Update on North American Ironmaking Joseph J. Poveromo Quebec Cartier Mining Company Fred C.

Download Report

Transcript Update on North American Ironmaking Joseph J. Poveromo Quebec Cartier Mining Company Fred C.

Update on North American
Ironmaking
Joseph J. Poveromo
Quebec Cartier Mining Company
Fred C. Rorick
Rorick, Inc
ABM 2nd International Meeting on Ironmaking,
1st International Symposium on Iron Ore,
September 12 – 15, 2004, Vitoria – Espirito
Santo, BRAZIL
TOPICS
Blast Furnace ironmaking
Alternative Ironmaking Processes
Future Prospects
Total Pig Iron
Total Raw Steel
2000
1994
1988
1982
1976
1970
1964
1958
1952
1946
1940
1934
1928
1922
1916
1910
1904
1898
1892
1886
1880
1874
1868
1862
140000
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
Problems of North American Blast
Furnace Sector
External – EAF mini-mill competition,
imports, environmental mandates
 Internal – limited capital for modernization,
high legacy costs, poor profitability
 Consequences – reduction in hot metal,
coke & sintering capacity – excess pellet
plant capacity

Response of North American
Blast Furnace Steelmakers
Non-technical – consolidation, reduce
legacy costs, currency changes, markets
 Technical
improve raw materials, upgrade existing
facilities to:
increase productivity, reduce reductant rate
and extend lining life

North American BF’s – Increased
Productivity, Reduced Fuel Rates
Key factors:
fluxed pellets, improved acid pellets
improved coke quality
higher levels of natural gas, coal injection
high levels of oxygen enrichment – lower
cost oxygen-pipelines, on-site plants
higher blast temperatures
furnace upgrades: charging, cooling, casting
Extend Lining Life to 8 – 12 years +
Enhanced cooling and refractory systems
- intensive plate cooling, copper staves
Remote repair methods
- gunniting, grouting, shotcreting
Hearth life extension
- North American carbon, coke quality
Burden distribution equipment
PW or MA tops on 25 of 41 furnaces
Weighted (by Production Rate) Averages of Reductants by AISI
BF’s (4)
Hot Metal # of
Reductant Usage, kg/tHM
Production, Working Coke
Coal Oil Gas Tar COG
MT
BF’s Lump Nut Total
1990 55
60
454 1 455
1
12 23
3
0
1995
61
51
402
8
410
34
2002 50
38
377 23 400
60
13
38
1
1
7 29
2
3
Increased Furnace Productivity
Furnace
Hearth Productivity Burden
Dia., M T/M3/day
Injectant
AK Middletown BF 3
8.9
3.9
pellets,HBI
gas
Dofasco 4 BF
8.5
2.9
pellets
oil
Severstal NA C
8.8
3.1
pellets
gas
13.5
2.5
sinter/pellets coal
ISG. Sp.Pt. L BF
ISG Sparrows Point Ispat Inland
L Furnace
7
Furnace
Hearth diameter, m
Burden, kg/tHM
Sinter
Acid Pellets
Fluxed Pellets
Lump ore, siliceous ore, etc
Reductant use, kg/tHM
Large coke
Small coke
Coal
Natural gas
Top gas utilization, %
Slag volume, kg/tHM
13.5
13.7
1040
534
0
48
228
0
1350
13
316
24
149
1
50.4
270
319
22
155
0
49.2
265
Waste Oxide Processing
7 Remaining sinter plants
 Direct BF charging: BOF slag, pellet chips
 Cold bonded briquettes, < 5% of burden
 DR options, Severstal RHF plant
 Landfill options

Coke Supply Challenges






US Coke Oven Capacity: 14 MTPY
Expensive Imported Coke
Maximize Injection of Coal, Gas, etc
Use HBI – ISG Circored Plant ??
Rebuild Slot Oven Batteries
Heat Recovery Cokemaking
- Indiana Harbor Coke Corp
- ISG Haverhill Coke Battery, 0.8 MTPY
Development of Competitive
Processes & Process Routes
Smelting reduction – Corex, HIsmelt
 Direct reduction/scrap/EAF steelmaking
route
 Hot metal/scrap/EAF steelmaking route
 Alternative (pig iron) iron/scrap/EAF
steelmaking route

