International Conference on Mining, Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Engineering (ICMMME'2013) April 15-16, 2013 Johannesburg (South Africa)

Bioprocessing of South African Coal and its

Impact on Coal Mineral Content
Elvis Fosso-Kankeu, Antoine-Floribert. Mulaba-Bafubiandi and T Strydom

concentrating tables, jigs, heavy media systems, flotation,

flocculation, and agglomeration. Although these techniques
have been successfully used in some coal upgrading
processes, their application may be limited by challenges such
as ineffectiveness especially in the processing of fine coal,
production of hazardous byproducts, harsh operating
conditions in some cases and high capital and operating costs
[5], [6], [7], [8]. The existing biological approach is
comparatively cheap but not totally satisfactory; it is less
effective, reducing partially pyritic sulphur and hardly organic
sulphur [4]. There is therefore a need to develop a convenient,
mild and effective method of desulphurization.
Oxidative action of some autotrophic microorganisms such
as thiobacillus through direct and indirect mechanisms can
lead to degradation of pyrite and release of sulphur in the form
of sulphuric acid [9], [10]. However autotrophic
microorganisms can be inhibited by organic matter, and could
not be suitable for degradation of organic sulphur [11], [12],
[4], this finding have prompted some researchers to combine
the action of heterotrophic and autotrophic microorganisms in
order to achieve better results [13]. Suitable heterotrophic
microorganisms must therefore be identified. Some
heterotrophic microorganisms are likely to produce chelating
agents which will complex sulphidic compounds and mobilize
the sulphur content through a mechanism called
complexolysis; here the formation of complexes on pyrite
surface by ligand exchanging polarizing critical bonds will
facilitate the destabilization of the compound [14].
Coal upgrading or desulphurization is very important before
the combustion process; reduction of sulphur and minerals in
coal results in low air pollution by exhaust gases from burning
coal, and reduce corrosion effects [15]. Optimization of the
coal cleaning process can be achieved by determining
conditions suitable for maximum removal and minimum time;
previous researchers have established performance indices
necessary for the assessment of the effects of desulfurization
and de-ashing processes; such indices include for example the
combustible matter recovery (CMR), total suphur rejection
(TSR), ash rejection (AR) and ash separation efficiency.
This study investigate the potential of heterotrophic
microorganisms to reduce the level of sulphur and ash in
South African coal aiming at minimizing emission of toxic gas
during combustion as well as wear and abrasion of mills used
to grind coals.

Abstract There has been a growing concern amongst

authorities of South African thermal power plants regarding the high
level of coal abrasiveness index (AI). This concern results from the
fact that high AI value has often led to the quick deterioration of the
machines. A number of factors are responsible for the AI value of
coal, among these the sulphur content is of paramount importance.
Minerals such as pyrite and quartz are the main components in the
coal responsible for the wear and abrasion.
Four samples of South African coal of 6 mm and 212 m sizes
were exposed to two heterotrophic microorganisms Bacillus subtilis
and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (individually and in combination) and
systematically suspended under mild conditions over a period of
time. The treated samples were then analysed for their chemical
contents. Results showed the potential of these microorganisms to
affect mainly the ash and volatile contents of coal samples. The
maximum ahs rejection index of 10% was achieved from the
combined action of B. subtilis and P. aeruginosa. It was observed
that the microorganisms performed better when in combination.
This study has shown the potential of B. subtilis and P. aeruginosa to
reduce the mineral contents of South African coals. These
microorganisms can be further investigated for their ability to
destabilize the structure of coal and reduce its hardness.
KeywordsCoal, de-ashing, B. subtilis, P. aeruginosa,
microorganisms, minerals, coal upgrading, biprocessing

