innovative biomass utilization iron & steelmaking 02
TRANSCRIPT
Innovative Biomass utilization Iron & Steelmaking
RED 902 Prof. Dr. Paulo Santos Assis
2013/2
General overview of Iron & Steelmaking
100% scrap
30% scrap+ 70% pig iron
Understanding the Sintering Process
Pelletizing
Blast Furnace
Wall conditions Cooling capacity
Gunning & grouting Temperature monitoring
Burden Distribution
Control of heat losses/ Control of central flow Center coke charging
Low alkali input
High permeability Cohesive zone control
Hearth Permeability
- Coke center charging
- High quality coke
Cooling efficiency
- Hearth chiller
- grouting
Tap-hole Management
- drilling
- High performance clay
- tap hole length
Wear monitoring
- temperature, flux
- modeling
Direct Reduction Process
New process: COREX
Steelmaking Processes
E AF : E l e c t r i c Ar c F u r n a c e
L D / B O F / B O S : L D P r o c e s s
Source: Meenakshi, P. Elements of Environmental Science and Engineering - pg 227; 237 – Ed.
Prentice Hall, Delhi 312p., 2008
1
2
3
4
5
6Natural Gas 21%
Energy
Non-renewable 82%
Oil 33%
Coal 22%
Biomass 11%
Nuclear power 6%
Hydropower, geothermal,
solar, wind, 3%
Renewable 18%
Source of Energy
Solid Biomass Fuels
Wood logs and pellets
Charcoal
Agricultural waste
(Stalks & other plant debris)
Timbering wastes
(Branches, treetops & wood chips)
Animal wastes (Dung)
Aquatic Urban wastes (Aquatic plants Kelp &
water hyacinths)
Urban wastes (Paper, cardboard & other
combustible materials)
Direct burning Conversion to gaseous and
liquid biofuels
Gaseous Biofuels
Synthetic natural gas (Biogas)
Wood gas
Liquid Biofuels
Ethanol
Methanol
Gasohol
Overview of Energy in the World
Why Iron and Steelmaking in the World is feasible ?
1. Iron ore source: overall (for the next 1000 years or more)
2. Electric functions with low price, i.e. in comparison with other alloys like Ni-Co
[Normally the prices of Si-Steel is 1/3 of the equivalent alloy. Other hand, the price of Si-Steel is by USD 1650/ton or even more]
3. Structure can be modified by Alloys adding or even by Temperature (CCC to CFC)
4. Diffusion of Carbon at high Temperatures, till 2 %. It seems to be unique for Metals.
Why Iron and Steelmaking in the World is feasible ?
5. Low cost in comparison with other Materials that can be substituted
6. Low Consumption of Energy in comparison with the Al (Primary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Steel
Concrete
Aluminium
USD/kg/km
Material
Cu – Ti – Carbon Based
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Primary Steel
SecondarySteel
PrimaryAluminium
SecondaryAluminium
GJ/ M Ton
Why Iron and Steelmaking in the World is feasible ?
7. Wastes with low risk (Normally is 2A or even 2B). Possibility for recycling 100 %
[Although high volume of Waste (it could be more than 1 t/t Steel), all of them could be
recycled in Steel or even Other Industry (Cement Producer)]
By CST [Arcelor Mittal Tubarão, almost 100 % is recycled !
Where about the problems concerning Iron and Steel production ?
1. High Capacity [Ladle of capacity of 400 t/Heat.
Blast Furnace with 12 000 t/day. LD Converter by 420 ton/Heat]
High Investment Cost
2000 USD/t Steel/Year [1stroute]
{For EAF this value could be highly reduced: USD 250 USD/t Steel/Year}.
This is one advantage for producing Sponge Iron !
It depends upon on Scrap Availability !
Where about the problems concerning Iron and Steel production ?
2. Memory Effect – Just for some years ago it has been in developping Steel
with the Memory Effect • [Article on USA – Mai 2009 – 1st in the Congress]
3. Main Characteristic of Iron: Corrosiv. – Effect of O2 and H2O is Thermodynamic unsustainable
4. Change on Market (Global Market) – Past P = C + W
– Now C = P – W P is defined by the Market
W comes from the Investor Then C ≤ CSteel plant
5. New process for developping
– Speed is low due to: – Normal route has high Efficiency
– Investiment is high
– Sector is not elastic like Computer Sciences (CS) – [In India, the Metallurgical Engineer are changing from Metallurgy to CS]
6. Energy is connected with CO2
– For the common process x Scrap Route
7. Challenge is using Non coking coal,
– Iron Ore with low Iron content and be economical, without CO2 generation
Where about the problems concerning
Iron and Steel production ?
