 3.
UHV is defined as:

UHV = 8,900 138 (A + M)
where: A = ash content (%) on the equilibrated basis
M = moisture content at 60% relative humidity (RH) and 40C.
These grade bands were originally selected in order to make low quality coal a more
attractive proposition for the power plants by reducing the price/kcal for lower-grade
coals. This artifice was created in the 1970s in order to encourage power plants to burn
lower-quality coal produced from low-cost surface-mined deposits. From this point of
view, UHV has been highly successful. However, it has meant that typical power
station feed quality is now ~45% ash, as mines cannot improve quality sufficiently to
achieve a grade increase and find it beneficial to increase ash as much as possible
without dropping a grade. It has also meant that it has been difficult to persuade power
stations of the benefits of burning higher-quality fuels with lower ash, since under the
grading system the cost per heat unit of coal increases as the grade increases.
Figure 7 shows the current regulated prices for non-coking coal in Grades A-G. These
prices are for mine gate deliveries and additions can be made for transportation in
excess of 3km from the mine to the disposal point and for crushing to smaller than the
standard 300mm top size. In addition, for contracts that require fixed or guaranteed
deliveries, an additional risk premium may be added. The additional costs can increase
the price by up to 70Rs/t. It is noteworthy that in the latest prices in 1998 there is less
price reduction for lower grade coal. This is to encourage the use of better-quality coal
and reduce the use of transport fuels.
Another difficulty with this system is the very wide range in CV for lower-quality
grades. It is often impossible to achieve an increase in grade by washing the coal
despite a substantial increase in CV. Very often, the result of cleaning the coal has
been that the coal grade remains in the same band and hence the price paid will be the
same, despite the losses due to washing. This system of pricing will be discontinued in
December 1999. In fact, the last price notification was in 1998 and prices have
remained constant since that time. CILs profitability has been impacted since its costs
have escalated but its prices have remained the same.
2.5
Market Trends
2.5.1 Coking Coal

Coking coal production has remained constant as Indias coking coal reserves are
limited and there is little ability to increase output. The two largest steel companies in
India, SAIL and TISCO, whilst increasing steel output have increased their proportion
of imported coal. There is little opportunity for CIL to increase coking coal production;
however, there is some potential for producing lower-ash fuels for use as pulverised
coal injection (PCI).
Coking coal in India is produced at 19% ash for delivery to the coking plants of SAIL
and TISCO. This has gradually increased over recent years from 10% ash in the 1960s
to 17% in the 1980s and now to 19%. This is a reflection of the deteriorating quality of
the ROM coal. PCI coal is generally required to be ~10% ash or less. Whilst this is an
8
increasing market, the scope for production of this quality of coal is limited. There is,
however, the possibility of producing such low-ash coals for PCI and then taking the
reject coal for PSF. Such a quality would have limited volume but high value.
In general, the market for coking coal in India will increase as steel output increases.
However, indigenous supplies will reduce as available coking coal resources are
depleted.
2.5.2 Cement
Quality requirements for the cement industry are for coals to be <30% ash and more
generally, <25% ash. This is a reflection of the need to limit the effect of coal ash on
the produced cement since most cement plants are direct fired. Cement production in
India is predicted to continue a substantial growth and Table 4 illustrates the projected
cement production and their estimated coal requirement(12).
Coal forms, by far and away, the largest source of fuel for cement production in India
as there is no natural gas supply and oil is not economical. Lignite is used in some
plant in southern and western India as a supplement for coal. There is a possibility of
the use of gas in Gujarat and Rajastan in the future. Cement making technology has
improved in India during the last 20 years and fuel-to-clinker ratio has improved by
some 12%. Coal supplied to the cement market is largely from indigenous sources but
some imported coal is used in areas remote from indigenous coal supplies.
In addition to consuming coal as fuel for cement making, the cement industry also
provides an outlet for the use of fly ash from power stations, consuming coal to
generate power(13).
2.5.3 Power Stations
Deliveries to power stations are typically in the range 40-50% ash with the majority of
deliveries being in the range 42-45% ash. This high ash content is partly due to
inherent ash within the coal seams but also due to the inclusion of large dirt bands and
quantities of roof and floor material. Current practice in opencast mining is to include
all dirt bands of thickness <1m. Dirt bands >1m are considered removable by selective
mining and are normally excluded from the reserve and production estimates.
The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) has recently instituted a guideline
for the quality of coal to be burnt in power stations. This guideline states that all coal
delivered to power stations from distances >1000km must be <34% ash. This guideline
is the result of an ADB-funded study carried out by Montan Consultants and CMPDIL
in 1998(14). The figure of 34% ash was chosen as being readily attainable with limited
loss of heating value in the discard from coal preparation. The 1000km limit was
chosen rather arbitrarily as being an initial stage in a wider introduction of coal
preparation whilst providing a clear economic benefit to the power stations.
It is the view of the MOP that the 1000km limit is likely to be reduced to 500km within
10 years. It is currently estimated that the 1000km limit will require that 80-90Mtpa of
coal will need to be reduced to 34% ash. Although some coal preparation plants have
been and are being constructed, it is clear that this capacity cannot be achieved by the
time of the implementation of the guideline in July 2000. As an interim measure,

lower-ash coal is being imported and blended with the indigenous high ash coal to
produce the required quality. CIL has recently announced that it will be constructing a
large blending facility for preparing PSF of <34% ash. It is not, however, clear where
the blending facility will be located, since Indias deep-water ports are not close to
sources of PSF. The intention of the MOEF guideline is to reduce the quantity of
transport fuel required to meet Indias power demand. It is clear that increasing the CV
of the fuel will reduce the transport bill. In addition, power stations will enjoy the
benefits of reduced erosion, reduced coal handling and reduced ash disposal costs as a
result of lower-ash fuel(15). These effects are only recently being considered but it is
felt that once power stations gain experience in the use of lower-ash coal then the
demand will increase.
An exception to the 1000km rule is for areas where it is considered that air quality is at
a premium and in those special cases, washed coal will also be required. This is
particularly the case in Delhi and all power stations in Delhi must now burn coal of
<34% ash according to a recent High Court ruling. This coal is currently being
supplied from the Karanpura area of the Damodar Valley coalfield where some coking
coal washeries have been converted to producing non-coking coal and also where the
new Piparwar mine is located.
As indicated above, there are at present no long-term contracts between power
producers and CIL. Rather, the Linkage Committee determines volumes and coal is
paid for on delivery. The SEBs are, however, in a poor financial state since they are
often not paid for some electricity supplied to agriculture and only slowly paid by
larger users. Consequently, payments to CIL can be very slow and CILs cash flow
suffers as a result. The implications for the purchase of the 34%-ash coal stipulated by
MOEF are, therefore, confused since the quality is not covered under the present
grading system so that there will be some delay in negotiating prices.
Recently, SEBs have started to negotiate prices for coal purchases on the basis of a
guaranteed return on investment to CIL. This has encouraged the development of
reserves of higher-cost coal but possibly closer to the point of use than would otherwise
have been possible under the old system. For instance, very low stripping ratio (<1:1)
coal from SECL would be transported >700km to Maharastra since the production cost
would be very low and CILs margin on the very low price paid would be higher. CIL
would not develop mines in Maharastra with stripping ratio of >3:1 since they would be
sub-economic even though there is a local demand for the coal. The Maharastra State
Electricity Board (MSEB) and NTPC have recently negotiated contracts with CIL for
the development of higher stripping ratio reserves which are closer to their power
stations. This is economic for the power stations since the long transport chain and
inherent cost thereof is avoided. However, the power company has to guarantee to take
delivery of the contracted quantity of coal in order to ensure that CIL is reimbursed for
its investment. Such long-term contracts have not previously been common in India.
Such economic considerations will increasingly determine the source of coal burnt at
any particular power station. Power stations will attempt to minimise the delivered cost
of heat either by purchasing higher production cost coal locally for higher mine gate
price or by purchasing higher-quality coal transported over longer distances.
10
In the latter context, two coal preparation plants are currently under construction for the
supply of coal to power stations, under long-term contract. The first is at Dipka mine
in SECL and is owned by Bombay Suburban Electric Supply Company (BSES) and is
being constructed by a joint venture of Spectrum Technologies (ST) and CLI
Corporation of the USA(12,16). In this scheme, BSES is funding the construction of the
coal preparation plant and purchasing coal on a raw coal basis from CIL at the Dipka
mine. BSES will pay the operating costs of the coal preparation plant and CIL will
dispose of the plant discard. Clean coal will be transported by rail from Dipka to
Mumbai, a distance of ~1200km.
A second plant is being constructed at the Kalinga mine, for the supply of coal to the
Hinduja National Power Company Ltd (HNPCL) project in Visakhapatnam.(17) The
HNPCL plant is an Independent Power Project (IPP) and, as such, HNPCL has
concluded a long-term coal supply contract with MCL where the Kalinga mine is
located. Under the terms of this contract HNPCL will buy coal from CIL at a price
which is based on the currently notified raw coal price with the cost of cleaning the coal
added to the price. CIL will contract with Indo-US Washeries, a joint venture between
Visakhapatnam Bottling Company (VBC) and Roberts and Schaefer (R&S) of the
USA. Indo-US Washeries will fund, build and operate the coal preparation plant for a
fixed fee, based on raw coal tonnes. MCL will deliver coal to the coal preparation plant
and remove clean coal and discard from the washery. Clean coal will be delivered to
HNPCL by MCL.
CIL is not in favour of concluding future deals on the Kalinga model. The contractual
arrangement leaves CIL with all of the supply risk including delivery and quality. The
BSES model leaves CIL with only the mine production risk, which it considers to be its
core business. CIL has no interest in operating or constructing any new coal
preparation plants and will not consider any new build-own-operate (BOO)
arrangements, in the future. CIL is willing to consider build-own-operate-trade
(BOOT) contracts wherein a third party would build and operate a coal preparation
plant, purchase raw coal from CIL and be free to sell clean coal to their own customers.
Whilst this appears attractive to CIL, it is difficult to envisage how such a trading
approach could be financed on a project finance basis given the market conditions for
coal in India.
The recently constructed Piparwar project is not a pattern that CIL is likely to repeat.
Piparwar was constructed as a WB-funded demonstration project intended to provide
CIL with a modern western-equipped high-capacity coal mine. The mine was
constructed by White Industries of Australia and the supply included all opencast
mining equipment, in-pit crushing, overland conveying, a coal preparation plant and
rail loading facilities. Although the project has been completed and is operating
satisfactorily, the inclusion of a coal preparation plant is contrary to CILs current
policy. In addition, the rail loading facility is still not in operation since the rail link
has yet to be completed.
Power companies such as NTPC are, however, most interested in coal preparation and
in buying washed coal for their power plants. As previously stated, the SEBs are in
poor financial straits and would have difficulty funding a coal preparation plant. NTPC
is not in such a difficult state, however, and is considering the construction of coal
preparation plants for a number of its power stations.
11
3.
CLEANING POTENTIAL OF INDIAN COALS
3.1
Washability
All coals in India with the exception of the lignites are Carboniferous Gondwana in
origin. The lignites are Tertiary in origin. Like all Gondwana coals, Indian coals are
highly interbanded, with dirt bands ranging from a few millimetres to several metres
thick. It is standard practice in India to classify the various components of coal into
lithologies according to Table 5.
From this table it is quite clear that the definition of coal is broad and the boundaries
between the lithologies are arbitrarily chosen. Indeed, ply-by-ply analysis of individual
seam sections can demonstrate a very wide range of ash and moisture.
As might be expected, the moisture content within an individual seam on the
equilibrated basis varies according to the ash content. The range of coal rank in India
varies from the northern coalfields in Assam, with low volatile coals of 200 Rank, to
the Jharia coalfields where coking coals of 301a Rank exist, down to the western
coalfields which are borderline between high volatile bituminous C and sub-bituminous
coals (ASTM classification). There are also lignite deposits; most notably in Tamil
Nadu where the Neyveli lignite is a major energy source.
An interesting feature of Indian coals is the range of inherent moisture that has lead to
the adoption of standardised conditions for proximate analysis. These conditions are
known as equilibrated and the equilibrated moisture is determined at 60% RH and
40C. Very often this leads to lower moisture content than would normally be expected
by determining quality according to ISO Standards for air dried quality. In India, most
quality parameters, such as ash and moisture are quoted on the equilibrated basis.
Typical vertical seam sections are shown in Figure 8. Section A shows a typical
section from an opencast mine in the Raniganj formation of eastern coalfields that
demonstrates a 35m-thick seam containing a large number of dirt bands of varying
thickness. As well as pure dirt bands, there are many gradations of carbonaceous
material ranging from pure coal to pure shale.
Section B is from the western coalfields where the seams are somewhat thinner. It is
more noticeable in the southerly coalfield, however, that somewhat higher quality coal
could be achieved than is possible in the more northern coalfields. The wide range of
ash content within lithologies within the seam, however, is still apparent in the more
southerly coalfields.
Section C illustrates a seam section from southeastern coalfields where the coal is
slightly lower rank with seam and interburden thickness greater than Sections A and B.
Although the very fine divisions associated with the northern coalfields are not so
prevalent, it is quite clear that there is a wide range of coal qualities within the seam
section. In this case, however, it is noticeable that there are quite large bands of dirt
within the seam.
Where lower ash components are present within seam sections of higher rank coal, it is
possible to liberate purer coal material by crushing. In general, the pure coal sections
12
tend to be softer than the surrounding rock or higher-ash components and some
liberation of higher-quality material is possible by crushing. The extent to which this is
possible is, however, limited since components with inherent ash contents >20%, or of
lower rank, have a tougher nature and the ash components can be very finely divided
throughout the coal material. In this case, crushing does not liberate any additional coal
and the so-called coal component can be quite hard. Nevertheless, selective breakage is
attracting considerable attention and is in commercial operation.
Table 6 shows a typical size analysis of a coal from the Talcher Coalfield, from an
opencast mine. It shows the higher ash content of coarser coal and of fines. This
sample has been crushed to <100mm, but does indicate that some beneficiation may be
possible even for lower rank coals. Table 6 also shows that the 100-75mm size fraction
is higher in ash than the smaller sizes, indicating that the higher-ash material is harder
than the smaller material. Differential breakage may, therefore, give some upgrading
potential. In a further study(18), Bhittacharya and Misra showed that an ecart probable
moyen (Epm) of 0.12 at a d50 cut-point of 2.0 relative density (RD). is possible with
selective breakage when applied to Moonidih (a prime rank coking coal).
Epm, is normally used to indicate the accuracy of any particular sepration and is
defined as:
Epm = d75 - d25
2
where: d75 = RD for a partition coefficient of 75
d25 = RD for a partition coefficient of 25
The extent of the difficulty in liberating clean coal is shown in Figure 9, which shows
the very fine nature of intergrown material. This is an electron scanning
photomicrograph set to detect silicon and aluminium. White areas are mineral matter
and grey areas are carbon. A pure coal particle is shown on the left of the
photomicrograph and appears as a grey shape. The small particle at the top of the
picture is a pure mineral matter particle and two pieces of shaley coal are shown in the
centre. The scale at the bottom left hand corner shows the size of the particles to be
100-500m and mineral matter inclusions within shaley coal range down to sub-micron
sizes.
The extremely small size and wide-ranging distribution of sizes clearly illustrates the
difficulty in attaining very low-ash products from Indian coals. Each particle shown in
the photomicrograph will have an RD in the range 1.3-2.5 and this results in significant
quantities of material reporting to intermediate density fractions within the coal bulk.
Washability data from a number of mines throughout India are shown in Table 7. Of
necessity, the overwhelming majority of washability data is for the coking coal areas of
the Jharia coalfield. This is because, historically, coal preparation has only been carried
out on coking coal.
The last three entries for the Korba coalfield, Talcher coalfield and Wardha coalfield
reflect the more recent interest in washing non-coking coals for power generation. The
13
Korba coalfield is a large non-coking coal producer operated by SECL, the Talcher
coalfield is operated by MCL and the Wardha coalfield is operated by WCL.
In general, the washability characteristics of Indian coals are difficult. It is normal to
characterise the washability of coals according to Table 8. In this classification, the
separations for coking coals in India are formidable. Separations for steam coals at
higher densities are largely classified as difficult with near gravity material (NGM)
in the range 10-20%. Some workers in India have attempted to produce a different
classification system for washability characteristics based only on the ash and yield of
coal but the result is generally the same(19).
Figure 10 shows the washability characteristics of a coal from the Korba coalfield
operated by SECL. This coal is typical of the bulk of coals likely to be supplied to
power stations. Noticeable characteristics are the raw coal ash, which is 44% and the
quality of discard at high-density separations which can be >70% ash. This indicates
that recovery of combustible materials should be high at high densities. The RD curve
also indicates that a separation at 2.0RD will yield good combustible recoveries. The
0.1RD curve also indicates that NGM reduces as RD increases and for high-density
separations, the amount of NGM should indicate an easy-to-clean coal.
The washability data shown in Figure 10 is for raw coal and therefore incorporates the
dilution from the mining process. The mine concerned is a large opencast mine where
any parting >1m is excluded from the mining section. However, there are several
bands of dirt within the seam which increase the ash content. These dirt bands are
readily removed during a washing process and account for the very high ash content of
the discard.
By contrast, the coal depicted in Figure 11 is for a coking coal mine in the Jharia
coalfield. This coal exhibits very low ash content at low densities but extremely high
NGM at low density. The mine produces a 19%-ash coking coal and this washability
data indicates that the yield should be ~75% for this coal. Separation at ~1.65RD is
required and, at this cut-point, quantity of NGM is ~15%, indicating moderate
difficulty of washing.
Figure 12 shows the washability data for the Piparwar mine in the Damodar Valley.
This mine produces non-coking coal for power stations in the Delhi area and is based
on a partial-washing process. Piparwar is typical of coal mines in the Damodar Valley
and a notable feature of the washability of this coal is the rather high NGM in the
middle RD range. This does appear to be reducing at higher densities but indications
are that a dense medium (DM) separation system would be more advantageous than a
jig-based system(20). In order to achieve a product of 34% ash, it will be necessary to
clean only part of the coal to provide a cleaned product that can be blended with raw
coal. In this way, relatively high yields can be achieved but it is likely that discards
will contain appreciable quantities of combustible material.
Figure 13 illustrates the washability of coals from the Wardha Valley coalfield operated
by WCL. In the particular example illustrated, the raw coal ash is quite low and this
illustrates what may be possible in some areas by more-selective mining. It is likely, in
general, that coals mined in this area will have a higher raw coal ash content than this
sample as a result of inclusion of more mining dilution. Raw coal ash of, perhaps, 40%
14
would be considered quite common. Wardha Valley coals, however, have less shaley
coal sections than many other areas in India, as illustrated by Figure 8.
What would not change, however, is the amount of NGM, which is <10% throughout
the RD range normally considered for washing non-coking coals. This indicates an
easy-to-wash coal and reflects the lower inherent ash of the coal. Consideration could
be given to using jig washers in this area.
It is also noticeable for the coals from the northern areas of India that the sulphur
content is very low in all RD fractions. Coals in this area have an equivalent sulphur
content of ~1mg/kcal, on an as received (ar) basis, compared to 3.5mg/kcal for UK
coals (assuming 2.0% sulphur and 5,650 kcal/kg ar). In the western coalfields of
Wardha Valley, higher sulphur is present (up to 2mg/kcal) and, in many locations, this
is very largely pyritic in nature. In the east of the Wardha Valley coalfield, the pyrite
tends to occur in nodular form, with grain sizes up to 20mm. In western areas of the
coalfield, sulphur can be more organic in nature and cannot therefore be reduced by
physical coal preparation means.
Throughout India, the chlorine content of coals is low as would be expected from any
Gondwana coal. Other trace elements are present however, and Table 9 gives examples
of trace elements in various coals throughout India. Although trace elements in Indian
coals are low, some are higher than elsewhere. In particular, mercury and vanadium
average 0.35ppm and 86ppm respectively against a world-wide average of 0.012ppm
and 25ppm respectively. Whilst these values are noteworthy in being higher than
average, they are less than those required to cause unacceptable flue gas emissions.
3.2
Froth Flotation
In common with Gondwana coals in other areas of the world such as South Africa and
Brazil, the vitrinite content of Indian coals is very low. Inert macerals dominate,
resulting in higher surface area for fine particles and higher oxygen (O2) contents at
particle surfaces. In addition, coals intended for power station consumption are
generally of lower rank (often sub-bituminous) and are in opencast deposits close to the
surface. The resulting high O2 content in the coal material further depresses froth
flotation performance. As a consequence, yield from froth flotation is either very low
or the ash content of the froth is very high when aggressive froth flotation is applied(21).
Froth flotation is applied in Indian coalfields but only to coking coals. In keeping with
expectations, the hydrophobic nature of coking coal means that the better-quality Indian
coking coals are amenable to froth flotation. However, considerations discussed above
with finely dispersed ash materials throughout the coal matrix lead to higher-ash froths
and lower-ash tailings than would be normal in other areas of the world. Considerable
work is being carried out as to the application of surface-based processing technologies
in India, particularly froth flotation.(22), and work being carried out on the application of
column flotation is achieving some success.(23)
15
3.3
Effects of washing on coal quality
3.3.1 Ash Content

Considering the washability data laid out in Table 7, the coals from Piparwar, Korba
and Wardha Valley represent the majority of coals which would be supplied as fuel for
power stations. The most noticeable aspect of the washability data is the low ash of the
final sink fraction. The second aspect of note is the very large weight of material that
occurs throughout the density range. This implies that, even on a theoretical basis,
discard material from coal preparation will contain relatively low ash. Even perfect
separations therefore, would result in an energy loss.
From a practical point of view, no coal preparation separator is 100% efficient.
DM separators and, in particular, DM baths are the most accurate separators currently
available with Epm values of 0.02-0.04. With Epm values in this range, such
separators would be expected to produce organic efficiency of ~98-99% on a European
coal, where organic efficiency is defined as:
Actual Yield for a Given Quality
Organic Efficiency =
Theoretical Yield for a Given Quality
For Indian coals, with NGM of 20% to 30%, the organic efficiency would be reduced
to, possibly, 95% or less. Application of a jig with an Epm of 0.1 would have a more
deleterious effect, reducing organic efficiencies to closer to 90%.
3.3.2 Effects on Other Qualities
A recognised feature of the combustion of coals in India, as identified by the MOP and
NTPC, is its very highly abrasive nature. Table 10 gives examples of fly ash analysis
from power stations in India. The high silica content of these examples is evident and
normative analysis suggests that free silica content will be high. Free silica leads to
erosion of grinding mills and the hot passes of boilers used for steam generation.
One of the perceived benefits of the use of clean coal is the reduction in the free silica
present in coal feed to the boiler. This reduction in free silica should lead to lower rates
of erosion and a positive cash benefit to power generators.
When preparing coal for the steam coal market, it is likely that the raw coal will be
reduced from ~45% ash to 33% ash. By removing abrasive components such as free
silica, it is not expected that there would be any significant change in ash fusion
temperature. Indeed, the high silica and alumina contents of Indian coals, generally,
offer high ash fusion temperature, although some exceptions to this do exist. Given the
very high ash content of Indian coals when low ash fusion temperatures occur, they are
a significant problem.
16
In those areas where there are low ash fusion temperature coals, it is probable that coal
preparation will reduce the content of heavier minerals in the ash, eg those containing
iron. Reduction in iron in the washed coal will lead to increased ash fusion
temperatures and, therefore, better properties for combustion of coal. This mechanism
is understood by the power generators and it is a benefit that is expected to accrue from
the use of washed coal. Increased ash fusion temperatures will lead to lower slagging
and fouling problems in boilers.
In the case of coking coal, the prime consideration is to increase the coking properties
of the coal, which is generally done by reducing the ash content. Increased ash
contents reduce the Swelling Index and Gray-King Index of the coal by increasing the
inert content. It is the extremely difficult-to-wash nature of Indian coals, which has
resulted in an increase in the ash content of coking coals produced by CIL. The
application of more modern coal preparation techniques based on DM systems may
well improve the quality of the product whilst at the same time improving the yield.
Coal preparation using DM and jig systems will, of course, add moisture to the washed
product. The extent to which moisture is added to the coal will depend on the amount
of coal washed the size distribution of the coal and the rank of the coal. The degree to
which coal will be upgraded in India (raw coal ash 45%; product ash 34%) means that
the amount of ash removed from the coal will be ~10-15% points. Any moisture added
as a result of coal preparation will detract from the benefits of the reduced ash content.
Total moisture content in many of the coals considered for PSFs, eg from Korba
coalfield, Talcher coalfield or western coalfields, are already ~10-14%, even before
coal preparation is applied. In the rainy season, the moisture content of the delivered
coals can increase to 20%. It is expected that water-based coal preparation systems will
add moisture to the extent of:
for coals >13mm: 1-2%
for coals 13-1mm: 5-6%
for coals <1mm: 15-30%.
It is essential from the foregoing that the least possible amount of moisture is added to
the clean coal. In order to avoid added moisture, it will be undesirable to clean coals of
<13mm. It is considered practical to dry screen coal at 13mm, in India, for most of the
year.
One potential benefit of a slightly elevated moisture content will be to reduce the
tendency for spontaneous combustion of Indian coals. Presently, it is unwise to leave
ROM coal for more than two weeks on stock as spontaneous combustion starts
relatively quickly. An increased moisture content will delay the onset of spontaneous
combustion by reducing the access of air into coal particles and by absorbing any heat
initially generated by coal oxidation.
Coal preparation has been shown to increase the reactive maceral content cleaned coal,
which improves coking performance(24). It has also been found that middlings from
coking coal plants have reactive components that may be recovered by recycling(25).
17
4.
STATUS OF COAL PREPARATION IN INDIA