I. INTRODUCTION

N South Africa the major part of electricity is supplied by

thermal power plants [1], however production of such
form of energy requires combustion of coal and simultaneous
releases of byproducts such as toxic sulphur dioxide gas. The
coal consumed in the country is of relative poor quality with
average calorific values of 4500 kcal/kg, ash 29.5% and
sulphur 0.8% [2], [3]. It is reported that none of the power
stations in the country have flue-gas desulphurization [2]; this
may lead to the emission of high amount of sulphur dioxide
into the atmosphere during combustion, contributing to the
pollution of air and acid rain [4].
Conventional techniques used for the upgrade or
desulphurisation of coal include gravity concentration,
Elvis Fosso-Kankeu is with the Mineral Processing and Technology
Research Centre of the University of Johannesburg, 37 Nind Street,
Doornfontein-Johannesburg-South Africa (Tel:+2711 559 6529; fax:+2711
559 6329; e-mail:elvisf@uj.ac.za).
Antoine-Floribert Mulaba- is with the Mineral Processing and Technology
Research Centre of the University of Johannesburg, 37 Nind Street,
Doornfontein-Johannesburg-South Africa (e-mail:amulaba@uj.ac.za).
Jim T Modipe and Eunice Maroga were with the Mineral Processing and
Technology Research Centre of the University of Johannesburg, 37 Nind
Street, Doornfontein-Johannesburg-South Africa.

102

International Conference on Mining, Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Engineering (ICMMME'2013) April 15-16, 2013 Johannesburg (South Africa)

II. METHODOLOGY

Treated and non treated coal samples were weighed (1.1 g)

into a volatile matter crucible of known mass. The coal and
crucible were placed into a furnace at temperature of 900C
5C for 7 minutes, the sample was then cooled to room
temperature and weighed.

A. Sampling and preparation of coal

A sample of approximately 50 kg was split using a cone
and quarter method into approximately 10 kg. The 10 kg
sample was air dried for 4 hours then crushed into -6mm
particle size and then split into 2 (two) 5kg samples. One
portion was pulverised to -212 m particle size.

Inherent Moisture
Treated and non treated coal samples were weighed (1.1 g)
into a moisture crucible of known mass. The sample and
moisture crucible were placed in an oven at a temperature of
110C for 2 hours. Samples were remove from the oven and
cooled to room temperature then weighed.

B. X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyses of coal samples

Powder coal samples mixed with binder, grinned and
pelletized in an aluminium cuvette for uniform grain size
suitable for XRF analysis. The XRF was performed on the
MagiX PRO & SuperQ Version 4 (Panalytical, Netherland);
the sample was suspended above the x-ray tube in a two
position carousel in a holder. A rhodium (Rh) anode was used
in the X-ray tube and operated at 50 kV and current 125 mA;
at power level of 4 kW. The X-ray spectra were evaluated
with the IQ+ program which is part of SuperQ.

E Calculation of performance index

The performance index considered was the ash rejection
which was calculated using the following equation:
AR = [(A f A t )/A f ] 100
Where A f is the ash in dry feed and A t is the treated coal.
III.

C. Bio-treatment experiment
Two heterotrophic microorganisms namely Bacillus subtilis
and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, were inoculated in nutrient
broth (Lab-Lemco powder: 1.0 g/L; yeast extract 2.0 g/L;
peptone 5.0 g/L; sodium chloride 5.0 g/L; pH 7.4 0.2 at
25C; Merck Chemicals, SA) and incubated at 37C overnight
in a shaking incubator, for growth to early stationary phase.
The cells were harvested by centrifugation for 10 min at 8000
rpm. The biomass (0.6g) of each bacterium as well as the
combination of bacteria was mixed with an aqueous solution
containing 2 g of coal (1:50 solid-liquid ratio) and incubated
in the shaking (160 rpm) incubator at 37C. Sample (5 mL)
was collected after 1, 15, 20 and 24 hours. After 24 hours the
processed coal was recovered and dried at 50C in an oven
over night. The treated coal were further analysed.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. Elements contents in coal samples

The XRF results of all the coal samples (Figure 1) showed
that they contained almost the same elements. The ashforming elements (oxides of Si, Al, Fe, Ca, S, Mg, K, Ti, Na)
were in relative proportion indicating the coal samples were
likely undergone the same genesis; however relatively higher
level of silicate, aluminium and sulphur in sample A, indicates
it is harder than the rest.

