Coal Market In India, New Delhi, 2013 Total Coal Quality Management Systems Viktor Valenta Enelex, Czech Republic

Czech Republic coal mining Germany Poland Czech Republic Slovakia Austria Northern-Czechia basin (thermal coal) Ostrava-Karviná region (hard coal)

Early 1980’s developments DGP-2 at the Počerady power plant stockyard (1985)

On-line monitoring in mines in 1990’s GE1100.S at the KU-300 excavator, Tušimice mine (1992)

Economy of coal utilization  Consumer side  Most of focus on utilization efficiency  Direct feedback by plant performance score  Not too much options to handle coal quality  Mine / Washery  Good opportunity to manage coal quality  Focus on coal quality based on profit  Focus on expenses of extraction and washing  No direct feedback Implementation of alternative procedures:  Coal blending at mine/stockpile  Minimize coal washing  Mines to produce homogenous coal quality The Coal Quality Management Systems are designed to improve the economy of coal utilization. Both producer side and consumer side do have possibilities to gain the improvements in operational efficiency:

Coal suitability for processing Q r : 5,4 MJ/kg A d : 61,5 % S d : 2,2 % Q r : 12,6 MJ/kg A d : 28,8 % S d : 2,3 % Q r : 10,4 MJ/kg A d : 39,8 % S d : 1,4 % Q r : 14,0 MJ/kg A d : 17,9 % S d : 2,2 % Q r : 14,1 MJ/kg A d : 17,1 % S d : 2,7 % Q r : 10,7 MJ/kg A d : 37,0 % S d : 3,0 % Coal quality fluctuation in different seams brings difficulties in further processing of coal.

Fluctuation of input coal quality decreases the efficiency of blending. There is a need of stable input to produce stable results of blending. Possible solutions  Monitoring of the coal washery performance  Monitoring of inputs and outputs  Monitoring of rejects  Active controlling of washing process  Simplified coal blending with direct feedback  Blending is achieved minimum investments into existing technology  Direct feedback allows adaptable blending ratio  Coal homogenization at the stockyard  Homogenized coal is more suitable for blending or consumption  Corrective actions can be taken to gain desired result Coal blending efficiency

Sko-Energo coal handling plant, Mladá Boleslav performs the simplified blending using Enelex online ashmeter

Coal blending efficiency Windrow homogenization method, Tušimice mine

Total coal quality management systems  Total quality management systems cover the whole coal treatment process to achieve improvements of coal utilization efficiency. Stable power generation and production of coal-fired facilities bring positive environmental and economic effect.  Total quality management systems are not only a question of technical equipment but also a symbiosis of rules and decisions.  Total quality management systems guarantee customer satisfaction in any stage of the process.  Total quality management systems utilize:  Input information  Technical tools  Coal flow management

Total coal quality management systems General diagram The operation of the whole technology is monitored by the online analyzers and controlled by the PLC system to ensure compliance with customer requirements.

Technical tools of coal quality management  Online sensors:  Determination of machine position (GPS, RF triangulation, positioning)  Machine status information  Belt weighers  Coal analysis (as per need: ash, moisture, calorific, sulfur)  Monitoring equipment (CCTV system, security system etc.)  Supporting technology:  Automatic coal samplers  Laboratory rapid-analyzers Total coal quality management systems

Tušimice mine – coal stockyard is fully integrated into quality control system and uses the online coal quality measurement to control homogenization

Coal flow management  Suitable timing:  Managing of coal quality requires a time to react to actual situation  Needed reaction time depends on speed of transportation, capacity of intermediate storage and response time of monitoring methods  Stockyards:  The stockyard can keep coal for several days or weeks  Outlet from the stockyard is predictable  Stockyard can become active part of coal handling and blending  Coal flow redirection:  Usually requires technology adaptation  Enables conditional coal handling  Optional coal circulation offers efficient correction tool Total coal quality management systems

Project example – Tušimice mine  The company has been established in 1953 – state owned company  At present owned by ČEZ a.s.  In time of maximal production:  Employees  Mined overburden 55 mil. m3  Coal mining 9 excavators, 22 mil. t. of coal/year  At present:  Employees  Overburden layer thickness 100 – 120 m, 3 excavators  Mined overburden 27 mil. m3  6 excavators types KU 300 and K800, 13,5 – 15 mil.tons/year  The most important customers:  ČEZ a.s., Power plant Tušimice  ČEZ a.s., Power plant Prunéřov I. and II.  ČEZ a.s., Power plant Chvaletice Coal mine Nástup Tušimice

Coal parameters  Brown coal  Ash content: 17% – 43%  Sulfur content: 1,2% – 6,7%  Heating value: 8,5 MJ/kg – 13,5 MJ/kg  Coal grain size – end product 0 – 40 mm  Customers ´ requirements for end product:  Heating value 10,5 – 11,5 MJ/kg,  Max. content of sulfur - 3 % Coal mine Nástup Tušimice Project example – Tušimice mine

Difficult geological situation Coal mine Nástup Tušimice

Total quality system diagram general view of the mine control system Coal mine Nástup Tušimice The control system indicates the status of the important technology in general control panel.

Partial quality system diagram Crushing plant Coal mine Nástup Tušimice Partial control panels are used to monitor and control of the technology units in details.

Coal mine Nástup Tušimice Homogenization stockpile diagrams Automatic coal quality mapping The stockyard control module performs mapping and statistic evaluation of stored coal parameters.

Coal Quality Management System Economic profit  Before the online measurement started  lab samples were evaluated only  time needed for measurement and evaluation – ca 3 days  quick answer for quality changes was not possible  high penalties if coal parameters were not fulfilled  up to 2 mil.t / year of coal had to be rejected  After the online measurement was put in operation  coal mixing directly on belt conveyors  quick answer to coal quality changes  decreased penalties for low quality coal deliveries  After the homogenization process started  penalties decreased to zero  previously unusable coal can be mixed in homogenization process and sold (ca 2 mil. t / year) Coal mine Nástup Tušimice

Thank you! Viktor Valenta Enelex s.r.o. U Stadionu Chvaletice Czech Republic Phone :