<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>Thanks for the comment and highlighting us on production and use of charcoal.<BR> <BR>I was not aware of the clear cutting of Scotland and thanks to the Royal Navy, there are still some trees back in Britain................<BR> <BR>May be we should reconsider the Navy to be in charge in Africa and Haiti to ban and stop the clear cutting for charcoal, before it is too late.<BR> <BR>The blacksmiths had an alternative and WE should give the low Income People in Africa and Haiti an alternative too.<BR> <BR>Namely:<BR>Natural Draft pyrolytic units for Cooking and Production of Biochar out of any type of dry biomass.<BR> <BR>Otto<BR>Miombo for Africa (and Haiti)<br> <BR><div>> From: bobstuart@sasktel.net<br>> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 23:10:48 -0600<br>> To: gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org<br>> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Gasification Digest, steel making<br>> <br>> There are still blacksmiths using only charcoal from wood. The iron <br>> business in England only switched over to Coal when the Royal Navy <br>> insisted on keeping a few trees handy, after Scotland had been clear- <br>> cut. The problem is over quantity, not chemistry.<br>> <br>> Bob Stuart<br>> <br>> On 14-Aug-14, at 11:01 PM, Geoff Thomas wrote:<br>> <br>> > ,<br>> > On 15/08/2014, at 4:00 AM, gasification- <br>> > request@lists.bioenergylists.org wrote:<br>> ><br>> >> Today's Topics:<br>> ><br>> > Hi People, i had a question the other day about Coal being the only <br>> > way to make Steel, from my friend GeoffH, i am putting the <br>> > question below, it is in two parts, and my answer below that, - <br>> > displaying my ignorance, - particularly if gasified waste would <br>> > reach the high temperature required, - I realise Charcoal does, and <br>> > also the aluminium reaction I mentioned, but am personally skating <br>> > on very thin ice re temperature.<br>> ><br>> > Please comment, I believe it is an important area of discussion in <br>> > the gasification arena, - PS, I have a thick skin :)<br>> ><br>> > Cheers,<br>> > Geoff Thomas.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > "Had a discussion with someone about the concept of 100% renewables <br>> > as to whether renewable could substitute for coal in steelmaking.<br>> ><br>> > Well, it seems coal is important not only for generating very high <br>> > temperatures, but also for the chemical use of carbon monoxide in <br>> > extracting the iron from iron ore.<br>> ><br>> > There are alternatives – maybe – such a DRI and ‘sponge iron’. <br>> > Hydrogen can be used instead of carbon monoxide but is so much more <br>> > expensive.<br>> ><br>> > The Comments listed at the end of this article (on the Net) are <br>> > insightful.<br>> ><br>> > Interested in other people’s comments on steel production vis-ŕ-vis <br>> > renewable energy.<br>> ><br>> > Cheers,<br>> > GeoffH<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > http://theenergycollective.com/robertwilson190/308896/explosive- <br>> > growth-steel-production-china-why-it-matters<br>> > The Explosive Growth of Steel Production in China: Why It Matters<br>> > Posted November 27, 2013<br>> > Keywords: Carbon and De-carbonization, Energy Security, Tech, <br>> > Sustainability, Coal, Environmental Policy, China, Energy, Energy <br>> > and Economy, Energy Collective Exclusive, Fuels, china, industry <br>> > growth, steel, The Energy Transition<br>> ><br>> > China and Steel Growth<br>> > There is no material more fundamental to industrial civilization <br>> > than steel. Modern buildings, ships, cars, planes and bridges would <br>> > all be unthinkable without steel, and as pointed out by Allwood and <br>> > Cullen in their fine recent book on materials production we <br>> > currently have no viable substitute materials that could perform <br>> > steel's multiple functions. We are still very much living in the <br>> > iron age.<br>> > Global production of steel has now reached almost 1.5 billion <br>> > tonnes each year. The geographic make up of steel production <br>> > however has changed profoundly in the last decade. In the year 2000 <br>> > China produced 15% of the world's steel. Today almost half of the <br>> > world's steel is made in China, with Chinese steel production <br>> > increasing by over 500% since 2000. The astonishing levels of steel <br>> > consumption in China is illustrated by the fact that 60% of rebar, <br>> > used in buildings to reinforce concrete, that is produced each year <br>> > is now consumed in China.<br>> ><br>> > Energy requirements of steel manufacturing in China<br>> > Last year China produced 708 million tonnes of steel. On average <br>> > each tonne of steel produced in China requires the equivalent of <br>> > 0.69 tonnes of coal in energy consumption. In other words China's <br>> > steel industry consumes the equivalent of 500 million tonnes of <br>> > coal each year, and this being China more or less all of the energy <br>> > used to make steel comes from coal. China's steel industry consumes <br>> > almost 7% of the world's coal, and if China's steel industry was a <br>> > country it would rank 6th globally in total primary energy <br>> > consumption, ranking above both Germany and Canada. A comparison of <br>> > this level of energy consumption with current global consumption of <br>> > wind and solar energy is sobering.