|
![]() |
|
| UFDC Home |
myUFDC Home | Help | RSS
|
|

HIDE
| Front Cover | |
| Division of Natural Resources | |
| Title Page | |
| Table of Contents | |
| Executive summary | |
| Acknowledgement | |
| Historical perspective of peat... | |
| Accumulation of peat | |
| Mining technology | |
| Accumulations of peat in Flori... | |
| Inventory of peat in Florida | |
| Everglades agricultural area | |
| Industrial uses of peat | |
| Economic impact | |
| Permitting | |
| Potential environmental impacts... | |
| Endangered species associated with... | |
| Reclamation of mined peatlands | |
| Summary and conclusions | |
| References | |
| Glossary | |
| Appendix A: Federal environmental... | |
| Appendix B: Classification of wetlands... | |
| AppendixC: Florida statutes concerning... | |
| Appendix D: Water quality | |
| Appendix E: Peatlands manageme... |
CITATION
SEARCH
THUMBNAILS
PDF VIEWER
PAGE IMAGE
ZOOMABLE
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Full Citation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
STANDARD VIEW
MARC VIEW
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Downloads | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Table of Contents | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Front Cover
Front Cover Division of Natural Resources Unnumbered ( 3 ) Title Page Page i Page ii Table of Contents Page iii Page iv Page v Page vi Page vii Page viii Page ix Executive summary Page x Page xi Page xii Page xiii Page xiv Page xv Page xvi Page xvii Acknowledgement Page xviii Historical perspective of peat research in Florida Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Accumulation of peat Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Mining technology Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Accumulations of peat in Florida Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Inventory of peat in Florida Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Everglades agricultural area Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Industrial uses of peat Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Economic impact Page 78 Page 79 Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Permitting Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 Page 87 Page 88 Page 89 Page 90 Page 91 Page 92 Page 93 Page 94 Page 95 Page 96 Page 97 Potential environmental impacts of peat mining Page 98 Page 99 Page 100 Page 101 Page 102 Page 103 Page 104 Page 105 Page 106 Page 107 Page 108 Page 109 Page 110 Page 111 Page 112 Page 113 Page 114 Page 115 Page 116 Page 117 Page 118 Page 119 Page 120 Page 121 Page 122 Page 123 Page 124 Endangered species associated with areas of potential peat mining Page 125 Page 126 Page 127 Page 128 Page 129 Page 130 Page 131 Page 132 Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 Reclamation of mined peatlands Page 136 Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Page 146 Summary and conclusions Page 147 Page 148 Page 149 Page 150 References Page 151 Page 152 Page 153 Page 154 Page 155 Page 156 Page 157 Glossary Page 158 Page 159 Page 160 Page 161 Page 162 Page 163 Page 164 Page 165 Page 166 Page 167 Page 168 Page 169 Appendix A: Federal environmental legislation Page 170 Page 171 Page 172 Page 173 Appendix B: Classification of wetlands in Florida Page 174 Page 175 Page 176 Page 177 Page 178 Page 179 AppendixC: Florida statutes concerning wetlands Page 180 Page 181 Page 182 Page 183 Page 184 Page 185 Page 186 Page 187 Page 188 Page 189 Page 190 Page 191 Page 192 Page 193 Page 194 Appendix D: Water quality Page 195 Page 196 Page 197 Page 198 Page 199 Appendix E: Peatlands management Page 200 Page 201 Page 202 Page 203 Page 204 Page 205 Page 206 Page 207 Page 208 Page 209 Page 210 Page 211 Page 212 Page 213 Page 214 Page 215 Page 216 Page 217 Page 218 Page 219 Page 220 Page 221 Page 222 Page 223 Page 224 Page 225 Page 226 Page 227 Page 228 Copyright Main |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Full Text | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
cpE Fi ~eufr -4
AN OVERVIEW OF PEAT IN FLORIDA AND RELATED ISSUES DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ROBERT GRAHAM Governor GEORGE FIRESTONE Secretary of State BILL GUNTER Treasurer RALPH D. TURLINGTON Commissioner of Education ELTON J. GISSE Executive Di JIM SMITH Attorney General GERALD E .iLEW IS Comptroller dlOYLE ;'ONNER Commissioner' of a oricuiture ENDANNER rector Cover Drawing: The cover drawing shows Water:Lilly (Nymphaea), the living plant from which Water Lilly Peat ',ot s, characteristiic of,,.'; relatively deep, open waters ' r ~-~':: ~~I~II ~' I "" STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Elton Gissendanner, Executive Director DIVISION OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Charles W. Hendry, Jr., Director BUREAU OF GEOLOGY Steve R. Windham, Chief AN OVERVIEW OF PEAT IN FLORIDA AND RELATED ISSUES Prepared by staff Bureau of Geology Paulette Bond, Principal Investigator at the direction of THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Executive Summary. ................ ... .................... x Acknowledgements.... .. d........ ............ .............. xviii Purpose and Scope of the Study .............. ............. 1 Historical Perspective of Peat Research in Florida......... 1 Definition of Peat and the Significance of This Definition ... .. ............... .... ........... ......... 4 Terminology Relating to the Peat Forming Environment.. 7 Peat: Agricultural or Mineral Resource?.............. 9 Harvesting or Mining ................................. 14 Classification Systems Applied to Peat ................ 16 The Accumulation of Peat... .... ..... ....... ... ............. 20 The Process of Peat Formation......................... 20 Geologic Conditions Associated with Peat Accumulation ...................................... 21 Mining Technology .......... .............................. 23 Mining Methodology Associated with the Use of Peat for Fuel................................. .. .. 23 Mining Methodology Associated with the Agricultural Use of Peat ........................... 26 The Accumulation of Peat in Florida...................... 27 Rates of Peat Accumulation in Florida................. 27 iii Geologic Settings of Peat Accumulation in Florida..... 30 Inventory of Peat in Florida............................... 40 Mapping and Evaluating the Peat Resource.............. 40 Current Estimates of Peat in Florida.................. 42 The Everglades Agricultural Area.......................... 49 History of the Everglades Agricultural Area........... 49 Crops and Soils of the Everglades Agricultural Area... 51 Subsidence ............................................ 54 Conservation Measures. .......... . ............. 60 The Near Future of the Everglades Agricultural Area... 61 Industrial Uses of Peat .... ...... ........................ 65 Preparation of Peat for Industrial Utilization........ 65 Fuel Uses ............................................. 67 Direct Combustion ............................... 67 Gasification ................. ... ........ ........ 68 Biogasification .................................. 69 Industrial Chemicals... ............................... 70 Bitumens. ........... ............................ 70 Carbohydrates. ........................... ....... 72 Humic Acids ........ ...... ...................... 73 Peat Coke, Peat Tar and Activated Carbon......... 74 Use of Peat as a Growth Medium ............. .......... 75 Horticulture .......... .... ... ... ................ 75 Agriculture..... .............................. 76 Energy Crops ........... ........................ 76 Sewage Treatment. ....................................... 77 Economic Impact........................... .......... ..... 78 Production, Value, and Price of Peat.................. 78 Location of Peat Producers ........... ....... .......... 80 Location of Markets... ............................... 82 Use of Peat.................................. .. ........ 82 Permitting ................................................. 83 County Level Permits ... .............................. 83 State Level Permitting .............................. ..... 86 Department of Environmental Regulation........... 86 Water Management Districts....................... 87 Suwannee River Water Management District.... 87 St. Johns River Water Management District... 87 Southwest Florida Water Management District ........................ ....... 93 South Florida Water Management District..... 94 Department of Community Affairs.................. 94 Federal Level Permitting............................... 95 Army Corps of Engineers.......................... 95 The Environmental Protection Agency............... 96 Peat Revenue and Taxation................................... 96 Potential Environmental Impacts of Peat Mining............. 98 The Effects of Peat Mining on Wetlands................ 98 The Effects of Peat Mining on Water Quality............ 102 The Effects of Peat Mining on Water Resources......... 107 Water Resources in an Undisturbed System......... 107 Water Resource Parameters Affected by Peat Mining ........ ..... ........ ....... ........ The Effects of Peat Mining on Air Quality ............. The Effects of Peat Mining on Topography ............. Endangered Species Associated with Areas of Potential Peat Mining............... .. .. ........................... Reclamation of Mined Peatlands............................. Peatland Reclamation in Minnesota..................... Peatland Reclamation in North Carolina.......... ..... Peatland Reclamation in Finland........................ Peatland Reclamation in New Brunswick................. Reclamation in Peatlands of Florida................... Summary and Conclusions........................ ...... ..... References............ .................................... Glossary of Technical Terms............................. ... Appendices ...................... .......... ............... Appendix A. Federal Environmental Legislation........ Appendix B. Classification of Wetlands in Florida.... Appendix C. Florida Statutes Concerning Wetlands...... Appendix D. Water Quality............................ Appendix E. Peatland Management...................... ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1 2 3 The process of coal formation................... The relationship of peat types to fuel grade..... A comparison of moisture content and heating value for peat, wood and various coal types.... 109 114 118 125 136 137 141 143 145 146 147 151 158 170 170 174 180 195 200 4 Peat provinces of southern Florida............... 31 5 SW-NE cross-section from Cape Sable to vicinity of Tamiami Trail ....... .......... ... ........... .. 32 6 Cross-section through a cypress hammock...c...... 33 7' Cross-section through a "Bay Head"............... 34 8 Cross-section through bay swamp and titi swamp... 35 9 Peat deposits bordering lakes.................. 36 10 Cross-section showing peat filling lake.......... 37 11 Cross-section using cores to show buried peat layers at Eureka Dam site, Oklawaha River, Marion County, Florida........................ 38 12 Isopach map of the Everglades region showing thickness of peat and some muck areas........... 41 13 Peat deposits in Florida......................... 45 14 Fuel grade peat deposits in Florida.............. 46 15 Peat deposits in Florida........................ 47 16 Location map of the Everglades Agricultural Area........................................... 53 17' Map of the Everglades Agricultural Area showing the locations of profiles A-A' and B-B'........ 57 18 Profile A-A' across the upper Everglades showing the original surface elevations and the ground elevation in 1940 as shown by topographical survey. Profiles for the years 1970 and 2000 are estimated .................... 58 vii 19 Profile B-B' through the lower part of the Everglades Agricultural Area show the original surface elevation and the surface elevation as determined in 1940 by topographic surveys. Profiles for the years 1970 and 2000 are estimated...... ............ ................. 59 20 Soil depths predicted (Stephens and Johnson, 1951) for the year 1980. Compare with figure 17: ..................................... 62 21 Thicknesses of soils from the Everglades Agricultural Area as determined in a recent study .......................................... 63 22 Location of current peat producers............... 79 23 Production and value of peat in Florida.......... 81 24 Topographic profile of a karst basin peat deposit in north Florida ...................... 119 25 Topographic profile of St. Johns River Marsh peat deposit in southern Brevard County........ 120 26 Topographic profile of the Oklawaha River peat deposit in northern Lake-southern Marion counties ....................................... 121 27 Topographic profile of the Santa Fe Swamp peat deposit in Alachua and Bradford counties....... 122 28 Topographic profile of the Everglades in Collier and Dade counties............. ..... ...... .... 124 viii Table 1 Estimated rates of peat accumulation in Florida ......... ................... .......... 28 2 Proportions of the organic soils of the Everglades Agricultural Area falling into categories based on thickness.................. 64 3 Summary of county level permitting requirements .. ............................... 84 4 Water quality issues associated with peat mining ......................................... 104 5 Water resources issues associated with peat mining........................................ 110 6 Air quality issues associated with peat mining... 115 7 Plant communities of concern ..................... 128 8 Endangered, threatened, and rare species associated with areas of potential peat accumulation ................................... 129 9 Independent factors governing site specific reclamation programs........................... 