Jacobi Activated Carbon for Biogas: Alternatives Compared

If you're running a biogas upgrading plant or landfill gas treatment system, there's a good chance your carbon spec says "Jacobi" somewhere on it. The AddSorb and EcoSorb series have become default specifications for biogas purification across European and North American markets — covering everything from bulk H₂S removal to siloxane polishing.

That position is based on real performance. Jacobi's biogas carbons are engineered for the specific contaminant mix in biogas streams — hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, siloxanes, and VOCs that damage CHP engines and contaminate upgraded biomethane.

But "engineered for biogas" also means "priced through a distributor network." If you're consuming 20–100+ tons of carbon per year, the question worth asking is: does an equivalent carbon exist at factory-direct pricing — and does it actually perform the same?

This article breaks down Jacobi's current biogas product line, what each grade actually does, and how Huamei's HME-AC™ pellet carbon and custom-impregnated carbons compare on the parameters that determine whether your biogas meets pipeline or engine specifications.

Jacobi's Current Biogas Product Portfolio

Jacobi organizes its biogas carbons into three product families, each targeting different contaminants. Here's the current lineup:

H₂S Removal — AddSorb Series

Jacobi Grade	Primary Target	Mechanism	Key Feature
AddSorb VA6-BG	H₂S	Catalytic oxidation (impregnated)	Standard biogas H₂S grade
AddSorb VA12-BG	H₂S (high concentration)	Catalytic oxidation (impregnated)	Higher sulfur loading capacity
AddSorb OX20	H₂S	Catalytic oxidation	Non-impregnated, oxygen-dependent
AddSorb OX30	H₂S	Catalytic oxidation	Higher capacity than OX20
AddSorb VA10	H₂S, mercaptans	Chemical + physical adsorption	Broader sulfur compound spectrum

NH₃ Removal — AddSorb VB1-BG

Jacobi Grade	Primary Target	Mechanism	Key Feature
AddSorb VB1-BG	NH₃, amines	Acid-impregnated (chemical reaction)	Purpose-built for alkaline gas removal in biogas

Jacobi Grade

Primary Target

Mechanism

Key Feature

AddSorb VB1-BG

NH₃, amines

Acid-impregnated

(chemical reaction)

Purpose-built for alkaline

gas removal in biogas

Siloxane & VOC Removal — EcoSorb / ReSorb Series

Jacobi Grade	Primary Target	Mechanism	Key Feature
EcoSorb BS	Siloxanes (D4, D5, L2)	Physical adsorption	Optimized pore structure for siloxane molecules
EcoSorb GXC	Siloxanes + VOCs	Physical adsorption	Broader spectrum, multi-contaminant
ReSorb VT	VOCs + trace siloxanes	Physical adsorption	Regenerable grade for thermal swing systems

Jacobi Grade

Primary Target

Mechanism

Key Feature

EcoSorb BS

Siloxanes (D4, D5, L2)

Physical adsorption

Optimized pore structure

for siloxane molecules

EcoSorb GXC

Siloxanes + VOCs

Physical adsorption

Broader spectrum,

multi-contaminant

ReSorb VT

VOCs + trace siloxanes

Physical adsorption

Regenerable grade

for thermal swing systems

The key insight: Jacobi doesn't use one carbon for everything. They split the job into specialized grades — impregnated carbons for reactive gases (H₂S, NH₃), virgin carbons for physical adsorption tasks (siloxanes, VOCs), and regenerable grades for systems with thermal swing capability. Your replacement strategy needs to respect these distinctions.

What Makes Biogas Carbon Different from Generic Carbon

Biogas purification isn't generic adsorption. The contaminant mix — H₂S, NH₃, siloxanes (D4, D5, L2), mercaptans, and halogenated compounds — demands specific carbon properties for each target:

H₂S removal operates through catalytic oxidation on the carbon surface. The carbon needs:

Alkaline pH (>8) or specific chemical impregnation (KOH, NaOH, KI) to catalyze the H₂S → elemental sulfur reaction
High mesopore volume for sulfur deposition capacity
Sufficient oxygen availability in the gas stream (~2% O₂)

NH₃ removal requires the opposite chemistry — acid-impregnated carbon (typically phosphoric acid) that reacts with alkaline gases. Standard alkaline carbon does almost nothing for NH₃. This is why Jacobi has a separate grade (VB1-BG) rather than using their H₂S carbons for both.

Siloxane removal is primarily physical adsorption driven by:

High surface area (siloxane molecules are larger than H₂S or NH₃)
Mesopore-to-macropore ratio optimized for D4/D5 molecule size (~0.8–1.0 nm)
Low moisture sensitivity (wet biogas streams reduce adsorption capacity)

The engineering reality: A single carbon grade cannot handle all three targets effectively. Most biogas plants run multi-stage systems with different carbons matched to each contaminant — and that's exactly what you should plan for when evaluating alternatives.

Huamei Alternatives: Grade-by-Grade Matching

Replacing Jacobi biogas carbons isn't one product swap — it's matching the right Huamei grade to each Jacobi grade's function. Here's the mapping based on contaminant target and mechanism:

H₂S Grades: AddSorb VA6-BG / VA12-BG / OX20 / OX30 / VA10

Parameter	Jacobi AddSorb H₂S Grades (typical)	Huamei KOH-Impregnated Pellet	Huamei HME-AC™60 (Virgin)
Form	Extruded pellet	Extruded pellet	Extruded pellet
Diameter	4mm	3mm or 4mm	4mm
Mechanism	Impregnated (VA6/VA12) or catalytic (OX series)	KOH-impregnated (chemical + physical)	Catalytic oxidation (physical only)
H₂S capacity	Published per grade	5–8× higher than virgin carbon	Standard catalytic capacity
CTC	50–60% (typical)	Varies with impregnant loading	60%

Replacement logic:

For AddSorb VA6-BG, VA12-BG (impregnated H₂S grades): Replace with Huamei KOH-impregnated pellet carbon. These are chemically enhanced carbons — you need the same type of chemical impregnation, not just a high-CTC virgin carbon. Huamei produces custom KOH-impregnated grades with adjustable loading percentages.
For AddSorb OX20, OX30 (non-impregnated catalytic grades): Replace with HME-AC™60 — virgin coal-based pellet with alkaline pH. These grades rely on the carbon's natural catalytic surface rather than added chemicals, so a virgin pellet with matching CTC and pH is the right equivalent.
For AddSorb VA10 (mercaptans + H₂S): Discuss with Huamei — may require KI (potassium iodide) impregnation rather than KOH, depending on
htmlyour mercaptan species.