The driving forces for evolution • Reduction of cost
– lower grade raw materials
– substitution coke – coal Biomass
– high productivity, efficiency
• Flexibility
– shorter routes
– fine ores, coals
• Quality of steel
– residuals
– C, N ; UBC
• Sustainability / Environmental aspects
– recycling
– treatment of by products
– emissions : dust, Sox, Nox, dioxines, VOC, CO2
Evolution of BF - BOF route
• Ironmaking
– Efficiency; reduction of number of Blast furnaces
– low cost: raw materials, energy
– preserve life time of coke plants and Blast furnaces
– environmental aspects at sinter plant
• BOF
– increased use of scraps : hot metal ratio 800kg/t
• Secondary metallurgy
– dramatic improvement of vacuum technology
– ultra low C, H, N, O, P, S steels ; C< 15ppm ; N < 20ppm
• large and highly integrated steel mills
• process driven by the products
– very high cold formability
– weight reduction
Biomass
Biomass
Evolution of the blast furnace technology
The rupture towards New frontiers keeping the counter current in the shaft
injection of partly reduced ores through the tuyeres
fulfillment of the local and global heat requirements
hot metal = counter current metal + injection metal
The continuous improvement
life time :
realistic objective : 20 years (KSC, CST, …) ; 12000 t/m3
coke consumption:
230 - 250 kg/tf coal ; 270 - 250 kg/tf coke (incl. small coke)
productivity :
70t/m²/d
hot metal quality :
sigma Si 0.1% ; S << 0.020%; S residuals < 0.05
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
EAF route
• Iron sources
– scrap quality: scrap « purification » for controlling tramp elements
– shredding and sorting of E40 scrap : %Cu 0.45 down to 0.10
– beneficial effect of DRI or hot metal on the process
• Large room for EAF process improvement
– productivity
– use of fossile energy to improve melting time ; slag foaming
– post combustion
– development of air tight technology
– quality of steel : low C and N achievable; N: 40 ppm ; C: 0.04%
• mini mills, increasing use of secondary metallurgy
• access to flat products (automotive, packaging )
• good fit with thin slab casting
Biomass
Biomass
Science Technology
Technology
Charcoal Production
Technological Overview Solid Biomass Fuels
Wood logs and pellets
Charcoal
Agricultural waste
(Stalks & other plant debris)
Timbering wastes
(Branches, treetops & wood chips)
Animal wastes (Dung)
Aquatic Urban wastes (Aquatic plants Kelp &
water hyacinths)
Urban wastes (Paper, cardboard & other
combustible materials)
Direct burning Conversion to gaseous
and liquid biofuels
Gaseous Biofuels
Synthetic natural gas (Biogas)
Wood gas
Liquid Biofuels
Ethanol
Methanol
Gasohol
thermal chemical
biochemical
Biomass • Definition
Biomass is biological material derived from living, or recently living organisms. It most often refers to plants or plant-derived materials which are specifically called lignocellulosic biomass.
• Use of biomass
– As a renewable energy source, biomass can either be used directly via combustion to produce heat, or indirectly after converting it to various forms of biofuel
Conversion
Conversion of biomass to biofuel can
be achieved by different methods which
are broadly classified into:
1 thermal
2 chemical
3 biochemical methods
BioFuel and BioDiesel
Biofuels
Corn can be harvested to produce ethanol.
Unlike other renewable energy sources, biomass can be converted
directly into liquid fuels - biofuels - for our transportation needs
(cars, trucks, buses, airplanes, and trains).
The two most common types of biofuels are ethanol and biodiesel.
Sugarcane Bagasse
Sugar cane Plant -Sucrose: 30 %
- Leaves & Stem Tips: 35 %
- Bagasse: 35 %
Sucrose accounts for little more than 30% of the chemical
energy stored in the mature plant; 35% is in the leaves
and stem tips, which are left in the fields during harvest,
and 35% are in the fibrous material (bagasse) left over
from pressing.
Process production of Sugar and Ethanol
The production process of sugar and ethanol in Brazil
takes full advantage of the energy stored in sugarcane.
Part of the bagasse is currently burned at the mill to
provide heat for distillation and electricity to run the
machinery.
This allows ethanol plants to be energetically self-
sufficient and even sell surplus electricity to utilities;
current production is 600 MW for self-use and 100 MW
for sale.
Cost & Investment This secondary activity is expected to boom now that
utilities have been induced to pay "fair price "(about
US$10/GJ or US$0.036/kWh) for 10 year contracts. This is
approximately half of what the World Bank considers the
reference price for investing in similar projects.
The energy is especially valuable to utilities because it is
produced mainly in the dry season when hydroelectric
dams are running low.