138 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Peat is a deposit of partially decayed plant remains which accumulates in a waterlogged environment. It may contain some proportion of inorganic material which is referred to as ash. Ash content is a critical parameter if peat is to be used as a fuel and may not exceed 25 percent of the material by dry weight. In addition, fuel grade deposits must be at least four feet thick with a surface area of at least 80 contiguous acres per square mile. Fuel grade peat must yield at least 8000 BTU per moisture- free pound. Peat is removed from the ground in an excavation process. The procedure is alternatively referred to as harvesting or mining. "Harvesting" when used in conjunction with peat correctly refers to the nearly obsolete practice of harvesting Living Sphagnum from the surface of a bog. In this process, the Sphagnum was allowed to grow back so that repeated harvests were possible in a given area. Very little or no true harvesting occurs today. Thus, the extraction of peat is properly termed mining. An important implication of the definition of peat is its classification as an agricultural resource as opposed to a mineral resource. This classification may have ramifications with respect to the sorts of regulations which are applied to peat mining. Peat does not comply with the conditions set forth in the academic definition of the term mineral. It is, however, considered a mineral resource by the United States Geological Survey and the United States Bureau of Mines. Peat is an ancestor of the mineral graphite and is also viewed by earth science professionals as nonrenewable. Thus it is considered appropriate to term peat a mineral resource. Peat-accumulates and is preserved in wetlands, such as the Everglades, marshes and mangrove swamps, river-valley marshes (St. Johns river-valley marsh), and in sinkhole lakes. This strong association of peat with wetlands occurs because the presence of water serves to inhibit the activity of decomposing organisms which would normally metabolize plant matter and prevent its accumulation. Earth science professionals consider peat to be nonrenewable. In Florida an average rate of peat accumulation is 3.62 inches per 100 years. Using this average rate, a deposit 4 feet thick (minimum thickness of a fuel grade deposit) could accumulate in approximately 1,326 years or approximately 18 human lifetimes (average lifetime of 7'2 years). Florida is estimated as having 677,688 acres of fuel grade peat or 606 million tons. This estimate is based on material thought to contain no more than 25 percent ash. Other estimates are much greater (1.7'5 billion tons and 6.9 billion tons). These estimates include organic soils whose ash content exceeds ASTM standards for material defined as peat and U.S. Department of Energy standards for fuel grade peat. The Everglades Agricultural Area was delineated based on scientific analysis of soils to determine their suitability as a growth medium. The drainage necessary for successful agriculture has been accompanied by subsidence primarily because soils are no longer protected from decomposing organisms which require oxygen for their metabolizm. Soil loss continues to occur at about 1 inch each.year. It is predicted that by the year 2000 approximately 250,000 acres in the Agricultural Area will have subsided to depths of less than one foot. The fate of soils less than one foot thick is uncertain. They may be used for pasture land or abandoned for agricultural purposes. Peat currently is used in Florida for a variety of horticultural and agricultural purposes. The United States Bureau of Mines reports that in 1982, 120 thousand short tons was produced at a value estimated at 1.5715 million dollars. These data reflect voluntary information supplied to the Bureau of Mines and do not include responses from all of Florida's peat producers. Most peat sales in Florida are currently wholesale and for agricultural purposes and are thus exempt from sales tax. Records are not maintained which detail sales tax on retail sale of peat products specifically, and thus there is no way of esti- mating the current tax income derived from the exploitation of peat resources in the State of Florida. The peat permitting process as it applies to peat mining is complex. County level permits may be required, although in many cases zoning regulations are the only regulations which apply to opening a peat mine. At the state level, the Department of xii Environmental Regulation and Water Management Districts containing peat may require permits. The Department of Community Affairs has jurisdiction over Developments of Regional Impact (DRI). Certain peat mining operations could come under federal jurisdiction. The agencies concerned would include the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers. The environmental impacts associated with peat mining for energy purposes depend strongly on the size of the prospective operation. Environmental impacts are also extremely site specific. Small operations would consume 26 acres of peat mined to a depth of 6 feet, over 4 years, moderate operations 3500 acres mined to a depth of 6 feet, over a 20 year period and a large operation would require 125,000 acres of peat, mined to a depth of 6 feet to operate for 20 years. Peat mining will occur largely in wetlands and the functions of each individual wetland must be weighed against the value of peat to be removed. The wetland habitat will be severely affected. Fauna will be displaced and possibly destroyed and flora will be destroyed when the peatland is cleared for mining. Water quality impacts may be major, even for small operations and are related to chemical characteristics of the discharge waters. Water resource parameters are not expected to be severely affected by small scale operations but may be more seriously impacted by larger scale development. The impacts of mining on air quality arise from mining, processing, and utilizing peat as a fuel. They are specific to an operation's size, mining method, and the intended xiii use for the product. Endangered species, both plant and animal, may inhabit peatlands. The change in habitat brought about by peat mining might lead to the destruction of members of stressed species associated with a mined area. Research in Minnesota, North Carolina, Finland and New Brunswick, Canada, show that reclamation techniques can be successfully applied to peatlands. Reclamation techniques are specific to those areas and do not address difficulties inherent to Florida peatlands. Reclamation of Florida's peatlands will involve a change from wetland systems to other systems (probably aquatic systems). Restoration of mined peatlands (for the most part wetlands) will, in all probability, be financially unfeasible. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Mineral Versus Non-Mineral Peat, like coal, petroleum and natural gas, does not comply with the principal conditions set forth in the academic defini- tion of the term mineral. Peat represents an early stage in a series of products resulting in the conversion of vegetable matter to pure carbon (peat-lignite-coal-graphite), the end pro- duct of which fits all the requirements of a true mineral. In classifying peat as a mineral or non-mineral, there has been a tendency toward allowing use to play an important role in the xiv classification, that is, if used as an agricultural product peat would be treated as a non-mineral or if used as an energy source or fossil fuel peat would be treated as a mineral. Classifica- tion based on use can create considerable confusion especially with mineral products used as fertilizers. Peat has been historically classified by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the U.S. Geological Survey as a mineral resource, a somewhat broader category than just "mineral," along with coal, oil and natural gas. Peat is generally regarded as nonrenewable by earth science professionals, requiring in excess of 1,000 years to generate a commercially extractable deposit of fuel grade peat. This study would conclude that because of peat's genetic relationship to the mineral graphite, its general classification by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the U.S. Geological Survey as a mineral resource, and emphasizing its nonrenewability, peat should be classed as a mineral, mineral resource, or mineral pro- duct. Consequently, any classification based on use should be discouraged. Harvesting versus Mining Harvesting and mining have been used synonymously to refer to the extraction of peat. Literature searches reveal the term harvesting correctly refers to the nearly obsolete practice of selectively removing living Sphagnum from the surface of the bog. In this practice, Sphagnum was allowed to grow back, permitting successive harvests in a single location. Peat (unlike living Sphagnum) is considered nonrenewable and the term harvesting is inappropriate when applied to peat extraction. Additionally, the method and equipment utilized in peat extraction and the environ- mental impacts of peat extraction are synonymous with those com- monly attributed to mining, not harvesting. This.study would conclude that harvesting should be applied only to the removal of living Sphagnum or other living plants and that the extraction of peat should be categorized as mining. Environmental Impacts of Peat Mining Peat occurrence in Florida is, in nearly every case exa- mined, coexistent in and beneath a current wetland area. For this reason, peat mining and wetland mining are virtually synony- mous terms in Florida. The environmental impacts associated with peat mining may vary widely depending on the type of wetland, the location of the wetland, the function of the wetland, the extent of mining, the type of mining, and other physical parameters of the site. This study would conclude that an accurate assessment of the environmental impacts of peat extraction will be site specific and can be anticipated to range from minor to severe. Reclamation of Peat Mining Reclamation or the return of mined land to a beneficial use is applicable to most mining operations and would be so with peat mining. Restoration or the return of mined land to the pre- xvi mining function is only partially applicable to most mining operations and would not be practical with peat mining. The higher the ratio of overburden to the mined product, the higher the percentage of original landform and contour that can be achieved in reclamation. In peat mining, where the mined product typically-has no overburden, the extraction leaves a void space with no material available for filling, and therefore, no origi- nal landform and contour can be achieved in reclamation. This study would conclude that reclamation of mined peatlands to a beneficial use as an aquatic or uplands system is achievable, however, the restoration of mined peatlands to pre- mining contour and function is not feasible. Agricultural Use of Peat The inplace use of peat and related organic for agri- cultural purposes such as the Everglades Agricultural Area appear to be a nonconsumptive use of peat. In fact, the exposure of peat to air allows aerobic bacteria to oxide the peat causing a gradual loss of peat accompanied by subsidence of the land sur- face. It is predicted that by the year 2000, approximately 250,000 acres in the Everglades Agricultural Area will have sub- sided to depths of less than one foot. This report would conclude that agricultural uses of inplace peat be viewed as a consumptive use of peat and that companion to the use, research and planning be carried out to determine the systems impact resulting from peat loss and land subsidence for management to better transition into future land uses. xvii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The initial outline for this study was read and improved by David Gluckman, representing the Florida Chapter of the Sierra Club; Charles Lee, representing the Florida Audubon Society; and Katherine Ewel, Helen Hood, John Kaufmann, and Marjorie Carr, representing the Florida Defenders of the Environment. Richard P. Lee, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation offered helpful comments on the outline and sent valuable references concerning wetlands. Irwin Kantrowitz, United State Geological Survey read the outline and offered assistance. Ronnie Best of the Center for Wetlands, University of Florida provided an excellent perspective on the values attributed to wetlands and proved to be a most useful reference. Roy Ingram, Professor of Geology at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, provided work space, access to his personal collection of peat reference works and the benefit of his research experience through numerous informal conversations concerning various aspects of peat. xviii PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY This study was undertaken in response to a directive from the Florida Legislature originating in the Natural Resources Committee of the Florida House of Representatives. Florida is currently faced with immediate expanding industrial interest in the exploitation of its peat resources for fuel use. The study is primarily a compilation of literature pertinent to peats of Florida and their use for agriculture and energy applications. It is conceived as providing an information base for decisions concerning both the utilization and conservation of Florida's extensive peat resource. