New breakthrough claims 90% reduction in Steelmaking emissions.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ก.พ. 2023
- Steel making accounts for about 8% of all global emissions, and that's rising quickly as urbanisation accelerates around the world. So we need to decarbonise the steelmaking process NOW! Here's a great new solution for how to achieve that goal.
Help support this channels independence at
/ justhaveathink
Or with a donation via Paypal by clicking here
www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
You can also help keep my brain ticking over during the long hours of research and editing via the nice folks at BuyMeACoffee.com
www.buymeacoffee.com/justhave...
Video Transcripts available at our website
www.justhaveathink.com
Interested in mastering and remembering the concepts that I present in my videos? Check out the FREE Dive Deeper mini-courses offered by the Center for Behavior and Climate. These mini-courses teach the main concepts in select JHAT videos and go beyond to help you learn additional scientific or conservation concepts. The courses are great for teachers to use or for individual learning.
climatechange.behaviordevelop...
Main Paper citation
Harriet Kildahl, Li Wang, Lige Tong, Yulong Ding,
Cost effective decarbonisation of blast furnace - basic oxygen furnace steel production through thermochemical sector coupling,
Journal of Cleaner Production,
Volume 389, 2023,135963,
ISSN 0959-6526,
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.202....
(www.sciencedirect.com/science...)
Check out other TH-cam Climate Communicators
zentouro: / zentouro
Climate Adam: / climateadam
Kurtis Baute: / scopeofscience
Levi Hildebrand: / the100lh
Simon Clark: / simonoxfphys
Sarah Karvner: / @sarahkarver
Rollie Williams / ClimateTown: / @climatetown
Jack Harries: / jacksgap
Beckisphere: / @beckisphere
Our Changing Climate : / @ourchangingclimate
Engineering With Rosie / engineeringwithrosie
Ella Gilbert / drgilbzhelp support this channels independence at / justhaveathink
Planet Proof / @planetproofofficial - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
One of your best videos, because you listened to the people in your Patreon community who understand the issues better than even the researchers who wrote the paper you were commenting on. Rather than just putting the hyperbolic statements of the researchers out there and letting commenters challenge them, you actually listened and put the necessary context in there for the viewing public. That is fantastic- keep up the good work!
Thank you. I really appreciate your feedback :-)
This is one of the most productive comments I’ve seen on a video like this. Good job.
Your sober presentation is this channels strong point in my view.
@@bonghead6621 Nice name.
In general it would be better to interview experts that can criticize new research like this to put things into perspective.
I have absolutely nothing worthwhile to add to the content of this video, but THANK YOU for your tireless work! And your honesty and integrity.
Cheers. I appreciate that :-)
Global warming is not proven refer to my previous reply
Thanks again. You're bridging the gap between the scientific/engineering community and the environmentally concerned groups that I'm part of. There is a way of thinking about these problems that allows people from my milieu to actually contribute. You help.
Cheers Bob. Glad to be of some service :-)
Environmentally misinformed equals extra cost for all of us when it does not need to. Get informed about CO2 instead of just going knee-jerk.
I'm glad you're spending more time on decarbonizing steel. Two technologies I'm sure we would love you to cover and update are Molten Oxide Electrolysis (MOE) initially discussed by Engineering with Rosie and Lillacs Direct Carbon capture (for cement) as discussed by Simon Clark.
Hat tip to your patreon suporters. I work in steel industry decarbonisation. We saw this paper and was angry at it's conclusions for same reasons in the video and the basis being theoretical. Sadly other press sources don't give the same scrutiny! Thank you
I appreciate this dynamic of adding Information with crowd access. Brilliant.
Glad you enjoyed it!
This is what I love about your channel, the non confrontational exchange of information and experience. Very refreshing, and as some who has retired from building huge oilsands projects, helps me get into all the great ideas put forward without getting my hackles up! Well done! Carry on!
It' just hot air.....
That's what I like about this channel. Check, re-check, correct errors, re-check and be open minded enough to accept new information that changes the story. Great Job Dave. 👍🤠
Just think! . The current temperature trend is negative. It is getting colder but the CO2 is increasing.
Why the hysteria?
