![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](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/maximizing-ash-value-150213192029-conversion-gate02/85/Maximizing-Ash-Value-22-320.jpg)
Maximizing Ash Value
- 1. Joe Wong – ADA Carbon Solutions John Kline – Kline Consulting Workshop at Reinhold APC Round Table July 14, 2014 Kline Consulting 1
- 2. 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
- 3. $‐ $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
- 5. Power Plant Cement Plant Concrete Plant Structures Cement Sand Aggregate Flyash Water Limestone Clay Shale Sand Flyash Bottom ash Syngyp 5
- 6. 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
- 7. Cement Plants Using Ash Source: PCA 7
- 8. How Cement Works (The Simplified Version) CaO SiO2H2O Calcium Silicate Hydrate Both the Calcium and Silica Oxides need to be in a reactive form 8
- 9. 78% 4% 18% 11% 41% 26% 16% 6% Water Sand Gravel Cement Air Clinker Gypsum SCMs Cement In Concrete Clinker In Cement Limestone in Clinker 80% 20% Limestone Other Raw Materials CaO SiO2 Al2O3 Flyash Flyash Bottom Ash FCB Ash Reactive Unreactive The Use of Ash in Cement and Concrete SynGyp 9
- 10. Most Important Binder Materials C‐Ash SiO2 CaO Al2O3 PC Slag SF F‐Ash MK L Legend C‐Ash – ASTM Type C Flyash F‐Ash – ASTM Type F Flyash L – Lime (Limestone ‐ CaCO3) MK – Metakaolin PC – Portland Cement SF – Silica Fume Slag – Ground Blast Furnace Pozzolanic Reactions Hydraulic Reactions Slower Later Strength Faster Early Strength 10
- 11. Clinker Substitution 2006 data, CSI 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 26% 26% 24% 22% 21% 20% 17% 16% 16% AverageAdditioncontentincement 11
- 12. 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
- 13. 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
- 14. 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 Saturation World 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
- 15. 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
- 16. 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
- 17. Flyash Usage in Concrete In 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
- 18. 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
- 19. 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
- 20. $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 Purchase Total Installed Layers Other Construction Costs Monitoring (Operation) Maintenance (Operation) Total Filling Total Transportation Management & Supervision Post Closure Expenses Direct cost per ton - $ 8.00/t w/ Cost of Capital - $16.35/t Ohio State University Model $ 51,415,645 - Total Costs 2001 Dollars 20
- 21. 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
- 22. 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
- 23. 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 1.4 Sorbent Dosage, %/w of cement ConcreteInitialAirContent,% C D E R X J F H N Q L M Constant Dosage of AEA ‐ Microair 0 5 10 15 20 25 Lbs of Sorbent per million ACF Flue Gas Dosage Nature 23 Data from EUEC Conference, Phoenix, January 2013
- 24. 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
- 25. 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
- 26. Impact of Reagents on Ash Usage Reagent Usage Cement Raw Materials 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
- 27. Consistency is KEY! Control Ash Before 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 7.0 Air Entraining Admixture Dose (oz/cwt) Concrete Air Content, % Concrete Friendly Sorbent Sampling over a 3 week period Small variations in PAC content severely impacts air requirement 27
- 28. 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 Air Entrainment Agent (50µL=1drop) 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
- 29. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 DropsofAEA(50µL=1drop) 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
- 30. 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 7 Pounds per Million ACF of Sorbent Generation 2 More Consistent Generation 1 Less 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
- 31. 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
- 32. 32
- 33. 33 Relative Cost and Product Quality for Ash Beneficiation Technologies (EPRI) Technology Basis # of Output Products Primary Product (Low Carbon) Yield Secondary Product Initial Ash Quality Cost Range ($/Ton) Carbon Masking 1 Same LOI as initial ash 100% NA <6% LOI $2.00 - $7.00 Wet Processes Multiple NA NA NA NA NA Aerodynamic Classification 2 10 - 40% Reduction in LOI 50 – 90% Variable LOI (typically > 30%) No Limit $1.00 - $3.00 Sieving 2 15 - 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) 2 30 - 60% Reduction in LOI 35 – 70% Variable LOI (typically > 30%) <10% LOI $5.00 - $8.00 Combustion 1 1.5 – 2.5% LOI 80 – 95% NA >8% LOI $10.00 - $20.00
- 34. 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
- 35. 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
- 36. Path Forward Define your target market End use Quality required Quantity required Target price Define your approach Marketer Direct Sales 36
- 37. 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
- 38. 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
- 39. 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
- 40. 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
- 41. Thank You Joe Wong Joe.wong@ada-cs.com (303) 962-1967 John Kline johnpkline1@gmail.com (484) 602-3474 Kline Consulting 41