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF PEAT RESEARCH IN FLORIDA Interest in Florida's peat deposits has fluctuated since the Florida Geological Survey published a "Preliminary Report on the Peat Deposits of Florida" in its Third Annual Report (Harper, 1910). This early work was basically a reconnaissance study of peat resources in the state. The author acknowledged that as population density in the state increased a detailed report would be required. In light of current environmental awareness, it is especially interesting that Harper (1910) recommended studies by both an engineer and an ecologist. The historical perspective of peat use in Florida is not complete without mention of the work of Robert Ransom, a civil engineer, who came to Florida from Ipswich, England in 1884. Ransom viewed Florida's peat deposits as a readily exploitable resource and was especially interested in energy production from peat. For thirty-five years Ransom experimented with peat, even- tually even opening a test plant near Canal Point (Palm Beach County) which produced power gas, tars, oils, methyl alcohol and various by-products. He was not able to gain acceptance for his radical projects within his lifetime (Davis, 1946). In 1946, John H. Davis published The Peat Deposits of Florida, Their Occurrence, Development and Uses. This study categorized peat-forming environments in the state and treated individual deposits in detail. It extended Harper's work and included chemical characterization of various Florida peats. Chemical characteristics were related to the use of peat for agricultural purposes and also to its use as a fuel source. A number of studies treating the peats of south Florida have been prepared by W. Spackman in conjunction with co-workers. Spackman and others (1964) presented a summary of various coal forming environments associated with the Everglades. This work includes a large number of geologic cross sections which document the relationship of peats to bedrock and surrounding materials. The plant communities currently associated with peats in the various coal forming environments are also carefully documented. Cohen and Spackman (1977', 1980) present detailed descriptions of peats from southern Florida along with discussions of their ori- gin, classifications and consideration of the alteration of plant material. Spackman and others (1976) present an updated and augmented edition of the original guidebook. The format of these works (Spackman, et. al., 1964 and Spackman, et. al., 1976) makes them particularly useful to scientists in various disci- plines whose interests converge on the various wetland environ- ments of south Florida. In 1979, the U. S. Department of Energy began its "Peat Development Program." The assessment of fuel grade peat deposits was part of an effort to define energy resources in the United States exclusive of petroleum. The Florida Governor's Energy Office subcontracted with the University of Florida's Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences to survey the peat resources of Florida. This study resulted in a literature survey of peat deposits of Florida combined with detailed work in the Everglades Agricultural Area (Griffin, et al., 1982). The current study was undertaken in response to a directive from the Florida Legislature originating in the Natural Resources Committee of the Florida House of Representatives. It provides a compilation of information concerning the location and amount of Florida's peat resources. In addition, the various aspects of the Everglades Agricultural Area are described in some detail and implications of subsidence of peats in this region are con- sidered. Emphasis is also placed on existing information rela- tive to potential effects of peat mining on Florida's environment. Legislation which may be applied to peat mining, water quality parameters monitored in conjunction with various phases of peat mining and methods of regulation applied to the peat resource by Minnesota, New Brunswick and North Carolina are included as appendices to this report. DEFINITION OF PEAT AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS DEFINITION Peat is defined by workers in a variety of disciplines (geology, botany, soil science, and horticulture among others). These definitions proliferate in response to the specific interest of researchers and also in response to the multiple uses of peat. The American Geological Institute defines peat as, "An unconsolidated deposit of semicarbonized plant remains of a watersaturated environment, such as a bog or fen and of per- sistently high moisture content (at least 7'5 percent). It is considered an early stage or rank in the development of coal..." (Gary, et al., eds., 1974). This extremely general definition notes several essential points. Peat is composed of plant remains which accumulate in a wet environment. It is con- sidered to be an early product of the coal-forming process. In a definition which will be published in an upcoming volume (A. Cohen, personal communication, 1984), the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) defines peat as a naturally occurring substance derived primarily from plant materials. Peat is distinguished from other organic soil materials by its lower ash content (less than 25 percent ash by dry weight IASTM Standards D2974]) and from other phytogenic material of higher rank (i.e. lignite coal) by its lower BTU value on a water saturated basis. This very specific definition is designed so that peats may be classified objectively and distinguished from both organic soils and also coals. Griffin and others (1982) note the definition of fuel grade peat which is used by the United States Department of Energy. Fuel grade peat is defined as an organic soil consisting of greater than 75 percent organic matter in the dry state. In order for a peat deposit to be classified as fuel grade, the deposit must be at least 4 feet thick, with a surface area of not less than 80 contigous acres per square mile and yield not less than 8000 BTU per pound (moisture free). The definition for fuel grade peat establishes minimum standards for organic matter con- tent and also for heating value (BTU per pound). It further com- ments on the deposits itself, stipulating minimum thickness and contiguous acreage requirements. The three definitions of peat presented here respond to the specific purposes of individuals and agencies who prepared them. Varied user groups and professionals who work with peat may for- mulate additional definitions directly suited to their needs. It is thus necessary to determine the way in which an author defines peat in order to fully understand the implications of his work. In the state of Florida, the definition of peat may take on special significance if it is used as criteria for classification of peat as either a mineral resource or an agricultural (vegetable) resource. It has been argued that if peat is not classified as a mineral then its excavation might constitute a harvesting process. Harvesting may not be subject to the regula- tory procedures that govern mining of a legally-defined mineral material. The usage of the term harvesting to describe the mining of peat follows Kopstein (1979). "Harvesting" when used in conjunc- tion with peat correctly refers to the nearly obsolete practice of harvesting living Sphagnum (peat moss) from the surface of a bog. In this process, the Sphagnum was allowed to grow back so that repeated harvests were possible in a given area. Thus, a crop was in actuality "harvested." Very little or no true har- vesting occurs today (A. Cohen, personal communication, 1984). In the carbonization process, the carbon content of the plants' cellulose is proportionally increased as water, carbon- dioxide and methane are evolved. Carbonization can be generally described by the following equation: 072H120060 = C62H72024 + 2CH4 + 8C02 + 20H20 Cellulose Peat Methane Carbon Dioxide Water The expressions for cellulose and peat were taken from U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 7'28 (Soper and Osbon, 1922). Two major considerations arise from the definition of peat. One of these considerations involves the classification of peat as a vegetable or mineral and the second consideration follows from the first. If peat is viewed as being a vegetable material, then its excavation might be termed a harvesting process. Harvesting practices would not be subject to the regulatory pro- cedures that govern mining of a legally-defined mineral material. TERMINOLOGY RELATING TO THE PEAT FORMING ENVIRONMENT Peat can only accumulate in a waterlogged environment. The terms which refer to these environments take on different defini- tions according to author preference. The American Geological Institute distinguishes between bogs and fens on the basis of chemistry. Bogs and fens are both characterized as waterlogged, spongy groundmasses. Bogs, however, contain acidic, decaying vegetation consisting mainly of mosses while fens contain alka- line, decaying vegetation, mainly reeds (Gary, et al., eds., 1974). The terms "bog" and "fen" are not usually applied to peatlands in the southeastern United States. They are included in this discussion because they occur frequently in the litera- ture associated with peatlands extraneous to Florida. Although a significant body of research specific to the peats of Florida exists (Cohen and Sparkman, 1980; Cohen and Spackman, 1977; Griffin et al., 1982 Spackman et al., 1976), much information concerning mining techniques, reclamation methods and hydrologic aspects of peatlands pertains directly to areas remote to Florida where the terms "bog" and "fen" may be used. The concepts of minerotrophy and ombrotrophy are based on the quality of water feeding a peatland (Heikurainen, 1976) and are perceived as separate from the series eutrophy, mesotrophy and oligotrophy. The latter series describes nutrient resources of peatlands using plant composition with eutrophy being richer in nutrients and oligotrophy being poorer. The eutrophy oli- gotrophy series is difficult to apply since it may be expanded to include additional extreme and transitional groups. The boun- daries between these various groups are not clear (Heikurainen, 1976) and they will not be considered further in this document. Bogs are said to be ombrotrophic, which implies that the bog is isolated from the regional groundwater system and receives its moisture mainly from precipitation. Minerotrophic peatlands, or fens, are defined as being connected with the regional ground- water system and are nourished both by precipitation and ground- water flow (Brooks and Predmore, 1970). The U.S. Department of Energy in its Peat Prospectus avoids the usage of fen and characterizes peat as forming in swamps, bogs and saltwater and freshwater marshes (Kopstein, 1979). The extent of this confusion becomes clear on examination of the American Geological Institute's definition of swamp (Gary, et al., sds., 1974) which is characterized as "A water saturated area..., essentially without peatlike accumulation." It should be noted that most workers in the field do not concur with the portion of the American Geological Institute's definition that addresses the accumulation of peat in swamps (A. Cohen, personal communication, 1984). Moore and Bellamy (1974, p. 84) use the term "mire" to cover all wetland ecosystems in which peat accumulates in the same area where its parent plant material lived and grew. Thus, the meaning of specific names assigned to the peat-forming environment must be derived from an author's context. In the southeastern United States, the most commonly used terms for.peat-forming environments are swamps and marshes. Swamps refer to forested wetlands and marshes refer to aquatic, herbaceous wetlands (A. Cohen, personal communication, 1984). PEAT: AGRICULTURAL OR MINERAL RESOURCE? In Florida, peat may eventually be viewed as a mineral resource or an agricultural resource. The United States Bureau of Mines has long considered peat a mineral resource for the reporting of commodity statistics. In deference to the formal definition of the term "mineral," the greatest majority of earth science professionals would not classify peat as a mineral. Peat more properly might be likened to a rock in that it contains a number of minerals (quartz, pyrite, and clay minerals among others) as well as macerals which are the organic equivalents of minerals. If, however, the formal and most restricted definition of mineral is compared with a definition of mineral that reflects current usage, it is noted that "minerals" adhere to the specifi- cations of the formal definition in varying degrees. The intent of this discussion is not to establish that peat is a mineral, but rather to illustrate the extent to which the formal defini- tion has been expanded in the realm of common usage. A standard mineralogy textbook for university students, Elements of Mineralogy (Mason and Berry, 1968), gives the following definition of a minerals "A mineral is a naturally occurring, homogeneous solid, inorganically formed, with a defi- nite chemical composition and an ordered atomic arrangement." This definition is useful because its authors continue by expanding on each part of their definition, taking into account the complexity of the group of compounds classified as minerals. According to this definition, a mineral must be naturally occurring. This eliminates materials which are synthesized in the laboratory or are formed as by-products of various manufac- turing processes. Since peat is indisputably naturally occurring, this aspect of the definition will not be considered further. A mineral must also be a homogeneous solid. This qualifica- tion eliminates liquids and gases from consideration and implies that a mineral cannot be separated into simpler compounds by any physical means (Mason and Berry, 1968). In the coalification process by which plant material (i.e., cellulose) becomes peat, water, carbon dioxide and methane are evolved with time (Kopstein, 1979). Kopstein (1979) is referring to a generali- zation of the peat-forming process in which all initial plant material is referred to as cellulose. In actuality, peat con- tains many types of plant material and may possibly contain no cellulose at all. It is important here to note that many mineral substances evolve water or gaseous by-products when subjected to changed conditions of pressure or temperature. Gypsum dehydrates (evolves water) forming anhydrite. The mineral talc evolves water and forms enstatite and quartz at elevated temperatures. Thus, minerals commonly contain water as an integral part of their crystal structures. The term mineral is restricted by definition (Mason and Berry, 1968) to refer to inorganically formed substances. It eliminates homogeneous solids formed by plants and animals such as oyster shells, pearls and gallstones. Ostensibly, this qualification could eliminate peat from consideration. The American Geological Institute in its Glossary of Geology (Gary, et al., eds., 1974) includes the following reference in its definition of the term mineral: "A mineral is generally con- sidered to be inorganic, though organic compounds are classified by some as minerals." Thus, organic compounds are not automati- cally eliminated from consideration as minerals. This suggests that'the term mineral has come to be used in a sense that is less restricted than might be supposed from examination of the defini- tion presented to beginning students of mineralogy. Minerals are defined as having definite chemical composition (Mason and Berry, 1968). This implies that their composition must be readily expressible using a chemical formula. It does not preclude variation in chemical composition. Variation within definite limits is allowed, thus, the composition is definite but not fixed (Mason and Berry, 1968). The compositions of cellulose and the peat derived from it are frequently cited using the appropriate chemical formulae (Soper and Osbon, 1922, pp. 6-7; Kopstein, 1979, pp. 5-6; Cameron, 1973, p. 506). (As noted pre- viously, the formulae cited here are based on a generalization of the peat-forming process in which peat is derived from a starting material of cellulose. For most peats, this simplified approximation is not realistic.) The last criterion in the definition of a mineral is that of an ordered atomic arrangement; that is, a mineral should be a crystalline solid. Mason and Berry (1968) note a group of com- pounds which are considered minerals even though the crystalline state is not initially attained: "A few minerals, the commonest being opal, are formed by the solidification of a colloidal gel and are noncrystalline initially; many such minerals become crystalline during geologic time." The mineral opal may attain an ordered atomic arrangement only in the course of geologic time. The coal-forming process is illustrated in figure 1. As organic matter (originally deposited as peat) is subjected to conditions of increasing temperature and pressure it undergoes the changes associated with coalification. The end-product of this process is the mineral graphite (Press and Siever, 1974, p. 468). Graphite crystallizes in the hexagonal system and its formula is simply carbon (C). It is found in a number of occurrences including metamorphosed coal beds (Quinn and Glass, WETLAND ENVIRONMENT ABUNDANT VEGETATION ADAPTED TO SWAMPY CONDITIONS OVERLYING SEDIMENTARY ROCKS I BROWN COAL -UNDERLYING SEDIMENTARY ROCKS " l i I -- - -~~ --- - - - -'- HUNDREDS TO THOUSANDS ........... OF M TERS ........... .::::::::::OF METERS OF.