NH₃ Grade: AddSorb VB1-BG

Parameter	Jacobi AddSorb VB1-BG	Huamei H₃PO₄-Impregnated Pellet
Raw material	Coal-based	Coal-based (Ningxia anthracite)
Form	Extruded pellet	Extruded pellet
Diameter	4mm	3mm or 4mm
Mechanism	Acid-impregnated (reacts with NH₃)	Phosphoric acid-impregnated (reacts with NH₃)
Target	NH₃, amines	NH₃, amines

Replacement logic: NH₃ removal requires acid-impregnated carbon — the chemistry is the opposite of H₂S removal. Do NOT use KOH-impregnated or standard alkaline carbon for NH₃; it won't work. Huamei produces phosphoric acid (H₃PO₄) impregnated pellet carbon specifically for alkaline gas treatment, which is the direct equivalent of VB1-BG.

Siloxane & VOC Grades: EcoSorb BS / EcoSorb GXC / ReSorb VT

Parameter	Jacobi EcoSorb/ReSorb (typical)	Huamei HME-AC™70	Huamei HME-AC™80
Raw material	Coal-based / coconut shell	Coal-based (anthracite)	Coal-based (anthracite)
Form	Pellet or granular	Extruded pellet	Extruded pellet
Diameter	4mm	4mm	4mm
Mechanism	Physical adsorption	Physical adsorption	Physical adsorption

Replacement logic:

For EcoSorb BS (siloxane-focused): Replace with HME-AC™70 — CTC 70% provides the pore volume needed for D4/D5 siloxane molecules.
For EcoSorb GXC (siloxane + VOC multi-contaminant): Replace with HME-AC™80 — higher CTC (80%) for broader-spectrum physical adsorption across both siloxanes and mixed VOCs.
For ReSorb VT (regenerable): Both HME-AC™70 and HME-AC™80 support thermal regeneration. Confirm your regeneration temperature and method with Huamei to ensure compatibility.

Quick Reference: Jacobi → Huamei Replacement Table

Jacobi Grade	Target Contaminant	Huamei Equivalent	Key Matching Criteria
AddSorb VA6-BG	H₂S	KOH-impregnated pellet (custom)	Match impregnant type + loading %
AddSorb VA12-BG	H₂S (high conc.)	KOH-impregnated pellet (high loading)	Higher KOH loading for higher capacity
AddSorb OX20	H₂S	HME-AC™60	Virgin, alkaline pH, CTC ≥60%
AddSorb VA10	H₂S + mercaptans	KI-impregnated pellet (custom)	Discuss mercaptan species with Huamei
AddSorb VB1-BG	NH₃, amines	H₃PO₄-impregnated pellet	Acid impregnation required — NOT KOH
EcoSorb BS	Siloxanes	HME-AC™70	CTC 70%, pore structure for D4/D5
EcoSorb GXC	Siloxanes + VOCs	HME-AC™80	CTC 80%, broad-spectrum adsorption
ReSorb VT	VOCs (regenerable)	HME-AC™70 / HME-AC™80	Confirm regen temperature compatibility

Price and Supply

Factor	Jacobi AddSorb / EcoSorb	Huamei HME-AC™ / Impregnated
Pricing model	Distributor network	Factory-direct
Distribution layers	Manufacturer → Distributor → End user	Manufacturer → End user
MOQ (virgin pellet)	Varies (typically 5–10 tons via distributor)	3 tons
Sample	Through distributor	Free sample direct
COA	Yes	Yes (SGS available on request)
Custom impregnation	Limited to catalog grades	KOH, NaOH, H₃PO₄, KI — adjustable loading %

The structural price difference is distribution economics: Jacobi passes through intermediaries between factory and end user; Huamei ships direct. For a biogas plant consuming 40–100 tons/year across multiple grades, the annual cost difference funds comprehensive pilot testing in Year 1 — and delivers ongoing savings every year after.

Important Note: Impregnated Carbon Is Not Interchangeable

This deserves its own section because it's the most common mistake when switching biogas carbon suppliers.

You cannot replace impregnated carbon with virgin carbon. If your current Jacobi grade is AddSorb VA6-BG (KOH-impregnated for H₂S) or VB1-BG (acid-impregnated for NH₃), replacing it with a standard HME-AC™60 pellet will fail — the virgin carbon lacks the chemical reactivity needed for high-efficiency removal of reactive gases.

Conversely:

KOH-impregnated carbon works for H₂S but NOT for NH₃ — both are alkaline, they won't react
H₃PO₄-impregnated carbon works for NH₃ but NOT for H₂S — acid surface won't catalyze H₂S oxidation
Virgin carbon works for siloxanes and VOCs — physical adsorption only, no impregnation needed (or wanted — impregnant occupies pore volume that should be available for physical adsorption)

When requesting quotes from Huamei, always specify:

Whether your current carbon is impregnated or virgin
If impregnated: what reagent and what loading percentage (ask your Jacobi rep if you don't have this)
Target contaminant and inlet concentration
Operating temperature and humidity

Huamei produces both KOH and H₃PO₄ impregnated carbons with adjustable loading — but they need your specific requirements to match the product correctly.

FAQ

What Jacobi activated carbon is used for biogas H₂S removal?

