Copper - Ecoinvent

Transcription

Copper - Ecoinvent

Special LCA forum, December 5, 2003
EPFL Lausanne / session „metals“
Introduction
Hans-Jörg Althaus
Swiss Federal Laboratories for Material Testing and Research (EMPA)
Centre for energy and sustainability (ZEN)
[email protected]
slide 2
Präsentation Hans-Jörg Althaus
contributors
• responsible institute: EMPA, Dübendorf
• project leader: Hans-Jörg Althaus
• authors: Hans-Jörg Althaus, Mischa Classen, Silvio Blaser
• contributions from: ESU-services, Niels Jungbluth
• financial support: BUWAL, BBL, ASTRA, EMPA
slide 3
Main differences to ÖvE3
• Consideration of resource quality
• Consideration of slag, filter dust, overburden and tailings
• ferroalloys
• couple production
• New land use
• Meta information
• Material and processing separately
slide 4
metals in ecoinvent
• iron and steel
• aluminium
• copper / molybdenum
• nickel / ferronickel
• chromium/ ferrochromium
• manganese / ferromanganese
• Platinum group metals (PGM)
• other (lead / zinc, tin, bronze, brass)
• processing
slide 5
Workshop
• copper / molybdenum (Mischa Classen)
• iron / steel (Hans-Jörg Althaus)
• discussion
slide 6
ETH Lausanne / Session „metals“
Non ferrous metals
Mischa Classen
Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research (EMPA),
Centre for Energy and Sustainability, Dübendorf
[email protected]
slide 1
Presentation: Mischa Classen
Content
• Nonferrous metals in ecoinvent
• Chief Differences to ÖvE3
• Data Sources
• Copper / Molybdenite: Production Chain
• Selected Results
slide 2
Non Ferrous Metals in ecoinvent
• Nickel, platinum group metals (Pt, Pd, Rh), copper,
molybdenum, chromium, lead, zinc, tin
• Processing: welding, rolling, drawing of wire and pipe, casting
• Auxiliary modules: tailings (dump heaps), slag disposal,
infrastructure
• use: mostly as ferroalloys (ferrochromium, ferronickel,
ferromanganese)
¾ Metainformations „General Comment“
slide 3
Chief Differences to ÖvE3
• Tailings are included
• Modelled consistently as multi-output process (allocation by
value, except for resources)
• Higher burden as compared to ÖvE3
– Copper (swiss ecopoints) + 57% to 1.9 104 UBP / kg Cu
– Copper (EIH,A )
+ 97% to 2.1 EP / kg Cu
¾ Increased importance of materials (infrastructure) as compared
to operation phase (energy)
slide 4
Data Sources (Copper)
• Materials & Energy
– values for Germany 1994 (Krauss et al. 1999)
– general process data (Ayres et al. 2002)
• Land use
– publication in Erzmetall (Martens et al. 2002)
• Process specific emissions from IPPC’s BAT-report
– copper (Rentz et al. 1999)
– exploitation und beneficiation (IPPC 2002)
slide 5
Copper: Consumer Mix
• Regional consumer mix as starting point
• Characteristics:
– imported primary copper
– regional primary copper
(imported copper concentrates)
19%
13%
24%
– regional primary copper
(regional copper concentrates)
– regional secondary copper
– recycled copper scrap
22%
22%
Consumer
Consumer
mix
mix
(RER)
(RER)
= 44%
slide 6
Copper: Production Chain
• Primary copper, at refinery
beneficiation
molybdeniteconcentrate
(55% Mo)
pre-treatment
reduction
refining
primary copper
extraction
Winning
copper
concentrate
Exploitation
SX-EW process
slide 7
Copper: Winning of Primary Metal
• Technology:
– different pyrometallurgical processes
– varying emission factors
• Regions
– varying concentration in ore
– specific production technology mix
– specific abatement technology
¾ Regional production mixes in ecoinvent
slide 8
Copper: SX-EW
• Solvent-Extraction / Electrowinning (SX-EW) is a
hydrometallurgical process
• oxidic ores only, sulfidic ones have to be roasted previously
• consists of exploitation, beneficiation, extraction and
electrolytical winning
• copper is dissolved with acid from ore
• env. 10% production worldwide
• characterised by
– high demand in electricity
– high land use due to leaching
– moderate demand in quality of the raw ore
slide 9
Copper: Ore Exploitation
• Extraction
– >90% sulfidic ores, >10% oxidic ores
– decreasing grades in worked deposits (1%w)
– 30% underground mining, rest open cut with increasing trend
• Beneficiation
– ore is ground
– unwanted minerals are removed in water using chemicals
• Environmental critically issues
– use of cyanide (sulfidic ores)
– use of organic chemicals (frother, flocculant)
– tailings (dump heaps)
– land use by open cut operations / leaching heaps
slide 10
Copper: Allocation of Coupled Product
• 54% of Molybdenum originates from copper-molybdenum porphyry
deposits
• Two coupled products from ore exploitation
– copper-concentrate
– molybdenite-concentrate (MoS2)
• Ore exploitation is modelled as multi-output process
• Allocation by value (price x output)
• Small fraction of molybdenite in output: 1.5 kg Mo-conc. / t Cu-conc.
