July 2010
PF 10-08 Profiles
Landfill disposal costs are
rising rapidly
Coal fly ash production is expected
to increase as a result of the worlds
increasing reliance on coal-fired power
generation over the next few decades.
Dealing with such a large waste stream
is becoming an important
environmental issue. The conventional
landfill approach is constrained by
concerns over the potential for
underground water pollution and rising
costs of obtaining land and disposal site
management. This concern has recently
increased in the USA following the
unprecedented fly ash spill from the
Kingston Fossil Plant in Tennessee.
Consequently, almost all major coal-
consuming countries are promoting
beneficial utilisation of fly ash. The
largest-volume and most profitable
utilisation option for fly ash is as a
cement raw material or replacement for
clinker in cement manufacture and
replacement for ordinary Portland
cement in concrete production.
However, fly ash use in
cement/concrete is undermined by the
carbon-in-ash issue in that excessive
unburnt carbon in fly ash adversely
affects the air entrainment performance
of concrete. With inadequate air
bubbles trapped in the concrete
structure, the concrete is vulnerable to
freeze-thaw cycles, leading to cracks
and weakened mechanical strength. The
marketability of the fly ash is therefore
reduced.
Excessive unburnt carbon in fly ash
is also undesirable from the plant
operation perspective. It represents an
apparent fuel loss so that the overall
plant efficiency is reduced. Moreover,
the performance of electrostatic
precipitators is degraded by an
Reducing carbon-in-ash
Excessive carbon
reduces the marketability
of fly ash
excessive carbon level because carbon
has high conductivity and loses electric
charges quickly. As a consequence, the
stack opacity may increase
considerably, making it difficult to
comply with particulate emission
regulations.
This report reviews current measures
and technologies that can be used to
prevent excessive carbon-in-ash in
pulverised coal combustion (PCC)
power plants. The immediate response
to the carbon-in-ash issue is to improve
coal burnout in boiler furnaces. The
greatest challenge for present-day boiler
operation is to achieve both low NOx
emissions and satisfactory coal burnout.
Improving the fineness of coal mill
output using a dynamic classifier is the
most effective measure to improve coal
burnout, which requires coal cleaning
and optimisation of coal mills. It is also
important to reduce any air/coal
distribution imbalance among burners,
to increase air-coal mixing rates at both
burner and OFA levels, and to increase
local oxygen availability and coal
particle residence time before reaching
the convective pass. A plasma-assisted
combustion enhancement can achieve
better ignition and a more stable flame
for less combustible coals. Finally,
computer-based combustion diagnostic
tools and optimisation systems are
becoming invaluable measures to tackle
the carbon-in-ash issue.
In all the national standards for fly
ash use in cement/concrete, the
permitted concentration range of
unburnt carbon in fly ash is indicated
by the loss on ignition (LOI) parameter.
This mass-based parameter can be
measured quickly and serves practically
The performance of
ESPs can be degraded,
leading to high stack
opacity
as the first step in fly ash quality
control. It is also clear that the absolute
quantity of unburnt carbon alone is not
sufficient to judge the suitability of a
fly ash for use in cement/concrete
production. To determine precisely that
suitability, the actual morphological
properties of a fly ash need to be taken
into account. However, at present only
few national regulatory standards, for
example the US standards, involve
terms for so-called performance-based
fly ash specifications for use in
concrete applications.
Apart from China and Russia which
allow for relatively high LOI values for
certain ashes, the other major coal-
consuming countries stipulate similar
LOI limits for fly ash for use in
concrete production. This broad
consistency in permitted LOI range is
perceived to be beneficial for
development and wider deployment of
carbon-reduction technologies.
The report finally reviews a variety
of methods for carbon reduction from
fly ash, which are key to increased and
expanded beneficial utilisation of fly
ash. As the simplest method,
classification works by the fact that the
majority of unburnt carbon concentrates
on large particles. Froth flotation has
been used to recover disposed fly ash
into a useful fly ash product and an
unburnt carbon-based solid fuel.
Triboelectrostatic separators are
chemical free, reliable and also
compact. Thermal processes can
recover the thermal energy from
unburnt carbon through combustion,
fusion or steam gasification. Carbon
surface modification is often considered
for fly ashes with relatively low
 raw ash silo

feeder

vibrating screen
feed rate: 40 t/h
negatively charged positive electrode positively charged
mineral particles carbon particles
separator

negative electrode

sampler

ProAsh EcoTherm IEA Clean Coal Centre is a

product high-carbon
storage silo
collaborative project of member
hopper
silo and product countries of the International
for carbon
return Energy Agency (IEA) to provide
information about and analysis of
blower coal technology, supply and use.
ash pump IEA Clean Coal Centre has
contracting parties and sponsors
to coal conveyor for reburn from: Australia, Austria, Brazil,
Canada, China, Denmark, the
The ST triboelectrostatic separator European Commission, Germany
India, Italy, Japan, Republic of
South Korea, the Netherlands,
Summary of requirements for LOI in different major coal-using countries New Zealand, Poland, Russia,
South Africa, Sweden, Spain,
Countries LOI limits, %, maximum Thailand, the UK and the USA.
Australia 36

Canada 310

China 515
Type A: 5
EU Type B: 27
Type C 4-9
India 5

Japan 38
Basic ash:35
Russia
Acid ash: 225
South Africa 5
Class F: 6 (12)
USA
Class C: 6

Each issue of Profiles is based on a Gemini House

unburnt carbon content, because the detailed study undertaken by IEA 10-18 Putney Hill
other carbon reduction methods are not Clean Coal Centre, the full report of London SW15 6AA
economically viable for these ashes. which is available separately. This United Kingdom
Ammonia and mercury contamination particular issue of Profiles is based on
are becoming barriers for fly ash the report: Tel: +44 (0)20 8780 2111
utilisation. There are thermal and Fax: +44 (0)20 8780 1746
chemical processes available to remove Reducing carbon-in-ash e-mail: mail@iea-coal.org
the ammonia from fly ash. Scientific Nigel Dong > Internet: www.iea-coal.org
research findings to date indicate that CCC/167, ISBN 978-92-9029-487-0,
mercury is unlikely to release into the 64 pp, May 2010,
environment in leachate or vapour 255*/85/42.50
under most management or utilisation * non-member countries
conditions. member countries
educational establishments within member
countries