EPA-230/1-73-015
AUGUST 1973
           ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
                     OF
    PROPOSED EFFLUENT GUIDELINES

   INORGANIC CHEMICALS, ALKALI  AND
   CHLORINE INDUSTRIES  (Major  Products)
                    QUANTITY
      U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
           Office of Planning and Evaluation

              Washington, D.C. 2046O
f
I
 <$,.
                    5322
I
<3

-------
  This document is available in limited quantities through the
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Information Center,
Room W-327 Waterside Mall,  Washington, D. C. 20460.

  The document will subsequently be available through  the
National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia
22151.

-------
EPA-230/1-73-015
                       ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED
                      EFFLUENT GUIDELINES—INORGANIC
                CHEMICALS, ALKALI AND CHLORINE INDUSTRIES
                            (MAJOR PRODUCTS)
                              August 1973


                        Contract No. 68-01-1541
                    Office of Planning and Evaluation
                     Environmental Protection Agency
                         Washington, D.C.  20460
                 230 Sov.-.

-------
This report has been reviewed by the Office
of Planning and Evaluation, EPA, and approved
for publication.  Approval does not signify
that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of
trade names or commercial products consti-
tute endorsement or recommendation for use.

-------
                                PREFACE

        The attached document is a contractors' study prepared for the
Office of Planning and Evaluation of the Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA").  The purpose of the study is to analyze the economic
impact which could result from the application of alternative effluent
limitation guidelines and standards of performance to be established
under sections 304(b) and 306 of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, as amended.

        The study supplements the technical study ("EPA Development
Document") supporting the issuance of proposed regulations under
sections 304(b) and 306.  The Development Document surveys existing and
potential waste treatment control methods and technology within particular
industrial source categories and supports promulgation of certain
effluent limitation guidelines and standards of performance based upon
an analysis of the feasibility of these guidelines and standards in ac-
cordance with the requirements of sections 304(b) and 306 of the Act.
Presented in the Development Document are the investment and operating
costs associated with various alternative control and treatment tech-
nologies.  The attached document supplements this analysis by estimating
the broader economic effects which might result from the required
application of various control methods and technologies.  This study
investigates the effect of alternative approaches in terms of produce
price increases, effects upon employment and the continued viability of
affected plants, effects upon foreign trade and other competitive
effects.

        The study has been prepared with the supervision and review of the
Office of Planning and Evaluation of EPA.  This report was submitted in
fulfillment of Task Order NO. 8, Contract 68-01-1541 by Arthur D.
Little, Inc.  Work was completed as of August  1973.

        This report is being released and circulated at approximately
the same time as publication in the Federal Register of a notice of pro-
posed rule making under sections 304(b) and  306 of the Act for the subject
point source category.  The study has not been reviewed by EPA and is not
an official EPA publication.  The study will be considered along with
the information contained in the development document and any comments
received by EPA on either document before or during proposed rule making
proceedings necessary to establish final regulations.  Prior to final
promulgation of regulations, the accompanying study shall have standing
in any EPA proceeding or court proceeding only to the extent that it
represents the views of the contractor who studied the subject industry.
It cannot be cited, referenced, or represented in any respect in any
such proceeding as a statement of EPA's views regarding the subject
industry.
                                  iii

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                      Page
  List of Tables                                                       ix

  List of Figures                                                    xiii


  1.  SUMMARY                                                           1

      A.  INTRODUCTION                                                  1

      B.  CONCLUSIONS                                                   7


 II.  INDUSTRY CHARACTERIZATION—ADDITIONAL PRODUCTS                   23

      A.  CALCIUM CARBIDE                                              23

      B.  SODIUM SULFATE                                               36

      C.  TITANIUM DIOXIDE                                             54

      D.  SODIUM BICHROMATE                                            76

      E.  POTASSIUM BICHROMATE                                         90


III.  IMPACT ANALYSIS—INITIAL STUDY PRODUCTS                          93

      A.  ALUMINUM CHLORIDE                                            93

      B.  ALUMINUM SULFATE                                             94

      C.  CHLORINE AND CAUSTIC SODA                                    95

      D.  .HYDROCHLORIC ACID                                            97

      E.  HYDROFLUORIC ACID                                            98

      F.  HYDROGEN PEROXIDE                                            99

      G.  LIME                                                        100

      H.  NITRIC ACID                                                 101

      I.  SULFURIC ACID                                               102

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
IV.   IMPACT ANALYSIS—ADDITIONAL PRODUCTS




     A.  CALCIUM CARBIDE                                             105




     B.  SODIUM SULFATE                                              106




     C.  TITANIUM DIOXIDE                                            107




     D.  SODIUM CHROMATE AND BICHROMATE                              112

-------
                             LIST OF TABLES

Table
 No.                                                               Page

  1    WATER TREATMENT COSTS BY LEVELS OF CONTROL                    3

  2    MANUFACTURING COSTS AND PLANT ECONOMICS                       4

  3    IMPACT ANALYSIS MATRIX                                       12

  4    CALCIUM CARBIDE PRODUCTION, IMPORT/EXPORT, AND APPARENT      24
       CONSUMPTION

  5    TOTAL MARKET VALUE OF CALCIUM CARBIDE PRODUCTION             25

  6    USE PATTERN OF CALCIUM CARBIDE BY APPLICATION                27

  7    CAPTIVE VS. COMMERCIAL CONSUMPTION OF CALCIUM CARBIDE        29

  8    CALCIUM CARBIDE PRODUCERS—LOCATION AND CAPACITY             31

  9    ESTIMATED COST OF MANUFACTURING CALCIUM CARBIDE              33

 10    CALCIUM CARBIDE PRICES—PUBLISHED VS. ACTUAL                 35

 11    SODIUM SULFATE PRODUCTION, IMPORT/EXPORT, AND                37
       APPARENT CONSUMPTION

 12    USE PATTERN OF SODIUM SULFATE BY APPLICATION                 39

 13    GEOGRAPHIC USE PATTERN OF SODIUM SULFATE                     41

 14    CAPTIVE VS. COMMERCIAL CONSUMPTION OF SODIUM SULFATE         43

 15    PRODUCTION OF SODIUM SULFATE BY PROCESS                      44

 16    SODIUM SULFATE PRODUCTS—LOCATION AND CAPACITY               50

 17    SODIUM SULFATE PRICES—PUBLISHED VS. ACTUAL                  >3

 18    TiX>2 APPARENT CONSUMPTION AND INDUSTRY SHIPMENTS             56

 19    Ti02 MARKE'i CONSUMPTION                                      57

 20    Ti02 CAPTIVE CONSUMPTION                                     60
                                  ix

-------
                             LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Table
 No.                                                               Page

 21    Ti02 MANUFACTURING LOCATIONS AND CAPACITIES                  64

 22    Ti02 MANUFACTURING ECONOMICS—SULFATE PROCESS                65

 23    Ti02 PIGMENT PROFITABILITY—SULFATE PROCESS                  67

 24    Ti02 MANUFACTURING ECONOMICS—CHLORIDE PROCESS               69

 25    Ti02 PIGMENT PROFITABILITY—CHLORIDE PROCESS                 71

 26    T102 INDUSTRY PLANT CAPACITY UTILIZATION                     74

 27    Ti02 COMMERCIAL SHIPMENT VALUES                              75

 28    APPARENT U.S. CONSUMPTION OF SODIUM CHROMATE AND             78
       BICHROMATE

 29    ESTIMATED 1971 USE PATTERN FOR SODIUM CHROMATE               79
       AND BICHROMATE

 30    PRODUCTION OF CHROMIUM PIGMENTS AND CONSUMPTION OF SODIUM    80
       BICHROMATE EQUIVALENT, 1971

 31    SHIPMENTS OF SODIUM CHROMATE AND BICHROMATE                  83

 32    ESTIMATED MANUFACTURING COST, SODIUM BICHROMATE              85

 33    PRODUCERS OF SODIUM BICHROMATE                               87

 34    ACTUAL VS. LIST PRICES FOR SODIUM BICHROMATE                 89

 35    ESTDIATED MANUFACTURING COST, POTASSIUM BICHROMATE           91
                                   xi

-------
                            LIST OF FIGURES

Figure
 No.                                                               Page

  1    INCREMENTAL WATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR BEST AVAILABLE          8
       TECHNOLOGY VERSUS SELLING PRICE AND PROFIT MARGIN

  2    INCREMENTAL WATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR  BEST PRACTICABLE      11
       TECHNOLOGY VERSUS SELLING PRICE AND PROFIT MARGIN

  3    SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM—PRODUCTION OF CALCIUM CARBIDE        30

  4    RECOVERY OF SODIUM SULFATE FROM NATURAL BRINES               46

  5    PRODUCTION OF SODIUM SULFATE IN VISCOSE RAYON PROCESS        47

  6    PRODUCTION OF SODIUM SULFATE IN THE MANNHEIM PROCESS         48

  7    Ti02 PIGMENT MANUFACTURING PROCESSES                         62
                                  xiii

-------
                              I.  SUMMARY
A.  INTRODUCTION

        Tne rollowxng report is submitted in compliance with Phase III
of Task Order WA73X-420 "Economic Impact of 1972 Federal Water Pollution
Control Amendments on the Inorganic Chemical Industry."  As outlined in
our proposal (2-8601), dated May 8, 1973, this Phase III report deals
with nine inorganic chemicals discussed in the initial study,! including:

        Aluminum Chloride
        Aluminum Sulfate
        Chlorine and Caustic Soda
        Hydrochloric Acid
        Hydrofluoric Acid
        Hydrogen Peroxide
        Lime
        Nitric Acid
        Sulfuric Acid

as well as the additional six inorganic chemicals discussed in the
Phase I draft report of the Contractor, including:

        Calcium Carbide
        Sodium Sulfate
        Titanium Dioxide (Chloride)
        Titanium Dioxide (Sulfate)
        Sodium Chromate and Bichromate
        Potassium Bichromate.

        The objective of this study was to analyze the economic impact of
the costs of water pollution abatement requirements for the specified
products, using the data for the nine initial study products contained
in the initial impact study, new water treatment cost data provided by
EPA, and the industry information developed for the additional products
from the Phase I Contractor work.
 "Initial Analysis of the Economic Impact of Water Pollution Control
 Costs Upon Ten Inorganic Chemicals,"  report to Environmental Protection
 Agency by Booz, Allen Public Administration Services, Inc., January
 5, 1973.

-------
    1.  Source of Water Treatment Costs

        All of the water treatment costs for the various levels of
effluent control shown in this report were taken from the effluent
guideline development document prepared for the EPA under contract
number 68-01-1513 dated June 1973.  The water treatment costs (on a
before-tax basis) by product are summarized in Table 1.  Base-level
practice (B.L.P.) represents water treatment practices which, in the
judgment of the effluent guideline development document, are followed
by most of the industry and exceeded by exemplary plants.  Similarly,
exemplary plant practice (E.P.P.) reflects the unit, cost of water
treatment and control practices at the exemplary plant.  Proposed best
practicable technology (B.P.T.) reflects the guideline  development
document's estimate of the unit water treatment cost for the product
in question based upon the best technically and economically feasible
treatment and control technology.  Finally, proposed best available
technology (B.A.T.) reflects the degree of effluent, reduction which
must be achieved by July 1, 1983.  The unit treatment costs used for
any particular level of control in the impact analysis is the incremental
cost over B.L.P.

    2.  Source of Manufacturing Costs and Profitability Data

        In the following report the manufacturing costs and profitability
data shown in Table 2  for the "Initial Study Products" were taker
from the initial study project.  Comparable data for the six "Additional
Products" were developed by the Contractor.

    3.  Impact Analysis Methodology

        In order to assess the impact of water treatment costs on the
inorganic chemicals covered in this report, we have, developed an analytical
framework to arrive at the impact judgment.  In addition to providing
us with a systematic method to weigh each of the factors effecting the
impact judgment, the methodology also provides a format by which the
basis for our conclusions are clearly presented.

        The basic premise behind the methodology is that a producer faced
with new investment in water treatment facilities could  (1) continue to
operate by (a) passing on the additional costs through price increases,
or (b) absorbing the costs (thereby reducing profits); or (2) shut his
plant down.  This premise, of course, reduces the impact of higher
water treatment costs to the simplest terms.  In the real world, the
result of higher costs most probably would be some combination of
these alternatives, e.g., a price hike by the most efficient producer
sufficient to recover part of his costs (but not enough to cover
most of the costs of the marginal producer), reduced profit margins
for the most efficient producer partially offset by an increased market
share resulting from plant shutdowns by the marginal producer(s).

