Final presentation compiled v12

NOVEL WASTE

MINIMIZATION FOR STEEL

MANUFACTURINGN O V E M B E R 2 7 T H , 2 0 1 2

Adriano Arnini , Amir Fakhruddin Mohamed,

Anika Mohammed, Francis Bui,

Xiaobo Pan, Sonia Liscio

OVERVIEW

Integrated Steel Mill Waste Management Plan

Glacius’ Proposal

Key Unit: Reactor

Settling and Storage Sites

Economics

Recommendations & Conclusions

1

2.

4.

6.

5.

1.

3.

1.Steel Mill Waste Management

2.Glacius’ Proposal 3.Key Unit: Reactor

4.Settling & Storage 5.Economics

6. Recommendations &Conclusions

2

US Steel Canada

Steel-making Process

INTEGRATED STEEL MILL

WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN

Objectives

1. Maximize the amount of waste utilized from

an integrated steel mill

2. Reduce the costs associated with waste

management

3 1.Background 2.Process Description

3.Reactor 4.Equipment 5.Hazards

6.Economics 7.Conclusions

Formerly Stelco Inc.

Site chosen to

demonstrate concept

Steel production

capacity:

2.6 Million tonnes/year

4

US Steel Canada – Hamilton Works Plant

1.Background 2.Process Description



Hamilton Harbor

Hamilton Works

Google. (2012). Google Maps. Retrieved November 20,

2012, from https://maps.google.ca/)

Lake Ontario

Integrated Steel Mill

Blast Furnace Slag

Iron ore

Coke

Limestone

Blast

Furnace

Basic Oxygen

or Electric Arc

Furnace

Steel Slag

Pig Iron

Species Composition [%wt]

SiO2 15

CaO 45

Al2O3 2

MgO 10

MnO 4

Fe2O3 22

Trace Metals 2


SiO2 35

CaO 33

Al2O3 20

MgO 7

MnO 1

Fe2O3 1

SO3 2

Trace Metals 1

Molten Steel




Recycled

SteelO2 Limestone

Integrated Steel Mill Regeneration

HCl(aq) recycle

Costs $150/tonne WPL

Energy intensive

6


H2O 67

HCl 10

FeCl2 20

Trace Metals 3

Finishing

Processes

Refining

Casting

Rolling

Steel

Products

Molten Steel

Waste Pickle

Liquor

Pickle Liquor

(30% HCl(aq))

Regeneration




Pickle Liquor

Acid bath

Strip iron oxide layer

from steel surface

Waste Streams: Product:

The Proposal

Source:

http://www.betweenthelake

s.com/iron/fobf_7_5_03.ht

m

Source:

http://www.environmentallever

age.com/industry/steel/Steel.h

tml

Steel Slag Waste Pickle

Liquor

De-icing Fluid

Source:

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/transtek/roadtalk/r

t16-4/index.shtml

Utilize two major waste streams from the steel mill to make a significant value added product




Background

Stelco Inc. initially proposes idea

Preliminary lab studies conducted

Results show idea is feasible

Revealed no major environmental concerns

US Steel Corp. purchases Stelco Inc.

Project suspended indefinitely




9

Design Philosophy

Process Schedule

Background Chemistry

Product Specifications

GLACIUS’ PROPOSAL

Design Philosophy

SimplicityEase of operation

Economic ReturnMinimize capital and operating costs

Novel and InnovativePatent and license opportunity

Ability to implement globally




De-icing Fluid Production Schedule

11

Waste Pickle

LiquorSteel Slag

Reactors

Sediment Pond

Reservoir

Solids to Steel

Mill

Solids to Steel

Mill

Set 1 Set 2

Finishing Process

Basic Oxygen

Furnace

De-icing Fluid

Sediment




Main Chemical Reactions

1. CaO(s) + 2HCl(aq) CaCl2(aq)+ H2O(l)

∆H = - 190kJ/mol

2. MgO(s) + 2HCl(aq) MgCl2(aq) + H2O(l)

∆H = -150kJ/mol

3. CaO(s) + FeCl2(aq) CaCl2(aq) + FeO(s)

∆H = -720kJ/mol

12

Steel SlagWaste Pickle LiquorDe-icing Fluid

By-Product




Water

∆T =

20oC

Reaction Data Assumptions

Limited Access to Preliminary Research Pilot studies required

Literature for Similar Reaction Ideal batch reactor 0 to 31 Hours reaction Less than 10mm particle size

