ILVD USTRIAL A N D ENGIKEERING CHEiVISTRY
505
calculating the sulfur content, rather than by making two tests. A comparison of the percentage of total sulfur present in each coal as finely disseminated pyritic sulfur and as organic sulfur, with the reductions in pyritic and total sulfur secured in the cleaning tests, is given in Table IX. It will be noted that the amount of this nonremovable sulfur varies from 30.4 per cent in the Pennsylvania coal to 86.0 per cent in the coal from the bottom bench of the Deep River bed in North Carolina, The difference between these values and 100 gives the percentage of coarse pyritic sulfur present. As the proportion of fine pyritic sulfur and organic sulfur increases, the reduction obtained in total and pyritic sulfur decreases. The marked differences which may exist between coals with respect to the amount of sulfur that may be removed from them is illustrated by this table. The reductions in total sulfur range from 63 to 11 per cent, with the North Carolina coal showing a conpentration of sulfur. Pyritic sulfur reductions range from a maximum of 82 per cent to a minimum of 32 per cent, the bottom bench North Carolina coal showing a slight concentration of pyritic sulfur. Two sets of figures are given, showing the reduction obtained in the work on the Pennsylvania coal. These represent the reduction a t different yields of washed coal. At 63 per cent reduction in total sulfur the yield of washed coal was 63 per cent, and a t 60 per cent the yield amounted to 83 per cent of the raw coal. The reduction in sulfur that may be obtained by cleaning a given coal depends to a considerable extent upon the yield of cleaned produot. The data presented in Table IX show the futility of attempting to formulate a general statement regarding the amount that the sulfur in a coal may be reduced, without knowledge of both the chemical forms and physical distribution of the sulfur in the coal.
FORMS OF SULFUR IN VARIOUS COALS During the progress of this work the forms of sulfur occurring in a number of coals have been determined. These data have been tabulated and are included in Table X as a matter of record, because of their importance in connection with the subject of the removal of sulfur from coal. TABLSX-FORMS
O F SULFUR IN VARIOUS COALSa
(Values in per cent, moisture-free basis)
Organic Sulfur as Per cent Total Pyritic Organic of Total LOCATION OF MINE COALBBD Sulfur Sulfur Sulfur Sulfur 20.8 2.82 0.74 C&D 3.56 Clearfield Co Pa. 1.50 40.5 2.52 1.02 No. 6 Franklin Co “Ill. 0.69 46.0 1.50 0.81 No. 6 Franklin Co:: 111. 2.23 68.0 3.28 1.05 No. 9 52.5 1.81 1.65 3.46 No. 9 0.78 52.6 1.48 0.70 No. 12 72.0 0.46 0.13 0.33 Freeburn 0.46 83.7 0.08 Pocahontas 3 0.55 0.51 75.0 0.68 0.13 Elkhorn 2.48 1.47 1.01 40.5 Eagle 0.81 50.0 1.62 0.81 Pratt Walker Co Ala. 41.9 1.72 0.97 0.72 Pratt Jefferson & Ala. 65.7 0.69 1.05 0.33 Mary Lee Tefferson Co? Ala. 45.7 1.79 3.92 2.13 Elay c o Ind. No. 3 0.80 34.5 1.52 2.32 Deep River Cumnoci; N. C. 0.55 26.4 2.08 1.53 Deep River Cumnock’ N. C. 0.97 64.2 1.51 0.47 Natal, So: Africa 0.70 0.59 50.4 1.39 Transvaal. So. Africa 84.1 0.37 0.44 0.06 Transvaal. So. Africa 0.50 1.78 20.9 2.39 Brazil S . 87.7 7.90 1.09 9.01 Istria ’It6+ 42.7 0.76 1.78 0.92 Germhny, bituminous** 3.06 0.02 97.1 3.15 Germany browngo , 4.57 95.8 4.77 0.15 Germany’ brown’@ 60.6 0.46 0.27 0.76 Bohemia.’brownno -a Sulfate sulfur values are not recorded in table. Where the sum of pyritic and organic sulfur is not equal to total sulfur, the differenceis sulfate suEur.
..... .....
..‘.’ .....
.
