15-03-2022

Underground Coal Gasification

Underground coal gasification (UCG) is a method whereby the mining and conversion
of coal are accomplished in a single step.
UCG involves injecting steam and air or oxygen (O2) into a coal seam from a surface
well.
The injected gases react with coal to form a combustible gas which is brought to the
surface in a production well, cleaned and used as a fuel.
The high pressure combustion is conducted at temperature of 700 -900 C, but it may
reach up to 1500 C
The process decomposes coal and generates CO2, H2, CO and small quantities of CH4
and H2S and possibly NH3

1
 15-03-2022

Environmental benefits of UCG over underground coal mining

• Lower fugitive dust, noise and visual impact on the surface
• Lower water consumption
• Low risk of surface water pollution
• Reduced methane emissions
• No dirt handling and disposal at mine sites
• No coal washing and fines disposal at mine sites
• No ash handling and disposal at power station sites
• No coal purchase, stocking and transport
• No gasifier purchase, operation
• Smaller surface footprints at power stations
• No mine water recovery and significant surface hazard liabilities on abandonment.
• Low CO2 sequestration cost
• Proximity of UCG site and CO2 sequestration site

Worldwide interest

2
 15-03-2022

Restricting factors
The reactions take place underground and out of sight, surrounded by a
huge heat sink
Only a limited number of parameters can be either controlled or measured
Thus modelling play a substantial role, but almost none have been
validated
Site selection criteria have not yet been well defined
There are environmental issues if there is gas escape through fractured
rocks, and u/g water contamination - although these can be prevented
It requires a unique multi-disciplinary integration of knowledge from
geology and hydrogeology with the thermodynamics of gasification

Perspective on UCG
• At present, natural gas offers attractions as a clean fuel that UCG may
find difficult to compete with other than if it has a compelling cost
advantage.
• However, natural gas reserves have a finite life. At some time it may
prove economically and strategically beneficial to replace, or
complement, natural gas power generation with UCG schemes.

3
 15-03-2022

Controlled Retracting Injection Point

4
 15-03-2022

Process development for UCG

• Underground gasification cannot be controlled to the same extent as a
surface process, as the coal feed cannot be processed.
• Knowledge gained on surface gasifiers can therefore be invaluable to
researchers and operators of UCG processes.
• Thus it is necessary to test the UCG process in laboratory conditions and
model the results to predict in-situ conditions.
• Research on surface gasifiers shows that low rank coals tend to be more
reactive than bituminous coals and that mineral matter may have an
important catalytic effect on gasification rates.

R&D on UCG
The principal processes of UCG can be divided into two stages, namely
pyrolysis (also known as carbonisation, devolatilisation or thermal
decomposition) and gasification.
During pyrolysis coal is converted to char, releasing tars, oils, low molecular
hydrocarbons and other gases. Gasification occurs when water, O2, CO2 and H2
react with the char.
The main gases produced are CO2, CH4, H2 and CO. CH4 is essentially a
product of pyrolysis, rather than gasification. Its formation is favoured by low
temperature and high pressure.
Research and development of UCG technology have been conducted using
experiments and mathematical modeling to simulate gasification processes and
products.

5
 15-03-2022

UCG reactions
Although complex in reality, the basic reactions can be generalised to a simple empirical
form:

C + O2 = CO2 + Heat
C + CO2 + Heat = 2CO
C + H2O + Heat = CO + H2
C + 2H2 = CH4 + Heat

Carbon oxidation reactions dominate at low temperature and pressure leading to a high
CO2 content in the product gases and a low heat value.
Pressure increases the proportion of coal pyrolysed to form methane thus raising the
heat value of the product gases.

Unit operations which needs optimization

Gasification Circuit
The gasification circuit requires a flow link to be achieved between an
injection and a production well. Methods of achieving the link are:
• Accurate drilling assisted by a target device in the vertical well if
necessary.
• Reverse combustion, involving ignition at the base of the production
well.

6
 15-03-2022

Cavity Behaviour
• It is desirable to gasify the
maximum volume of coal
between a well pair.
• As gasification proceeds, a
cavity is formed which will
extend until the roof collapses.
• This roof collapse is important
as it aids the lateral growth of
the gasifier.
• Where the roof is strong and
fails to break, some fluid
reactants will by-pass the coal
and the reactor efficiency could
decline rapidly.

Cavity Growth Modeling

• Various mathematical models have been developed to evaluate the likely
growth of an underground gasifier.
• It has been concluded (Wilks, 1983) that a pear-shaped cavity would
grow around the injection well, narrowing towards the production well.
• The model assumed that combustion and gasification reactions are
uniformly distributed over the whole height and that the roof caves
immediately into the cavity formed by gasification and subsequently
compacts.

7
 15-03-2022

Cavity Growth Modeling

Coeme et al (1993) incorporated a representation of the chemical processes into the
Wilks concept.
Subsequently, researchers replaced the radial flow simplification used by Wilks with
equations representing two-dimensional fluid flow in porous media (Mathy et al, 1994)
and a Boundary Element Method to obtain solutions.
The main parameter of this improved model is the ratio between the permeability of
the high and low permeability zones.
There is scope for further modelling. Geotechnical aspects in respect of caving and
permeability of caved material could be developed using modelling concepts
established from longwall mining research.
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) could also be useful for improving the
understanding of the likely flow and combination processes. However, without any test
results, none of the models can be calibrated or validated

Treatment of UCG Product Gas

The gas treatment system must accept product gas at elevated
temperatures and high pressures (~ 5.0 MPa) from the production
wellhead.
Idea is to, clean and dry the stream and route it to maximising the potential
for energy conversion.
In one field trial in Spain the volume flow rate of the product gas stream
was typically about four times greater than that of the injection gas stream.
Deep UCG will produce a fuel gas consisting of a mixture of CO2, CO,
H2, CH4 and water, together with pollutants such as H2S, HCN, NH3 and
traces of other gases. There will also be particulate matter entrained in the
gas flow.

