Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

D.R. Chesnut

Publications and source records attributed to D.R. Chesnut.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2002

Comparison of the Eastern and Western Kentucky coal fields (Pennsylvanian), USA-why are coal distribution patterns and sulfur contents so different in these coal fields?

More than 130 Mt of Pennsylvanian coal is produced annually from two coal fields in Kentucky. The Western Kentucky Coal Field occurs in part of the Illinois Basin, an intercratonic basin, and the Eastern Kentucky Coal Field occurs in the Central Appalachian Basin, a foreland basin. The basins are only separated by 140 km, but mined western Kentucky coal beds exhibit significantly higher sulfur values than eastern Kentucky coals. Higher-sulfur coal beds in western Kentucky have generally been inferred to be caused by more marine influences than for eastern Kentucky coals. Comparison of strata in the two coal fields shows that more strata and more coal beds accumulated in the Eastern than Western Kentucky Coal Field in the Early and Middle Pennsylvanian, inferred to represent greater generation of tectonic accommodation in the foreland basin. Eastern Kentucky coal beds exhibit a greater tendency toward splitting and occurring in zones than time-equivalent western Kentucky coal beds, which is also inferred to represent foreland accommodation influences, overprinted by autogenic sedimentation effects. Western Kentucky coal beds exhibit higher sulfur values than their eastern counterparts, but western Kentucky coals occurring in Langsettian through Bolsovian strata can be low in sulfur content. Eastern Kentucky coal beds may increase in sulfur content beneath marine zones, but generally are still lower in sulfur than mined Western Kentucky coal beds, indicating that controls other than purely marine influences must have influenced coal quality. The bulk of production in the Eastern Kentucky Coal Field is from Duckmantian and Bolsovian coal beds, whereas production in the Western Kentucky Coal Field is from Westphalian D coals. Langsettian through Bolsovian paleoclimates in eastern Kentucky were favorable for peat doming, so numerous low-sulfur coals accumulated. These coals tend to occur in zones and are prone to lateral splitting because of foreland tectonic and sedimentation influences. In contrast, Westphalian D coal beds of western Kentucky accumulated during low differential tectonic accommodation, and therefore tend to be widespread and uniform in characteristics, but exhibit higher sulfur values because they accumulated in seasonally drier paleoclimates that were unfavorable for peat doming. Hence, basin analyses indicate that many differences between the mined coals of Kentucky's two coal fields are related to temporal changes in paleoclimate and tectonic accommodation, rather than solely being a function of marine influences. ?? 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

International Journal of Coal Geology↗
USGS1997

Deep-coal potential in the Appalachian Coal Basin, USA: The Kentucky model

The Eastern Kentucky Coal Field is located in the Appalachian Basin of the United States and occupies an area of approximately 15,000 square kilometers. The coal beds range from a few centimeters to several meters in thickness and consist of high-grade bituminous coal. Currently the amount of coal mined by surface methods exceeds underground extraction; however, there is a steady and gradual shift toward underground mining. In the future, as near-surface resources are depleted, this trend toward increased underground mining will continue. Knowledge about deeper coals is essential for future economic development of resources. Preliminary investigations indicate that coal-bearing strata with deep-mining potential exist in several parts of eastern Kentucky, especially along the Eastern Kentucky Syncline. Eastern Kentucky coals are Westphalian A through D; however, current production is from major beds of Westphalian A and B. Because coals that occur above drainage are more easily accessible and are generally of better quality, most of the current mining takes place in formations that are at or near the surface. In the future, however, due to environmental regulations and increased demands, it will be necessary to attempt to utilize deeper coals about which little is known. Future development of deep resources will require data from boreholes and high-resolution geophysical-logging techniques. There is also potential for coal-bed methane from the deeper coals which could be an important resource in the Appalachian Coal Basin where a natural gas distribution system already exists.