D. Proximate and other analyses Ash

Treated and non treated coal samples were weighed (1.1 g)
into an ashing boat of a known mass. The coal and ashing boat
was placed into an ash furnace at room temperature. The
temperature of the furnace was raised to 500C in 30 minutes.
This temperature was maintained for a further 30 minutes. The
temperature of the furnace was further raised to a temperature
of 815C and maintained at this temperature for 60 minutes.
The sample was then cooled to room temperature and weighed
again.
Calorific Value (CV)
Treated and non treated coal samples were weighed (1.1 g)
into a crucible. The coal and crucible were placed in a
calorimeter bomb and then in a calorimeter. The sample mass
was input and the cycle started, on completion of the cycle the
CV was read off from the calorimeter.

Fig. 1 Level of chemical elements in coal samples

B. Effects of microbial treatment on coal contents

The results obtained from the proximate and calorific value
analyses are shown in Table I. It can be observed that the
exposure of coal microorganisms led to inconsistent effects,
especially with single strain of microorganisms. However
their performance resulted to more than 50% achievement of
the expected effects (reduction of ash and volatile contents;
increase of fixed carbon and calorific values). The mixed
strains were much more effective and performed to nearly
100% as expected. This is certainly due to the synergetic
action between P. aeruginosa and B. subtilis. The advantage

Volatile Matter

103

International Conference on Mining, Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Engineering (ICMMME'2013) April 15-16, 2013 Johannesburg (South Africa)

of the combination of microorganisms for biodesulphurization

reside in the fact that in the microbial ecosystems, symbiotic
and commensal relationships may exist, although in certain
circumstances, competitive, parasitic and predatory ones may
also take place. An example of symbiosis and commensalism
is provided by L. Ferrooxidans, Thiobacillus organoparus, T.
Thiooxidans and T. Acidophilus; each of which, individually,
has been proved incapable of lixiviating pyrite, while in
contrast, L. Ferrooxidans in association with any one of the
other three not only lixiviates the pyrite, but seems in general
to do it faster than when used as pure cultures [16]. Although
the mechanism promoting effective action of the combined
strains is not yet properly understood, suggestion is made that
extracellular polymeric substances (ligands) produced by the
strains in presence act in complementary way for the
complexation and enhanced destabilization of the compound.

achieved with combined strains removing a maximum of

10.85% of ash. Ash was easily removed from sample D than
the other samples (average removal from 6 mm samples was
8.95% and average removal from <212 m samples was
6.21%). In general the particle size did not significantly
influence the de-ashing of coal samples.
TABLE II
PERFORMANCE INDICES OF MICROBIAL TREATMENT EFFECT
Treat
ment
conditi
ons