8
 15-03-2022

Case study - The UCG trial at El Tremedal in Spain

The trial was initiated in 1989 and the site finally abandoned in 1998.
The aim of the UGE project was to demonstrate the technical feasibility of
performing UCG at intermediate depths, between 500m and 700m.
The field trial involved:
1. Site selection
2. Geological exploration
3. Installation of injection and production wells
4. Construction of surface plant for gas storage, injection, treatment and flaring and
also water treatment
5. Process monitoring and control
6. Post burn investigations
7. Well sealing and site reinstatement

Site properties
It was recognised that a single trial could not be representative of all European
coals and was intended to be the first of two trials.
The coal rank was much lower than most of the deep coals that the technology
would normally be applicable to in western Europe
The geology of the site was investigated using three exploration boreholes. The
target coal seam was 2m to 5m thick, dipping at 30° at a depth of 530-580m.
Some 7-14m below lay another coal seam. The coal was of sub-bituminous
rank, almost lignite.
A clayey sand layer above allowed water to migrate into the seam. Subsequently,
it allowed some 17% of the produced gas to escape into the strata.

9
 15-03-2022

Site properties
• The gasifier circuit is achieved by drilling and linking an injection well
and a production well.
• The wellheads of the two boreholes were 150m apart.
• Deviated drilling technology was used to position the ends of two
boreholes, within a metre of each other in a coal seam.
• As the production well was drilled to within 1m of the injection well at
El Tremedal a link was easily established.

Ignition of the gasifier

Ignition of the gasifier was started 4m from the end of the production
well by introducing a pyrophoric compound, tri-ethyl borane, to ignite a
methane burner located at the end of the coiled tubing.
The dry product gas generated at El Tremedal consisted of roughly 40%
CO2, 12% CO, 25% H2, 13% CH4 and 8% H2S, with a calorific value
of about 11MJ m-3.
The temperature, reaction rate and the production gas quality were
affected by gas losses to the surrounding strata and by uncontrolled water
ingress. No water injection was needed.
The production gas was flared after analysis

10
 15-03-2022

Technical Problems Encountered During the UGE Operation

During the gasification trials it became evident that the available coal
exploration data was insufficiently detailed. These resulted in uncontrolled
gas losses and groundwater inflows.
The hydrogeology is critical
Minor inflows of water into the cavity can be accommodated by adjusting
the injected water input.
Excessively high water flows however, could reduce the efficiency of
gasification due to cooling. The worst case event is gasifier quenching.
Gas and temperature losses to the overlying permeable stratum were
responsible for decreases in gasification efficiency at El Tremedal.

Environmental Impact and its Control

The environmental effects of the UCG process are perceived as being
fairly low as the main product of the process is gas.
The by-products are either left in the ground, or can be re-injected back
into the seam.
The environmental impacts of mining and also ash disposal are totally
negated.
Surface water can be affected by UCG operations if pumped groundwater
is discharged into local water.
If groundwater can connect with the surface via springs

11
 15-03-2022

Conclusions
Despite 50 years of trials no commercial UCG project has been demonstrated
The development of new technologies and the increase in the value of energy
may change this
There has been a great deal of recent progress with some projects showing
considerable promise
The current pilots could result in commercial- scale operations within about five
years, providing greatly increased confidence in the technology
Keeping more of the knowledge in the public domain could greatly enhance the
chances of UCG becoming an accepted and widely applicable technology

UCG References
Write a report on H2 production from coal. The report should be like a go, no-go document.

• Beath A, Craig S, Littleboy A, Mark R, Mallett C (2004) Underground coal gasification: evaluating
environmental barriers. CSIRO Exploration and Mining report P2004/5, Kenmore, Queensland,
Australia, CSIRO, 125 pp (Aug 2004)
• Burton E, Friedmann J, Upadhye R (2006) Best practices in underground coal gasification. Draft.
US DOE contract no W-7405-Eng-48. Livermore, CA, USA, Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, 119 pp (2006)
• DTI (2004) Review of the feasibility of underground coal gasification in the UK. DTI/Pub
04/1643, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK, Harwell International Business Centre, 46 pp (Oct 2004)
• Mallett C (2008) Carbon Energy’s Bloodwood Creek UCG project. Paper presented at:
CoalTech2008. Brisbane, Qld, Australia, 29-30 Sep 2008. Sydney, NSW, Australia, IIR Pty Ltd. 11
pp (2008)
• Perkins G M P (2005) Mathematical modellingof underground coal gasification. PhD Doctorate
Thesis. Available from: http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/25518. Sydney, NSW, Australia,
Materials Science & Engineering, University of New South Wales. vp (Dec 2005)

12
 15-03-2022

Unconventional Oil & Gas

• Oil Sands
• Shale gas
• Tight gas
• Coal bed methane
• Natural gas hydrates

200

13