Abstract
Energy demand of India is continuously increasing. Coal is the major fossil fuel in India and continues to play a pivotal role in the
energy sector. India has relatively large reserves of coal (253 billion tonnes) compared to crude oil (728 million tonnes) and natural gas
(686 billion cubic meters). Coal meets about 60% of the commercial energy needs and about 70% of the electricity produced in India
comes from coal, and therefore there is a need for technologies for utilization of coals efciently and cleanly. UCG offers many
advantages over the conventional mining and gasication process. UCG is a well proven technology. Due to the site-specic nature of the
process, possibility of land subsidence and surrounding aquifer water contamination, this technology is still in a developing stage in
India. Potential for UCG in India is studied by comparing the properties of Indian coals with the properties of coal that are utilized by
various UCG trials. The essential issues are elaborated for starting UCG in India based on the reported information from the successful
eld trials conducted all over the world. Indian industries are in the process of initiating pilot studies of UCG at various sites. This study
will help to motivate both applied and theoretical research work on UCG sites in India and after detailed analysis it will provide basic
data to interested industries.
1. Introduction
Coal is the major fossil fuel in India and continues to
play a pivotal role in the energy sector. Coal meets about
60% of the commercial energy needs and about 70% of the
electricity produced in India comes from coal [1]. Hence,
there is a need for technologies for utilization of coal
efciently and cleanly. Depleting oil and gas reserves can
be substituted with abundantly available coal thus
prolonging the reserves of all the fossil fuels for use by
the future generations. Due to the availability of low price
crude oil and natural gas, the coal consumption and
process development was slow in the last few decades. But
as the oil and natural gas reserves deplete, coal will again
emerge as the best option for energy production.
Coal usage has been affected by the pollution caused by
its transport, storage, and combustion [2]. To deal with
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2062
Table 1
Coal reserves in India on 01.01.06 [16]
Coal
Total
reserve
(billion
tonnes)
Proved
reserve
(billion
tonnes)
Indicated
reserve
(billion
tonnes)
Inferred
reserve
(billion
tonnes)
Coking
Noncoking
Total
32
221
17
79
13
106
2
36
253
96
119
38
Table 2
Statewise coal reserves in India on 01.01.06 [16]
No.
State
Quantity of coal
(billion tonnes)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Chhattisgarh
Jharkhand
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Meghalaya
Nagaland
Orissa
Uttar Pradesh
West Bengal
Total
17.145
0.090
0.376
0.160
41.442
73.898
19.758
9.077
0.459
0.020
61.999
1.062
27.815
253.301
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2063
Table 3
Statewise lignite reserves in India [17]
1
2
3
4
5
Table 4
Non-coking coal grading [15]
State
Coal grade
26 154
1505
1467
128
108
29 362
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
46200
56006200
49405600
42004940
33604200
24003360
13002400
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2064
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2065
Table 5
The output of the fully developed Chinchilla project [6]
Product
Output
Energy
Electricity
Gas
Hydrocarbons
Phenols
Anhydrous NH3
Clean water
67 MW
4.4 PJ/annum
0.6 PJ/annum
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2066
Table 6
Summary of UCG eld trials with coal type and thickness [21,30,39,40]
Location
Coal type
Thickness
(m)
Depth (m)
Year
Comment
Lisichanskaya
Bituminous
0.442
60250
19481965
220
Yuzhno-Abinskaya
Angrensikaya
Podmoskovnaya
Shatskaya
Bituminous
Lignite
Lignite
Lignite
2.29
222
2.5
2.64
50300
120250
3080
3060
1999current
1957current
19461953
19631956
290
860
Sinelnikovsky
Chinchilla
(Australia)
Tremedal (Spain)
Lignite
3.66
810
80
130
19992004
25
530580
1989-1998
France
Subbituminous,
lignite
Anthracite
1200
19811986
Belgium
Anthracite
860
19791987
Newman Spinney
(UK)
USA (Hanna 2)
Subbituminious
Subbituminious
Subbituminious
0.75
75
1959
6.8
90120
19731974
7.6
38
19761979
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2067
Table 7
The product composition of UCG gas [20,30]
Location
Lisichanskaya
Yuzhno-Abinskaya
Angrensikaya
Podmoskovnaya
Shatskaya
Sinelnikovsky
Hanna.2
CO
H2
CH4
H2 S
Cm Hn
O2
N2
26.728
14.3
19.5
17.6
28.4
16.9
20.5
12.4
68
10.6
5.4
6
15.6
6.1
2.1
14.7
1315
14.1
17
15.2
35
15.1
11.6
17.3
22.4
2.3
2
1.8
1.8
1.5
1.3
3.3
1.61.9
0.03
0.4
1.2
3.5
1.2
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.8
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
4649
58.3
54.8
57.8
15.7
58.5
63.6
51.6
3.3
3.8
3.52
3.36
6.39 65%O2
3.35
2.6
1620 kcal=m3
Table 8
The properties of the UCG trial coals [21,30,39,40]
Country
US
France
China
UK
Spain
Australia
USSR and Russia
Location
Newman Spinney
Tremendal
Chinchilla
Lisichanskaya
Yuzhno-Abinskaya
Angrensikaya
Podmoskovnaya
Shatskaya
Sinelnikovsky
Ash
VM
FC
29.2
1.4
4.18
0.020.18
6
22.2
6.8
1215
2.58
35
30
30
55
6.79
26.26
5.8
15.41
6.37
3.4
7.61
16.1519.50
6
14.3
19.3
717
2.35.2
12-20
34.30
26
23.80
36.15
36.07
45.96
20.63
31.9
28.6
23.08
28.6830.01
35
27.5
40
3940
2732
33
44.50
38.10
64.50
57.06
37.67
48.24
63.96
32.90
31.7153.74
53
36
33.9
76.50
54.81
69.23
74.67
47.41
