Joe Wong – ADA Carbon SolutionsJohn Kline – Kline Consulting
Workshop at Reinhold APC Round TableJuly 14, 2014
Kline Consulting
1
Workshop Outline Revenue and Costs – Why aren’t I making
money from MY ash? Byproduct utilization potential Cement/Concrete utilization drill down
Drivers and Limits How cement works – the market Flyash in cement and concrete today / future Sorbent impacts Management approaches If there’s time: CO2 avoidance potential; global
markets
2
$‐
$2.00
$4.00
$6.00
$8.00
$10.00
$12.00
$14.00
$16.00
$18.00
$20.00 CO SC NC MI
WY
MI
MD
OH NE MS
MI
OH FL FL TN IA LA WY
NE LA WV
NV MO TX LA WV
OH FL
MO ND IN TX AL TX CO IA
NM NH TX IA IA MI
WI
SC KS PA WI
OK
Fly Ash Revenue
Mean - $6.60
Data from EIA
How Utilities Are Faring Today
$/ton
3
23%
4%
6%
4%4%
3%
56%
Use of Fly Ash in US
Concrete / Grout
Blends / Clinker Feed
Structural Fill
Mining Applications
Waste Stabilization
All Other Uses
Discarded
ACAA 2012 Data
Costs Cash
4
Power Plant
Cement Plant
Concrete Plant
Structures
CementSandAggregateFlyashWater
LimestoneClayShaleSandFlyashBottom ashSyngyp
5
The use of flyash in concrete & grout Pros
Improves concrete Reduces costs Reduces carbon footprint
Cons Reduces strength Reduces air entraining (freeze –thaw
durability)
6
How Cement Works(The Simplified Version)
CaO SiO2H2O
Calcium Silicate HydrateBoth the Calcium and Silica Oxides
need to be in a reactive form
8
78%
4%18%
11%
41%
26%
16%6%
Water
Sand
Gravel
Cement
Air
Clinker
Gypsum
SCMs
CementIn
Concrete
ClinkerIn
Cement
Limestonein
Clinker
80%
20%
Limestone
OtherRaw
Materials
CaO
SiO2Al2O3
Flyash
Flyash BottomAsh
FCB Ash
Reactive Unreactive
The Use of Ash in Cement and Concrete
SynGyp
9
Most Important Binder Materials
C‐Ash
SiO2
CaO Al2O3
PC
Slag
SF
F‐Ash
MK
L
LegendC‐Ash – ASTM Type C FlyashF‐Ash – ASTM Type F FlyashL – Lime (Limestone ‐ CaCO3)MK – MetakaolinPC – Portland CementSF – Silica FumeSlag – Ground Blast Furnace
PozzolanicReactions
Hydraulic Reactions
SlowerLater Strength
FasterEarly Strength
10
Clinker Substitution
2006 data, CSI
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%26% 26%
24%22% 21% 20%
17% 16% 16%
Aver
age
Add
ition
con
tent
in c
emen
t
11
Clinker Substitutes
Portland cement is made up primarily of calcium silicates These react with water
Other Produced and Natural Materials also contain calcium and silica oxides Blast furnace slag Flyash Pozzolans (Natural and Artificial) Also known as “Supplemental Cementing
Materials” (SCMs)
12
Keys to Fly Ash Use in Concrete
Chemistry and purity of the Fly Ash Reactivity of the Fly Ash
Calcium in CaO form Amorphous silica Small particles (high surface to weight)
Availability of the Fly Ash Local specifications and norms
Most locations opening up to more SCMs
13
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
160%
180%
200%
‐
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
China Europe US India Russia Rest of World
Million Metric
Tons
Cement
Coal
Coal Ash
Saturation
Normal SaturationWorld Average 27%
Coal Ash to Cement Balance
Assumes 12% Ash in coal consumed
20% - 40%
Surplus of Fly Ash in US
Deficit of Fly Ash outside US
& Russia
Availability
14
Global Potential to Increase Flyash
Today Potential
Clinker 2780 77.2% 2780 68.6%Gypsum 120 3.3% 120 3.0%Flyash 250 6.9% 500 12.3%Slag 150 4.2% 200 4.9%Pozzolan 150 4.2% 300 7.4%
Limestone 150 4.2% 150 3.7%
Total Binder 3600 100.0% 4050 100.0%
15
Quantity of Flyash Usage Historically usages has been between 15 –
25% of the binder content Usage rates depend on:
The application The properties of the flyash Specification limits Geographic location Climate
Higher percentages (30 – 50%) have been used in massive structures, such as foundations and dams
16
Flyash Usage in ConcreteIn order for fly ash to be used beneficially, it must
adhere to the specifications imposed by the ultimate product. These specifications may include requirements on, among others:
• Size• Carbon Content / LOI• Foam Index Activity• Chemical Composition• Color• NH3 (ammonia)• Hg (Mercury)
17
The Value of “Good” Fly Ash The average price of cement today is around
$90/t (USGS) To qualify as an SCM, fly ash should meet
75% of the strength of cement Therefore as a substitute material, maybe
$70/t maximum However, if / when the cost of cement and