Jacobi offers several H₂S grades for biogas: AddSorb VA6-BG and VA12-BG (impregnated, high sulfur capacity), AddSorb OX20 and OX30 (non-impregnated catalytic), and AddSorb VA10 (H₂S plus mercaptans). The choice depends on H₂S inlet concentration, whether you need impregnated or catalytic removal, and bed design. For direct factory-sourced equivalents, Huamei's HME-AC™ pellet carbon (virgin catalytic) and custom KOH-impregnated pellets match these specifications.

Can I replace Jacobi AddSorb with a cheaper activated carbon for biogas?

Yes — if you match the mechanism, not just the format. For H₂S grades: impregnated Jacobi carbons (VA6-BG, VA12-BG) must be replaced with impregnated equivalents. For siloxane grades (EcoSorb BS, GXC): match CTC value and pore structure with high-CTC virgin pellet carbon like HME-AC™70 or HME-AC™80. Always run a pilot breakthrough test before committing to a full bed replacement.

What is the difference between AddSorb and EcoSorb from Jacobi?

AddSorb grades target reactive gases — H₂S (VA6-BG, VA12-BG, OX20, OX30, VA10) and NH₃ (VB1-BG) — using catalytic or chemical impregnation mechanisms. EcoSorb grades (BS, GXC) target siloxanes and VOCs using physical adsorption — they rely on pore structure rather than chemical treatment. ReSorb VT is the regenerable variant for thermal swing systems. They're different product families for different contaminant targets.

How much activated carbon does a biogas plant use per year?

Typical consumption ranges from 10–100+ tons/year depending on plant capacity, contaminant levels, and number of treatment stages. A 500 Nm³/hr biogas upgrading plant with 2,000 ppm H₂S inlet typically consumes 20–40 tons/year of H₂S-grade carbon. Siloxane polishing stages consume less (5–15 tons/year) but require more frequent replacement due to faster saturation.

Does Huamei make impregnated activated carbon for biogas?

Yes. Huamei produces custom-impregnated pellet activated carbon including KOH-impregnated (for H₂S/acid gases), NaOH-impregnated, H₃PO₄-impregnated (for NH₃/alkaline gases), and KI-impregnated (for mercaptans). Impregnant loading percentage is adjustable to match your target contaminant concentration. MOQ is 10 tons per impregnation type, with 28-day lead time including impregnation, curing, and QC.

Norit RO 3515 Alternative Activated Carbon: Specs Compared

Norit RO 3515 has been the default gold recovery carbon in CIL/CIP circuits for decades. If you've worked in gold mining in South Africa, West Africa, or Australia, chances are RO 3515 was the first carbon your plant loaded — and possibly the only one your metallurgist ever approved.

That market position was earned. NORIT built RO 3515's reputation through long-standing use in gold recovery applications and a global supply network. But an established brand is not automatically the best fit for every circuit. Today, mines may also evaluate alternative carbons based on gold adsorption performance, attrition resistance, supply availability, and total operating cost.

This article compares RO 3515 against HMGOLD™7500 from Huamei Carbon — spec by spec, using Norit's published product data and Huamei's SGS test results (Report No. MSRCZ2500346-01A). Where the numbers speak, we let them. Where they don't, we say what's missing.

Spec Sheet: Head-to-Head

Parameter	Norit RO 3515	Huamei HMGOLD™7500	Notes
Raw material	Coconut shell	Coconut shell	Same
Activation	Steam	Steam	Same
Iodine number	≥1050 mg/g	1150 mg/g (spec) / 1208 mg/g (SGS actual)	✅ HMGOLD higher
Ash content	≤5%	2.52% (SGS)	✅ HMGOLD significantly lower
Moisture	≤5%	≤5%	Match
Ball-pan hardness	≥97% (ASTM D3802)	98.2% (GB/T method, SGS)	⚠️ Different test methods
K value (gold loading)	Not typically published	28 kg/t	HMGOLD published
R value (adsorption kinetics)	Not typically published	58%	HMGOLD published
Bulk density	0.46–0.50 g/cm³	0.48–0.52 g/cm³	Comparable range
Mesh size	6×12	6×12, 8×16	HMGOLD offers more options
pH	Alkaline	10.0 (SGS)	Both alkaline

One thing jumps out immediately: The first thing to note is that RO 3515 and HMGOLD™7500 are not identical product forms. RO 3515 is an extruded activated carbon, while HMGOLD™7500 is a coconut-shell granular carbon. HMGOLD shows strong iodine, ash, and hardness results in Huamei's SGS testing, but these values alone do not prove superior gold-recovery performance. Gold-specific adsorption and attrition tests under comparable conditions are more meaningful when evaluating an alternative.Iodine is 100+ mg/g higher. Ash is half. The real question is whether those spec-sheet advantages translate to performance advantages in your specific circuit — and that requires testing, not assumptions.

Why RO 3515 Became the Default

Understanding why mines use RO 3515 helps you evaluate whether switching makes sense:

Track record: RO 3515 has a long history of use in gold recovery and is widely recognized in CIL/CIP applications. Its established operating history is an important advantage for mines that prefer proven products with existing plant experience and internal approval records.

Consistency: Norit's manufacturing process delivered batch-to-batch consistency that mines relied on. When you ordered RO 3515, you got RO 3515 — the carbon performed within predictable bounds every time.

Distribution reach: From Johannesburg to Perth to Accra, Norit distributors could deliver. In regions where logistics are the bottleneck, having a reliable supply chain matters as much as the spec sheet.

Inertia: This is the honest one. Many mines run RO 3515 because they've always run RO 3515. The metallurgist who approved it may have retired. The procurement team reorders on autopilot. Nobody has run a comparative trial in years — because why would you change something that works?

That last point is the opening for HMGOLD. "Works" and "optimal" are different things. If you're paying a premium for a carbon that meets your minimum performance requirements, a lower-cost carbon that matches or exceeds those same requirements is worth evaluating.

Where HMGOLD™7500 Has the Edge

Iodine Number

Norit RO 3515: ≥1050 mg/g
HMGOLD™7500: 1150 mg/g (spec) / 1208 mg/g (SGS actual)

Iodine number isn't the primary metric for gold recovery carbon — K value matters more. But a higher iodine number indicates greater total micropore volume, which correlates with overall adsorption capacity. At 1208 mg/g (SGS verified), HMGOLD™7500 has roughly 15% more adsorptive capacity than RO 3515's minimum specification.