Buffer time allotted Varying particle sizeoUp to 35mm

13

Product Quality

Minimize amount of heavy metals

pH = 9.5

Control with neat HCl




Retrieved from Dyer, J. A., Scrivner, N. C. and Dentel, S. K. (1998), A practical guide for determining the

solubility of metal hydroxides and oxides in water. Environ. Prog., 17: 1–8. doi: 10.1002/ep.670170112

Final Product Specifications (De-icing Fluid)

15

Trace Metals

(ppm)

FeCl2 390

Fe(OH)2 0.80

Ca(OH)2 390

Mg(OH)2 40

Cr(OH)3 0.02

Ni(OH)2 0.00017

Cd(OH)2 0.11

Pb(OH)2 1.5

Trace Metals, 0.003%

H2O70%

CaCl224%

MgCl26%




By-Product Specifications (Sediment)

16

Fe58%

Ca10%

Mg3%

Si14%

Cr5%

Trace10%

Trace (wt%)

Mn 0.04

Al 0.020

Ni 0.03

Ti 0.009

S 9.0 E-04

P 4.6 E-03

CN- 1.2 E-05

As 1.5 E-05

Pb 0.004

Trace Metals

(ppm)

Cd <1

Cr 22

Ni 15

Pb 28Source: Bavrlic, K., & Quenselle, P.

(2010). Monitoring Forest Integrity

within the Credit River Watershed.

Meadowvale.

Forest Soil

Compariso

n

17

Design

Recirculation System

Internal Design

External Design

KEY UNIT: REACTOR

Plant Layout

18

Reactors




HCL

Storag

e Shed

Main

Reservoi

r

Back-Up

Reservoi

rLoading

Area

Sedimen

t Pond

WPL

Tanks

Batch reactor

Sloped walls

Capacity = 110m3

Dimensions

L = 7m

W = 5m

19

Reactor Design

0.3 m

2.0 m

2.0 m

2.0 m 2.0 m1.0 m




3-D Reactor Layout




Recirculation Process




Unites States Patent Office. (1976). Patent #3958952. (Original work published 1974). Retrieved from http://www.google.com/patents/US3958952?printsec=drawing#v=onepage&q&f=false