• Split of total environmental burden as follows
– molybdenite-concentrate = 1%
US$ 3’188 / t x
5.3 kg
= 99%
US$ 522 / t x 3’480 kg
• Due to higher market price higher burden per unit (kg) is assigned to
molybdenite than to copper-concentrate
slide 11
Molybdenite as Main Product
• Analogous process as exploitation of copper ore (GLO)
• Differences
– resource (0.041% Mo in crude ore, identical grade in Cu)
– output (21 kg Mo-concentrate per t Cu-concentrate)
• Allocation
– molybdenite-concentrate = 11% US$ 3’188 / t x
74 kg
= 89% US$ 522 / t x 3’480 kg
• Higher burden per unit for molybdenite-concentrate compared
to copper-concentrate.
• Molybdenite production mix composes of molybdenite as main
product (46%) and molybdenite as coupled product from copper
ore exploitation (54%)
slide 12
Results: Copper-Modules - Energy
120.0
renewable energy resources
MJ-Eq
cumm.
non-renewable energy resources, nuclear
non-renewable energy resources, fossil
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
copper,
primary, at
refinery,
GLO [kg]
copper,
primary, at
refinery,
RNA [kg]
copper,
primary, at
refinery,
RLA [kg]
copper,
primary, at
refinery, RER
[kg]
copper,
primary, at
refinery, ID
[kg]
slide 13
copper,
primary, at
refinery,
RAS [kg]
copper, SXEW, at
refinery,
GLO [kg]
copper,
secondary,
at refinery,
RER [kg]
copper, at
regional
storage, RER
[kg]
Results: Copper-Modules - IPCC
5
CO2-Eq.
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
copper,
copper,
copper,
copper,
primary, at
primary, at
primary, at
primary, at
refinery, GLO refinery, RNA refinery, RLA refinery, RER
[kg]
[kg]
[kg]
[kg]
slide 14
copper,
primary, at
refinery, ID
[kg]
copper, SXcopper,
EW, at
primary, at
refinery, RAS refinery, GLO
[kg]
[kg]
copper,
secondary,
at refinery,
RER [kg]
copper, at
regional
storage, RER
[kg]
Results: Copper-Modules - EIH,A
points
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
copper,
copper,
copper,
primary, at
primary, at
primary, at
refinery, GLO refinery, RNA refinery, RLA
[kg]
[kg]
[kg]
copper,
primary, at
refinery, RER
[kg]
copper,
primary, at
refinery, ID
[kg]
copper,
copper, SXprimary, at
EW, at
refinery, RAS refinery, GLO
[kg]
[kg]
slide 15
copper,
secondary,
at refinery,
RER [kg]
copper, at
regional
storage, RER
[kg]
Results: Copper-Modules - BUWAL
1.4E+05
UBP
1.2E+05
1.0E+05
8.0E+04
6.0E+04
4.0E+04
2.0E+04
0.0E+00
copper,
primary, at
refinery,
GLO [kg]
slide 16
copper,
primary, at
refinery,
RNA [kg]
copper,
primary, at
refinery,
RLA [kg]
copper,
copper,
primary, at
primary, at
refinery, RER refinery, ID
[kg]
[kg]
copper,
primary, at
refinery,
RAS [kg]
copper, SXEW, at
refinery,
GLO [kg]
copper,
secondary,
at refinery,
RER [kg]
copper, at
regional
storage, RER
[kg]
Results: Consumer Mix
• Regional consumer mix of copper (RER)
content EIH,A
UBP
imported primary copper
19%
59%
75%
regional primary copper
(imported concentrate)
13%
14%
8.8%
regional primary copper
(regional concentrate)
24%
21%
12%
regional secondary copper
22%
6.9% 4.0%
recycled copper scrap
22%
0.1% 0.1%
slide 17
Results: Production Chain- EIH,A
Valued impacts of the production of 1 kg primary copper (GLO)
Konzentrat
31%
resource
SXEW Copper
14.1%
3.3%
total
resource
1.7%
15.8%
0.5%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
2.7%
1.7%
blasting
milling (chromiumsteel)
electricity
additives
2.2%
1.4%
0.5%
0.6%
blasting
milling (chromiumsteel)
operation (diesel)
infrastructure
particulates, < 2.5 um
particulates, > 2.5 um,
particulates, > 10 um
heavy metals
6.9%
3.2%
0.1%
0.1%
electricity (winning)
0.16%
proportion SX-EW
9.40%
Winning of Primary Copper
limestone
0.40%
concentrate use
3.15 kg
heavy oil furnace
gas furnace
cadmium (air)
nickel (air)
sulfur dioxide (air)
arsenic (air)
lead (air)
copper (air)
zinc (air)
disposal slags
disposal tailings
1.83%
0.2%
0.6%
19.4%
14.1%
9.0%
8.9%
6.4%
4.1%
2.2%
1kg
Cu
0.1%
disposal tailings
0.31%
2.1%
Particular percentages sum up to a total impact of 100%
slide 18
Conclusions
• Metal emissions to air domintate pyrolytical winning.