- z--OVERLYING SEDIMENTARY ROCKS la- .- , I OR BITU C Plant litter accumulates at the surface Buried plant litter decays partially and is compacted forming peat Underlying sediments in -rida typically consist of limestone clay and unconsolidated sand. With shallow burial peat is compressed to form brown coal. Additional burial transforms the brown coal to lignite if burial is comparatively shallow and bituminous coal if depth of burial is greater. Coal is metamorphosed to anthracite or graphite with continuing burial and metamorphism. The process of coal formation. (Modified from Press and Siever, 1974, Figure 13-18, p. 468) Figure 1. I L __ -- I ,, = I 1958). The parallels with the case of opal seem apparent. Neither opal nor peat initially attain the internal atomic ordering referred to in Mason and Berry's definition of a mineral. Opal will presumably achieve internal atomic ordering in the course of geologic time (Mason and Barry, 1968). The transformation of peat into the mineral graphite requires, in addition to the passage of time, increases in temperature and pressure (Press and Siever, 1974). Geologists do not universally include crystalline form as a prerequisite to classification of a material as a mineral. This is demonstrated in the continuation of the AGI Glossary's defini- tion of mineral. "Those who include the requirement of crystalline form in the definition of a mineral would consider an amorphous compound such as opal to be a 'mineraloid'" (Gary, et al., eds., 1974). The United States Geological Survey in its volume entitled United States Mineral Resources (Brobst and Pratt, eds., 1973), devotes a chapter to peat as well as chapters to petroleum, natural gas and coal. The United States Bureau of Mines also considers peat to be a mineral resource in addition to coals, petroleum and natural gas. These resources including peat are all non-renewable. HARVESTING OR MINING Harvesting and mining are both terms which are applied to the extraction of peat. As was discussed in the section of this report "The Definition of Peat and Significance of this Definition" the term "harvesting" properly refers to the practically obsolete procedure of literally harvesting living Sphagnum from the surface of a bog. In this procedure, Sphagnum is allowed to continue its growth subsequent to harvesting (A. Cohen, personal communication, 1984). Currently, the choice of "harvesting" as opposed to "mining" for terms to describe the excavation process of peat is arbitrary. The nature of the distinction is demonstrated in the following quotation taken from Peat Prospectus: "Thus, the reco- very of peat is a surface mining or harvesting process," (Kopstein, 1979, p. 18). It may be significant that surface mining carries with it certain negative environmental connota- tions. Harvesting is largely free of environmentally negative connotations but this is perceived to be due to a lack of understanding since harvesting is frequently used as synonymous with surface mining. The equipment utilized in the peat removal process is not associated with harvesting in its commonly accepted sense. Peat operations which are currently active in Florida utilize earth moving and excavating machinery. In drained bogs such machinery commonly includes shovels, bulldozers and front-end loaders while draglines, clamshells and dredges are used in undrained bogs (Searls, 1980). Harvesting originally referred to removal of living Sphagnum which was allowed to replenish itself after harvesting. Peat is not considered renewable due to its slow rate of accumulation (Kopstein, 1979; Moore and Bellamy, 197'4). The process of harvesting in its usual sense does not imply the necessity of extensive land reclamation. However, reclama- tion of peatlands which have been excavated is acknowledged as necessary.(Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1981) and is discussed more thoroughly in the section of this report entitled "Reclamation of Peatlands of Florida." CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS APPLIED TO PEAT Peat, like many materials, is classified for the convenience of persons using it. Since peat use in the United States has been largely agricultural, most classification schemes are based on properties of peat pertinent to agricultural applications. As one might expect, classification schemes devised for agricultural application do not necessarily indicate peat quality for energy purposes. However, there is a general relationship between peat decomposition and its energy value with respect to direct com- bustion. This is illustrated in figure 2. The American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) has established maximum and minimum particle sizes for peat (ASTM, 1969). They additionally specify fiber content requirements for various types of peat. The maximum particle size for fibers is 0.5 inch (1.25 cm) and the minimum is 0.006 inches (0.15 mm). Peat is subdivided into five types and each type must contain a SAPRIC HEMIC FIBRIC MODERATE HIGH LOW 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PLANT FIBER DECOMPOSITION (%) Figure 2. The relationship of peat types to fuel grade. (Modified from Kopstein, 1979) certain percentage of the characteristic fiber. These percen- tages are based on an oven-dried weight at 105 OC as opposed to volume. The types of peat recognized by the ASTM include: 1) Sphagnum moss peat which must contain 66.66 percent Sphagnum fibers by weight, 2) Hypnum moss peat which must contain 33.33 percent fibers with one-half of those identifiable as Hypnum moss, 3) reed-sedge peat which must contain 33.33 percent fibers, half of which are reed-sedge and other nonmosses, 4) peat-humus must contain less than 33.33 percent fiber, and 5) other peat, which accounts for all peat not previously classified in ASTM Designation D-2607-69 (ASTM, 1969). The ASTM classification as discussed in the previous paragraph is currently under revision. Two major factors were considered in this revision. The classification of peat should meet the needs of three major user groups including engineers, energy users and agricultural users. In addition, the classification should be based on parameters which may be measured objectively. These parameters include ash, botanical composition, pH, and water holding capacity. In order to be called peat, a material will have to contain 75 percent or more organic material. Although peats will still be categorized as fibric, hemic or sapric, these general terms will be modified by ash content, botanical composition, pH and water holding capacity (A. Cohen, personal communication, 1983). One essential parameter that is characteristic of all peat is moisture level, but there are no current regulated standards for moisture in peat. The United States Bureau of Mines con- siders a commonly accepted value in the United States to be 55 percent moisture by weight for air dried peat (Searls, 1980). The U.S. Department of Agriculture divides peat into three categories (Searls, 1980). Fibric peat must contain more than 66.66 percent plant fibers. Hemic peats are more decomposed than fibric peats. They must have a fiber content which ranges between 33.33 percent and 66.66 percent fibers. Sapric peat con- sists of the most extensively decomposed plant material. Sapric peat contains less than 33.33 percent recognizable plant fragments of any type. Peat in the United States has often been classified into three general categories (Searls, 1980; Kopstein, 1979). Moss peat comprises Sphagnum, Hypnum and other mosses. Reed-sedge peat is mainly the product of reeds, sedges and other swamp plants. Humus is simply too decomposed for evidence of its ori- gin to be retained. The parameters which bear most directly on peat's usefulness as a fuel source are measured by proximate analysis. In this procedure, peat is analyzed in the laboratory for its volatile content, fixed carbon, ash content and moisture. The volatile content of peat refers to substances other than moisture which are emitted as gas and vapor when peat is burned. Peat has a very high volatile content compared to coal. This is a positive attribute for peat which is to be gasified since the reactivity of peat in the gasification process increases with increased volatile content. The fixed carbon content of the peat is responsible for much of its combustion energy. Ash is the amount of material in a fuel which remains after combustion. The amount of ash varies for different types of peat. Peats which receive their moisture primarily from precipi- tation are usually lower in ash than those which are nourished by surface waters. In times of flood, surface waters may carry large sediment loads onto the peatlands where it is trapped in the peat. Peat's high moisture content can be a major problem which must be considered in its utilization. Even a drained and soli- dified bog may contain 70-95 percent moisture and for some uses peat will require additional drying which will, in turn, require energy. THE ACCUMULATION OF PEAT THE PROCESS OF PEAT FORMATION Peat forms when the rate of accumulation of plant matter exceeds the rate at which decomposing organisms metabolize it. The conversion of fresh plant material to peat takes place over a period of time as peat becomes enriched in fixed carbon while evolving water, carbon dioxide and methane (Kopstein, 1979). Peat is comparatively increased in fixed carbon as opposed to cellulose and the process by which this takes place is referred to as carbonization. It is this enrichment of carbon which makes peat desirable as a fuel source (figure 3). The Peat Prospectus (Kopstein, 1979) compares peat with wood and various grades of coal in terms of fixed carbon and the heating value (in British Thermal Units, BTU). The following values are taken from figure 3 of the Peat Prospectus and are approximate (Kopstein, 1979). One pound-of wood with a fixed carbon content of approximately 20 percent, generates 9,300 BTU on a moisture and mineral free basis. An equivalent amount of peat containing 28 percent fixed carbon may generate approximately 10,600 BTU. These values for peat and wood contrast with values for lignite which yields about 12,400 BTU at a fixed carbon content of approximately 47' percent. These figures demonstrate that peat is a material distinguishable from wood in its fuel-producing characteristics. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH PEAT ACCUMULATION As was previously noted, peat forms when the accumulation of plant material exceeds its destruction by the organisms which decompose it. Since plant matter is usually decomposed before significant accumulations develop, it is instructive to examine the set of circumstances which allow peat to form. Certain geologic, hydrologic and climatic conditions serve to inhibit decomposition by organisms. Ideally, areas should be continually waterlogged, temperatures generally low and pH values of asso- ciated waters should be low (Moore & Bellamy, 1974). It should noted that Moore and Bellamy (1974) primarily treat peats asso- 14 i 01 #A 60 Ow 2i 40 . . 30o. 20' 10 r30 20w 0. 