Gas adsorption capacity of Carboniferous coals in the Zonguldak basin (NW Turkey) and its controlling factors

Methane and carbon dioxide sorption on a set of coals from India

“…Levy et al (1997) reported that, for Bowen basin coal, the average decrease in methane adsorption capacity for 1% increase in ash was 0.38 cm 3 /g. Studies by Gurdal and Yalcin (2000) and Laxminarayana and Crosdale (1999) match well with this negative relationship.…”

“…For the rest of the coals, an average 15% increase in fixed carbon content increases sorption capacity by 15 mL/g for methane and by 40 mL/g for CO 2 . However, Gurdal and Yalcin (2000) found a highly scattered relationship between fixed carbon and gas adsorption capacity. On the other hand, Levy et al (1997) have shown that there is a continuous increase of methane adsorption capacity with increasing fixed carbon values of the moisture-equilibrated Bowen Basin coals in Australia.…”

Coal mine methane: A review of capture and utilization practices with benefits to mining safety and to greenhouse gas reduction

“…From duller to the brighter lithotypes, there is a significant decrease of inertinite contents and an increase in vitrinite. Local variations in inertinite contents can be linked to an incomplete burning of the organic matter by local fires or aerobic biodegradation due to bacterial attack when the water level dropped (Silva et al, 2008. It has been previously recognized and documented that different coal components have varying gas generation and storage capacities (Beaton et al, 2006;Gurdal and Yalcin, 2000;Karacan and Mitchell, 2003;Lamberson and Bustin, 1993. Most researchers agree that vitrinite-rich, bright coals have a greater methane adsorption capacity than inertinite-rich, rank-equivalent coals.…”

Organic petrology and coalbed gas content, Wilcox Group (Paleocene–Eocene), northern Louisiana

“…Researchers have demonstrated that coalbed gas content is influenced by rank-dependent properties such as moisture content, permeability, and porosity, and geologic and hydrologic properties such as mineral matter content, reservoir temperature and pressure, in situ stress, degree of fracturing (cleat), the nature of cleat fill, the nature of sealing lithologies, basin history, and hydraulic gradient, among others (e.g., Lamberson and Bustin, 1993;Gamson et al, 1993;Bustin, 1996a,b, 2000;Bustin and Clarkson, 1998;Crosdale et al, 1998;Crosdale, 1999, 2002;Gürdal and Yalçın, 2000;Yalçın et al, 2002;Pitman et al, 2003). Estimation of coalbed gas reserves and forecasting production trends have proven more difficult than conventional resource estimates due to the complexities associated with the relative influences of these many parameters.…”

“…Several studies have demonstrated a positive correlation between vitrinite content and methane adsorption capacity, attributed to higher micropore volume in vitrinite than other coal maceral groups (Lamberson and Bustin, 1993;Crosdale et al, 1998;Bustin and Clarkson, 1998;Gürdal and Yalçın, 2000). However, others have determined that there is little or no correlation between maceral composition and methane adsorption capacity (Laxminarayana and Crosdale, 2002;Mastalerz et al, 2004), or the conflicting result that the inertinite maceral fusinite has a greater sorption than vitrinite (Ettinger et al, 1966).…”