• Particulate emissions (dust) dominate open cut mining.
• Ressource depletion. Copper deposits last another 60 years.
• Tailings: marginal importance, but: long-term emissions!
• Emissions from energy production play minor role.
• SXEW: high energy use, but lower specific emissions to air.
• Molybdenite: per mass 3.7 times higher burden than copper
concentrate.
slide 19
Literature
Krauss U., Wagner H. and Mori G. (1999) Stoffmengenflüsse und Energiebedarf bei der
Gewinnung ausgewählter mineralischer Rohstoffe; Teilstudie Kupfer. In:
Geologisches Jahrbuch, Vol. Sonderhefte SH 9. Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften
und Rohstoffe, Hannover.
Rentz O., Krippner M., Hähre S. and Schultmann F. (1999) Report on Best Available Techniques
(BAT) in Copper Production. Deutsch-Französisches Institut für Umweltforschung
(DFIU) and University of Karlsruhe (TH).
Ayres R. U., Ayres L. W. and Råde I. (2002) The Life Cycle of Copper, its Co-Products and
Byproducts. MMSD - Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development
Martens P. N., Ruhrberg M. and Mistry M. (2002) Flächeninanspruchnahme des
Kupfererzberbaus. In: Erzmetall, 55(5/6), pp. 287-293.
Rentz O., Krippner M., Hähre S. and Schultmann F. (1999) Report on Best Available Techniques
(BAT) in Copper Production. Deutsch-Französisches Institut für Umweltforschung
(DFIU) and University of Karlsruhe (TH).
IPPC (2002) Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC); Draft Reference Document on
Best Available Techniques for Management of Tailings and Waste-Rock in Mining
Activities.
slide 20
EPFL Lausanne / session „metals“
Iron and Steel
Hans-Jörg Althaus
Swiss Federal Laboratories for Material Testing and Research (EMPA)
Centre for energy and sustainability (ZEN)
[email protected]
slide 1
Presentation Hans-Jörg Althaus
content
• iron and steel in ecoinvent
• the iron and steel chain in ecoinvent
• data sources
• main differences to ÖvE3
• selected results
• uncertainties
• conclusion
• future steps
slide 2
iron and steel in ecoinvent
• pig iron
• cast iron (electric-)
• un-alloyed steel (converter, electric, mix (reinforcing steel))
• low alloyed steel (converter, electric, mix)
• chromium steel (18/8) (converter, electric, mix)
• Processing of steel (hot and cold rolling, section bar rolling,
tube and wire drawing, welding, zinc coating)
slide 3
iron and steel chain
land transformation
& land occupation
mine infrastructure
buildings &
machines
in mine
Building
machines
Re-transformation
land, mine
slide 4
land transformation
blasting,
& land occupation building machines,
open mine
power
mine, iron
(infrastructure)
recultivation,
iron mine
Iron ore,
46% Fe,
at mine
dust
iron ore,
46% Fe,
at mine
transport
water
power
Iron ore,
65% Fe,
at beneficiation
emissions
to water
energy
sinter
auxillaries
pellets
emissions to air
slide 5
sinter
coal
iron ore, 65% Fe,
at beneficiation
pig iron, at plant
auxiliaries
slide 6
water
blast furnace
transport
inert waste
pellets
emissions to air
waste to
„sanitary landfill“
waste water to
treatment
pig iron
alloying
elements:
ferrochromium
ferronickel
ferromanganese
molybdenite
Inert waste
iron ore, 65% Fe,