1 Figure 3. m -I >0 a u z 2-0 I ^r -* Jor z^ A comparison of moisture content and heating value for peat, wood and various coal types. (Modified from Kopstein, 1979) ciated with northern cold climates. Certain geologic characteristics are associated with waterlogged surface conditions. The tendency toward waterlogging is enhanced if topographic relief is generally low and topographic barriers exist which restrict flow and allow water to pond. Additionally, waterlogging is encouraged if highly permeable bedrock is covered with material of low permeability (Olson, et al., 1979). The chemical nature of the plant litter may also serve to reduce its susceptibility to decomposition. Moore and Bellamy (1974) note the association of cypress and hardwood trees with peats characteristic of the hammocks or tree islands of the Everglades. These hammocks occur on peat deposits which are situated on limestone bedrock. The trees, which are responsible for the peat beneath them, contain enormous amounts of lignin. Lignin is very resistant to decay (Moore and Bellamy, 1974). It is alternatively suggested that hammock peats in Florida may be controlled by the persistence of water (A. Cohen, personal com- munication, 1984). MINING TECHNOLOGY MINING METHODOLOGY ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE OF PEAT FOR FUEL Recently, several potential commerical users have been investigating Florida's peat as a fuel source. This interest is prompted by the rising cost of traditional fuels. Preliminary proposals for the use of peat as a fuel in Florida suggest that peat will be air dried and burned directly. This usage will require comparatively large amounts of peat which must be dried before it is burned (this drying is in addition to the moisture reduction which accompanies bog drainage) (Kopstein, 1979). The drainage of a peatland is an integral and necessary first step in any large-scale peat mining operation utilizing milled peat or sod peat mining methods. Moisture must be reduced to approx- imately 90 percent for the bog to be considered workable (i.e., able to bear the weight of machinery). Drainage is accomplished by construction of a system of ditches and waterways which are designed to capture water and route it away from the portion of the bog to be mined (Kopstein, 1979). If surface streams traverse the bog, they are diverted around it. Eventually, surface vegetation and stumps must be removed. There are several mining methods in common use in Europe. The manual method is one in which peat is cut into blocks by hand, removed from the bog for air drying and finally burned for home heating and cooking (Kopstein, 1979). Manual peat har- vesting is labor intensive and probably will not become important in Florida. The sod peat mining method is one in which a trench is cut into a previously prepared field. These trenches are cut by excavator/macerators which are specifically designed to cut, macerate, and extrude sods onto a conveyor which deposits them onto the field for air drying. At a moisture content of about 75 percent the sods are windrowed. Windrows are periodically split and turned to facilitate drying and at about 55 percent moisture sods are considered dry and removed for storage (Aspinall, 1980). The milled peat mining method is one in which a peat layer 1/4 to 2 inches thick is milled or shredded from the prepared surface of the bog. The peat is periodically harrowed to expedite drying. At a moisture content of 50 to 55 percent, the dried peat is pushed into ridges where it is collected for transportation to storage facilities (Aspinall, 1980). Several methods of hydraulic peat mining are in development. Examples of these processes are the slurry ditch, hydro peat and slurry pond methods (Aspinall, 1980). In each of these methods, the surface must be cleared; but drainage is not necessary. The slurry ditch and hydro peat methods utilize high pressure water guns to cut peat from a ditch face. The dif- ference between the methods lies in the post-mining dewatering process. The slurry ditch method utilizes a dewatering apparatus; whereas, the hydro peat method is dewatered by pumping the slurry to a drying field where it spread to dry (Minnesota DNR, 1981). The slurry pond method utilizes mechanical excavators or a dredge to remove peat. Mining equipment is mounted on a barge which floats on a pond excavated within the peat deposits as the mining progresses. The ultimate success of wet mining methods will depend on the successful development of very large scale dewatering processes and upon the environmental impacts of the mining process (Kopstein, 1979). These may be the preferred methods, however, in areas where drainage of the peat deposit will be difficult. MINING METHODOLOGY ASSOCIATED WITH THE AGRICULTURAL USE OF PEAT In order to obtain current information on Florida's active peat operations for the present study, the staff of the Bureau of Geology designed and conducted a survey of producers. In the first stage of this survey, a list of peat producers was compiled. In an effort to make this list as comprehensive as possible, a number of sources were consulted including: existing lists of producers (Florida Bureau of Geology, United States Bureau of Mines, United States Mines Safety and Health Administration); agencies contacting peat producers in conjunction with regular professional services (county agricultural agents, Florida Department of Agriculture); and numerous telephone directories. In the second stage of the survey, peat producers were contacted by telephone and field visits were arranged. The information which follows was contributed on a voluntary basis by producers'who were contacted during field visits. Peat extraction methods vary with the size and nature of the deposit being mined. Most deposits are mined using conventional types of earth-moving and excavating equipment. The machinery used includes draglines, backhoes, grade-alls, front-end loaders and hydraulic excavators. The majority of companies use a dragline for mining. A shredder is used to pulverize the peat. Most-companies drain the immediate area of mining by pumping and ditching, which enables the deposit to be mined by dry processes. Approximately one-third of the companies con- tacted conduct all or part of their mining below the watertable. Two companies utilize a variety of the milled peat mining process. After surface clearing and ditching is complete, the surface peat is pulverized with a rotovater. The pulverized material is dried in the sun and is turned by discing to help promote drying. The dried material is mechanically windrowed using a front-end loader or bulldozer and is then stockpiled or loaded for transport. There are no companies currently mining peat by the sod peat method in Florida. ACCUMULATIONS OF PEAT IN FLORIDA RATES OF PEAT ACCUMULATION Knowledge of the rate of peat accumulation is important in that it allows various extractive uses for the resource to be weighed in light of the amount of time it takes for the material to accumulate. Rates of peat accumulation are usually deter- mined using the carbon-14 method of dating organic materials. This method is subject to a number of difficulties when applied to peat. The following problems are enumerated by Moore and Bellamy (1974). 1) Wide errors may be introduced since young roots may penetrate material at depth. This problem could result in apparently rapid rates for the accumulation of peat. 2) Older layers are compacted as new ones are deposited. This could cause rates of deposition to appear anomalously low. 3) Rates of peat formation vary with climate and climate varies with time. Thus, an accumulation rate probably reflects a sort of average rate for some given amount of peat. Several estimates of peat accumulation rates in Florida are presented in Table 1. TABLE 1. ESTIMATED RATES OF PEAT ACCUMULATION IN FLORIDA Author Estimated Rate Comments Davis (1946, p. 74) 5.2in/100 years This rate is computed based on the amount of Si02 fixed by a standing crop of sawgrass from the Everglades. It is widely quoted, but a recent analysis of the method (Gleason, et al., 1974) indicates that certain of the assump- tions necessary to the calculation must be in error. This difficulty is dis- cussed more completely in the accom- panying text. Kuehn (1980, p. 49) 4.24in/100 years This rate was computed from a core which penetrated peat formed alter- nately in marine, brackish and fresh water environments from southwest Florida. The computations were based on radiocarbon ages. Kuehn (1980, p. 49) 3.64in/100 years This rate was computed for a single type of peat, red mangrove (Rhizophora), from southwest Florida using measured thickness and radiometric ages. Stephens (1974, 3 in/100 years Rates were computed from the Everglades p. 356) using radiocarbon ages which were not specifically referenced in the text. The variation in rate presented here for peat accumulation may be attributed to a number of factors. Gleason and others (1974) used Davis' (1946) data to compute a value of productivity for the sawgrass environment. Productivity refers to the amount of dry organic matter (measured in pounds) which is formed on an acre of ground in a year. When this productivity is compared to the dry weight of an acre-foot of peat as estimated by Davis (1946), a discrepancy is apparent. According to these com- putations, more material accumulates as peat than is originally formed in the sawgrass environment (Gleason, et al., 1974). Factors which may account for this difficulty include possible low estimates of productivity and inadequate estimates of silica content or peat density. It is also possible that silica in the peat might not be entirely derived from sawgrass (Gleason, et al., 1974). Rates of peat accumulation computed from radiocarbon age are grouped about an average of 9.1 cm/100 years. The rate of peat accumulation can vary with climate (which also varies with time), the position of the water table and nutrient supply (Moore and Bellamy, 1974). Data are not available which would allow rate variation in different environments to be evaluated. The rates presented here were calculated from peats produced from varying plant communities which thrive in different environments. In addition, peat has been lost by fire during various prehistoric dry periods (Cohen, 1974). Failure to recognize evidence of fire could alter the rate at which peat is calculated to accumulate. GEOLOGIC SETTINGS OF PEAT ACCUMULATION IN FLORIDA The conditions under which peat can occur in Florida are highly variable. While geologic and hydrologic relations of peat to its neighboring materials have been thoroughly documented in the Everglades of south Florida, numerous small deposits in the central peninsula remain unmapped. Davis (1946, p. 114), con- sidered the peat deposits of Florida as falling into a number of groups based on their locations. These groups include: 1) coastal associations, including marshes and mangrove swamps, lagoons and estuaries as well as depressions among dunes; 2) large, nearly flat, poorly-drained areas as exemplified by the Everglades illustrated in figures 4, 5, 6, and 7; 3) river-valley marshes such as the marsh adjacent to the St. Johns River; 4) swamps of the flatland region (figure 8); 5) marshes bordering lakes and ponds (figure 9); 6) seasonally flooded shallow depressions; 7) lake bottom deposits (figure 10); 8) peat layers buried beneath other strata (figure 11). Cohen and Spackman (1977) have devised a more comprehensive classification of south Florida's phytogenic (of plant origin) sediments based on micropetrological studies. They first divide BIG CYPRESS PROVINCE .. . R RIDGE AND SLOUGH SUB-PROVINCE COASTAL PROVINCE Figure 4. Peat Provinces of Southern Florida. (Modified from Spackman et al., 1976) WHITEWATER SCAPE SABLE- -EE-8C LEGEND PEAT "10 3 MARINE MARL E 0 8 KM LIMESTONE E \ .SHELL BEACH I -Mi. WATER 0 Figure 5. SW-NE cross-section from Cape Sable to vicinity of Tamiami Trail and map showing line of section. (Modified from Spackman, et al., 1964 and Spackman, et al., 1976) SW - "Moat "Moat" -'- LEGEND Figure 6. Cross-section through a cypress hammock. (Modif*ed from Spackman et al., 1964) SI, LEGEND WATER FRESH WATER MARL Figure 7. PEAT BEDROCK I Cross-section through a "Bay Head". (Modified from Spackman et al., 1964) FEET (METERS) ABOVE SEA LEVEL 70 (21.3) 60 (18.3) 50 (15.2) 40 (12.2) 30 (9.1) 20 (6.1) PINE- PALMETTO FLATWOOD I -- BAY SWAMP --------- ---------- ---------- ------------- -- --------- ----1 - -- -e - - - -- --- - - ----- - - - --- -- - ---~------------- ---------- ------------ ------ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- - -------------------------- --- ------- ---- I----- -_-------------------------- - --11--------------- ---- 11 --------- -- 111--- ----- --------- ----- - - -- - - ----- - ____-II-------- -------- -- -- ----- --------- ------ -------- LEGEND ED PEAT, MUCK and SAND l SAND PEAT and MUCK D SAND, SILT and CLAY I-- MARL Fige 8. Cross-section trough bay swamp and titi swamp. (Modified from Cameron et al.,i 19771). I / :!I ,,,.I ' I LEGEND PEAT S LAKE S APOPKA Figure 9. Peat deposits bordering lakes. (Taken from Davis, 1946) HUNDREDS OF YARDS LEGEND SAPROPEL FIBROUS SAWGRASS PEAT CLAY Figure 10. Cross-section showing peat filling lake. (Taken from Davis, 1946) SCALE VER [4FT. LEGEND HOR. 200 FT. SAND : 2 SHELL SILT . CLAY PEAT : i MARL I- I- - COMBI- [7D NATIONS. MA- MARINE I FAUNA PO PINE-OAK :: POLLEN . SF SPRUCE- FIR 1 POLLEN Figure 1 cross-section using cores to show buried peat layer! (at eka i' Dam Site, Oklawaa River, Marion County, Florida. ( fom Davis, 1946) phytogenic sediments into two groups based on whether the plant material is transported from the site of growth or deposited at or near the growth sites of their source plants. Transported and nontransported phytogenic sediments are subdivided as occurring in marine to brackish water or fresh water. Specific environ- ments are enumerated for both marine to brackish water deposits and also fresh water deposits. Peats of these deposits are dif- ferentiated based mainly on their botanical composition. In Florida, peat deposits occur above or below the water- table (Davis, 1946; Gurr, 1972). Wet peat deposits occur if the watertable remains relatively high. Peat may be actively accumu- lating in these deposits. Certain areas within the Everglades, the coastal mangrove peats, and some lake-fringing peat deposits, such as the one associated with Lake Istokpoga, are examples of deposits which occur below the watertable. In other instances, peat deposits are located above the watertable. This drainage may have been instigated to enhance the land for agricultural use. The Everglades agricultural region contains numerous tracts drained'for this purpose. Other deposits have apparently been drained as a result of regional lowering of the watertable. Most peatlands in Florida occur at or below the watertable and, thus, are very frequently also wetlands. INVENTORY OF PEAT IN FLORIDA MAPPING AND EVALUATING THE PEAT RESOURCE There is no comprehensive inventory of Florida's peat de- posits currently in print. Until recently, peat was not even remotely considered as a fuel source in Florida; and several scattered deposits were adequate to satisfy the state's agri- cultural and horticultural needs. Thus, neither interest nor funding were available for a complete peat inventory in the recent past. It is important to point out that a comprehensive inventory of Florida's peat resource is, of necessity, a massive undertaking. The reasons for this difficulty are manifold. Florida is currently estimated to have 6.8 billion tons of peat contained in 4,700 square miles (U.S. Soil Conservation Service). This peat occurs in a variety of geologic settings which are both discontinuous and widely distributed across the breadth and length of the state. The various geologic settings of peat in Florida are discussed in a previous section, "Geologic Settings of Peat Accumulation in Florida." These difficulties are compounded by the inaccessibility of many peat-producing areas. Peat actively accumulates in wetland situations typified by marshes, swamps, and mangrove islands. Much of Florida's peat occurs in the Everglades region (figure 12). Due to extensive drainage in the Everglades the exact LAKE LEGEND OKEECHOBEE MUCK PEAT II ~-9 I; WITHIN LIMITS OF EVERGLADES ! MANGROVE PEAT ISOPAC H SHOWING THICKNESS THE EVER MAP OF PEAT LADES Figure 12. Isopach maps of the Everglades region showing