        The approach we have taken in assessing the impact on each of
the inorganic chemicals is to first examine the likelihood that the

-------
                                     TABLE 1
WATER
TREATMENT COSTS BY LEVELS OF CONTROL
(Dollars Per Ton of Product)

Initial Study Products
Aluminum Chloride
Aluminum Sulfate
Chlorine
(Mercury)
(Diaphragm)
Hydrochloric Acid
Hydrofluoric Acid
Hydrogen Peroxide
(Organic)
(Electrolytic)
Lime
(Bag)
(H20 Scrubber)
Nitjric Acid
Sulfuric Acid
(Burning)
(Regen)
Additional Products
Calcium Carbide
Sodium Sulfate
Titanium Dioxide
(Sulfate)
[Neutralization]
[Acid Recovery]
(Chloride)
Sodium Chromate and
Base-
Level
Practice
0.00
0.79

2.14
0.04
0.25
3.57
0.20
0.00

0.00
0.00
0.00

0.05
0.25
0.00
0.00

1.90
1.69
2.12
0.26
Exemplary Best
Plant Practicable
Practice
3.77
1.72

2.14
0.29
0.25
4.04
0.33
0.75

0.00
1.28
0.22

0.10
0.75
1.94
0.00

10.05
10.05
38.61
11.66
Practice
3.77
1.72

2.74
0.29
0.30
4.89
1.06
1.14

0.00
1.28
0.22

0.17
0.75
1.94
0.00

83.57
35.71
38.61
16.45
Best
Available
Practice
3.77
1.72

3.00
0.56
0.30
12.95
1.06
1.14

0.00
1.28
0.22

0.17
0.75
1.94
0.00

98.09
50.48
66.79
16.45
    Bichromate

  Potassium Bichromate
0.57
3.52
5.24
5.24
Source;  Guidelines development document on inorganic chemicals,  alkali
         and chlorine industries prepared for United States Environmental
         Protection Agency under Contract Number 68-01-1513,  June 1973.

-------
                                   TABLE 2
                     MANUFACTURING COSTS AND PLANT ECONOMICS
                     Selling  Manufacturing  After  Tax  Depreciable
                      Price       Cost*      Net Income   Investment
Initial Study Products

  Aluminum Chloride    292

  Aluminum Sulfate      42

  Chlorine and Caustic
    Soda
                          r
    Mercury            101'
    Diaphragm          101'

  Hydrofluoric Acid    370

  Lime                  16

  H2S°4
    Burning             20
    Regeneration        22
-($/Ton)-


   226
    32
  N.A.
    81
  N.A.

    12


    14
    16
21
 3
 4.12
 4.33
18
 1.00
 1.20
 1.20
$MM


 1.2
 1.0
13
20
 5
 4

 6
 9
                        Sample
                        Plant
                       Capacity
                      M Tons/Year
 10
 33
 66
115
 21
165

330
330
Additional Products

  Calcium Carbide       90

  Titanium Dioxide—
    Sulfate            540
    Chloride           570
  Sodium Bichromate    245

  Potassium Bichromate 475
    86

   416
   471
   212

   403
26
21
18

24
15
21
 5

 2
 45

 25
 25
 49

  5
 Excluding GS&A and federal income taxes.
f\
 S^les revenue per ECU.

Source;  Initial Study Products;  "Initial Analysis of the Economic Impact
         of Water Pollution Control Costs Upon Ten Inorganic Chemicals,"
         final report to Environmental Protection Agency for Booz, Allen
         Public Administration Services, Inc., January 5, 1973.
         Additional Products:  The Contractor.

-------
higher costs imposed on the industry by virtue of new water effluent
guidelines will be defrayed, wholly or in part,  by higher product
prices.  If the conclusion is that treatment costs cannot be passed
on through price increases, the second part of the impact analysis is
to examine the likelihood that some plants in the industry would be
forced to shut down, taking into account both economic and noneconomic
factors.

        a.  Price Increase Constraints

        The treatment costs per ton before taxes indicate the magnitude
of the unit price increase necessary to fully recover all treatment costs
(i.e., repay the investment and cover operating costs).  The larger the
ratio of before-tax unit treatment cost to actual unit selling price,
the more difficult it will be to fully recover treatment costs, all things
being equal.  As indicated, the first question we have addressed is whether
conditions in the specific competitive situation would permit price in-
creases.  In general, the products' price history and the nature of those
prices—whether firm or widely dispersed and discounted—provide a clue
as to the possibility of price increases.  More specifically, however,
the following factors are those that we have used in arriving at the
judgment as to whether price increases are feasible.  Except in unusual
circumstances, no one factor would be overriding.  Rather, the judgment
is based on a combination of factors.

        Substitute Products  (or Processes)—If substitute products exist,
price increases to cover the (full) costs of water treatment would be
difficult.

        Capacity Utilization—If capacity utilization for the industry
is low, price increases to cover the  (full) costs of treatment would
be difficult.

        Captive Usage—If  there is negligible captive use, price increases
to cover  the  (full) costs of water treatment would be difficult.

        Demand Growth—Price increases are more difficult  to achieve  in
a static or declining market than in a growing market.

        Foreign Competition—If the market can be served by  foreign
competitors  (particularly  if the foreign producers are not faced with
added water pollution abatement costs), price increases  are  less  likely.

        Abatement Cost Differences—If some plants in  the  industry will
incur  substantially higher water pollution abatement expenditures  than
other plants, they will be  less able  to pass on  the added  costs  as price
increases.

        Price Elasticity of  Demand—For some products, substantial water
pollution abatement costs,  if passed  on as price  increases,  could  result
in reduced  demand for  the  product.

-------
        Basis for Competition—If the basis for competition in the in-
dustry is primarily price as opposed to service or technology, cost in-
creases will be more difficult to pass on, particularly if there is a
significant difference between unit treatment costs between large-
producers and small producers.

        Market Share Distribution—If the market share distribution is
fragmented (rather than concentrated, in which case there often is a
dominant price leader), price increases are less likely, particularly
if treatment costs do not effect all producers fairly equally.

        Number of Producers—If the market is served by many producers
(increasing the likelihood of manufacturing cost differences, abatement
cost differences, etc.), a condition exists constraining price increases.

        Although not explicitly listed in the generic model, we have been
alert to other factors which might prevail for individual products.
For example, the economic importance of a product in the manufacturing
costs of derivative products might act as a constraint on price increases.

        b.  Plant Shutdown Factors

        If treatment costs cannot be passed on as price increases, the
simplistic model says that the producer either absorbs them or shuts down
his plant.  The shutdown decision will involve both economic and
strategic (i.e., noneconomic) considerations as follows.

        Profitability—The after-tax cost per ton of water treatment
compared with unit after-tax net income measures the producer's ability
or willingness to absorb the added cost.

        Cash Flow—Plants will continue to operate temporarily at
essentially zero profitability (if necessary) if the plant is producing
a positive cash flow (and has a competitive process and is in a stable
or growing market).

        Ratio of Investment in Treatment Facilities to Net Fixed
Investment—If the new investment in water treatment facilities bulks
large in comparison with existing plant investment (and other factors
are marginal), a shutdown decision may be in order.  In some  instances,
the availability (and cost) of capital to the producer may influence  the
shutdown decision.

        Integration—The degree of backward or forward  integration is  a
factor in the shutdown decision.  A producer  (or industry) with a  sig-
nificant raw material position or one using the product for  downstream
manufacture is less likely  to curtail production than a non-integrated
producer  (or industry).

        Chemical Complex—An  isolated plant would  be unable  to  take
advantage of common treatment facilities.

-------
        Other Environmental Problems—If a plant has already commited
runds for air pollution, it will be more likely to commit the additional
funds necessary for water pollution.  Alternately, if a company faces
both water and air pollution abatement (and/or unusual OSHA) costs, the
magnitude of the environmental costs taken together may prompt plant
closing whereas any one taken alone would not.

        Emotional Commitment—The emotional commitment of the company to
Jiat particular product (taking into account protection of competitive
position, prestige, the importance of the product in the company's long-
range strategy, etc.) may be a factor in the shutdown decision.

        Ownership—Other things being equal (and negative), multi-
industry companies are more likely to shut down marginal plants than less-
diversified producers.  The premise is that the multi-industry producer
has other (and better) investment opportunities than the single product
company (particularly a privately-held", family business) .
B.  CONCLUSIONS

        In Figure 1 we have compared the incremental (over B.L.P.) water
treatment costs estimated in the effluent guideline development document
to achieve B.A.T. effluent standards as a function of product selling
price versus treatment costs as a function of unit profit margin for the
inorganic chemicals discussed in this study.  Three initial study products
do not appear on the figure because data for industry profitability were
not developed.  For the three products (hydrochloric acid, nitric acid,
and hydrogen peroxide), however, unit treatment costs are small so that
these products would appear in the lower left-hand corner of the figure.
One of the additional products, viz. calcium carbide, has also been left
off the figure.  With a treatment cost of $1.94 per ton versus a selling
price of $90 per ton, the cost/price ratio is a nominal 2.2 percent.
However, since industry profit margins are minimal, the treatment cost
as a function of unit margins is very high and falls off the scale of the
figure.

        Titanium dioxide stands out in this figure as the product where
the estimated treatment costs represent the highest proportion of both
selling price and profit margin.  (For both the chloride and sulfate
process, the estimated treatment costs on a unit basis are very nearly
2.5 times current estimated industry profit levels.)  Lime and sodium
bichromate are at an intermediate level where treatment costs represent
7-8% of selling price and 50-80% of estimated profit margins.  A third
group of products—hydrofluoric acid, sludge sulfuric acid, and aluminum
sulfate—are faced with treatment costs representing 2-3% of selling
price and 15-25% of estimated profit margins.  A final group of products
including aluminum chloride, potassium bichromate, chlorine and caustic
soda, and direct burning sulfuric acid, have estimated treatment costs
at about 1% of selling price and 5-10% of profits.  No water treatment
costs were ascribed to sodium sulfate (as chromate by-product).

-------
    250
                                                                         • Titanium Dioxide • Chloride
                                                                                                         • Titanium
                                                                                                           Dioxide •
                                                                                                           Sulfate
                                                                                                           (Neutralization)
    200
!  150
                                                         • Titanium Dioxide - Sulfate (Recovery)
£
s   100
    50
20
                                                         Lime
                                                              10
                           Sodium Bichromate   *
           Sulfunc    •• Hydrofluoric Acid
           Acid - Regeneration
                        Aluminum Sulfate
    _                 • Chlorine/Caustic - Mercury
                Aluminum Chloride •
                          • Potassium Bichromate
     Chlorine/  • • Sulfuric Acid • Burning
    Caustic - Diaphragm
                                                                        . Sodium Sulfate
                               • For Key to Product Identity See Expanded Scale Diagram
                               I	I	1	I	I
                                          6           8          10          12

                                                  Treatment Cost as Percent Selling Price
                                     16
                                                 18
                                                             20
              FIGURE 1    INCREMENTAL WATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY VERSUS
                           SELLING PRICE AND PROFIT MARGIN

-------
        The same comparison is made in Figure 2 using incremental water
treatment costs for B.P.T.  In general, the spatial relationships between
the identified products is much the same as in Figure 1, with the ex-
ception that sulfate process titanium dioxide is at a greater disadvantage
with respect to chloride process titanium dioxide.

        Although Figures 1 and 2 provides a first approximation of the
impact severity on each of the products from additional water treatment
costs, we have used the methodology described above to assess the
economic impact.  The results of this assessment are summarized in
Table 3.  From this table and based on the treatment costs given in the
effluent guideline development document we conclude that plant shutdowns
as a direct result of increased water treatment costs using B.A.T. are
likely for chlorine/caustic soda, lime, sludge sulfuric acid, sulfate
process titanium dioxide and sodium bichromate.   Although the B.A.T.
costs for potassium bichromate could be passed on through a price in-
crease the one significant manufacturing facility could not continue
operating if the sodium bichromate plant upon which it depends were shut
down.  For the other products included in the study the increased water
treatment costs will either be passed on as price increases or absorbed
by the producers.

        The same shutdown conclusions pertain as well for B.P.T.  For
three of the five shutdown candidates—viz. lime, sludge sulfuric acid,
and sodium bichromate—B.P.T. costs are identical to B.A.T. costs.  For
the remaining two—viz. mercury cell chlorine/caustic and sulfate
process titanium dioxide—the costs resulting from B.P.T. were not judged
to be significantly different (i.e.,, lower) than B.A.T. costs to impact
the industries less severely.

