Any budding pyro-metallurgists out there?
I’m a bit rusty on this. (pun intended)
There is more than enough carbon content in the flux most commonly used in iron making. IE Limestone aka CaCO3 in it’s mineralised forms.
The report stated the hydrogen trial only introduced H2 through one of the furnace tuyeres. There is no mention of the furnace charge being modified from the usual blend of ore, coke, and flux etc. or change to pf coal injection through the other 27 tuyeres.
The chemistry of reducing iron ore in a traditional blast furnace is well known. It should be straight forward to put an approx figure on the hydrogen to ore/iron ratio. Hydrogen has been used previously in a very limited way To assist in refining metal ores. It has however not been available at a competitive price to be more widely considered, until now?
Yes, there are other ways to produce iron, including the various processes used to produce ferro chrome and ferro nickel, or the HBI process trialled by BHP. And that is all without discussing aluminium and copper or any other metals. There is a long way to go given how much a low carbon future might depend on many of these metals.
I should have also indicated earlier that a similar question has come up in a resource recovery lecture I give to engineering students. It appears that finding non-coking carbon source for steel production has interest with some students and they have asked about biosolids…which is why it was one of the potential (?) alternatives indicated above. The problem with biosolids is it is around 90% water and significant energy to remove this water. Biosolids can also contain other compounds (metals, suplhur etc) which may not be optimum for steel production.
Tyres is another which has also been suggested. Tyres can be a fuel (has a good calorific value), and carbon source, but not as renewable like other forms of carbon.
The following is a direct quote from the news item.
Following the successful trial, Thyssenkrupp plans to scale up the injection to all 28 tuyeres within the furnace and aims to eventually run at least three furnaces completely on hydrogen by 2023.
I take ‘completely on hydrogen’ to say zero coal.
NOTE:
Blast Furnaces produce iron, which is not steel. The carbon chemistry of molten iron and steel is complex. The dissolution and crystallisation of carbon and carbon compounds in molten iron to from different types of iron and steel is a science all on its own. There is no need to panic over running out of carbon sources to add to the melt, if necessary, assuming there is insufficient C gained from the flux or added with the hot air blast. Our atmosphere and environment is full of it. Low carbon iron may be less of a problem with the subsequent conversion to steel in electric arc furnaces or BOS. I’d leave it to Thyssenkrupp to already know the answer.
How Thyssenkrupp will be making steel in a few years time is perhaps best judged on their current year 2019 work. It would seem to be more relevant to the future than relying on vested coal industry assessments from years past.
There is some potential competition from another European consortium.
Just a pie in the sky thought…this could be one of the many drivers to why Germany is collaborating with Australia in relation to the Australian Hydrogen Strategy. They also see hydrogen as industrial hydrogen. It is however unlikely an Australian renewable hydrogen industry will be developed with sufficient capacity before 2023.
The use of solar generated hydrogen to power mineral ore processing and metals production is a great fit for Australia.
Solar gives hydrogen plus ore gives exportable metal.
A much greater value add, and far more efficient to transport the refined metal than crude ores OS. Also a much simpler hydrogen process, as locally hydrogen can be managed the same as uncompressed natural gas, as a localised bulk commodity.
Of course Australia has a long history of ignoring or screwing up such opportunities to get ten fold the value out of our raw resources.
With the trillions in Aussie super being added to every year it would appear a very direct and smart investment opportunity.
On a large enough industrial scale there may even be a viable hydrogen industry able to provide large volumes of excess production to domestic transport needs such as long distance haulage and buses.
Without comment on the overall picture, the concept of efficiency can sometimes be a furphy.
In a simple contrived example, if 100% renewable energy ‘A’ had 5% efficiency while 80% renewable energy ‘B’ had 90% efficiency, over a long enough period ‘A’ could still be the better option because ‘B’ would eventually run out.
True, with current technology the direct use of energy from battery storage is far more efficient than through hydrogen fuel cells.
Hydrogen from solar and wind or battery from solar and wind both though both start at 100% green (renewable) energy. For LV use there is currently a clear lead to battery in efficient use of green energy despite the weight penalty of the batteries.
For HV and other transport needs, it would appear a more open race.
Few of the green experts prioritise the differences in the carbon or energy content in manufacturing or sustaining either option. Or impact and demand for natural resources of either. Perhaps they are irrelevant considerations. Perhaps they are very relevant and like the oft raised concerns around lithium supply and production highly debatable?
