Sulfur in Coal in Coke<sup>1</sup>

Selvig, W.A.; Fieldner, A.C.

doi:10.1021/ie50210a028

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The average values obtained by the benzidine method seem in general to be a few hundredths of a per cent higher than those by the bomb-washing method. The sodium peroxide results also run a few hundredths higher than those by the bomb-washing method, as was also noted by Selvig and Fieldner (24).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 71%

A Rapid Volumetric Method for Determination of Sulfur in Coal and Coke

Seau¹,

Newell²

1933

Ind. Eng. Chem. Anal. Ed.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 71%

A Rapid Volumetric Method for Determination of Sulfur in Coal and Coke

Seau¹,

Newell²

1933

Ind. Eng. Chem. Anal. Ed.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The “average bedrock” and fine‐grained sediment samples were analyzed for major elements by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy. Total sulfur in bedrock samples was reduced to H 2 S by a boiling mixture of HI‐HCl‐H 3 PO 2 (Thode et al., 1961) and precipitated as Ag 2 S. Freeze‐dried and powdered soil samples were fused with Eschka’s mixture (MgO and CaCO 3 ) at 800°C, converting available sulfur to BaSO 4 (Selvig & Fieldner, 1927). Sulfur isotope ratios of recovered Ag 2 S and BaSO 4 were determined using a Delta V Plus continuous‐flow isotope ratio mass spectrometer operated by the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Northwestern University.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Significance of the Terrestrial Sink in the Biogeochemical Sulfur Cycle

Joo

Sim

Madden

et al. 2022

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Earth's oxidation state and climate are both a cause and consequence of biogeochemical element cycles. As the sixth most abundant element present in both the geosphere and biosphere (Brychkova et al., 2007;Mandeville, 2010;Torres et al., 2014) in variable oxidation states, sulfur plays a major role in shaping Earth's surface environments (Berner & Raiswell, 1983;Fike et al., 2015). Terrestrial environments form a critical part of the global sulfur cycle as continental weathering provides the primary source of sulfate to the ocean, overwhelming magmatic inputs (Holser et al., 1989). Recently, increasing attention has turned toward possible feedback loops among atmospheric CO 2 , glaciation, and oxidative weathering of pyrite exposed on land (Bufe et al., 2021;Calmels et al., 2007;Torres et al., 2014Torres et al., , 2017. Quantitative models calculating pyrite-derived sulfate fluxes in rivers often assume conservative mixing of isotopically distinct sources (Chillrud et al., 1994;Szynkiewicz et al., 2015); however, catchment-scale studies report deviations from simple isotope mass balance (Finley et al., 1995;Turchyn et al., 2013). More importantly, the rate of global pyrite oxidation on land, estimated assuming conservative mixing between terrestrial end-members, does not balance with that of marine pyrite burial (Burke et al., 2018). These discrepancies, notwithstanding inherent uncertainties in calculations using a single isotope-mass balance model, suggest that weathering alone fails to capture the complex nature of the terrestrial sulfur cycle, jeopardizing our understanding of the global redox budget.To address this gap, we revisit the role of terrestrial environments in the biogeochemical sulfur cycle at both local and global scales. In the fluvial system downstream of the Jostedal Glacier, Norway (Figure 1), we examine the limitations of a conservative mixing model, using the sulfur isotope compositions of a range of geologic and

show abstract

“…Coal samples weighing approximately 1 g are weighed out in clean porcelain crucibles. Then approximately 3 g of Eschka mixture (2) (2 parts by weight MgO and 1 part Na2C03) is added to each crucible containing a coal sample. Using a spatula, the sample is thoroughly mixed and the mixture lightly packed by gently tapping the crucible on a hard flat surface.…”

Section: Procedures For Conversion Of Sulfur In Coal To Soluble Sulfatementioning

confidence: 99%