at beneficiation
steel, converter,
low alloyed,
at plant
waste to
„sanitary landfills“
slide 7
scrap
coal
energy
auxiliaries
transport
converter
waste water to
treatment
emissions
to air
transport
power
power
electrode
inert waste
slide 8
scrap
steel, electric, unand low alloyed, at
plant
waste to
„sanitary landfill“
coal
energy
auxiliaries
oxygen
transport
EAF
waste water to
treatment
emissions
to air
steel, electric, unand low alloyed, at
plant
hot rolling
steel, converter,
low alloyed,
at plant
steel,
low alloyed,
at plant
slide 9
data sources
• Mining / beneficiation:
Roth et al. 1999
Anonymous 1998 (world bank) (water emissions beneficiation)
• sinter and pellet production and metallurgy:
Roth et al. 1999 (input materials up to pig iron)
IPPC 2000 (emissions, input materials (after pig iron), waste
(amount, share to recycling, composition)
• mixes: „steel at plant“
IISI 2002
slide 10
Main differences to ÖvE3
• New sources
• Specific chromium steel instead of “high alloyed steel” (high
alloyed steel in ÖvE3 was the same steel as today but not
obviously declared)
• Consideration of waste
slide 11
Selected results; interpretation
• ecological scarcity points in chain
• ecoindicator 99 H,A in chain
• CED in chain
slide 12
ecological scarcity points
2000
Umweltbelastungspunkte (1997)
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
la
n
tp
n,
p,
a
at
,a
tp
ir o
n
pi
g
sc
ra
iro
ro
n
,i
pe
lle
ts
t
t
pl
an
t
la
n
la
n
tp
,a
ro
n
,i
si
nt
er
ir o
n
or
e
,6
ir o
n
5%
or
e
Fe
,a
,4
tb
6%
en
ef
Fe
,a
ic
ia
tio
n
tm
in
e
t
0
slide 13
Other ecosphere
Mercury to air
Dioxins to air
Cadmium, ion to water
Mercury to water
Particulates to air
Other technosphere
steel, electric, chromium steel 18/8
steel, converter, chromium steel 18/8
steel, converter, low-alloyed
hot rolling
steel, electric, un- and low-alloyed
steel, converter, unalloyed
molybdenite
ferrochromium, 68% Cr
disposal, slag, unalloyed electr. Steel
pig iron
iron scrap
ferronickel, 25% Ni
sinter
pellets
iron ore, 65% Fe
quicklime
iron ore, 46% Fe
electricity
ecoindicator 99 H,A
0.2
Ecoindicator 99 (H,A) [Punkte]
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
ir o
n
or
e
,6
ir o
n
5%
slide 14
p,
a
tp
la
n
t
la
nt
sc
ra
iro
n
pi
g
iro
n,
,a
tp
ro
n
,i
ll e
ts
pe
at
p
la
n
t
pl
an
t
at
n,
iro
si
nt
er
,
or
e
Fe
,a
,4
tb
6%
en
ef
Fe
,a
ic
ia
tio
n
tm
in
e
0
Other ecosphere
Zinc to air
Dioxins to air
Arsenic, ion to water
Particulates to air
Other technosphere
hot rolling, steel
molybdenite
disposal, dust, unalloyed EAF steel
pig iron
iron scrap
ferronickel, 25% Ni
sinter
pellets
iron ore, 65% Fe
quicklime
iron ore, 46% Fe
electricity
Kumulierter Energiebedarf [MJ-Äq]
CED
n
iro
Non renewable, fossil
Renewable, water
Non renewable, nuclear
Renewable, biomass
Renewable, wind, solar, geothermal
1.0E+1
9.0E+0
8.0E+0
7.0E+0
6.0E+0
5.0E+0
4.0E+0
3.0E+0
2.0E+0
1.0E+0
0
,
ore
%
46
no
iro
tm
,a
Fe
re,
%
65
ine
,
Fe
b
at
e
i
fic
ne
on
ati
,
ter
s in
i
,a
ron
la n
tp
ll
pe
t
ets
o
, ir
a
n,
tp
t
lan
pig
slide 15
iro
p
at
n,
t
lan
i ro
ns
cra
a
p,
la n
tp
t
ecological scarcity points
Umweltbelastungspunkte (1997)
11000
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