Historically, coal preparation in India has only been carried out in order to produce
coking coal. In this context, the northern coalfields of India were at one time able to
produce 17% ash coal without the need to wash. However, increased mechanisation,
reduction of high-quality reserves and the need for increased output have lead to the
increased adoption of coal preparation for the production of coking coal. There are
now 24 coking coal preparation plants in India, generally producing 17-19% ash coking
coal at a yield of ~50%(26). Most of these washeries are also capable of producing
middlings or discard that are of a quality acceptable to power stations. In many cases,
the middlings are, in fact, merely rejects from the production of coking coal.(27,28) Fine
coal treatment varies, but froth flotation may be used to produce a coking coal product,
or the fines may only be dewatered and included in the PSF product.
The first coal preparation plants in India were built during the 1950s by a number of
western companies and are based on a wide range of technologies. Early washeries
included Chance Cones constructed by Fraser and Chambers and Baum Jigs
constructed by Acco and McNally. These early processes developed into more modern
systems based on DM separation and Batac Jigs. Also common are Baum jigs which
are used for deshaling prior to cleaning.
Figures 14-26 show a broad range of the types of processes and configurations adopted
in India. Each plant was individually designed taking into consideration the wide
variation in raw coal quality and washability characteristics. There is little
rationalisation of types of equipment either within plants or throughout the industry;
rather, any particular plant was built by the contractor who was most able to survive the
bidding and negotiating process(29,30,31). This is a point that must be born in mind by
any party wishing to do business in India. The opportunity is there, but the road is long
and arduous. Many companies have failed to win contracts but withdrawing because
they have not wanted to expend any more effort in the bidding process. The successful
companies have been the competitive ones, with the stamina and will to succeed, and
not necessarily those offering the best technical solution.
4.1
Current Technology(32,33)
4.1.1 Dugda I
Figure 14 shows the flow diagram for the Dugda I coal preparation plant, which
prepares coking coal. This plant originally comprised a deshaling Baum Jig and Tromp
baths for cleaning down to 13mm. A Komag Jig (a type of Batac Jig), froth flotation
and 75mm screen were incorporated in 1985 and a further screen in 1994. It is
interesting to note the use of the two Tromp baths, which is due to different washability
characteristics for the coarse and small coal. The addition of the froth flotation plant
illustrates the deterioration of the ROM coal quality.
Dugda produces a middlings product as well as the prime coking coal and a discard.
The froth product is included in the coking coal and the thickened tailings can be added
to the middlings, if the quality allows.
18
4.1.2 Dugda II
Figure 15 shows the process flow diagram for another coking coal plant, the Dugda II
washery in BCCL. Once again, froth flotation and Komag Jigs were added in 1985 and
1986 respectively and a 75mm screen was added in 1993. Of note in this flow diagram
is the fact that all raw coal is reduced to <13mm prior to cleaning, reflecting the need to
crush to small sizes in order to liberate the coking coal fraction. The principal
separation is carried out in DM cyclones. Originally, water-only cyclones (WOCs)
cleaned the <0.5mm fraction. Froth flotation is now used to clean the fines and the
product is included in the coking coal. Tailings from the froth plant are discarded in a
pond.
4.1.3 Patherdih
Figure 16 shows the process flow diagram for the coking coal plant at Patherdih. This
shows a deshaling Baum jig followed by DM separation. In this case, a Barvoys bath is
used for the 75-13mm fraction and DM cyclones for the 13-0.5mm fraction. A rotary
breaker was added in 1996. The addition of the rotary breaker is an interesting feature,
illustrating the potential for the use of rotary breakers for differential breakage and
deshaling. A froth flotation plant was added in 1995 and this is used to clean the
<0.5mm fraction, clean coal from which is included in the coking coal. Flotation
tailings are discarded to a pond.
4.1.4 Bhoujudih
Figure 17 shows the flow diagram for Bhoujudih coking coal plant. The Bhoujudih
process is based on using a DM bath for cleaning the >25mm fraction and a jig for the
<25mm fraction. This configuration is interesting as it illustrates the easier separation
for the smaller coal and, also the relatively difficult magnetite supply arrangements in
India. There is no fine coal cleaning at this plant, and the untreated <0.5mm fraction is
added, untreated to the coking coal, after dewatering.
4.1.5 Sudamdih
Figure 18 illustrates the process for the Sudamdih coking coal plant, which was visited
on the data-gathering phase of the project. In Sudamdih, all coal is reduced to <37mm
and two stages of DM cyclones are used to produce a clean coal and middlings. Froth
flotation has been included in the plant since its inception and tailings from froth
flotation are currently included in the middlings from the plant. The Sudamdih plant,
in common with many plants in India, is entirely fabricated from cast concrete columns
and floor beams, similar to that shown in Figure 19.
There is little structural steel within the plant, except local structures for the support of
equipment. As is common with plants of this construction, spillage has become
difficult to clean up and water flowing through apertures in the floor makes the working
environment unpleasant. The dewatering centrifuges for the clean coal and middlings
products are no longer in service as they were difficult to operate due to continual
blockage and dewatering is now by drainage in the clean coal bunker.
19
4.1.6 Moonidih
Figure 20 shows the process flow sheet for the Moonidih coking coal plant, which was
constructed in 1982. Once again, all the raw coal is crushed to <37mm prior to
cleaning and this plant is based on two stages of DM cyclones for the principal
separation. Moonidih was designed and constructed by Kopex, the Polish coal
contracting company, and is one of the tallest plants in India. The two-stage DM
cyclone separations are sequentially gravity fed and the primary feeds directly into the
secondary. This leads to a plant height >35m and intermediate floors with no process
equipment but only connecting pipework.
Fines treatment consists of two stages of WOCs, with the clean coal incuded in the
coking coal or middlings. The arrangement is unusual for two-stage WOCs in that
there is no recycling of the primary reject.
4.1.7 Lodna
Figure 21 shows the flow diagram for the Lodna washery, which is a recent
construction and is unique in India in that it incorporates Parnaby barrel washers and
cyclones. The plant produces coal for the cement market. The reason for selecting
barrel washers is not apparent, but they may have been selected for price and
portability, since the cement market does not require a high degree of cleaning.
4.1.8 Kargali
Figure 22 shows the flow diagram for the Kargali coking coal plant, which has
undergone several changes since its inception. The original plant was based on primary
and secondary DM bath separations for coarse coal and two stages of Baum jig
separations for small coal. The flowsheet was subsequently modified to utilise the two
Baum jigs in parallel and increase the plant throughput. A DM cyclone was also added
to improve the product quality from the small coal section. In the latest flowsheet, a
Batac jig has replaced the DM cyclones and small coal Baum jigs and Wemco drums
carry out the separation for the coarse coal.
The replacement of the DM cyclones was an attempt to overcome the difficulties
caused by poor-quality magnetite and the high maintenance requirement of DM
systems. A dry deduster was installed, in the early 1980s, along with the Batac jig (in
common with German technology of the period). Indian experience has been similar to
UK experience with dedusters, that in practice they have little effect due to becoming
blocked when raw coal moisture becomes too high. Although normally in the dry
season Indian raw coal moistures are quite low, during the rainy season, the raw coal is
very wet and the dedusters do not work at all. The dedusters at Kargali and elsewhere
are no longer used.
There is only minimal fines treatment, due to the original inclusion of the dedusters.
Fines are dewatered by cyclones and a thickener and added to the middlings or coking
coal, depending on the quality.
20
4.1.9 Kedla
Figure 23 shows the process for the Kedla coking coal plant. This plant is interesting
since the principal separation for both coarse and small coal is a Batac jig but the
middlings from the coarse coal Batac jig are crushed and rewashed in a DM cyclone.
Froth flotation is applied to the <0.5mm fraction and disc filters are used for dewatering
froth flotation concentrate.
4.1.10 Piparwar
Figure 24 shows the process for the Piparwar steam coal plant, which was also visited
during the data-gathering phase of the project. Piparwar is based on a single process
for cleaning coal; a Batac jig which cleans only the >20mm coal. All the <20mm
material is fed untreated into the product and is, in many respects, similar to the
majority of British coal preparation plants preparing coal for the power station market.
The plant was completed in 1996 and was designed and constructed by White
Industries of Australia.(34,35,36,37,38,39)
The Piparwar plant has unusual construction features for an Indian coal preparation
plant (see also notes in Appendix 1). The principal difference is that it is entirely of a
steel construction with concrete used only for foundations. As can be seen from
Figure 25, there is no side sheeting on the plant allowing good ventilation and light into
the plant. All floors are open grating and, consequently, the plant is considerably
cleaner than any other Indian plant visited during this study.
The plant has a modern computer control system and three ash monitors on the raw
coal and product belt conveyors. Although the product quality is monitored, there is no
automatic control system to control the product quality. Quality is controlled manually,
based on the ash monitor readings. As there is no storage of untreated smalls, quality
control is by adjustment of the float settings on the Batac jig.
The plant circulating water is cleaned by hydrocyclones and a thickener, with thickener
underflow pumped to a slimes pond. Supernatant water is pumped from the pond to the
plant and the pond is occasionally dug out to recover the slimes.
The 20mm untreated smalls screen is a steel-decked multi-slope (banana) screen and all
other screens are conventional double deck with steel upperdeck and woven wedge
wire bottom decks. The Epm for the jig is stated as being 0.11 at a separation of
1.85-1.9RD, indicating an Imperfection of 0.12-0.13 which is slightly inferior to the
performance expected of a Baum jig in the UK, for this size range.
Operators and plant management are issued with personal radios which is not a
common feature of Indian coal preparation plants where tannoys are the normal form of
communication.
Also of interest is the use of in-pit crushing at Piparwar. There is considerable interest
in this in India, to reduce the use of diesel fuel, which must be imported. Another
example is at Ramagundan where coal is crushed in-pit and delivered to a neighbouring
2000MWe power station.(40)
21
4.1.11 BSES/CLI/Spectrum Dipka

Figure 26 shows the intended flow diagram for the BSES-owned steam coal plant at the
Dipka mine operated by SECL. This plant has been designed by CLI Corporation of
Pittsburgh, USA, after testing was carried out under a grant from USAID(41). This
shows a very conventional partial washing scheme where the raw coal is crushed
entirely to 37mm topsize, screened dry at 10mm and the >10mm fraction is cleaned in
DM cyclones. Clean coal from the cyclones is blended with untreated fines to produce
a part-cleaned smalls product. This flowsheet, once again, illustrates the simplicity of
design which could become a feature of Indian coal preparation plants for production of
power generation if well-qualified western companies become involved in the design
and construction.
4.2
Process Selection
The use of jigs within Indian coal preparation plants is somewhat surprising given the
difficult washability characteristics of Indian coals. A review of the processes within
India shows that Batac jigs are used very commonly for principal processing. Baum
jigs are used for deshaling and on occasion for principal separation.
In India, Baum type jigs are considered to have higher Epm (lower efficiency) than
Batac type, but are cheaper to purchase. Batac jigs are, therefore, preferred for cleaning
applications (low-density separations) and Baum jigs are considered useful for removal
of shale prior to cleaning or deshaling (high-density separations).
DM systems are used but are not the prevalent system within India. The use of jigs
with Indian coals can only lead to losses of coal in discard far higher than would be
expected with DM systems. The reasons for the adoption of jigs rather than DM
systems are partly due to the poor availability of magnetite and, also, a lack of modern
materials which can withstand the wear from magnetite transport. DM plants installed
in the 1970s were not equipped with modern abrasion-resistant materials. In
consequence, life of materials was very short. CILs financing arrangements made it
impossible for plants to install expensive cast basalt or alumina tile and pipe, at a later
date. To our knowledge, HPDE piping has never been installed in India. Indias
overall economic situation during the 1970s and 1980s did not permit the importation
of suitable materials. In addition to considerations of wear, Indian magnetite is poor
quality, being low in magnetics, causing magnetite consumption as high 7kg/t.
Because of these factors, DM systems have a poor reputation in India. The percieved
ease of operation of jigs compared to DM system without suitable wear-resisteant
materials has inclined plant operators in favour of jigs for Indian coals.
The difficulty and cost of international travel means that the experience of Indian coal
preparation engineers is somewhat limited and they must rely on the claims of
equipment suppliers when assessing appropriate technology. The claims of KHD for
the Batac jig, during the 1970s, of having an Epm close to that for a DM cyclone, made
the jig an acceptable unit process. Indian engineers of the era had little experience
outside India and had virtually no opportunity to discuss modern coal preparation
practice with other countries.
22
Another consideration that has influenced the choice of process technology is the
pricing structure for coking coals in India whereby CIL is paid for the raw coal which
they produce and the consumer pays for the coal preparation processing. CIL has no
financial incentive to maximise the yield of coking coal or to minimise the losses of
coal in discard.
In keeping with most coal mining companies, it is not possible to obtain performance
data on installed equipment. The data on Piparwar (see Section 4.2.10) was disclosed
unofficially during conversation but no official figures are published for the
performance of Batac jigs in Indian coal preparation plants. However, based on the
information from Piparwar, the difference in yield, to produce 34% ash, using a jig with
Ep of 0.1 compared to a DM bath with Ep of 0.04 and using the Piparwar washability
data, could be as much as 3-4%.
The potential for improvement in yield offers and opportunity to increse the output of
coking coal from existing coal preparation plant and also to minimise the losses for
new steam col plants. This is particularly true of those plants that reduce the topsize of
the coal to <30mm before washing. The use of DM cyclones for this size, separating at
1.6RD to produce coking coal, should give an Epm of ~0.04 compared to a jig giving
an Epm of 0.17. This would make a significant difference in the plant yield for the
same product quality.
4.3
Specific Technology Requirements

In reviewing the specific technology requirements for cleaning Indian coals, it is
necessary to separate the requirements for coking coal from those of the requirements
of the power generation industry. Although there are some common areas between the
two markets, there is a different emphasis on quality control and product quality that
will lead to different technology requirements.
4.3.1 Steam Coal

In the case of steam coal, the general requirement for cleaning coal is and will be to
reduce shale levels in order to increase the CV of the product, thereby reducing
transportation costs and operating costs for power stations. The main technology
requirement, therefore, will be to minimise the loss of combustible material in the
discard from the coal preparation plant. Separations will consequently be carried out at
high density and it will also be necessary to minimise the quantity of water in the clean
product.
In all cases when cleaning Indian coals, as the degree of cleaning increases the loss of
coal into the discard will also increase. There is, therefore, an economic limit to the
degree to which coal preparation can be carried out and the specific characteristics of
Indian coal have been discussed in Section 3. In the case of cleaning coals for power
generation as the separating densities used will be high, in general the amount of NGM
will be less than that in the case of coking coal. However, the amount of NGM will
still be considerably higher than would normally be expected from European-style
coals.
23
It is an advantage that most power station coals will be derived from opencast mines
and the amount of fine coal within the ROM will be quite low, at <5% compared to the
10-20% that would normally be expected from a European underground mine.
Nevertheless, in order to minimise the addition of water during the coal preparation
process, cleaning of only coarse coal and blending of cleaned coal with untreated fine
coal should be the first approach in considering coal preparation processes. Therefore,
partial cleaning processes, as have been used in the UK for many years, and their
associated control philosophy and equipment could form the basis for the majority of
processes to be used for the power generation sector.
Except during the rainy season, ROM moisture contents are very low (even when water
spraying is carried out for dust suppression purposes). Clay content of ROM coals is
also low. Consequently, there will be little difficulty in dry screening coal at 20mm, or
even 6mm in some cases. Use of modern materials for screen decks such as
polyurethane and 3CR12 will also enable dry screening to be carried out at relatively
small sizes. As a result, partial cleaning of coal with untreated fines, topsize 6-20mm
should be possible in most cases.
During the rainy season, however, dry screening will be seriously impacted. Rainfall is
extremely heavy and during 1999 in some areas, 200-300mm of rain fell in a 24h
period. No dry screening process could cope with this level of weather and, indeed,
mining and all other operations must of necessity come to a halt during such inclement
weather.
Inevitably some fines will be carried over into the washing process and in common
with European practice, it will be necessary to recover, filter or centrifuge the fine
material in the water circuit for inclusion within the product. Careful consideration will
have to be given to the moisture content of such fine products. The addition of 1% of
moisture in the product would have a significant impact in comparison to the ash
reduction that the washing process is achieving. Centrifuges, (either vibrating basket or
screen bowl, depending on material size) and vacuum filters (either rotary drum or
horizontal belt) are likely to be applicable technologies for preparation of Indian steam
coal and are not currently well understood or used within India.
In an effort to minimise the use of water or addition of moisture to products, Indian
research organisations have been examining the possibilities for dry coal cleaning. In
particular, they have evaluated the use of selective breakage and rotary breakers are
currently the equipment of choice. CFRI has installed a batch rotary breaker at its
facilities in Dhanbad and is currently testing a number of coals for suitability for this
method of cleaning. Some commercial applications of selective breakage are currently
being used (see Appendix 1, Section 12.9) but these are on a small scale. Particularly,
Aryan Coal Beneficiations Pvt. Ltd. are cleaning coal for the cement market by using a
rotary breaker. Care will have to be taken when applying this technology, however,
since, in many cases, Indian coals can be quite tough and the associated rock can be
relatively soft and the degree of upgrading achievable will need to be assessed in every
case.
Discussions with research organisations such as CFRI and CMPDIL did not indicate
that any work was currently being undertaken with air tables or air jigs. These devices
24
may have some application in India and manufacturers with suitable drawings and
expertise should consider the application of their technology to Indian circumstances.
However, the best approach to minimising water consumption and moisture content of
the product is likely to be cleaning of as little coal as possible and that which is cleaned,
should be as large as possible with the products being dewatered to the fullest extent.
The review of current practice has shown that many existing plants have open- or
long-water circuits. The use of fully-closed short-water circuits would greatly benefit
water consumption (see also 4.4.3). A few researchers have assessed this possibility
but there is no widespread adoption of filtration of fine discard. The use of thickeners
and belt press filters, hyperbaric filters and associated equipment is a potential area for
exploitation.
Fine coal treatment in India has utilised WOCs and froth flotation but in the non-coking
coal context only WOCs would be applicable. The low rank of non-coking coals in
India does not permit the use of froth flotation. Spirals are, however, being considered
by CMPDIL and they will be reviewing their use at the Rajrappa pilot plant. It is
understood that teetering-bed separators, however, have not been applied in India, and
these should be applicable technology for non-coking coal cleaning.
Also in the context of steam coal production, the use of partial cleaning to achieve
low-loss and low-cost coal preparation for the required product quality will require a
product quality control system. To this end, it will be necessary to monitor product
quality in terms of ash, using automatic ash monitors and to ensure the proper blending
of untreated fines with cleaned coal. UK companies have the greatest experience with
this type of control technology since it forms the basis of all coal preparation within the
UK, at present. It would appear from the plants that are being constructed by
Australian or US suppliers that their degree of understanding of this type of process is
limited.
4.3.2 Coking Coal
In the case of coking coal, separations will be carried out at lower RD than for steam
coal separations. Also, in this case the product quality is the prime consideration and
the quality of discard is of secondary import. As a result of separations at low RD, the
quantity of NGM is very high, in many cases 50-60%. The accuracy of separation is,
therefore, of prime concern if the quantity of prime product is to be maximised. Some
of the existing coal preparation plants producing coking coal in India are based on DM
processes and also crush coal to much smaller sizes than would be typical for steam
coal preparation. The processes based on jigs will typically be producing lower yields
than would be normal for a DM system due to the amount of NGM and the
Imperfection of the jig.
As far as we could tell, little care is taken to minimise the loss of coal to the discard
from primary separations in coking coal plants. This is mainly due to the pricing
structure of coking coals. In India, coking coal prices are quoted on a ROM basis and
customers such as SAIL or TISCO pay CIL for ROM tonnage. The cost of coal
preparation is added to the price at cost. In effect, losses of coal are, therefore, paid for
by the buyer and CIL is able to sell such losses as steam coal in middlings or reject.
25
Historically, prices have been set to ensure that CIL are recompensed for making
coking coal available and take into account the sales of PSF as a by-product.
In the future, it may be possible to increase the yield of coking coal from certain coal
preparation plants. However, this would only be of benefit with a different pricing
structure and possibly only for private operators of coal preparation plant. A BOOT
operator may well consider that improvements in technology to increase the output of
coking coal would be beneficial. In this case, recleaning of discard or replacement of
the existing jig processes by DM processes may well be considered.
Coking coal processes in India commonly utilise froth flotation to clean <0.5mm coal.
Some use is being made of Nalco reagents to replace the more traditional pine oil and
kerosene froth flotation reagents. Future advances in froth flotation reagent technology
will be of interest and of use in India. Control of reagent dosage is poor in India and
modern control systems would help to reduce cost and increase efficiency
.
Currently, fine coal filtration is carried out using, in the main, disc filters or in some
cases drum filters and the application of more advanced filtration techniques using filter
presses and flat bed filters would be attractive in India. There is currently no use of
filtration aids in India.
4.3.3 Coal Handling and Blending
The increased use of coal and the perceived increase in demand, has led to
consideration of imported coal. CIL has announced that it plans to set up a blending
facility, whereby imported coal can be blended with indigenous coal to meet the MOEF
guidelines. The location of this facility is not yet known, but it will have to be located
carefully.
Some new power stations are being sited near to the coast and remote from the
coalfields. It makes sense for these stations to import coal, although the port
infrastructure in India is limiting on ship size. Coal traders are now importing coal
deep into the heart of India, largely for the cement market. There is the possiblility,
however, of importing steam coal in the same way and blending this with indigenous
coal.
Blending sites will need to be located at a point to reduce the re-handling of coal and
minimise the transportation. Ideally, this would be close to a number of power stations.
Given a suitable location, establishment of a number of coal blending facilities can be
expected and this will provide opportunities for UK companies who have the requisite
expertise. The facilities are likely to be low cost, however, and schemes developed will
need to be carefully considered to minimise capital cost, whilst providing low operating
cost.
The principals for this type of market will be the Indian coal traders such as Koyela
International Pvt Ltd and Coastal Energy. These companies are actively involved in
importing coal into India and arranging transportation to customers. Indian pundits
project this market to grow to ~20Mtpa in the near future.
26
4.3.4 Coal Preparation in General