B
subtilis

Abiotic
control

Ash
Moistu
re
Volatil
e
Fix
Carbo
n
CV
Ash

B subtilis

Moistu
re
Volatil
e
Fix
Carbo
n
CV

P
aerugino
sa

Ash
Moistu
re
Volatil
e
Fix
Carbo
n
CV

Mixed

Ash
Moistu
re
Volatil
e
Fix
Carbo
n
CV

Mixed

Sample A

Sample B

Sample C

6 mm

< 212
m

6 mm

< 212 m

6 mm

< 212
m

6 mm

28.67

27.81

30.34

30.57

24.89

23.59

30.83

30.59

4.02

4.09

2.68

2.34

2.59

2.54

3.15

3.61

24.55

24.71

25.98

26.29

26.34

27.03

26.22

23.12

42.76

43.39

41

40.8

46.18

46.84

39.79

42.67

20.78

20.73

20.1

21.24

26.8

25.9

21.33

20.11

27.86

27.43

31.84

29.7

23.87

22.74

28.56

29.33

4.06

4.11

2.59

2.43

3.01

2.94

2.9

3.32

22.8

21.42

26.33

24.97

24.83

21.39

27.4

28.83

45.28

47.04

39.69

42.89

48.29

52.93

41.14

38.52

21.01

22.44

20.62

20.54

20.48

21.63

21.88

22.71

28.21

28.38

29.92

29.52

23.43

23.98

28.1

27.63

4.1

3.9

2.65

2.36

3.2

2.53

3.56

3.77

25.18

23.92

24.38

33.12

22.6

21.7

25.49

26.91

42.51

43.8

43.04

34.99

50.77

51.79

42.84

41.68

20.81

21.38

21.27

20.11

22.48

27.29

19.24

23.94

27.36

27.7

29.15

28.74

22.19

23.41

27.55

29.11

4.05

4.08

2.44

2.37

23.93

23.87

23.17

23.73

< 212 m

2.86

3.79

3.32

21.77

23.49

23.11

27.44

44.35

45.24

45.16

53.79

50.24

45.55

40.13

22.63

21.96

20.8

21.64

27.33

25.49

25.75

24.22

1.37

2.85

4.10

3.60

7.36

4.12

1.60

1.38

3.43

5.87

8.86

9.68

4.57

0.40

3.92

5.99

10.85

0.76

10.64

4.84

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

[3]

[5]

104

< 212 m

The chemical changes of coal samples observed following

treatment with B. subtilis and P. aeruginosa individually and
mainly in combination allow to conclude that these
heterotrophic microorganisms have the potential affect the
composition of coal and could possibly affect its hardness.
This application must be further investigated in order to
determine optimum conditions suitable to achieve effective
upgrading of South African coal..

[4]

C. De-ashing of coals (Interpretation of performance indices)

The results (Table II) of de-ashing using microorganisms
showed B. subtilis achieved better de-ashing than P.
aeruginosa, while better performance was once again

6
mm

2.83

IV.

[2]
44.66

Sample D

Fig. 1 Removal of cobalt and copper by clinoptilolite

regenerated in alkaline solution (KCl, 0.02M) The rejection of
ash in this study expresses the removal of minerals from coal
samples. Therefore, low mineral contents will result in low air
pollution by exhaust gases from coal combustion. De-ashing
of coal is often considered as an upgrading process
considering that high ash level in the blast furnace requires
higher energy consumption for slagging and lowers the
productivity of the blast furnace [17].

[1]

2.25

Sample C
<
6
212
mm
m

TSR
AR

Sample D

Sample B
<
6
212
mm
m

TSR
AR

Samples analyzed

Parmet
ers
investig
ated

Sample A
<
6
212
mm
m

TSR
AR

P
aerugi
nosa

TABLE I
COAL CONTENTS FOLLOWING TREATMENT WITH MICROORGANISMS

Treatment
conditions

Samples analyzed
Perfor
mance
indices

Prevost X.M., 2007. Coal. In: South Africas Mineral Industry

2006/2007. Directorate: Mineral Economics, Department of Minerals
and Energy of South Africa, Pretoria, pp. 51-60.
Eberhard A. 2011. The future of South African coal:Market, Investment
and Policy challenges. Freeman Spogli Institute of International Studies.
Program on Energy and Sustainable Development, Stanford University,
Stanford. http://pesd.stanford.edu.
Eskom
2010
Annual
Report.
http://www.eskom.co.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=443.
Prayuenyong
P.
2002.
Coal
biodesulfurization
processes.
Songklanakarin Journal of Science and Technology. Vol. 24, No. 3: 493507.
Uslu T, Sahinoglu E, Yavuz M. 2012. Desulphurization and deashing of
oxidized fine coal by knelson concentrator. Fuel Processing Technology.
101: 94-100.