For operations where carbon also handles organic fouling alongside gold adsorption — common in high-organic ore bodies — that extra capacity provides a useful buffer before performance degrades.

Ash Content

Norit RO 3515: ≤5%
HMGOLD™7500: 2.52% (SGS verified)

This is the biggest measurable gap. HMGOLD's ash is roughly half of RO 3515's maximum specification.

Why this matters in your circuit:

Elution efficiency: Inorganic ash residues trap gold within the carbon structure during Zadra or AARL stripping. Lower ash = cleaner stripping = less residual gold left on carbon after each elution cycle. Over hundreds of cycles, that gold retention compounds into real losses.

Reactivation longevity: Ash doesn't burn off during thermal reactivation. It accumulates cycle after cycle. Carbon starting at 2.52% ash builds up contamination slower than carbon starting at 5%, maintaining its gold loading capacity through more reactivation cycles before requiring replacement.

Doré purity: Lower-ash carbon contributes fewer inorganic impurities to your final gold precipitate. If your refinery penalizes you for impurities in doré bars, your carbon's ash content directly affects your refining charges.

K Value and R Value

Here's where things get interesting. Norit/Cabot does not typically publish K value and R value for RO 3515 in the same format that Jacobi publishes for PICAGOLD G210AS.

HMGOLD™7500 publishes both:

K value (gold loading): 28 kg/t
R value (adsorption kinetics): 58%

These are competitive numbers. For context, Jacobi G210AS — another premium gold carbon — publishes K=28 kg/t and R=60%. HMGOLD™7500's K value matches G210AS exactly; the R value is 2 percentage points lower, which is within normal batch variation for most CIL circuits.

The fact that HMGOLD publishes K and R values while Norit does not is itself significant. If you're currently running RO 3515, you probably don't know its K and R values — unless you've tested it yourself. That means you're paying premium pricing for a carbon whose gold-specific performance metrics you may have never quantified.

Mesh Size Options

Norit RO 3515: 6×12 only
HMGOLD™7500: 6×12, 8×16, 5×10

RO 3515 comes in one size. HMGOLD offers three — which matters because mesh size selection directly affects circuit performance:

6×12: Standard for CIL circuits with aggressive inter-stage screening
8×16: Better for CIP circuits — faster kinetics, higher gold loading per unit mass, fewer screen blinding issues
5×10: Coarser option for high-abrasion circuits where attrition drives carbon consumption

If you're running a CIP circuit on 6×12 carbon because that's all your supplier offers, you may be leaving performance on the table.

Where Norit RO 3515 Still Wins

Track Record

No amount of spec-sheet comparison replaces 40+ years of operational data. RO 3515 has been tested, approved, and documented in more CIL/CIP plant operating manuals than any other gold carbon. When your client requires a "proven carbon with established track record," RO 3515 checks that box without discussion.

HMGOLD™7500 is growing — Tanzania, Ghana, South Africa, Egypt, Azerbaijan — but it doesn't have decades of data yet.

Brand Approval

Some mining companies have approved vendor lists. RO 3515 is on most of them. Getting HMGOLD approved requires a formal evaluation process — lab testing, plant trial, metallurgical report, management sign-off. That process takes 3–6 months and costs money.

If your company's procurement policy mandates approved-vendor-only purchasing, you'll need to run that approval process before HMGOLD becomes an option — regardless of how good the specs look.

Local Support

Cabot's distributor network provides local technical support in major mining regions. If you have a carbon performance issue, your Cabot rep can visit your site. Huamei's support is primarily remote (WhatsApp, email, video calls) with periodic site visits for key accounts.

For operations in remote locations where on-site technical support matters, this is a real consideration — not a deal-breaker, but a factor.

The Cost Question

Factor	Norit RO 3515	Huamei HMGOLD™7500
Pricing model	Cabot distributor network	Factory-direct
Distribution layers	Manufacturer → Regional distributor → Local agent → Mine	Manufacturer → Mine
MOQ	Varies by distributor (typically 20+ tons)	10 tons
Lead time	2–6 weeks (dependent on distributor stock)	2–3 weeks production + shipping
Sample	Through distributor	Free 1–2 kg sample direct
COA	Yes	Yes (SGS reports available)

The structural price difference is distribution economics. RO 3515 passes through 2–3 intermediaries between Cabot's factory and your mine. Each adds margin. HMGOLD ships factory-direct from Fujian, China — one invoice, no intermediary markup.

On equivalent specifications, the price gap is significant. But "significant" varies by region, volume, and current market conditions. Get current quotes from both suppliers for your specific requirements before making assumptions based on list prices.

The Honest Scorecard

Category	Norit RO 3515	HMGOLD™7500	Edge
Iodine number	≥1050 mg/g	1150 mg/g (spec) / 1208 (SGS)	HMGOLD
Ash content	≤5%	2.52% (SGS)	HMGOLD
Hardness	≥97% (ball-pan, ASTM D3802)	98.2% (GB/T, SGS)	Not directly comparable
K value (gold loading)	Not published	28 kg/t	HMGOLD (data available)
R value (kinetics)	Not published	58%	HMGOLD (data available)
Mesh options	6×12 only	6×12, 8×16, 5×10	HMGOLD
Track record	40+ years, global	Growing, Africa/Asia focus	Norit
Brand approvals	Industry standard	Requires evaluation	Norit
Pricing	Distributor markup	Factory-direct	HMGOLD
MOQ	20+ tons	10 tons	HMGOLD

The bottom line: HMGOLD™7500 matches or exceeds Norit RO 3515 on every measurable specification — and publishes gold-specific metrics (K value, R value) that Norit doesn't. What HMGOLD lacks is the decades of operational track record and automatic brand-approval status that RO 3515 carries. If your procurement decision is based on specs and price, HMGOLD wins. If it's based on institutional history and approved-vendor lists, Norit wins. For most operations, the smart move is to run a parallel trial and let the data decide.