Development of Alternative
Ironmaking Processes
o large scale ironmaking - avoid cokemaking,
sintering steps preceding blast furnace – most
efforts have failed except for Corex – high
capital cost?
o small scale ironmaking - provide iron units
to EAF mini-mill sector – only shaft furnace
gas based plants ( Midrex, HyL ) so far
successful in North America
o process waste oxides at both EAF and BFbased steel plants – limited success
North American Direct Reduced
Iron ( DRI ) Production
Main process route in Mexico > 5 MTPY
shaft furnace ( HyL, Midrex ) DRI
 USA, Canada: < 2 MTPY DRI ( Ispat
Sidbec, ISG Georgetown ); other facilities
down due to high gas prices: AIR, Corus
Mobile
 North America major importer of metallics:
HBI (Venezuela ); pig iron ( Brazil, Russia )

North American Shaft Furnace
DRI Developments
Application of pellet coating techniques;
increase bustle gas temperature
 Midrex – OXY+ system
 HyL – self reforming, hot charging of DRI (
HyTemp system )

EVOLUTION OF MIDREX FURNACE
PERFORMANCE
DRI
– Ispat Sidbec
Nat.
Elec.
Production Gas Temp.Addition Gas
T/hr
C
Nm3/T
Nm3/T
Cons.
kWh/T
1970’s
1980’s lump ore
1990’s coat pellets
late90’s, O2 inj.
2000 OXY+
Reducing
88.8
100.3
110.2
121.5
129.2
780
850
918
1050
961
O2
0.0
0.0
0.0
17.5
30.2
268.6
262.3
257.9
260.3
265.8
135
120
109
99
93
Coal-based Alternative Ironmaking
Iron Dynamics, Inc ( IDI ) – hot metal
process to feed SDI’s EAF flat-rolled
mini-mill, IDI is an RHF(rotary hearth
furnace)/SAF (submerged arc furnace )
process – start with briquettes of iron
ore/waste oxides/coal, produce DRI in
RHF, then melt DRI in SAF – plant
restarted late 2003
 Mesabi Nugget Demonstration Plant of
Kobe ITmk3 pig iron nugget process

Coal-based Alternative Ironmaking
 HIsmelt
plant ( 0.8 MTPY pig iron )
in Kwinana, Australia – JV involving
Nucor
 Nucor/CVRD JV to build mini-blast
furnaces in Brazil to produce pig
iron for Nucor EAF’s in USA
 RHF waste oxide plants – built at
EAF and BF/BOF plants; all are
currently idle
Role of Quebec Cartier Mining Company
in North American Ironmaking




QCM mines iron ore in Quebec-Labrador
Trough, with pellet plant, port facilities at Port
Cartier on St. Lawrence Seaway.
Mt. Wright mining, concentrating: produce 13
MT; mining and upgrade 2.4 MT of raw ore at
32 % Fe to yield 1 MT of concentrate:
specular hematite at 66 % Fe.
Produce pellets ( 8.7 MTPY ) in ( 2 straight
grate machines, 464 m2 ) for BF and DR use
Ship to Europe, N. America, Asia
Chemistry of QCM’s Mt. Wright
concentrate and pellets
Mt. Wright concentrate
Fe SiO2 Al2O3 CaO MgO
66.0 4.90 0.33 0.07 0.05
TiO2 P
S Mn
0.18 0.015 0.005 0.025
Blast Furnace pellets
Fluxed
Low SiO2 Fluxed
Acid
Fe
63.3
65.1
65.1
SiO2 Al2O3 CaO MgO
3.75 0.50 3.68 1.30
2.50 0.40 2.25 1.50
5.20 0.45 0.60 0.25
DR grade pellets
67.8 1.65 0.35
0.50 0.30
US Steelmaking vs. Off-shore slabs
Advantages of existing blast furnace plants:
fully depreciated plants
high labor productivity, < 1 man-hour/ton
local coal, equity pellet plants
Off-shore slab plants – added costs
capital recovery
ocean freight
AISI Actual – 2002
Blast Furnace
DR
M tonnes # of BF’s
USA
Canada
Mexico
*
ICSTI’03 Forecast - 2015
DS*
39.4
31
0.5 <0.1
8.0
5
0.2
0
3.5
3
4.6
0
------------------------------------------50.9
39
5.3 <0.1
Blast Furnace
DR** DS
M tonnes # of BF’s
33.0
25
1.0 2.0
8.0
5
1.0 1.0
4.0
3
6.0
0
---------------------------------------45.0
33
8.0 3.0
IDI (RHF/SAF), HIsmelt, ITMk3 ** Midrex, HyL or RHF waste oxide
Conclusion - Key North
American Developments
“Heat Recovery”Cokemaking
 Blast Furnaces – high productivity, “endless
campaigns”, high use of O2, pellets, HBI
 Midrex, HyL DR – higher productivity,
metallization: coated pellets, O2, hot
discharge
 Coal based alternative ironmaking – IDI,
ITmk3 processes