thickness of peat and some muck areas. (Taken from Davis, 1946) thickness and extent of the peat has decreased since figure 12 was prepared. Many of these areas are not accessible to conventional vehicles. Their size and character may render foot travel unfeasible. Some, but not all, sites may be accessible to boats. Coring apparatus for taking samples and measuring thickness must, in addition, accompany any field party charged with assessing peat reserves. A realistic appraisal of Florida's peat resource is further complicated by the variability of the material. Peat may be classified as fibric, hemic or sapric depending on the extent to which it has decomposed (see section entitled "classification systems applied to peat"). It also varies with respect to chemical properties that affect its viability as a fuel source. Complete assessment of the peat resource requires laboratory analysis in addition to time-consuming field studies. Attempts to assess the amount and locations of peat in Florida are hampered by an additional factor. Peat deteriorates by oxidizing when the wetlands where it accumulates are drained. This drainage may be due to the activities of man or by natural lowering of the water table in times of drought. Any data base for peat will require periodic updating if it is to remain useful. CURRENT ESTIMATES OF PEAT IN FLORIDA The total peat resources available in Florida are difficult to estimate and published values vary widely. The paucity of actual peat resource investigations is an important hindrance to the development of accurate figures. A few published studies are concerned with the entire state (Davis, 1946; Griffin, et al., 1982). Several others concentrate on limited areas (Stephens and Johnson, 1951; Gurr, 1972). Individual county soil surveys vary in their usefulness due to apparent inconsistencies in the terminology relating to organic and organic-rich soils. The more recent studies were used by Griffin, et al. (1982) to estimate fuel grade peat resources. Unfortunately, these studies are not complete for every county in the state. As a result, Griffin, et al. (1982) were unable to provide a comprehensive inventory of the peat resources for the entire state. Another possible reason for the variation between resource estimates may be the result of the specific material studied. Griffin, et al. (1982) investigated "fuel-grade peats" while Davis (1946) inventoried a variety of organic materials classified as peats. The United States Soil Conservation Service (1981) studies soils in general and describes their organic con- tent in addition to other characteristics. Griffin, et al. (1982) report the discrepancies among the figures from various studies but were unable to determine the reason for the differences. Griffin, et al. (1982) also state that verbal reports from other Department of Energy peat researchers indicate that they have found similar discrepancies between the resource figures from the Soil Conservation Service and their own figures in other states. Published estimates of Florida's peat resources vary nearly by an order of magnitude. Griffin, et al. (1982) provide the lowest figure of 677',688 acres (1,059 square miles) consisting of 606 million tons of peat. Davis (1946) estimated 2,240,000 acres (3,500 square miles), comprising 1,750,000,000 tons of peat. The highest figure is provided by the Soil Conservation Service and is 3,000,000 acres (4,700 square miles), or 6,900,000,000 tons of peat. The published resource estimates vary significantly and thus should be used with reservation. The U.S. Bureau of Mines currently uses the Soil Conservation Service figure (C. Davis, personal communication, 1983). The determination of a more accurate resource figure for Florida peats would require a significant investment of time and money to complete. The scattered nature of the deposits in north and central Florida (figure 13) is such that there are literally thousands of sites to be investigated. In south Florida, peat deposits cover broad areas which would have to be examined in order for accurate estimates to be prepared. The greatest potential peat resources in Florida lie predo- minantly in south Florida (figures 13, 14, and 15). The vast majority of this peat lies in the Everglades and associated swampy areas. It is interesting to note that while Davis (1946) (figure 13) and the Department of the Interior (Christ et al., 1981) (Figure 15) show similar areas of peat in south Florida, I .- . _", ,.. I -. ,- EVERGLADS- - MostlycSaw-9 ssPeo--,. l A an I-'tt >.. : -', .Muck. and-T -. A at 8 Loxahatchee Peat COASTAL MANR VE '- E CORKSGLREW MARSH o -. . Mostly Sowoross Peat - A Muck and *oat -oq B Loxahatche. Peat ^ --*---f'H 1 SALT-MARSH PEATS ^ ^ - + E CORKSCREW MARSH o + -, r---c- - F VAN SWEARINGEN SLOUGH -. . G ISTOKPOGA MARSH & SWAMP -- " H UPPER ST JOHNS RIVER FELLSMERE AREA -._ _ 1 PEACE CREEK DRAINAGE -- DISTRICT AREA ' J CLERMONT MARSH - K LAKE APOPKA MARSH Lt, .L '- - L OKLAWAHA RIVER AREA M ORANGE LAKE N FLORAHOME AREA -_- ,." 0 SAMPLES TAKEN AND SMALLER '. -- ,. ... . q PEAT AREAS' . STATE OF FLORIDA 'IS<' .-. SHOWING - PEAT DEPOSITS . C.L A'< ,- U D S--- UI- ,- -. ,-.I -- -- + 7 x x 1 .0 ,I^ ..L . GtvLP oF MXxILo rC(\ 1. : Peat Deposits in Florida. (Taken from Davis, 1946) Figure 13. FUEL-GRADE PEAT DEPOSITS * No Survey Avoilable ; I I 1 o Z\ e/ f1 Figure 14. Fuel Grade Peat in Florida. (Taken from Griffin, et al., 1982) Figure 15. Peat deposits in Florida. (Taken from Christ, et al., 1981) ("7" r-' k~ I ,e ,d~P~L Griffin et al. (1982) (figure 14) show a significantly smaller area. This discrepancy may be due to subsidence and high ash content which would render peat unsuitable for fuel use. Griffin, et al. (1982) show peat deposits in Collier and Lee counties that are not included on the other maps. Figures 13, 14, and 15 indicate the presence of large depo- sits in the St. Johns River Valley (Indian River, Brevard and Ocange counties), and the Oklawaha River Valley (Marion and Lake counties). Other relatively large deposits include: Lake Apopka (Orange and Lake counties), near Lake Arbuckle (Highlands County), Orange Lake area (Marion and Alachua counties) and the Florahome deposit (Putnam County). Smaller deposits are also indicated on Davis' (1946) map (figure 13) and Griffin, et al. (1982) map (figure 14). It is interesting to note that while Davis (1946) (figure 13) shows scattered samples taken from small peat areas in the panhandle, Griffin, et al. (1982) (figure 14) show a number of deposits including a large deposit in Leon County and smaller deposits in Bay, Jackson, and Santa Rosa counties. The Department of the Interior map (Christ et al., 1981) (figure 15) does not indicate any deposits in the panhandle. Peat associated with mangrove and coastal swamps generally occur in a narrow band paralleling Florida's coastline. The zone occupied by these environments is widest in southwest Florida. These peats are not generally shown on the maps of peat resources due to the scale of the maps. Until a more detailed investigation of our peat resources is undertaken the published resource estimates must suffice. It must, however, be kept in mind that the figures are estimates of the available resources and vary from one investigator to another. THE EVERGLADES AGRICULTURAL AREA HISTORY OF THE EVERGLADES AGRICULTURAL AREA The Everglades Agricultural Area is a part of an immense natural drainage system that begins in the northernmost reaches of the Kissimmee River drainage basin near Orlando. The Kissimmee River flows to the southeast into Lake Okeechobee. In its natural state, the level of Lake Okeechobee fluctuated within a range of approximately 8 feet, that is, between 12 to 20 feet above mean sea level (M.S.L.) (Parker, 1974). The water level in the upper Everglades rose and fell in response to the fluctuations of Lake Okeechobee. In the wet season, most of the Everglades was inundated much of the time. When the water level of Lake Okeechobee reached about 14.6 feet (M.S.L.), two separate segments of the lake shore would begin overflowing into the Everglades. At about 18 feet (M.S.L.), the entire southern shore (30 miles) overflowed pouring a flood into the upper Everglades (Parker, 1974). It is important to note, however, that losses to evapotranspiration are estimated to have been as high as 82 percent. Thus, flood water from Lake Okeechobee most probably did not travel the entire length of the Everglades, but rather local precipitation caused the inundation (Parker, 1974). This mass of water flowed sluggishly to the Gulf and has come to be described as sheet flow (Parker, 1974). The chronic inundation allowed the accumulation and preservation of the organic soils which characterize the highly productive Everglades Agricultural Area. In about 1880, Hamilton Disston entered into a contract by which he would drain land on the upper Kissimmee River and receive as compensation half of the land he drained. His success was debatable (Tebeau, 1974). The history of early drainage efforts is a history of inadequate technical expertise and inse- cure funding. The scope of the drainage issue was continually underestimated. Disasterous floods associated with hurricanes in 1926 and 1928 moved the Federal Government to take action. The extensive floods of 1947 and 1948 made it obvious that water control had not yet been established and set the stage for the intervention of the Army Corps of Engineeers (Tebeau, 1974). In 1947, most of south Florida was flooded for several months. The U.S. Congress, in response to the continuing water- control problems, passed the Flood Control Act of June 30, 1948. This action directed the Army Corps of Engineers to plan, design and construct a massive project which would ultimately solve water problems in all or parts of 18 counties in central and south Florida (Snyder, et al., 1978). In the plan proposed by the Army Corps of Engineers, major concern was devoted to the protection of life and property along the lower east coast of Florida. The first phase of the project involved building an artificial levee from Lake Okeechobee to about Homestead in order to confine flood waters to the Everglades. The project was also designed to provide water control for soil, water conservation and farming (Snyder, et al., 1978). After studies by both the United States Department of Agriculture and the University of Florida, the lands of the pre- sent "Everglades Agricultural Area" were set aside for agri- cultural development. The organic soils of the Agricultural Area were the only soils of sufficient depth and of the proper type to support cultivation for a period of time sufficient to justify development (Snyder, et al., 1978). It is important to note that when the Everglades Agricultural Area was being planned it was recognized that subsidence of organic soil would occur and that the area could not support cultivation indefinitely (Snyder, 1978). CROPS AND SOILS OF THE EVERGLADES AGRICULTURAL AREA The Florida Everglades comprises the single largest body of organic soils in the world, 1,976,800 acres (Shih, 1980). The Everglades Agricultural Area consists of 1,892,811 acres of fer- tile organic soil. Winter vegetables from the Agricultural Area include sweet-corn, celery, radishes, leaf crops, carrots and beans. In addition, lands of the agricultural tract are used for sugar cane, pasture and turf (Shih, 1980). Sugar cane is the dominant crop with cash receipts of $215 million in 1977-1978 (Snyder, et al., 1978). The proximity of the Florida Agricultural Area to the south shore of Lake Okeechobee is not coincidence (figure 16). Before the activities of man altered the tendency of Lake Okeechobee to overflow along it southern edge silt, clay, and organic colloids were mixed with dead plants to form muck. In this way, the mucks became enriched in the microelements that peat lacks (Stephens, 1974), enchancing the mucks as an agricultural growth medium. The soils of the Everglades Agricultural Area are classified by soil scientists on the basis of the percentage of inorganic matter they contain and their thickness. The Torry Series soils occur within two to five miles of Lake Okeechobee. They contain black organic layers more than 51 inches thick and are characterized by a range of 35 percent to 70 percent mineral matter (mostly the clay minerals sepiolite and montmorillonite) (Snyder, 1978) and are not considered peats according to ASTM standards. The Terra Ceia, Pahokee, Lauderhill and Dania soils are dark organic soils which are differentiated from one another based on their thickness above bedrock. The Terra Ceia soils are the thickest with the Pahokee, Lauderhill and Dania becoming successively thinner. As the process of subsidence occurs, Terra Ceia soils will become Pahokee soils since Pahokee soils differ from Terra Ceia soils only in their thickness (Snyder, 1978). PRIVATELY BACKPUMPED LANDS STATE OWNED LANDS CANAL LEVEE (L) Figure 1 6. Location map of the Everglades Agricultural Area. (Modified from Snyder et al., 1978) m Lull L` J HI-- !! LLIII SUBSIDENCE Subsidence refers to the loss of thickness which is incurred by organic soils when they are drained. A group of physical pro- cesses are responsible for subsidence, including 1) shrinkage due to dessication, 2) consolidation by loss of the buoyant force of groundwater and loading, or both, 3) compaction by tillage, 4) wind erosion, 5) burning and 6) biochemical oxidation (Stephens, 1974). The processes of drying, consolidation and compaction do not result in actual loss of soil (Shih, 1980). Stephens and Johnson (1951) documented an increase of oven dried weight for Everglades peat from about 9 pounds to about 16 pounds per cubic foot after cultivation. This increase in density corresponds to a decrease in soil volume. In this manner, the volume of the soil decreases although there is little actual loss of soil. The processes of wind erosion, burning and oxidation do, however, result in the actual loss of organic soils (Shih, 1980). Wind erosion is thought to have minor effects in the Everglades Agricultural Area. Numerous charcoal rich lenses which represent ancient fires have been found at depth in cores through the organic soils of the Everglades and coastal swamps (Cohen, 1974). Attempts to correlate charcoal layers from core to core were futile suggesting that fires were not widespread geographically. The fires were confined mainly to sawgrass-dominated peats. Modern observation indicated that fires are very common in sawgrass