International Conference on Mining, Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Engineering (ICMMME'2013) April 15-16, 2013 Johannesburg (South Africa)
[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]
[10]

[11]
[12]
[13]

[14]

[15]
[16]

[17]

Parekh BK and Khalek MAAA. 2002. Using a Falcon concentrator as a

new technology for removal of environmental pollutants of Egyptian
coal. Ore dressing. 7: 20-28.
Sahinoglu E and Uslu T. 2008. Amenability of Muzret bituminous coal
to oil agglomeration. Energy Conservation and Management. 49: 36843690.
Kawatra SK and Eisele TC. 2001. Coal desulphurization, HighEfficiency Preparation Methods, first ed. Taylor & Francis Inc., New
York.
Klein J. 1998. Technological and economic aspects of coal
biodesulfurization. Biodegradation, 9, pp 293-300.
Larsson L, Olsson G, Karlsson HT and Holst O. 1994. Microbial
desulfurization of coal with emphasis on inorganic sulphur. In
Biological degradation and bioremediation of toxic chemicals, edited by
Chaudhry, RG Chapman and Hall.
Karavaiko GI, Kuznetsov SI, Golonizik AI. 1977. Stonehouse:
technology limited. The bacterial leaching of metals from ores, pp 61-65.
Wichlacz PL, Vuz RF. 1981. Acidophilic heterotrophic bacteria of acidic
mine waters, Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 41, p 1254.
Kos CH, Poortes PPE, Bos P, Kuenen JG. 1981. Geochemistry of
sulphides in coal and microbial leaching experiments. In: International
Conference on Coal Science, 842, RFA, Dusseldorf.
Brandl H and Faramarzi MA. 2006. Microbe-metal-interactions for the
biotechnological treatment of metal-containing solid waste. China
Particuology. Vol. 4, No. 2: 93-97.
Petela R and Petela G. 1996. Indices for coal desulfurization and deashing processes. Fuel. Vol. 75, No. 11: 1259-1266.
Aller A, Martinez O, De Linaje JA, Mendez R and Moran A. 2001.
Biodesulphurization of coal by microorganisms isolated from the coal
itself. Fuel Processing Technology. 69: 45-57.
Adekele AA, Ibitoye SA, Afonja AA and Chagga MM. 2011. Multistage
caustic leaching de-ashing of Nigerian Lafia-Obi coal. Petroleum &
Coal. 53(4): 259-265.

Born in Cameroon, the author obtained the certificate for completion of

high school in Bafoussam-Cameroon and then completed a BSc in
Bioichemistry at the University of Dschang in Cameroon. He then traveled to
South Africa where he continued his studies and completed a B-Tech and MTech in Biotechnology; after a year in the consulting sector, he went back in
academia to complete a D-Tech in Extraction Metallurgy focusing on
Bioprocessing.
He worked for two years in the marketing sector for a company based in
Camerron, after his B-Tech he was concurrently appointed as a part-time
research associate for six years and also worked as a part-time lecturer for five
years. He is currently a Postdoctoral fellow at the University of JohannesburgSouth Africa and lectures on a part-time basis. He has published a couple of
articles in accredited journals including: The health implication of
relationships between bacterial endotoxin, cyanobacteria, coliforms and water
stored in domestic containers of rural households in South Africa. Journal of
Water and Health, Vol 8 (4), 2010, pp 601-610; A comprehensive study of
physical and physiological parameters that affect biosorption of metal
pollutants from aqueous solutions. Journal of Physics and Chemistry of the
Earth, Vol 35, 2010, pp 672-678 and Prediction of metal-adsorption
behaviour in the remediation of water contamination using indigenous
microorganisms. Journal of Environmental Management, 92 (10), pp 27862793. Examples of book chapters published include: Metal derived complexes
for improved fight against bacteria. In: Mishra A.K., Tiwari A. and Mishra
S.B. (Eds). Smart Biomolecules in Medicine. VBRI Press, India. ISBN 97881-920068-01, 2010, pp. 199-226 and High-technology therapy using
biomolecules or synthetic compounds for HIV inhibition. In: Mishra A.K
(Eds). Nanomedecine for Drug Delivery and Therapeutics. Wiley, Scrivener
Publisher. ISBN: 978-1-1184-1409-5. 2013, pp 3-38. His main research focus
has been on the monitoring of water quality and bioremediation of polluted
water.
Dr Elvis Fosso-Kankeu has been a recipient of several merit awards, the
more recent is the best paper award received at the International Mine Water
Conference in Bunbury-Australia, October 2012.

105