In this study, it has become apparent that Indian operators often lack the necessary
skills for commercially-successful operation of coal preparation plants. This criticism
applies not only to the management but also to the operator level within the plant.
Efforts have been made in the past under technology transfer agreements and funds
provided by the Deparment for International Development (DFID), the ADB and the
WB to attempt to provide the necessary skills and training for coal preparation plant
operators. Whilst, in the short term, this has improved certain plants operations, the
skills learnt have not been carried forward and have not been spread outside the plants
in which they were originally applied. A key skill which could successfully be
provided by UK companies is the knowledge and experience of successful operation of
coal preparation plants. Operator and management training would provide substantial
economic benefits. As CIL has little interest in operating coal preparation plants, these
skills will likely be provided to private companies who take over the operation of
existing coal preparation plants or who are building new coal preparation plants(42).
No coal preparation plant in India has been certified for ISO 9000. It would be an
advantage for new plants or for privately-operated old plants to gain ISO 9000
accreditation. Accreditation would also improve management and operator discipline.
Control
In keeping with the wide range of age of coal preparation plants in India, the control
technologies are equally spread in age. Technologies from relay control logic using
individual analogue control loops and in older plants, pneumatic control systems are all
represented within the industry. More modern plants have incorporated microprocessor
systems such as the Sawang Washery and the Piparwar Washery(43).
Operations
Management and operator skills in Indian coal preparation plants are poor. There is a
tendency for managers who acquire qualifications and skills to move upwards in the
CIL organisation and to move away from collieries. Indeed, engineers with degrees
may never work at colliery level at all. In addition, operator training is poorly
organised when applied at all. Little attention is paid to optimising the coal preparation
processes employed or to carry out preventive maintenance in order to increase plant
availability. Planned maintenance schemes are rarely in evidence and maintenance is
normally carried out as a result of a breakdown. This is not entirely a result of poor
management but rather one of lack of cash, which would facilitate expenditure on
replacing equipment prior to its failure.
4.4
Infrastructure Requirements
Every coal preparation plant requires the following infrastructure:
power
water
land for plant and coal-handling facilities
facility for waste disposal
facility for product outloading
manpower
facilities for consumables and spares.
27
As mentioned previously, CIL does not propose to finance the construction of coal
preparation plants, but will provide the necessary infrastructure.
4.4.1 Waste Disposal
Even in the older coal areas in India, coal mines are located a reasonable distance from
each other. There is not the situation that existed in the UK, where neighbouring mines
were so close that there surface curtilages often interfered. In India, mines are typically
20km apart and, very largely, land area is available for the location of coal preparation
plants and their associated handling facilities. In a large number of cases, new coal
preparation plants will be constructed at an existing mine where there are already
facilities for power, water, land and waste disposal. As yet, waste dumps from coal
preparation plants are not a feature of the Indian landscape. This is because,
traditionally, the coking coals produced from the northern coalfields leave a waste
product that is suitable for thermal power stations. In the future, the production of
washed coal for power station use will generate larger volumes of waste that cannot be
burnt in conventional pulverised fuel burners. It will have to be determined on an
individual basis whether the waste materials from these new coal preparation plants
will be utilised, eg in a Circulating Fluidised Bed Combustor (CFBC) or will have to be
disposed of.
If disposal is the preferred option, then facilities will need to be available for disposal
of the waste. Large mines producing coal for thermal power generation are presently
opencast in India. Since opencast mines already produce large spoil heaps and voids
which must be back-filled, these will provide an opportunity for the disposal of discard
from coal preparation plants. However, CILs agreement will be necessary in order to
be able to dispose of the waste in this manner.
In the case where combustion of waste in a CFBC is contemplated, distribution of the
electricity or process heat generated will have to be taken into consideration and a
market for the particular product will need to be determined. The CFBC will, itself,
produce an ash material that will need to be disposed of. The opencast spoil heaps and
voids are potential disposal sites but it may be necessary to build an ash-containment
facility for the disposal of this waste. This would be particularly the case where ash
raises an environmental concern due to pH of leachate or its heavy metal content. It is
not likely that there will be any special uses for CFBC ash at mines; there is already
>100Mtpa of ash produced in India and the market for such materials is over supplied.
Fluidised bed burners are capable of burning low-CV fuel but, although less sensitive
than pulverised fuel burners, they are sensitive to changes in feed quality. In cases
where the quality of the coal preparation plant discard is highly variable, it may not be
possible to apply CFBC technology for the production of power generation. In other
cases where the primary coal preparation plant product is of better quality, the discard
quality may be controlled by further washing and producing, in effect, a middlings
product and a very poor-quality discard.
The optimisation of such processes is not trivial due to the complex relationships
between the value of the primary product, its yield and the yield and quality of the
middlings product required to ensure efficient generation of electricity(44). Such
28
optimisations can be carried out using computer-based coal preparation flowsheet

simulator programs, available in the UK.
4.4.2 Water
Most of the coal areas in India have acute water shortage. Despite the fact that Indian
coalfields are named for the river valleys in which they occur, eg Wardha Valley,
Damodar Valley, Mahandi Valley, Godavari Valley, the flow in these rivers varies
considerably from wet season to dry season. Generally in India, the wet season lasts
from July to September with some rain occurring in June and October. For the other
seven months of the year there is largely no rain whatsoever throughout India. In the
peak of this dry season in March, April and May, water shortages throughout India are
acute. Water is normally only obtained in these periods from aquifers and most water
storage facilities will run dry during this time. Ambient temperatures are typically
35_40C in the peak of the dry period and drop to 25-30C during the wet season in
most of the coalfield areas. It is for this reason that, although all of the existing coal
preparation plants are based on water processes, India would very much like to be able
to utilise dry processing.
As stated previously, India has a dry season lasting ~6-8 months. During this time,
little or no rainfall can be expected and levels of water, even in major watercourses,
will sink to very low levels. The availability of water and the usage of water within
coal preparation plants raises considerable environmental concerns and is a principal
concern addressed by any environmental impact assessment for the construction of coal
preparation plant. Figure 27 shows a full geological section from topsoil down to coal
measures. Beneath the topsoil lies a series known as the Kamthi, under which is the
Barakar series, which contains the coal measures. The Kamthi is a Carboniferous
deposit of poorly-consolidated sandstone. The Barakar is Carboniferous/Permian but is
well consolidated. In those areas where the Kamthi is present, it is almost always used
as a potable water aquifer. Water wells are, therefore, the most likely source of water
unless a nearby river can be tapped to provide the necessary water for the coal
preparation plant. In cases where borehole water is used, consideration will have to be
given to the effect on the water table and the availability of drinking water for the
surrounding population. In all cases, the environmental approval of coal preparation
plants will have conditions relating to the consumption of water within the coal
preparation plant. Companies will, therefore, need to give careful consideration to the
use of processes which consume less water.
4.4.3 Magnetite
Limited supplies of magnetite are available within India. Deposits are presently being
mined in Orissa and Karnataka for the production of iron ore. These deposits, whilst
magnetite rich, generally contain only 40-60% magnetics. The use of these materials
can and does, therefore, lead to higher consumption of raw magnetite than would
otherwise be the case. Additionally, magnetite from these mines is typically supplied
as a 15mm topsize material that needs to be crushed and ground to the necessary size
for the process for which it is intended.
There is also a Uranium Corporation plant located in Bihar which produces a fine
magnetite as a by-product of its uranium production. This material is delivered ready
29
for use and contains ~98% magnetics. However, its production is very low in quantity
and availability is intermittent. Although being used presently by CIL, notably by
BCCL, it is not considered as a viable long-term source for new major coal preparation
facilities.
The new plants being constructed by R&S and CLI are planning to import magnetite
for their processes. The cost of this is, in our view, small in comparison to the benefits
to gained from the use of DM systems.
4.4.4 Froth Flotation Reagents
Froth flotation is commonly used for the production of coking coal and froth reagents
such as pine oil, MIBC and the Nalco reagent are commonly used throughout the
coking coal fields. It is unlikely, however, that froth flotation will be necessary for the
production of thermal coal and the availability of these materials will be of little
concern.
4.4.5 Flocculants
Flocculants are not commonly used in the Indian coal industry. Tailings from froth
flotation plants are commonly thickened and are of such quality that, after filtration, the
material can be sold as PSF. As is typical with Gondwana coals, the clay content of the
raw coal is very low and the ash content of raw fine material is correspondingly quite
low. Fine material settles in thickeners at reasonable rates therefore and reasonable
solids concentration can be expected from thickener underflow. Clarified water quality
is not as good, however, as one would expect in Europe, USA, South Africa or
Australia but in most cases this will be recycled back to the process. In the future,
however, increased environmental concerns over the quality of water circulating
outside the coal preparation plant in emergency catch ponds, long closed-water circuits
and for tailings disposal, will provide increased pressure to further clarify water to
produce suitable quality discharge. The use of flocculants is presently considered to be
too expensive and there are no easily-available supplies. Coal preparation plant
operators requiring the use of flocculant will probably have to consider their special
importation.
4.5
Organisations Involved in Coal Preparation
4.5.1 CIL
All coking coal preparation plants within India are currently owned by CIL or TISCO.
Some of these plants are being, or will be, converted to produce some steam coal as the
coking coal reserves at particular locations are depleted. New coal preparation plants,
particularly those constructed for washing coal for the power station market, will not be
constructed by CIL. Their declared policy is that they have neither the cash nor the
resources to devote to the construction of coal preparation plant. They consider that
their business is the mining of coal and the production of raw coal. Any customer
wishing to purchase washed coal will have to make their own arrangements for the
construction and operation of coal preparation plants. CIL will supply land and
infrastructure but would prefer to have no contractual obligation directly with the coal
preparation plant. Their preference is to sell raw coal either directly to the user at their
30
coal preparation plant or to the coal preparation plant for the coal preparation plant to
sell onwards.
In addition, CIL is considering disposing of its existing coal preparation plants. Under
current Indian law, it would not be possible for CIL to retain ownership of the coal
preparation plant and to contract out its operation, as has been the case in the UK.
However, CIL would be prepared to give the coal preparation plant ownership to a third
party and for the third party to then operate the plant. CILs preference in this case is
that they would sell raw coal to the coal preparation plant owner and have the coal
preparation plant owner sell the products from the plant, the so-called
own-operate-trade (OOT) scheme. Such a scheme could provide business
opportunities for coal preparation plant operating companies from the UK, but careful
consideration would have to be given to the risks involved in buying and selling coal.
An Indian partner who would be prepared to take on this risk could satisfy concerns of
British companies who could take on the pure management role of the coal preparation
facility.
What is clear is that CIL does not have any interest nor will it have any influence on the
processes to be used in coal preparation plants. It will have an influence on contractual
arrangements for coal preparation plant insofar as they affect the sale of CILs raw coal
products. CIL is, therefore, not directly funding or undertaking any research into coal
preparation.
The organisations that will be driving coal preparation will therefore be the generators
and government organisations such as the Ministries of Power and Environment.
NTPC is committed to using coal preparation for its existing power stations in order to
reduce the cost of transportation. The SEBs will be more reluctant to invest, as they
have less money than NTPC. Some of the requirement for lower-ash steam coal will be
derived from blending imported coal. Importing also creates problems for SEBs, since
it requires foreign exchange. Despite more relaxed exchange controls, SEBs are in a
poor position to pay for foreign coal and coal preparation is likely to be their best
option.
4.5.2 TISCO
TISCO owns its own coal mines and coal preparation plants as well as using the coking
coal produced for the production of steel. In contrast to CIL, it is very much in the
interests of TISCO to maximise the amount of coking coal being produced and to
minimise the waste from the coal preparation plant. TISCO is also a private company
and less constrained by Government bureaucracy. It also has a more commercial
attitude than one normally finds with a nationalised company. TISCO would,
therefore, be far more receptive to innovative ideas that could reduce their costs, either
directly for coal preparation or indirectly by improving yield or steel production.
4.5.3 CMPDIL
A subsidiary of CIL, CMPDIL is the main repository of knowledge and experience of
coal preparation plant design within India. In its role as the engineering division of
CIL, CMPDIL is responsible for carrying out feasibility studies and design studies for
new facilities related to the coal industry. In the past, it has designed many of the coal
31
preparation plants which are currently in operation within India and a reference list of
CMPDIL plants is shown in Table 11. In addition to these projects, CMPDIL has
prepared designs for new coal preparation plants or additions to existing plants for ~30
other projects.
CMPDIL has constructed a 10t/h pilot coal preparation plant at Rajrappa. This facility
currently contains DM cyclones and a DM bath. CMPDIL will be increasing the extent
of the facility by incorporating a number of fine coal treatments including spirals and
froth flotation. It has not, as yet, considered the inclusion of elutriator or teetering bed
separators.
CMPDIL has also developed a rudimentary coal preparation plant simulation program,
allowing quick estimates of the product quality to be expected from certain separators
from a given raw coal washability.
CMPDIL is very keen to co-operate with foreign companies, either in carrying out
studies or in the design of coal preparation plant facilities for either greenfield sites or
for retrofits.
CMPDIL is employed either by CIL itself or by the subsidiary companies for carrying
out individual projects. It has branches in all the major coalfield areas and much of the
work for exploration and design is carried out at these branch offices. Coal preparation
expertise, however, resides in Ranchi and any contacts on coal preparation topics
should be addressed to CMPDIL there.
In addition to its work for CIL, CMPDIL is keen to undertake design projects and
consultancy projects for independent third parties. As mentioned elsewhere, it has
already co-operated with Montan Consulting to prepare a report on the benefits of
burning cleaned coal in Indian power stations and it is very keen to develop this side of
its business. As CIL is no longer interested in coal preparation, co-operation with two
parties in studies and the design of coal preparation plant is the only way for CMPDIL
to maintain its in-house capabilities.
In addition to its design and engineering capabilities, CMPDIL has an extensive coal
laboratory with a large sample preparation facility, two float/sink benches and
capability to carry out petrographic analysis, as well as the usual range of coal analyses.
CMPDIL would be a useful contact for any company considering an entry into the
Indian coal preparation scene as tt has, perhaps, the most extensive knowledge of the
technical requirements for coal preparation within India. This will be particularly
useful for those companies wishing to market equipment as a favourable opinion from
CMPDIL would carry considerable weight with individual subsidiaries that may be
responsible for the adoption of equipment. However, bearing in mind our previous
comments regarding CILs involvement in coal preparation, CMPDIL can be of
assistance but will not provide direct access to any market for coal preparation plant
services or equipment.
32
4.5.4 CFRI
CFRI is located in Dhanbad, Bihar and is responsible for a number of research projects
relating to coal and the summary of recent projects is given in Table 12. CFRI also
possesses a 20t/h pilot plant on its premises in Dhanbad. This pilot plant has recently
had installed a batch rotary breaker for the investigation of selective breakage. The
main plant comprises a 20t/h Batac jig, a 20t/h Wemco drum, froth flotation and a
newly installed 10t/h Baum jig. The pilot plant can be configured in a number of ways
in order to test rewashing of middlings and discard from the jig, as well as primary
preparation in the Wemco drum. CFRI has plans to construct a small coal washing
section with DM cyclones to extend its capability further.
CFRI is more scientifically orientated compared to CMPDILs engineering approach.
Nevertheless CFRIs staff have considerable knowledge of Indian coals and CFRI is
also a useful contact for gaining experience on the techniques and technologies
applicable for Indian coals.
4.5.5 NTPC
NTPC is the largest single generator of power within India. Although state-owned. it is
self-funding and encouraged to profit from the generation of electricity. It currently has
capacity to produce 16,795MWe which is 19% of Indias total and purchases some
70Mtpa of coal. It currently has two power stations that will be affected by the MOEF
guidelines, namely Unchachar and a station near Chennai. It expects in the future,
however, to have other stations affected as the 1000km limit presently adopted may be
reduced to 500km. All power generated by NTPC is fed into a national grid. Power is
not designated for any particular state and plants are located in areas where it is
considered that support is needed for the grid.
In anticipation of the increased adoption of the requirement for coal preparation, NTPC
is actively considering and funding research into coal preparation techniques and
technologies. It is particularly interested in dry processes and would like to have any
information on dry coal beneficiation that can be made available. NTPC has already
funded some testing of selective breakage at CFRI and considers that the results
obtained so far are quite promising. If UK companies wish to consider reviving air
table technology for trials within India, NTPC would be a useful first contact.
NTPC is committed to the purchase of lower-ash coal. In some cases, this may mean
that it will import coal, where it is viable to do so. However, it is convinced that it will
be funding more developments in the coal business. This will include coal preparation
plant construction and investment in mining projects.
As NTPC will be, at the very least, funding coal preparation plants it should be
approached by any company wishing to take a major presence in the coal preparation
industry in India.
4.5.6 SEBs
Each state within India has its own SEB. Each SEB is responsible for the sale and
distribution of power within its own state. SEBs may purchase power from NTPC as
33
well as operate their own generating stations. Some states are also purchasing power or
intend to purchase power from IPPs. SEB-owned power plants were constructed
during a period when central funding was available to SEBs for such construction.
This is no longer the case, however, and SEBs need to consider carefully before
undertaking such constructions.
As they provide power to many very poor communities and, in particular, to
agriculture, their cash flow is currently severely impacted. Power for irrigation to small
agricultural holdings is given free in order to promote agricultural production.
However, even those users who are obliged to pay can be notoriously slow in paying
for electricity. Most SEBs are, therefore, financially constrained and unable to fund
major new projects.
In order to carry out new generating projects within states, SEBs have adopted the
principal of buying power from IPPs. In the more industrialised and affluent states of
Maharastra, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, major power stations of over
1000MWe are being considered for construction by IPPs. However, the contractual
arrangements and payment guarantee arrangements for IPPs have made them extremely
difficult to develop. Given the financial standing of most SEBs, the IPPs require
guarantees of payment from the GoI. The GoI has been reluctant to provide unlimited
support for the states concerned and negotiations over suitable wording of guarantees
has been protracted. Nevertheless some guarantees have been provided to the
satisfaction of both project sponsors and lenders and several major IPPs are currently
close to financial close.
Some smaller IPPs, notably those in Tamil Nadu, such as the Krishnapatnam project,
are already under construction. These are smaller projects of up to 200MWe and are
entirely Indian financed. Indian financial institutions are prepared to undertake the
financing of these smaller projects where there is very little dollar capital investment.
They are all fueled with imported coal.
Most SEBs are more finanically constrained than NTPC and are, therefore unable, if
willing, to undetake the kind of investment contemplated by NTPC. Opportunities will
exist for BOT coal preparation and blending facilites.
4.6
Other Organisations Involved/Interested

Many private companies are involved in the coal preparation industry although few of
them are large or long-term players. Amongst the larger and longer-term participants
are McNally Bharat Ltd, Larsen and Toubro (L&T), Humboldt Wedag and
Vishakapatnam Bottling Company (VBC). Table 13 gives a list of companies known
to be involved in coal preparation.
It is difficult to locate companies who are interested in the future of coal preparation in
India because companies take a passing interest during the construction of coal
preparation plants and then fade in the intervening periods when there is no
construction. There appears to be little ongoing industry for the supply of spares and
contracting services for the maintenance and upkeep of coal preparation plants. Also
the companies which become interested in the construction of coal preparation plants
are not obvious contenders. The prime example of this is VBC which is Indias
34
principal bottlers of Coca-Cola. However, it became interested in the construction of

coal preparation plants and formed a joint venture company with R&S of the USA,
called Indo-US Washeries Ltd. The connection between bottling Coca-Cola and
building coal preparation plants is by no means obvious.
4.6.1 L&T
L&T has been involved in the construction of coal preparation plants in India for some
considerable time. Until recently, it had an agreement with Birtley Engineering of UK.
However, since the closure of Birtley, L&T is interested in acquiring similar expertise.
L&T is also Indias largest cement producer and a very large company with good
connections throughout India and ongoing relations with CIL and the power
companies. Table 14 shows a reference list for L&Ts coal handling plants.
4.6.2 McNally Bharat
McNally Bharat has been involved in the construction of coal preparation plants in
India since the 1970s when it was originally a subsidiary of McNally Pittsburgh in the
USA. The links with McNally Pittsburgh have been severed for several years and
McNally Bharat is now an independent company. McNally Bharat is one of the few
companies supplying equipment as well as coal preparation design expertise and it is an
agent for Siebtecnik.
4.6.3 Humboldt Wedag
Humboldt Wedag is partly owned by Klochner Humboldt Deutz of Germany and
supplies KHD equipment within India. Humboldt Wedag is, however, interested in
importing and supplying complementary equipment.
4.6.4 Metallurgical and Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd (MECON)
MECON is a Delhi-based consulting and contracting company with interests in the
construction of coal preparation plants. It is interested in co-operating with overseas
companies and has, until recently, had an arrangement with ST of the USA. This
association has been terminated and it is now looking for suitable technology partners
to provide coal preparation technology.
4.6.5 Koyela International and Coastal Energy
These companies are Indian-based coal traders who have taken some of the risk away
from coal importation for coal suppliers. Indian steam coal buyers are new to the
international market and impose contractual conditions on coal suppliers that are not
normal for the international market and unacceptable for well-know suppliers. The
Indian traders accept the risk that the suppliers will not, such as delivery to the
customers site and discharge port analysis. The supplier is then repsonsible for
delivery to Indian port and is paid on load port analysis.
35
The traders take reasonably large fees for accepting these risks. With their experience
in internal transportation, these traders will be the companies who will set up coal
blending facilites within India,
5.
ASSESSMENT OF MARKET POTENTIAL
5.1
Markets for Washed Coal

Figure 28 shows the current distribution of markets for washed coal. Whilst
demonstrating the current situation, it already demonstrates the increased use of washed
coal for power generation. Up until two years ago, this market was virtually zero. The
same is true of the cement market which, although still at a very low level, is rapidly
developing as the availability of cheap washed coal displaces the more expensive raw
coal of the same quality.
Figure 1 shows how the distribution of markets will change in coming years. As can be
seen, the production of coking coal will remain constant. However, its proportion
within the market will reduce as the amount of washed coal for power stations increases
to meet the MOEF guidelines.
5.1.1 Power Generation

Table 15 indicates the trend within the next 10 years of the coal requirement by
distance for power generation(45). If the current MOEF guideline of coals delivered
over 1,000km is reduced to 500km, the market for washed coal will increase to some
275Mtpa. The size of this market will dwarf the coking coal market and completely
dominate the production of washed coal.
5.1.2 Cement Manufacture
There is also likely to be an increased use of washed coal for cement manufacture
although this will remain a relatively small player, as cement production is not
presently or expected in the future to be a dominant user of coal. Also, cement
manufacturers require coal of ~25% ash. For the reasons stated elsewhere, this is
difficult to produce economically within India and production is likely to be limited to
specific coal deposits with low ash.
Cement manufacturers have started to import coal for blending. Even some of the
inland cement plants utilise low-ash internationally-traded coals for this purpose. The
logistical difficulties for importing coal and transporting to the interior may also make
it more attractive to cement manufacturers to use local coal, where possible. Coastal
cement plants are likely to continue to import low-ash coal.
5.1.3 Steel Making
There may also be some niche markets wherein high-value speciality products could be
marketed with some success. As SAIL and TISCO attempt to improve the productivity
of their blast furnaces and reduce the consumption of coke, they are increasingly
turning to the adoption of PCI. PCI coal is injected directly into the tuyeres of the blast
36
furnace providing additional heat and reductant, thereby lowering the use of coke.
Coals for this use need to be <10% ash, medium volatile and low in sulphur. In Japan,
USA and UK, coke consumption can be reduced by as much as 30-50% by the use of
PCI. Even a 10% use of PCI in India would result in a reduction of 4Mtpa in the use of
coking coal by SAIL and TISCO. Whilst the new large thermal coal mines in central
and southern coalfields could not produce such low ash material, it might be feasible to
produce a prime product from some northern coalfield mines. Although of a low yield
(~10%), the value of this material could easily make the venture profitable. Rejects
from the primary cut could be rewashed to produce steam coal middlings with yields of
perhaps 60-70%, leaving a discard of 60-70% ash.
5.1.4 Industrial Markets
Other than for cement manufacture, there is currently ~40Mtpa of coal used for
industrial purposes. Much of this is used in the manufacture of fertiliser, producing
process heat and some on-site power generation. Demand for industrial coal is
projected to grow and, in the absence of indigenous natural gas, growth does seem
likely.
The quality requirements for the market are variable, depending on the equipment used
at each plant. However, the range of coal quality required is from low ash (<20%) to
bulk PSF (40-50% ash).
Individual customers may provide opportunities for special high-value products. The
market will, however, largely be for similar coal to the cement industry and competing
with imports in coastal areas.
5.2
Current and Future Market Influences