-------
   200
    180
    160
    140

•

I
    120
    100
     80
     60
     40
     20
                                                                      Titanium Dioxide • Sulfate (Neutralization)
                                                        • Titanium Dioxide • Chloride
                                                      i Titanium Dioxide - Sulfate (Recovery)
                                                                         10
                                                               Lime •
                                       Sodium Bichromate  •
 •  Sulfuric Acid - Regeneration



 • Aluminum Sulf»*»



4—For Key to Product Identity See Expanded Scale Diagram

  	I    	I	I
                                                                  • Potassium
                                                                    Bichromate
                                                        Aluminum Chloride •
                                                                                     ' Chlorine/Caustic -
                                                                                      Mercury

                                                                                     •Sulfuric Acid - Burning
                                                                                  • Hydrofluoric Acid

                                                                                • Chlorine/Caustic - Diaphragm
                                                                             Sodium Sulfate
                                                                                    I
                                                     6              8              10

                                              Treatment Cost as Percent Selling Price
                                                                          12
                                                                                         14
             FIGURE 2   INCREMENTAL WATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR BEST PRACTICABLE TECHNOLOGY VERSUS
                          SELLING PRICE AND PROFIT MARGIN
                                                             11

-------
                                                                           TABLE  3
                                                                   IMPACT ANALYSIS MATRIX

1972 Production (M Tons)
1971 Unit Value ($/Ton)
1972 Production Value ($MM)
Number of Plants (Current)
PRICE INCREASE CONSTRAINTS
Factor
Ratio of BT Treatment
Cost to Selling Price
(%)
, Substitute Products
Capacity Utilization
Captive Usage
Demand Growth
Foreign Competition
Abatement Cost
Differences
Price Elasticity
of Demand
Basis for Competition
Market Share
Distribution
Number of Producers
Condition for
Constraint
High
High Occurrence
Low
Low
Low
High
Unequal
High
Price
Fragmented
Many
Treatment
Level
E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.









	 	 : 	 * 	 1
ALUMINUM CHLORIDE
34
292
9.4
8
1.3
1.3
1.3
Low
65%
Low
Static
Low
Equal
Low
Quality, Service
Fragmented
6
ALUMINUM SULFATE
1,124
42.50
47.8
100
2.2
2.2
2.2
Low
ca. 75%
<10%
3%/Yr
< 1%
Unequal
Low
Price
Concentrated
27
CHLORINE & CAUSTIC SODA CHLORINE (, CAUSTIC SODA
(Mercury) (Diaphragm)
9,870 (C12); 10,710 (NaOH)
45.50 (C12); 47.80 (NaOH)
464 (C12); 525 (NaOH)
29* 34*
0.0 0.25
0.6 0.25
0.8 0.52
Low
95%
62% (C12); 33% (NaOH^
6%/Yr (C12); 5% (NaOH)
Low
Unequal
Low to Moderate
Price
Concentrated
30
^Includes five combined (both mercury and diaphragm) plants.

-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)
ALUMINUM CHLORIDE i ALUMINUM SULFATE
1
PLANT SHUTDOWN DECISION
Factor
Ratio of AT Treatment
Cost to AT Net Income

-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)

L972 Production (M Tons)
L971 Unit Value ($/Ton)
L972 Production Value ($MM)
lumber of Plants (Current)
PRICE INCREASE CONSTRAINTS
Factor
Ratio of BT Treatment
Cost to Selling Price
(%)
Substitute Products
Capacity Utilization
Captive Usage
Demand Growth
Foreign Competition
Abatement Cost
Differences
Price Elasticity
of Demand
Basis for Competition
Market Share
Distribution
Number of Producers
Condition for
Constraint
High
High Occurrence
Low
Low
Low
High
Unequal
High
Price
Fragmented
Many
Treatment
Level
E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.
•-- . '

-


,. .,




HYDROCLORIC ACID
2,204
43.2
95.2
89
0.0
0.2
0.2
Moderate
ca. 90%
60%
4%/Yr
Low
Unequal
Moderate
Price
Fragmented
42
HYDROFLUORIC ACID
332.2
349.31
112.8
14
0.1
0.4
2.5
Low
84.5%
75%
5%-7%/Yr
Low
Equal
Low
Price
Concentrated
9
HYDROGEN PEROXIDE
(Electrolytic)
9
596
5.4
1
0.1
0.2
0.2
HYDROGEN PEROXIDE
(Organic)
66
596
39.3
5
0.1
0.1
0.2
Low
70%
30%
Static
Moderate
Unequal
Low
Quality, Service
Concentrated
6

-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)

PLANT SHUTDOWN DECISION
Factor
Ratio of AT Treatment
Cost to AT Net Income
(%)
Cash Flow (Including
Treatment Costs)
Ratio of Investment in
Treatment Facilities to
Net Fixed Investment (X)
Integration
Chemical Complex
Other Environmental
Problems (Including OSHA)
Emotional Commitment
Ownership
Condition lor
Shutdown
High
Negative
High
Low
Isolated Plant
Multiple
Indifference
Multi-Industry
Companies
^
". reatrcent
T.pvi>l
E P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.
•
E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.
•




HYDROCHLORIC ACID HYDROFLUORIC ACID
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Positive
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
High
Complex
Air
High
Multi-Industry
i 	
1.3
3.6
25.4
Positive
0.6
1.0
1.5
High Forward
Comp lex
Nominal
High
Multi-Industry
	
HYDROGEN PEROXIDE
(Electrolytic)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
HYDR03EN PEROXIDE
(Organic)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
il.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Moderate Forward;
Moderate Backward
Isolated
None
High
Multi-Industry

-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)

1972 Production (M Tons)
1971 Unit Value ($/Ton)
1972 Production Value ($MM)
Number of Plants (Current)
PRICE INCREASE CONSTRAINTS
Factor
Ratio of BT Treatment
Cost to Selling Price
(Z)
Substitute Products
Capacity Utilization
Captive Usage
Demand Growth
Foreign Competition
Abatement Cost
Differences
Price Elasticity
of Demand
Basis for Competition
Market Share
Distribution
Number of Producers
Condition for
Constraint
High
High Occurrence
Low
Low
Low
High
Unequal
High
Price
Fragmented
Many
Treatment
Level
E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.
•'.' •' • '









LIME
20,865
16
32'.
170
8.0
8.0
8.0
Low
ca. 95%
35%
Moderate
Low
Unequal
Moderately High
Price
Fragmented
110
NITRIC ACID
7,000
67
441
80
N.A.
N.A.
0.3
Moderate
85%
90%
Low
Low
Equal
Moderate
Price
Fragmented
49
SULFURIC ACID SULFURIC ACID
(Burning) . (Regen)
31,086
21
652.8 j
142 Total; 33 Regen
0.2 2.3
0.6 2.3
0.6 2.3
Moderate
65-70% (Fertilizer)
95% (Merchant)
60%
3-4% (Fertilizer)
2-3% (Merchant)
Low
Unequal
Moderate
Price
Concentrated (Fertilizer)
Fragmented (Merchant)
71

-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)

PLANT SHUTDOWN DECISION
Factor
Ratio of AT Treatment
Cost to AT Net Income
(Z)
Cash Flow (Including
Treatment Costs)
Ratio of Investment in
Treatment Facilities to
Net Fixed Investment (Z)
Integration
Chemical Coup lex
Other Environmental
Problems (Including OSHA)
Emotional Commitment
Ownership
Condition for
Shutdown
High
Negative
High
Low
Isolated Plant
Multiple
Indifference
Multi-Industry
Companies
Treatment.
Level
E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.

E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.




„
LIME
67.0
67.0
67.0
ca. $2/Ton Depr.

Moderate Forward;
High Backward
Complex and Isolated
Air
High
Two-thirds are
Mul t i- Indus try
NITRIC ACID
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
High Forward;
Low Backward
Complex
Air Pollution
Moderate
Large Multi-Industry;
Small Fertilizer
and Explosive
SULFURIC ACID
(Burning)
2.5
6.0
6.0
Positive
1.4
3.0
3.0
SULFURIC ACID
(Regen)
25
25
25
Positive
14.4
14.4
14.4
Moderate to High
Complex
Air Pollution
High
Multi-Industry

-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)

1972 Production (M Tons)
1971 Unit Value ($/Ton)
1972 Production Value ($M
Number of Plants (Current
PRICE IN(
Factor
Ratio of BT Treatment
Cost to Selling Price

Substitute Products
Capacity Utilization
Captive Usage
Demand Growth
Foreign Competition
Abatement Cost
Differences
Price Elasticity
of Demand
Basis for Competition
Market Share
Distribution
Number of Producers

0
>
31EASE CONSTRAINTS
Condition for
Constraint
High
High Occurrence
Low
Low
Low
High
Unequal
High
Price
fragmented
Many



Treatment
Level
E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.
•*- .-.• '

f . ".'. . : "
• J " '"' I"



-

<"• :
-. - '
CALCIUM CARBIDE
493
90
44.4
5


2.2
2.2
2.2
High
39Z
75Z
Declining
Low
Unequal
Moderately High
Price
Concentrated
4
SODIUM SULFATE
1,364
21
28.6
32


0.0
0.0
0.0
High
88%
Low
Static
Moderate to High
Unequal
High
Price
Fragmented
22
TITANIUM DIOXIDE TITANIUM DIOXIDE
(Sulfate) (Chloride)
687
452
343
6 8

Neut. Acid Rec.
1.4 1.5 6.4
14.3 6.0 6.4
16.8 8.6 11.3
Low
85Z
14Z
4-5%/Yr
Low
Unequal
Low
Technology and Service
Concentrated
4 7

-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)

PLANT SHUTDOWN DECISION
Factor
Ratio of AT Treatment
Cost to AT Net Income
(%)
Cash Flow (Including
Treatment Costs)
Ratio of Investment in
Treatment Facilities to
Net Fixed Investment (%)
Integration
Chemical Complex
Other Environmental
Problems (Including OSHA)
Emotional Commitment
Ownership
Condition for
Shutdown
High
Negative
High
Low
Isolated Plant
Multiple
Indifference
Multi-Industry
Companies
Treatment
Levej
E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.

E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.





CALCIUM CARBIDE
0.0
0.0
0.0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Moderate Forward;
High Backward
Complex and Isolated
Air Pollution
Acetylene Low;
Others High
Primarily
Multi-Industry
SODIUM SULFATE
0.0
N.A.
0.0
0.0
0.0
High
Complex
Some Air Pollution
By-product Low;
Others High
Multi-Industry
TITANIUM DIOXIDE
(Sulfate)
Neut. Acid Rec.
19.7 20.3
198.0 82.5
233.0 118.0
TITANIUM DIOXIDE
(Chloride)
134
134
237
Positive
0.2 0.2
48.3 19.0
55.6 26.3
Low to Moderate Forward;
Moderate Backward
17.3
17.3
23.5
Low to Moderate Forward;
Low to Moderate Backward
Isolated
Solid Waste
Air (Chloride)
High
Multi-Industry

-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)

L972 Production (M Tons)
1971 Unit Value ($/Ton)
L972 Production Value ($MM)
dumber of Plants (Current)
PRICE INCREASE CONSTRAINTS
Factor
Ratio of BT Treatment
Cost to Selling Price
(%)
Substitute Products
Capacity Utilization
Captive Usage
Demand Growth
Foreign Competition
Abatement Cost
Differences
Price Elasticity
of Demand
Basis for Competition
Market Share
Distribution
Number of Producers
Condition for
Constraint
High
High Occurrence
Low
Low
Low
High
Unequal
High
Price
Fragmented
Many
Treatment
Level
E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.










SODIUM CHROMATE
AND BICHROMATE
137.1
248
34.9
3
4.6
6.6
6.6
Many (for
derivatives)
80%
35%
Declining
High
Unequal
High
Price and Service
Concentrated
3
POTASSIUM BICHROMATE
3
475
1.4
1
0.6
1.0
1.0
Moderate
N.A.
Low
Low
Moderate
	
High
Price
Concentrated
1



























-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)

PLANT SHUTDOWN DECISION
Factor
Ratio of AT Treatment
Cost to AT Net Income
(%)
Cash Flow (Including
Treatment Costs)
Ratio of Investment in
Treatment Facilities to
Net Fixed Investment (%)
Integration
Chemical Complex
Other Environmental
Problems (Including OSHA)
Emotional Commitment
Ownership
Condition for
Shutdown
High
Negative
High
Low
Isolated Plant
Multiple
Indifference
Multi-Industry
Companies
Treatment
Level
E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.

E.P.P.
B.P.T.
B.A.T.





