Coconut Shell
Versus
Bituminous Coal Activated Carbon
A
ctivated carbon (AC) filter media
is commonly used in point-of-
use/point-of-entry (POU/POE)
water applications. The type of raw ma-
terials used to produce AC has a major
impact upon its characteristics. The two
most common are coconut shell and bi-
tuminous coal.
Coconut shell-based AC has the
most micropores. Micropores are defined
as pores less than 20 angstrom units (two
nm) in diameter. AC produced from bi-
tuminous coal have fewer micropores,
but more mesopores and macropores.
Mesopores are between 20 and 500 ang-
strom units (2 and 50 nm); macropores
exceed 500 angstrom units (50 nm). See
Table 1.
Table 1.
Pore type Pore size
Micropores < 2 nm
Mesopores 2 - 50 nm
Macropores > 50 nm
The scanning electron micrographs
(SEM) shown in Figure 1 were taken at
1,000X magnification. At this magnifica-
tion, the prevalence of the micropores can
be seen in the coconut shell-based acti-
vated carbon.
Pore volume among different pore
sizes is measured by nitrogen adsorption
and mercury intrusion pore volume re-
sults. Nitrogen adsorption and mercury
intrusion pore volume results can be plot-
ted to obtain a pore volume distribution
(see Figure 2). The quantity of micropores
present in coconut shell-based AC is
about 50 percent higher than bituminous
coal-based activated carbon.
The most common method used to
Water Conditioning & Purification
By Ken Schaeffer and Robert Potwora
Figure 1.
Coconut shell-based
Bituminous coal-based
distinguish micropore volume is the
ASTM D 4607, Standard Test
Method for Determination of Io-
dine Number of Activated Car-
Pore volume (mL per gram carbon)
bon, ASTM International.
Table 2 compares iodine num-
bers and other key properties
between coconut shell and bi-
tuminous coal-based AC.
Higher micropore vol-
umes (reflected in higher io-
dine numbers) in coconut
shell activated carbons means
they have much higher capac-
ity to adsorb small molecules,
such as volatile organic chemicals (VOC).
Higher capacity means coconut shell-
based activated carbon will last longer
before it needs to be replaced.
VOC treatment
Volatile organic chemicals include
most disinfection byproducts (DBPs),
such as trihalomethanes (THMs) and
other VOC contaminants, such as trichlo-
roethylene (TCE). Many VOCs have a
low molecular weight, typically less than
200 and have low water solubility.
To measure the AC’s theoretical satu-
ration capacity for VOCs, carbon adsorp-
tion isotherms were conducted on
coconut shell- and bituminous coal-based
activated carbons. The results for ben-
zene in water are shown in Figure 3.
At all benzene concentrations in wa-
ter, the benzene saturation capacities of
the coconut shell-based AC were higher.
Column 2 in Table 3 summarizes the
isotherm results for 10 ppb benzene in
water. The coconut shell AC had almost
twice the saturation capacity compared
to bituminous coal-based AC, 11 mg of
benzene per gram of coconut shell car-
bon versus six for the coal based. Column
Figure 2. Pore volume distribution
0.4
Coconut shell
0.35
Bituminous coal
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Micropores Mesopores Macropores
JUNE 2008
3 in Table 3 calculates the car- Table 2. coconut shell carbon.
bon usage (exhaustion) rate The capacity advantage
Base material Coconut shell Bituminous coal
based upon this saturation ca- shown with coconut shell AC
pacity at an influent of 10 ppb Iodine number (mg/g) 1,100-1,300 850-1,000 may not always be realized in
benzene. The amount of coco- Total ash (percent) Less than 3 8-15 (5-7 acid washed) actual full-scale use. Background
nut AC exhausted for every organics like total organic carbon
Hardness number 98-99 85-90
1,000 gallons of water treated (TOC) will diminish the AC’s
is 0.0076 pounds versus 0.014 saturation capacity for a VOC
pounds of bituminous AC. The cost of the Figure 3. Benzene adsorption isotherms to some extent. Also, low,
carbon exhausted per every 1,000 gallons empty bed contact times (wa-
Bituminous coal-based Coconut shell-based
of water treated was then calculated (see ter residence time) in the AC

x/m, benzene loading (mg/g carbon)

column four, Table 3). The cost of acid-
washed bituminous coal activated carbon
and unwashed coconut shell activated
carbon was used for this comparison.
Acid-washed was selected because un-
washed bituminous coal carbon has ash
or impurity levels three times higher,
compared to unwashed coconut shell
carbon. Acid-washed bituminous coal
AC has ash levels two times higher, com-
pared to unwashed coconut shell AC. In
column four, the treatment cost is almost
three times higher (with washed bitumi-
nous AC compared to unwashed coco-
nut shell AC), indicating a significant cost
savings with coconut shell AC.
The carbon adsorption isotherm re-
sults for methyl tertiary-butyl ether
(MTBE) in water are shown in Figure 4.
At all MTBE concentrations in water,
MTBE capacities of the coconut shell-
100
10
1 of Activated Carbon, ASTM In-
0.001 0.01 0.1
Concentration (mg/L)
based activated carbon were higher. Table
4 summarizes the results for 568 ppb
MTBE in water.
Again the saturation capacity of the
coconut shell carbon was significantly
higher. This translates into a treatment
cost 2.5 times higher with washed bitu-
minous carbon compared to unwashed
filter will prevent the
carbon’s saturation capacity
to be reached.
Additional
differences
Table 2 compares the
ASTM D 3802, Standard Test
Method for Ball-Pan Hardness
1 10 ternational of the two types
of activated carbon. A higher
hardness number means less
particle attrition and less dust. Coconut
shell carbon requires less water to rinse
(backwash) a new bed and generate
fewer fines during operation.
Coconut shell carbons are also more
environmentally friendly or green. The
coconut tree produces coconuts three
times a year. The tree is not killed to har-