FAQ

What activated carbon is equivalent to Norit RO 3515?

HMGOLD™7500 from Huamei Carbon matches or exceeds RO 3515 on published specifications: higher iodine (1150 vs ≥1050 mg/g), lower ash (2.52% vs ≤5%), and comparable hardness. Both are coconut shell, steam-activated carbons designed for CIL/CIP gold recovery. A bottle-roll test and plant trial with your specific ore is recommended to confirm equivalent performance in your circuit.

Is Norit RO 3515 still manufactured?

Yes. Norit RO 3515 is now manufactured by Cabot Corporation, which acquired Norit in 2012. The product continues to be available through Cabot's global distributor network. Some industry professionals report longer lead times and availability fluctuations since the acquisition, but the product specification remains unchanged.

What is the iodine number of Norit RO 3515?

Norit RO 3515 specifies a minimum iodine number of ≥1050 mg/g. This measures total micropore volume using the ASTM D4607 method. While useful as a general quality indicator, iodine number is not the primary metric for evaluating gold recovery carbon performance — K value (gold loading capacity) and R value (adsorption kinetics) are more relevant for CIL/CIP applications.

Why are mines switching from Norit RO 3515?

Three main drivers: (1) pricing — RO 3515 routes through Cabot's multi-layer distributor network, adding margin at each step; (2) alternatives have improved — Chinese manufacturers like Huamei now offer SGS-verified carbons with equivalent or superior specifications; (3) data transparency — newer brands publish gold-specific metrics (K value, R value) that help metallurgists make informed comparisons, while Norit relies on legacy reputation.

How much cheaper is HMGOLD™7500 than Norit RO 3515?

Exact pricing varies by volume, destination, and current market conditions. The structural difference comes from distribution: RO 3515 passes through 2–3 intermediaries (Cabot → regional distributor → local agent), while HMGOLD ships factory-direct. Request current quotes from both suppliers for your specific requirements — pricing from even 6 months ago may not reflect today's market.

Jacobi PICAGOLD G210AS Alternative

Most activated carbon comparisons stop at the spec sheet — iodine number, hardness, ash content. Useful for procurement paperwork, but not for predicting what happens inside a CIL circuit where carbon spends months being pumped through abrasive ore slurry, screened at high velocity, stripped in acid, and thermally reactivated — over and over.

This article compares Jacobi PICAGOLD G210AS and Huamei HMGOLD™7500 based on verified data: Jacobi's official gold recovery brochure parameters for G210AS, and Huamei's SGS test report (No. MSRCZ2500346-01A) for HMGOLD™7500. Where data is available, we compare directly. Where it isn't, we say so.

Spec Sheet: Head-to-Head

Parameter	Jacobi PICAGOLD G210AS	Huamei HMGOLD™7500
Raw material	Coconut shell	Coconut shell
Activation	Steam	Steam
Iodine number	Not primary metric*	1150mg/g
Ash content	≤4%	2.52% (SGS)
Moisture	≤5%	≤5%
Hardness/Strength	≥99% (ball-pan)	98.2%
K value (gold loading)	28 kg/t	28 kg/t
R value (adsorption kinetics)	60%	58%
Mesh size	6×12 or 8×16	6×12, 8×16

*Jacobi's gold recovery brochure does not use iodine number as a primary specification for G210AS. This is standard practice — iodine measures total microporosity, not gold-specific adsorption capacity. K value and R value are the metrics Jacobi uses to define gold carbon performance.

Attrition: Where Gold Gets Lost

Carbon attrition is the single largest source of unrecoverable gold loss in CIL circuits. When carbon breaks into fines smaller than your screen aperture, those fines — loaded with adsorbed gold — pass through inter-stage screens and exit with tailings.

Hardness: The Test Method Problem

Jacobi G210AS: ≥99% ball-pan hardness
HMGOLD™7500: 98.2% strength (GB/T method, SGS Report No. MSRCZ2500346-01A)

These numbers come from different test methods using different equipment, sample preparation, and measurement criteria. A direct percentage-to-percentage comparison is not valid. Both values indicate high-strength carbons, but you cannot conclude that one is harder than the other based on these numbers alone.

What This Means for Your Circuit

Jacobi provides three attrition-relevant metrics (ball-pan hardness, rolling bottle attrition, platelet content) that together give a comprehensive picture of G210AS durability in CIL circuits.

Huamei provides one metric (GB/T strength) from a different test standard.

If attrition-related gold loss is a primary concern for your operation — and for most CIL plants, it should be — this data gap matters. Request rolling bottle attrition and platelet testing from Huamei before making a procurement decision based on durability.

Ash Content: HMGOLD's Clear Advantage

Jacobi G210AS: ≤4% (specification limit)
HMGOLD™7500: 2.52% (SGS verified)

This is one area where HMGOLD has a clear, verifiable edge. Lower ash = fewer inorganic mineral residues = cleaner carbon matrix.

Why this matters in CIL:

Elution efficiency: During Zadra or AARL stripping, inorganic residues can trap gold within the carbon structure, reducing strip recovery per cycle. Lower ash content means cleaner stripping and less residual gold left on carbon after elution.

Reactivation quality: During thermal reactivation, mineral ash doesn't burn off — it accumulates cycle over cycle. Carbon that starts with 2.52% ash accumulates less than carbon starting at 4%, meaning the low-ash carbon maintains its performance characteristics over more reactivation cycles.

Contamination risk: In operations producing doré bars or shipping gold precipitate for refining, lower-ash carbon contributes fewer impurities to the final product.

Elution: Getting Your Gold Back

Both G210AS and HMGOLD™7500 are coconut shell, steam-activated carbons. Both are coconut-shell, steam-activated carbons, but their actual elution performance should be verified under identical operating conditions.

Ash content (advantage: HMGOLD): As discussed above, HMGOLD's lower ash (2.52% vs ≤4%) theoretically supports cleaner stripping with less gold retention per cycle.