SODIUM CHROMATE 1 pQTASSlm BICHROMATE
AND BICHROMATE [ ™1Abt>iuM BICHKUMAlfc
30.8
43.7
43.7
Positive
15.8
29.8
29.8
Low to Moderate
Isolated
Multiple
High
Multi-Industry
6.2
9.7
9.7
Positive
0.5
1.0
1.0
High Backward;
Low Forward
Isolated
Multiple
High
Multi- Indus try









....._









-------
          II.  INDUSTRY CHARACTERIZATION—ADDITIONAL PRODUCTS
A.  CALCIUM CARBIDE
    1.  Summary

        Calcium carbide is produced in the United States almost exclusively
for conversion to acetylene gas.  Acetylene is used primarily in the
synthesis of various organic chemicals and plastics, although a sig-
nificant amount is used as a fuel for welding and other metalwork.

        Production of calcium carbide declined more than 50% by 1972
from a peak reached in the mid-1960's.  The main reason for this decline
has been the substitution of acetylene derived from hydrocarbons for that
produced from calcium carbide for the manufacture of organic chemicals.
Acetylene for chemical uses has also been largely replaced by other,
less expensive, raw materials.

        While the lower cost of shipping calcium carbide to industrial
centers for conversion to fuel acetylene has favored this source over
tanked, hydrocarbon-derived acetylene, more convenient and economical
fuels (e.g., propane) have made significant inroads into the amount
of acetylene used for metalworking.

        The general trend of a declining market for calcium carbide is
likely to continue as hydrocarbon-derived acetylene replaces carbide-
derived acetylene for chemical use, and as other raw materials replace
acetylene in both chemical and metalworking applications.
    2.  Market Characterization

        a.  Size

        U.S. production of calcium carbide reached a maximum of approxi-
mately 1.1 million tons per year in the period 1960 to 1965.  Since U.S.
foreign trade in this commodity has always been small in comparison
to production, apparent annual consumption of calcium carbide was also
at a level of about 1.1 million tons during this period, as is shown in
Table  4.   By 1972, production had fallen to less than half a million
tons per year.  Table  4  also indicates the low level of imports,
which have ranged between 1% and 3% of consumption in recent years,
and have come exclusively from Canada.

        b.  Growth

        Calcium carbide producers have experienced a oceady drop in
demand for almost a decade.  Annual market value data for calcium carbide
production since 1950 are given in Table 5.    While 1972 production, at

                                   23

-------
                            TABLE 4
CALCIUM

Year
1950
1955
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
CARBIDE PRODUCTION, IMPORT /EXPORT,

Production
671
875
1,093
1,042
1,083
1,109
1,132
1,098
1,063
912
942
856
791
625
493
(Thousands of Tons)
AND APPARENT

Imports Exports
6 6
2
5
5
6
7
12
11
20
8
7
18
19
20
11
4
5
6
6
6
6
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
—
CONSUMPTION

Apparent
Consumption
671
873
1,093
1,041
1,083
1,110
1,138
1,109
1,083
920
949
874
810
645
504
 Exports not reported separately after 1964.

2
 Apparent consumption:  production and imports minus exports.




Source;  U.S. Department of Commerce.
                               24

-------
                           TABLE  5
          TOTAL MARKET  VALUE OF  CALCIUM CARBIDE  PRODUCTION
Year

1950
1955
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
Production
(Thousands of Tons)
671
875
1,093
1,042
1,083
1,109
1,132
1,098
1,063
912
942
856
791
625
493
Market
Value
($/Ton)
78
94
100
99
93
95
91
89
87
94
94
78
81
90
90 (est.)
Total
Market
Value
($MM)
52.3
82.3
109.3
103.5
101.0
104.9
102.8
97.7
92.5
85.7
88.5
66.8
64.1
56.3
44.4
Sources:  U.S.  Department of Commerce, and Contractor's estimates,
                                 25

-------
493,000 tons represented a 55% drop from 1960 production levels, price
erosion has caused the total market value of calcium, carbide production
to drop 60% over the same period (from $109 million to $44 million).

        c.  Uses

        Although a small quantity of calcium carbide is consumed in such
direct applications as the carburization of steel, desulfurization, and
other foundry work, by far the largest use is in the production of
acetylene.  In the preferred "dry" process, water is added to calcium
carbide to form acetylene and calcium hydroxide at the rate of 640 pounds
of acetylene per ton of carbide.  The "wet" process uses excess water,
and produces by-product calcium hydroxide in a slurry which is 90% water.

        Approximately 80% of the acetylene produced from calcium carbide
is used as a raw material in the synthesis of organic chemicals and
plastics by the chemical industry.  The balance is used as a fuel in
metalworking for welding, cutting, and scarfing.  A summary of calcium
carbide use, showing representative products produced by the chemical
industry, is given in Table 6.

        d.  Substitute Products

        Until 1951, all of the acetylene produced in the United States
was derived from calcium carbide.  Since that time, acetylene has also
been manufactured through the pyrolysis, or cracking, of hydrocarbons.
This process produces several other important industrial chemicals as
by-products, and has become increasingly competitive with the calcium
carbide route to acetylene.

        The advantage of calcium carbide as a source of acetylene is that
the carbide can be shipped more economically than the heavy cylinders of
compressed acetylene gas.  Thus, for uses which are geographically
removed from the production of hydrocarbon-derived acetylene, calcium
carbide as a source of acetylene is less-susceptible to substitution.
Even here, however, carbide acetylene faces competition from other fuels,
such as propane or natural gas, and also from electric-arc welding.

        In such direct applications as the carburization of steel, de-
sulfurization, and use as a drying agent, calcium carbide also  faces
competition from a variety of products.  In foundry work, various com-
binations of lime, coke, and magnesium can replace cailcium carbide.
Calcium sulfate is only one example among a variety of alternative drying
agents which are available as substitutes for calcium carbide.  These
direct applications currently account for only  about 3% of U.S. con-
sumption.

        e.  Geographic Consumption

        Except for the relatively small amount  of calcium carbide used
to generate acetylene for metalworking, virtually all calcium carbide
                                    26

-------
                             TABLE 6


           USE PATTERN OF CALCIUM CARBIDE BY APPLICATION


Calcium Carbide Converted to Acetylene                               97%

          Chemical Acetylene                              80%

               Used in synthesis of organic chemicals
               (e.g., butadiene, allyl alcohol, vinyl
               ethers) and derived products such
               as neoprene, other plastics, and resins.

          Fuel Acetylene                                  17%

               Used for welding, cutting and scarfing
               in metalwork, and for production of
               acetylene black.


Calcium Carbide for Direct Use                                        3%

          Includes use as a dehydrating agent and a
          reducing and desulfurizing agent in certain
          metallurgical processes.
                                                                    100%
 This use pattern is typical of consumption in 1972.  Chemical use
 of calcium carbide acetylene is rapidly becoming much less
 significant.


Sources;  Kirk-Othmer, Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology;
          Shreve, Chemical Process Industries; and
          Contractor's estimates.
                                  27

-------
 .s consumed in the region in which it is produced.  In fact, most
 .arbide acetylene is generated either in the same plant as the carbide,
 ir in an adjacent one.  In 1972, nearly 85% of U.S. calcium carbide
 ^reduction capacity was located in Kentucky and Ohio, and with it, the
 iulk of calcium carbide consumption.  Most of the remaining 15% of
 :onsumption occurs in major industrial metalworking cities such as
 Cleveland, Detroit, and Pittsburgh.

        f.  Captive Requirements

        As indicated above, calcium carbide is most often used as a ready
source of acetylene.  Furthermore, the greatest portion of calcium car-
bide is consumed either in the same plant as it is produced, or at
another plant owned by the same company.  Although the most recent
information on merchant shipments was given in 1965, it is apparent from
these data that captive consumption was typically at a level of 75%.
Data illustrating this relationship for the years 1962 through 1965 are
given in Table 7.   Although the trend in recent years has been away
from captive use, as acetylene for chemical synthesis has been replaced
by ethylene, propylene, and other less expensive raw materials, the
bulk of calcium carbide production will be consumed captively through-
out the 1970's.
    3.  Supply Characterization

        a.  Manufacturing Route

        Calcium carbide is prepared from quicklime (calcium oxide) and
coke (carbon) which are mixed together at approximately 2000° C.  This
temperature is achieved in an electric furnace using large amounts of
electric power.  In a typical run, 1900 pounds of quicklime, 1300
pounds of coke, and 3,000 kilowatt hours of electricity are required
to produce one ton of calcium carbide.  The product, tapped from the
furnace as a liquid, is allowed to solidify and is then crushed to a
convenient size for packing and handling.  Calcium carbide for chemical
acetylene often goes directly to an acetylene generator in the same
plant.

        An example of the overall process is shown in Figure 3   as a
simplified schematic diagram.  The source of quicklime is a high-grade
limestone containing nearly 100% calcium carbonate.  The limestone is
heated in a kiln to produce quicklime, which is combined with coke,
or another source of carbon such as anthracite, in the electric furnace.
The large power requirements and high raw material shipping costs are
important factors in determining plant location.

        b.  Producers

        In 1972, calcium carbide was produced in seven plants by four
different companies.  As indicated in Table  8,   three of these plants
                                   28

-------
                            .TABLE  7
      CAPTIVE VS. COMMERCIAL CONSUMPTION OF CALCIUM CARBIDE
                         (Thousands of Tons)
                                       Consumption
Year     Production     Captive    Merchant      Percent Captive
1962       1,083          815        268                75


1963       1,109          824        285                74


1964       1,132          891        241                79


1965       1,098          819        279                75
 Last reported separately in 1965.
Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce.
                                 29

-------
                                FIGURE 3
          SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM—PRODUCTION OF CALCIUM CARBIDE
Limestone
 (CaC03)
Coal
Coke
                       Crusher
Pulverizer
  Crusher
                  Carbon Monoxide
                        (CO)
          Calcium Carbide
              (CaC2)
                             Kiln
                Quicklime
                  (CaO)
Drier
                                             Electric-arc
                                               Furnace
          Cooling
           Cars
                Crusher
                                       Commercial-Grade
                                       Calcium Carbide
                                  30

-------
                               TABLE  8
             CALCIUM CARBIDE PRODUCERS—LOCATION AND CAPACITY
                           (Thousands of Tons)
Producer
            Location
                              Annual
                             Capacity
Airco, Inc.
   Airco Carbide Div.
1
Calvert City, Ky.
Louisville, Ky.
325
150
Midwest Carbide Corp.
            Keokuk,  Iowa
            Pryor, Okla.
                                30
                                50
Pacific Carbide & Alloys Co.
            Portland,  Ore.
                                20
Union Carbide Corp.
   Chemicals & Plastics Div.
            Ashtabula,  Ohio
            Portland, Ore.
                               228
                                35
          Total
                                           838
1
 Manufacturing operations in Calvert City were discontinued early in
 1973; the Louisville plant is to be phased out over the next
 several years.

 Operations at Portland were discontinued in mid-1973.
Sources:  Trade journals, industry contacts.
                                   31

-------
were responsible for most (84%) of the 1972 annual production capacity
of 838,000 tons.  These were the Airco plants at Calvert City and
Louisville, Kentucky, and the Union Carbide plant at Ashtabula, Ohio.

        A decade ago, in 1960, there were twelve plants, with a combined
capacity of 1,225,000 tons.  The move to reduce capacity, which began
in the early 1960's, has continued into 1973 with the announcement by
Airco that operations would be discontinued  at the Calvert City plant,
and that the Louisville plant  would be phased out by about 1980.  The
closing of Calvert City has reduced 1973 U.S. capacity by 39% to
approximately 513,000 tons per year.

        Existing calcium carbide plants may be classified as either large
(annual capacity 150,000 tons or more), or small (annual capacity 50,000
tons or less), with four of the six plants operating in early 1973 classi-
fied as small.  All of these plants are at least ten years old and some
are much older.  Airco's Calvert City plant had been operating about 20
years when it closed this year.