The fundamental driving force behind the need for coal preparation in India is Indias
increase demand for energy(6,46,47,48,49,50,51). As has been explained elsewhere in this
report, demand for coal in India is set to rise at a substantial rate over the next
10-20 years in order to meet the increasing demand for energy.
This increase in demand for coal brings with the challenge of how the demand can be
met, physically, financially and at the same time maintaining environmental impact to
the minimum. Coal must be moved substantial distances and the transport
infrastructure will not be able to transport the volume of coal required at the current
quality. India is not a rich nation and must spend as little as possible to meet the
increased energy demand. Increased coal use will increase the emissions of carbon
dioxide (CO2) both directly and indirectly through the increased use of transport fuels.
The use of cleaner coal would bring the following benefits(52,53):
reduction of transport fuels to the reduction in the total volume of coal moved
reduction in the auxiliary energy used in power plants for coal handling and ash
disposal
improvement in boiler heat rate as a result of less slagging and fouling
37
reduced use of land for ash disposal
reduced pollution due to trace elements released by high temperature oxidation of

ash.
5.2.1 Transport
IR will not be able to fully support the increased production at current quality levels
and as rail freight rates increase over time, their burden on delivered heat prices will
also increase. At the Coaltrans Conference in 1997, the Minister of Transport stated
that IR would not be able to transport the expected demand for coal. Other forms of
transport (barges where possible) would be required, imports would have to replace
indigenous coals and coal preparation would be required to reduce the volume of coal
moved by the railways, whilst maintaining the same amount of delivered heat.
IRs difficults are two-fold. First, it lacks the track capacity for further expansion and
secondly, it lacks the rolling stock to move increased volumes.
Track capacity can be increased but only by large capital expenditure. Even though
India could raise the inherent capacity of its track by reducing the signalling distance to
10km, even this would be highly expensive. Currently, signals are mostly manual at
stations. Implementation of large-scale signal automation would be very costly and
tranining of operators on the scale required will take many years. New track is being
constructed where absolutley necessary but, often, this has been done and the expected
demand has not materialised. The result has been that IR is sceptical about increased
demand and reluctant to undertake major projects without the demonstrated need.
India has a stock of 400,000 railwagons for coal of the older BOX type (the designation
is probably due to the shape of the wagons) of 62t capacity. These are drop-door,
side-opening wagons that can be tippled to empty them. India has no rotary couplings
so the wagons must be uncoupled before being rolled into tipplers. Much of the
inventory is old and this type of wagons is being replaced by the new bottom-opening,
bottom-removal (BOBR) wagons, also 62t capacity. These new wagons can remain
coupled during unloading and this leads to faster unloading times.
In the case of a new power plant developed today, the probability is that it will be
required to provide its own rail wagons. These will be supplied under the own your
own wagon scheme and will be of the BOBRN type. Under this scheme, the customer
buys and supplies the wagons and leases them to IR. The customer then pays for rail
freight at the normal rates. If the quantity of coal to be delivered is reduced, then the
number of rail wagons which will be required for the transportation train would be
reduced, thereby reduce the capital investment required. Although CIL guarantee a rate
of return for the investment in rail wagons, there is always a risk in such a venture that
returns may not be achieved due to loss of wagons and other commercial risks.
A reduction in the tonnage of coal to be delivered, would reduce the cost of rail freight.
The economic impact of this will be discussed in subsequent sections of this report.
38
5.2.3 Economic Influences

Many of the papers reviewed for this study have considered several cases stating the
savings to be generated from reduced rail tonnages as a result of consuming lower ash
coal. Others have considerd the saving from reduced tonnage of coal burnt at power
stations. No single study seems to have considered all of the economic and finacial
benefits to be gained from the application of coal preparation and, where applicable, the
utilisation of plant waste. The debate on the economic benefits of coal preparation and
reduced coal ash still rages within India.
As stated above, the economic benefits for power stations to be gained from the use of
cleaned coal will be reduced rail freight costs, reduced auxiliary power consumption,
reduced slagging and fouling and reduced land area for ash disposal. In addition,
longer-term bebefits will include reduced mill wear, lower maintenance costs and
improved plant availability due to better product consisitency. As power generators
gain experience with the use of washed coals, it is likely that they will appreciate the
improvements to boiler performance and power generation costs(54).
Montan Consulting, in conjunction with CMPDIL, carried out a study, funded by the
ADB, reviewingd the status of coal production in India and evaluating the cost of
implementation of the utilisation of washed coal and went on to determine the
economic benefit and optimum methods of processing for a number of options(14).
They did not consider the use of CFBC of discard as they felt that this would be
unreliable at best and should not be taken into account as a general principle. However,
the findings of the study are summarised inTable 16.
The study considered the case of a 1000MWe power station initially burning 41% ash
coal and comparing with burning 34% ash coal, transporting coal over 1000km. The
study took account not only of the cash savings at the power plant due to reduced
operating cost but also considered savings on freight and included the increased cost of
mining additional coal and the cost of coal preparation.
As can be seen, the financial benefits are substantial at 426MRspa. However, when
considering the return on investment for the additional mining equipment and the coal
preparation plant, this saving is insufficient to offer a positive Net Present Value
(NPV), although the internal rate of return was ~10%. The study went on, however, to
consider the economic benefits of reduced land for ash disposal, reduced water
consumption and reduced environmental impact and, when added to the more direct
savings, this produced an increased economic benefit of some 251MRspa for a total
benefit of 675MRspa. This produces a positive NPV and very high rates of return of
50-70% depending on the case. The underlying assumption, however, for this study
was that the pricing regulation system currently in force in India will be terminated and
a new system based on a cost per heat unit would be in place. Under any scenario
utilising the existing payment system for coal based on UHV and the grading system,
no economic benefit can be derived from the preparation of coal.
Other authorities have studied similar cases; most notably Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd
(BHEL) who considered a 250MWe power station and also compared a base coal of
40% ash and a clean coal of 30% ash(48,55). BHEL also considered the installation of
CFBC systems but did not consider any benefits from environmental issues such as
39
reduced land use. Again, financial returns were encouraging despite the higher initial
cost. The BHEL study is based on the existing pricing system.
Other authorities(2,41,47,56,57) have all considered the freight savings due to the increased
CV of washed coal in comparison to the current use of raw coals. In all cases, it is
clear that there is an economic benefit to be derived from the reduced freight costs.
However, the overall cost and benefit is more difficult to evaluate. Not all of the
pundits have considered all of the implications. The most authoritative study is the
Montan Consulting report which does consider all of the relevant factors, but does,
however, make the assumption that prices will be deregulated. At its time of writing
(1998), it was the Montan reports recommendation that prices be deregulated. Price
deregulation is now partially underway with Grades A-C being fully deregulated at
present. Grades D-G will be deregulated during the year 2000, clearing a way for the
derivation of clear financial benefits from the use of coal preparation.
Of course, the obvious conclusion from this study is that generation entirely at the mine
site would be a lower-cost option than transporting coal over any distance, a possibility
propounded by others.(30) However, this analogy cannot be carried to its conclusion,
since the cost of transmitting electricity over distances of 1000km, are excessive and
would require considerable infrastructure in ultra high-tension direct current
transmission systems.
What is clear, however, is that the economic case for coal preparation is not easily
made. Each linkage of mine and power station will have to be evaluated individually
and commercial considerations, such as the robustness of the market, will be of critical
importance.
The MOP believes that the result of international pressure will be to gradually increase
the CV of coals burnt in power stations and reduce the quantity of ash for disposal(58).
As this trend increases for power stations located remotely from their coal sources, the
heat content of discards from the coal preparation plants will increase. This is an
unavoidable consequence of the difficult washability characteristics of Indian coals and
the inherent efficiencies of processes likely to be employed. Even with the most
efficient DM processes, it will be impossible to avoid significant heat losses in discard.
In order to make use of this wasted heat, minemouth projects for the utilisation of low
CV wastes will become a necessity.
The MOP (see Section 12.3 in Appendix 1) is convinced that the only effective way of
ensuring that coal preparation becomes firmly established in the supply route for power
stations is that its benefit should be an economic one and easily definable.
The use of CFBC to burn low-quality coarse and fine wastes is likely to be a
requirement for economic justification for coal preparation. From an environmental
standpoint, the disposal of coal preparation plant waste is more acceptable than disposal
of ash. Coal preparation plant waste is relatively inert and inclusion in old mine
workings is not likely to cause any pollution. In addition, ash from CFBC plant would
be better disposed of at a mine site, where it could be diluted with overburden and
placed with the mine spoil heaps. No additional land would be required for disposal of
the ash and the land needed at the remote power station would be reduced. The
40
economics of the reduction in land use have not been taken into account in all of the
studies made into the economics of preparation for power station coals.
There are small projects of this type currently being operated in India. Examples are at
Jamadoba, Moonidih, Katarah and Rajrappa coal preparation plants(59,60). These
projects are currently of the order of 5-10MWe and generate power for use at the mine
at which they are located. The difficulty with this approach is that the generation units
are small and cannot supply power into the grid. Power is only utilised within the
colliery and at times when colliery utilisation is low, the power plant can have
difficulty in turning down to a low level of electricity production. Conversely, when
the power plant is unable to generate for any reason, it is necessary to buy very
expensive electricity from the power grid. This is a situation that has also been
encountered by collieries in the UK generating electricity from methane drainage.
This situation could be avoided by construction of larger units that would generate
significant quantities of power (100-200MWe) whereby the power could be fed,
economically, into the grid. This is an area of potentially significant growth for UK
companies who have the relevant technologies for the construction of 100-200MWe
power generation units based on atmospheric CFBCs.
5.2.4 Environmental Influences
In 1997, the MOEF issued guidelines for implementation in July 2000 that all power
stations buying coal from mines >1000km distant must burn washed coal of <34% ash.
This guideline was issued for the purposes of benefiting Indias total environment and
reducing the use of transport fuels for delivering coal from mines to power stations.
Whilst this guideline is helpful and will result in the necessary construction of several
coal preparation plants, in itself, it would not be a good reason for having a very
optimistic view on the construction of coal preparation plants, in the future.
Environmental guidelines intended to lead industry in a particular direction often have a
way of failing to meet the primary objective. Industry can be quite inventive in
meeting the guidelines in ways that are unexpected. An example of this in the UK is
the Landfill Tax, which has not encouraged waste recycling to the extent originally
intended. Landfill tax was originally set at a level that does not make it economically
attractive to re-cycle rather than tip waste material. The threshhold level would be
some six times higher than the original tax level. The initial level of tax was set after
considerable lobbying by industry. The result is that legal tipping continues at the same
rate and there has been an increase in illegal tipping to avoid the tax.
India has a similar situation with the MOEF coal quality guidelines. The target ash
content is less stringent than the 28% recommended in the original study by Mott
Ewbank, because of industry lobbying. We understand that power stations will now
need only to use an annual average of 34% rather than a maxium for individual
deliveries of 34%. Power stations are also considering importing more coal (lower ash)
and blending to meet the MOEF requirements, resulting in an increase in Indias
foreign currency requirement.
In addition to the economic benefits to power stations, the MOP is fully aware of world
opinion and current concerns over greenhouse gases. India is a major producer and
41
consumer of coal but has not, as yet, signed the Kyoto Agreement. The MOP is,
however, fully aware that India cannot ignore world opinion and it is likely that
increased pressure will be brought to bear by developed countries, particularly those of
Western Europe, to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. India does not have the
benefit of significant reserves of natural gas nor, indeed, oil and it would require an
investment of too large an amount for significant production of electricity by nuclear
means.
In order to achieve any economic growth of significance, India will require in the future
to generate additional electricity. Its only means of generating that electricity is by the
combustion of coal. Given an increase in world pressure to reduce greenhouse gases
emissions, India can only attempt to increase the efficiency with which it utilises its
coal resources.
One of the most significant impacts on power stations will be the reduction in land use
for ash disposal. Although some pulverised fuel ash (PFA) is utilised for cement fill
and the manufacture of lightweight building blocks, this is small in comparison to the
total production of ~110Mtpa. A reduction of PSF from 45% ash to 34% ash would
reduce production of PFA to 70Mtpa, or 35% on current volumes. This reduction
offers a considerable incentive to the generators to use cleaner coal.
5.3
Factors Influencing Implementation of Coal Preparation Technologies

Many British companies in the coal preparation industry have traded in India, in the
past. Most of these have found India to be a difficult market in which to trade with
Indian companies are frequently trying to take unfair advantage by retaining technology
outside of the spirit or letter of agreements with overseas companies. To some degree,
this situation still exists, but recent globalisation of Indian economy and the realisation
within India that it will be necessary to maintain consistent external links with overseas
companies providing technology, has greatly eased this situation.
Nevertheless, India remains a relatively poor country and reluctant to utilise foreign
exchange.
5.3.1 Commercial Barriers

In considering the construction of major capital projects, there are two principal
concerns:
(i)
the source of capital funds
(ii)
the source of revenue to repay the capital funds.
For a company wishing to take equity in a project in India the principal concern will be
the source of revenue to repay the initial investment. IPPs in India have sought to
obtain guarantees of payment from the central government as being the only
creditworthy entity in a chain of revenue streams, which includes SEBs. In
constructing coal preparation plant facilities, it will be the power plants that will
generate the cash stream to fund the coal preparation plant. The source of funds for the
power station may be the SEBs or may be the newly-formed National Power Company
42
(NPC). It is the lack of a creditworthy guarantor that has lead to the severe delays in
the implementation of IPP projects. Many of these projects, despite being termed fast
track have been in negotiation for some seven years and none have yet achieved
financial close.
The principal barrier, therefore, to equity investment in India in coal preparation plant,
which could be considered infrastructure, is assurance or cash flow to provide a return
on initial investment.
In considering contracting only construction of coal preparation plants, the credit
worthiness of the buyer will be the contractors main concern. If the buyer is funded by
creditworthy financial institutions, which includes major Indian banks, then the funds
may well be assured. The lower risk associated with such an arrangement does, of
course, mean that the expected returns from this type of involvement in the Indian coal
preparation market would be lower than an equity investment.
5.3.2 Manpower
A principal requirement for coal preparation plants will be manpower. Whilst
manpower is plentiful within India and CILs manning levels are relatively high, any
new coal preparation plant considered for construction by UK companies would
obviously consider the adoption of a low manpower process design and control
strategy. As the coal preparation plant would not be a facility owned by CIL, it would
not be necessary to adopt Indian manning levels. Companies will be prepared,
however, to adopt higher manning levels than would be normal in Australia, USA,
South Africa or the UK.
Many of the new coal preparation plants will be constructed in areas where coal
preparation has not been previously applied. In these cases, there will not be a
readily-available supply of trained manpower. Companies will need to establish
training programmes which will need to include fundamental training on the principals
of coal preparation as well as detailed training on day-to-day operations. It is likely
that training programmes that were previously used in the UK, such as the City and
Guilds 040 and 051 courses would be applicable to these areas. Having trained
manpower to a reasonable level, however, companies should expect that this manpower
is likely to be a desirable commodity should there be any neighbouring coal preparation
plants.
In addition to operators, management themselves will have to be trained in the
operation and management of coal preparation plants. The education level of
management staff is reasonably good. Many universities produce reasonable
engineering degrees and it will be possible to find good high-level management. The
same situation will apply as with operators, however, that having been provided with a
high level of training by the coal preparation plant owner, they will become a desirable
commodity and will seek promotion and advancement, possibly in other locations. A
fundamental difficulty in the management of any project in the mining industry in India
is that managers with good qualities and skills are often very mobile. Engineers with
degrees are usually ambitious and will not be satisfied with location at a coal
preparation facility for any length of time. Turnover of lower management can be
expected to be high.
43
5.3.3 Rail Transportation

Most coal preparation plant constructions will be large and typically 1-2000t/h. In
these circumstances, the disposal of products will most certainly be by rail. Whilst it
will be the coal buyer in most cases who will be responsible for the construction of the
rail link to the coal preparation facility, coal preparation plant constructors will need to
give consideration to the type of rail-loading facilities to be used. As discussed
previously, new facilities will be based on BOBRN wagons, each containing 62t of coal
in rakes of 36 wagons. IR offers a discount on rail freight for loading in <4h and
guarantees to leave locomotives coupled to the train if loading can be accomplished
in <6h. Although the times are quite generous by UK or world standards, it does mean
that consideration will have to be given to the use of rapid-loading facilities.
Consideration should also be given to the construction of a siding for the receipt of
consumable materials and spare parts. There is an extensive road network throughout
India and, indeed, much of Indias freight travels by road. However, the roads are
generally of poor condition, the trucks are generally limited to 10t or 14t payload, are
often also of poor condition and certainly of old design. Therefore, deliveries of spare
parts can be expected to be somewhat unreliable and spares holdings should be
expected to be somewhat higher than would be normal in the UK, USA or Australia.
Although having a poor reputation for reliability in the past, IR has improved
considerably and the adoption of a siding to accept deliveries of spares and
consumables would be an advantage.
Consideration can be given to importing magnetite for specific projects. South African
or Swedish magnetite containing >90% magnetics could easily be financially viable.
Magnetite could be imported through the ports of Paradip or Visakhapatnam and
transported by rail to the coalfields.
5.4
Commercial Options
The growing use of coal preparation in the Indian steam coal market and the increased
technology demands placed on the production of coking coal from existing Indian
sources will create a large market for coal preparation plant construction and equipment
purchase. This growth will present a commercial opportunity to UK companies with
established products and expertise. However, companies wishing to take advantage of
these opportunities must approach the Indian market with considerable cautione. The
following sections will consider the commercial approaches required for various supply
sectors.
5.4.1 Coal Preparation Plant Construction

The construction of coal preparation plant will be a major sector. Coal preparation
plant contractors within the UK will wish to consider the possibility for involvement in
the construction of new coal preparation plant in India. The first consideration in any
involvement in India is to form an association with a local company. In the case of the
construction of coal preparation plants, the company, of necessity, will have to be large.
A further consideration of the company involved will depend on the UK contractors
wish regarding the type of involvement. Where contractors wish only to build coal
44
preparation plant and not to invest, the contractor will wish to form an alliance with a
company that is well-connected to the power generation industry.
It should also be borne in mind that India possesses a wealth of very cheap engineering
skills. Detailed engineering, construction of structural steel work and erection staff are
well supplied from indigenous sources. The UK contractor would not consider the
supply of such skills from the UK since high costs in the UK would make supply
within India uncompetitive. The UK contractor will wish to supply those skills and
items of equipment that are either unavailable within India or are better supplied from
the UK. Key skills that can be provided from the UK are process design, equipment
layout and project management. Contractors should be prepared to establish an
expatriate community in India for some period prior to the commencement of
construction and for some period afterwards.
For those contractors who are contemplating an investment in the construction of coal
preparation plant, the opportunities are somewhat greater. There is less competition in
this particular market and foreign companies who have access to secured capital will
have a distinct advantage in the market. There will also be opportunities for trading of
coal within India in the future which might offer improved security of cash flow since it
will not rely on payments from a SOI with an insecure financial status.
The value of coal preparation plants ~$30-50M is marginal in terms of non-recourse
project financing. A contractor wishing to invest in this type of coal preparation
opportunity will, therefore, be a large company, either in its own right or a subsidiary
of a substantial corporation. In this way corporate debt may be used which, although
exposing the company to increased risk, will reduce the cost of debt.
This type of investment may also include an integrated CFBC power station producing
~100-200MWe. In this case, the contractors may wish to consider an association with
companies able to provide such power facilities in addition to their own contracting
abilities. The cost of construction of the power station will be considerably more than
the cost of the coal preparation plant.
5.4.2 Equipment
Those companies wishing to supply major components of coal preparation plants such
as jigs, screens, DM baths, etc. should consider the possibility of manufacturing
equipment within India under some form of exclusive licence. This has been the path
for sales of major equipment in India in the past and companies have had some
difficulty maintaining the confidentiality of their intellectual property. Whilst the risk
of this situation is still present in India, the current business climate is less protectionist
and more Indian companies see the opportunities of being able to import ever more
sophisticated technology.
It is unlikely that suppliers of large equipment with a high manufacturing content, such
as jigs, would be able to compete if the equipment is entirely supplied from the UK.
UK labour is far more expensive than Indian and heavy equipment manufactured in
India would be more competitive. UK equipment suppliers will be best able to
compete by carrying out the engineering and design functions in the UK and have
manufacturing done in India.
45
Suppliers of smaller equipment will be able to compete, where the labour element of
the equipment cost is low, such as in instrument and control equipment, or where
specialist materials are used in manufacture.
The simple message, however, is to carry out as much manufacture in India as is
possible in order to utilise low cost local labour. In this respect, India could also
become a manufacturing base for UK companies, to improve their world-wide cost
effectiveness.
Direct sales to coal preparation plant operators will be limited in the short term, as the
major operator is CIL, who have no interest in improving their coal preparation
facilities for the reasons given previously. Equipment sales will be through major coal
preparation plant constructors.
In the longer term, however, we believe that the coal preparation indistry will be
privatised and sales to end users will increase. The pace of privatisation will determine
the timing of this development.
5.4.3 Plant Operation
As indicated previously, Indian coal preparation plant management and operators lack
the degree of training and skill associated with western operations in the UK, Europe,
USA and Australia. Also, given CILs lack of willingness to undertake coal
preparation operations and, indeed, their wish to divest themselves of their coal
preparation operations, there will be opportunities to take over the operation of coal
preparation plants.
It will certainly be possible to take over operations directly from CIL, but this may
expose the operator to a risk he is unwilling to take in trading coal on the Indian
market. A likely route to supply this type of service is, therefore, for UK companies to
associate with Indian companies who have a desire to enter the coal trade within India.
The UK company can supply the necessary expertise for coal preparation plant
operations, train manpower and ensure that the plant runs at its most efficient level.
This will ensure that plant losses are minimised, product quality control is maximised
and assist in maintaining a market position for the trading company. Opportunities will
become apparent in both the coking coal and the non-coking coal section of the Indian
coal market.
5.4.4 Services
In addition to coal preparation plant operations, ancillary services could also be
provided to Indian coal preparation plant. These services could include the provision of
maintenance facilities, analytical services, training and the provision of consultancy for
technical and quality assurance.
Some UK companies have already established some connections in the Indian market,
particularly in analytical services. However, if western companies can become more
established in the operation of coal preparation plants, then the provision of services by
western companies could become more normal.
46
A revival of the City and Guilds 040 and 051 courses would be most valuable in India.
UK training companies could provide organised sessions in India with links to UK
educational establishments for qualifications. Such UK-based qualifications would be
highly sought after in India.
5.4.5 Fluidised Bed Combustion (FBC)
Although FBC is not a coal preparation technology, in our view it is a necessary
adjunct to the implementation of coal preparation for the power generation sector. For
a large mine producing several million tonnes of coal per annum, the production of
useable waste will be considerable. It is likely that power stations of up to 200MWe
may be possible based on the combustion of coal preparation plant discard. The cost of
such a power plant would be several hundreds of millions of dollars and would be far
larger than the cost of the coal preparation plant. Companies wishing to be involved in
the construction of coal preparation plants may, therefore, wish to form joint ventures
or alliances with companies capable of providing the power station development. Such
an integrated approach would be attractive to the GOI, as well as helping to defray the
risks involved in equity investment in coal preparation plant. UK companies such as
ABB ALSTOM and Mitsui Babcock Energy Ltd may be able to provide suitable power
station expertise when in conjunction with the larger UK coal preparation contractors
such as Baker Process and Kvaerner.
5.4.6 Control Systems
Coal preparation plant control is an area where India, at present, has a very low
standard. The Piparwar washery, as constructed by White Industries, has a great deal
of control equipment which is not normally apparent on the majority of Indian coal
preparation plants. Density control systems are in evidence for magnetite systems but,
very often, these have fallen into disrepair and subsequent manual control of magnetite
density is the norm.
Material weighing and plant material balances are not commonly determined and there
is considerable scope for companies that can supply robust equipment which will
provide a material balance for the plant and the associated control facilities. Ash
monitoring, moisture monitoring and the usual level controls etc., could also be
usefully applied to both existing and new coal preparation plants within India.
It is likely, however, that such equipment will only be of interest to private operators of
coal preparation plant for reasons given above concerning the lack of financial benefit
to CIL for the efficient operation of their plants.
5.5
International Activity in India

Although in the past, UK companies have been very involved in the provision of coal
preparation plant and services to the coal industry in India, the current level of activity
and the provision of equipment and services from UK companies is very low. The
USA and Australia have provided a high level of service and formed strategic alliances
with Indian companies and now stand in a good position to provide services and
equipment into India. Germany has constructed several coal preparation plants in India
and continues to be active in marketing products through KHD.
47
The principal US companies in the coal preparation market are R&S of Chicago and
CLI Corporation of Pittsburgh. Both these companies are actively involved in the
construction of coal preparation plant, backed by services provided by the
US government.
When establishing its involvement in the construction of the Kalinga Washery in
Madhya Pradesh, R&S wase able to organise funds from USAID and carried out a good
deal of test work at the Pittsburgh Energy Technology Center (PETC) and at CFRI.
CFRI carried out the basis washability tests and PETC carried out a coal preparation
plant simulation using its in-house coal preparation simulation program. This work
formed the basis of the plant design carried out by R&S and also established R&Ss
credibility within the Indian coal market.
R&S also came to an agreement with VBC and formed a joint venture company, the
Indo-US Washery Company, for the construction of coal preparation plants in India.
In addition to the Kalinga washery, R&S is also involved in the design of a coal
preparation plant for Dipka and Bharatpur.
CLI has formed a joint venture with ST to construct a coal preparation plant at Dipka.
This plant will be commissioned by the end of December 1999 and is described
elsewhere in this report. CLI has benefited from the pioneering efforts of R&S and has
also used CFRI for test work to facilitate their plant design.
From Australia, White Industries has been successful in the construction of the
Piparwar coal preparation plant and mine, in the vicinity of Ranchi, now operated by
CCL. Although funded by WB loans, White Industries has been highly successful in
establishing itself as a credible coal preparation contractor within India.
Sedgeman Associates of Brisbane, Australia has carried out several studies on behalf of
the ADB and CIL, funded by Australian Overseas Aid. Although the amount of this
aid is relatively small, it does help to establish the credibility of Australian contractors
within India. The continued presence of Australian companies such as BHP and
Rio-Tintos Coal Division (although Rio-Tinto is a UK company, its coal division is
operated from Australia and is, generally, considered to be an Australian-affiliated
company) helps to maintain Australia as a country associated with new and developing
technology in the coal industry.
The difficulty suffered by Australian and US companies is having to establish their own
position and credibility within India. UK companies are already well established and
have their own credibility within India. This would include companies which have not
previously traded in India as the Indian coal industry regards the UK as a source of
good technology. Previous associations with BCC and other companies that continued
to provide services to CIL through aid programmes have already established UK
technology as a market leader in the Indian mind. This position should be capable of
exploitation by UK companies.
48
5.6
Financing Coal Preparation Developments