I do hope the Birmingham team get some traction with the local UK steel production teams, perhaps to explore what it would look like to setup their new process in the current steel production lines. I worked as a sponsored undergraduate student for British Steel back in 1978-1981 and having lived in Newport was highly connected to steel production as were almost everyone in my street as Llanwern Steel plant was a huge local employer. It would be good to see the research team in Birmingham help the local steel producers. Thanks for presenting these low carbon ideas Dave.👍
Newport... It was very ironic to load a shipment of steel there the day they announced closure of the steelplant.
I am going to expect that efficiency in megaplants is going to be a way forward, but possibly smaller plant is more CO2 efficient, will be interesting to see how it will work out, clearly we cannot (for political reasons ) outsource our entire metals processing output to China (or even India)
Check the current trends in temperatures. They are falling but CO2 is rising . The climate change hypothesis is wrong.
I love this channel a lot for staying informed about the global efforts for carbon dioxide reduction. It can be a bit of a pick-me-up to hear of all the minds hard at work in the area, but also a bit of a downer to really and fully grasp the immense scale of the issues.
Just keep it up and we will all starve to death when crops cannot produce because there is not enough CO2 for them to flourish. You guys who think CO2 is worth all the $$$$$ you want to spend to reduce it know nothing about the role of CO2 in the life of plants. CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas and what greenhouse effect it does exert is needed to keep earth in balance. Is the glass half full or half empty? You're using the wrong ALGORE rhythm . It is all about $$$$$$, not concern for life on earth. So many folks are completely fooled by this hysteria based on gross misinterpretations of data. Sheeple
As all the commentators have said in various ways, it is rare to see this level of integrity on TH-cam technology videos. Great work in motivating people to think differently through “just have a think - -“
Excellent installment as always. Your introduction of alternative views and information is so refreshing compared to the many click bate focus of headlines that often are a quantum leap from the body of the text. You are truly prompting us to have a think about some data collection rather than stating it as conclusive reality. So often Correlation is presented as causation when a little think will help to see alternatives that are often times far more viable explanations! Keep it up.
Well that proves quailty youtubers attract quality watchers. I am humbled to find myself in such company! Keep up the good work and keep smiling!
5:20 "[FYI; I don't know anything about this next bit, I'm just reading it]". 👍
-- This is the sound an educated man makes when he doesn't need his ego fluffed. And yet another reason these videos have trusted value.
That is extremely kind feedback, and very much appreciated :-)
@@JustHaveaThink I think i can speak for the audience and say we very much appreciate your videos. I learn something new from each of them. It's a rarity to find information in media that hasn't been watered down, (especially the corporate media). You treat your audience with respect, and we respect you for it.
And being so conversational with technical material?- a rare ability. Fun to watch and informative.
Yes, the moment you mentioned CO replacing Coke, my Pyrometallurgist training (I cut my teeth on Blast Furnaces) dug in heels (burden properties are crucial!). Could be interesting (and easier) to apply this to DRI or HBI processes, which are gas based. But for BF, not likely.
Is it necessary at all. The earth is cooling. Fact. Please refer to the NOAA temperature data conveniently not mentioned here or in the MSM
What is DRI and HBI??
@@srnpandub from what I have found, DRI = Direct Reduced Iron and HBI = Hot Briquetted Iron. DRI is obtained from the direct reduction of iron ores and is also called sponge iron. HBI is a form of DRI that occurs when the latter has been compacted at temperatures greater than 650 degrees Celcius.
So what are you saying? Speak english (use words the uneducated can relate to). The subject is reducing CO2. Can we still make excellent steel after changing the process? CO2 is not the enemy. $$$$$$$ is@@ananya.a04
I love your openness. I wish more channels had that.
My sincerest thanks!
Happy that your Patreon pointed that out - saves me the effort. Those coke pillars also allow iron and slag to be tapped safely and the taphole clays used wouldn't work without them.
Hey, good catch and so glad you corrected it. I appreciate your insight and sharing of these new technologies.
I love the honesty and completeness of your excellent investigations, ........ at least they are working on It !
Loved the intervention to realign some of the assumptions made in the paper. Another great video. Keep it up 👍.