        As stated earlier, approximately 75% of all calcium carbide
produced is captively consumed.  This gives some indication of the large
degree of intra- and inter-company integration in the sale and use of
this chemical commodity.  As an example, the Airco plant at Calvert City,
which was the largest calcium carbide plant in the world, shipped a
small part of its output to the Airco plant in Louisville, and con-
verted the rest to acetylene for local use.  This local use included
chemical synthesis at an adjacent Airco plant, and shipment of acetylene
and derived products by pipeline to the plants of several other firms in
the large Calvert City chemical complex.

        c.  Manufacturing Economics

        A summary of estimated manufacturing costs for calcium carbide
is given in Table  9.  The data in this table are for a plant of
45,000 ton-per-year annual capacity, operating at 100% capacity.  A
plant of double this capacity would benefit from relatively small economics
of scale, reducing manufacturing costs by about 5%, to $81 per ton.
On the other hand, a plant producing calcium carbide for fuel acetylene,
as opposed to chemical acetylene, experiences manufacturing costs which
may be from 5%  to 6% higher than that shown in Table 9   due to quality
requirements relating both to raw materials and to the manufacturing
process itself.  General, selling, and administrative expenses are
estimated  to be 5% of manufacturing costs.  This brings  total costs  to
about $90 per ton for a 45,000 ton-per-year plant producing calcium
carbide for conversion to chemical acetylene.  Depending on plant size
and intended end use of the product, total manufacturers   costs may
vary from approximately $85 to $95 per ton.
                                    32

-------
                                 TABLE 9
ESTIMATED COST OF MANUFACTURING CALCIUM CARBIDE
Plant Capacity: 45
Fixed Investment:

Variable Costs
Quicklime
Coke
Carbon Electrodes
Operating Supplies
Power
Water
Semi-Variable & Fixed Costs
Operating Labor
Supervision
Maintenance
Labor Overhead
Plant Overhead
Depreciation
Local Taxes & Insurance
Cost of Manufacture (Bulk)
Off Gas Credit2
3
Net Cost of Manufacture (Bulk)
,000 Tons/Yr (1-15,000 KVA
$3,740,000
Quantity /Ton
0.95 ton
0.65 ton
30 Ib.

2780 kwh
32 M gal
9 men/shift
4 foremen
1 superintendent
4*5% of investment/yr
30% of operating labor
and supervision
70% of operating labor
and supervision
6-2/3% of investment/yr
1*5% of investment/yr
3.14 MM Btu
furnace)
$/Unit
18.75
24.00
0.15

0.007
0.02
4.25/hr
12,000/yr
17,000/yr



0.35

$/Ton
17.81
15.60
4.50
0.30
19.46
0.64
58.31
7.45
1.07
0.38
3.73
2.67
6.23
5.53
1.25
28.31
86.62
0.10)
85.52
1
 For older plants depreciation may only cover xi-ems replaced and be about
 20% of this amount.

 Credit valid only if carbon monoxide can be utilized as fuel at plant.

 Quality requirements make manufacturing costs about $5/ton higher for
 manufacturers of calcium carbide for use in generation of fuel
 acetylene.
                                     33

-------
    4.  Supply/Demand Balance

        Industry capacity for calcium carbide has gradually been reduced
since the early 1960's.  As of 1972, capacity had been reduced by 30%,
while production had fallen by more than 50%.  In the early 1960's,
operating rates were typically close to 90% of capacity; in the early
1970's operating rates have generally been below 80%, and it is only
the shut down of the largest plant in the industry (Calvert City) which
has brought current capacity down to a level consistent with current
demand.

        In view of the continued replacement of carbide acetylene by
hydrocarbon-derived acetylene, and replacement of acetylene for chemical
use by less expensive raw materials, this trend towards reduction of
excess capacity is likely to continue as demand is further reduced.
Total production in the first two months of  1973, for example, was 20%
below that of the same period in 1972.
        Prices
        Published prices for packaged and delivered calcium carbide have
increased steadily from $121 per ton in the early  1950's, to a level of
$171 per ton since 1963.  A more realistic price for  1972 is the  $100
per ton, f.o.b. plant, quoted by industry sources.  Some discounting
occurs, and the average actual price received  for  calcium carbide shipments
has been somewhat lower than this in recent years, as is shown in Table  10.
While  list price was raised 15% in  the early 1960's,  the price per ton
actually dropped 10% during the same period.   Packaging charges range
from $35 to $45 per ton, and freight charges add approximately $10 per
ton locally and up to  $20 per ton for more distant shipments within a
given  region.

        Information on 1972 actual  prices is not yet  available, but it
appears that the declining trend was at least  temporarily halted  in
1971 when actual price increased approximately 10%, from $81.00 to
$90.00 per  ton.  In any case, a comparison of  manufacturer's total costs
with actual prices received per ton of calcium carbide, indicates that
U.S. producers  of  this chemical are currently  operating at, or near,
the break-even  level.
                                     34

-------
                       TABLE  10
     CALCIUM CARBIDE PRICES—PUBLISHED VS.  ACTUAL
(Thousands of Dollars)

Year
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1971
1972
1
Published Price
121
134
149
171
171
171
171
2
Actual Price
78
94
100
89
81
90
N.A.
 Published prices include packaging and freight charges of
 ca. $50/ton.   Quoted 1972 price for bulk calcium carbide
 was $100 per ton, f.o.b. plant.
2
 Actual Price:  Total Value of Shipments/Tons Shipped.
Sources:   Chemical Marketing Reporter,  U.S.  Department of
          Commerce, and Contractor's estimates.
                            35

-------
B.  SODIUM SULFATE
    1.   Summary

        Sodium sulfate is produced in the United States largely as a
joint product with some other material, rather than for its own value.
This joint-product characteristic, combined with a low price, has often
led to a situation where the potential supply of sodium sulfate has ex-
ceeded demand.  Uses have been developed to take advantage of the large,
inexpensive supplies.  As a result sodium sulfate has become an important
material to several industries, and its low cost ultimately translates
to lower product costs in those industries where it is used.

        Sodium sulfate is used in the paper industry, by detergent
manufacturers, and in the manufacture of glass and textiles.  U.S.
consumption has averaged 1.6 million tons over the last decade, and this
level of use is likely to be characteristic of the foreseeable future.
    2.  Market Characterization

        a.  Size

        U.S. production of sodium sulfate was approximately  1.36 million
tons in 1972, down 8% from a record level of nearly  1.5 million tons
in  1968.  Total value of  1971 shipments was $28 million.

        Net imports of about 0.27 million tons in  1972  (equal  to 20%
of  U.S. production) brought total 1972 U.S. apparent consumption to
approximately 1.63 million tons.  Belgium accounted  for 48%  of import
dollar value, Canada 38%, and in descending order  of importance, The
Netherlands, East Germany, Sweden, West Germany, and Japan accounted
for the remaining 14%.

        Historical data for production, foreign  trade,  and apparent
consumption are given in  Table  H-    In this  table,  and in Table 17.
(giving price information) the  data are presented  for both high purity
(anhydrous sodium sulfate), and lower purity  (saltcake),  grades of
sodium sulfate.  Most of  this analysis will be in  terms of aggregate
data  for  both grades.

        b.  Growth

        As Table  11  illustrates, both U.S. production  and apparent
consumption of  sodium sulfate reached record  levels  in  1968.  Between
1968  and  1972,  production decreased  8% and  apparent  consumption
                                     36

-------
                                   TABLE 11
      SODIUM  SULFATE PRODUCTION.  IMPORT/EXPORT, AND APPARENT  CONSUMPTION
(Thousands of Tons— 100% Na^O^)
Production, by Type
Year
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
Saltcake
810
844
826
837
926
976
1,009
696
758
,730
561
514
681
Anhydrous Na0SO,
• 	 1- — q
303
327
368
396
390
428
436
668
725
744
812
843
683
Foreign
Imports
167
196
188
160
290
274
237
290
305
286
269
269
299
2
Trade
Exports
31
32
51
45
44
13
28
28
56
91
55
67
29
3
Apparent Consumption
1249
1335
1331
1348
1562
1665
1654
1626
1732
1669
1587
1559
1634
   The large difference between pre-1967 and post-1966 production figures is
   due to a product classif icat'ion change.

   Total for crude and refined sodium sulfate.

  Apparent  Consumption:  production plus imports minus exports.
Source:    U.S.  Department of Commerce.   Data for 1972 are preliminary.
                                         37

-------
decreased 6%.  Data for 1972 indicate that the downward trend has at
least temporarily stopped.  Production volume was up slightly (less
than 1%) from 1971, and apparent consumption increased 5%.

        While net imports were at a record level in 1972, and accounted
for most of the 5% increase in apparent consumption between 1971 and
1972, it is difficult to discern a trend in imports over the past
decade.  From a low of 9% to a high of 20%, net imports have
averaged 16% of U.S. production since 1962.

        c.   Uses

        An estimated use pattern for sodium sulfate is given in
Table 12.   By far the largest use (ca. 70%) is in the kraft, or sulfate,
pulping process of the paper industry.  Sodium sulfate is converted to
sodium sulfide, and with sodium hydroxide and water, forms a digesting
solution for wood chips.  Techniques for recovering impure sodium sulfate
(saltcake)  from the digesting liquor are constantly being improved, but
present losses average about 100 pounds of saltcake per ton of pulp.
Purchased saltcake is used to replace that which is not currently re-
covered.  Use in kraft pulping has remained relatively constant at
about 1.1 million tons for the last ten years.  Increasing requirements
due to growing pulp demand have been offset by improved sodium sulfate
recovery techniques.

        The second largest use of sodium sulfate (ca_. 18%) is in deter-
gent formulations.  A small amount is added to all detergents as part
of the manufacturing process, but increasingly, manufacturers have
been adding additional purchased sodium sulfate to their formulations.
This additional sodium sulfate partly compensates for the loss of bulk
and detergency brought about by decreased phosphate content.  Sodium
sulfate use in detergent formulation has doubled from about 150,000 tons
in the early 1960's to about 300,000 tons in 1972.

        Use in the manufacture of glass, in textile finishing, and other
uses constitute the remainder (ca. 12%) of U.S. consumption of sodium
sulfate.  In glass manufacture, sodium sulfate speeds the melting of the
raw material charge, improves the working properties of high-silica glass,
and, when carbon is added, forms sulfur dioxide gas.  The sulfur dioxide
bubbles have a "fining" effect, removing other gas bubbles as they move
toward the surface of the molten glass.

        Use of sodium sulfate in glass manufacture has decreased slightly
over the past decade due to restrictions on the sulfur dioxide content
of stack gases.  Manufacturers are being forced to cut down on the amount
of sodium sulfate in each batch of glass and to install scrubbing units
which will allow recycling of sodium sulfate.  Current consumption is
about 140,000 tons per year.

        In textile manufacture, sodium sulfate finds use in the finish-
ing operation.  The primary use is dye standardization; that is,
                                    38

-------
                            TABLE  12

            USE PATTERN OF SODIUM SULFATE BY APPLICATION
Kraft (Sulfate) Paper Process                             70%
    Used with sodium sulfide and sodium
    hydroxide in the pulping-bleaching operation.
Detergents
    Sodium sulfate is used in detergents to               18%
    improve detergency and contribute bulk
    density to the formulation.
Glass, Textile, and Other
    In approximate order of importance, sodium            12%
    sulfate is used in "fining" glass, standard-
    izing textile dyes, manufacturing cellulose
    sponges, as a cleaning and metal pickling agent,
    in mineral feed supplements, and in photography.
                                                         100%
Sources:   Kirk-Othmer, Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology;  Shreve,
           Chemical Process Industries; and Contractor's estimates.
                                  39

-------
dilution of the dye to a standard potency.  Sodium sulfate is also
added to the dye bath to level, or control, the color.  Consumption of
sodium sulfate for textile applications has remained fairly constant a*-
an estimated 50,000 tons annually over the past several years.

        Finally, several thousand tons per year of sodium sulfate find
application in such uses as cellulose sponge manufacture, mineral feed
supplements, cleansing agents, photography, and as a chemical catalyst.

        d.  Substitute Products

        In applications which account for the bulk of U.S. sodium sulfate
consumption, other products could be substituted with relative ease.
The major consequence of such substitution would probably be increased
manufacturing and product costs.

        In kraft pulping operations, sodium sulfate is employed as the
most economical source of make-up sodium and sulfur values.  Other, more-
expensive sources (e.g., sodium carbonate or caustic soda) could be sub-
stituted for the purchased saltcake, or "synthetic saltcake" may be
manufactured by oxidizing a mixture of soda ash (sodium carbonate) and
sulfur.  Furthermore, the newer pulp mills will generate most, or all,
of their saltcake requirements internally as a by-product of on-site
chlorine dioxide bleach production.  The only problem here is that
sodium values must still be purchased outside, and high prices for
sodium hydroxide or sodium carbonate can make this source of saltcake
less attractive than purchased saltcake.

        Increasing use of sodium sulfate in detergent formulation is,
itself, the result of a substitution.  Sodium sulfate, as an inexpensive
electrolite, serves to replace some of the lost detergency and bulk to
detergents with reduced phosphate content.

        e.  Geographic Consumption

        An estimated geographic use pattern for sodium sulfate is  . \^en
in Table 13.   More than 60% of sodium sulfate demand is in the U.r.
south, and approximately 90% of this demand is attributable to the kn ~t
pulping industry.

