Coconut Shell Versus

Bituminous Coal Activated

Carbon
Posted: Saturday, June 21st, 2008 in 2008, June, Ken Schaeffer, Robert J. Potwora, Spotlight, Writer

By Ken Schaeffer and Robert Potwora

Activated carbon (AC) filter media is commonly used in point of use/point of

entry (POU/POE) water applications. The type of raw materials used to
produce AC has a major impact upon its characteristics. The two most
common are coconut shell and bituminous coal.

Coconut shell-based AC has the most micropores. Micropores are defined

as poresless than 20-angstrom units (two nm) in diameter. AC produced from
bituminous coal have fewer micropores, but more mesopores and
macropores. Mesopores are between 20 and 500 angstrom units (two and
50nm); macropores exceed 500 angstrom units (50nm). See Table 1.

Table 1.

The scanning
electron micrographs (SEM) shown in Figure 1 were taken at 1,000X
magnification. At this magnification, the prevalence of the micropores can be
seen in the coconut shell-based activated carbon.
Coconut shell-based Bituminous coal-based
Pore volume among different pore sizes is measured by
nitrogen adsorption and mercury intrusion.
Nitrogen adsorptionand mercury intrusion pore volume results can be plotted
to obtain a pore volume distribution (Figure 2).

The amount of micropores present in

coconut shell-based AC is about 50 percent higher than bituminous coal-
based activated carbon.

Figure 2. Pore volume distribution

The most common method used to distinguish micropore volume is the

ASTM D 4607, standard Test Method for Determinaqtion of Iodine
Number of Activated Carbon, ASTM International. Table 2 compares iodine
numbers and other key properties between coconut shell- and bituminous
coal-based AC.

Table 3. Benzene at 10 ppb

Hrbons means they have much higher capacity to adsorb small molecules,

such as volatile organic chemicals (VOC). Higher capacity means coconut
shell-based activated carbon will last longer before it needs to be changed
out.

VOC treatment
Volatile organic chemicals include most disinfection by-products (DBPs)
such as trihalomethanes (THMs), and other VOC contaminants such as
trichloroethylene (TCE). Many VOC’s have a low molecular weight,
typically less than 200, and have low water solubility.

To measure the AC’s theoretical saturation capacity for VOC’s,

carbon adsorptionisotherms were conducted on coconut shell- and
bituminous coal-based activated carbons. The results for benzene in water are
shown in Figure 3.

Figure 4. MTBE adsorption isotherms

At all benzene concentrations in water,

the benzene saturation capacities of the coconut shell-based AC were higher.

Column 2 in Table 3 summarizes the isotherm results for 10 ppb benzene in

water. The coconut shell AC had almost twice
the saturation capacity compared to bituminous coal-based AC, 11 mg of
benzene per gram of coconut shell carbon versus six for the coal based.
Column 3 in Table 3 calculates the carbon usage (exhaustion) rate based
upon this saturation capacity at an influent of 10 ppb benzene. 0.0076 pounds
of coconut shell AC would be exhausted for every 1,000 gallons of water
treated versus 0.014 pounds of bituminous coal AC. The cost of the carbon
exhausted per every 1,000 gallons of water treated was then calculated (see
Column Four, Table 3). The cost of acid-washed bituminous coal activated
carbon and unwashed coconut shell activated carbon was used for this
comparison. Acid-washed was selected because unwashed bituminous coal
carbon has ash or impurity levels three times higher, compared to unwashed
coconut shell carbon. Acid-washed bituminous coal AC has ash levels two
times higher, compared to unwashed coconut shell AC. In Column 4,
the treatment cost is almost three times higher, with washed bituminous AC
compared to unwashed coconut shell AC, indicating a significant cost
savings with coconut shell AC.

The carbon adsorption isotherm results for methyl tertiary-butyl ether

(MTBE) in water are shown in Figure 4. At all MTBE concentrations in
water, MTBE capacities of the coconut shell-based activated carbon were
higher. Table 4 summarizes the results for 568 ppb MTBE in water.

Table 4. MTBE at 568 ppb

Again the saturation capacity of the coconut shell carbon was significantly
higher. This translates into a treatment cost 2.5 times higher with washed
bituminous carbon compared to unwashed coconut shell carbon.

The capacity advantage shown with coconut shell AC may not always be

realized in actual full-scale use. Background organics like total organic
carbon (TOC) will diminish the AC’s saturation capacity for a VOC to some
extent. Also, low empty bedcontact times (water residence time) in the
AC filter will prevent the carbon’s saturation capacity to be reached.