This is the only channel I trust. There's too many sites giving out information that sounds either too good or too bad to be true
Please check the NOAA temperature data
Thank you for this video and for listening to feedback with an open mind! It makes me trust your content and input all the more!
You run a more valuable channel that the dozen most popular content providers combined. Thank you.
well done and objective as always! I love the walk back...
Good stuff, it is nice to have some hope! I do look forward to your videos!
Hope? For what?
@@yourcrazybear Smart people trying to solve problems in creative ways.
@@brianmckeever5280 "Smart people trying to solve problems in creative ways."
There have always been smart people solving real problems in creative ways. So there have not been any good reason for feeling hopeless in that regard.
I appreciate that!
excellent video... i think even better with the interjection and objective discussion .
Excellent video. Objective discussion, i like the honesty and of your investigations! People are focus and working..... As always, It is nice to have hope!
I love your videos!! I learn so much!! You are one of my favorite TH-cam channels!! Thank you for your great content!!
Congrats, this time only one typo in the chemistry part. Keep going 😉 And a big Cheers to your patreon who pointed out the complex and decades-long empirically optimised processes in steel production, so I don't have to elaborate on that 😁
However, please explain: If the crude iron (pig iron) has 4% carbon, and the steel has 1.5%, how can this difference make up 0.7 tonnes per tonne of iron? What else is included in that number?
Because 2.5% of a tonne = 25 kg Carbon, which will become 92 kg of CO2 after reaction. That's 0.1 tonne, not 0.7.
The company I work for is highly dependent on high strength carbon steel. I have been watching these developments with great curiosity.
Thank you for covering.
Fantastic job Dave!! Great example of the reality of life - that not every concept is rainbows and sunshine. Yet on we must strive, and progress is being made.
I really like your content and the way you present it. Thank you!
Thanks Marion. I appreciate your feedback :-)
Thanks for considering the feedback from your patrons and including these caveats at the end of the video. Really reinforces your credibility.
Very useful epilogue - I'd seen this announcement before and rather suspected the old 'works in the lab not so easy in reality' would come into play but had not really seen much discussion of the issues
Great video, Dave! Living in Saarland, Germany, a steel maker here is apparently planning to switch to green hydrogen as well
Thanks Martin. That sounds great!
Is the plant located near an interconnect with France to get large amounts of power to run the hydrolyser? I'm concerned that the grid in your area is having the same issues getting access to wind power from the northern shore, so the claims that its is green will have to be seen with a pink colored pair of glasses in the short-term.
@@terrencesauve that's my concern too. Detailed plans are not yet available
Dave, have you explored Boston Metal yet? An MIT spinoff, Boston Metal is developing Molten Oxide Electrolysis, MOE, which uses electricity to separate the oxygen out of iron ore. The only "waste" gas is oxygen--MOE was developed in part to provide oxygen for lunar colonists, and it will displace the entire medical and industrial oxygen gas industry--and the only carbon involved is that which you add to the melt. Add the right amount of chrome and you get a pretty good grade of stainless steel right out of the primary melt, no need for a second heat to create an alloy. It should work with metals other than iron, too.
Boston metal says that MOE will use less energy overall to make steel, and that it should cost 20 percent less than coke-furnace steel, but that we will have to expand electrical generation by about 20 percent to clean up the entire steel industry (which MOE developer and MIT prof Donald Sadoway says is 9 percent of climate change). A small modular molten salt nuke, or a bank of Lawrenceville Plasma Physics dense plasma focus fusion generators, powering each steel mill, and maybe providing its community with electricity during emergencies, or selling any excess into the grid? Boston Metal is currently prototyping, and say they are on schedule to commercialization by 2026. They also say MOE scales up/down well, and that the plant should cost a fraction of the price of a new coke-steel (is it correct to say Bessemer Process?) plant.
MOE can make use of low-grade ores. The Swedish HYBRIT (hydrogen reduction) tech you mention needs the high-grade stuff.
Hasn't most of the American steel industry been decapitalized and offshored? Les-expensive new plant to make 20-percent-less-expensive steel sounds to me like a better way to revitalize the American steel industry than tariffs paid by consumers. And with China's belligerence, it might make sense to not be dependent upon a wannabe geopolitical enemy for steel (or anything else strategic).