..... ..... ..... .....
The majority of the determinations were made during this investigation. Foerster and GeislerZO have very recently 19 20
Powell, THISJOURNAL,12, 889 (1920). Donath and Indra, Chem. Ztg.. 36, 1119 (1912). Foerster and Geisler, 2. ongew. Chem., 36, 193 (1922).
Vol. 16, No. 5
used the Parr and Powell method for determining pyritic sulfur in their investigation of the behavior of sulfur in coal during dry distillation. Their results are given in Table X. The wide variation of the proportion of the total sulfur present in organic combination in various coals is especially noticeable. This amount varies from 20.8 per cent of the total sulfur content in the Pennsylvania coal to 97.1 per cent of it in the German brown coal. All the coals that are low in total sulfur carry a rather high percentage of it in the organic form of combination. Of the sixteen American coals given, eleven have less than 1per cent of organic sulfur. The Indiana coal and the coal from the No. 9 seam in western Kentucky show higher values for organic sulfur than any of the others. Obviously, it would be neither possible nor profitable to attempt to produce a low-sulfur coal from either of them, or from any coal similarly high in organic sulfur. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thomas Fraser, assistant mining engineer, U. S. Bureau of Mines, worked with the writers on part of the work and furnished much valuable assistance. The writers are indebted to R. Thiessen, research chemist, U. S. Bureau of Mines, for preparation of the microphotographs. The investigation was conducted according to the terms of a cooperative agreement between the Engineering Experiment Station of the University of Illinois, the Illinois Geological Survey, and the U.S. Bureau of Mines.
G. N. Lewis Receives Willard Gibbs Medal To the Chicago Section no event of the year approaches in importance the annual award of the Willard Gibbs Medal. This prize, founded by William A. Converse, administered by the Chicago Section, and awarded by a jury of chemists of wide renown, has previously been bestowed upon twelve of the world’s leading men and women for their outstanding contributions to chemistry. The previous Willard Gibbs medalists are Svante Arrhenius, T. W. Richards, L. H. Baekeland, Ira Remsen, A. A. Noyes, W. R. Whitney, E. W. Morley, Wm. M. Burton, W. A . Noyes, F. G. Cottrell, Mme. Curie, and Julius Stieglitz. The medal for 1924 was awarded on April 17 to Gilbert Newton Lewis, dean of the School of Chemistry of the University of California, for his outstanding work in physical chemistry. G. A. Menge, chairman of the Chicago Section, spoke of the importance of the work of Willard Gibbs, and the significance to the section and to the recipient of the medal founded in his honor. The presentation address was made by H. N. McCoy, who traced the history of the conceptions of energy relationships, distinguishing between the inadequate kinetic hypothesis and the more modern thermodynamic views. Van’t Hoff, Berthelot, Nernst, A. A. Noyes, and Haber are among those who have been most prominent in developing the newer concepts, Haber being the first to attempt to measure free energy. Later came entropy, and Dr. McCoy pointed out that to Dr. Lewis and his associates we owe more than to anyone else for our present knowledge in this field. It is becoming more and more feasible to predict the course of chemical reactions; in other words, these energy relationships are applicable to chemistry that pays dividends. Thus, regarding the possibility of causing to combine nitrogen and water to form ammonium nitrite, Dr. Lewis calculated that 1061 atmospheres pressure would be required; hence there is no use trying it. In a similar manner, it has been calculated that to make diamonds from graphite a pressure of 8000 atmospheres would be required. This is the pressure 15 miles below the Earth’s surface, and diamonds may therefore be formed in that region. Dr. McCoy recalled that Dr. Lewis is the author of about fifty papers on thermodynamics, fifteen to twenty on other subjects, besides two books. Dr. Lewis, after receiving the medal, delivered an address on “The Molecule as a Magnet,” wherein he presented some of the modern ideas concerning the activity of the electron, and its relation to valence and the stability of atoms. The address was illustrated by slides and some clever mechanical modek. Production of Chilean Nitrate-The 1923 production of sodium nitrate in Chile increased t o 19,035,271 metric quintal(1 metric quintal = 220.46 pounds) from 10,717,973 in 1922.