As stated previously, one of the options for the financing of large coal preparation
plants will be the use of project financing, although the value of a coal preparation plant
is marginally applicable for financing by project finance.
In general, it is not difficult to fund projects within India as India has a reasonable
international credit rating.
The credit rating for individual companies within India should be established and this
can be done through the local credit rating agencies. The principal credit rating agency
in India is Credit Rating and Information Services India Ltd (CRISIL), with
headquarters in Mumbai. Other suitable financing agencies to contact would be the
Indian Development Bank (IDB) in Mumbai and the Industrial Credit & Investment
Corporation of India Ltd (ICICI), also in Mumbai.
Some financing in the form of grants or aid may be possible through DFID, particularly
for research. DFIDs current policy is to fund projects that will have a direct benefit on
the environment or improve the social welfare of the underprivileged. The application
of coal preparation will benefit Indias environment and, indeed, the worlds, but these
benefits would need to be seen as direct.
Another financing option would be export credit through the UK Export Credits
Guarantee Department (ECGD). The ECGD considers India to be one of the strongest
economies in Asia. Despite the difficulties in the Far East economies of last year, India
retained a considerable foreign exchange balance and contained domestic inflation to a
reasonable level. Export credit is available for normal trading operations for the supply
of equipment and services and, also, longer-term loans for project financing.
Companies considering supplies of high value to India should contact ECGD to
establish the precise requirements for export credits for their particular supply.
6.
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
6.1
Coal Preparation Options

The largest market for new coal preparation plants in India will be in the power
generation sector. Several options are available from simple crushing and screening
with no beneficiation up to full cleaning of all sizes. These options generally fall into
three categories:
(i)
Level 1 crushing and screening with no beneficiation
(ii)
Level 2 crushing and screening cleaning coarse coal only
(iii)
Level 3 crushing, screening and total cleaning.
The first level is, in effect, the current level of coal beneficiation at Indian mines
producing coal for PSF. Level 2 is being applied to the Piparwar and BSES Washeries
and is part of the option for the Kalinga Washery. Level 3, to our knowledge, has not
49
been considered for any new plant for power generation in India, except as a process
option for the Kalinga plant. The Kalinga plant, however, is not fully cleaning as coal
will only be cleaned down to 0.5mm, material <0.5mm will be added to the product in
its raw state.
As the level of cleaning increases, the cost of coal preparation will also increase and the
yield of clean coal will decrease. To some degree it may be possible to increase the
yield for Level 3 washing by reducing the topsize of the coal to be cleaned. However,
this will need to be the subject of some investigation.
Several studies have been carried out to evaluate the costs and benefits of different
levels of coal preparation(56,61,62,63,64). There is no general conclusion which can be
drawn other than the specific benefits to be derived from the level of washing need to
be evaluated on an individual basis(65).
The difficulty of cleaning minus 0.5mm coal for PSF in India, however, leads to the
belief that Level 2 coal preparation will be the most widely applied process technology
for Indian PSF. Level 3 coal preparation may be an option at some later date when
power station operators have further assessed the benefits of improved quality coal on
their own costs. An increase in coal price will be required in order to fund the
additional coal processing and inevitably, heat will be lost in the coal preparation
discard. This will need to be utilised in order to improve the economics.
Other possibilities for improving plant efficiency have also been investigated such as
recycling and retreating middlings in DM cyclone systems(66).
In examining the washability of Wardha Valley coals, which contain higher sulphur
than elsewhere in India, workers have considered the effect of coal cleaning on the
sulphur within this coal. In many cases in the Wardha Valley, the sulphur tends to be
pyritic in nature and, therefore, reports to discard. Therefore, there may be some
potential for utilising the discard as a source of sulphur within India(67,68,69).
6.2
R&D Specific to India

This study has highlighted a number of areas where Indias coal preparation plants
could be improved. Considerable improvement could be achieved by the systematic
application of well-proven technology as it is used in the UK, USA and Australia.
India does, however, have some specific difficulties with its coal that could benefit
from further research work carried out with the expertise available in the UK. It is
stressed that, in common with the provision of other equipment and services to India, it
will be important in carrying out R&D work, that work which can be readily carried out
in India should be carried out in India and the UK organisation should only provide
those expertise and facilities which are not available within India. Specific areas where
R&D from the UK could provide benefit in India are discussed below.
6.2.1 Wet Beneficiation

Due to the difficulty of washing Indian coals it would be beneficial to evaluate the
potential for increased plant efficiency by the reduction of topsize of the feed to the
50
plant. This is particularly the case for the coking coal sector where it could be
beneficial to reduce the topsize of the feed to the coal preparation plant to
<13mm(70,71,72). Particular techniques for size reduction will need to be examined in
order to minimise the quantity of minus 0.5mm material produced. Although this
measure sounds extreme, the benefits to India from increased production of coking coal
and increased coking coal reserves could be substantial. The application of coal
preparation to smaller sizes may increase the coking coal reserve as most new coal
deposits have not been evaluated for the yield of coking coal at this topsize. This
would not be dissimilar to the situation in some areas in Australia where a coking
fraction of <10mm can be extracted from raw coal with topsize of 50mm. Evaluation
of this potential could be the subject of co-operation with an Indian partner.
One of the effects of reduced topsize in coal preparation would be an increase in the
generation of fines. Work has already been carried out on how to improve the size
distribution of coal preparation plant feeds. The application of UK technologies such
as MMD crushers to reduce fines could prove beneficial for those applications using
small topsize(73).
Other workers have investigated the use of microwaves to increase comminution(74).
6.2.2 Dry Beneficiation
With its very dry weather for some 9 months of the year, India suffers severe water
shortages. Also, the degree to which coal is required to be cleaned for power
generation under the present MOEF Guidelines is small and additional moisture would
detract from the benefits obtained from cleaning coal. The application of cleaning coal
without the use of water, therefore, would be a considerable advantage. It should be
borne in mind that the requirement for cleaning coal for power generation in India will
be to produce a very low CV discard. Accurate cleaning and low ash clean coal will
not be a requirement. Therefore, dry coal cleaning need not be very accurate in order to
provide economic separations. Although not widely applicable throughout the coal
preparation industry in the world, dry coal beneficiation may find some application in
India and a number of researchers have evaluated these processes (75).
Selective Breakage
Selective breakage is one possible method of dry beneficiation for Indian coals(76).
CFRI has carried out a considerable amount of work on selective breakage and has a
batch rotary breaker available for test work(18). Some success has been achieved with
selective breakage using a rotary breaker and there is at least one application.
In addition to the use of the rotary breaker, however, other methods of selective
breakage could be worthy of consideration. These may include devices that give an
impetus to larger particles rather than using the force of gravity.
Optical Sorting
Indian coals delivered to power stations are currently typically 200-300mm in topsize
and cleaning the >100mm fraction by means of optical sorting could offer substantial
benefits. Although optical sorting has been tried in the past with varying degrees of
success, applications in India for the very large topsizes may offer an opportunity for
modern optical sorting systems. The colour of the coal and the associated mineral
51
matter would need to be taken into account, however, since the transition between
relatively pure coal and relatively pure rock is rather gradual and in shades of grey.
However, enhanced optical methods using single wavelength light, microwaves, or,
possibly, X-rays or Gamma rays could be considered(77). In addition, modern
computerised optical recognition systems might be successfully applied in the field of
optical sorting for coal.
Air Separations
It is some years since air tables and jigs have been used in the western world, but
certain applications may exist within India and collaboration between research
organisations in the UK and UK companies possessing the relevant technologies could
be effectively applied in India. In investigating the use of air tables and jigs for Indian
conditions, however, it will need to be borne in mind that, despite the long dry season,
ROM coal can be rather wet. The elevated moisture content will interfere with air jigs
and tables and could lead to the same difficulties that these technologies suffered from
when applied in the UK and the USA.
Other Methods
Some researchers have assessed the value of magnetic and electrostatic separation for
beneficiating Indian coals. Magnetic separation has been found to be poor in Indian
circumstances due to the low iron and, specifically, low pyrite content of Indian coals.
Electrostatic separation techniques have also not performed well due to the very
intergrown nature of Indian coals.
6.2.3 Fine Coal Cleaning
Much of the coal to be supplied to Indian power stations is of low rank, often bordering
on sub-bituminous. The use of froth flotation to clean any coal fines, that may be
required to be cleaned, is difficult to apply using conventional flotation reagents. In
addition, the very finely intergrown nature of the mineral matter within the coal makes
froth flotation selectivity poor. However, there may be benefits to be derived from the
evaluation of froth flotation techniques and reagents based on UK experience,
particularly to coking coal plants(78). Column flotation has also been briefly assessed
and shown to have some promise(79,80).
Although there has been some work on the application of spiral cleaning to fine coals in
India, this work is still in its infancy(81). The application of spirals and teetering bed
separators to Indian conditions could also usefully benefit the Indian coal industry and
UK companies.
There is still interest in India in the application of oil agglomeration to the cleaning of
Indian coals(82). In keeping with results from elsewhere in the world, oil agglomeration
is an efficient technique for cleaning coal but, even in Indian circumstances, it is likely
to remain uneconomic(83,84,85).
6.2.4 Control Systems
The development, in co-operation with Indian companies or organisations such as
CMPDIL, for the control of both non-coking coal and coking coal coal preparation
plants has considerable potential.
52
In the case of non-coking coal plants, the application of continuous monitoring and
controlled addition of untreated fine coal to cleaned coal for the production of
consistent-quality PSF is an area where there would be considerable potential in the
future. The application of ash monitoring systems using active Gamma, X-rays,
neutrons or passive Gamma radiation to the control of blending systems is also an area
where development would be worthwhile.
In the coking coal sector, the sensitivity of separations to changes in density indicates
that improved density control systems within coal preparation plants would improve
product quality. The application of model-based control systems is another potential
area for development for Indian coal preparation plants(86).
6.2.5 FBC
Although studies have been carried out, as previously mentioned in this Report, all of
these, to date, have looked at the optimum quality of coal to be produced at mine sites
consistent with not throwing away combustible material in the discard from coal
preparation plants. In some cases, notably the Montan study(14), combustion of discard
in an FBC unit was discounted on the basis of inconsistent quality and very low CV of
discards likely to be produced. We do not agree with Montans assessment; FBCs are
capable of operating with very low CV fuels. Furthermore, optimum energy useage
may not necessarily be obtained through the adoption of a strategy of minimising the
loss of heat in the discard from the coal preparation plant. It would, for instance, be
worthwhile investigating the economics of producing discard from the coal preparation
plant with significant heat content and a much lower-ash product for transportation to
distant power stations.
This could involve a desktop study to evaluate the potential for reducing the ash
content from coal preparation plants located at mine sites to <34% ash and constructing
significant-sized FBC power stations at the mine site. This arrangement could
overcome many of the difficulties experienced by existing FBC projects within India
and, possibly, impact significantly on the transportation cost for remote large power
stations to an extent not possible when producing coal of only 34% ash.
6.3
Potential for Future Collaboration

The potential for coal preparation companies within the Indian coal industry is very
large. If India is to maintain a reasonable standard of living for its growing population,
the power generation facilities within the country must be increased by a substantial
amount over the next 20 years. This need, however, is recognised by many countries
and companies around the world and the competition for supply into the Indian market
will be fierce. Companies wishing to take part in the growth of Indias coal industry
must recognise that they will face obstacles as great in India as in any other country in
the world. As with elsewhere, companies must maintain their visibility within the
market. To that end, companies must be willing to attend the various conferences held
within India and to tour those companies with an interest in the coal preparation
market. This will include not only CIL but the high-profile power generators and, of
necessity, some government institutions.
53
Companies should not underestimate the difficulty involved in visiting several different
companies within a short space of time. Indian transport infrastructure, whilst
improving apace, is still primitive in comparison to European standards. A visit to a
single location can take 1-2 days for the return journey. It is also essential to have an
Indian contact who is capable of organising the necessary logistics.
It is unlikely that any UK company would successfully trade with India unless they had
a suitable Indian company as a partner. The partner should be chosen with
considerable care and with regard to the particular service or equipment to be provided.
Obviously, the larger the value of the supply the larger the company within India the
UK company should select. Selction of suitable partners can best be done by
establishing contacts within India and identifying companies interested in the particular
service or equipment. Some companies in India were contacted during the preparation
of this report but the list is very small in comparison to the number of Indian companies
that may be interested.
Appendix I includes notes on meetings held with various companies and institutions
within the Indian coal industry. These organisations make an excellent first point of
contact for those companies wishing to supply equipment and services to the Indian
coal industry. Of principle interest in the construction of new coal preparation plants
are the power generation companies, notably NTPC. These should the first contacts, as
they will be the source of funds for any coal preparation plant in the power industry.
Companies wishing to form associations with Indian companies should first contact
British Trade International in the British High Commission in New Delhi and, also, in
Calcutta. In addition, the CFRI and the CMPDIL should also be contacted. These
organisations are closely connected with the current coal industry and have detailed
knowledge of the companies involved in the supply of equipment and services at
present. They will also be able to provide lists of suitable local partners and some
background information on the size and capability of relevant Indian companies. UK
companies will need to carry out their own investigation of any companies
recommended however to satisfy themselves of the suitability and strength of Indian
companies.
Further companies may be sought by advertisement in the trade press and in national
newspapers such as the Times of India and the Hindustan Times. Advertisements are
often placed in these papers for national tenders and they are regular reading for
companies interested in the coal industry. India is a very large country and the number
of companies within India is, also, very large. It is difficult to identify all of the
companies interested in and capable of being involved in the coal preparation industry
within India. Indian partners that have been identified by overseas companies have not
always been those which would normally be associated with the coal industry. For
instance, the collaboration between R&S and VBC is not one which would normally be
intuitively connected.
Table 13 presents a list of companies with known interest in the coal industry and
contact with these companies may also generate further specific lists of companies with
more specialised interest.
54
6.4
Review of UK Involvement in India

UK companies are capable of supplying the complete range of equipment and services
to construct all of the handling and process equipment required for a fully-integrated
coal preparation system. This includes the supply of major equipment, control systems,
process design, project management and construction facilities. Table 17 gives a
comprehensive list of UK companies manufacturing equipment or providing services
applicable to the Indian coal preparation market.
During this study, discussions were held with a number of UK companies with
potential interest in India. A summary of those discussions is given below.
6.4.1 ABB Alstom

ABB ALSTOM is the company resulting from the merger of ABB and Alstom. The
materials-handling and coal preparation expertise is part of the Alstom Automation
Division located in Leicester. Alstom Automation incorporates the expertise of the
former GEC Handling of Erith in Kent and before that, Frazer and Chalmers Ltd. As
the last of these companies it has constructed several plants in India, albeit more than
15 years ago.
ABB ALSTOM is very active in infrastructure projects, currently being one of the
investors in the Bhadravati IPP in Maharastra. Thecompany would consider investing
in the construction and operation of coal preparation plants in India, as well as purely in
the construction. As with any investment, however, it is concerned to ensure that the
project receives adequate cash flow to support the project return on investment. In this
regard, it would look closely at the ultimate source of cash and the creditworthiness of
the project. Contacts are Mr I Negus ( Infrastructure Projects Group, Rugby) and
Mr. A Jackson (Alstom Automation, Leicester).
6.4.2 Kvaerner
Kvaerner has taken over the company formerly known as Davy McKee of Stockton on
Tees, once one of the UKs foremost coal preparation plant constructors. In the past,
Davy McKee has engineered and commissioned three coal preparation plant in India.
The company has recently decided to concentrate on its core business of main
contractor for large projects. As a result, Kvaerner would be interested in constructing
coal preparation plant in India but would not be interested in investing or operating.
Kvaerner may, however, consider a joint venture with suitable partners that would
allow it to act solely as a contractor. Contact: Mr N Wall, Director, Non-ferrous
Metals.
6.4.3 Norec Ltd
Norec specialises in the operation of coal preparation plant. Norec has extensive
experience of operating plants for the former BCC and, subsequently, for RJB Mining
Ltd. It currently operates coal preparation plants in Indonesia and South Africa. Norec
also operates other materials-handling facilities such as power station coal-handling
facilities.
55
Norec is interested in operating plants in India and in co-operating with Indian

companies to provide operating expertise. The company would not be interested in the
construction or major investment in coal preparation plant but is very keen to develop
contacts in India. Contact: Mr A Howells, General Manager.
6.4.4 Delcor Ltd
Delcor is a manufacturers of filtration equipment, in particular, horizontal belt filters. It
supplies filters to many parts of the world and is currently setting up a manufacturing
operation in China. The company is also very interested in supplying equipment to
India and is actively seeking a local partner for co-operation. Contact: Mr J Pegler,
Managing Director.
6.4.5 PowerGen Ltd
PowerGen is currently constructing a coal-fired IPP at Bina in India. It is aware of the
MOEF Guideline and are interested in the technologies for coal preparation that would
be suitable for power projects in India. In this respect, PowerGen is considering the
construction of a coal preparation plant for the supply to Bina. Contact: Mr. M. Bolton.
6.5.5 Baker Process
Baker Process supplies a wide range of minerals processing equipment suitable for the
coal preparation industry. As part of the Baker Hughes Group, it has worldwide
interests and in the past has had associations with a number of Indian companies. At
present, it does not have an Indian agent or associate and is not actively looking for
one. Baker Process is, however, very interested in supplying equipment to India and in
the construction of coal preparation plant. Contact: Mr D Woodruff, Minerals Market
Manager.
6.5.6 JMC Mining Services
JMC is the owner of the LARCODEMS technology and supplies a wide range of coal
preparation equipment, including modular plants. The company views India as an area
of interest for its products and services and is in the process of establishing local
contacts to enable its participation in BOO projects. JMC believes that the
LARCODEMS is particularly suitable for beneficiating difficult-to-wash Indian coals,
but will tailor a process design to suit the particular application and could supply jig or
conventional DM cyclone plants. Contact: Mr D Baillie, Technical Manager.
6.5.7 MMD Ltd
MMD is a manufacturer of crushing equipment extensively used throughout the mining
industry including the coal industry. The company has offices in many of the major
mining areas of the world and has a subsiduary company in India located in Madras.
Contact: Mr D Davies, Madras Office.
56
6.5.8 Svedala Ltd

Svedala is an international mining equipment manufacturer with a range of products
including screens, crushers, froth flotation equipment and pumps. Although an
international company, Svedala has extensive manufacturing facilities within the UK
resulting from the acquisition of a number of UK coal preparation companies. Svedala
has representation in India and is in a position to supply its wide range of products to
any location in India. Contact: Mr S Yadav, New Delhi Office.
6.5.9 Dargo Associates Ltd
Dargo Associates is a coal consulting company with several years and current
involvement in coal preparation projects in India. Dargo Associates is interested in any
new projects in India involving coal mining, coal preparation, geology and the supply
of coal to power stations, cement or steeel works.
It has been involved in projects worldwide and, with particular regard to coal
preparation, has its own in-house coal preparation simulation program, FLOSEP.
Contact: Mr S Frankland, Director.
6.5
Future Legislation
This study has reviewed the significant impact of the current MOEF Guidelines for the
requirement for power stations to burn lower-ash coal. The report has also discussed
the potential the current Guidelines to be broadened to include coals delivered from
shorter distances than the current 1000km limit. However, there is the potential for
further legislation, which is currently being discussed throughout the coal industry in
India.
In addition to the reduction in coal transported throughout India, there is likely to be
increasing pressure to improve power station efficiency in order to reduce greenhouse
gases (GHGs). This, in itself, may dictate that lower-ash coals are burnt in power
stations and, consequently, additional coal preparation facilities are require. Should
this become a real possibility, given Indias large requirement for PSF, the potential for
coal preparation plants in India would be enormous. As stated elsewhere in this report,
India will be burning >350Mtpa of coal for power generation within the foreseeable
future.
Additional environmental concerns will need to be addressed, however, as a
pre-condition to future WB loans to India for, not only the coal industry and the power
generation industry, but other industries as well.
Currently, India has little in the way of coal tips as coking coal preparation plants tend
to produce a discard which can be burnt in power stations. The number of power
station orientated coal preparation plants is limited and, therefore, India has little
experience of disposal of coal preparation plant discard. As part of future
environmental regulations, India, no doubt, will impose regulations on coal preparation
waste piles. In some cases, this may prove a limitation on the coal preparation discard
but it should be borne in mind that as the ash requirement for PF power plants is
reduced, the amount of heat contained in coal preparation plant discard will increase.
57
This will necessitate the combustion of the discard in FBCs in order to make economic
sense from coal preparation.
Therefore, the larger problem will be the disposal of FBC ash rather than coal
preparation plant discard. Opencast mines should provide an opportunity for the
disposal of most waste materials within the overburden spoil heaps. However, certain
ashes may give rise to concern regarding leaching of heavy metals from the ash into
ground water. If WB guidelines for the disposal of ash limit the possibility of disposal
in the spoil heaps, then the cost of FBC and discard may increase considerably. New
coal preparation plants, combined with FBC will need to carefully consider the
potential effects of future legislation.
Other environmental legislation that is likely to be imposed on coal preparation plants
will be stricter control on the use of water and the quality of water discharges(87,88).
Currently, coal preparation plant water discharge has regulations that are only loosely
applied. CIL, being a Government body, has considerable influence and has avoided
any serious effects of discharge water quality regulations. However, if coal preparation
plants are operated by private companies, then it would be expected that environmental
standards would increase. It is to be expected, therefore, that water quality standards
will be tightened and the need for short water circuits with good water clean up will
increase.
Indian coals intended for power stations, particularly those from the Korba, Talcher and
Wardha Valley coalfields, are very dusty in nature. Environmental regulations are
likely to be tightened to control the quantities of dust escaping from coal mining
operations and to reduce the quantities of respirable dust in the coal mining
operation(89,90). This will increase the usage of water to suppress dust and thereby
increase the difficulty of handling ROM coals. Therefore, it can be expected that sales
of dust suppression equipment will increase but also, perhaps more importantly, UK
experience in the handling of sticky, damp coal will be a necessary expertise for the
operation of coal preparation facilities in India.
7.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ISSUES