Pore size distribution: Two carbons with different iodine numbers may have different mesopore-to-micropore ratios. Gold cyanide complexes (~0.6nm) load preferentially in mesopores. Carbons with more micropores may trap gold more tightly, making it harder to strip. Without comparative mercury porosimetry data for both products, this remains a theoretical consideration.

What to test during your trial: Track gold-on-carbon before and after each elution cycle for both carbons. If one consistently retains more gold after stripping, that's a quantifiable cost — both in gold recovery and in progressive performance degradation.

Price and sample

Factor	Jacobi PICAGOLD G210AS	Huamei HMGOLD™7500
Pricing model	Distributor/agent network	Factory-direct
Sample availability	Through distributor	Free 1–2 kg sample direct
COA with shipment	Yes	Yes (SGS reports available)

The structural price difference comes from distribution model: Jacobi sells through a global agent network (each adding margin), while Huamei ships factory-direct. On equivalent specifications, factory-direct pricing is typically significantly lower per ton.

For exact pricing: request quotes from both suppliers for your specific volume, destination, and delivery schedule. Published price ranges become outdated quickly — get current numbers.

The Honest Scorecard

Category	Jacobi G210AS	HMGOLD™7500
Gold loading data (K value)	28 kg/t (published)	28 kg/t
Adsorption kinetics (R value)	60% (published)	58%
Attrition data	<1.0% rolling bottle, <4% platelets	＜2%
Hardness	≥99%	98.2% (GB/T, SGS)
Ash content	≤4%	2.52% (SGS verified)
Iodine number	Not primary metric	1150 mg/g
Pricing	Distributor markup	Factory-direct
MOQ flexibility	20 tons	10 tons
Track record in CIL	Decades, global	Growing, primarily Africa/Asia

The bottom line: Jacobi wins on data transparency — they publish the gold-specific metrics (K, R, attrition, platelets) that matter most for CIL procurement decisions. HMGOLD wins on ash content and pricing structure, but has significant data gaps on the metrics that CIL metallurgists need to see before approving a carbon switch.

Is Jacobi PICAGOLD G210AS better than HMGOLD™7500 for CIL?

G210AS has more comprehensive published performance data — K value (28 kg/t), R value (60%), rolling bottle attrition (<1.0%), and platelet content (<4%). HMGOLD™7500 has verified advantages in ash content (2.52% vs ≤4%) and offers factory-direct pricing with lower MOQ.

What is the K value of Jacobi PICAGOLD G210AS?

According to Jacobi's official gold recovery brochure, the typical K value (gold loading) for G210AS is 28 kg/tonne, measured by the Mintek method. K value indicates how much gold the carbon loads from cyanide solution under standardized conditions. This is a competitive value for premium gold recovery carbon.

What activated carbon is equivalent to Jacobi PICAGOLD G210AS?

HMGOLD7500 can be evaluated as an alternative, but equivalence should be confirmed through K/R, attrition and plant-trial data.

Why is HMGOLD™7500 cheaper than Jacobi PICAGOLD?

Distribution structure. Jacobi sells through a global network of agents and distributors who each add margin. HMGOLD ships factory-direct from Huamei Carbon in China with no intermediary markup. Both use coconut shell raw material and steam activation. The price difference reflects distribution economics, not necessarily a difference in manufacturing quality.

Can I replace G210AS with HMGOLD™7500 without losing gold recovery?

Possibly — but you must verify through testing, not assumptions. HMGOLD's published specifications (iodine 1150 mg/g, ash 2.52%, 6×12 mesh) indicate a high-quality coconut shell carbon suitable for CIL. Run a parallel plant trial in one CIL train for 8–12 weeks, tracking gold recovery, attrition, and elution performance against your current G210AS results before committing to a full switch.

46.2 Tons HMGOLD™7000 Coconut Shell Activated Carbon Shipped to Azerbaijan for Gold Recovery

Good news to share with you!

Huamei Activated Carbon has successfully completed the production and shipment of 46.2 tons of HMGOLD™7000 coconut shell activated carbon to Azerbaijan for gold recovery applications.

The activated carbon supplied in this project is specially designed for CIP/CIL gold extraction processes, where high adsorption capacity, excellent hardness, and stable performance are essential for efficient gold recovery.

Project Details

Product: HMGOLD™7000 Coconut Shell Activated Carbon
Application: Gold Recovery
Raw Material: Coconut Shell
Size: 6×12 Mesh
Iodine Value: 1100 mg/g
Quantity: 46.2 Tons
Destination: Azerbaijan

Huamei HMGOLD™7000 for Gold Recovery

In gold extraction operations, activated carbon is a key material that directly influences gold adsorption efficiency and overall recovery performance.

HMGOLD™7000 coconut shell activated carbon is manufactured from selected coconut shell raw materials and optimized through advanced activation technology. It features:

High adsorption capacity for gold cyanide complexes
Excellent mechanical hardness to reduce carbon loss during operation
Low attrition and reduced carbon fines generation
Stable performance during repeated adsorption and regeneration cycles

The microporous structure of coconut shell activated carbon makes it particularly suitable for gold recovery applications, providing efficient adsorption performance in CIP and CIL circuits.

Quality Control and Reliable Supply

At Huamei Activated Carbon, each batch of activated carbon undergoes strict quality inspection before shipment to ensure consistency and compliance with customer requirements.

From raw material selection, activation process control, to final product testing, Huamei focuses on delivering stable and reliable activated carbon solutions for global mining customers.

With professional manufacturing experience and continuous quality improvement, Huamei Activated Carbon supports gold recovery operations worldwide with high-performance coconut shell activated carbon.

Haycarb RCGC Gold Carbon: Specs, Alternatives & Pricing

If you're running a CIL or CIP gold circuit, chances are you've either used Haycarb RCGC or been quoted on it. It's one of the most recognized coconut shell activated carbon brands in gold mining — especially in African and Australian operations where it's been the default specification for decades.

But "default" doesn't mean "only option." This article breaks down what RCGC actually delivers, where it fits, what it costs, and what factory-direct alternatives look like when you compare the numbers side by side.