ch
ric
,
le
ct
pl
an
t
la
n
at
n,
ca
st
iro
8/
8
l1
st
ee
ro
m
iu
m
nd
-a
l,
e
st
ee
,a
tp
tp
la
,a
ye
d
8,
lo
w
-a
llo
l1
8/
st
ee
un
ric
,
le
ct
l,
e
nt
t
pl
an
at
at
d,
hr
om
iu
m
st
ee
ve
rt
er
,c
on
l,
c
st
ee
slide 16
-a
ll o
ye
,l
ow
ve
rt
er
on
l,
c
st
ee
st
ee
l,
c
on
ve
rt
er
,u
na
l
lo
y
ed
,a
tp
pl
la
n
t
an
t
t
1000
0
Other ecosphere
Mercury to air
Dioxins to air
Mercury to water
Particulates to air
Other technosphere
hot rolling
molybdenite
disposal, slag, unalloyed electr. Steel
pig iron
iron scrap
ferronickel, 25% Ni
sinter
pellets
iron ore, 65% Fe
quicklime
iron ore, 46% Fe
electricity
ecoindicator 99 H,A
Other ecosphere
Zinc to air
Dioxins to air
Arsenic, ion to water
Particulates to air
Other technosphere
hot rolling, steel
molybdenite
disposal, dust, unalloyed EAF steel
pig iron
iron scrap
ferronickel, 25% Ni
sinter
pellets
iron ore, 65% Fe
quicklime
iron ore, 46% Fe
electricity
pl
an
t
at
n,
iro
8/
8
st
l1
ca
st
ee
ro
m
iu
m
lo
w
nd
-a
le
ct
le
ct
ric
,
ric
,
ch
un
la
n
,a
tp
tp
la
,a
-a
llo
ye
d
8,
l1
8/
st
ee
hr
om
iu
m
l,
e
l,
e
st
ee
st
ee
on
l,
c
st
ee
nt
t
pl
an
at
at
d,
-a
ll o
ye
,l
ow
ve
rt
er
ve
rt
er
,c
l,
c
st
ee
st
ee
l,
c
on
on
ve
rt
er
,u
na
l
lo
y
ed
,a
tp
pl
la
n
t
an
t
t
Ecoindicator 99 (H,A) [Punkte]
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
slide 17
CED
Kumulierter Energiebedarf [MJ-Äq]
Non renewable, fossil
Renewable, water
el,
ste
co
e
ert
nv
slide 18
Non renewable, nuclear
Renewable, biomass
Renewable, wind, solar, geothermal
1.2E+2
1.0E+2
8.0E+1
6.0E+1
4.0E+1
2.0E+1
0
r, u
e l,
ste
llo
na
n
co
d
ye
,
r,
rte
ve
p
at
t
lan
l
-al
low
n
co
e l,
s te
v
oy
ed
c
er,
ert
tp
,a
m
hr o
t
la n
ium
el
ste
a
n,u
/8 ,
18
nd
...
l
-al
lo w
tr ic
tr ic
le c
lec
e
e
,
,
el
el
s te
ste
e
oy
hro
,c
a
d,
mi
t ..
um
.
e
ste
,
8 /8
l1
at.
..
st
ca
i ro
n
t
,a
n
pla
t
uncertainties
20
Min Value
18
Mean Value
61
35
Max Value
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
Occupation,
mineral
extraction
site
CO2, fossil
to air, high
population
density
CO2, fossil
to air, low
population
density
CO2, fossil
to air,
unspecified
Dioxins to
air,
unspecified
PM 2.5 to
air, low
population
density
PM 2.5 to
air,
unspecified
Cadmium to
soil,
agricultural
Cadmium to
soil,
unspecified
0
1/1000 m2a
1/10 kg
1/10 kg
1/10 kg
ug
g
1/10 g
1/100 ug
1/10 ug
slide 19
conclusion
• direct emissions (other then CO2) are rather relevant
• Contributions of alloying elements are relevant Æ specific
alloys should be inventoried
• Uncertainties (not errors) are large
slide 20
future steps: tailings
1% Mo in steel Æ UBP of steel raise to 890%
Æ ei 99 (H,A) of steel raise to 370%
Nickel
Copper (Primary, GLO)
Molybdenite
Steel, low alloyed, at plant
1.5x
2.51E+06
2x
25
42
22.5
1.50E+06
1.35E+06
20
1.20E+06
17.5
1.05E+06
15
9.00E+05
12.5
7.50E+05
10
6.00E+05
7.5
4.50E+05
5
3.00E+05
2.5
1.50E+05
0.00E+00
0
in ecoinvent
from emissions from
tailings
eco-indicator 99, (H,A) [points/kg Product]
slide 21
in ecoinvent
from emissions from
tailings
ecological scarcity 1997 [UBP/kg Product]

Copper - Ecoinvent

Transcription

Similar documents

Interaktive Fernsehszenarien unter Verwendung von Smart TV API