Google Boston Metal, or read the rant, Clean Steel, at www.ptbocc.com. You can also download (or read and comment online) an advance reader copy of the book, Pumping the Brakes on Climate Change: A Review of the Technologies and Politics that Could Leave the Future a Future, there. The chapter, Steel is a Filthy Industry. New Tech from MIT, SSAB could Make it Clean, Cheaper, explains MOE and the (more expensive, more energy-intensive) Swedish HYBRIT techniques rather well, but misses out on the perovskite thing.
Wonderful(open, honest) video as ever, thank you
Another great video Dave, well done, keep up the good work.
Thanks! Great content and love the corrections at the end. Feedback is important!
Thanks for your support. Much appreciated 😀
Thank you David.
Great stuff mate well done.
Fascinating Commentary Dave, thanks indeed to you and specialist patreon supporter. Not quite too good to believe, but real world application maybe not as soon as research might at first blush imply. Cheers
Your channel is an excellent example of Open Source economy. Outstanding work!
Really interesting video. I didn't expect to see another use for perovskites, which is quite exciting, and super interesting!
Double perovskites, as it happens, also have a potential (but less promising) role in PVs, as they have been proposed for lead-free devices, as a way to eliminate toxicity risks. However, they are a long way behind when it comes to power conversion efficiencies!
Nice one Dave. Another good vid.
For a couple of minutes, I thought the solution was to replace the Carbon Dioxide off gassing with Carbon Monoxide off gassing, rather than using a closed loop system to use the Carbon Monoxide up.
I am glad I was wrong. Carbon Monoxide off gassing would probably be considered, as my friends across the pond might say: "rather unsavory".
CO off gassing is normaly done by flaring it off to CO2, indeed rather unsavory.
Were you wrong? I suspect that there will be some fugitive CO and CO2 emissions
Wow - this would be a great breakthrough!
GREAT work! Thanks!
A very interesting video, thank you. The problem of replacing the structural support provided by coke in a blast furnace is also faced by teams trying to replace air with hydrogen in conventional blast furnaces, such as Thyssenkrupp Steel. One solution may be small ceramic bricks to provide the structural support and separation in the mix, which would be recovered and reused.
Fascinating! Now let’s look at CONCRETE.
Love your channel, thank you!
Excellent work!
Brilliant Dave!
Gotta love those patrons.
Thanks for the re-visit to this important topic.
Cobalt and Rare-earths get thrown around by "agendists" but Iron (for Steal) is the big mining elephant in the room.
Good topic Dave, as always. An approach that at first seems impracticable is sometimes the one that proves eventually to be the best solution, once other supporting processes and technologies catch up, re. Electric vehicles, first coming into use before the internal combustion engine took over. Battery and electronics had to be sufficiently developed first before a practical auto was marketed, eg, the Prius. A second approach to greener steel production is to increase electric furnace steel production from scrap, which means a BIG increase in metals recovery programs. There are literally billions of tonnes of scrap ferrous that is not recycled because of the relative low value and high cost of collection and processing. Other non ferrous metals are much more likely to be recycled cost effectively. Over the years, a trend has developed amongst the world's smelters to specialize into different product groups. High value specialist steels, bringing good returns floated off to profitable companies and bulk steel steel making being a near loss maker, especially during economic downturns in the economy, less demand etc. The old problem of cost analysis over the entire cycle, that includes mining, refining, smelting, supply chain logistics, recycling, environmental etc. etc. Is still around.
Cheers Graham. Interesting stuff
Great video. Especially enjoyed the "instant" qualification you added courtesy of your patreon contact. Although we are all keen to hear about the latest "game changer" I think it's wise to announce the negatives ahead of the naysayers who want to ignore any solution that may contain flaws.
I agree Jim :-)
Wow, what a deal Jim. You are one of the chosen.
Thank you! About the Swedish Hydrogen steel projects. I don’t know anything about it myself really. But when listening to and reading Swedish media, the high cost of making the steel may not be a huge problem according to some because when steel is used in for example cars the higher cost of the steel supposedly aren’t affecting the price for the consumer that much and the car industry supposedly want green steel.