Who Is Haycarb?

Haycarb PLC is a Sri Lankan activated carbon manufacturer, founded in 1973 and listed as a subsidiary of Hayleys PLC on the Colombo Stock Exchange. They're vertically integrated — meaning they control the supply chain from coconut shell charcoal production (sourced from 19 districts across Sri Lanka) to activation and packaging.

Key facts:

Headquarters: Colombo, Sri Lanka
Production bases: Sri Lanka, Thailand, Indonesia
Annual capacity: 58,500 MT/year (one of the world's largest coconut shell AC producers)
Core markets: Gold mining, water treatment, food & beverage, air purification

Haycarb's strength is consistency. When you order RCGC, you're getting a product backed by 50+ years of process control in coconut shell activation. Their quality management system is mature, and their brand carries weight with mining engineers who've used it across multiple projects.

That said, you're also paying for that brand. And as China-based manufacturers have closed the quality gap in the last decade, the value equation has shifted.

RCGC Specifications: What You're Actually Getting

RCGC is Haycarb's gold recovery grade — designed specifically for carbon-in-leach (CIL), carbon-in-pulp (CIP), and carbon-in-column (CIC) applications. Here's what a typical RCGC Technical Data Sheet looks like:

Parameter	RCGC Typical Spec	Test Method
Raw material	Coconut shell	—
Activation	Steam activated	—
Mesh size	6×12 (1.70–3.35 mm)	ASTM D2862
Iodine number	≥1050 mg/g	ASTM D4607
Hardness (ball-pan)	≥97%	ASTM D3802
Moisture	≤5%	ASTM D2867
Ash content	≤3%	ASTM D2866
Bulk density	0.48–0.54 g/cm³	ASTM D2854
Surface area (BET)	≥1000 m²/g	BET method
Gold adsorption rate (K value)	Published on request	Mintek method

These are solid specifications. The 97% hardness floor is what makes RCGC survive the abrasion of CIL circuits — where carbon is constantly pumped, screened, and recycled through aggressive pulp environments. The iodine number at 1050+ ensures adequate gold loading capacity.

Where RCGC Excels

To be fair to Haycarb — there are legitimate reasons RCGC became an industry standard:

1. Track record in African gold mines. Haycarb has supplied major operations in Ghana, Tanzania, Mali, Burkina Faso, and South Africa for decades. When a mine's metallurgical team has 10+ years of plant data on RCGC, switching carries perceived risk.

2. ESG documentation. Haycarb's green charcoal program and Colombo Stock Exchange listing mean they can provide ESG compliance documentation that some publicly-traded mining companies require from suppliers.

3. Consistent quality batch-to-batch. Their vertically integrated model — controlling charcoal production through to activation — reduces variability. You generally get what the TDS says.

4. Global distribution. Warehouses in multiple countries mean shorter lead times for urgent orders, even if the per-ton cost is higher.

Where RCGC Falls Short (Or at Least, Where You're Overpaying)

1. Premium pricing. RCGC typically lands 30–50% above factory-direct alternatives from Chinese manufacturers producing equivalent specs. For a mine consuming 200+ tons/year, that's a significant cost difference.

2. Lead times during peak demand. Despite their capacity, Haycarb's order book fills up — especially when gold prices spike and every mine is restocking. Lead times of 6–8 weeks are not uncommon during peak periods. Factory-direct suppliers in China often ship within 2–3 weeks.

3. Limited customization. RCGC is a standard product. If your circuit needs a slightly different mesh distribution, higher iodine value, or acid-washed variant, Haycarb can accommodate but at premium pricing and longer lead times. Smaller manufacturers are generally more flexible.

4. Minimum order quantity. Haycarb's MOQ is typically 20+ tons. For small-scale operations or trial orders, this can be a barrier. Factory-direct Chinese manufacturers commonly accept 10-ton trial orders.

Head-to-Head: RCGC vs Factory-Direct Alternatives

Here's where the comparison gets concrete. We'll use published specifications from Haycarb and two factory-direct manufacturers.

Parameter	Haycarb RCGC	HMGOLD™ 7500 (Huamei)
Raw material	Coconut shell (Sri Lanka)	Coconut shell (Philippines)
Mesh size	6×12	6×12
Iodine number	≥1050 mg/g	≥1100 mg/g
Hardness	≥99%	≥99%
Ash content	≤3%	≤3%
Moisture	≤5%	≤5%
Bulk density	0.48–0.54 g/cm³	0.48–0.52 g/cm³
Surface area	≥1000 m²/g	≥1050 m²/g
CTC	Not typically published	≥60%
MOQ	20 tons	10 tons
Lead time	2–3 weeks	2–3 weeks
Pricing model	Distributor/agent network	Factory-direct

The numbers tell the story: on paper, the factory-direct alternatives match or exceed RCGC on key parameters (iodine, hardness, ash). The HMGOLD™ 7500, for example, specs at ≥1100 iodine and ≥99% hardness — both above RCGC's guaranteed minimums.

But paper specs aren't the whole picture.

What the Spec Sheet Doesn't Tell You

Experienced metallurgists know that two carbons with identical TDS numbers can perform differently in the same circuit. Here's what to evaluate beyond the data sheet:

Gold loading capacity (K value and R value)

The K value measures how fast carbon adsorbs gold from solution. The R value measures how much gold the carbon can hold. These are the metrics that actually predict CIL/CIP performance — not iodine number.

Haycarb publishes K and R values on request. If you're comparing alternatives, demand these numbers from every supplier. Any manufacturer serious about gold recovery carbon will have Mintek or equivalent test data available.

Attrition resistance under real conditions

Ball-pan hardness (ASTM D3802) is a standardized test, but it doesn't perfectly replicate the specific abrasion conditions in your circuit. Carbon that tests at 99% hardness in a lab may lose 2% vs 1.5% per cycle in a high-screen-velocity CIL plant. The only way to verify: run a trial.

