AFGHANISTAN · COAL

Afghan Thermal Coal

Six tested coal profiles represented by four historical laboratory reports, including three location-based results from Dara-e-Suf and three individual proximate analyses from northern Afghanistan. Across the submitted specimens, the reported GCV results range from 6,905 to 7,839, with ash between 2.19% and 7.00%, total sulphur between 0.20% and 0.89%, and moisture between 2.50% and 6.90%.

The results indicate potentially attractive thermal-coal characteristics for buyer-led technical screening. Final suitability for a particular power plant, combustion system or blend strategy must nevertheless be established through representative sampling, a clearly stated analytical basis and a complete buyer-approved fuel-characterisation programme.

The published results are sample-specific and historical. They describe the submitted specimens but do not by themselves establish the guaranteed quality, consistency, production capacity or performance of a future commercial shipment.

Coal-01

Selected Sample

GCV

06 May 2018

Coal-01

Selected Sample

GCV

19 Apr 2022

Coal-01

Selected Sample

GCV

19 Apr 2022

Coal-01

Selected Sample

GCV

19 Apr 2022

One Fuel

Multiple Performance Profiles

Coal is not defined by a single element or concentration. Its commercial behaviour arises from the relationship between energy, moisture, ash, volatile matter, fixed carbon, sulphur, particle size and the mineral composition of the ash.

The available reports provide valuable preliminary indicators across six submitted specimens. They also reveal materially different combustion profiles: one Dara-e-Suf sample combines 70.24% fixed carbon with 20.14% volatile matter, while other profiles report volatile matter between 40.78% and 45.00%. Such variation may affect ignition, flame behaviour, milling and potential blending strategy and should therefore be evaluated at representative-lot level.

01

Reported GCV results of 6,905–7,839 across the six tested profiles.

02

Ash results between 2.19% and 7.00%, with several submitted specimens below 4%.

03

Total sulphur between 0.20% and 0.89%, providing a useful starting point for emissions and fuel-cost evaluation.

04

Plant qualification still requires confirmed analytical bases, representative sampling, grindability, ash-fusion behaviour, ash chemistry and trace-element testing..

01

LAB ANALYSIS 01 · BCH / BINA SHARGH LABORATORY

Date: 28 April 2018

Report: PKS2445544

Sample: PKS2445544.001

Source Document

Extracted Result

Key Characteristics

Proximate and energy results
7,839 Energy
0.20% S
Parameter Khaima Bala Sang Kala Futo Jaryaz
Moisture 2.50% 4.00% 2.97%
Ash 7.00% 2.19% 2.40%
Carbon 70.24% 49.00% 51.73%
Energy 7,839 cal 7,618 cal 7,673 cal
Sulphur 0.25% 0.28% 0.20%
Volatile matter 20.14% 45.00% 42.90%

Key Characteristics

  • The three submitted profiles record GCV results from 7,618 to 7,839, as printed on the certificate. Moisture is reported between 2.50% and 4.00%, while ash ranges from 2.19% to 7.00%.

  • The Chashma Bala profile carries the highest reported GCV result of 7,839 and the highest fixed-carbon result of 70.24%. Its volatile matter is comparatively lower at 20.14%, distinguishing it from the other two profiles, which report volatile matter of 42.90% and 45.00%.

  • The remaining two profiles combine ash results of 2.19% and 2.40% with total sulphur of 0.28% and 0.20%respectively. These figures form an attractive preliminary quality profile, subject to confirmation on a consistent reporting basis.

  • Across the three specimens, total sulphur remains within a narrow reported range of 0.20–0.28%. The difference in volatile matter and fixed carbon, however, indicates that the samples should not be treated as one uniform commercial grade without additional geological and stockpile-level investigation.

  • The certificate prints the energy results using “cal” without identifying a mass unit or stating whether the values are as-received, air-dried, dry or dry ash-free. The results should therefore be presented as reported numerical values until the unit and analytical basis are independently confirmed.

Potential Technical Review

  • Confirm the exact source location and chain of custody for each of the three submitted specimens.
  • Reanalyse representative seam or stockpile composites through an internationally recognised independent inspection company.
  • Report GCV and NCV in agreed units and on clearly identified AR, ADB, DB and, where required, DAF bases.
  • Determine total moisture, inherent moisture, ash, volatile matter, fixed carbon, total sulphur and ultimate-analysis parameters using mutually agreed methods.
  • Add Hardgrove Grindability Index, ash-fusion temperatures, ash chemistry, chlorine, phosphorus and relevant trace elements.
  • Establish particle-size distribution, washability, crushing and screening response, and variability between production areas.

02

LAB ANALYSIS 02 · SANA COAL LABORATORY

Date: 19 April 2022

Report: A050MM

Sample: 00218

Source Document

Extracted Result

Key Characteristics

Proximate and energy results
6,998 GCV
3.41% Ash
Parameter Method Unit Reported value
Gross calorific value ASTM-5865 6,998
Ash content ASTM-3174 % 3.41%
Volatile matter ASTM-3175 % 42.62%
Fixed carbon ASTM-3176 % 48.77%
Total sulphur ASTM-3177 % 0.78%
Total moisture ASTM-3302 % 5.20%

Key Characteristics

  • Sample 00218 reports a GCV result of 6,998, accompanied by 3.41% ash, 5.20% total moisture and 0.78% total sulphur.