Estimates of potential power generation from bagasse
range from 1,000 to 9,000 MW, depending on technology.
Comparison of Energy
Higher estimates assume gasification of biomass,
replacement of current low-pressure steam boilers and
turbines by high-pressure ones, and use of harvest trash
currently left behind in the fields.
For comparison, Brazil's Angra I nuclear plant generates
657 MW.
Presently, it is economically feasible to extract about 288
MJ of electricity from the residues of one ton of
sugarcane, of which about 180 MJ are used in the plant
itself. Thus a medium-size distillery processing 1 million
tonnes of sugarcane per year could sell about 5 MW of
surplus electricity.
Yield Increasing At current prices, it would earn US$ 18 million from sugar
and ethanol sales, and about US$ 1 million from surplus
electricity sales. With advanced boiler and turbine
technology, the electricity yield could be increased to 648
MJ per tonne of sugarcane, but current electricity prices do
not justify the necessary investment.
Source: According to one report, the
World Bank would only finance
investments in bagasse power
generation if the price were at least
US$19/GJ or US$0.068/kWh.
Environmental Advantages Compared with Coal
Bagasse burning is environmentally friendly compared
to other fuels like oil and coal. Its ash content is only
2.5% (against 30–50% of coal), and it contains very
little sulfur. Since it burns at relatively low temperatures,
it produces little nitrous oxides.
- Less Ash
- Less SOx& NOx
Other Advantages
Moreover, bagasse is being sold for use as a fuel
(replacing heavy fuel oil) in various industries, including
citrus juice concentrate, vegetable oil, ceramics, and tire
recycling.
The state of São Paulo alone used 2 million tonnes,
saving about US$ 35 million in fuel oil imports.
Researchers working with cellulosic ethanol are trying to
make the extraction of ethanol from sugarcane bagasse
and other plants viable on an industrial scale.
Closing Remarks
• We can see that all wastes generated in the Agriculture in Brazil can be converted in Energy
• Brazil can substitute may be more than 40 % of Energy based upon on the profit of Wastes generated in the Farms
• We can reduce the import of coal by using more wastes from the Agriculture in the Ironmaking & Steelmaking
Case Study
Use of sugar cane bagasse and charcoal mixture for injection into the tuyeres of Blast Furnace aiming the CO2 Emissions
Reduction of the Steel Segment
Prof. Dr. Paulo Santos Assis - UFOP/Brazil
Prof. Dr. Danton Heleno Gameiro - UFOP/Brazil
Dipl-Ing. Janaina Solvelino Brum-UFOP/Brazil
Presenter: Prof. Dr. Suleimenov – Kazakhstan
BHU / India
Introduction
Steel production in Brazil is by 35 Million tons
1/3 is produced using Charcoal
Biomass can be injected into Charcoal Blast Furnaces
Advantagens considering GHG Emissions
Overview
Objectives
Study the possibility of injection of Sugar Cane Bagasse mixed with Charcoal into Small Blast furnaces.
Determine the combustion rate of the selected mixtures
Methodology
Grinding the bagasse
Sample: 30 kg Sieving
Classification
Fixed carbon and volatiles materials determination.
A sample < 150 # determination of Calorific Power Value.
Classification
Sugar Cane Bagasse
Methodology
Calsete Ironmaking
Gusa Nordeste Four samples
A sample – 150g Identification
(C1, C2 e C3) – Carbon Fix
(G1, G2 e G3) – Grain Size Distribuition
(U1, U2 e U3)- Moisture
(AP) – Elementary Analysis
Charcoal Characterization
Mixtures preparation for the Combustion Test
Methodology
% Charcoal % Sugar Cane Bagasse
100 0
80 20
60 40
40 60
20 80
0 100
Simulation of Injection rate: 50, 80, 140 kg/ton Hot Metal
HGTS- High Gradient Thermal Simulation
Methodology
Methodology
Esquema da queima realizada no simulador de gradiente térmico
Injection Powder Process
Time schedule for combustion trial
1st Photo: 40 ms before 2nd P: In the moment 3rd P: 20ms after
Gas Analysis – ORSAT Equipment
Methodology
Carbon monoxide – CO
Carbon Dioxide – CO2
Oxygen – O2
Combustion rate determination
Methodology
TC = {(%CO + %CO2)*n / [(ma*%Cf / 1200000) – (%CH4*ng / 100)]}*100
where:
TC = combustion rate (%);
%CO, %CO2, %CH4 = Produced Gas in vol. percentage;
%Cf = Fixed Carbon in the Sample;
ng = Gas Mols number produced;
ma = Biomass of materials injected in mg.