communities and it is suggested that sawgrass may be especially well-adapted to survival of fires (Cohen, 1974). The most serious cause of long term subsidence in the Everglades is biochemical oxidation. Biochemical oxidation has been responsible for 55 to 75 percent of the total soil loss in the upper Everglades Agricultural Area (Stephens, 1974). Although original plans for drainage in the Everglades recognized that subsidence would occur, the causes were apparently misunderstood (Stephens and Johnson, 1951). Shrinkage of original peat due to drainage was taken into account, but the slow continual loss of peat due to biochemical oxidation was not considered. The organic soils of the Everglades are a collection of organic particles and mineral particles which are interspersed with void spaces or pores. When these pores are filled with water the micro-organisms which actively decompose the organic soil are unable to function or function at a greatly reduced rate (Snyder, et al., 1978). This is the condition that allowed organic soils to accumulate before modification of natural drainage patterns. Biochemical oxidation of organic soils is facilitated by warm temperatures, low water tables, high pH and high organic content (Stephens, 1974). Drained organic soils of the Florida Everglades Agricultural Area subside at an average rate of approximately 1 inch/year (Stephens, 1974). This rate varies with variation of depth to the water table. Rates of subsidence for experimental plots with water table depths of 12 inches, 24 inches and 36 inches were measured to be 0.6 inches per year, 1.4 inches per year and 2.3 inches per year, respectively. Subsidence has been documented in the Everglades using repeated surveys of ground elevation along certain lines. In figures 17, 18 and 19 (Stephens and Johnson, 1951), the solid lines represent the original elevation of the surface of the ground and the elevation as measured in 1940. The dashed lines indicate the topographic elevations predicted from subsidence rates. Stephens (1974) notes that subsidence was measured to be 33.5 inches between 1941 and 1966 in the upper Everglades which may be compared to a predicted subsidence loss of 33.0 inches in 25 years (Stephens and Johnson, 1951). Rates of subsidence in the Everglades Agricultural Area vary with the depth to which the water table is maintained. The depth at which the water table is maintained depends on optimum con- ditions for each land use. Snyder and others (1978) note that most vegetable crops produce high yield when the water table is maintained at 24 inches below the surface. Sugar cane normally requires a water table depth which is greater than 24 inches; and in certain organic soils, a water table depth of 30 to 36 inches greatly improves sugar cane quality. Water tables for cattle and sod production may be maintained at levels which would be con- sidered too high for most crops. It is important to note that extremely high water tables may cause problems specifically related to crop land use even though high water tables allow maximum soil preservation (Snyder, et al., 1983). Figure 17. Map of the Everglades Agricultural Area showing the locations of profiles A-A' and B-B'. (Modified from Stephens and Johnson, 1951) A A' 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 MILES Figure 18. Profile A-A'across the upper Everglades showing the original surface elevations and the ground elevation in 1940 as shown by topographical survey. profiles for the years 1970 and 2000 are estimated. (Modified from Stephens and Johnson, 1951). B' 5 10 15 20 25 30 Figure 19. Profile B-B' through the lower part of the Everglades Agricultural Area show the original surface elevation and the surface elevation as determined in 1940 by topographic surveys. Profiles for the years 197 and n 2000 are estimated. (Modified from Stephens and Johnson, 1951) 1 , CONSERVATION MEASURES Researchers who have worked in the Everglades Agricultural Area suggest that maintenance of high water tables is the most effective measure available for conservation of organic soils. Tate (1980) notes that the only feasible means of controlling subsidence is knowledgeable manipulation of the water table. Snyder and others (1978) recommend: "For best conservation organic soils should be kept flooded whenever not in use. When soils are used, the water table should be maintained as high as is possible for that use." Stephens (1974) lists a number of suggestions geared toward conservation of organic soil: "(1) provide adequate water control facilities for keeping water tables as high as crop and field requirements will tolerate; (2) make productive use of drained lands as soon as possible; and (3) intensify research studies to develop practices to prolong the life of the soils." It has been suggested that extending the life of organic soils by plowing under cover crops or litter (Snyder, et al., 1978; Stephens, 1974) is probably not an effective conservation measure. The rate at which peat forms is extremely slow and the volume of plant litter produced is very small. Snyder and others (1978) discuss an example which clarifies this relationship. Sugar cane produces an amount of top growth exceeded by few, if any, plants. An average cane crop (30 tons/acre) is estimated to contain approximately 8 tons of dry matter. If all of the dry matter from an entire crop were added to the soil, it could be assumed that about half of it would be decomposed rapidly. One acre-inch of top soil is about the amount lost to subsidence each year in the Everglades Agricultural Area. That amount of soil weighs approximately 50 tons. Thus, 4 tons are replaced each year, which is still only approximately 1/12 the amount which is lost. THE NEAR FUTURE OF THE EVERGLADES AGRICULTURAL AREA Snyder and others (1978) have included a discussion of land use in the Everglades Agricultural Area through the year 2000. It is noted that the predictions of Stephens (1951) have proved reliable (compare figures 20 and 21). These predictions are pre- sented in Table 2 (Snyder, et al., 1978). Although land eleva- ,tions are shown through the year 2000, subsidence will continue. By the year 2000, only approximately 80,000 acres of soil three feet in depth or deeper will remain. It is predicted that sugar cane acreage will decrease, pasture acreage will increase signi- ficantly and vegetable acreage will remain essentially unchanged assuming the economic viability of such operations. By the year 2000, over 500,000 acres will be less than 3 feet in thickness. Approximately half of this will be less than a foot in depth (Snyder, et al., 1978). The depth of 3 feet is significant because, at depths of less than 3 feet, the use of mole drains becomes impractical. The soils which have subsided to depth of LAKE MARTIN COUNTY PALM BEACH COUNTY .M BEACH COUNTY BROWARO COUNTY 0 2 4 6 8 10 MILES SCALE Figure 20. Soil depths predicted for the year 1980. (Modified from Stephens and Johnson, 1951) Compare with Figure 17. (Taken from Griffin, et al., 1982) 0 KEECHOBEE n 0 C z -4 1 ,- .. .' MARTIN CO. 0 LAKE U., OEECH PLMEACH CO. S- ... * f. *:.:-:.': :. '. :*:** 10 22 PALM BEACH CO. BROWARD CO. Figure 21, Thicknesses of soils from the Everglades Agricultural Area as determined in r recent study. (Modified from Griffin et al., 1982). TABLE 2 Proportions of the Organic soils of the Everglades Agricultural Area falling into categories based on thickness (after Snyder, 19 7). YEAR 0 to 1 ft. 1 to 3 ft. 3 to 5 ft. over 5 ft. 1912 0 1 3 95 1925 1 3 7, 89 1940 1 7' 14 85 1950 2 7 28 76 1960 4 12 28 55 1970 11 16 41 45 1980 17' 28 41 14 1990 27' 28 39 7 2000 45 42 9 4 less than one foot face an uncertain fate. Snyder and others (1978) suggest that while some of those soils may be suitable for pasture, the soils may be abandoned for agricultural uses. It is also suggested that the remaining soils and the existing water- control structures be used to produce aquatic crops. The authors suggest that such a usage could greatly extend the useful agri- cultural life of the soils. INDUSTRIAL USES OF PEAT Industrial use of peat can be divided into two major categories: extractive and non-extractive (Minnesota DNR, 1981). The extractive uses include direct combustion, gasification, industrial chemicals, horticultural products and sewage treatment. The non-extractive uses include agriculture, energy crops and again sewage treatment (Minnesota DNR, 1981). PREPARATION OF PEAT FOR INDUSTRIAL UTILIZATION For most applications, peat must be dewatered before pro- cessing. Biogasification and some energy crops and sewage treat- ment processes do not require dewatering. Solar drying in the field is energy efficient but is not suitable to wet mining processes or to all mining plans.- Alternative dewatering processes include mechanical presses and thermal dryers, in addition to pretreatment processes such as wet carbonization, wet oxidation and solvent extraction. Mechanical methods are limited in the amount of water they can remove. Most of the water contained in peat is held in chemical bonds, colloidal suspensions and small pores in the organic matter. Mechanical methods may reduce water content to 70 percent at best (Minnesota DNR, 1981). Thermal dryers can be utilized to reduce the moisture content further. The efficiency of mechanical dewatering is greatly enhanced by pretreatment processes such as wet carbonization, wet oxidation and solvent extraction. Peat can be mechanically dewatered to approximately 30 percent water content after wet oxidation (Mensinger, et al., 1980 in Minnesota DNR, 1981, p. 30). Wet carbonization consists of heating a slurry of peat and water (approximately 3 percent solids) to 300-400F.at 50-100 atmospheres of pressure for 30 minutes. A "peat coal" with a heat value of 12,000-14,000 BTU/lb dry weight is obtained after the liquid is removed (Kopstein, 1979). Wet oxidation is an established process for the oxidation of many wet organic materials. Air or oxygen is pressure fed to wet peat in a closed, heated vessel. Combustion is rapid and is controlled by the rate of supply of the oxygen or air. The pro- cess can be stopped after enough heat has been generated to car- bonize the remaining peat or can be carried to completion to produce energy (Kopstein, 1979). Solvent extraction reacts a heated peat-water slurry under pressure with an organic solvent. The water is extracted from the peat by the solvent. Subsequent to cooling, the absorbed water is stripped from the solvent and after treatment is disposed of as waste. FUEL USES Direct Combustion Direct combustion of peat is a method of producing energy which has been utilized on a commercial scale in Ireland, Finland and the Soviet Union for several decades. The Soviet Union had installed an electric power station fueled entirely by peat as early as 1914 (Kopstein, 1979). The U. S. Department of Energy has developed several cri- teria for fuel-grade peat. The criteria are: 1) heat value greater than 8000 BTU/lb (dry weight), 2) greater than 80 acres of peat per square mile, 3) peat depth greater than 4 feet, and 4) ash content less than 25 percent (Minnesota DNR, 1981). Hemic and sapric peats are the most suitable for direct combustion useage. The more decomposed peats (sapric) have been carbonized to a greater extent but often have larger ash contents which reduces their fuel value. Hemic peats generally are the most suitable for fuel use (Minnesota DNR, 1981). Direct combustion of peat is accomplished in boilers designed or retrofitted for either peat fuel entirely or mixed fuel feed. Boiler design must accommodate the characteristics of peat fuel: low energy density, high moisture content. Both of these characteristics result in increased cost (approximately 50 percent greater) of the boiler and feed system compared with a coal or oil fired boiler of the same capacity (Kopstein, 1979). Grate fired and fluidized-bed boilers require pelletized or bri- quetted feed. Pulverized-fired boilers require peat ground to the particle size compatible with the combuster design. Direct combustion techniques can result in partial oxidation of the peat and generation of synthetic fuel gases. Reduced oxy- gen input and/or water vapor injection are required to generate the fuel gases. Gasification Peat is very reactive during gasification. Gasification can yield low to medium BTU fuel gases, synthesis gases (those which can be further upgraded by hydrocracking) fuel liquids, ammonia, sulfur and oil byproducts (napthalene, benzene and phenol) (Kopstein, 1979; Minnesota DNR, 1981). Several basic designs of gasifiers are feasible for peat gasification, however, data for peat gasification is primarily limited to laboratory scale operations (Kopstein, 1979). Entrained flow and fluid bed gasifiers appear attractive. An example is the PEAT GAS process developed by the Institute of Gas Technology. Dry peat is fed to the gasifier, and heated under pressure with a hydrogen rich gas. The carbon in the peat reacts with the hydrogen to form hydrocarbon gases (primarily methane and ethene). The gases produced can be upgraded to pipeline quality (Minnesota DNR, 1981). Byproduct oils (benzene, napthalene and phenols), ammonia and sulfur are extracted in turn from the liquids which are condensed during various gas upgrading processes.