CO2 increases, the value of fly ash also increases
Flyash and bottom ash as a cement raw material have a maximum value of $15/t delivered
18
What about the Cost Side
Disposal Costs are Increasing Land costs New Landfill Regulations Landfill liners Water monitoring Seepage collection systems
Landfills create a future liability
19
$599,704
$14,267,812
$6,383,761
$1,663,130 $3,916,723
$8,955,616
$10,200,058
$2,688,644 $2,740,196
Landfill Costs (6.5 million tons - 20 years)
Land PurchaseTotal Installed LayersOther Construction CostsMonitoring (Operation)Maintenance (Operation)Total FillingTotal TransportationManagement & SupervisionPost Closure Expenses
Direct cost per ton - $ 8.00/tw/ Cost of Capital - $16.35/t
Ohio State University Model
$ 51,415,645 - Total Costs 2001 Dollars
20
The Challenge
The value of good ash is increasing While, the cost of disposal is also
increasing However, maintaining a marketable ash
is becoming more difficult
21
Challenges to Fly Ash Value Quality and consistency of the fly ash
Reactive○ Fresh Ash○ F-Ash can be reclaimed○ C-Ash can not be reclaimed
Clean○ Low Carbon [consistent / steady levels? –
admixture impacts]○ Low Sorbents
Oversupply of the market (US today) The addition of various sorbents for
environmental controls
22
Impact of dosage on concrete air content
Concrete air content strongly depends on nature and dosage of AC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4Sorbent Dosage, %/w of cement
Con
cret
e In
itial
Air
Con
tent
, % CDERXJFHNQLM
Constant Dosage of AEA ‐Microair
0 5 10 15 20 25 Lbs of Sorbent per million ACF Flue Gas
Dosage
Nat
ure
23Data from EUEC Conference, Phoenix, January 2013
Sorbents for SOx & HCl Reduction
Limestone is inert and does not overly impact cement or concrete quality when included in small doses (<5%)
Lime is more reactive and can also be added to cement and concrete in small doses (<5%)
Calcium sulphate can be used in wallboard and cement production, calcium sulfite needs to be oxidized (wet scrubbers)
Sodium based sorbents include alkali (Na) and can impact the quality of cement and concrete, sodium additions should be kept to a minimum
24
Sorbents for Mercury Reduction
Field of Sorbents Powdered Activated Carbon
Consistency and stability of the ash product Time effect Improvements to consistency Fly ash beneficiation
25
Impact of Reagents on Ash Usage
Reagent Usage Cement RawMaterials
Cement Component Concrete Additive
Lime Large Amounts Medium Amounts Small Amounts
Limestone Large Amounts Medium Amounts Medium Amounts
CaBr2 Large Amounts Small Amounts Small Amounts
Mercury Very Small Amounts Large Amounts Large Amounts
Activated Carbon Large Amounts Very Small Amounts Very Small Amounts
Trona Small Amounts Very Small Amounts Very Small Amounts
Sodium Bicarbonate Small Amounts Very Small Amounts Very Small Amounts
All reagents play a role in the usage and value of CCPs !26
Consistency is KEY!
Control AshBefore ACI
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0Air Entraining Admixture Dose (oz/cwt)
Concrete Air Co
nten
t, %
Concrete Friendly Sorbent Sampling over a 3 week period
Small variations in PAC contentseverely impacts air requirement
27
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Drops of A
ir Entrainm
ent A
gent
(50µ
L=1d
rop)
Time (Minutes)
ADA PowerPAC
ADA FastPAC Premium™
Competitor 1
No Carbon Baseline
Concrete Foam Stability vs. Time
Advances in Concrete Compatibility From Generation 2 FastPACTM PACs
The rapid achievement of foam stability provides assurance for ash marketers
Our patent-pending FastPAC™ products conserve Air Entrainment Agent Usage and provide Rapid Foam Stability. These curves represent the initial AEA required and foam stability over time for
various sorbents at an injection rate of 3 lb/MMacf 28
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Dro
ps o
f AEA
(50µ
L=1d
rop)
Time (mins)
FastPAC Premium 3lbs/MMacf
FastPAC Premium 2lbs/MMacf
FastPAC Premium 1lbs/MMacf
Fly Ash Only
Our patent-pending FastPAC™ products require lower ACI injection rates to achieve Hg capture targets, thus reducing the relative levels of carbon in fly ash and resulting in low initial AEA
dosing combined with excellent foam stability over time.
