Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T05:38:09.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative Bconomics of Several Alternatives for Bulk Utilization of Fly Ash and Coal Gsification Ash

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

D. E. Severson ,
O. E. Manz  and
N. J. Mitchell
D. E. Severson
Affiliation:
University of North Dakota, Department of Chemical Engineering, Grand Forks, North Dakota 58202
O. E. Manz
Affiliation:
University of North Dakota, Department of Civil Engineering, Grand Forks, North Dakota 58202
N. J. Mitchell
Affiliation:
University of North Dakota, Energy Research Center, Box 8213, University Station, Grand Forks, North Dakota 58202
Get access

Abstrct

Fly ash and gasification ash have been evaluated economically for the following uses: partial replacement of Portland cement; mineral wool; blended cement; Sulfurcrete®, high flexural strength ceramic products; ash to upgrade roads; glazed ceramic wall tile; and unglazed floor tile. The ash evaluated is a high-calcium, high-sodium material derived from the Beulah-Zap lignite mined in the Beulah region of North Dakota. Of the uses examined, concrete replacement provided an 8.0% cost saving, blended cement 37.3%, high flexural strength ceramics 52.8%, ash in road construction 44.4%, and wall tile 5.2%. Mineral wool had no replacement savings calculated because blast furnace slag is not available locally to provide a consistent basis. Sulfurcrete® did not provide a cost saving over concrete but its use life and properties are sufficiently different from those of concrete to justify use in some applications, provided that the raw materials are readily available.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 43: Symposium M – Fly Ash and Coal Conversion By-Products I , 1984 , 195
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Manz, Oscar E. “Utilization of By-Products from Western Coal-Combustion in the Manufacture of Mineral Wool and Other Ceramic Products,” Cement and Concrete Research, 14, 513–519 (1984).10.1016/0008-8846(84)90127-3Google Scholar
2. Communication: Ericksen, R.L. Basin Electric Power Cooperative to G. Groenewold, NDMMRD, December 20, 1983.Google Scholar
3. Economic Feasibility of Using Fly Ash in the Ceramic and Concrete/Cement Industries. Report prepared for Energy Development Board of Mercer County, North Dakota, by Resources Planning Associates, Inc., Washington, D.C. (From U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Agency, Project No. 05–06-0–1878, and U.S. Department of Energy, Buildings and Community Systems Division, Contract No. DE-FG03–80DS20028). 112 pp.Google Scholar
4. Peters, Max S. and Timmerhaus, Klaus D. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers. 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968, pp. 140–41.Google Scholar
5. Trief, L. The New TRIEF Cement Process. International Ash Symposium. Atlanta, GA, 1979.Google Scholar
6. Development of Power Poles from Fly Ash. Phase II. Project 851-1 Final report, ECP, Inc., El Segundo, California for EPRI, September 1979.Google Scholar
7. Vroom, Alan H. U.S. Patent 4, 058, 500, November 15, 1983.Google Scholar