(Minnesota DNR, 1981). The ratio of gaseous to liquid products is controlled by changes in temperature, pressure and length of reaction time. Increased temperature and reaction time lead to gaseous product increases. With higher temperature and longer reaction times, the large hydrocarbon molecules comprising the liquid products are hydrocracked into lighter gaseous molecules (Kopstein, 1979). Biogasification Biogasification is an anerobic fermentation process. An important advantage of biogasification is that dewatering is not required. -Biogasification is a two-stage process. In the first step, the peat-water slurry is partially oxidized to break it down to simple compounds. Aldehydes, ketones, organic acids and esters are the main products at this stage. The pH is adjusted and the mixture is transferred to the fermenter (anerobic biolo- gical reactor) where bacteria catalyze methane production. Methane and carbon dioxide are produced in stoichometric propor- tions (Kopstein, 1979) with up 95 percent of the material being converted to methane or carbon dioxide (Minnesota DNR, 1981). The resulting gas can be upgraded to substitute natural gas (SNG) by scrubbing the carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide from the methane gas (Kopstein, 1979). The waste material from the fermentation process contains undigested peat components, inorganic residues and residual bac- teria. These materials can be utilized for soil conditioners, animal feeds, or can be concentrated for disposal. Excess water is recycled to the fermenter (Kopstein, 1979). INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS Peat has been utilized as a raw material for the production of industrial chemicals for many years in Europe and the Soviet Union. U. S. interest has developed only recently. Peat bitu- mens, carbohydrates and humic acids are extracted by processes at low to moderate temperatures. Peat coke, peat tar and activated charcoal are produced by pyrolysis. The use of peat for industrial chemicals does not pose major technical problems. The technology has been developed in Europe and the Soviet Union. The chemicals produced are similar to petroleum derived products. As petroleum becomes more expensive, the incentives to utilize peat will increase (Minnesota DNR, 1981). Bitumens Peat bitumens are those peat components which are soluble in nonpolar organic solvents. The yield of bitumens depends on the extracting solvent chosen. Yield increases from low to high in the following list of solvents: petroleum ether, gasoline, dichloroethane, benzene, ethanol:benzene (1:1) (Fuchsman,1978). Although various solvents are utilized for analytical purposes, gasoline is the solvent used in commercial processes. Benzene is not used because of health hazards (Bel'Kevich, 1977'). The peat bitumens of commercial interest are peat waxes and resins. The waxes are the most important commercially (Fuchsman, 1978). Peat, suitable for commercial wax production, contains at least 5 percent gasoline extractable material and has an ash con- tent less than 10 percent (Lishtvan and Korol', 1975). The wax content of peat is higher in more highly decomposed peats (Naucke, 1966) particularly those with remains of shrubs and trees (Fuchsman, 1978). Dried peat particles in the size range of 0.02 inches 0.2 inches are required for efficient solvent extraction. Wax extraction-utilizes gasoline as the solvent and extracts most of the wax but relatively few of the resins (Bel'Kevich, 1977). Gasoline and peat are mixed at 20:1. Approximately 5 percent of the gasoline is lost in the process, with the rest being recycled after wax removal by solvent evaporation. The crude wax contains some resins. Resins are partially removed by treatment with an appropriate solvent (cold acetone, alcohol and ethyl acetate) (Fuchsman, 1976). Further purifica- tion is accomplished by treatment with potassium dichromate and sulfuric acid at 1670F-230F. The result is a fairly hard, light tan wax (Bel'Kevich, 1977'). Peat waxes are produced commercially only in the Soviet Union where they are used as release agents in foundary castings and on polyethylene surfaces. Peat waxes are similar to montan wax which is derived from lignite. Montan wax is a substitute for beeswax and carnuba wax and is used as an industrial lubri- cant and as an ingredient in shoe and furniture polish, electri- cal insulating materials and in candles (Minnesota DNR, 1981). Peat resins are the primary byproducts of peat wax produc- tion. The resins are of importance as a source of steroids for use by the pharmaceutical industry (Minnesota DNR, 1981). Carbohydrates Peat carbohydrates consist primarily of cellulose and related materials such as hemicellulose and starches (Fuchsman, 1978). Sugars are produced by acid hydrolysis for use in yeast culture. Yeast culture can be optimized for the production of single cell protein or for the fermentation of alcohol (Fuchsman, 1978). Peat suitable for carbohydrate hydrolysis, according to Soviet criteria are: Spagnum peat with degree of decomposition less than 20 percent, ash content less than 5 percent and at least 24 percent of the dry weight of the peat recoverable as fermentable sugars from the easily hydrolyzable carbohydrates (or 45 percent if difficultly hydrolyzable carbohydrates are included) (Fuchsman, 1978). Cellulose is classified as being difficult to hydrolyze. The preferred Soviet process (Ishino, 1976) is as follows: peat with a maximum grain size of 0.4 inches is.slurried with water to 7-20 percent solids and mixed. The suspension is then pumped at 5-7 atmospheres of pressure and concentrated sulfuric acid is added to give an overall acid con- centration of 0.25-1 percent. The slurry is heated to 2840F-338*F by steam injection and discharged to atmospheric pressure and reacted for 10-30 minutes. Volatile matter is flashed off, the fluid is diluted and reacts for an additional 10 minutes at 2840F to allow hydrolysis completion. Solids are then removed by sedimentation centrifuge or filtration. Yield by this process is 34-40 percent of the peat dry weight. Humic Acids Fuchsman (1978) describes humic acid as "alkali-soluble, acid-insoluble organic compounds, excluding bitumens and carbohydrates." There are several lines of chemical modification of humic acid: pyrolysis, oxidation and reduction (Fuchsman, 1978). To date, there are no large scale commercial uses for humic acid. Present industrial uses for humic acids include sizing for paper, tanning agents, in fertilizers and as viscosity modi- fiers for oil well drilling mud (Fuchsman, 1978). Potential uses include the production of plastics and synthetic fibers, com- ponents for paints and adhesive formulations and flocculants or thickeners in water purification systems. These uses are based primarily on the adsorption and ion exchange properties of humic acids (Fuchsman, 1978). Peat Coke, Peat Tar and Activated Carbon Peat coke, tar and activated carbon are produced by the pro- cess of pyrolysis. Pyrolysis consists of decomposition of orga- nic substances by heat in the absence of air. When carried to a high enough temperature and for long enough time, the process yields a carbon residue (peat coke), a water immiscible conden- sate (peat tar) and non-condensable gases which can be utilized as fuel gases. Peat suitable for coking requires a relatively high carbon content (high level of decomposition), low ash content and low phosphorous content (Fuschman, 1978). High carbon content is necessary for acceptable yields. Phosphorous and ash degrade the product quality. Several factors influence the yield of pyrolysis products. Coke yields are increased with more highly decomposed peats and slower rates of heating. Peat tar and gases generated by the pyrolysis process are often recycled as fuel for the coking pro- cess. Activated carbon is produced from peat coke by treating coke with steam at 16320F-2012*F. The reaction forms hydrogen gas and carbon monoxide which has the physical effect of expanding the pores in the peat coke, greatly increasing the surface area available for adsorption (Norit, N.V.). Peat-coke is utilized to form high purity silicon for the electronics industry and as a reducing agent in electric smelting furnaces especially in the production of ferrochrome and ferrosi- licon alloys (Eckman, 1975). Peat tars are refined for pesticide and wood preservative use. The primary use, however, is as fuel recycled to the peat coke production process. (Minnesota DNR). Activated carbon is utilized for a variety of purposes, all of which take advantage of the large surface area available for adsorption. Uses include removal of pollutants from industrial waste gases, as a gas absorber, deodorizer, and for purification of water and sugar (Fuchsman, 1978). USE OF PEAT AS A GROWTH MEDIUM Horticulture Essentially all of the peat mined in Florida, at the present time, is used for horticultural purposes. Peat is used by home owners'for soil enhancement, by nurseries and landscapers for potting soils and growing media for plants, and also as a medium for mushroom and earthworm culture. Agriculture Agricultural uses of peat are similar to horticultural uses. The peat is utilized as a growing medium (soil) for agricultural crops. The material is not mined, however, drainage is generally necessary to provide the proper moisture conditions. Hemic and sapric peats, as well as mucks, are utilized for agricultural purposes. Fibric peats, typically are not suitable due to the low pH (acidic) which makes nutrients unavailable to many plants (Farnam and Levor, 1980). Large areas of Florida peats and mucks are utilized for agricultural purposes. Energy Crops Growing energy crops for plant biomass production allows peatlands to be utilized to produce renewable energy sources. Plant biomass can be harvested and burned directly or can be gasified to produce liquid and gaseous fuels. Energy crops can be an alternative to conventional mining (using the peat as a growing medium) or can be utilized as a reclamation technique on mined out peatlands (Minnesota DNR, 1981). Plants which may be suitable for energy crop use in wetlands include; cattails, reeds and sedges, willow and alder (Minnesota DNR). These wetland species have two distinct advantages over conventional crops for use in biomass energy production: 1) the biomasss productivity of wetland species is often higher than conventional crops (corn, soybeans, etc.) and 2) they can be grown in wetlands unsuitable for conventional crop plants and thus do not compete with conventional crop production (Minnesota DNR, 1981). SEWAGE TREATMENT Peat has been utilized in the tertiary treatment of waste water both in the U. S. and in Europe. The primary objective is to reduce nutrient levels, primarily phosphorous and nitrogen (Minnesota DNR, 1981). Phosphorous is removed from solution by bacteria present in that portion of the peat exposed to air. Bacterial metabolism converts the phosphorous to insoluable forms. Chemical reactions with calcium, aluminum and iron present in the peat also remove phosphorous from solution (Nichols, 1980). Nitrogen is metabolized by anerobic bacteria, converting nitrate in the waste water to gaseous nitrogen which is released to the atmo-sphere (Nichols, 1980). Additional nutrients are removed through uptake by plants growing on the peat surface. Three methods are commonly used for the tertiary treatments of waste water. Two utilize the peat in place, the third utili- zes excavated peat (Minnesota DNR 1981). The waste water can be introduced directly to the bog surface and allowed to filter through the peat or may be introduced to a ditched and drained peat deposit. This would increase the volume of peat exposed to the waste water, increasing residence time and allowing more efficient nutrient uptake (Nichols, 1980). The third method involves a built up filter bed of peat, sand and gravel. The effluent is applied to the filter surface by sprinklers. Generally, the surface of the filter would be seeded with a suitable sedge or grass to remove additional nutrients (Minnesota DNR, 1981). Peat water treatment systems and experimentation has not been conducted for enough time to determine the period of time over which it can effectively remove nutrients before it becomes saturated. Environmental effects, therefore, must be strictly monitored (Minnesota DNR, 1981). ECONOMIC IMPACT Peat is currently mined in twelve Florida counties (figure 22). In each of these counties, the mining companies provide jobs, pay state and local taxes, require the services of various support industries and provide a valuable product to nurseries and individuals. PRICE, PRODUCTION, AND VALUE OF PEAT The U. S. Bureau of Mines reports an average 1982 price for Florida peat of $13.12 per short ton. 1983 prices quoted by mining companies range from $8.50 to $18.00 per cubic yard of CT 9 o ,-- *' -S Figure 22. Location of Current Peat Producers. (Bureau of Geology survey for this study) peat with the most common price being $10.00 to $10.50 per cubic yard. Blended topsoils range from $11.00 to $20.00 per cubic yard. If one ton of peat is assumed to occupy 2.3 cubic yards, the $10.50 per cubic yard price is equivalent to $24.15 per short ton. Bagged peat prices are higher and are in the range of $45.00 per ton. Florida ranked second in peat production nationally in 1982 (Boyle and Hendry, in press, 1984). The U. S. Bureau of Mines (B.O.M.) reported peat production in 1982 as 120,000 short tons, with a value of $1,575,000 dollars (figure 23). The average price in 1982 was $13.12 per short ton. The above figures repre- sent a 25 percent drop in production and a 47' percent drop in value from 1981. The B.O.M. production and value figures do not represent the complete picture. The B.O.M. reported peat production from four counties in 1982. Of the ten companies on the B.O.M. peat producer list, only six are still active. The authors have com- piled a list of 21 peat producers, located in 12 counties. The actual peat production in the state must be significantly higher than reported by the B.O.M. LOCATION OF PEAT PRODUCERS Peat production is concentrated in central peninsular Florida, in Sumter, Lake, Orange, Pasco, Hillsborough, Polk and Highlands counties. Additional producers are located in Madison |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| MILLISECOND | CLASS.METHOD | MESSAGE |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.constructor | |
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.constructor | Application State validated or built |
| 0 | sobekcm_database.verify_item_lookup_object | |
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.constructor | Navigation Object created from URI query string |
| 0 | sobekcm_database.verify_item_lookup_object | |
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.display_item | Retrieving item or group information |
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.get_entire_collection_hierarchy | Retrieving hierarchy information |
| 0 | sobekcm_assistant.get_entire_collection_hierarchy | |
| 0 | cached_data_manager.retrieve_item_aggregation | |
| 0 | cached_data_manager.retrieve_item_aggregation | Found item aggregation on local cache |
| 0 | item_aggregation_builder.get_item_aggregation | Found 'all' item aggregation in cache |
| 0 | system.web.ui.page.page_load (ufdc.page_load) | |
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.constructor.on_page_load | |
| 0 | html_echo_mainwriter.add_style_references | Adding style references to HTML |
| 0 | html_echo_mainwriter.add_text_to_page | Reading the text from the file and echoing back to the output stream |
| 33 | html_echo_mainwriter.add_text_to_page | Finished reading and writing the file |