Dear Geoff and all: I believe they make steel using charcoal in Sweden and Brazil. It makes a superior grade, lacking some of the secondary components fro coal ash.
Tom Reed Thomas B Reed 280 Hardwick Rd Barre, Ma 01005 508-353-7841 > On Aug 15, 2014, at 1:01 AM, Geoff Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > > , >> On 15/08/2014, at 4:00 AM, [email protected] >> wrote: >> >> Today's Topics: > > Hi People, i had a question the other day about Coal being the only way to > make Steel, from my friend GeoffH, i am putting the question below, it is in > two parts, and my answer below that, - displaying my ignorance, - > particularly if gasified waste would reach the high temperature required, - I > realise Charcoal does, and also the aluminium reaction I mentioned, but am > personally skating on very thin ice re temperature. > > Please comment, I believe it is an important area of discussion in the > gasification arena, - PS, I have a thick skin :) > > Cheers, > Geoff Thomas. > > > > "Had a discussion with someone about the concept of 100% renewables as to > whether renewable could substitute for coal in steelmaking. > > Well, it seems coal is important not only for generating very high > temperatures, but also for the chemical use of carbon monoxide in extracting > the iron from iron ore. > > There are alternatives – maybe – such a DRI and ‘sponge iron’. Hydrogen can > be used instead of carbon monoxide but is so much more expensive. > > The Comments listed at the end of this article (on the Net) are insightful. > > Interested in other people’s comments on steel production vis-à-vis renewable > energy. > > Cheers, > GeoffH > > > > http://theenergycollective.com/robertwilson190/308896/explosive-growth-steel-production-china-why-it-matters > The Explosive Growth of Steel Production in China: Why It Matters > Posted November 27, 2013 > Keywords: Carbon and De-carbonization, Energy Security, Tech, Sustainability, > Coal, Environmental Policy, China, Energy, Energy and Economy, Energy > Collective Exclusive, Fuels, china, industry growth, steel, The Energy > Transition > > China and Steel Growth > There is no material more fundamental to industrial civilization than steel. > Modern buildings, ships, cars, planes and bridges would all be unthinkable > without steel, and as pointed out by Allwood and Cullen in their fine recent > book on materials production we currently have no viable substitute materials > that could perform steel's multiple functions. We are still very much living > in the iron age. > Global production of steel has now reached almost 1.5 billion tonnes each > year. The geographic make up of steel production however has changed > profoundly in the last decade. In the year 2000 China produced 15% of the > world's steel. Today almost half of the world's steel is made in China, with > Chinese steel production increasing by over 500% since 2000. The astonishing > levels of steel consumption in China is illustrated by the fact that 60% of > rebar, used in buildings to reinforce concrete, that is produced each year is > now consumed in China. > > Energy requirements of steel manufacturing in China > Last year China produced 708 million tonnes of steel. On average each tonne > of steel produced in China requires the equivalent of 0.69 tonnes of coal in > energy consumption. In other words China's steel industry consumes the > equivalent of 500 million tonnes of coal each year, and this being China more > or less all of the energy used to make steel comes from coal. China's steel > industry consumes almost 7% of the world's coal, and if China's steel > industry was a country it would rank 6th globally in total primary energy > consumption, ranking above both Germany and Canada. A comparison of this > level of energy consumption with current global consumption of wind and solar > energy is sobering. > > As with all comparisons of energy consumption, methods and calculations > should be laid out transparently. Here I will compare the total primary > energy consumption of China's steel industry with global primary energy > consumption of wind and solar. In 2012 wind and solar electricity production > was 614 TWh (trillion watt hours). However to make a more apples to apples > comparison we should ask how much coal would be needed to produce this > electricity. Using this approach current annual global energy consumption > from wind and solar works out as 200 million tonnes of coal equivalent (using > EIA's conversion methodology and BP's assumptions for the average thermal > efficiency of power plants). Therefore growth in global energy consumption > from wind and solar since 2000 has been approximately half of the increase in > energy consumption by China's steel sector alone. A stark illustration of how > little has been achieved in the transition to low carbon energy. > > This rapid growth in Chinese steel consumption poses another problem. We are > not only fundamentally dependent on steel production, but as Vaclav Smil > points out steel production is more or less fundamentally dependent on the > large scale use of coal, with no prospect of a transition to low carbon > methods of steel production in the short to medium term. Calls to fully > dismantle the coal industry must consider how we can make steel without coal, > because currently no methods seem particularly feasible. Globally about 1 > billion tonnes of coal is used to produce steel, representing 14% of total > coal production, with steel and iron production equating to over 6% of global > carbon dioxide emissions. This figure is much higher than that of the > aviation industry, yet have you ever read an op-ed calling steel > manufacturing a rogue industry? > > The vast disparities in steel consumption in the world today suggest that a > significant increase in overall steel consumption is inevitable and probably > desirable. We are however reaching the limits of how efficiently steel can be > produced, and despite multiple opportunities to improve the rationality of > steel use it appears clear that we will need to mine hundreds of millions of > tonnes of coal each year to produce steel for decades, and more likely, > generations to come. These realities should be borne in mind by those who > claim there are no significant barriers to 100% renewable energy." > > > Hi GeoffH, thing with steel making is to remove the oxygen from the Iron Ore, > ( basically iron oxide) which is done by the carbon in the charcoal (coal,) > but charcoal is not the only way (the Japanese have been using wood charcoal > to make steel from 6000BC) nor is coal the best source of charcoal, so this > is a fruit-full area of possible development. > Interestingly, there was a development called Direct Reduced Iron some 20 odd > years ago where electricity was used on an iron/carbon briquette, (my vague > remembering) and of course in this time we can talk of electricity from > Solar, Wind, Geothermal or tidal/wave to provide at times when any of those > have too much, but on another side, my grandfather who was a railwayman in > between fishing, when they mixed aluminium powder with rust, to weld the > rails together, - the yearning of the aluminium for oxygen (which is normally > halted by it's instant oxide coating) would cause it to burn in that reduced > environment, created by the railway workers with clay moulds from local mud, > so the aluminium would effectively disappear, (evaporate or float to the top) > leaving superheated steel which would go down into the clay mould between the > two rail ends - so hot it would melt the steel rails on either side to join > them, > The point being that not only carbon will do that chemical transformation > with steel. > > For changing the steel production away from coal we could consider using > gasification, where one has a carbon containing substance, - such as waste > from cities, burns it without enough oxygen so creates Carbon Monoxide, very > hot, so also gives your reaction that energy, - and of course the carbon > monoxide, hungry for more oxygen so that it can become carbon dioxide, takes > that oxygen away from the iron oxide, simply put. > > Whether we blow that carbon dioxide through an 'algal bloom bed' to make more > biomass or vent it to the atmosphere may well be a point but my main point is > that the coal can stay in the ground, where it was laid down in the > Pleistocene, > > So we have, from gasification, carbon monoxide, produced from waste, to make > steel. > > Cheers, > Geoff Thomas. > _______________________________________________ > Gasification mailing list > > to Send a Message to the list, use the email address > [email protected] > > to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page > http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org > > for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site: > http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/ _______________________________________________ Gasification mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email address [email protected] to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site: http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/