        Approximately 16% of U.S. sodium sulfate demand is in the nort -
central—Great Lakes region.  The primary use in this region (ca. 60%)
is in detergent formulation, with kraft pulping operations accounting
for most of the remaining consumption.

        The U.S. west and northwest require an estimated 14% of annual
U.S. sodium sulfate supply   Kraft mills account for most (ca. 75%) of
this regional demand; detergent formulation and other uses make up the
rest.

        In the U.S. northeast, it is estimated that half of the 7%
regional consumption is for detergent formulations; most of the remaining
half is split between kraft pulping and glass manufacture.

                                    40

-------
                              TABLE 13
                 GEOGRAPHIC  USE  PATTERN  OF  SODIUM SULFATE
  South
      Approximately  90%  -  kraft  pulping,                     63%
      10% other.
  North Central  -  Great  Lakes
      Approximately  60%  -  detergent  formula-                 16%
      tion,  25%  kraft  pulping,  15% other.
  West  and  Northwest
     Approximately 75%  -  kraft  pulping,                     14%
     15% detergent formulation,  10%  other.
  Northeast
      Approximately  50% -  detergent  formula-                  7%
      tion,  20%  -  kraft pulping,  20% glass
      fining,  10%  other.
                                                           100%
Source:  Contractor's estimates.
                                    41

-------
        f.  Captive Requirements

        Production of sodium sulfate for captive use by producing
companies is insignificant in the U.S.  Nearly 90% of U.S.  production is
as by-product or co-product sodium sulfate.  The small amount produced
as primary product is produced for sale to end users.  Table 14  shows
a comparison of sodium sulfate production and shipments for the years
1962-1972.  Shipments have averaged 99% of production over  the last
decade.

        Production of by-product sodium sulfate during chlorine dioxide
bleach manufacture at pulp mills, is the only significant case where
by-product sodium sulfate is used in another operation by the same
company.

        g.  Other Market Characteristics

        Most of the sodium sulfate produced in the U.S. sells for about
$20 per ton, with price as the main basis for competition.   In this price
range, freight costs become a significant consideration in  marketing
and distribution of the product.  Local shipment may cost up to $15
per ton, and long distance shipping rates may be $24 per ton and more.
These rates are relatively high compared to transatlantic bulk shipping
rates of about $7 per ton, and allow foreign producers to compete
effectively with U.S. companies located on the Atlantic coast.

        Within the U.S., the relatively high freight costs  cause
local demand to be highly dependent on the proximity of sodium sulfate
supply.  Substitution may occur when freight-equalized costs of another
product make its use more economical.  An example is caustic soda as
a source of sodium values for kraft pulping operations.
    3.  Supply Characterization

        a.  Manufacturing Routes

        Sodium sulfate has rarely been produced in quantity for its
own sake.  A summary of sodium sulfate production by process, from
1964 to 1971, is given in Table  15.  Only about one-third of the pro-
duction classified as "natural" is recovered solely for sodium sulfate
value, and in 1972, approximately 90% of U.S. production could be
classified as by-product or co-product sodium sulfate.

        By-product sodium sulfate is defined as sodium sulfate formed in
a process which produces one or more other products of significantly
higher value.  These processes include manufacture of rayon and
cellophane, lithium and strontium processing, and the chemical
synthesis of sodium bichromate and resorcinol.

        Co-product sodium sulfate is formed in a process which con-
currently produces products having a value comparable to that of sodium


                                     42

-------
                                TABLE  14
          CAPTIVE VS. COMMERCIAL CONSUMPTION OF SODIUM SULFATE

Year
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
(Thousands of Tons)
Production
1,194
1,233
1,316
1,404
1,445
1,364
1,483
1,475
1,373
1,356
1,364

Shipments
1,170
1,226
1,303
1,364
1,398
1,384
1,469
1,439
1,386
1,377
- -
   Including interplant transfers.
Source:   Current Industrial Reports, U.S.  Department of Commerce,
                                      43

-------
                         Table  15
PRODUCTION OF SODIUM SULFATE BY PROCESS
(Thousands of Tons)
Sodium

Year
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
Mannheim
Furnace
214
224
228
196
165
181
177
162
Polymer
By-Product
356
382
387
346
404
388
354
362
Dichromate
and Other
201
190
217
228
254
282
278
210

Natural
544
608
613
594
660
624
564
622

Total
1,315
1,404
1,445
1,364
1,483
1,475
1,373
1,356
Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce.

-------
sulfate.  Examples of such processes are the Mannheim and Hargreaves
processes for producing hydrochloric acid,  and the recovery of sodium
sulfate from natural brines and salts which contain a variety of in-
organics of similar value.

        One produv^r, with about 10% of U.S. capacity, has plants which
sell sodium sulfate recovered from natural brines as their sole source
of revenue.  Thi.i is the only significant case in which sodium sulfate
is produced as a primary product.

        Methods for sodium sulfate production may be divided into three
categories:  recovery from natural sources, production as a by-product
of rayon and cellophane manufacture, and production accompanying the
synthesis of various chemicals.

        Recovery from natural brines accounts for about half of U.S.
sodium sulfate production.  Figure  4  illustrates, in flow chart form,
a typical process for recovery of both anhydrous sodium sulfate and
Glauber's salt, a hydrated form of sodium sulfate.  The natural brine,
containing dissolved sodium sulfate and other inorganics, is pumped into
a natural salt deposit to reduce the solubility of sodium sulfate.  When
the saturated solution is cooled, Glauber's salt precipitates.  The
mixture is filtered, and the hydrated sodium sulfate is collected for
direct sale or for further processing to anhydrous sodium sulfate.

        Produ'.tijn of sodium sulfate as a by-product of viscose rayon
or cellophane production is responsible for about 30% of U.S. sodium
sulfate capac'.tv.  Figure 5   is a schematic diagram for production of
sodium sulfate as a rayon by-product.  The sodium sulfate is formed in a
spinning bath when the basic viscose rayon dope is forced through the
fine holes o.c a spinneret into a solution containing sulfuric acid.  Sodium
sulfate is produced at a rate of about 1.2 pounds  per pound of rayon or
cellophane.  The spinning bath must be refreshed periodically by removing
the sodium sulfate which has formed and replenishing the sulfuric acid.

        The production of certain industrial chemicals results in the
formation of sodium sulfate as a natural result of the process used.
Approximately 20% of U.S. sodium sulfate capacity is of this type.
Figure 6   is a simple flow diagram for the Mannheim hydrochloric acid
process.  Salt (sodium chloride) and sulfuric acid are heated together
to form hydrogen chloride and crude sodium sulfate.  The crude sodium
sulfate may be further refined or converted to Glauber's salt depending
on relative demand for the two products.

        Other examples in this third category of sodium sulfate production
include the Hargreaves process for hydrochloric acid, formation with
sodium bichromate when sodium chromate is treated with sulfuric acid,
and production accompanying the synthesis of phenol and resorcinol.

        b.  Producers

        In 1972 there were 22 companies producing sodium sulfate in
32 locations.  These companies, plant locations and capacities, and

                                    45

-------
                                   FIGURE  4
               RECOVERY  OF  SODIUM SULFATE  FROM NATURAL  BRINES
  Natural Brine
  (7-11%
                                   Chiller
                        Salt
                       Deposit
                             Crystallizer
                                Filter
      Dryer
Evaporator
Anhydrous Sodium Sulfate
                            Glauber's Salt
                                     46

-------
                               FIGURE  5
         PRODUCTION  OF SODIUM SULFATE  IN  VISCOSE  RAYON  PROCESS
      Viscose Tank
                                          Viscose  Solution
                                (Cellulose  Xanthate + NaOH solution)
             Rayon Fibers
To bobbin
                                            + 2 NaOH
                                                Spinning Bath
                                                 Anhydrous Sodium Sulfate
                                   47

-------
                      FIGURE 6
    PRODUCTION OF SODIUM SULFATE IN THE MANNHEIM PROCESS
Sulfuric Acid
    Salt
   (Nad)
Hydrochloric Acid
      (HC1)
Recovery
                         Furnace
                                                  Solution Tank
                      Sodium Sulfate


Filter
i



pU-t 1 1 OT-




                                 Glauber's Salt
                                48

-------
processes involved are given in Table 16.   The five major producers
accounted for 70% of 1972 U.S. capacity.  Seven companies (10 plants)
produce sodium sulfate from natural sources.  Only one of these
companies has facilities (2 plants) which produce sodium sulfate as their
sole source of operating revenue.  The others produce it as either a by-
product or co-product along with other inorganics.

        Five companies (11 plants) produce sodium sulfate as a by-
product of rayon or cellaphane manufacture, and ten companies (11 plants)
produce sodium sulfate as a by-product or co-product of chemical synthesis
ope-rations.

        Seven plants having approximately 100,000 tons-per-year capacity
each, were responsible for 60% of 1972 U.S. capacity, and would be
classified as large producers of sodium sulfate.  Fifteen plants, of
25,000 tons-per-year capacity or less, accounted for 12% of 1972 U.S.
capacity, and would be classified as small.  The remaining ten plants,
with capacities between 25,000 and 100,000 tons per year each, accounted
for 28% of 1972 U.S. capacity.

        The base materials from which sodium sulfate is produced as a
by-product are long-established chemical commodities.  It is there-
fore not surprising that many of the plants producing sodium sulfate
are fairly old.  Most plants have been operating at least ten years;
some nearly twenty years.

        c.  Manufacturing Economics

        Raw materials for sodium sulfate production are either natural
brines and salt deposits or sodium alkalis and sulfuric acid.  In
either case, nearly all of the manufacturing cost is represented by
separation, drying, and packaging costs.  In the case of natural sources,
depletion costs must be covered; where sodium sulfate is formed as a
joint product of some manufacturing process, raw material  costs are
often allocated to each product according to its relative value.

        We understand that water pollution abatement costs have been
developed only for chrome saltcake, i.e., that sodium sulfate produced
as by-product from sodium bichromate manufacture.  For that reason, our
sodium sulfate manufacturing cost estimates are included with the sodium
bichromate costs.
    4.  Supply/Demand Balance

        Sodium sulfate has had an inverse relationship from that most
often associated with the law of supply and demand.  With nearly 90%
of sodium sulfate production resulting from processes in which it is a
by-product or co-product of some other material, and with both a low
price and low profit margin, demand for this product has traditionally
followed supply.
                                    49

-------
                                     TABLE 16
                  SODTUM SULFATE PRODUCERS — LOCATION AND CAPACITY

                                   (Thousands of Tons)
Producer
                                Location
                  Annual Capacity
                  Process
Akzona Inc.
     American Enka Co., div.
Enka,  N.C.
Lowland,  Tenn.
 20
 36
Polymer by-product
Polymer by-product
Allied Chem. Corp.
     Industrial Chems.  Div.
Baltimore, Md,
 50
Bichromate by-produc
American Cyanamide Co.
     Indust. Chems.  & Plastics
       Div.                     Ft.  Worth, Tex.
     IRC Fibers Co., subsid.     Painesville, Ohio
                        13
                        33
              Catalyst by-product
              Polymer by-product
Chem. Met Corp.
Chicago, 111.
Climax Chem. Co.
Monument, N.M.
Courtaulds North America,Inc.    Le Moyne,  Ala.
 36
                        25
Mannheim furnace
(HC1 by-product)

Polymer by-product
El Paso Natural Gas Co.
     Beaunit Corp, subsid.
     Beaunit Fibers Div.
Elizabethton, Tenn.
 25
Polymer by-product
FMC Corp.
     American Viscose Div.
Fredricksburg, Va.
Fort Royal, Va.
Lewistown, Pa.
Marcus Hook, Pa.
Nitro, W. Va.
Parkersburg, W.Va.
                                                       275
              Polymer by-product
Great Salt Lake Minerals &
     Chems.  Corp.
Green Bay Packaging, Inc.
Ogden, Utah


Green Bay, Wise.