  • The proximate profile contains 42.62% volatile matter and 48.77% fixed carbon. Together with the reported moisture and ash, these results form a complete approximate mass balance for the submitted specimen.

  • The combination of 3.41% ash and 42.62% volatile matter may be of preliminary interest where ignition behaviour, combustible content and potential blending performance are being evaluated. Actual plant response cannot be established from proximate analysis alone.

  • The certificate records the Gross Calorific Value unit as %, which is not an energy unit. The numerical result of 6,998 can be displayed faithfully, but its intended unit and reporting basis should be confirmed before commercial comparison or contractual use.

Potential Technical Review

  • Confirm the intended GCV unit and whether the reported results are on an as-received, air-dried or other analytical basis.
  • Repeat the analysis on a representative composite collected under documented chain-of-custody procedures.
  • Determine both gross and net calorific value, including GAR and NAR values where required by the receiving plant.
  • Add HGI, ash-fusion temperatures, ash chemistry, chlorine, phosphorus and a suitable trace-element suite.
  • Confirm whether A050MM denotes a nominal 0–50 mm sample size and establish the actual shipment-size distribution.
  • Evaluate repeatability across seams, working faces and stockpiles before defining a guaranteed specification.

03

LABORATORY ANALYSIS 03 · SANA COAL LABORATORY

Date: 11 November 2025

Report: SAY-FO-TE-22

Sample: 2568-1

Source Document

Extracted Result

Key Characteristics

Proximate and energy results
6,974 GCV
6.95% Ash
Parameter Method Unit Reported value
Gross calorific value ASTM-5865 6,974
Ash content ASTM-3174 % 6.95%
Volatile matter ASTM-3175 % 41.35%
Fixed carbon ASTM-3176 % 45.90%
Total sulphur ASTM-3177 % 0.89%
Total moisture ASTM-3302 % 5.80%

Key Characteristics

  • Sample 00126 records a GCV result of 6,974, with 6.95% ash, 5.80% total moisture and 0.89% total sulphur.

  • The specimen reports 41.35% volatile matter and 45.90% fixed carbon. The resulting proximate balance is internally coherent at approximately 100%, although the reporting basis is not stated on the certificate.

  • Among the three SANA specimens, this sample has the highest reported ash and sulphur results, but it remains close to Sample 00219 in both energy and proximate composition. This relationship may indicate a broadly similar preliminary fuel profile, although common origin or production continuity cannot be inferred from the certificates alone.

  • The reported values provide a useful starting point for technical screening. Confirmation of the energy unit, moisture basis and repeatable production range remains necessary before the material is compared with a plant specification.

Potential Technical Review

  • Confirm the GCV unit, analytical basis and sample-preparation procedure with the issuing laboratory.
  • Perform independent duplicate testing of a representative production composite.
  • Establish gross and net calorific values on the commercial bases requested by the buyer.
  • Determine ash-fusion behaviour, ash composition, slagging and fouling indicators, HGI and chlorine.
  • Complete ultimate analysis for carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen, together with buyer-specified trace elements.
  • Assess whether crushing, screening or washing could produce a stable commercial specification.

04

LABORATORY ANALYSIS 03 · SANA COAL LABORATORY

Date: 11 November 2025

Report: SAY-FO-TE-22

Sample: 2568-1

Source Document

Extracted Result

Key Characteristics

Proximate and energy results
6,905 GCV
6.60% Ash
Parameter Method Unit Reported value
Gross calorific value ASTM-5865 6,905
Ash content ASTM-3174 % 6.60%
Volatile matter ASTM-3175 % 40.78%
Fixed carbon ASTM-3176 % 45.72%
Total sulphur ASTM-3177 % 0.88%
Total moisture ASTM-3302 % 6.90%

Key Characteristics

  • Sample 00219 reports a GCV result of 6,905, together with 6.60% ash, 6.90% total moisture and 0.88% total sulphur.

  • The proximate results include 40.78% volatile matter and 45.72% fixed carbon. The reported components total 100%, providing an internally consistent proximate balance for the submitted specimen.

  • Compared with the other SANA samples, Sample 00219 carries the highest reported moisture at 6.90% and the lowest reported GCV result at 6,905. The relatively small difference between the three SANA energy results may be encouraging, but three client-supplied specimens are insufficient to define shipment-level consistency.

  • The sulphur result of 0.88% remains close to the 0.89% reported for Sample 00126, while the ash results differ by only 0.35 percentage points. These similarities warrant further source and variability investigation rather than an assumption that the certificates represent one homogeneous deposit.

Potential Technical Review

  • Establish whether Samples 00218, 00126 and 00219 came from the same mine, seam, stockpile or production period.
  • Confirm the laboratory’s intended energy unit and the basis applied to every reported parameter.
  • Conduct representative multi-point sampling with sealed duplicate and referee samples.
  • Add NAR, GAR, HGI, ash-fusion temperatures, ash chemistry, chlorine and trace-element analysis.
  • Determine size distribution, fines content, bulk density and handling behaviour for the proposed logistics route.
  • Establish a statistically supported guaranteed range before committing to a firm grade, volume or plant application.

Coal Supply Enquiry

Check Availability