Putting Some Concrete Boots On Global Warming
Tyler Hamilton has an article at Technology Review on a company that claims to have a new process that stores carbon dioxide in precast concrete - A Concrete Fix to Global Warming.
A Canadian company says that it has developed a way for makers of precast concrete products to take all the carbon-dioxide emissions from their factories, as well as neighboring industrial facilities, and store them in the products that they produce by exposing concrete slurry to carbon-dioxide-rich flue gases during the curing process. Industry experts say that the technology is unproven but holds great potential if it works.
Concrete accounts for more than 5 percent of human-caused carbon-dioxide emissions annually, mostly because cement, the active ingredient in concrete, is made by baking limestone and clay powders under intense heat that is generally produced by the burning of fossil fuels. Making finished concrete products--by mixing cement with water, sand, and gravel--creates additional emissions because heat and steam are often used to accelerate the curing process.
But Robert Niven, founder of Halifax-based Carbon Sense Solutions, says that his company's process would actually allow precast concrete to store carbon dioxide. The company takes advantage of a natural process; carbon dioxide is already reabsorbed in concrete products over hundreds of years from natural chemical reactions. Freshly mixed concrete is exposed to a stream of carbon-dioxide-rich flue gas, rapidly speeding up the reactions between the gas and the calcium-containing minerals in cement (which represents about 10 to 15 percent of the concrete's volume). The technology also virtually eliminates the need for heat or steam, saving energy and emissions.
Work is expected to begin on a pilot plant in the province of Nova Scotia this summer, with preliminary results expected by the end of the year. If it works and is widely adopted, it has the potential to sequester or avoid 20 percent of all cement-industry carbon-dioxide emissions, says Niven. "If the technology is commercialized as planned, it will revolutionize concrete manufacturing and mitigate hundreds of megatons of carbon dioxide each year, while providing manufacturers with a cheaper, greener, and superior product." He adds that 60 tons of carbon dioxide could be stored as solid limestone--or calcium carbonate--within every 1,000 tons of concrete produced. Further, he claims that the end product is more durable, more resistant to shrinking and cracking, and less permeable to water.
Labels: carbon dioxide, concrete, sequestration
Simply "requiring innovative technology" in the concrete, aluminum and shipping industry can make the change...
In the U.S. manuf. are required to used BACT (Best Achievable Control Technology) standards for facility emissions. At first (late 90's) companies reactively install "post" controls to meet deadlines. Eventually industry leaders install super efficient process's to meet standards that save massive amounts of energy and offer long term returns on manufacturing costs.
The EPA, Navy and others have proposed regulations since the 90's on cargo tankers to improve engine efficiencies that would greatly improve ship fuel use resulting in massive global emission reductions.
(no not adding silly sails)
BACT regulations implemented in the concrete, cargo freight and aluminum industries alone could have a 5-10 fold impact on reducing global fossil fuel consumption than simply dreaming of removing all the cars driven by consumers (not to mention the emissions).
The planet engineers I work with in the aluminum and concrete industries reflect that little to nothing in technology advances have happened since the 40's because energy has been to cheap to long.
"Forced industrial evolution" through regulations is key.
Improving through efficiencies on the front end is the only way to reduce consumption and environmental impact... simply capping and trading the problem will lead to devastating issues.
How many windfarms does it take to run the aluminum, concrete, steel, mining or cargo industries?
Never enough unless innovative control and reduction technologies are implemented with growth and scope of the usage scale.
These industries feed all others. It is the trump card of usage and losses.
How do wind, solar, tidal, rail or any sectors maintain viability without a clear focus on the obvious long term problems in food chain?
Have a good weekend,
Posted by
EHS Director |
10:01 PM
Slartibartfasts cousin maybe?
"The planet engineers I work with..."
Given that "silly sails" drove the expansion of the English empire.. I'd be a little less dismissive. There is a limit to engine efficiency, and it may just be that adding silly sails or slowing down is the response from the shipping industry.
Your question "How many windfarms does it take to run the aluminum, concrete, steel, mining or cargo industries?" seems to assume that these industries and the manner of our consumption of there output remains unchanged.
Like it or not, I suspect our consumption from these industrial sectors is going to be less in the future...
Posted by
SP |
11:36 AM