Results
Preliminary results characterization of sugarcane bagasse powder
Parameter Grain Size
[% < 200#]
Density
[kg/m3]
Fixed Carbon
[%]
Volatile
[%]
PCI
[kcal/kg]
Value 80 195 16,46 78,28 2.095
Results
Representation of chemical analysis and particle size of charcoal
Sample Proximate Analysis; Dry Basis Elemental Analysis Avarage of grain
size [mm] Cf
[%]
TU
[%]
MV
[%]
CZ
[%]
C
[%]
H
[%]
N
[%]
O
[%]
C1 54,8 1,4 24,2 21,0 0,070
C2 59.6 1,4 24,6 15.8 0,072
C3 65.3 1,4 24,1 10.6 0,068
U1 59.6 1,1 24,6 15.8 0,070
U2 59.6 2,9 24,6 15.8 0,072
U3 59.6 4,8 24,6 15.8 0,070
G1 60,1 1,5 24,4 15,5 0,070
G2 59,8 1,5 24,3 15,9 0,119
G3 60,9 1,5 24,4 14,7 0,162
AP 60,1 1,6 24,2 15,7 66,67 2,54 0,81 29,98 0,073
Parameters results of porosity and bulk density of charcoal
Results
Sample Specific
Surface
Total
volume
of pores
Micropore
volume *
(θm <2ηm)
Area of
micropore
*
Average
pore
diameter
Size of
pores
Density
Unity m2/g 10-
2cm3/g
x10-3cm3/g m2/g Ǻ Ǻ g/cm3
C1 1,861 0,5804 0,7991 2,262 120,48 2918,6 1,512
C2 1,729 0,6945 0,7995 2,264 160,07 1342,8 1,504
G1 1,367 0,1143 0,7453 2,110 330,44 1795,4 1,597
G3 2,171 1,086 1,0119 2,885 200,00 1466,8 1,539
AP 2,442 1,102 1,057 2,993 180,05 2278,1 1,555
Results of combustion rates as a function of charcoal percentage
in the mixture and the injection rate of mixtures (kg / t HM)
Results
Charcoal + Sugar Cane Bagasse
Charcoal
(%)
Bagasse
(%) 50 kg/tHM 80 kg/tHM 140 kg/tgHM
0 100 86 85,1 78.0
20 80 87,2 87.5 81.3
40 60 90.2 88.6 83.5
60 40 93.3 92.7 88.7
80 20 95.1 94.8 88.7
100 0 94.8 93.2 87
Results
75
80
85
90
95
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Bagaço na mistura (carvão vegetal + bagaço) [% peso]
Ta
xa
de
co
mb
us
tão
[%
]
50 kg/tgusa 80 kg/tgusa 140 kg/tgusa
Effect of bagasse in the mixture on the combustion rate.
Results
75
80
85
90
95
100
40 60 80 100 120 140
Taxa de Injeção [%]
Ta
xa
de
Co
mb
us
tão
[%
]
Carvão Vegetal 100% Bagaço de cana-de-açúcar 100%
Effect of injection rate of charcoal on the combustion rate for two
extreme situations: 100%charcoal and 100% bagasse.
CONCLUSIONS
•There is an increase of combustion rate when mixed
sugarcane bagasse with charcoal;
•There is an increase in combustion rate when you put up
20% of sugarcane bagasse in the mixture;
•An increase in injection rate implies a reduction in the
rate of combustion for the two fuels;
•Increases from 50 to 80 kg / t hot metal practically do not
change the combustion rate, however when it goes up to
140 kg / tgusa, there is a reduction in the combustion rate
• From the point of view of the combustion in front of the
tuyeres is technically feasible the injection of a mixture
with charcoal and sugarcane bagasse;
•From the environmental point of view it is possible
through the use of this mixture reduce the emission of
CO2 in the atmosphere, ie, the hot metal production of
may be more sustainable comparing with only charcoal
use in the Blast Furnace;
•The development and application of new technology
are in line with the concept of Socio Economic
Environmental Sustainability.
CONCLUSIONS
• To UFOP- Escola de Minas
• To CNPq and FAPEMIG
• To Gorceix Foundation
• To Prof. Suleimenov that gave us time to prepare and
to present this Technical Contribution
.To Prof. Gupta that invited us for this Contribution
All of you for kindly attention !
Acknowledgments
Thank you!
55
Paulo Santos Assis
Photo of Escola de Minas, at night in Ouro Preto
Prof. Dr. Paulo Santos Assis [email protected]
Thank [English]
Vielen Dank [Deutsch]
Спасибо [Руссо]
谢谢 [中国]
धन्यवाद [ ह िंद ू]
ありがとう [日本人]
Obrigado [Português]