But there are a lot of naysayers to these green steel projects and their argument often is that the required energy for these projects would require about as much energy Sweden use now. And building all this new energy generation in huge wind farms isn’t something they like either.
I don’t know if the required energy would double but it is a lot more needed and more than is currently available. So maybe that also is a problem how to build this required energy supply.
the other argument against is that green steel is inferior in terms of strength & durability...disastrous when used in buildings...
@@vincentl.9469 The steel made by these new processes is chemically identical to traditionally produced steel, about 99% Fe and 1% C. The main problem along with the energy requirements has been the development of the technology and upgrading the steel mills (at least in the SSAB/hybrit case, their pilot plant has barely started up and they are moving to convert their full scale plants soon)
@@otsokivivuori7726 The main aim is to not use coal..or coke as some people say, cutting the release of Co2. how much co2 I'm not clear about. Where will the energy come from for the new process?
Apparently there is also a concept where the iron is extracted from the ore directly by electrolysis. If you can split H² and O² with electrolysis, then why not splitting Fe and O² ? However, that process has only been shown on lab scale so far. But there is a startup in the USA, attempting to implement it on industrial scale. Let's see how this goes...
This approach is called Molten Oxided Electrolysis (MOE) by MIT Spin-Off Boston Metal. This technology was for a long time rated at very low technology readyness level (because no cathode material could withstand the extreme temperatures and reactivity in molten iron) but recently leaped forward due to massive funding and a new electrode material. Boston Metal already left lab-scale behind, will likely bring a third-generation prototype to operation this year and already secured 120M$ financing (mostly from strategic investor and steel giant AccelorMittal) to beginn building an industry-size plant 2024 (finalization is planned for 2025, if I remember correctly). MOE is considered the most energy efficient process for green steel and also seems very elegant in the way that several of the traditional steps of the process can be done in one.
I would look forward to see this third option here on the channel one day :)
Thumbs up for your work and the anonymus Patreon with the in-depth insights!
Fun fact:
Our local district heating used to use 2 gas generators for electicity and heat. Due to the current green hype they have to phase out the gas generator so they need a new istallation to provide heat to ~15.000 people.
They choose to burn iron powder to rust and use "Green H2" to reduce the rust back to iron. To me this sounds like complete waste of energy over the entire front.
So I wonder: How (in)efficient would this be if the rust was reduced by electrolysis?
(Note the thermal loss in the 40 year old instalation is estimated >30% and it is has no longer electricity as side product.)
@@hotdognl70 Their idea strikes me as loony, unless they can get green hydrogen for free and have nothing better to do with it. Extracting both electricity and heat from gas is very efficient overall, particularly when that electricity is potentially displacing electricity that would have been produced in a coal-fired plant. Perhaps next they will propose burning Euro notes for heat...
@@incognitotorpedo42 Burning Euro notes is not allowed: The ink may produce toxic fumes.
But serious: I'm so glad we decided 2 years ago to get disconnected from that grid! A roof covered with solar pannels and a heatpump is saving a ton of money and feels a bit greener than that system.
Boston metals have spun off a Brazilian subsidiary with the intent of making ferroalloys from Iron Ore mining fines. The production of ferro alloys (Ferrosilicon, Ferromanganese, Ferrovanadium, Ferrochrome) is often done with fairly inefficient processes such as submerged arc furnaces which produce large volumes of Carbon Dioxide.
The really attractive feature of the Boston Metals system is that it requires Iron Ore fines rather than lump Iron Ore as blast furnaces do. I haven't seen any estimates of energy efficiency of the electrolytic route to molten Iron but the savings in capital cost (Blast furnaces are really expensive pieces of equipment) alone would make it an attractive route.
What do you think of the pyro plasma electrical torches replacing bunker fuel oil to pelletize iron ore before shipment to steel manufacturers? Seems like a good first step.
Texas has some 20,000 wind turbines spinning and likely an equal amount of electricity from solar farms, so if there's an All-American corridor for developing hydrogen-reduction electric-arc steel production, that's the place. With Iron Range taconite shipped through the Illinois Waterway, down the Mississippi, and via the Intracoastal Waterway, Houston could be the steelmaking capitol of the world.