Advances in Concrete Compatibility From Our FastPAC™ Products
29
Gen 2 FastPAC™ Products Achieve Consistent Fly Ash Properties
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
1 1.3 1.6 1.9 2.2 2.5 2.8 3.1 3.4 3.7 4 4.3 4.6 4.9 5.2 5.5 5.8 6.1 6.4 6.7 7Pounds per Million ACF of Sorbent
Generation 2More Consistent
Generation 1Less Consistent
Less Impact on Fly Ash
Lower injection rates and a tighter control range mean improved repeatability of fly ash AEA demand. Our Gen 2 FastPAC Premium™ allows low PAC injection for high Hg capture and greater active engineering
control (steeper capture curves), resulting in more consistent fly ash properties.
30
Ash Additives
Masking Works on native and carbon based sorbents Low capital costs Can be added at load-out (process as
needed) Chemicals can be expensive IP controlled by fly ash marketers Chemicals are proprietary Over / under dosing could be an issue
31
33
Relative Cost and Product Quality forAsh Beneficiation Technologies (EPRI)
Technology Basis
# of Output Products
Primary Product (Low
Carbon)Yield
Secondary Product
Initial
Ash Quality
Cost Range ($/Ton)
Carbon Masking
1Same LOI as initial ash
100% NA <6% LOI $2.00 - $7.00
Wet Processes Multiple NA NA NA NA NA
Aerodynamic Classification
210 - 40%
Reduction in LOI
50 – 90%Variable LOI
(typically > 30%)No Limit $1.00 - $3.00
Sieving 215 - 50%
Reduction in LOI
50 – 90%Variable LOI
(typically > 30%) No Limit $2.00 - $4.00
Electrostatic
(Belt)2 1.5 – 3.0% LOI 60 – 85%
Variable LOI (typically > 30%)
<20% LOI $4.00 - $7.00
Electrostatic (Pneumatic)
230 - 60%
Reduction in LOI
35 – 70%Variable LOI
(typically > 30%) <10% LOI$5.00 - $8.00
Combustion1 1.5 – 2.5% LOI 80 – 95% NA >8% LOI
$10.00 -$20.00
Fly Ash Value
If your fly ash was good before sorbents it may very well still be marketable
If your fly ash was not good before, well more work will be required
34
The Path Forward
Know your fly ash Strengths Weaknesses Environmental requirements Results of specific tests such as foam index,
stability, slump Know your competition
Who else is marketing ash in your area Their strengths and weaknesses Their environmental compliance strategy
35
Path Forward
Define your target market End use Quality required Quantity required Target price
Define your approach Marketer Direct Sales
36
Path Forward Select / adjust your environmental
compliance strategy Target One: Cement / Concrete market (highest
margin)○ Avoid sodium based sorbents○ Minimize activated carbon variability/ restrict type○ Lime / limestone OK
Target Two: Cement Raw Materials○ Limited amounts of sodium based sorbents○ Minimize mercury content○ Activated carbon OK○ Lime / limestone OK
37
Path Forward
Select / adjust your environmental compliance strategy Target Three: Structural fill / Soil
Stabilization / Mine backfill○ Activated carbon OK, minimize HM leaching○ Trona OK○ Lime, check PH issues / limits
38
The Future of Flyash in Concrete
There is a need in most of the world Flyash value will increase with CO2
costs / constraints Substitutes may be limited
Finite amount of slag available Natural pozzolans not available globally Artificial pozzolans require processing
Cost of disposal is increasing Careful planning is therefore required
39
The Future of Flyash
Globally there is not enough flyash Locally there is too much flyash CO2 reduction will increase the value of
“clean” Flyash Utilities that market flyash will need to
consider their path forward carefully Mercury Carbon / sorbents Trona / sodium bicarbonate
40
Thank You
Joe Wong
(303) 962-1967
John Kline
(484) 602-3474
Kline Consulting
41