India is a rapidly developing country with an increasingly large population that will
demand increased economic growth. In order to satisfy the consumer demand for
growth, India is keen to embrace new technologies and higher production techniques in
order to improve its industrial output. The new financial centre of Mumbai is
indicative of this drive for economic growth. It is most apparent in India that the
increasingly wealthy middle class is not only a large consumer base in its own right but
in developing business is also actively engaged in generating wealth for the population
as a whole.
It is noticeable that in the last five years, the growth of telecommunications and
computer systems throughout India has been nothing short of phenomenal. India is
also one of the worlds largest providers of software with centres of excellence in
Mumbai and Hyderabad. The drive for new technology is also extended throughout
industry and modern equipment is appearing in the more industrialised centres. The
coal industry has been rather slower to respond and has persisted in the use of
58
lower-capacity, lower-technology mining and preparation equipment. This has partly

been due to CIL being a nationalised entity and partly because the demand for coal has
never been satisfied. CIL has always been able to achieve its financial targets due to a
lack of competition.
CILs lack of performance, however, is seen as a bar to the countrys economic growth
and the Government is keen to see coal demand being met more readily by indigenous
resources. This will mean that higher-technology mining techniques and management
systems will be increasingly required throughout India.
As the culture of introducing newer technology and higher productivity systems
becomes more engrained within the mining industry, the demand for newer and newer
technology will continue to rise. It cannot be expected, however, that a leap will be
made to western levels of technology implementation in one step. Indeed, it would
unwise on the part of Indian mining companies or suppliers to attempt such a sea
change. A better approach would be the incremental introduction of ever increasing
levels of technology with a final goal to be western levels of productivity sometime in
the distant future.
It must be borne in mind that India has a very large and very poorly paid population.
The introduction of western levels of productivity would be a social catastrophe in
putting large numbers of people out of work. The poorly paid nature of Indian
employees does mean that the cost of labour as a percentage of the final production cost
is no higher than elsewhere. Labour costs are, however, rising and productivity will
have to rise correspondingly in order to maintain competitiveness.
Consumers, who include power station buyers of coal, are becoming increasingly
sophisticated as elsewhere in the world. This means that quality control as well as
lower-cost production will be significant drivers in the search for improved technology.
7.1
Coal Preparation
Much of the available technology within the UK for coal preparation processing is
directly applicable to Indian requirements. DM processing systems, jigs, screens and
crushers are readily applicable and the process requirements readily understood by the
Indian market. For companies with this type of technology, the strategy they will need
to adopt will be, first, to establish a connection with an Indian company interested in
supplying the technology within India. Such an agreement could be in the form of a
joint venture or a licensing agreement but the company chosen must have appropriate
connections and political influence.
Larger companies will need to ensure that their partner has influence, at least, at
Minister level within the GOI, since major investment projects are referred to
government for investment sanction.
For smaller companies supplying only equipment or minor services, connections will
need to be established with managers with influence within the target company. Such
contacts will need to be at substantially higher level than would normally be necessary
within a European or US context, since delegation of spending authority is usually
limited.
59
Companies will need to consider the degree to which they will be able to supply
services and manufacturing from within India itself. India has many engineering
companies capable of undertaking detailed engineering work of low technology.
Companies undertaking large amounts of supply from within India will be given more
favourable consideration when supplying equipment and services within India. Care
must be taken, however, by companies to ensure that their core technology or expertise
is maintained and protected.
Not only is the political consideration of using Indian services of importance but Indian
services will be much cheaper than those obtainable in Europe. It is imperative that
costs are kept to a minimum for supplying within India. Despite Indias rapid
economic growth, it must not be forgotten that India is still a Third World country and
cannot support the degree of capital investment that might be expected in a European
context.
Companies may also consider an Indian manufacturing base as a springboard for
supplying their own equipment or technology to other areas of the world in order to
improve their international competitiveness.
7.1.1 USA
The USA has been very active in developing technology transfer into India. The US
Agency for International Development (USAID), in co-operation with the US Asia
Environmental Partnership (USAEP) and the Federal Energy Technology Center
(FEDC) of the US Department of Energy, launched a programme called the Indo-US
Coal Preparation Programme (IUCP). This aim of this programme was to promote US
companies for the construction of coal preparation plants in India. The IUCP lobbied
government departments and CIL and raised the level of the debate regarding coal
washing for power generation in India. To date, the US Government has invested
considerable amounts in promoting US companies. This promotion has included
subsidising visits for Indian officials to USA coal preparation plants, carrying out
testing of bulk samples of Indian ROM coals and funding the assessment of coal
preparation technology as applicable to Indian coals. Partly due to the work by
USAID, R&S and CLI have been awarded contracts in India for the construction of
major coal preparation facilities.
7.1.2 Germany
German companies, particularly KHD (Humboldt Wedag), have been very active in
selling coal preparation technology to India. There are a number of installations of
Batac jigs supplied by KHD, within the Indian coking coal industry and other German
technology has been adopted such as dedusting (although more recently abandoned).
As noted from Table 13, KHD has a local company, which promotes the use of KHD
equipment throughout the coal preparation industry. Currently, KHD is promoting the
ROM jig which is a moving-bed system similar to the British Greaves washbox.
7.1.3 Australia
A number of Australian mining companies, notably BHP and Rio-Tinto (a British
company, but with the coal business managed from Australia), are actively seeking
60
mining projects within India with a view to investment. Due to the involvement of
such large Australian mining companies, Australian coal preparation plant suppliers are
also gaining exposure to the Indian coal preparation industry.
The Piparwar mine was built by White Industries of Australia under WB funding as a
demonstration project for the application of western mining techniques to Indian
circumstances. White Industries managed the construction of the coal preparation
plant, but the main separating process was supplied by KHD, in the form of two Batac
jigs. It is worth noting that the arrangement of the Piparwar coal preparation plant is
similar to many Australian plants in Queensland with no side sheeting and only a roof.
7.1.4 UK
UK companies have previously constructed coal preparation and coal-handling plant in
India. Kvaerner (formerly Davy McKee) has engineered and commissioned three plant
and Moxey has constructed coal-handling plant. Several UK companies have
representation in India for supplying equipment. However, although UK coal
preparation technologies are well regarded in India, competition is fierce and recent
progress has been slow in identifying markets and winning projects.
This review has identified a number of opportunities for collaboration between India
and the UK in coal preparation technologies. Further steps that could be taken to
increase the profile of UK companies in India include participation in activities such as
trade missions, conferences, seminars and, where appropriate, collaborative technology
transfer projects. The latter are aimed at providing support to strengthen links and raise
the profile of UK products and services whilst, at the same time, benefitting the global
environment. Coal preparation has significant potential to improve environmental
performance and increase the efficiency of coal utilisation in India and could, therefore,
be a suitable area for collaboration.
8.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The aim of this project was to review the current status and technology requirements of
coal preparation in India and to investigate opportunities for UK companies to
collaborate in future industry development.
India is the third largest producer of coal in the world with an annual production of
300Mtpa in 1998. India also has very large reserves of coal, sufficient for its needs for
decades to come. With few other sources of energy, India will rely primarily on power
from coal to support its rapidly developing industry.
The major markets for coal within India will be for power generation, coking coal,
cement production and industrial and domestic use. The projected growth in the use of
coal for power generation will increase Indias coal utilisation by some 200Mtpa over
the next 10 years. Coking coal production will not increase over the next 10 years due
to the lack of availability of suitable quality coking coal within India. However, the
need for preparation of coking coal will increase as the raw coal quality deteriorates.
The demand for coal in the cement sector will also grow.. However, with an estimated
61
additional capacity of some 10-20Mtpa required, this increase will be dwarfed by the
increase in demand for PSF.
To add to the demand for PSF, the MOEF has published a guideline that will be strictly
applied in July 2001, that all power stations buying coal from >1000km distant will
have to burn coal of <34% ash. This implies that coal preparation will be required for a
substantial proportion of the coal burnt within India from indigenous sources. In
addition, power stations located in sensitive areas, such as New Delhi, will also be
required to burn fuel with <34% ash, wherever the source. The MOEF guideline is
designed to reduce the use of transport fuels in bringing coal deliveries from the mine
to the power station. However, in addition to reduced transportation costs there will be
benefits to the power plants in terms of increased efficiency , reduced amount of coal
and ash to be handled, reduced maintenance costs and reduced auxillary power
consumption within the power plant.
IR cannot hope to provide the necessary infrastructure for the transportation of the
increased volume of PSF and there is increasing pressure to improve the efficiency of
existing power stations within India. These two factors will drive the increased use of
coal preparation to reduce the volume of coal moved by rail and provide power stations
with cleaner coal. At the same time, imported coal will increasingly be utilised in the
southern areas of India where there are fewer coalfields.
Indias experience with coal preparation plants is limited, with only 23 plants currently
operating in India despite the very large production of coal. This is because,
historically, coal has only been washed for the preparation of coking coals and it is only
recently that coal has been prepared for the power station market. The total capacity of
coal preparation plants within India, currently, is ~18Mtpa, representing ~8% of the
total ROM production. Two plants have now been installed to produce coal
specifically for the power generation market. These are located at Piparwar in CCL
and at Dipka in SECL. Further coal preparation plants are planned to provide fuel for
IPP generators at Kalinga, Bina and a further plant at Dipka.
The application of coal preparation to the production of PSF is likely to result, in some
cases, in discard containing significant amounts of energy and it may be necessary in
these cases to recover this heat by burning the discard in an FBC, either to generate
electricity for sale to the grid or to reduce costs of electricity at mines. This possibility
is recognised and, on a limited scale, has been applied to some coking coal preparation
plants. Wider application of this type of scheme at larger plants intended for the PSF
market would present considerable opportunities. There is, as yet, no plan to produce
electricity on a significant scale from discard from plants producing PSF.
Indian coals are difficult to wash by international standards and will produce better
yields from DM processes than from jigs. Historically, however, jigs have been the
technology of choice for Indian coal preparation plants and this is largely due to the
lack of suitable quality magnetite. Private companies, however, will consider the
importation of high-quality magnetite and the use of harder wearing resistant material
to improve the quality of operation of DM processes within India.
Indias lack of experience in coal preparation operation offers an opportunity for
private enterprise to improve the quality of operation of the plant either by means of
62
consultancy or by complete take-over of operations. CIL wishes to divest itself of its

own coal preparation plant as it considers that its core business should be restricted to
the production of ROM coal. This possibility also presents opportunities for companies
to carry out modifications to existing plants to improve the process operations by
capital investment, not only in process equipment by also in new control systems.
The emergence of coal preparation for the power generation market in India and the
possibility of taking over operation of existing coking coal preparation plants offers an
extremely large market for UK coal preparation technology. In addition to providing
operating services, UK companies can also provide training and consultancy services to
assist in developing the necessary skills for operating coal preparation plant.
Opportunities for equipment sales and spares provision will also increase as western
companies take over the operation of coal preparation plant. There will also be
opportunities for consumable sales, such as flocculants, froth flotation oil and
magnetite.
UK companies have had some experience in supplying coal preparation equipment and
services into India in the past but this has not always been a very profitable experience.
In the last five years, however, India has come a long way towards commercialisation
in a free market and the old ways of the command economy are being rapidly set aside.
The nationalised companies, CIL and NTPC, are now completely independent financial
entities. Each is required to fund its own capital investment and to return sufficient
profit to enable ongoing investment. UK companies entering the Indian market may
now find a rather different situation to the one that has existed in the past. Furthermore,
Indian companies are ready to accept and trade with UK companies far more readily
than any other areas of the world. Indians are very comfortable with UK technology
which in their eyes has already established sufficient credibility to be useful in India.
However, companies wishing to operate in the Indian market will need to develop a
relationship with a reliable and substantial Indian partner. Companies should also bear
in mind that it is not cost effective to bring to India those services that are cheaply
available within India. These include labour, detailed engineering and, to a large
degree, fabrication.
Companies taking a substantial part in the market, particularly those contemplating
investment, will need to establish the financial credentials of the parties involved in any
deal. In most cases, the ultimate source of funds for the power generation market will
be a SEB or an IPP. In the case of an IPP, the funds are reasonably assured as the IPP
will already have carried out its own evaluation of its source of funds. However, in the
case of an SEB, companies will wish to establish the financial credibility of the SEB.
Financing is available from within India and from the UK for coal preparation projects
and, in principle, there is no bar to the financing of any coal mining project within
India. Coal preparation projects are a suitable size for fully Indian financing without
recourse to overseas lenders whose requirements may be more stringent than those
demanded by an Indian lender.
The UK has been slow to respond to the potential for the provision of coal preparation
plant and equipment and services within India but there is still plenty of opportunity for
business in this growing market. UK companies are highly regarded in India and will
63
have no difficulty in finding suitable partners and opportunities. UK experience in the

particular types of coal preparation technology required for the large power generation
market in India will be of particular benefit to companies wishing to supply goods and
services to India.
UK coal preparation companies should become better informed about the opportunities
available in India. This could include establishment of a database of Indian companies
involved in or interested in coal preparation. Efforts should also be made to raise the
profile of UK companies in India. This could be done, for instance, through attendance
at conferences and active participation in trade missions and other promotional
activities. In particular, the Coal Preparation India Conferences, which are held biannually, are a useful forum for suppliers to meet potential buyers.
Future R&D and technology transfer efforts should be directed towards investigation of
technologies appropriate to India. Key areas are:
(i) Comminution techniques to increase the liberation of mineral matter whilst
minimising the production of fine coal.
(ii) Application of dry coal beneficiation techniques, such as selective breakage,
optical sorting and air separation in areas of water shortage.
(iii) Development of suitable fine coal cleaning and dewatering processes to improve
recovery and quality of fine coal.
(iv) Adaptation and implementation of UK-developed control strategies for partial
washing to optimise technical and economic performance of coal preparation plant.
(v) Development and optimisation of integrated coal preparation and minemouth
power schemes, whereby a premium product is produced for sale to a distant power
station and the coal preparation discard is burnt in a locally-sited FBC.
9.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This project was fully funded by the DTI, through the UK Cleaner Coal Technology
Programme. Thanks are also due to the many organisations and individuals who
supplied information for the review.
10.
REFERENCES
1.
B. George,Jewel in the Crown?, World Coal, August 1994.
2.
S.K. Chowdhray, Coal in India, 17th Congress of World Energy Council

September 1998, World Energy Council, London 1998.
3.
S. Nadkarni, Opening up the Market, International Bulk Journal, Vol.18, Pt.6,

June 1998.
64
4.
Inside Brief India, International Coal Report, Pt.361, November 1994.
5.
T.N. Singh, Indian Coal Mining Industry Emerging Trend in the Light of Global
Trade, The Indian Mining and Engineering Journal, September 1998.
6.
A.P. Sanda, India A Land of Opportunity, Someday, Coal Age, October 1996.
7.
L.B. Clarke, S. Walter, O. Montfort, Coal Prospects in India, IEA Coal Research,
1997.
8.
S.K. Bose, Optimum Preparation of Non-Coking Coals for Thermal Power

Generation, Journal of Mines, Metals and Fuels, Vol.35, April 1987.
9.
R.J.M. Wylie, Neyveli Lignite A New Mine is in Production, Engineering and

Mining Journal, Vol.189, 1988.
10. Chris Wardell, Clean Coal and Government Coal Sector Policy Initiatives A
World Bank Perspective, Coal Preparation India 1998, January 1998, New Delhi.
11. Yogendra Narain, Sec. Min. Surface Transport, Chairmans Address, Coal
Transport Session, Coal Prep. India 98.
12. N. Rao, Improving Indias Coal Quality Building Cost Effective Washeries,
Coal Trans-India 97, New Delhi, March 1997.
13. Prem S. Tripathy, S.N. Mukherjee, Perspectives on Bulk Use of Fly Ash, CFRI,
Dhanbad, 1997.
14. Montan-Consulting GMBH (in assoc. with International Economic and Energy
Consultants and CMPDI International Consultants), Implementation of Clean
Coal Technology through Coal Beneficiation, India October, 1998.
15. D.B. Kehoe, J.D. Herool et al, Evaluating the Effects of Cleaned Coals in Utility
Boilers, 11th International Coal Preparation Congress, Tokyo, 1990.
16. R.V. Shahi, Continuing Dominance of Coal in Indian Power Industry, Coal
Trans-India 97, New Delhi, March 1997.
17. P.M. Mohnot, Mahanadi Coalfields Limited Performance for the Year
1994-95, Journal of Mines, Metals and Fuels, September/October 1995.
18. S. Battacharya, D.D. Misra, Efficacy of Rotary Breakers as Dry De-Shaling
Units, 4th Asian Mining Conference, India, November 1993.
19. K.S. Narasimhan et al, Washability Characteristics of Indian Coals, Journal of
Mines, Metals and Fuels, 1997.
20. C. HughesNarborough, D.B. Woodruff and J.P.Bapot, The Development of the
Dense Medium Cyclone System for Processing Indian Coking Coals.
65
21. S.K. Biswal, P.S.R. Reddy, Flotation Characteristics of Thermal Coal, Journal of
Mines, Metals and Fuel, 1997.
22. S. Mohana Rao, P.K. Banerjee and C.V.G.K. Murty, Flotation Characteristics of
West Bokaro Coal Fines A Critical Evaluation, in Mineral Processing: Recent
Advances and Future Trends.
23. P.V.T. Raw, P.K. Banerjee et al, Factorial Design of Experimentation for Column
Flotation Studies with Fine Coal, in Mineral Processing: Recent Advances and
Future Trends.
24. B. Bardhan, S. Sengupta, Petrological and Chemical Controls on the Washability
of Coal and Its Implications, Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research,
Vol.57, Pt.3, March 1998.
25. Maitra, R.N. Basak et al, Optimum Reactive Content and Ash Level in Washed
Coking Coals from Kedla Area a Petrographic Approach, Fuel Science and
Technology, October 1992.
26. B.K. Srivastowa, Coal Beneficiation in India, Mine and Quarry, June 1996.
27. K.P. Madhusudhanan and M. Rajagopal, Status of Coal Beneficiation in India,
Seminar on Clean Coal Technology, New Delhi, 1994.
28. T.K. Basu, P.K. Mitra, S.G. Chowdhury, T. Banerjee, J. Roy and A. Chowdhury,
Coal Carbonisation, CFRI, Dhanbad, 1996.
29. D.D. Bali, and S. Chattopadhyay, Construction of Prime Coking Coal Washeries
in India, C.I.M.Bulletin, August 1986.
30. Ghosh, J. Schwerdtfeger, Application of Rom jig and Batac Jig for Preparation of
Run-of-Mine Coal for use in Power Stations in India, International Seminar of
Mineral Sector in India, February 1993, Hyderabad, India.
31. B.R. Prasad, Challenges of Coking Coal Production, Journal of Mines, Metals
and Fuels, Vol.34, December 1986.
32. Kotur S. Narasimham and A.K. Mukherjee, Gondwana Coals of India, CFRI,
Dhanbad, 1999.
33. B.B. Konar et al, Coal Preparation, CFRI, Dhanbad, 1997.
34. Cross, Coal Mining System at Piparwar, India, Bulk Solids Handling, Vol.15,
Pt.4, October/December 1995.
35. Roy, Development of a Modern Opencast Mine at Piparwar Transfer of
Technology from Australia to India by White Industries Australia Ltd., Journal of
Mines, Metals and Fuels, September 1996.
66
36. Roy, Contract Mining in India: the Piparwar Project, Australian Coal Reviews,
Pt.6, October 1998.
37. S.C. Khera, M.N. Jha, Crushing and Conveying Technology at Piparwar Opencast
Project, Journal of Mines, Metals and Fuels, 1997.
38. The Piparwar Benchmark, World Coal, April 1999.
39. White Industries, Development of a Modern Coal Beneficiation Plant at Piparwar:
Transfer of Technology from Australia to India.
40. G.N.Sharma, In-Pit Crushing and Conveying Technology at Ramagundan
Opencast 11 Project, Journal of Mines, Metals and Fuels, 1998.
41. D.G. Chedgy, S. Yu et al, Evaluating Coal Process Technology for the Indian
Power Industry, 13th Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, September
1996.
42. Coal Washing: a New Business Opportunity, A Coal India Ltd. Brochure.
43. N.R.G. Krishnan, Coal Beneficiation and Process Control, 2nd Indian Conference
on Computer Applications in Mineral Industry, I.C.C.A.M.I. 93.
44. K. Sen, A. Choudhury et al, Composite Washing of Coals from Multiple Sources,
Optimisation by Numerical Techniques, Int. Journal of Min. Proc. 41 (1994)
pp147-160.
45. R.K.Sachdew, Beneficiation of Coal An Economic Option for the Indian Power
Industry, 17th Congress of the World Energy Council, World Energy Council,
September 1998.
46. S.B. Tarafdar, Captive Coal Mines, Planned or Underway, Coal Age, October
1996.
47. Kumar, C.P. Singh, Coal Beneficiation A Pressing Need for Power Sector,
Mecon, Ranchi.
48. P. Selvakumaran, K. Ramachandra et al, Beneficiation of Indian Coals; its
Relevance to Thermal Power Generation, Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.
49. B.C. Misra, Mining and Beneficiation of Coal for Power Plants, Indo-German
Power Plant Seminar on Use of Coal, New Delhi, January 1992.
50. Kotur S. Narasimhan, Towards an Energy Efficient Nation: Vision 2020, CFRI,
Dhanbad, 1996.
51. D.K. Biswas, T.K. Goswami, Rural Energy, CFRI, Dhanbad, 1996.
67
52. S.Y. Namjoshi, A.N. Deshkar, Problems in Handling Coal in Power Stations,
Workshop on Coal Problems in Thermal Power Stations, October 1997, New
Delhi.
53. Technology Information, Forecasting and Assessment Council of The Department
of Science and Technology, Improvements in the Performance of Thermal Power
Stations Techno-Market Survey of Techniques to Improve Operational Efficiency
of Thermal Power Stations, India, 1995.
54. G.G. Dalal, Low Cost Mine Coal Beneficiation A Case Study, Energy
Management January/March 1997.
55. P. Ramireddy, K. Nandakumar et al, A Manufacturers View of Coal
Beneficiation Systems for Indian Power Plants.
56. S.V. Gollakota et al, Profitability Analysis of Non-Coking Coal Preparation for
Power Plants in India, 13th International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, September
1996.
57. R.K. Sachdeur, Beneficiation of Thermal Coal in India: Issues and Options, XIII
ICPC Proceedings, Vol.1.
58. K. Jechoutek, Coal for Development: The World Banks Clean Coal Initiative,
Energy World, Pt. 246, February 1997.
59. 5 K.B. Trehan, Power from Waste A step towards a Cleaner Environment,
International Conference on Environmental Issues in Minerals and Energy
Industry, India. IME Publications, October 1994.
60. S.P. Singh, R.M. Chauhan, Fluidised Bed Boilers for Washery Rejects
Operating Experience, 13th International Conference on Fluidised Bed
Combustion, ASME, May, 1995.
61. HughesNarborough, Cutting the Cost, World Coal, November 1996.
62. M.J. Laurila, Coal Preparation in India, Coal Age, October 1996.
63. D.G. Osborne, Economics of Coal Preparation of Indian Coals for Power
Generation, Asian Journal of Mining, September/October 1997.
64. K. Gupta, Power Generation: At Coal Pit Heads, Chemical Engineering World,
1993, Vol.28.
65. H.C. Dulta and A.N. Banerjee, Beneficiation Trends of Indian Coals, Mine
Tech, Vol.4.
66. J. Abbott, J. Hillman et al, The Economics of Secondary Separations with
Re-circulation in Dense Medium Processes, IX International Coal Preparation
Congress, New Delhi, 1982.
68
67. G.K. Bhart, A.K. Chowdhury et al, Rational Utilisation of Wardha Valley Coals,
Seminar on Clean Coal Technology, New Delhi, 1994.
68. S.B. Kitkaru, U.K. Ghosh et al, Sulphur Reduction Studies on Niljai Coals
Wardha Valley Coalfield, Seminar on Clean Coal Technology, New Delhi 1994.
69. R. Menon, G.K. Bharat et al, Beneficiation of Non-Coking Coals for the Power
Sector, Seminar on Clean Coal Technology, New Delhi, 1994.
70. Kumar, Potential of Performance Improvement by Indian Coal Washeries, Coal
Prep. 95 12th International Coal preparation Exhibition and Conference, May
1995, Lexington.
71. K.S. Rao, B.D. Badjumdar et al, Studies on Beneficiation and Rational Utilisation
of Medium Coking Coals from Nandan and Tandsi South Areas, Pench Kanhan
Valley Coalfield, Seminar on Clean Coal Technology, New Delhi, 1994.
72. Chatterjee, V.G.K. Murty et al, Coal Washing in India Time for a New
Approach, Fuel and Science Technology, Vol.10, January & April 1991.
73. S. Battacharya, D.D. Mirsa, Performance Improvement in Crushing Circuits of
the Washeries An Investigation, Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India)
Mining Engineering Development, Vol.78, May 1997.
74. M.Viswanathan, Investigations on the Effect of Microwave Pre-treatment on
Comminution/Beneficiation and Desulphurisation of Coals, 11th International
Coal Preparation Congress, Tokyo, 1990.
75. S. Banerjee, D.S. Mallick, Dry Deshaling of High Ash Indian Coal by
Infrasizers, Powder Handling and Processing, Vol.5, Pt.4, 1993.
76. L. Prasad, Some Aspects of Beneficiation of Non-Coking Coal in India, Journal
of Mines, Metals and Fuels, Vol.37, 1989.
77. V. Mahadevan, Potentialities of Microwave Applications in Mining, Preparation
and Processing of Coals, Dept. of Chemical Engineering, Kharagpur
78. K. Sen et al, Development in Fine Coal Flotation for Future, Fuel Science and
Technology, Vol.10, 1991.
79. K.S. Narasimham, R.N. Singh et al, Column Flotation for Fine Coal Recovery in
India A Techno Economic Assessment, International Symposium on Column
Flotation, Society of Mining Engineers, Phoenix, Arizona, January 1988.
80. P.S.R. Reddy, S.G. Kumar et al, Flotation Column for Fine Coal Beneficiation,
International Journal of Mineral Processing, Vol.24, 1988.
81. P.K. Banerjee, S. Mohan Rao et al, New Strategy for Beneficiation of Jamadoba
Group of Prime Coking Coals, Tata Search 1998.
69
82. G.S. Topagi and P. Bandopadhyay, Studies on Beneficiation Characteristics of