Benefits

Increased mixing effect

oResulting solution is

denser than solvent

Avoid clogging of the

plate with fines

Less movement of slag

reduces wear on lining

Top View

Stop Logs

Stacked

Removable

Manual or Automatic

Stop Logs vs. Pumps

Gravity vs. electricity

oHorsepower is 6hp

oMinimal energy

oMinimize operating cost

22

http://www.internationalwastewater

.com/Products/Gates.aspx




23

Sediment Pond

Reservoirs

Covering Structure

SETTLING & STORAGE SITES

Sediment Pond

24

Sediment

Pond




Purpose To settle the solids

Material Carbon steel lined

with Reinforced Polypropylene

Dimensions 40m x 14m x 5m

Capacity 2800m3

25

Sediment Pond




Settling rate

The settling rate is

0.1m/h

All solids will settle in

one week

Drainage Time

1 stop log = 7 minutes

26

Settling Rate & Drainage Time




Reservoirs

27

Backup

Reservoir

Main

Reservoir




Purpose

To store

deicing fluid

Dimensions

51m x 60m x 3m

Capacity

9200m3

28

Main Reservoir




Purpose

When reservoir is full

& for maintenance

To store extra

production

Dimensions

28m x 28m x 3m

Capacity

2400m3

29

Backup Reservoir




Vegetation

Fill Dirt

Slag

RPP

Clay

Body

1. Vegetation

2. Fill Dirt

3. Steel Slag

Lining

1. Reinforced

polypropylene sheets

2. Calcium bentonite clay

30

Materials of Reservoirs




Purpose

To cover product

from rain

Dimension

125m x 155m

Area

19400m2

31

Covering Structure

Covering Structure

Hazard Mitigation

32

Reactors




HCL

Storage

Shed

WPL

Tanks

33

Comparison Between Existing and Proposed Plan

Cash Flow and Sensitivity Analysis

Current Market of De-icing Agents

Cost-saving Benefits

ECONOMICS

Replacing Regeneration Process

De-Icing Fluid Production: 11,000 tonnes per year

De-Icing Fluid Unit Price: $300 per tonne

34

Proposed Plan Current Process

Revenue from De-

icing Fluid

$3,300,000 Regeneration of

Waste Pickle Liquor

($15,800,000)

Cost of Neat Pickle

Liquor

($16,800,000)

Total Cost $13,500,000 Total Cost $15,800,000

Net Benefit: $2,300,000




Total capital investment: $8.6M

Annual operating cost:

$727,000

Annual earnings before tax and

interest: $2.73M

Payback period: 6 years

Net present value: $24.7M

35

Cash Flow Analysis




$(10,000,000.00)

$(8,000,000.00)

$(6,000,000.00)

$(4,000,000.00)

$(2,000,000.00)

$-

$2,000,000.00

$4,000,000.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Sensitivity of Project

36

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50

Inte

rna

l R

ate

of

Retu

rn (

IRR

) in

%

Variation in %

Internal Rate of Return vs. Variation of Factors

Total Capital Investment

Revenue

Maintenance

MARR

Ontario usage500,000 to 600,000

tonnes of salt per year

De-icing trucksCity of Hamilton already

purchasing new liquid application trucks

Infrastructure in placeFixed Automated Spray

Technology (F.A.S.T)

37

Current Market for De-icing Agents

Fixed Automated Spray Technology. (n.d.). Retrieved November 18, 2012, from http://www.ibigroup.com/Pages/Project.aspx?ProjectId=430&DisciplineId=3&PracticeId=50&pageName=AreaOfPractice.aspx&backString=AreaOfPractice.aspxxDisciplineID=3ppracticeID=50ppage=




City of Hamilton – Cost of Materials

Unit price: $50 per tonne

Annual Usage:

26,000 tonnes per year

Total cost: $1,300,000

De-icing fluid

Unit Price: $300 per tonne

Annual Usage:

2,730 tonnes per year

Total cost: $830,000




Road salt

Savings of $470,000

Cost Savings & Benefits

Environmentally friendly material

Zero release of ferrocyanide

Introduction of calcium ions in soil

Corrosion reduction

Reduced chloride release

Socioeconomic benefits

Vehicular accident reduction (F.A.S.T)




40

Market Expansion

International Implementation

Paramagnetic Iron Oxide Recovery

RECOMMENDATIONS &

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations

Market ExpansionScale-up production

Solid product

Global Implementation Minimizing footprint

Top steel producers & calcium chloride consumers

Alternate uses for calcium chloride solution

Alternate Use for Sediment Paramagnetic iron oxide recovery Magnetite

Potential source of greater revenue




Conclusions

Maximized amount of waste used

Converted to a marketable product

Cost savings of $2,300,000/year

Novel, simple, energy-efficient

Adaptable to steel mills world-wide

42

Acknowledgements

Henry Miyamoto

Jill Lam

Donald Kirk

Graeme Norval

Rosanna Kronfli

Lydia Wilkinson

43

44

QUESTIONS

Overview Back-up Slides

Slide 58

45

Reactor Dimensions with Reactant Levels

46

Mass Balance

Per Set of 2 Batch Reactors (Weekly basis)

47

P&ID

48

pH Control

49

HCl

Tote

Metering

Pump

Reactors

Turn on

Turn off

A

E

AES

L

AESH

Concentration Control

50

Recirculation – P&ID

51

Loading Reactor – P&ID

52

Time to Drain Calculation

53

Settling Time Calculation

54

Reactor Flow rate & Pump Required

55

Solubility of Heavy Metals

Retrieved from Dyer, J. A., Scrivner, N. C. and Dentel, S. K. (1998), A practical guide for determining the solubility of metal

hydroxides and oxides in water. Environ. Prog., 17: 1–8. doi: 10.1002/ep.670170112

