|
<br />('\')
<br />, l
<br />r ,
<br />~ '..
<br />
<br />~
<br />~~)
<br />
<br />C~:l
<br />
<br />researched by the Alberta Research Institute
<br />a few years ago, The capsules that were used
<br />to carry the coal after emptying could be
<br />incinerated at the final destination point and
<br />their hydrocarbon heat content recovered,
<br />Since the coal is cleaned. crushed. and dried
<br />before shipment. a more uniform and higher
<br />grade coal could be delivered direct to the
<br />power plant than through existing
<br />transportation means, Moisture. sulphur. and
<br />ash content would be reduced prior to
<br />encapsulation and the coal would be
<br />stabilized in the capsule so that spontaneous
<br />combustion could not occur during transport
<br />and storage, Significant savings could be
<br />realized In the design of new power plants
<br />versus the use of coal transported in a saline
<br />water slurry. In addition, the benefits of
<br />removing highly saline water from the
<br />Colorado River basin could be substantial.
<br />The seven Colorado River Basin States will
<br />need to review existing water laws for such a
<br />project to be possible, One reason this
<br />analysis has been delayed is because no
<br />viable means of transporting coal and water
<br />containing high amounts of dissolved solids
<br />has been available, Now. with a market for
<br />U,S, coal emerging In the Pacific Rim
<br />countries of Japan. Korea, and Taiwan for 10
<br />to 20 million tons of coal per year by 1990, a
<br />pipeline transport of Colorado and Utah coal
<br />seems feasible, Since the number of coal
<br />capsules can be varied from time to time. this
<br />psrticular concept allows for the gradual
<br />buildup of coal shipments and for market
<br />fluctuations in the future, Also. it avoids
<br />problems associated with coal/saline water
<br />slurries that have not been resolved to date,
<br />The problems of the saline water leaching
<br />undesirable minerals out of the coal during
<br />transport (and thus adding to a water
<br />disposal problem) and saline materials being
<br />added to the coal. which cannot be entirely
<br />removed before burning thus causing
<br />corrosion. slagging. and fouling during the
<br />combustion process, are resolved with this
<br />process,
<br />Research is continuing within WR. Grace &
<br />Co" and with outside consultants, The
<br />financing of the pipeline is being discussed
<br />with Lazard Freres and Co, of New York,
<br />
<br />Prepared by Ira E. McKeever, Jr., President,
<br />Western Mining Operations. WR. Grace &
<br />
<br />Co" Natural Resources Group, Stapleton
<br />Plaza, 3333 Quebec Street. Suite 8800,
<br />Denver. Colorado. 80207, (303) 399-0779.
<br />
<br />Paradox Valley Public Meeting
<br />
<br />A public meeting and tour were held in
<br />Paradox Valley, Colorado, on November 13
<br />and 14. 1961. for people interested in the
<br />Paradox Valley Unit of the Colorado River
<br />Water Quality Improvement Program,
<br />Bureau of Reclamation personnel and Mr,
<br />Ray Amstutz, a representative of Williams
<br />Brothers Engineering of Tulsa. Oklahoma,
<br />were on hand both days to present the results
<br />of last year's testing. to introduce the brine-
<br />disposal plan using deep-well injection, and
<br />to answer any questions on the unit.
<br />Seventeen people attended the public
<br />meeting on Friday evening, November 13, in
<br />the Paradox Grad,e School. On Saturday,
<br />November 14. five people toured the well-
<br />field testing facilities, At the public meeting
<br />Rege Leach and Errol Jensen from the
<br />Durango Projects Office highlighted the
<br />results of the well-field testing and
<br />monitoring program begun In March 1980
<br />along the Dolores River in Paradox Valley.
<br />These results showed that by pumping brine
<br />at a rate of 1.2 cubic feet per second (540
<br />gallons per minute) approximately 60
<br />percent of the past 8-year's average brine
<br />inflow could have been controlled, Originally.
<br />a 5 cubic feet per second (cis) rate was
<br />anticipated as' being necessary to control
<br />brine inflow to the Dolores River.
<br />The audience was informed that by
<br />installing a few more pumping wells in
<br />strategic locations and by pumping at a rate
<br />of 2 cfs (900 gallons per minute). the
<br />originally estimated 160.000 tons of salt per
<br />year still could be removed, Many area
<br />residents. concerned about their domestic
<br />water supplies. viewed profiles of water-table
<br />levels that showed well-field pumping did not
<br />significantly affect their wells.
<br />Bureau personnel and Mr, Amstutz also
<br />informed the audience that last year's
<br />findings concerning a pumping rate of 2 cfs.
<br />sufficient to control brine inflow. changed the
<br />criteria for evaluating disposal methods and
<br />made another alternative, deep-well
<br />
<br /><'"
<br />~">J
<br />"'--'
<br />
<br />injection. more attractive from the technical.
<br />economic, and environmental standpoint.
<br />Basically. the idea consists of conveying the
<br />brine from well field in a pipeline and
<br />disposing of it In a permeable geologic
<br />formation deep under Paradox Valley at a,
<br />depth of approximately 14,000 feet.
<br />Mr. Amstutz explained the technical details
<br />involved with deep-well injection of brine
<br />and. in response to one concern, stated, "If
<br />any potential for fresh-water contamination
<br />existed. we would not recommend it as a
<br />means of disposal." By December 1961,
<br />detailed designs and cost estimates will be
<br />available, Afterwards. a permit application for
<br />underground injection will be obtained from
<br />the State of Colorado. and an injection well
<br />will be built and tested for several months
<br />before making a final decision. While touring
<br />the well field, residents, even those who've
<br />lived in the valley for years, expressed
<br />surprise at the extensive areas of the brine
<br />inflow and the obnoxious odor of hydrogen-
<br />sulfide gas, The participants were told well-
<br />field testing and verification will continue and
<br />studies on evaporation pond disposal have
<br />been suspended until more information is
<br />available on deep-well injection, Many of the
<br />area residents commented favorably on the
<br />presentations and on the direction ofthe unit
<br />study.
<br />
<br />CRSS Executive Summary
<br />Available
<br />
<br />The Colorado River Simulation System. An
<br />Executive Summary. published in October
<br />1961. is available by writing Bureau of
<br />Reclamation, 0-752 (CRSS) P.O. Box 25007.
<br />Denver Federal Center. Denver CO 80225 or
<br />Telephone (303) 234-2027,
<br />The CRSS (Colorado River Simulation
<br />System) is a deterministic digital
<br />computerized simulation model that has
<br />been developed by the Bureau of
<br />Reclamation in accordance with all of the
<br />"Laws of the River," With CRSS. proposed
<br />changes to the operation or altemative
<br />deveiopment schemes of the river system
<br />can be modeled and their effect on the future
<br />quantity and quality of water in the river may
<br />be evaluated.
<br />
|