Middling Products of Some Central Coal Washeries in India, Journal of Mines,
Metals and Fuels, 1997.
83. G.G. Sarkar, S. Sakha et al, Effective Beneficiation of Difficult Washing Coals by
the Combined Application of Jig and Oil Agglomeration Systems, IX
International Coal Preparation Congress, New Delhi, 1982.
84. K. Sen and S.G. Chaundhuri, Beneficiation of Difficult to Wash Coal:
Development and Prospects, 12th International Coal Preparation Congress,
Cracow, 1994.
85. R.M. Basak, A.K. Gupta and S.S. Raghavan, Washing Characteristics of Prime
Coking Type Coal of Kedla Area, West Bokaro Field vis--vis Retrieval of
Additional Cleans from Middlings, Fuel Science and Technology, Vol.7, 1988.
86. Rege, N. Kar et al, Model based Control A New Concept in Coal Washery
Automation, 2nd Indian Conference on Computer Applications in Mineral
Industry, I.C.C.A.M.I. 93.
87. Ritu Kumar and Yasser Sherif, Economic Incentives for Pollution Prevention: A
Case Study of Coal Processing Industries, Dhanbad, Bihar, India.
88. R.K. Gupta and C. Singh, Water Pollution Profile of Coal Washeries, Pollution
Research, Vol.14, Pt.2, April 1995.
89. M.K. Ghose and S.K. Banerjee, Status of Air Pollution caused by Coal Washery
Projects in India, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, Vol.38, Pt.1,
P.G.97-105, October 1995.
90. S.K. Banerjee and S.K. Dhar, Air Pollution due to Washery Projects and its
Abatement Measures,
70
Country
China
USA
India
Australia
South Africa
Russian Federation
Poland
Germany
Canada
Ukraine
Indonesia
Kazakhstan
Other Asia Pacific
Czech Republic
United Kingdom
Colombia
Other Europe
Turkey
Spain
Greece
Mexico
Bulgaria
Romania
Hungary
Venezuela
France
Brazil
Zimbabwe
Japan
South Korea
New Zealand
Other Africa
Pakistan
Production
1997
(Mtce)
953.96
830.11
210.57
203.26
167.14
158.68
126.14
95.75
62.09
56.76
48.31
53.18
50.31
37.27
42.29
33.40
24.08
23.51
18.35
11.61
7.88
7.31
9.17
6.16
4.73
6.02
4.59
4.73
4.01
3.44
3.15
2.15
2.15
Production
1998
(Mtce)
896.91
845.16
211.86
211.43
169.58
149.94
109.37
87.87
58.91
56.76
53.18
51.17
47.88
36.98
35.98
31.11
25.23
24.08
17.20
11.90
8.31
7.02
7.02
5.73
5.45
5.02
4.59
4.59
3.44
3.30
3.01
2.15
2.15
Table 1. Production and Reserves by Country
71
Reserves
1998
(Mtce)
114500
246643
74733
90400
55333
157010
14309
67000
8623
34356
5220
34000
2526
6177
1500
6749
17538
1075
660
2874
1211
2711
3611
4461
479
116
11950
734
785
82
571
5345
2928
COALFIELDS
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Raniganj Coalfield
}
Mugma Salanpur Coalfield }
Rajmahal Coalfield
Jharia Coalfield
Giridih Coalfield
East Bokaro Coalfield
D.V.C. Berino Coalfield
South Karanpura Coalfield
North Karanpura Coalfield
Singrauli Coalfield
Wardha Valley Coalfield
Umrer Coalfield
Kamthi Silewara Coalfield
Patharkhera Coalfield
Pench Kanhan Coalfield
Korba Coalfield
Central Indian Coalfield
Ib Valley Coalfield
Talcher Coalfield
Singareni Coalfield
Total
**Geological
Reserves
19,194
Off-take
1996-97
18.11
11,739
6,102
23.00
111.00
Part of East
Bokaro
4,875
13,043
9,198
4,996
85 }
1,640}
438.00
1,580
19,538
9,432
21,237
25,449
10,093
158,773
9.91
26.65
0.34
10.59
0.10
3.51
13.52
36.99
19.04
5.62
2.62
3.61
35.20
20.92
13.88
23.33
29.34
273.28
! mostly producing >10Mtpa

** Non-coking coal reserves down to 600m depth (as on 01.01.96)
Table 2. Indian Coal Reserves and Production by Coalfield
GRADE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
UHV
(kcal/kg)
>6,200
5,6006,200
4,9405,600
4,2004,940
3,3604,200
2,4003,360
1,3002,400
Ash
(%)
<15
1519
1924
2429
2935
3542
42-50
Table 3. Indias Present Grade Bands
72
Year
IX-Plan
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2006-07
Est. Cement Prodn.

(Large Plants)
Total Est. Coal

Required
Lignite Required
83.5
90.0
97.5
105.5
113.0
150.00
18.00
19.50
21.50
23.00
25.50
35.00
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
2.00
3.00
Table 4. Cement Industry Production and Coal Requirement
Ash + Moisture
(60% RH + 40oC)
<40
40-55
55-75
>75
1.1.1.1 Lithology
Coal
Shaley coal
Carbonaceous shale
Shale
Table 5. Indian Lithology Classification
Size (mm)
100-75
75-50
50-25
25-13
13-6
6-0.5
<0.5
Total
Wt %
22.7
16.7
23.6
9.5
9.1
12.9
5.5
100.0
Ash % (dry)
52.0
46.4
39.0
39.5
39.6
42.2
53.3
44.5
Table 6. Talcher Coalfield Size Analysis
73
WASHERY FEED
PATHERDIH
- do - do - do - do DURGAPUR (DPL)
- do - do - do - do - do - do - do - do SUDAMDIH
- do - do - do BHUJUDIH
- do - do - do - do - do MAHUDA
MAHUDA (contd)
KEDLA
- do - do - do - do - do - do - do - do - do Source: CFRI
Cr
(mm)
75
75
75
75
75
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
37
37
37
37
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
25
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
Size
(mm)
75-13
13-0.5
-0.5
750.5
75-0
13-0.5
13-0.5
13-0.5
13-0.5
13-0.5
13-0.5
13-0.5
13-0.5
13-0.5
37-13
13-0.5
-0.5
37-0.5
75-25
25-13
13-0.5
75-0.5
-0.5
75-0
75-0.5
25-0.5
75-6
6-0.5
75-6
6-0.5
75-6
6-0.5
75-6
6-0.5
75-6
6-0.5
Mass
%
Ash
%
48.2
36.4
15.4
84.6
100.0
81.1
78.0
83.0
77.8
78.7
83.1
82.9
79.2
78.6
37.8
46.5
15.7
84.3
41.3
20.4
28.9
90.6
9.4
100.0
39.0
30.5
25.8
35.4
33.9
28.2
22.4
28.0
27.6
26.3
28.1
24.3
24.6
27.7
35.4
25.9
25.3
30.2
34.6
30.2
28.3
31.6
25.1
31.0
94.8
87.0
9.4
84.2
12.2
73.5
18.5
85.6
11.6
87.5
9.6
23.6
29.6
22.0
17.0
10.5
22.9
17.8
25.4
15.8
28.7
20.8
Flt at 1 30
Wt
%
0.0
4.1
39.5
1.8
7.6
3.9
5.7
4.0
3.6
3.6
3.1
4.5
5.3
3.2
0.7
13.1
25.3
7.5
0.3
1.6
8.0
3.0
26.6
5.2
3.2
7.5
3.6
43.6
0.1
26.5
Ash
%
9.2
3.0
4.4
3.1
4.1
2.5
2.3
2.9
2.8
2.2
2.5
2.7
2.8
4.7
8.5
4.4
2.5
4.6
8.2
8.3
3.2
3.9
2.4
3.2
5.5
3.2
5.6
5.8
5.4
1.4
Flt at 1 40
Wt
%
7.3
23.3
48.1
14.2
19.4
14.0
27.2
15.3
16.6
16.8
14.7
24.0
23.1
15.3
23.0
41.9
44.0
33.4
16.2
28.1
32.9
24.1
48.0
26.3
40.4
33.2
19.6
44.5
58.6
78.0
42.6
64.4
32.5
65.2
17.3
50.6
Ash
%
13.3
9.8
6.2
10.8
9.1
6.9
7.4
8.1
7.4
6.9
7.5
8.3
7.8
8.3
13.7
9.6
5.2
10.9
13.3
13.4
9.5
11.7
5.3
10.6
15.8
10.2
15.6
6.3
10.8
5.3
12.6
5.1
11.8
8.0
13.8
5.6
Flt at 1 45
Wt
%
31.3
55.4
67.2
83.2
61.6
72.6
46.6
72.2
40.1
62.0
Ash
%
17.8
8.8
12.0
5.8
14.9
6.5
13.5
8.9
16.7
7.9
Flt at 1 50
Wt
%
31.2
46.6
58.8
37.8
41.1
40.3
60.6
38.9
41.4
46.3
41.5
55.9
51.7
42.4
50.8
64.7
56.6
58.5
48.0
58.7
56.8
53.2
61.4
54.0
79.6
75.0
48.9
64.1
86.1
88.0
74.0
77.3
63.5
81.3
57.7
68.7
Ash
%
18.2
14.5
8.9
16.2
14.6
14.1
12.4
14.2
13.8
13.5
14.5
14.2
13.3
14.5
18.5
13.4
8.1
15.4
17.8
17.5
13.5
16.3
7.9
15.4
19.7
16.9
20.3
10.7
14.4
6.7
16.7
7.5
15.4
10.4
19.0
9.3
Flt at 1 60
Wt
%
54.9
67.6
71.2
60.4
62.0
66.5
77.8
65.3
66.1
70.3
66.6
74.9
73.0
66.1
64.0
76.5
70.5
71.3
67.5
73.9
73.4
70.8
71.9
79.9
93.0
88.4
73.4
79.3
97.3
93.8
85.9
83.1
77.2
90.7
70.6
79.2
Ash
%
22.9
18.6
12.0
20.8
19.3
18.9
15.6
19.1
18.4
17.9
19.1
17.4
17.0
19.2
20.9
15.7
11.6
17.8
21.3
20.0
16.8
19.6
10.2
18.7
21.5
19.4
23.9
14.4
16.6
7.9
18.7
9.1
17.7
12.2
21.1
12.2
Flt at 1 70
Wt
%
66.0
77.6
79.4
71.0
72.3
80.9
87.8
81.9
80.9
84.1
81.0
86.3
84.4
81.4
72.6
82.8
80.7
78.2
73.9
80.4
79.3
77.1
76.4
77.0
95.8
91.4
89.8
86.8
98.5
95.7
90.6
85.7
82.9
93.7
82.3
83.5
Table 7. Beneficiation Characteristics of Washery Feed Coal
74
Ash
%
25.2
21.0
14.0
23.2
21.7
21.9
18.0
22.5
21.6
20.8
22.0
19.8
19.5
22.1
22.8
17.3
14.4
19.6
22.8
21.5
18.4
21.1
11.3
20.2
21.8
20.2
27.0
16.6
16.8
8.6
19.8
9.9
19.1
13.0
23.7
13.4
Flt at 1 80
Wt
%
72.5
82.7
81.9
76.9
77.7
87.1
92.5
89.2
87.9
89.9
88.2
91.7
90.5
89.6
77.0
85.9
83.7
81.9
78.5
84.2
84.1
81.6
79.4
81.4
96.9
94.5
95.3
91.4
99.9
97.1
94.5
86.8
87.5
95.2
90.3
86.6
Ash
%
27.0
22.5
14.8
24.9
23.3
23.5
19.2
24.2
23.4
22.4
23.8
21.2
21.2
24.1
24.1
18.3
15.3
20.8
24.2
22.5
19.9
22.4
12.4
21.5
22.1
21.2
28.2
18.1
16.8
9.1
20.8
10.4
20.4
13.5
25.8
14.6
Sinks at 1 80
Wt
%
27.5
17.3
18.1
23.1
22.4
12.9
7.5
10.8
12.1
10.1
11.8
8.3
9.5
10.4
23.0
14.1
16.3
18.0
21.5
15.8
15.9
18.4
20.6
18.6
3.1
5.5
4.7
8.6
0.1
2.9
5.5
13.2
12.5
4.8
9.7
13.4
Ash
%
70.7
68.8
75.5
70.1
70.8
60.1
61.4
59.5
58.6
61.0
60.8
59.1
57.3
58.1
73.2
72.2
76.7
72.7
72.6
70.8
72.5
72.4
74.1
72.6
67.3
64.8
59.6
63.2
51.8
57.9
58.2
66.0
61.0
61.1
55.7
60.8
- 0.5 mm
Wt
%
Ash
%
18.9
22.0
17.0
22.2
21.3
16.9
17.1
20.8
21.4
21.5
17.4
21.1
20.4
20.3
21.0
18.6
19.4
21.3
3.6
14.8
3.6
10.3
8.0
15.4
2.8
12.4
2.9
14.1
WASHERY FEED
KEDLA
- do - do - do RAJRAPPA
- do - do - do - do KATHARA
- do - do - do BARORA
- do POOTKEE
- do - do - do - do KARGALI
- do - do MONIDIH
- do - do - do DUGDA II
- do - do - do CHASNALLA
- do - do - do - do Source: CFRI
Cr
(mm)
75
75
75
75
80
80
80
80
80
76
76
76
76
13
13
75
75
75
75
75
80
80
80
37
37
37
37
13
13
13
13
75
75
75
75
75
Size
(mm)
75-6
6-0.5
75-6
6-0.5
80-16
16-3
3-0.5
-0.5
80-0
76-13
13-0.4
76-13
13-0.4
13-0.5
13-0.5
75-25
25-13
13-3
3-0.5
-0.5
80-20
20-0.5
80-0.5
37-0.5
37-0.5
37-0.5
37-0.5
13-0.5
13-0.5
13-0.5
13-0.5
75-0.5
75-0.5
75-0.5
75-0.5
75-0.5
Mass
%
91.4
6.4
85.0
11.0
52.0
27.9
11.2
8.9
100.0
86.6
60.1
20.2
10.5
5.5
3.7
56.3
36.3
92.6
92.1
95.7
95.2
94.1
82.3
83.8
83.4
83.8
Ash
%
36.2
24.7
36.6
29.6
26.4
22.4
20.8
28.5
24.9
25.3
30.4
24.0
20.7
18.8
17.3
18.0
26.0
20.2
23.7
19.0
23.6
28.5
19.8
41.8
39.2
41.2
37.3
31.6
36.0
32.0
32.9
28.4
Flt at 1 30
Wt
%
0.3
13.1
0.2
14.4
1.5
11.5
25.9
18.0
8.5
0.1
11.5
2.0
13.9
3.1
2.7
Ash
%
6.5
1.7
5.9
2.3
10.6
4.8
2.3
1.2
3.8
7.0
3.7
8.4
3.4
2.8
3.0
1.4
14.7
30.4
49.3
0.5
14.4
5.9
16.5
7.1
2.3
3.7
5.6
5.0
2.6
2.2
6.3
3.8
3.9
4.9
5.0
3.9
3.1
0.6
0.8
5.5
6.1
Flt at 1 40
Wt
%
8.0
40.9
7.4
33.4
33.9
44.8
53.6
33.7
39.1
16.6
37.7
22.6
37.5
25.8
12.1
39.7
53.8
64.9
65.7
67.9
27.6
50.0
36.3
69.7
46.2
30.4
51.7
4.8
4.7
4.5
3.2
23.9
9.7
24.7
22.3
27.6
Ash
%
15.2
7.8
14.0
7.1
14.4
10.6
6.6
4.6
11.2
14.6
9.0
16.2
9.6
12.4
9.8
11.3
11.6
10.7
6.3
4.7
13.6
9.3
11.3
9.9
11.3
12.3
9.9
11.3
14.4
12.4
10.9
13.9
12.4
13.8
15.2
12.7
Flt at 1 45
Wt
%
23.3
49.0
18.4
38.8
Ash
%
19.2
9.5
17.7
8.9
36.3
47.0
51.0
55.6
17.1
10.8
18.8
12.9
50.9
64.4
56.1
75.9
62.5
51.1
67.2
12.9
9.4
9.2
9.0
16.1
11.4
14.0
10.0
13.5
14.6
11.7
15.4
16.5
15.1
15.0
Flt at 1 50
Wt
%
40.0
58.1
34.8
48.5
68.7
76.7
71.4
42.7
68.5
52.2
58.4
73.1
70.7
70.0
44.4
67.8
77.5
83.2
79.4
76.5
64.5
75.7
68.9
82.3
73.1
63.5
76.8
21.7
20.2
19.8
19.0
49.2
27.3
50.4
41.6
61.8
Ash
%
21.5
11.4
21.2
11.5
17.6
14.6
9.6
7.3
15.2
18.9
13.1
21.0
15.5
18.4
17.3
14.6
14.2
13.2
8.3
6.2
17.8
13.2
15.8
11.9
14.9
16.4
13.1
17.9
19.5
18.8
18.3
17.9
17.8
17.7
17.8
17.4
Flt at 1 60
Wt
%
59.1
74.4
50.5
60.3
78.3
84.6
81.3
53.9
78.2
66.5
68.2
90.2
85.6
85.3
70.3
80.2
86.9
9.4
85.7
80.9
81.2
86.3
83.1
88.7
84.0
72.6
82.9
36.8
9.3
42.7
40.0
65.5
52.7
65.1
55.4
74.0
Ash
%
24.9
15.4
25.0
15.2
19.0
16.1
11.6
11.3
16.8
21.3
15.2
23.0
18.2
20.9
21.3
16.8
15.9
14.5
9.8
7.4
20.5
15.3
18.4
13.4
16.9
18.6
14.2
22.2
25.1
23.2
23.8
21.1
22.8
20.0
20.1
19.2
Flt at 1 70
Wt
%
72.3
82.3
71.0
72.8
85.4
87.5
84.8
78.7
85.3
78.4
74.0
95.3
92.4
90.1
80.2
87.0
91.0
92.6
88.4
84.3
89.1
91.5
90.0
91.8
88.4
79.8
87.5
48.6
67.6
54.7
56.4
75.1
66.9
73.9
68.7
80.9
Table 7 (cont). Beneficiation Characteristics of Washery Feed Coal
75
Ash
%
27.8
17.7
29.7
19.5
20.5
16.9
12.6
18.3
18.4
24.1
17.0
24.0
19.6
21.9
23.4
18.3
16.8
15.3
10.6
8.3
22.1
16.6
20.0
14.4
18.1
20.7
15.4
25.1
28.1
26.3
27.9
22.9
25.5
21.8
22.3
20.7
Flt at 1 80
Wt
%
81.2
88.0
84.8
82.2
89.0
90.7
87.5
80.9
88.6
85.2
78.1
96.7
94.2
94.1
85.7
89.1
92.8
93.5
89.8
86.4
93.8
94.3
94.0
93.6
90.3
85.1
89.5
55.5
73.4
61.2
69.6
81.6
74.7
77.4
76.1
83.4
Ash
%
30.0
19.5
32.8
22.7
21.6
18.0
13.6
18.8
19.5
25.8
18.4
24.3
20.1
22.9
24.7
19.0
17.4
15.6
11.0
9.0
26.0
17.5
21.1
15.0
18.8
22.5
15.9
26.9
29.4
28.4
31.0
24.3
27.2
22.6
23.6
21.3
Sinks at 1 80
Wt
%
18.8
12.0
15.2
17.8
11.0
9.3
12.5
19.1
11.4
14.8
21.9
3.3
5.8
5.9
14.3
10.9
7.2
6.5
10.2
13.6
6.2
5.7
6.0
6.4
9.7
14.9
10.5
44.5
26.6
38.8
30.4
18.4
25.3
22.6
23.9
16.6
Ash
%
63.0
62.6
57.5
61.2
65.2
65.5
71.2
70.0
66.7
66.0
65.4
63.1
60.2
63.0
64.0
65.0
63.5
65.6
72.2
75.2
64.3
65.2
64.6
76.8
68.4
63.2
53.0
60.4
63.3
61.4
51.6
64.0
62.0
64.1
62.9
64.1
- 0.5 mm
Wt
%
Ash
%
2.2
19.0
4.0
23.0
13.4
21.3
7.4
17.4
7.9
4.3
4.8
5.9
17.7
16.2
16.6
16.2
11.7
12.8
18.5
12.7
37.9
34.9
35.2
31.8
WASHERY FEED
DUGDA I
- do - do DUGDA I (contd)
- do - do PIPARWAR
- do NANDAN
Source: CFRI
Cr
(mm)
75
75
75
75
75
75
100
100
75
Size
(mm)
75-25
25-13
13-0.5
75-25
25-13
13-0.5
100-25
100-13
75-25
Mass
%
27.7
29.1
36.3
27.1
28.6
35.1
77.3
86.5
63.8
Ash
%
38.9
35.8
32.6
38.6
35.0
34.5
38.6
38.5
28.4
Flt at 1 30
Wt
%
Ash
%
1.7
2.2
9.8
4.8
0.8
2.8
7.1
5.2
Flt at 1 40
Wt
%
4.3
8.6
9.4
1.7
4.0
9.2
22.5
15.1
32.0
Ash
%
15.2
13.9
9.7
15.9
13.7
11.0
18.7
16.8
14.3
Flt at 1 45
Wt
%
14.6
21.2
18.8
9.6
14.2
18.4
Ash
%
18.4
17.0
13.0
18.7
17.7
13.9
44.9
16.1
Flt at 1 50
Wt
%
26.7
36.8
31.7
18.8
26.2
30.1
36.6
32.2
56.4
Ash
%
20.4
19.6
16.4
20.4
19.8
16.8
22.9
21.6
18.2
Flt at 1 60
Wt
%
53.6
60.1
59.2
45.0
49.3
57.3
55.8
57.4
72.0
Ash
%
24.8
23.4
22.5
25.5
24.3
22.5
27.5
27.7
20.9
Flt at 1 70
Wt
%
65.9
72.7
82.8
58.1
72.8
62.7
72.4
72.1
83.2
Table 7 (cont). Beneficiation Characteristics of Washery Feed Coal
76
Ash
%
27.0
25.8
26.9
27.9
28.1
23.9
31.1
31.0
23.3
Flt at 1 80
Wt
%
71.2
77.5
89.3
65.3
80.6
86.3
83.2
84.2
91.0
Ash
%
28.4
27.1
28.5
29.8
29.8
30.3
33.4
33.8
25.5
Sinks at 1 80
Wt
%
28.8
22.5
10.7
34.7
19.4
13.7
16.8
15.8
9.0
Ash
%
64.9
65.7
67.3
55.3
57.8
61.0
64.2
63.2
58.1
- 0.5 mm
Wt
%
Ash
%
6.9
24.2
9.2
25.1
NGM
% within 0.10RD
<7
710
1015
1520
2025
>25
Difficulty of Separation
Simple
Moderately difficult
Difficult
Very difficult
Exceedingly difficult
Formidable
Table 8. Relationship between NGM and Difficulty of Separation
77
Sample Particulars
Ash
(%)
Cr
Ni
Co
Mo
Pb
Sn
Hg
As
Sb
Bi
Be
Cd
Kashmir Lignite
Kutch Lignite
South Arcot Lignite
Palana Lignite
Makum Coal, Assam
Baragolai Coal, Assam
Talcher, Orissa
Morpa Colly. (incl. Band) 7ft.
seam
Godavari Valley Coal
Umrer Coal
Purewa Top Seam, Singrauli CF
Wardha Valley Coal
Dilwadi Block, Korba CF
Kusmunda Block, Korba CF
Ramgarh Coal
Charcha Colly, Sohagpur CF
W. Chirimiri Colly. Sohagpur
CF
Metka Colly. VIII Seam (J&K)
Rampur Seam, Ib-river CF
nd = below detectable range
Source: CFRI
55.6
19.5
6.2
12.7
4.1
10.1
15.0
29.1
500
100
nd
nd
10
465
465
300
250
130
33
35
150
45
465
150
300
170
233
80
210
200
465
100
60
80
80
80
112
94
76
120
10
100
nd
nd
nd
50
50
nd
100
86
56
100
150
40
50
25
150
nd
nd
nd
20
50
nd
20
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.31
nd
100
100
75
50
50
100
100
25
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
100
465
400
500
700
450
150
100
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
19
8
5
19
16.4
14.4
23.0
19.5
17.4
33.8
27.8
14.0
12.5
250
20
200
nd
10
50
100
100
10
400
400
200
200
75
200
200
200
200
138
164
118
124
138
64
88
80
164
124
88
120
100
100
56
56
56
120
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
20
100
nd
nd
60
100
66
70
90
60
40
40
116
10
50
nd
nd
nd
nd
20
10
30
0.37
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
75
100
100
75
50
50
50
60
75
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
400
100
150
700
100
50
50
100
150
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
5
5
11
10
10
8
5
8
10
21.2
29.8
200
10
200
200
70
140
76
112
nd
nd
70
50
nd
nd
nd
nd
50
50
nd
nd
nd
nd
400
70
nd
nd
8
13
Table 9. Trace Metals Content in Different Indian Coal/Lignite Ash and Fly Ash and Bottom Ash (in ppm)
78
Thermal Power
Stations
%
SiO2
%
Al2O3
%
Fe2O3
%
CaO
%
MgO
%
SO3
%
Alkalis
% loss on
Ignition
Badarpur
Indraprasta
Rajghat
Faridabad
Panipat
Bhatinda
Ropar
Kota
Harduganj
Panki
Paricha
Tanda
Unchahar
Lucknow
Obra
Anpara
Singrauli
Rihand
NCTPP (Dadri)
BHEL (Hardwar)
Ahmedabad
Gandhinagar
Ukai
Wankbori
Sikka
Amarkantak
Korba (West)
Korba (East)
Satpura
Korba STPS
Vindhyachal
Bhuswal
Chandrapur
Koradih
Kaparkheda
Parli
Paras
Kothagudem
Nellore
Ramagundam
Raichur
Ennore
Tuticorin
Mettur
Barauni
Muzaffarpur
Patratu
Bokaro
Chandrapura
Durgapur
Talcher
Bandel
Santaldih
Kolaghat
Titagarh
Farakka
Bongaigon
Kahalgaon
Nasik
Trombay (TATA)
Neyveli
Vijayawada
Source: CFRI
63.94
56.99
63.20
56.60
61.50
62.14
62.14
61.66
61.80
62.02
62.70
62.80
64.00
65.42
64.24
60.28
59.50
65.20
55.55
56.30
68.05
58.06
55-66
54-67
63.42
67.30
63.84
64.70
66.84
67.70
64.31
66.46
60.30
64.20
65.10
68.10
70.92
61.20
60.18
60.10
62.75
58.05
63.30
58.70
60.28
61.17
65.71
55.32
63.90
49.30
59.84
56.70
58.68
61.57
59.35
60.84
57.10
61.57
58-62
54-66
45-59
63.14
24.40
26.11
24.50
27.32
30.50
25.64
27.44
26.60
16.10
23.00
19.92
18.91
27.10
24.59
23.60
29.24
32.40
23.45
29.56
28.35
19.02
22.61
25-30
19-23
18.68
16.02
19.80
23.00
18.30
23.00
17.67
23.88
26.88
25.40
23.20
17.24
18.43
28.19
18.14
26.50
24.32
27.21
25.60
26.01
22.58
21.24
20.58
27.33
24.20
18.20
21.01
20.91
22.31
26.33
30.00
28.10
20.21
26.33
15-31
22-28
21-30
24.63
5.12
4.56
4.90
5.64
2.20
5.16
4.50
3.98
5.60
5.90
10.17
8.98
6.40
4.55
5.05
4.12
4.40
7.73
5.00
4.75
6.60
6.80
2-3
5.00
9.05
10.88
10.38
4.63
8.88
4.63
10.23
4.45
5.30
4.80
4.50
7.07
6.04
4.79
16.28
5.80
5.77
7.24
5.50
7.66
8.45
8.95
8.00
5.59
5.30
10.20
11.55
7.79
9.65
6.35
4.05
2.94
8.81
6.35
3-7
5-9
1-5
3.00
1.50
1.07
1.60
1.74
0.40
1.86
0.90
0.09
3.10
2.23
0.67
0.70
0.80
0.72
0.36
0.80
1.20
0.47
0.91
1.02
0.96
2.78
0.2-2.0
2.0-3.6
1.75
2.70
0.58
1.40
0.58
1.40
1.86
2.06
1.18
1.25
2.16
2.52
1.28
0.60
2.08
4.80
5.32
Trace
1.10
0.95
1.10
0.91
0.88
0.71
0.98
6.43
2.30
Trace
1.49
0.95
0.88
2.31
5.12
1.60
3-5
0.5
5-16
2.15
1.11
1.17
0.90
0.90
0.60
0.86
0.50
0.93
0.90
0.82
1.06
0.96
0.72
0.33
0.70
1.00
0.50
0.46
0.42
0.82
0.85
1.68
2.0-3.0
0.2-3.0
1.58
0.15
1.45
0.44
1.54
0.44
1.58
0.32
0.51
0.85
0.46
0.60
0.77
1.50
1.28
1.20
Trace
2.72
0.80
0.27
0.31
1.00
0.91
0.95
0.70
3.20
0.84
1.19
0.85
0.85
0.70
1.32
1.66
0.85
1-3
1.00
3-4
1.65
0.15
0.10
0.30
0.10
0.10
0.25
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.36
0.30
0.10
Trace
1.12
0.08
0.01
0.23
0.40
0.72
0-1.25
0.08
0.10
0.14
0.02
0.14
0.10
0.07
1.10
1.60
0.40
0.30
0.02
Trace
0.24
0.56
0.35
0.99
Trace
1.00
1.40
1.95
2.01
0.45
0.62
Trace
1.35
0.60
Trace
0.30
0.09
0.44
Trace
0.30
Trace
0.3
1-3
2.25
1.90
2.57
1.51
Trace
2.15
2.20
1.75
0.40
2.06
1.77
1.62
1.27
1.36
1.30
1.65
0.5-1.5
1.77
1.25
1.40
1.86
1.37
1.0-1.5
0.93
1.98
1.32
0.15
1.82
0.12
0.93
1.23
1.40
0.80
0.92
1.60
0.90
0.80
0.95
1.00
1.46
2.89
1.09
0.20
0.10
1.75
1.11
1.90
0.96
0.81
4.22
0.85
1.80
2.26
0.83
0.85
0.4-0.6
1.8-2.2
1.5-5.1
2.11
2.01
7.56
5.70
2.80
2.30
2.75-6.88
2.28
11.80
4.30
5.80
3.70
6.20
4.80
3.40
5.50
0.94
0.50
1.40
2.60
1.0-6.0
7.3
4.2-8.8
2.0-3.0
3.9
> 4.0
4.10
0.30
2.90
0.30
1.40
0.50
5.20
4.50
5.40
0.87
0.43
3.80
1.05
0.63
3.80
1.46
2.80
0.90
6.00
6.60
1.07
5.41
6.20
11.33
0.27
10.80
3.94
0.60
6.20
0.32
4.84
1.60
0.5-2.4
1.5-2.5
1-2
1-2
Table 10. Ash Analysis of Various Indian Fly Ash
WASHERY/CPP
1.1.1.2 A. Projects
Completed
1. Coking Coal Washeries
Rajrappa
Nandan
Kedla
Madhuband
Modification of Gidi Washery
(Installation of Froth Flotation
Plant)
Deficiencies & recommendation
for rectification of Sudamdih
Washery
Modification of Kargali Washery
(Installation of Deshaling Plant)
Modification of Bhojudih Washery
(Installation of Deshaling Plant)
Bhojudih Froth Flotation Plant
Dugda-I Deshaling Plant
Dugda-II Deshaling Plant
Sudamdih Deshaling Plant
2. Non-Coking Coal Washeries
Piparwar
Bina
B. Modification of Existing
Washeries
(All Coking Coal Washeries)
Kathara Washery Modification
Patherdih Washery Modification
Gidi Washery Modification
Kargali Washery Modification
Installation of Froth Flotation
Plant at Kargali Washery
Treatment of Fine Coal at Sawang
Washery
Nandan Washery (July 92)
Patherdih Washery (Phase I) for
replacement of Baum Jig
Nandan Washery (Nov. 95)
Conversion of Patherdih Washery
to Non-coking Coal Washery
Kedla Deshaling Plant
Company
Capacity
(Mtpa)
Status
CCL
WCL
CCL
BCCL
CCL
3.00
1.20
2.60
2.50
0.42
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
BCCL
2.00
Completed
CCL
1.62
Completed
BCCL
2.00
Completed
BCCL
BCCL
BCCL
BCCL
0.40
2.40
2.40
2.00
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
CCL
NCL
6.50
4.50
Completed
Completed
CCL
BCCL
CCL
CCl
CCL
3.00
2.00
2.00
2.40
0.40
Under Implementation
Dropped
Dropped
Dropped
Yet to be taken up
CCL
Yet to be taken up
WCL
BCCL
1.20
Dropped
Dropped
WCL
BCCL
0.80
2.00
Submitted
Submitted
CCL
2.00
Submitted
Source: CMPDIL
Table 11. CMPDIL Coal Preparation Reference List
PROJECT
Sampling and Analysis of Washed Coals
from Dugda Washery
Beneficiation Potentiality of Coals from Karo
seams of Sawang Colliery
Pilot Plant Assessment of Coals from
V/VI,VII and Coal Seams of Jeenagora
Colliery for Metallurgical Use
Coking Potentiality of Washed Lower Seam
Coals of Jharia Coalfield
Assessment of Low Volatile Coking Coals of