I’ll stick to the suggestion that if hydrogen in Australia has an obvious opportunity, we should also be looking past the BEV vs FCEV light vehicle contest. Nor should Australia reduce itself to simply being an exporter of hydrogen as a source of energy.
My take of EVs is that they will have fair less moving parts, so they will require much less in the oil and fluids departments, no cylinders to crack & very little work elsewhere eg heads, gaskets, fuel lines, filters as most are obsolete. This carries over to a much reduced maintenance cost to every user of one. The innovation of battery tech will, I think, lead to much greater capacity and lifespan thus leading to reduced cost over the life of the battery (ie it lasts longer so each km becomes cheaper). Will heavy vehicle movement in future require anything more than batteries, I think too early to say but as storage tech improves this may be a case of no they won’t need anything but batteries. Nor perhaps will we need lithium as the research into Aluminium appears to show:
While the above (and other) research has some way to go the results at the moment look very promising.
H2 will still require a vast road distribution service whereas EV recharge stations could be powered from onsite or near onsite Solar, Wind, and Geothermal energy production in remote or even more urban areas.
I see the use of H2 in industrial production of goods as particularly useful eg smelting, metal fabrication, and similar high energy uses that currently rely much more on fossil fuels.
My greatest concern is what seems to be a lack of vision to develop secondary and tertiary industries in Australia from the resources we have rather than acting much like a primary production supply source for everyone else. When we do have something that value adds we seem almost excitedly breathless to sell it to some overseas entity for the short term cash windfall it produces with little foresight into the long term detrimental effects it will have on us and the lost long term benefits.
Yes, a little off topic, other than aiding our understanding of some of the key factors which influence consumer outcomes. Important given our drive to rely on importing which ever technical solution appeals most?
One oft quoted source of all internet wisdom had this to say about how the Australian economy functions.
The emphasis on exporting commodities rather than manufactures underpinned a significant increase in Australia’s terms of trade during the rise in commodity prices since 2000. However, due to a colonial heritage a lot of companies operating in Australia are foreign-owned and as a result, Australia has had persistent current account deficits for over 60 years despite periods of positive net merchandise exports; given the net income outlay between Australia and the rest of the world is always negative. The current account deficit totalled AUD$44.5 billion in 2016[72] or 2.6% of GDP.
One of the factors that undermines balance of payments is Australia’s export base, making it highly vulnerable to the volatility in the prices of commodity goods. In addition, due to a colonial heritage a lot of companies operating in Australia are foreign-owned and, as a result, Australia’s net income outlay between it and the rest of the world is always negative; this results in persistent current account deficits even when there is a positive export.
P.S.
It is interesting to read the summaries of the Wikipedia ‘Economy of …xyz-nation…’ and contrast the outside views with those for Australia. Some would say it is all pure luck.
Whether it’s a Tesla or a BMW or … range anxiety in Australia has a big solution. Not quite yet?
McDonalds has been encouraging customers to download and install their App also able to track your every move?
What chance a future McDonalds App will check the range left in your BEV? Automated the App will book ahead a charging spot at the next highway close outlet, preorder your standard meals, and check you are observing the stop every two hours for road safety advisory.
Yes it exists. Sometimes it is rational. Try doing Melbourne-Adelaide or similar in a day with 2 drivers and factor in the mandatory ‘rest stop’ to recharge assuming charging points become as common as bowsers. While there will probably be acceptable ‘fast charge’ solutions coming available with more and better to come
How many EVs will be ‘lined up’ and what night the wait be for your turn? Sure there can be many bays, but the power supply to fast charge 6-10 at once, epic under today’s infrastructures, at least for not a major data centre
Probably not for city commuters. But should everyone wanting to go on holiday need to hire a ‘long distance’ driver or be relegated to public transport that might or might not exist in the destination locale? Or add holiday time for recharging breaks?
If there’s a sufficiently substantial market, then one or more of the many possible solutions will meet the demand. Mostly, I view it as a mangement issue.
I presume you mean “long-distance” vehicle. That’s a possible solution. Bear in mind that, if autonomy lives up to the hype, very few of us will want (or be able to afford) to own any vehicle at all. Every vehicle we drive will be hired.
(pun intended)
thinking.