56

Production Schedule

Reactor

• 1 Week of Mixing

• Recirculation process

• 1 Week of Settling

• Vacuum Pumped

Sediment Pond

• 1 Week of Settling

• Sediment removed during maintenance

Reservoir

• 10 000 tonnesproduced

57

2 Batch Reactors per week

Staggered Production 4 Reactors in total

HCl Price

Current price of HCl $250

Maximum HCl price when regeneration process

becomes preferred: $284

58

Vacuum Truck

Datasheet

3000 gallons (us), Stainless tank, D.O.T. 407/412

6400 cfm, 27'' Hg., high vacuum pump

59

Source: http://www.supervac2000.com/en/specialized-

trucks/vacuum-truck/svpt-6400-tc-and-dot-coded-tank-

29.html


60

A. Direct Cost

1. Equipment 2,415,834.91$

2. Instrumentation and Controls 238,989.58$

3. Electrical Installations 183,838.14$

4. Building Including Services 128,686.70$

5. Yard Improvements 367,676.28$

6.Service Facilities 367,676.28$

B. Indirect Cost

1. Engineering and Supervision 551,514.42$

2. Construction Cost 1,295,945.66$

3. Contingencies 888,648.45$

4. Startup Expense 999,729.51$

C. Working Capital 1,190,166.39$


61

A. Direct Cost

1. Equipment Unit Cost Quantity Unit Installation Total Unit Cost

HCl Units

Semi Bulk Tanks/Totes 455.00$ 12 tote 5,460.00$

Metering Pump 3,485.00$ 2 per pump 1,394.00$ 9,758.00$

Spill Skid 765.50$ 2 per skid 1,531.00$

Waste Pickle Liquor Units

Low Carbon Steel Tanks 67,400.00$ 3 per tank 30,330.00$ 293,190.00$

HDPE Liner 7.00$ 435 per m2 0.33$ 3,188.55$

Centrifugal Pump 28,200.00$ 4 per pump 11,280.00$ 157,920.00$

Concrete Berm 260,000.00$ 1 per berm 260,000.00$

Reactor Units

Low Carbon Steel Tanks 53,900.00$ 4 per tank 24,255.00$ 312,620.00$

HDPE Liner 7.00$ 516 per m2 1.33$ 4,298.28$

Double Piston Diaphragm Pump 89,300.00$ 5 per pump 35,720.00$ 625,100.00$

Settling Pond Unit

Reinforced Polypropylene Liner 10.00$ 1100 per m2 0.38$ 11,418.00$

Low Carbon Steel Body 304,200.00$ 1 per body 136,890.00$ 441,090.00$

Conveyor Belt 118,200.00$ 1 per belt 118,200.00$

Reservoir Units

Calcium Bentonite 300.00$ 25 per tonne 7,500.00$

Reinforced Polypropylene Liner 10.00$ 4950 per m2 0.38$ 51,381.00$

Sump Pump 20,500.00$ 1 per pump 8,200.00$ 28,700.00$

Auxiliary Units

Pipe 36.88$ 330 per feet 16.60$ 17,647.08$

Level Indicator Controller 1,450.00$ 7 per controller 10,150.00$

pH Controller 1,500.00$ 4 per controller 6,000.00$

Pressure Indicator Controller 1,694.00$ 4 per controller 6,776.00$

HDPE Pipe Reducer 18.00$ 4 per reducer 72.00$

Check Valves 300.00$ 1 per valve 300.00$

Butterfly Valves 750.00$ 18 per valve 13,500.00$

3-way Valve 600.00$ 1 per valve 600.00$

Magmeter 1,455.00$ 1 per magmeter 1,455.00$

Flow Control Valve 420.00$ 1 per valve 420.00$

Filter 560.00$ 22 per filter 420.00$ 21,560.00$

Solenoid Valves 2,000.00$ 3 per valve 6,000.00$

Purchased Equipment Subtotal 1,838,381.40$ 2,415,834.91$


Plant Initial Investment Detailed Spreadsheet 1/2

62

2. Instrumentation and Controls

Normal Solid-fuild Chemical Processing 13% of Purchased-equipment 238,989.58$ 238,989.58$