            50
150
Natural; co-product
              By-product

-------
                                       TABLE 16 (Continued)
Producer
Location
Annual Capacity
     Process
Gulf Resources & Chera. Corp.
     Lithium Corp. of America
     Inc.,subsid.
Bessemer City, N.C.
      18
By-product
Hercules, Inc.
     Coatings & Specialty
       Products Dept.
Glens Falls, N.Y.  j
Hopewell, Va.      '
                                                              20
                Bichromate by-produc
                Polymer by-product
Kprr-McGee Corp.
     Kerr-McGee Chem. Corp.
                   subsid.
Trona, Calif,
     250
Natural, co-product
Koppers Co., Inc.
     Organic Materials Div.
Petrolia, Pa
      15
Resorcinol by-produc
Morton-Norwich Products, Inc.
     Morton Chem. Co. div.
 eeks Island, La.
     120
Hargreaves furnace
(HC1 by-product)
Nalco Chem. Co.
     Industrial Div.
Jhicago, 111.
      10
By-product
Ozark-Mahoning Co.
Brownfield, Tex. /
Seagraves, Tex.  >
                                                             185
                Natural, sole produc
                Natural, sole produc
Pratt Sodium Co.
Casper, Wyo.
                Natural, by-product
Reichhold Chems., Inc.
Tuscaloosa, Ala.
                Phenol by-product
Stauffer Chem. Co.
     Indust. Chem. Div.
San Francisco, Calif.
West End, Calif.
                                                             228
                Boric acid co-produi
                Natural
U.S. Borax & Chem. Corp.
Boron, Calif.
Wilmington, Calif.
                                                              44
                Boric acid co-produi
                Boric acid co-produi
Sources:  Trade journals, industry reports,
                                                    Total: 1,555
                                            51

-------
        With this type of relationship, there is often a time lag be-
tween increased supply and the development of new applications for the
product.  While supply often exceeds demand, the reverse is rarely true.

        Evidence of this relationship of demand following supply is
seen in the use pattern of sodium sulfate.  From a technological point
of view, very few uses of sodium sulfate result from unique chemical
or physical properties of the compound.  Rather, because of its rela-
tively low price, sodium sulfate is often used wherever its chemical or
physical properties allow its substitution in place of a more expensive
material.

        Substitution of sodium sulfate for higher cost materials wherever
possible is a healthy economic practice, and does riot detract from the
importance of this chemical to both manufacturers and consumers.  Even
so, an excess of supply over demand is likely in the future, as water
pollution abatement guidelines become more stringent.  More rigorous
water quality standards will have a dual effect:  increasing recovery of
by-product sodium sulfate, and decreasing consumption of sodium sulfate
by kraft pulping mills and detergent manufacturers.  Rayon and cellophane
manufacturers, for example, currently recover only about one-third of
the sodium sulfate produced by the industry.  Kraft: pulping mills,
on the other hand, experienced sodium sulfate "losses" (in plant
effluent) of about 250 pounds per ton of pulp in 1950, had reduced
these losses to approximately 100 pounds per ton by 1972, and may be
forced to reduce these losses by an additional 50% in the next decade.
This lower demand as a result of kraft pulping effluent guidelines is
in addition to reduced demand due to technical changes in bleaching and
pulping operations.

        In view of the joint-product nature of most U.S. sodium sulfate
production, capacity figures are less meaningful for this chemical than
for most others.  Reported capacity is often much lower than theoretical
capacity, and depends on the degree of commitment to recovering the sodium
sulfate produced.  Nevertheless, in terms of reported capacity, pro-
duction of sodium sulfate has varied from 75% of capacity in 1964,
to 100% in 1968.  Production in 1972 represented approximately 90% of
reported capacity.

        On a regional basis, the U.S. south, northcentral, and northeast
are net consumers of sodium sulfate, while  the west and northwest are
net producers.  European sources supplement supplies to the U.S.  south,
and Canadian sources provide additional sodium sulfate to northern U.S.
markets.
     5.  Prices

        Published and actual prices of sodium sulfate for representative
years since  1950 are given in Table 17.   The published price  for  lower
purity sodium sulfate (saltcake) has been $28 per  ton since  1955.  Actual
prices for this grade have varied erratically in a narrow range from
$20  to $22 per ton, indicating an average discount of 25%.

                                     52

-------
                                TABLE 17
             SODIUM SULFATE PRICES — PUBLISHED VS. ACTUAL

                       (Dollars per Short Ton)
Year
     Published Price
Lower Purity     High Purity
                    Actual Price
              Lower Purity    High Purity
1950
     22
40
12
17
1955
     28
52
22
27
1960
     28
54
22
29
1965
     28
5C
21
27
1970
     28
48
20
21
1971
     28
                  21
                20
1972
     28
   Published prices bulk, works, 100% Na  so  basis for saltcake; bags,

   carlots, delivered East for anhydrous Na  SO,.
   Actual price: Value of Shipments/tons shipped.
Sources:   Chemical Marketing Reporter, U.S. Department of Commerce,
          and  Contractor's estimates.
                                         53

-------
        Prices for higher grades of sodium sulfate are more difficult
to characterize due to the number of different grades in this category,
but it appears that considerable discounting occurs, and that the
average price commanded by higher grades has declined in recent years.
In 1971, the average price of high-purity sodium sulfate was below
that of the lower quality grade.  This unusual situation is most likely
the result of increased recovery of this high-purity grade from rayon
manufacture.
C.  TITANIUM DIOXIDE

    1.   Summary

        In 1972, U.S. titanium dioxide (TiO,-,) consumption, including
imports, was approximately 787,000 tons,  with paint, paper and
plastics applications accounting for nearly 80% of the total.  Market
demand growth in recent years has been at a 3% to 4% rate and is
expected to continue at least at that rate through 1975.  Imports remain
a relatively small proportion (10%) of sales and are generally used only
in non-critical, lower-cost applications.

        While TiO,., is sold in volumes comparable to those of some
commodities, it is marketed more as a specialty chemical rather than
a commodity.  Producers' marketing efforts in recent years have been
centered around grade improvement, quality control, and customer-
oriented technical service.  Depending on particular product expertise,
individual producers frequently are strong in one market segment,
such as paper, but do not fare as well in another—paint, for instance.

        Current list prices are 28.50 per pound for rutile grades,
24c per pound for paper grade, and, at these prices, TiO« frequently
is one of the more expensive raw materials in its end-use application.
List prices have historically been stable or slowly rising, with the
industry generally attempting to move as  a whole to a given new price
level.   A long-established 1C per pound price differential between
anatase and rutile grades disappeared in 1971 and both grades are currently
offered at the same list price.  Due mostly to overcapacity problems,
the industry has been plagued with substantial price discounts which
forced several major producers to operate at a loss in the 1970-71 period.
Prices  have firmed in recent months.

        TiO.-, is manufactured by either of two processes—sulfate and
chloride.  Current domestic manufacturing capacity is about 817,000 tons,
approximately 54% of which is sulfate.  The sulfate process is older and
employs sulfuric acid to separate and recover TiO,., from ilmenite, the
principal raw material used in this manufacturing route.  The sulfate
process has the disadvantage of producing a large amount of potential
pollutants in the form of spent sulfuric acid and ferrous sulfates
(copperas).  Depending on processing steps employed, both anatase and
rutile, the two chemical forms of TiO,,, can be produced.  Estimated
current manufacturing cost for pigment via the sulfate process is
approximately 21c per pound, including pigment finishing steps.

        The alternate method of production, and the one employed in every
TiO,., plant built since 1956, is the chloride process.  In this process,

                                    54

-------
chlorine is reacted at high temperature with the raw ore,  generally rutile,
a high TiOp-content material.   TiCK is recovered later in the process
through further chemical treatment, and approximately 90% of the chlorine
is recovered for reuse.  Due to higher quality ore and reactant recycling,
the chloride process produces  far less pollutant by-product than the
sulfate process.  Although rutile pigment has been the sole product from
the chloride process in the past, Du Pont will begin production of both
anatase and rutile grades upon conversion of its  Edgemoor, Delaware,
plant to 100% chloride production in 1974.  Chloride pigment has more
uniformly consistent particle  size, hence it offers greater hiding power
and is used preferentially in  certain critical applications such as
automotive paint.  Current chloride process manufacturing cost is
estimated at nearly 23c per pound.

        TiO~ for commercial production is obtained from four principal
sources—ilmenite, rutile, leucoxene, and slag.  Ilmenite contains
approximately 50% TiO?, is mined virtually worldwide, and is the
basic raw material for the sulfate process and for Du Font's chloride
process plants.  World supply  is plentiful with present production of
nearly three million short tons per year.  U.S. production is
approximately 700,000 short tons.  Rutile, containing 95+% TiO™,
is the raw ore for most chloride production and is found almost exclusively
in Australia.  World supplies  are believed to be limited to 20-25 years
at present production rates of over 400,000 long tons per year.  No
rutile is mined in the U.S.

        Leucoxene and titanium slag, used in sulfate production, are
relatively minor sources of TiO? worldwide, although over 100,000 tons
of Canadian slag are imported  into the U.S. every year.
    2.  Market Characterization

        a.  Market Size and Growth

        U.S. market demand for TiO- pigments in 1972 was approximately
787,000 short tons, valued at nearly $433 million on a delivered basis.
Table 18  shows the recent history of TiC^ production, trade and ship-
ments data.  Since 1965, overall market growth has been at an annual
rate of 3% to 4%, although certain individual end-use segments, such as
plastics, have grown considerably faster.

        Exports of TiO- have remained quite small, less than 2% to 3%
of domestic production, and have actually declined somewhat in recent
years.  Imports, on the other hand, have ranged in recent years from 5%
to 10% of total apparent consumption, although 1972 saw a large jump to
86,400 tons, or 11% of apparent consumption.  Imports will probably
continue at present percentage levels for the foreseeable future.

        b.  Product Uses

        Table 19  identifies the major end uses and recent consumption
history for Ti02 pigments.  Paint and coatings applications, currently
                                    55

-------
                                                            TABLE 18
Cn
Ti00 APPARENT CONSUMPTION AND INDUSTRY SHIPMENTS

Year
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1 079

Production
576.7
594.5
589.4
623.7
664.3
655.3
677.8
A87 T
^.
Imports
49.6
48.0
46.8
53.3
53.2
60.2
42.8
Rfi L
(Thousands of Tons)
Exports
17.0
15.0
14.0
15.0
14.0
15.0
14.0
in n
Stocks
101.7
98.5
103.3
94.2
100.8
106.9
89.7
fifi -\
Apparent
Consumption
606.3
630.7
617.4
671.1
684.3
691.4
723.6
7«7 1
Total
Shipments
573.0
593.3
582.3
632.1
654.5
643.7
684.7
Commercial
Shipments
524.5
545.4
542.5
564.4
590.1
560.9
581.2
        Sources:   U.S. Department of Commerce "Current Industrial Reports" and Tariff Commission trade data.

-------
                            TABLE 19
Paint and Coatings




Paper




Plastics




Rubber




Floor Covering




Printing Ink




Ceramics




Synthetic Fibers




Roofing Granules




Other






Total
TiO,, MARKET CONSUMPTION
(Thousands of Tons)
1965
345
110
27
31
29
12
10
6
4
26


1970
375
147
59
35
30
18
17
10
5
34


1972
390
158
78
35
30
20
21
10
5
40
600
730
787
Source;   Contractor's estimates.
                                  57

-------
accounting for 50% of 'total consumption, constitute the major use for
Ti02-  Two other end uses, paper and plastics, have grown rapidly in recent
years, and in 1972, accounted for an additional 30% of Ti02 consumption.

        (1)  Paint and Coatings

        The paint and coatings industry is comprised of two basic segments—
trade and industrial, with trade sales accounting for about 60%, or
235,000 tons of Ti02 consumption.  Due to its interior hiding power and
dispersibility (relative to rutlle), anatase grade TiC>2 is rarely used,
exceptions being low-cost applications such as highway paint.  Within
rutile grades, chloride process pigments account for about 60%, or
240,000 tons of paint pigment.

        Sulfate producers have worked hard in recent years to eliminate
previous performance deficiencies of sulfate rutile grades, and for
many trade sales applications, such as interior wall paint and exterior
house paint, sulfate and chloride grades are interchangeable.  In in-
dustrial applications, the chloride process pigments, with Du Font's
R-900 series grades as the industry standards, enjoy clear superiority.

        A critical factor in selling T102 to the paint industry is a
customer-oriented marketing effort.  With Ti02 pigment cost typically
comprising 10% to 25% of paint selling price, paint manufacturers demand
quality technical service and grade development to meet ongoing paint
application needs.  Imported TiC>2 has fared poorly in the paint industry
due  to lack of good customer service.

        (2)  Paper

        1972 Ti02 sales to the paper industry were about 158,000
tons and sales to  the industry have been growing at 6% per year.  Anatase
grade pigments, because of their lower cost, account for about  70%,
or  110,000 tons, of pigment sales.   (Ti02 frequently competes with
10  to 12£ per pound clays for whitening and opacity filler applications;
hence cost is a critical  factor, and imported anatase grades have made
their most successful penetration in this market.)

        There are  two main application areas within the paper industry—
beater and coatings.  Beater applications call for pigment addition
directly to the paper pulp, and  there is much grade and supplier
interchangeability.  A recent trend  in beater use has been an increased
TiOo requirement as paper sheet  has become  thinner while retaining
opacity.   In  the coating  area, use of rutile  grade Ti02 has been increas-
ing, and there is  less grade interchangeability than in beater  use.