JUNE 2008 Water Conditioning & Purification

Table 3. Benzene at 10 ppb
Carbon type
Coconut shell: CR1230C
Bituminous coal: CR1230B-AW
Figure
100
x/m, MTBE loading (mg/g carbon)
10
1 petition filed by domestic
0.1
vest the coconut shells; therefore, they are
a renewable resource. Bituminous coal
took millions of years to be formed;
hence, it’s a non-renewable resource. In
addition, part of the carbon dioxide pro-
duced during manufacture of coconut
shell carbon is removed by the coconut
trees and produces oxygen.
Water Conditioning & Purification
Carbon capacity Carbon usage Cost of carbon
mg/gram C pound C/1,000 gal. ¢/1,000 gal.
11 0.0076 0.64
6 0.014 1.7
4. MTBE adsorption isotherms Activated carbon
Bituminous coal-based Coconut shell-based supply
The United States has
two large domestic manufac-
turers of bituminous coal-
based activated carbon and,
for the last two decades, bitu-
minous coal-based activated
carbon was readily imported
from China. That has changed
dramatically in the last year.
In 2007, in response to a
1 10
Concentration (mg/L)
manufacturers, the US levied
new anti-dumping duty fees
on most activated carbon im-
ported from China, to the tune of 49-228
Table 4. MTBE at 568 ppb
Carbon capacity
Carbon type mg/gram C
Coconut shell: CR1230C 21.1
Bituminous coal: CR1230B-AW 11.1
percent duty (average was 62 percent) on
top of the standard 4.8 percent duty for
such products. In addition, China’s de-
mand for coal has been ever increasing
due to hundreds of new power plants
being built. At the same time, many coal
mines were closed for safety and envi-
ronmental reasons, resulting in shortages
and price increases for Chinese coal.
Adding to the mix of forces that com-
bined in this perfect storm, China also
eliminated the 13 percent value added tax
(VAT) rebate that AC exporters previ-
ously received from their government.
Finally, as the dollar has weakened, Chi-
nese carbon prices have increased due to
currency exchange rates. As China’s coal
carbon prices increased, the domestic
manufacturers followed suit.
The icing on this China coal carbon
cake is the impending government-or-
dered shutdown of most activated car-
bon plants in China on May 31 for
approximately three months, in an effort
to reduce air pollution for the Olympics.
Carbon usage Cost of carbon
pound C/1,000 gal. ¢/1,000 gal.
0.23 20
0.44 53
JUNE 2008
This will certainly exacerbate the coal
activated carbon supply and pricing situ-
ation. Already, the cost of coal in China
has almost tripled in the past year and
for the first time ever, last year, China im-
ported more coal than it exported.
We have plenty of coal in the US;
domestic activated carbon producers do
not have a problem getting raw material,
but they are at peak production capacity.
The planned new capacity is mainly for
powdered activated carbon for the loom-
ing mercury emission control market
(mainly power plant flue gas) in the US.
Coal carbon pricing has risen rapidly in
JUNE 2008
the past year because of anti-dumping
duties, energy and labor costs and high
domestic production levels.
Coconut shell activated carbon is
manufactured by scores of factories in a
dozen countries and imported into the
US by several resellers. It is suitable for
many applications and for the first time
ever, it is less expensive than comparable
coal-based carbons. Several factors (en-
ergy, labor, currency exchange rate, etc.)
have contributed to bituminous coal car-
bon price increases; coconut shell acti-
vated carbon pricing is up also, but not
nearly as high.
Conclusion
Coconut shell activated carbon is
preferred to remove VOCs from drink-
ing water in POU/POE systems because
it is more economical than bituminous
coal-based activated carbon. It has higher
hardness, less dust, lower ash and is
more environmentally friendly. The days
of low-cost activated carbon are gone and
one needs to make sure they are buying
and using the right AC for their applica-
tion. There are many types and grades
of activated carbon made from various
raw materials. Discuss your application
with your activated carbon supplier and
get the right carbon to help reduce your
costs.
About the authors

Ken Schaeffer, President
of Carbon Resources, LLC,
has over 25 years experi-
ence in the activated car-
bon industry. He holds a
BA in biology and an MS
in environmental science
from the University of
Texas at Dallas, is an of-
ficer of the ASTM D28 Schaeffer
Committee on Activated
Carbon and is a member of
the Pacific Water Quality
Association Board of Di-
rectors. Schaeffer can be
reached at ken@carbon
resources.com or (760)
630-5724. Robert Potwora
is Technical Director with
Carbon Resources, LLC Potwora
and has over 25 years experience in the acti-
vated carbon industry. He is current Vice-
Chairman on ASTM D28 Committee on
Activated Carbon. Potwora may be reached
at Robert@carbonresources.com or (760)
630-5724.
About the company

Carbon Resources, based in Oceanside,
Calif., is a quality supplier of activated car-
bon products and services, backed by techni-
cal support and individualized customer
service. Carbon Resources’ Management
Team has over 85 years of experience in the
activated carbon industry and offers an un-
matched line of the most diverse activated
carbon products on the market. The Sabre
series ® , Spartan series ® and Guardian
Adsorber series® and newly introduced Sen-
try series activated carbon products are
widely recognized in the industry. For more
information, please visit www.carbon
resources.com.
Visit: www.wcponline.com
Water Conditioning & Purification