80.13
72.72
5
4.45
5.24
4.25
3.53
4.71
4.71
8.64
12.30
17.79
3.38
11.95
6.27
8.32
1.71
1.43
1.45
1.11
0.91
1.47
1.13
0.7
0.75
0.49
1.18
0.02
0.63
1.33
13 992
9580
11 960
13 323
78.65
28.1429.31 (MJ/kg)
18.1 (MJ/kg)
2023
2830
15.10
11.80
11.10
8.0
Table 9
Indian coal reserves at various depths (in million tonnes) [18]
Depth (m)
Proved
reserve
Indicated
reserve
Inferred
reserve
Total
reserve
% Total
reserve
0300
300600
6001200
Total 01200
54 627.35
18 929.82
1560.58
75 117.75
54 242.51
25 694.76
9141.99
89 079.26
20 519.91
17 384.94
4137.64
42 042.49
129 389.77
62 009.52
14 840.21
206 239.50
62.74
30.07
7.19
100
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2068
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2069
Table 10
Potential UCG sites in India [17,18,43]
State
Field/block
Tamil Nadu
Rajasthan
Gujarat
Gujarat
Maharashtra
600
500
Mine-I
Kapurdhi
Kalol
Umarsar
Sasti-Rajura(Bhandara)
X-Mine
Proximate analysis
M%
Ash%
VM%
FC%
CV (k cal/kg)
4555
4050
2328
27.8
12
47
29
520
1020
12.7
1518
22
1925
2030
4044
37.9
32
12
1722
1530
3037
21
8.2
19
25003200
20013500
48005700
4180
0.71.1
0.21.5
15.7
Umarsar
Mine 1 (TN)
300
200
100
0
Depth (m)
Angrensikaya
Umarsar
X Mine Block
Mine 1 (TN)
Ash
VM
Moisture
FC
45
40
35
319479
55120
7001700
150220
600
300
120
520
550
0.330.5
8.2
Thickness (m)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Thickness (m)
Angrensikaya
X Mine Block
400
Depth (m)
Chinchilla
Sasti-Rajura
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Ash
VM
Moisture
FC
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2070
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
5. Summary
India is the third largest producer of coal in the world.
India has 253 billion tons of coal reserves and a signicant
portion is deep underground. Indian coal is of bituminous,
sub-bituminous and lignite type. The high ash content and
poor quality of these coals leads to operational problems in
industries. Hence, the consumption of coal is reduced. To
utilize the vast coal reserves underground coal gasication
is a promising technology. UCG can utilize low-grade coal
in India economically. After comparison of the coal in
India with the coal used in worldwide UCG trials, it seems
that some of the low-grade coal seams are suitable for
UCG particularly in Gujarat, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu.
X-Mine block selected by ONGC India recently for UCG
studies has comparable depth and coal properties as that of
the previous eld trials. Although the coal seam depths,
thickness and quantity of coal are favorable for UCG in
many places in India, properties such as ash and moisture
content may need further consideration.
Furthermore, additional information regarding the
environment and safety issues needs to be generated in
order to fully evaluate the candidature of any potential site
for UCG. Theoretical studies are also required for the
prediction of UCG gas composition and coal consumption
to support the pilot studies. Pilot studies will enable
detailed analysis of the UCG process in India based on coal
type, geology and hydrology of the particular site.
Coherent inputs are required from research institutes and
industries in order to take UCG activity forward in India.
References
[1] Rao OP. Coal gasication for sustainable development of energy
sector in India. CSIR New Delhi.
[12] ONGC News. ONGC to soon establish two pilots for underground
coal gasication.
[13] ONGC News: ONGC joins hand with GMDC for underground coal
gasication
[15] Chemical Weekly. Coal blocks allotment for underground gasication to be notied soon, 20 February 2007. p. 144.
[16] Coal India Ltd. Coal reserves in India.
[17] Pandey BP, Singh I. Underground coal gasication: a promising
alternative for India. Fuel Sci Technol 1992;11(1,2):738.
[18] Acharyya SK. Coal and lignite resources of Indiaan overview.
Geological Society of India, 2000.
[19] Chandra D, Singh RM. Text book of coal: Indian context. Tara
Book Agency India, 2000.
[20] OSC. Anthropogenic emissions from energy activities in India:
generation and source characterization
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2071
[31] Stephens DR, Hills RW, Borg IY. Underground coal gasication
review. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Report, UCRL
92068, 1985.
[32] Kuznetsov AA, Kapralov VK. UCG in Russia and prospects for
electric power production in gaselectric complexes. In: International
workshop on underground coal gasication, DTI conference centre,
London, 12 October 2003.
[33] Magnani CF, Farouq Ali SM. Mathematical modelling of the
stream method of underground coal gasication. Soc Pet Eng J 1975;
15:425.
[34] Yang L, Liu S. Simulation on heat and mass transfer in the process of
underground coal gasication. Numer Heat Transfer Part A 2003;44:
53757.
[35] Thorsness CB, Rosza RB. In situ coal gasication model calculation
and laboratory experiments. Soc Pet Eng J 1978;18:10516.
[36] Thorsness CB, Kang SW. A method of line approach to solution
of packed bed ow problems related to underground coal gasication. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Report, UCRN
90731, 1984.
[37] Thorsness CB, Kang SW. Future development of a general purpose
packed bed model for analysis of underground coal gasication.
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Report, UCRL 92489, 1985.
[38] Thorsness CB, Kang SW. A general purpose packed bed model for
analysis of underground coal gasication. Lawrence Livermore