I would maintain the laboratory contamination, or more broadly, overall laboratory and instrument limitations, could in itself plausibly account for end results indicating 14C. For the moment, however, I am going put that aside to focus on in situ and sample collection contamination.
To recap the central theme, the standard narrative is that coal formed from deposits of biomass back in deep time, and therefore any 14C that was originally present should have decayed away long ago. It may seem reasonable to assume that coal, once sequestered underground, would be isolated from the outside world, but it is increasingly clear that is unlikely, as I posted here.
In light of this, let us consider the procurement of coal samples referenced in the Baumgardner study.
The coals in this bank are intended to be representative of the economically important coalfields of the United States. The original samples were collected in 180 kg quantities from recently exposed areas of active mines, where they were placed in 115 liter steel drums with high-density gaskets and purged with argon. As soon as feasible after collection, these large samples were processed to obtain representative 300 g samples with 0.85 mm particle size (20 mesh). These smaller 300 g samples were sealed under argon in foil multi-laminate bags and have since been kept in refrigerated storage at 3°C
Nothing in that statement is false, but let us take a deeper look as to the purpose of the DOE sample database. First, the above management procedure including foil bags was developed because there was found to be unacceptable deterioration under the previous regimen. While they were satisfied with the new sample preservation:
Foil laminate bags purged with argon gas and stored under refrigeration were shown to perform well in preserving the properties of the coal samples.
…performing well does not mean perfect, as the DOE testing itself demonstrates. The level of preservation, however, is good enough for purpose, so job done. And the purpose is:
to ensure the availability of well characterized, high-quality coal samples for public and private coal research.
The public and private research anticipated is characterized by the tests the DOE itself runs - ASTM procedures, proximate analysis, gieseler plastometry, and sulfur forms. What these have in common is that they are industry specific tests for concerns particular to the usage of coal. All coal, whether metallurgical or thermal, is mined to be burned to CO2 and dumped to the atmosphere we breathe. Customers are concerned with the efficiency of combustion which can vary widely with water content, amount of ash they have to contend with, keeping within sulfur pollution allowances, and these tests, sample benchmarks and preservation, revolve around those sorts of issues. Notably absent from industry concerns are implications of AMS carbon dating for Noah’s Flood.
Now if you are going to embark on this ill conceived quest to find 14C in coal, you have to obtain samples from somewhere, and the DOE bank is as good a place as any, but that demonstrates just how difficult, really, the task of preventing contamination is. While long term storage in purged argon filled bags is great for industry tests, the collection and sampling does not preclude contamination for trace amounts of 14C.
Collection was undertaken from active sections of mines in order to obtain fresh, recently exposed coal.
Note the term exposed. How exposed is seen from the following various collection reports:
It was collected from a surface mine on … in multiple cuts from an automatic sampler on an overland conveyor belt system. — It was later determined that the coal was somewhat oxidized prior to collection. — The coal had been exposed less than two days; block samples were also collected. — The coal had been exposed approximately 20 hours prior to collection of the sample. — The coal had been exposed less than two days prior to collection.
To get an idea of what a day or two of exposure in a coal mine might entail, just take a look at pictures of miners after a shift. Black lung disease has been a historic bane. Bioslime coats timbers and shaft walls, and contributes to dangerous methane build. Dust is everywhere. These factors are better controlled in modern mines, but that is comparative. Contamination of at least trace amounts of 14C is probably inevitable in these conditions. Then afterwards, when the sample drums arrive for processing, the coal is crushed down to mesh size, allowing for another full on exposure to 14C.
But even prior to exposure at the mine, it is far from likely that the only carbon present is from original plant material. Coal is not isolated from water ground flow which supports a rich biome. Sample DECS-1 contained 30% water, DECS-11 Beulah 33%, DECS-15 Lower Sunnyside 3%, DECS-25 Pust 35%, all samples had water content ranging from 2% to upper 30%. While it could be argued that water is trapped, typical hydrology suggests that aquifers are part of a cycle in contact with the surface.
Given the hydrology of coal deposits, and the handling of samples, the results of 14C analysis, in my mind, actually lend support to the antiquity of coal. If the original carbon content of the material which turned to coal is radiocarbon dead, trace amounts of contamination both prior and subsequent to mining exposure would be expected and would be consistent with old but finite carbon dates. In view of all this, I find the conclusions of the Baumgardner study unjustified, to say the least.
Reference DOE Technical Reports MAINTENANCE OF THE COAL SAMPLE BANK AND DATABASE and ESTABLISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF A COAL SAMPLE BANK AND DATA BASE.
EDIT: Typo’s. Added link to Baumgardner study: 14C Evidence for a Recent Global Flood and a
Young Earth.