<br>> ><br>> > As with all comparisons of energy consumption, methods and <br>> > calculations should be laid out transparently. Here I will compare <br>> > the total primary energy consumption of China's steel industry with <br>> > global primary energy consumption of wind and solar. In 2012 wind <br>> > and solar electricity production was 614 TWh (trillion watt hours). <br>> > However to make a more apples to apples comparison we should ask <br>> > how much coal would be needed to produce this electricity. Using <br>> > this approach current annual global energy consumption from wind <br>> > and solar works out as 200 million tonnes of coal equivalent (using <br>> > EIA's conversion methodology and BP's assumptions for the average <br>> > thermal efficiency of power plants). Therefore growth in global <br>> > energy consumption from wind and solar since 2000 has been <br>> > approximately half of the increase in energy consumption by China's <br>> > steel sector alone. A stark illustration of how little has been <br>> > achieved in the transition to low carbon energy.<br>> ><br>> > This rapid growth in Chinese steel consumption poses another <br>> > problem. We are not only fundamentally dependent on steel <br>> > production, but as Vaclav Smil points out steel production is more <br>> > or less fundamentally dependent on the large scale use of coal, <br>> > with no prospect of a transition to low carbon methods of steel <br>> > production in the short to medium term. Calls to fully dismantle <br>> > the coal industry must consider how we can make steel without coal, <br>> > because currently no methods seem particularly feasible. Globally <br>> > about 1 billion tonnes of coal is used to produce steel, <br>> > representing 14% of total coal production, with steel and iron <br>> > production equating to over 6% of global carbon dioxide emissions. <br>> > This figure is much higher than that of the aviation industry, yet <br>> > have you ever read an op-ed calling steel manufacturing a rogue <br>> > industry?<br>> ><br>> > The vast disparities in steel consumption in the world today <br>> > suggest that a significant increase in overall steel consumption is <br>> > inevitable and probably desirable. We are however reaching the <br>> > limits of how efficiently steel can be produced, and despite <br>> > multiple opportunities to improve the rationality of steel use it <br>> > appears clear that we will need to mine hundreds of millions of <br>> > tonnes of coal each year to produce steel for decades, and more <br>> > likely, generations to come. These realities should be borne in <br>> > mind by those who claim there are no significant barriers to 100% <br>> > renewable energy."<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > Hi GeoffH, thing with steel making is to remove the oxygen from the <br>> > Iron Ore, ( basically iron oxide) which is done by the carbon in <br>> > the charcoal (coal,) but charcoal is not the only way (the Japanese <br>> > have been using wood charcoal to make steel from 6000BC) nor is <br>> > coal the best source of charcoal, so this is a fruit-full area of <br>> > possible development.<br>> > Interestingly, there was a development called Direct Reduced Iron <br>> > some 20 odd years ago where electricity was used on an iron/carbon <br>> > briquette, (my vague remembering) and of course in this time we can <br>> > talk of electricity from Solar, Wind, Geothermal or tidal/wave to <br>> > provide at times when any of those have too much, but on another <br>> > side, my grandfather who was a railwayman in between fishing, when <br>> > they mixed aluminium powder with rust, to weld the rails together, <br>> > - the yearning of the aluminium for oxygen (which is normally <br>> > halted by it's instant oxide coating) would cause it to burn in <br>> > that reduced environment, created by the railway workers with clay <br>> > moulds from local mud, so the aluminium would effectively <br>> > disappear, (evaporate or float to the top) leaving superheated <br>> > steel which would go down into the clay mould between the two rail <br>> > ends - so hot it would melt the steel rails on either side to join <br>> > them,<br>> > The point being that not only carbon will do that chemical <br>> > transformation with steel.<br>> ><br>> > For changing the steel production away from coal we could consider <br>> > using gasification, where one has a carbon containing substance, - <br>> > such as waste from cities, burns it without enough oxygen so <br>> > creates Carbon Monoxide, very hot, so also gives your reaction that <br>> > energy, - and of course the carbon monoxide, hungry for more <br>> > oxygen so that it can become carbon dioxide, takes that oxygen away <br>> > from the iron oxide, simply put.<br>> ><br>> > Whether we blow that carbon dioxide through an 'algal bloom bed' to <br>> > make more biomass or vent it to the atmosphere may well be a point <br>> > but my main point is that the coal can stay in the ground, where it <br>> > was laid down in the Pleistocene,<br>> ><br>> > So we have, from gasification, carbon monoxide, produced from <br>> > waste, to make steel.<br>> ><br>> > Cheers,<br>> > Geoff Thomas.<br>> > _______________________________________________<br>> > Gasification mailing list<br>> ><br>> > to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>> > Gasification@bioenergylists.org<br>> ><br>> > to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>> > http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/ <br>> > gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org<br>> ><br>> > for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:<br>> > http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/<br>> ><br>> <br>> <br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Gasification mailing list<br>> <br>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>> Gasification@bioenergylists.org<br>> <br>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org<br>> <br>> for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:<br>> http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/<br>> <br></div> </div></body>
</html>