Elution behavior

How cleanly does the gold strip during elution? Some carbons hold gold more tightly than others, requiring higher temperatures or longer strip times. This affects your overall gold recovery and operating costs. Request elution test data or, better, run your own strip test on a sample batch.

Fines generation

Even high-hardness carbon generates fines over time. The question is how much and how fast. Excessive fines mean gold losses (fines pass through screens), increased thickener load, and higher replacement costs. Track fines percentage per cycle during your trial.

The Real Cost Comparison

Let's model the actual cost impact. Assume a mid-size CIL operation consuming 150 tons of carbon per year:

Cost factor	Haycarb RCGC	Factory-direct (China)
FOB price (estimated range)	$3,500–5,200/ton	$3,200–3,800/ton
Shipping (to West Africa)	Similar (both export via container)	Similar
Annual carbon cost (150 tons)	$525,000–780,000	$480,000–570,000
Potential annual savings	—	$45,000–210,000
Sample/trial cost	Usually available, MOQ 20T	1–2 kg free sample, MOQ 10T

A $100,000–150,000 annual saving is worth investigating — even if it requires a 3-month parallel trial to validate performance.

Important caveat: These are estimated ranges based on market conditions. Actual pricing depends on volume, payment terms, and current supply/demand. Request quotes from both sides to get real numbers.

How to Evaluate an RCGC Alternative (Without Risking Gold Recovery)

If you're currently on RCGC and considering a switch, here's a low-risk evaluation process:

Step 1: Request TDS + COA + Gold Test Data

Contact the alternative supplier and ask for:

Technical Data Sheet (standard parameters)
Certificate of Analysis from a recent production batch
K value and R value from Mintek-method or equivalent gold adsorption testing
Elution test data if available

Any manufacturer that can't provide these documents isn't ready for gold mining supply.

Step 2: Order a Sample (1–2 kg)

Run your own lab tests. Compare iodine number (ASTM D4607), ball-pan hardness (ASTM D3802), and ash content (ASTM D2866) against your current RCGC batch results. Not against Haycarb's published minimums — against what you're actually receiving.

Step 3: Run a Parallel Plant Trial (10–20 tons)

Load the alternative carbon into one circuit or one adsorption stage while running RCGC in the others. Track:

Gold loading rate (g Au/kg carbon)
Attrition rate (% loss per cycle)
Fines generation (% passing 12 mesh after X cycles)
Elution efficiency (% gold recovered per strip)
Total gold recovery (compare circuits)

Run for a minimum of 8–12 weeks to capture performance over multiple adsorption/elution cycles.

Step 4: Calculate Total Cost of Ownership

Don't just compare purchase price. Factor in:

Carbon consumption rate (tons/year based on attrition)
Gold recovery rate (even 0.1% difference matters at scale)
Elution energy costs (if one carbon strips easier)
Logistics reliability (on-time delivery consistency)

If the alternative matches RCGC on performance and saves $100+/ton, you have your answer.

Who's Actually Switching?

Based on published case studies and export records, the shift from premium-brand carbon to factory-direct alternatives has been most pronounced in:

West African gold mines (Ghana, Burkina Faso, Mali): These markets were early Haycarb strongholds but have increasingly adopted Chinese-manufactured carbon as quality has proven equivalent in-plant. A 56-ton HMGOLD™ shipment to a Ghana CIP operation showed the mine upgraded from 6×16 to 6×12 mesh during the switch — improving both carbon retention and gold loading.

East African operations (Tanzania, Ethiopia): Chinese manufacturers have built strong export records here, particularly for CIL circuits.

South American mines: Peru, Brazil, and Colombia have seen increasing adoption of factory-direct coconut shell carbon, driven by cost pressure and improved logistics from Chinese ports.

Australian mines remain more brand-loyal, partly due to established supply agreements and proximity to Southeast Asian production.

FAQ

Is Haycarb RCGC the best activated carbon for gold recovery?

RCGC is one of the most proven gold recovery carbons on the market, backed by decades of plant data. "Best" depends on what you're optimizing for — if brand reputation and ESG documentation are priorities, RCGC delivers. If you're optimizing for cost-per-gram-of-gold-recovered and are willing to trial alternatives, factory-direct options with equivalent specs may deliver equal performance at 30–50% lower cost. The only way to determine what's "best" for your specific circuit is a parallel plant trial.

What is the difference between Haycarb RCGC and HMGOLD™?

Both are coconut shell, steam-activated, 6×12 mesh gold recovery carbons. The key differences: RCGC uses Sri Lankan coconut shells and is produced in Haycarb's own facilities; HMGOLD™ uses Indonesian/Philippine shells and is manufactured in China. On specifications, HMGOLD™ 7500 guarantees ≥1100 iodine and ≥99% hardness vs RCGC's ≥1050 iodine and ≥97% hardness. Pricing differs significantly — HMGOLD™ is factory-direct while RCGC goes through distributor networks. Performance in-plant should be validated through trial.

How much does Haycarb RCGC cost?

Haycarb doesn't publish pricing — it varies by volume, destination, and distributor. Market estimates for RCGC typically range $2,200–2,800/ton FOB, depending on order size and delivery terms. Factory-direct alternatives from Chinese manufacturers typically range $1,400–1,800/ton FOB for equivalent specifications. Request quotes from both sides for your specific volume and destination.

Can I use a cheaper activated carbon without losing gold recovery?

Yes — if the alternative meets or exceeds the critical performance parameters (K value, R value, hardness, and attrition rate) in your specific circuit. The key is testing, not assuming. Run a parallel plant trial with 10–20 tons over 8–12 weeks. If gold recovery rates match within your acceptable tolerance, the cheaper carbon delivers the same metallurgical outcome at lower cost.

Where does Haycarb ship from?

Haycarb ships from Sri Lanka (primary), Thailand, and Indonesia. They have warehouse/distribution points in several countries for faster delivery. Lead times from Sri Lanka to West Africa are typically 4–8 weeks including production and shipping. Chinese manufacturers ship from Fujian or Ningxia ports with similar transit times but often shorter production lead times (2–3 weeks vs 4–6 weeks).