You mentioned a few all electric steel processing plants about to open, can you please do a video on that process!!!!
Thank you 👏👏
7:55 My immediate thoughts are 'It's too complicated'. Complicated means more expensive to build and it requires tight tolerances during operations. Any change in either output or input could tilt the entire process and make it either not work at all, not work as efficiently, or not work as intended.
10:09 Aaaand here you pretty much validate my thoughts above. lol. If you wanted the iron/steel smelting processes to become cleaner with regards to CO2 production, you need to make electricity cheaper. If steelworkers were able to use electricity as their heat source, then they wouldn't have to use coal/coke or natural gas to heat up the furnaces. The reason they don't is because the 'dirtier' energy producers are a helluva lot cheaper which keeps costs down for the steel. Cheaper costs means more production, easier expansion, more hiring and cheaper building processes down the line. If you force these smelteries to pay for the CO2 they produce, you're going to kill the steel industry, which will force prices of everything that uses steel way up which will cripple economies. People will turn to dirtier forms of energy (deforestation to burn wood for heat and energy) because they can't afford the cleaner ones and you'll end up making the environment worse while attempting to make it better.
11:32 Lol. And here you're validating my 10:09 comment talking about electrifying steel production. XD
What we need is cheaper, reliable and plentiful energy production. If you can bring down electricity costs to $0.01-0.02/kWh, you could eliminate natural gas economically because it would be cheaper and thus a better deal for consumers. If there is enough excess energy available, then all of these energy hogs, like the steelmaking industry, would be able to switch to electricity as well because it would be cheaper than coal/coke/natural gas. So what energy production method do we have available right now to allow for this? Nuclear. It's clean. It's safe. It's modular. It's getting cheaper. And if your complaint about it is the waste, we can launch that into the sun (or empty space) pretty cheaply now using the new spinlaunching systems they're developing. No nuclear waste on Earth anymore. Wind and solar aren't going to get us there, at least not in their current forms.
There is also an Australian scientist at the university of New South Wales called Prof. Veena Sahajwalla , Who has done a lot of research on recycling, one of her project is on polymer injection where she use waste car tyres in the steel making process and the technology have been adopted by industries.
11:20 I'm glad to hear that _someone_ is trying to make a completely electric steelmaking plant. It makes very little sense to me to burn fuels for heat, when as far as I know (and I'm probably wrong, but hey), you can make electrodes and electrically powered plasma arcs that can get up to insanely high temperatures.
Thank you
I have nothing to say really, but I appreciate your content, and wish to help with the yt-algorithms.
Dear David, thank you very much for your next great video. I just wonder if we would be able to use the perovskite for the production of SOLAR PV MODULES and the heat of the process for another industrial application like CEMENT or other production
Recently, a report came out stating that the EU can cover their domestic heating and hot water needs by tapping into waste heat. This is from the company Danfoss' white paper titled: "The world’s largest untapped energy source: Excess heat"
Keeping it real! 🤟
Thanks Dave, you give us reasons to be cheerful.
a bit off topic: I'd love to hear from you about the recently demonstrated sodium-based battery for EVs by Hina.
Please consider the enviromental footprint of producing the perovskite. Overall impact of the complete process has to be considered.
Thanks for your vids, they are thought inspiring. No mean feat nowadays!
The perovskite is catalytic, so likely used in small quantities. You have to balance the environmental damage done by creation of the perovskite against the FAR larger environmental damage done by CO2 from steelmaking, not to mention the environmental impact of coke production, which is horrendous.
OEPS !!!!!!!!!
Outokumpu is shaping the stainless steel market with its new emission-minimized product line, Circle Green. It has the smallest emission intensity in the world, with a 92% lower carbon footprint than the global average and 64% lower than Outokumpu’s regular production - which is already the current sustainability leader in the industry. The new standard for sustainable stainless steel is now set.
The problem with steel making is controlled by basic physics. Replacing C with H to remove O from the iron oxide ore is laudable. But the cost of green H is currently 2 to 4 times the cost of using coke to reduce iron. If this cost can be reduced the reduction by iron oxide by H can be achieved.