Additional differences
Table 2 compares the ASTM hardness number of the two types of activated
carbon. A higher hardness number means less particle attrition and less dust.
Coconut shell AC requires less water to rinse (backwash) a new bed and
generate fewer fines during operation.

Coconut shell AC is also more environmentally friendly or green. The

coconut tree produces coconuts three times a year. The tree is not killed to
harvest the coconut shells; therefore it’s from a renewable resource. It took
millions of years for bituminous coal to be formed; hence, it’s a non-
renewable resource. In addition, part of the carbon dioxide produced during
manufacture of coconut shell carbon is removed by the coconut trees and
produces oxygen.

Activated carbon supply
The United States has two large domestic manufacturers of bituminous coal-
based activated carbon and, for the last two decades, bituminous coal-
based activated carbon was readily imported from China. That has changed
dramatically in the last year.

In 2007, in response to a petition filed by domestic manufacturers, the US

levied new anti-dumping duty fees on most activated carbon imported from
China, to the tune of 49 – 228 percent duty (average was 62 percent) on top
of the standard 4.8 percent duty for such products. In addition, China’s
demand for coal has been ever increasing due to hundreds of new power
plants being built. At the same time, many coalmines were closed for safety
and environmental reasons, resulting in shortages and price increases for
Chinese coal.

Adding to the mix of forces that combined in this perfect storm, China also
eliminated the 13 percent value added tax (VAT) rebate that AC exporters
previously received from their government. Finally, as the dollar has
weakened, Chinese carbon prices have increased due to currency exchange
rates. As China’s coal AC prices increased, the domestic manufacturers
followed suit.

The icing on the China coal AC cake is the impending government-ordered

shutdown of most activated carbon plants in China on May 31 for
approximately three months, in an effort to reduce air pollution for the
Olympics. This will certainly exacerbate the coal activated carbon supply and
pricing situation. In addition, the cost of coal in China has almost tripled in
the past year and for the first time ever, last year China imported more coal
than it exported.

We have plenty of coal in the US; domestic activated carbon producers do

not have a problem getting raw material, but they are at peak
production capacity. The planned new capacity is mainly for powdered
activated carbon for the looming mercuryemission control market (mainly
power plant flue gas) in the US. As a result of anti-dumping duties and
energy and labor costs and high domestic production levels, coal AC pricing
has risen rapidly in the past year.

Coconut shell activated carbon is manufactured by scores of factories in a

dozen countries and imported into the US by several resellers. It is suitable
for many applications and for the first time ever, it is less expensive than
comparable coal-baseAC. Several factors (energy, labor, currency exchange
rate, etc. have contributed to bituminous AC carbon price increases; coconut
shell activated carbon pricing is up also, but not nearly as high.

Conclusion
Coconut shell activated carbon is preferred to remove VOCs from drinking
water in POU/POE systems because it is more economical than bituminous
coal-based activated carbon. It has higher hardness, less dust, lower ash and
is more environmentally friendly. The days of low-cost activated carbon are
gone and one needs to make sure they are buying and using the right AC for
their application. There are many types and grades of activated carbon made
from various raw materials; Discuss your application with your activated
carbon supplier and get the right carbon to help reduce your costs.

About the authors

Ken Schaeffer has over 25 years experience in the activated carbonindustry
and is president of Carbon Resources, LLC. He has a BA in biology and an
MS in environmental science from the University of Texas at Dallas, is an
officer on ASTM D28 Committee on Activated Carbon, and is on the
Pacific Water Quality Association Board of Directors. He can be reached
at ken@carbonresources.com or (760) 630-5724

Robert Potwora is Technical Director with Carbon Resources, LLC and has
over 25 years experience in the activated carbon industry. He is current vice-
chairman on ASTM D28 Committee on Activated Carbon. He may be
reached at Robert@carbonresources.com or (760) 630-5724.

About the company

Carbon Resources, based in Oceanside, CA, is a quality supplier of activated
carbonproducts and services that is backed by technical support and
individualized customer service.  The Carbon Resources Management Team
has over 85 years of experience in the activated carbon industry and offers
an unmatched line of the most diverse activated carbon products on the
market.  The sabre series®, Spartan series® and Guardian Adsorber series®
and newly introduced Sentry series activated carbonproducts are widely
recognized in the industry. For more information, please
visit www.carbonresources.com.