Prace - Panstwowego Instytutu Geologicznego↗
USGS1996

Geologic framework for the coal-bearing rocks of the Central Appalachian Basin

Coal production has been an important economic factor in the Central Appalachian Basin. However, regional stratigraphic and structural relationships of the coal-bearing rocks of the basin have been poorly understood due to numerous separate nomenclatural schemes employed by various states. In order to estimate coal resources and understand mechanisms controlling the distribution of coal within the basin, a reliable geologic framework is necessary. Seven detailed cross sections across the Central Appalachian Basin were constructed in order to examine the stratigraphic and structural framework of the coal-bearing rocks in the basin. The cross sections were based on more than 1000 oil and gas well logs, measured sections, and borehole information from Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.

International Journal of Coal Geology↗
USGS1996

Lower and lower Middle Pennsylvanian fluvial to estuarine deposition, central Appalachian basin: Effects of eustasy, tectonics, and climate

Interpretations of Pennsylvanian sedimentation and peat accumulation commonly use examples from the Appalachian basin because of the excellent outcrops and large reserve of coal (>100 billion metric tons) in the region. Particularly controversial is the origin of Lower and lower Middle Pennsylvanian quartzose sandstones; beach-barrier, marine-bar, tidal-strait, and fluvial models all have been applied to a series of sand bodies along the western outcrop margin of the basin. Interpretations of these sandstones and their inferred lateral relationships are critical for understanding the relative degree of eustatic, tectonic, and climatic controls on Early Pennsylvanian sedimentation. Cross sections utilizing >1000 subsurface records and detailed sedimentological analysis of the Livingston Conglomerate, Rockcastle Sandstone, Corbin Sandstone, and Pine Creek sandstone (an informal member) of the Breathitt Group were used to show that each of the principal quartzose sandstones on the margin of the central Appalachian basin contains both fluvial and marginal marine facies. The four sandstones are fluvially dominated and are inferred to represent successive bed-load trunk systems of the Appalachian foreland. Base-level rise and an associated decrease in extra-basinal sediment at the end of each fluvial episode led to the development of local estuaries and marine reworking of the tops of the sand belts. Each of the sand belts is capped locally by a coal, regardless of whether the upper surfaces of the sand belts are of fluvial or estuarine origin, suggesting allocyclic controls on deposition. Peats were controlled by a tropical ever-wet climate, which also influenced sandstone composition through weathering of stored sands in slowly aggrading braidplains. Recurrent stacking of thick, coarse-grained, fluvial deposits with extra-basinal quartz pebbles; dominance of bed-load fluvial–lowstand deposits over mixed-load, estuarine-transgressive deposits; thinning of sand belts around tectonic highs and along faults; cratonward shift and amalgamation of successive sand belts on the margin of the basin; and truncation of successive sand belts toward the fault-bound margin of the basin are interpreted as regional responses to Alleghenian tectonism, inferred to have been the dominant control on accommodation space and sediment flux in the Early Pennsylvanian basin.

Geological Society of America Bulletin↗
USGS1992

Transgressive channel filling in the Breathitt Formation (Upper Carboniferous), Eastern Kentucky Coal Field, USA

Carbonaceous shales of brackish or marine origin in the Breathitt Formation may exhibit sharp bases with local channel-form scours. Minor channels at the bases of these shales exhibit three general types of fill: (1) shale, (2) bioturbated, heterolithic strata, and (3) coal overlain by shale or bioturbated, heterolithic strata. Most of the scours at the bases of the channels were formed during a depositional hiatus that preceded transgression. Some may also have been formed by transgressive reworking of underlying estuarine and deltaic siliciclastics. The channel fills are bioturbated and may contain crudely cyclical rhythmites, subordinate and dominant siltstone-laminae couplets, wave ripples, and bimodal current ripple trends. The fills are interpreted to represent estuarine sedimentation during marine transgression. Channels are capped by sideritic, bioturbated sandstones that separate the fills from the overlying dark shales deposited under brackish- to marine-water conditions. Some of these sandstones may represent local transgressive surfaces. The occurrence of these types of channels in different parts of the coal-bearing Breathitt Formation supports the hypothesis of multiple transgressions during the Late Carboniferous in the Central Appalachian Basin.

Eastern Kentucky Coal Field↗