If the TC-BF-BOF system can be made to work it will be a blessing. Containing such hot gasses will be tricky. But to reiterate, the basic physics is what is overlooked in many of these fanciful schemes.
Sounds good if they can get it worked out.
I think that the most promising solution that I have seen is Boston Metal"s Molten Oxide Electrolysis. This technique requires only iron ore and electricity in and the only outputs are high purity molten iron and oxygen plus some slag from the iron ore impurities. After adding alloying agents, the iron can be directly rolled into finished products. This solution promises to use less energy and has lower capital costs and can use lower grade iron ore. Maybe, it will produce higher quality steel at a lower cost than the current blast furnaces. This would be a real tipping point.
I agree with your metallurgist regarding his concerns, dust in steel plants is much more difficult to handle than one think. But there are other possibilities, one is to see if the process we use to make Aluminium can be adopted to make steel and regarding using H2 there is a unique opportunity in Australia. There they dream about making H2 with wind and sun on the west coast and transport it to Japan and S.Korea. However Portheadland from where they ship the best Iron ore in the world to Japan etc.( only rivaled by Kiruna in Sveden and a couple of other places) is just next door and it is a much better idea to make the ore to spunge with H2 and ship this product to Japan.
It is though in the tradition in Australia to through away money by not processing the products themselves , besides the government is under control of the oil, gas and coal companies that do not have imagination enough to divert into other industries. Sad but who knows.
I suspect that the issues of lack of mass-burden can be accounted by modifying the furnace design. Tailoring the slag and metal takeoffs to a different depth. Which is good from a technical standpoint, but will make retrofits impractical.
Or perhaps we should consider an entirely different technology. Fluidized catalyst systems used in oil refining operate near these temperatures. Perhaps similar technology can be applied to steelmaking.
Not sure if CO instead of CO2 is such a good idea if it's dumped into the atmosphere? Apart from been toxic doesn't it mop up free radicals which would otherwise be oxidizing methane, which is it's self a gh gas!
@@petewright4640 I believe the idea was to recycle the CO back into the input in place of the coke.
@@JaenEngineering can't we do that with co2, especially because it is also a greenhouse gas?
@@davitdavid7165 No, we can't. The carbon in CO2 is already fully oxidized, so is not available for extracting the oxygen from iron ore. Iron ore is just oxidized iron.
@@incognitotorpedo42 ooh, i get it now, thanks.
That is much smarter now.
Thanks!
Thanks for your support. Much appreciated 😀
If the charcoal from, say, a tree plantation, is produced by pyrolysis (heating without oxygen) the resulting gas can be put through a fractionation tower such as they have in petroleum refineries, to produce cooking gas, gasoline, diesel, airline fuel and so forth right up to tars. Perhaps this would make the whole process more economic.
7:00 (Shows diagram of a Rube Goldberg Machine).... 'This will clear things up'.
He said it was confusing, which wasn't wrong. That doesn't mean it won't work, though.
@@incognitotorpedo42 True. Rube Goldberg Machines work too.
There is a long way from lab scale to industrial scale. Many years ago (1990's/early 2000's) BHP built a large commercial Direct Reduced Iron plant in West Australia. Technically it worked - but was economically unviable and it was shut down. No company can afford to subsidize decarbonization of steel. Until production costs are built in as a design parameter, the theme that University Research can go easily to commercial application just ain't going to happen. It needs a change in mind-set of what University research means. It is not always the best technology, often what is actually needed is the most economic technology.
Steam Methane Reforming (SMR) for Hydrogen production can emit a large amount of CO2 during production. 40% to 100% is uncapturable depending on the process.
Another technology for Blue Hydrogen production is Partial Oxidation (POx) Gasification, which, when coupled with Carbon Cature & Storage / Sequestration (CCS), can result in up to 95% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
It's time to start taxing companies per ton of CO2 emitted.
Insane proposition that will just drive business to tax havens and increase foreign imports (and the overall carbon production).
You can’t control foreign sovereign states which will take advantage of this self inflected wound on domestic industry.
@@Ssyphoned The environment is more important that the businesses who've wrecked it.
@@Ssyphoned you sound like a tory.
Perovskite is the new super stuff. Also used in top-notch solar cells!