3. Electrical Installations

Electrical-installations cost 10% of Purchased-equipment 183,838.14$ 183,838.14$

4. Building Including Services

Solid-fuild Expansion at an existing site 7% Purchased-equipment 128,686.70$ 128,686.70$

5. Yard Improvements

Approximates 20% of Purchased-equipment 367,676.28$ 367,676.28$

6.Service Facilities

Approximates 20% of Purchased-equipment 367,676.28$ 367,676.28$

Subtotal 3,702,701.89$

B. Indirect Cost Cost Total Cost

1. Engineering and Supervision

Approximates 30% purchased-equipment 551,514.42$ 551,514.42$

2. Construction Cost

Contractor's Fee 5% 185,135.09$ 185,135.09$

Construction 10% of fixed capital 1,110,810.57$ 1,110,810.57$

3. Contingencies

Approximates 8% of fixed capital 888,648.45$ 888,648.45$

4. Startup Expense

Approximates 9% of fixed capital 999,729.51$ 999,729.51$

Subtotal 3,735,838.05$

C. Fixed Capital Investment 7,438,539.94$

D. Working Capital (10-20% of Total Capital Investment) 1,190,166.39$

E. Total Capital Investment 8,628,706.33$


Plant Initial Investment Detailed Spreadsheet 1/2

Production Annual Cost

63

A. Manufacturing Cost

Direct Production Cost Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost

1. Raw Materials

HCl 12 totes/year 455.00$ 5,460.00$

Waste Pickle Liquor

Steel Slag

2. Operating Labor 2 operator/year 56,600.00$ 113,200.00$

3. Utilities

Electricity 46250 kW-hr/year 0.08$ 3,700.00$

Fuel - Petro 17500 liter/year 1.30$ 22,750.00$

4. Maintenance and Repairs

0.05 of FCI 371,927.00$

5. Operating Supplies

0.15 of Main&Rep 55,789.05$

6. Laboratory Charges

0.15 of Op&Labor 16,980.00$

Direct Production Cost 589,806.05$

Fixed Costs

Insurance

0.007 of FCI 52,069.78$

Plant-overhead costs

0.6 of Op&Labor 67,920.00$

Manufactuing Cost Total 709,795.83$

B. General Expenses

Administrative costs

0.15 of Op&Labor 16,980.00$

Total Product Cost 726,775.83$

Detailed Plant Annual Operating Cost Spreadsheet

Total Production Cost

Top Steel Producers vs.

Top Calcium Chloride Consumers

64

Source: IHS Chemical. (2012). Calcium

Chloride. Retrieved November

2012, from IHS Chemical Web Site:

http://www.ihs.com/products/chemical/pl

anning/ceh/calcium-chloride.aspx

Country Steel Production

[million tons]

China 626.7

Japan 109.6

United States 80.5

India 68.3

Russia 66.9

South Korea 58.4

Germany 43.8Source: Badkar, M. (2011, July 26). The

10 Biggest Steel Producing Countries In

The World. Retrieved from Business

Insider:

http://www.businessinsider.com/countrie

s-that-produce-the-most-steel-2011-

7?op=1

Alternate Uses Of Calcium Chloride Solution

65

Source: http://www.calciumchloride.com/market.shtml

Paramagnetic Iron Oxide Recovery

Magnetite

• 3 Fe(OH)2 → Fe3O4 + 2 H2O + H2

Separation

• Wet low intensity magnetic separators

66

Potential Iron in Solid Waste: 2,300 tonne/year

Alternative Price

($/tonne)

Revenue

($/ year)

Magnetic Iron Oxide Recovery $320 $736,000

Sintering Plant $120 $276,000

Difference $200 $460,000

Source: (Iron Ore: Market Outlook to 2020, 7th edition 2012, 2012)