Rajapur and Keshalpur of Jharia coalfield
Beneficiation of Lower Seam coals of Jharia
Characterisation of the Kusmunda coals of

Korba coalfield
Quality monitoring of coal at Badarpui

Thermal Power Station
Beneficiation of Thermal Coals
DESCRIPTION
Evaluation of performance of the Dugda
Washery
Washability analysis of 5 coal seams and
evaluation of coking potential
Micum tests on coals produced from the
seams
Washability tests of several coal seams from
the Jharia coalfield which will form future
coking coal reserves. Study assessed the
potential yield of coking coal.
As above, but for a different area of the Jharia
coalfield.
An evaluation of alternative methods for
cleaning the lower seams of the Jharia
coalfield.
Analysis of 3 bulk samples from the
Kusmunda mine to be used to supply the
Korba East IPP power project in Madhya
Pradesh.
Analysis of coal samples taken from the
Badarpui power station located in Madhya
Pradesh.
Assessment of selective breakage studies on
samples obtained from Talcher, Ib Valley and
Karanpura coalfields
Table 12. CFRI Recent Projects
COMPANY NAME
BHEL
Tecnimont ICB Ltd
AKA Washeries (India) Pvt. Ltd
Larsen & Toubro Ltd

Engineering Projects & Equipment
Group
Mining & Allied Machinery
Corporation Ltd
(Government of India Enterprise)
McNally Bharat Engineering Co. Ltd
Humboldt Wedag
Marketing and Engineering Office
TRF Ltd
Elecon Engineering Company Ltd
ADDRESS
BHEL House,
Siri Fort,
New Delhi 110 049
168 Vidyanagri Marg,
Kalina,
Mumbai 400 098
6 Old Post Office Street,
(4th Floor),
Calcutta 700 001
Kanak Building,
41 Jawaharlal Nehru Road
Calcutta 700 071
Durgapur,
Burdwan,
West Bengal 713 210
44 Park Street,
4th Floor,
Calcutta 700 016
12 Camac Street,
Calcutta 700 017
11 Station Road
Burma Mines
Jamshedpur 831 007
Vallabh Vidyanagar
Gujarat 388 120
CONTACT
Mr. S.M. Dev Raj,
Sr. Deputy General Manager
(Power Sector)
Mr. G.A. Krishnan
INTEREST
Construction,
Equipment
Construction
Consultancy
Mr. S.C. Pal,

Sales Development Manager,
Mineral Dressing and
Processing Division
Mr. S. Gangopadhyay,
Manager (Commercial)
Construction,
Equipment
Equipment
Mr. S. Lahri,
Construction,
Dy. General Manager Marketing Equipment
Mr. Anup Dutta
Mr. P.K. Ghosh,
Asst. General Manager
Mr. T.K. Choudhary,
General Manager
Construction,
Equipment
Construction
Equipment
Table 13. Indian Companies with an Interest/Involvement in Coal Preparation
COMPANY NAME
Indiana Conveyors Ltd
ADDRESS
Indiana House,
PO Box 7409 Off M Vassanji Rd
Metallurgical & Engineering

Consultants (India) Ltd (MECON)
Eastern Electrolyser Ltd
Heavy Engineering Ltd

Aryan Coal Beneficiations Ltd
Central Mine Planning & Design

Institute Ltd (CMPDIL)
Central Fuel Research Institute
(CFRI)
VBC
Marol Nake
Andheri East
Mumbai 400 059
Ranchi 834 002
Bihar
New Asiatic Building, H. Block,

Connaught Circus,
New Delhi 110 001
Plant Panta Road,
Ranchi 834 004
C-102, Lower Ground Floor,
New Multan Nagar,
New Delhi 110 056
Gondwana Place,
Kanke Road,
Ranchi 834 008
P.O. FRI,
Jealgora District,
Dhanbad,
Bihar 828 108
3rd Floor, Progressive Towers,
6-2-913/914, Khairatabad,
Hyderabad 500 004
CONTACT
INTEREST
Mr. Gobind Hingorani,

Chairman
Equipment
Mr. S.P. Chathley,

General Manager
(Coal, Chemicals & PetroChemicals)
Mr. Chintan Tiwari,
Director
Construction,
Equipment
Mr. S.S. Jha,

GGM
Mr. G.C. Mrig
Managing Director
Construction,
Equipment
Operations
Mr. Animesh N. Sahay,

General Manager, Business
Development
Dr. Kalyan Sen,
Director
Plant Design, Testing
Mr. Ch. Srihari,

Vice President,
Corporate Planning & Project
Finance
Investment, Operations
Equipment
Plant Design, Testing
Table 13 (cont). Indian Companies with an Interest/Involvement in Coal Preparation
NAME OF CLIENT AND LOCATION
SCOPE OF WORK
CAPACITY
Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board
Design, Manufacture, Supply, Testing, Erection &

Commissioning of Coal Conveying System
comprising of:Rotary Breaker
1x1000mm Belt Conveyor System 5000Mt lg.
Complete Civil, Structurals, Electricals
Commissioning of Coal Handling Plant
comprising of:Underground Track Hopper
4 Paddle Feeders (Cap. 750t/h each)
4 Ring Hammer Mills (Cap. 750t/h each)
Dust Extraction & Ventilation System
Commissioning of Coal Unloading System
comprising of:1 Rotaside Wagon Tippler with Side Arm Charger
for 25 tips/h
6 Vibrating Feeders (Cap. 450t/h each)
Dust Suppression System
(Shobhapur Mines to Sarani Thermal Power

Station)
Madhya Pradesh
NTPC
Singrauli Super Thermal Power Station
Stage II (2x500MW)
Uttar Pradesh
Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board

Kothagudam Thermal Power Station
Andhra Pradesh
For:Station A (4x60MW)
Station B (2x110MW)
Station C (2x110MW)
BHEL
For:
Maharashtra State Electricity Board
Khaperkheda Thermal Power Station
Stage - II (2x210MW)
Maharashtra

Commissioning of Coal Stacker-cum-Reclaimer
Complex comprising of:2 Reversible Stacker cum Reclaimer Reclaiming
Cap. 2000t/h Max. Stacking Cap. 1800t/h Max.;
36Mt Boom
2x1600mm Yard Belt Conveyor 505Mt lg.
YEAR OF ORDER
550t/h
ORDER VALUE
(Million Rs)
80
2x1500t/h
260
1983
2x1200t/h
40
1987
1800t/h
80
1987
Table 14. Larsen & Toubro Ltd Coal-Handling Plants Reference List
1983

BHEL
For:
Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Limited
Tenughat Thermal Power Station
Stage - I (2x210MW)
Bihar
Maharashtra State Electricity Board

Chandrapur Super Thermal Power Station
Unit
V & VI ( 2x500MW)
Maharashtra
NTPC
Korba Super Thermal Power Station
Stage I (3x200MW) &
Stage II (3x500MW)
Madhya Pradesh
SCOPE OF WORK
CAPACITY
2x1600t/h
ORDER VALUE
(Million Rs)
690
YEAR OF
ORDER
1988

Commissioning of Coal Handling Plant:
Underground Track Hopper
4 Vibrating Screens (Cap. 800t/h each)
1 Unidirectional Stacker cum Reclaimer
Reclaiming Cap. 1600t/h Max. Stacking Cap.
1600t/h Max.; 30Mt Boom
2x1600mm Belt Conveyor System 6200Mtlg
Complete Civil, Structurals, Electricals &
Instrumentation
Commissioning of Coal Handling Plant:
Underground Track Hopper
2 Rotaside Wagon Tipplers with Side Arm
Chargers for 25 Tips/h each
2 Apron Feeders (Cap. 1500t/h each)
4 Impactor Crushers (Cap. 1250t/h each)
4 Wobbler Feeders (Cap. 1250t/h each)
Instrumentation
(Augmentation) comprising of:Underground Track Hopper
4 Grizzly Feeders (Cap. 1250t/h each)
2x2500t/h
580
1988
2x2000t/h
170
1988
Table 14 (cont). Larsen & Toubro Ltd Coal-Handling Plants Reference List

NTPC
Singrauli Super Thermal Power Station
Stage II (2x500MW)
Uttar Pradesh
NTPC
National Capital Power Project (Dadri)
Stage I (4x210MW)
Vidyut-Nagar
Uttar Pradesh
Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board

Sanjay Gandhi Thermal Power Station
Stage I (2x210MW)
Madhya Pradesh
SCOPE OF WORK
CAPACITY

Commissioning of Additional Coal Storage
Facilities comprising of:1 Unidirectional Stacker cum Reclaimer
Instrumentation
for 12 tips/h
Dust Suppression System
Commissioning of Double Stream Coal Handling
Plant (excluding Civil Works) comprising of:Underground Track Hopper (210 M lg)
Crushed Coal Covered Storage 23000Mt
2 Roll Crushers (Cap. 600t/h each)
2 Rotary Breakers (Cap. 1200t/h each)
Complete Civil, Structurals, Electricals & Instr.
1200t/h
ORDER VALUE
(Million Rs)
68.70
YEAR OF ORDER
1989
700t/h
51.10
1989
1200t/h
464.50
1989

Karnataka Power Corporation Limited

Raichur Thermal Power Station
Stage II (1x210MW)
Karnataka
Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board

Rayalaseema Thermal Power Station
Stage I (2x210MW)
Andhra Pradesh
SCOPE OF WORK
CAPACITY
1260t/h
ORDER VALUE
(Million Rs)
172.30
YEAR OF
ORDER
1992

Commissioning of Coal Handling Plant Equipment
comprising of:2 Rotaside Wagon Tipplers with Side Arm
2 Rotary Breakers (Cap. 1260t/h each)
2 Eccentric Disc Screens (Cap.1260TPHeach)
1 Unidirectional Stacker cum Reclaimer with
Hydraulic Drive Arrangement Reclaiming Cap.
1260t/h Max. Stacking Cap. 1260t/h Max.; 30Mt.
Boom
1 Yard Conveyor (Cap.1260t/h, 885Mt lg)
Instrumentation
1200t/h Max.; 28Mt. Boom
2x1400mm Belt Conveyor System 2100Mtlg
1 Yard Conveyor (Cap.1200t/h,400Mt lg)
Instrumentation
2x1200t/h
256.60
1992
NTPC
Ramagundam Super Thermal Power
Station
Stage II (3x500MW)
Andhra Pradesh
Rajasthan State Electricity Board
Kota Thermal Power Station
Stage III (1x210MW)
Rajasthan
Grasim Industries Limited

Captive Power Plant (1x40MW)
Nagda
Madhya Pradesh
SCOPE OF WORK
CAPACITY
700t/h
ORDER VALUE
(Million Rs)
98.80
YEAR OF
ORDER
1992

comprising of:2 Rotaside Wagon Tippler for 12 tips/h each
Charger for 24 tips/h
1 Apron Feeders (Cap. 1500t/h)
1 Two-Roll Crusher (Cap. 1500t/h)
1 Rotary Breakers (Cap. 1000t/h)
1x1400mm Belt Conveyor System 320Mt lg)
Instrumentation
for 15 Tips/h
1 Apron Feeder (Cap. 750t/h)
1 Four-Roll Crusher (Cap. 750t/h)
Belt Conveyor System 1380Mt lg
Instrumentation
1200t/h
158.40
1993
750t/h
225.50
1995

Rajasthan State Electricity Board

Suratgarh Thermal Power Station
Stage I (2x250MW)
Rajasthan
NTPC
Vindhayachal Super Thermal Power
Station
Stage II (2x500MW)
Uttar Pradesh
Jindal Vijaynagar Steel Limited

Toranagallu
Karnataka
SCOPE OF WORK
CAPACITY
1200t/h
ORDER VALUE
(Million Rs)
273.10
YEAR OF
ORDER
1995

2 Four-Roll Crushers (Cap. 1200t/h each)
2x1400mm Belt Conveyor System 585Mt lg
Instrumentation
comprising of:1 Unidirectional Stacker cum Reclaimer
1 Yard Conveyor (Cap.2000t/h, 840Mt lg)
Instrumentation
Commissioning of Coal/Ore Handling System
comprising of:2 Rotaside Wagon Tipplers with 25 ton Side Arm
3 Unidirectional Stacker cum Reclaimers
Complete Dust Suppression, Ventilation, Sump
Pump, Electricals & Instrumentation
2000t/h
98.50
1995
1200/1000t/h
252.20
1995
Larsen & Toubro Limited

Tadpatri Cement Plant
Andhra Pradesh
SCOPE OF WORK
CAPACITY

Commissioning of Coal/Limestone/Clinker/Mill
Additives/Bag/Bulk Cement Handling Plant
comprising of:1 Rotaside Wagon Tippler with 12.5 ton Side Arm
Charger for 15 Tips/h
Belt Conveying System 650mm to 1600mm Width
Tube Conveyor System, 2x200 tons/hour Cap. for
Bulk Cement
Complete Dust Suppression, Ventilation, Sump
Pump, Electricals & Instrumentation
265/1300t/h
ORDER VALUE
(Million Rs)
100
YEAR OF
ORDER
1995
Mt
DISTANCE
Pit-head
<500Km
500-1000Km
>1000Km
TOTAL
1996-97
70
50
30
50
200
2001-02
109
51
30
95
285
2006-07
128
55
47
170
400
2009-10
155
70
60
215
500
Table 15. Requirement of Thermal Coal by Distance
Financial Benefit
Non-Fuel Related Power Station Savings
Rail Freight Savings
Cost of Coal Preparation
Cost of Mining Increase
Sub-total Financial Benefit
MRs/a
269
338
- 146
- 36
426
Economic Impact
Reduced Land for Ash Disposal
Reduced Water Consumption
Reduced SO2 Emission
Reduced Dust Emission
Reduced CO2
Sub-total Economic Benefit
100
73
3
94
1
251
TOTAL BENEFIT
675
Table 16. Economic Benefits of Coal Preparation
EQUIPMENT
Centrifuges
Clarifiers
Cyclones
Crushers
Feeders
Filters
Flotation Equipment
DM Baths
Hydrocyclone
Jigs
Laboratory & Testing Equipment
Magnetic Separators
Operations
UK COMPANY SUPPLIER
Baker Process
Birtley Engineering
Don Valley Engineering
Baker Process
Dorr Oliver Ltd
Stokes
Svedala Ltd
JMC Mining Services Ltd
Svedala Ltd
Svedala Ltd
B.L. Pegson Ltd
BJD Ltd
Nordberg
Ogden
Parker Plant Ltd
MMD Ltd
Locker
Birtley Engineering
Baker Process
Haith Industrial Ltd
Svedala Ltd
George Meller Ltd
Svedala Ltd
Unifloc
Birtley Engineering
Baker Process
Birtley Engineering
Svedala Ltd
Svedala Ltd
Unifloc
Christy Hunt Ltd
Boxmag Rapid
Erietz Magnetics
Svedala Ltd
Norec Ltd.
Ogden Plant Ltd.
Table 17. UK Equipment Suppliers
EQUIPMENT
Samplers
Screens
Belting
Other Process Equipment
Pumps
Project Design Consultants
Weighing Equipment
UK COMPANY SUPPLIER
Birtley Engineering
Prisecter / Erietz
Svedala Ltd
Linatex Ltd
Robert Cort Ltd
B.L. Pegson Ltd
British Jeffrey Diamond 100 Ltd
George Meller Ltd
Mogensen
Birtley Engineering
Rhewum (G.B.) Ltd
Semperit Conveyor Services Ltd
Svedala Ltd
Unifloc Ltd.
Birtley Engineering Ltd.
Svedala Ltd.
Baker Process Ltd.
B.L. Pegson Ltd
George Meller Ltd
Grindex Pumps Ltd
ITW Devcon & Mazel
Linatex Ltd
Selwood Ltd
Svedala Ltd
Sykes Pumps
Warman (U.K.) Ltd
Birtley Engineering
British Jeffrey Diamond 100 Ltd
Baker Process
Kaeverner
Procon Engineering
Ramsey
Table 17 (cont). UK Equipment Suppliers

Review of Technology Requirements of The Coal Preparation Sector in India

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review of Technology Requirements of The Coal Preparation Sector in India

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LIMITED DISTRIBUTION UK COMPANIES ONLY

Report No. COAL R191

LIMITED DISTRIBUTION UK COMPANIES ONLY

Crown Copyright 2000

LIMITED DISTRIBUTION UK COMPANIES ONLY