If the co is replacing that much coke, then you are looking at something other than a blast furnace. That can be done and possibly cheapish compared to the coke ovens and blast furnace route. Tata have an experimental reactor that could be utilised. A top gas recovery project is also possible.
The generated co is more likely going to be injected at the tuyeres instead of coal. The pervoskite will likely be an offgas processing unit.
Another potential problem that wasnt mentioned is the leaching of the perovskite metal componentes to the steel. How that will affect the steel produced
The problem is always production at scale, cost of new equipment/processes, and lack of requirement/necessity to convert. No industrial scale company is going to willingly reduce outputs, raise their prices, or spend extra money on new equipment just to say "they're green". Especially when they can just buy "carbon credits" and say everything's fine.
We're only going to see real change when govts start forcing these changes and govts start spreading the message of overall reduced consumption. But no one is willing to do that so...we're going to keep sending it and keep playing math games with the carbon accounting
Excellent video - I found in particular valuable the comment from one of your Patreons who themselves work in the industry.
I would only have a naive question regarding the CO - if the plant would indeed convert nearly all the CO2 into CO - would some special additional treatment of this CO be necessary, or could it be simply blasted into the air outside the plant? The reason I am asking is that CO even at very low levels is very dangerous.
The CO is an input to the furnace - what comes out the top of the furnace is CO2, the extra oxygen having come from the ore. The key bit that makes it make sense as a emissions reduction process is that you _don't_ dump that CO2 to the atmosphere - you convert it to CO with your perovskite, and when you regenerate your perovskite into it's CO2-splitting form you get oxygen gas out. The CO2 and CO are intermediate steps. Actually doing this at scale, of course, is hard.
how about the MIT process used by Boston Metals, perfect for use in Australia where they have both sun for solar energy and iron ore for the feed stock to the Boston metals process
I understand that in the USA they also use induction furnaces for steel making.
one of the big issues of steam reforming using CH4 is that the steam is created by burning CH4 making it doubly bad for the environment. Flip the equation, using renewable energy and induction heating to produce the steam, reformate the CH4 to produce H2 + C02 then pass the C02 though a closed loop to produce graphene, also requiring heat. If the CH4 is used as a feed stock and not burned it becomes a much cleaner form of hydrogen production.
Absolutely brilliant. You may not realise it but the work you’re doing is triggering peer review & improving science, engineering, public engagement & under across this “pale blue dot”. Cheers Dave 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Peer review ain't worth a poop if the peers are all getting it the same wrong as the material being examined. Multiple wrongs just make them all wrong.
At 4:35 we're told of some marvelous trick by the, "Birmingham team", to add Perovskite to a process, minimise CO² production and maximise, CO production.
I remember being told back in the 70's, that CO production from cars wasn't a problem, as it would be burned by sunlight to become CO², which was thought of as OK, because of it's natural presence in the atmosphere.
That seemed like perfect sense to me, and still does.
So how does industry producing CO become a benefit ?
Co can be used in chemical production and indeed in reduction of new incoming ore.
I think the future is in the direction of graphene - we need a leap in material design where all the dimensions of a products life cycle is taken into account & also focuses on availability - ie common materials being the foundational elements
Once again, since I have commented on hydrogen production in one of your other videos, I would like you to research and report on the Hazer process. This may well be able to produce H2 much more cheaply than by electrolysis.
The Hazer process is being tested in Perth, Western Australia by the Hazer company. It uses methane from a landfill source, passes it over a heated iron ore, fluidised bed and produces hydrogen and graphite, which is deposited on the iron ore granules.
very interesting comment - thanks for your infomation 😇😇😇
Hazer process cost depends on natural gas feedstock with 60% conversion efficiency: 6-7kg of natural gas will be required to produce 1kg of hydrogen and 3kg of graphite. The iron-ore catalyst costs are inconsequential (with 1kg of catalyst consumed for every 15kg of methane feedstock, iron-ore costs approximately 4c per kg of hydrogen produced in the Hazer process). This is not CO2 neutral..
Well the diagram at 7mins really cleared things up for me....lol
Thanks
WOW!! Thanks @Binder Colman! I really appreciate your support :-)
I couldn't find the "full paper mentioned below" . i would like to download it.