Source: http://www1.southafricacrusher.com/optional

-equipment/low-intensity-magnetic-separator.php

Material Selection Process

67

Corrosion Resistance

Mechanical Reliability

Economic

Viability

Process Equipment MaterialsEquipment Body Lining Advantages

Reactor A242 Steel HDPE -A242 highly resistant to

atmospheric corrosion

(Brockenbrough, 2006)

- HDPE chemically inert to

reactants & products and

highly resistant to wear;

widely used with abrasive

slurries (Gabriel, 2001)

Settling Pond A242 Steel Reinforced PP -RPP highly resistant to UV

exposure (Western

Environmental Liner, 2009)

Reservoir 1st layer : Steel Slag

2nd layer: Fill Dirt

3rd layer:

Vegetation

1st layer : Reinforced PP

Lining Sheets

2nd layer: Calcium bentonite

clay

-RPP resistant to UV

exposure

- Clay is a self-healing pond

sealant to provide extra

safety against leaks (Moine-

Ledoux, 2000)

Stop logs Carbon Steel HDPE

- With EPDM seals and epoxy

painted steel guides

-HDPE lining chemically inert

to reactants & products

-EPDM weathering, UV and

chemically resistant (Rubber-

Cal, 1999)

-Epoxy paint protects steel

from corrosion by chloride

ions

68

Secondary Equipment Materials

Piping Body Lining Advantages

WPL

HCl

Recirculation

De-icing fluid

Flush (Water)

Piping

A242 Steel HDPE -A242 highly resistant to atmospheric corrosion

-HDPE chemically inert to reactants & products and

highly resistant to wear; widely used with abrasive

slurries

69

Pumps Body Lining Advantages

Diaphragm

(Recirculation)

Centrifugal

Metering

Sump

Carbon

Steel

Natural

Rubber

-Steel provides structural strength

-Natural Rubber excellent resistance to severe

abrasion, chemically resistant and low cost (Soft

Natural Rubber, 2012)

Valves Body Lining Advantages

Butterfly

Solenoid

Check

Flow Control

3-way

PVC EPDM -PVC is low cost and mechanically strong (Curbell

Plastics, 2012)

-EPDM provides chemically and UV resistant seal

Equipment Sizing

Product Mass

[kg]

Density

[kg/m3]

Actual

Volume

[m3]

% Volume Design

Volume

[m3]

Width

[m]

Depth

[m]

Height

[m]

Comments Stop Logs

[m]

Reactor

(1 unit)

WPL 107000 1450 74.3 0.74

Holds half a

batch of raw

materials

7x0.3048

3x0.1524HCl 378 1490 0.25 0.00

Water 0.00 1000 0.00 0.00

Slag 37000 3750 9.88 0.10

Total 84.4 100 5 6.875 4

Settling

Pond

Liquid 4210000 1380 304 0.11

Holds 1 yr solids

+ 2 liquid

batches

14x 0.3048

4x0.1524Solids 3990000 2020 1980 0.72

Total 2280 2740 40 13.9 5

Reservoi

r

Liquid 10500000 1380 7600 0.83

Holds 1 yr of

product -Solids 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 7600 9120 60 51 3

70

Table 13: Process Equipment Sizing 1 of 2

Equipment Sizing Continued

HCl Supply Mass Balance

Vol. [m3]

Vol. with OD [m3] Dimensions [m] of

OD

Design Vol. [m3] Comments

0.51 0.61

Radius= 0.5 &Height

= 1 Holds 2 batches

WPL Supply

455.69 535 (Total) - - Holds 3 weeks of WPL

- 178 (1/3 of Total)

Radius = 3 & Height

= 7 198 Holds 1 week of WPL

Back-Up

Reservoir - 9120/4 = 2280 28 x 28 x 3 2352 Holds ¼ of main reservoir

71

Table 14: Process Equipment Sizing 2 of 2

Date post:	14-Jul-2015
Category:	Education
Upload:	henry-miyamoto
View:	815 times
Download:	5 times

Final presentation compiled v12

Education