        (3)  Plastics

        The fastest growing market segment  for TiC>2 is plastics, with
1972 consumption of about 78,000 tons and a recent growth rate  of nearly
                                     58

-------
17% a year.  Major application  areas included polyethylene injection
molding and film production, polystyrene extrusions, and vinyl extrusions,
such as outdoor siding and moldings.  Product performance is the critical
factor in plastics use, and rutile accounts for over 95% of TiC>2 sales.
Rutile pigment, both chloride and sulfate, is superior to anatase in
dispersion and resistance to discoloration and weathering.  Technical
service is very important, and it is common for producer and user to
work together in developing new applications.  Imported Ti02, again due
to lack of customer service, has made little headway in this market.

         (4)  Other Applications

        The remaining applications shown in Table  19  make up the re-
maining 161,000 tons of Ti02 consumed in 1972.  Individual applications
and their consumption relative to the total are as  follows:  rubber,
4%; floor covering, 4%; printing ink, 2.6%; ceramics, 2.6%; synthetic
fibers, 1%; roofing granules, 0.5%.

        c.  Substitute Products

        TiO? use presently is threatened by substitute products in only
one market segment, paper.  There Ti02 enjoys the advantage of being an
effective opacifier, but it is at a cost disadvantage to alumina and
silica clays, some of which offer nearly equivalent brightness as Ti02-
In the paint industry, TiG>2 is by far the most effective white pigment
•in terms of hiding power, a key to  the trend toward one-coat paint
applications.  While pigment research is extensive, no equally effective
substitute has been found.  In plastics and rubber, Ti02 offers the
best combination of white pigment cost, dispersion, and resistance to
discoloration.  In other product application areas, no substitute products
represent serious threats to TiC^'s present position.

        d.  Captive Consumption

        The major captive use of Ti02 pigment is in the paint industry,
where  three of the top six Ti02 consumers have their own pigment plants.
Table   20 details captive TiCK consumption and shows the rise in
captive use as a percentage of apparent consumption from 8% in 1965
to 14% in 1971.  Sherwin-Williams, Du Pont, Glidden-Durkee, and NL
Industries are the major captive users, and it is believed that these
companies account for virtually all of the captively-consumed Ti02
pigment.
     3.   Supply

         a.   Manufacturing Processes

         Two  commercial processes  are  presently  employed  to  produce Ti02
 pigmeats—the  STrfrfffEe  process  and the chloride  process.   The  sulfate process
 is  older and is  the  process  employed  by  most  of the  existing  worldwide
                                      59

-------
                                   TABLE 20
Year


1965

1966

1967

1968

1969

1970

1971
  Total
Shipments
  573.0

  593.3

  582.3

  632.1

  654.5

  643.7

  684.7
Ti00 CAPTIVE
(Thousands
Commercial
Shipments
524.5
545.5
547.5
564.4
590.1
560.9
581.2
CONSUMPTION
of Tons)
Captive 1
Consumption
48.5
47.8
39.8
67.7
64.4
82.8
103.5
  Percent
 Apparent
Consumption
    8.0

    7.6

    6.4

   10.1

    9.4

   12.0

   14.3
Captive consumption is calculated as total shipments - commercial shipments.
Source;  Current Industrial Reports, U.S. Department of Commerce.
                                       60

-------
capacity.  The chloride process was developed in the 1950's and is
used in all new Ti02 plants built in the U.S. since 1956.  In recent
years chloride process plants have become increasingly widespread in
Europe as well.

         (1)  Sulfate Process

        Figure  7   left-hand side, is a schematic representation of
the sulfate process.  In the first step ilmenite, an ore or sand con-
taining 40-60% Ti02, or titanium slag, containing 60-70% Ti02> is
digested with sulfuric acid.  The amount of acid required ranges from
2.5 to 4.5 pounds per pound of finished pigment and depends on the Ti02
content of the ore.  In addition to the formation of titanium sulfate
salts, substantial amounts of ferrous sulfate are also formed since the
other major component of ilmenite is iron oxide, FeO.  The remainder
of the process involves separating the various sulfate salts, with iron
being removed from the process as hydrated ferrous sulfate, copperas, and
TiO? being precipitated in the hydrolysis step.  This final chemical
form of  the Ti02 pigment, anatase or rutile, is determined by the
nucleus  crystal used to seed precipitation in this step.  The TiO_
precipitate is next calcined at temperatures of up to 1250° C, during
which adsorbed sulfur trioxide and water are driven off  and, if rutile
seeds were used in the hydrolysis step, rutile-type pigment is formed.
The pigment finishing process will be described later.

         (2)  Chloride Process

         The chloride process typically utilizes rutile ore containing
90% to 97% Ti02 as its raw material.  Du Pont has developed the capability
to use ilmenite, thereby lowering its raw material costs significantly.
Figure 7    right-hand side, outlines the process.  In the first step,
rutile ore is burned with chlorine gas to produce titanium tetrachloride.
This material is separated from the reaction mixture via distillation,
then is  oxidized at high temperature to produce Ti02 particles, which
are quickly quenched.  The quenching process allows extremely close
control  of pigment particle  size which is essential in developing
hiding power of the pigment.  Chlorine is recovered in the oxidation
process  and is recycled for  use in the first step.  As in the sulfate
process,  the refined Ti02 pigment is sent to finishing steps which
enhance  the surface properties of the pigment particles.

         Although the chloride process is conceptually straightforward
and does not produce the substantial quantities of waste materials
that  the sulfate process does, it has been extremely difficult to operate
commercially.  One problem has been the extreme corrosiveness of  the
high  temperature chlorine employed.  A second, more fundamental problem,
has been the oxidation step, which is extremely sensitive to burner
configuration and  to product recovery methods.  Du Pont  is the most
successful in  this regard and holds .significant patent protection in
this  technology.
                                      61

-------
                                            FIGURE 7
                              TiO,, PIGMENT MANUFACTURING PROCESSES
           Ilmenite
SULFATE PROCESS

    Sulfuric
      Acid    Titanium Slag
                                                                   CHLORIDE PROCESS
                                                       Carbon
          Digestion
                Digestion
           Reduction
                              Scrap
                              Iron
         Clarification
               Clarification
          Crystallization
                                    Nuclei
                                   Waste and/or
                                     By-product
 Copperas
(FeS04-  7H20)
Titanium
  Salt
Hydrolysis
Titanium
  Salt
                                   Filtration
                                    Calcination
                             TiO 2
                      Rutile or Anatase
                                                Pigment
                                          Finishing and Coating
                                    Rutile
                                  Chlorination
                                                                          Ti Cl,
                                                                    Purification
                                                                       Oxidation
                                                     Ti02
                                           Rutile
                                       Chlori
                                                                                           C12
                                                                                          Recyc]
                                                                     Chlorine  Recovery
                                                     Neutralization
                                          Finished Ti02 Pigment

                                                 62

-------
        (3)  Pigment Finishing

        Before pigment from either process is sold, it is processed
through a series of finishing operations in which specific particle
surface properties are developed.  These properties in turn determine
characteristics such as pigment dispersibility and durability.  For
instance, pigment intended for plastics use is usually treated with an
organic agent, dimethyl siloxane, to enhance the pigment's compatibility
with the plastic system.  Sulfate producers have made their pigments
more competitive with chloride pigments in recent years through careful
control of particle size and coating characteristics obtained in finish-
ing operations.  Such finishing steps generally add l-2c to the basic
manufacturing cost of the pigment.

        b.  Producers

        At the end of 1972, there were 11 domestic TiO,, producers operating
15 plants, all but one of which are in the eastern half of the U.S.
Table 21  summarizes pertinent information regarding these facilities.
Since 1956, chloride process facilities have accounted for all new TiC^
pigment plant construction.  Possibly reflecting producer's uncertainty
about process technology and economics, individual capacity of most
chloride plants is in the 25,000 to 30,000 ton range.  The notable
exception is Du Pont, which is increasing the capacity of their New
Johnsonville, Tennessee, plant to 195,000 tons by year-end 1973 and if
actively considering a new 100,000 ton chloride facility in Georgia.
Two producers, PPG  and NL Industries, have recently closed their chloride
facilities, moves reportedly due to raw material supply and economics
problems.

        Several of the large producers—Du Pont, NL Industries, and
Glidden-Durkee—have integrated their operations backward to provide
captive supplies of ilmenite ore.  (No domestic producer has a captive
source of rutile as virtually all of this raw material is imported from
Australian producers.)  These three producers have also achieved forward
integration through captive Ti02 supply for their paint products.  No
other domestic producers have achieved integration to a comparable
extent.  Most TiO- plants are isolated manufacturing facilities, although
a few are part of larger, multi-product facilities, and most plants
produce and sell titanate and other salts as by-products from the
process.

        c.  Manufacturing Economics

        Tables  22 and  23 summarize estimated manufacturing economics
and profitability for a 25,000 ton sulfate plant.  The costs for raw
materials, utilities^-directr^abor, and overhead, are based on current
estimates for these items.  For the sulfate process, two investment
bases are used—replacement and depreciable.  The replacement basis is
an ADL estimate of current plant replacement cost and is used for
calculation of insurance and maintenance, since these items are best
reflected by current costs and replacement value.  A depreciable basis

                                     63

-------
                                                    TABLE 21
Ti00 MANUFACTURING LOCATIONS AND CAPACITIES

Company
American Cyanamid


Cabot
Combustion Engineering

E.I. Du Pont





N.J. Zinc (Div. of G&W)
Kerr-McGee
Lonza
N.L. Industries


Glidden-Durkee
(Div. of SCM)

Sherwin-Williams
Transelr.o


Location
Savannah, Ga.


Ash tabula, Ohio
Camden, N.J.
Wilmington, Del.
Antioch, Cal.
Edgemoor, Del.

New Johnsonville, Tenn


Gloucester City, N.J.
Hamilton, Miss.
Mapleton, 111.
St. Louis, Mo.
Sayreville, N.J.3

Baltimore, Md.


Ashtabula, Ohio
Penn Yan, N.Y.

(Thousands of
Annual
Capacity
70
40
110
27
no
• d •
n • 3. .
27
100

.2 141

268
42
45
no
• a •
108
115
223
50
25
75
27
no
• Ci •
817
Tons)
4
Process
S
C

C


C
1 S
i C

C


S
C

S
\ s
\ C

s
C

C



Raw Material
Imported ilmenite, slag
Imported rutile

Imported rutile


Imported rutile
Captive ilmenite, slag
Captive mixture of ilmenite
leucoxene, rutile
Captive mixture of ilmenite
leucoxe le, rutile

Slag
Imported rutile

Captive ilmenite
Captive ilmenite
Imported rutile

Captive ilmenite, slag
Imported rutile

Imported rutile



Start-Up
Year
1955
1966

1964

	 ^
*
1963
1935
1956

1959


1946
1965

*
1923
1918
1966

1956
1970

1969

	 ^
         Converting to all-chloride process and expanding to 112,000 tons by year end  1973.
         Expanding to 195,000 tons by year end 1973.
         Announced closing January 19.73.
        4S = Sulfate;  C = Chloride.

Sources:  Chemical Economics Handbook and  Contractor's estimates.

-------
                                   TABLE 22
                         TiO,
                       Basis:
Item
  Raw Materials

    Ilmenite (56% Ti02)
    Sulfur
    Caustic
    Other Chemicals
  Utilities
    Water
    Electricity
    Natural Gas
  Direct Labor

    Supervision
    Operators
    Helpers
 MANUFACTURING ECONOMICS— SULFATE PROCESS
	r, i i    .

 Sulfate Process
 25,000 T/Yr,  100% of  Capacity
 330 Days/Yr
 Replacement Investment—$26,325,000
 Depreciable Investment—$15,000,000

Unit
Ton
Ton
Ton
	

MGal
kwh
MMBtu

Man Hr
Man Hr
Man Hr

$/Unit
21.00
30.00
55.00


0.10
0.014
0.60

7.50
5.00
4.00

Units/Ton
1.87
0.88
0.20
	

220
525
10

1.58
4.43
3.8C
$/Ton
Pigment
39.27
26.40
11.00
30.00
106.27
22.00
7.35
6.00
35.35
11.85
22.15
15.20
                                                                                 49.20
  Overhead

    @ 100% Direct Labor                          	            	            49.20

  Maintenance, Labor, and Supplies

    @ 7% of Replacement Investment/Yr                                            73.71

  Depreciation
    @ 9.1% of Depreciable Investment/Yr                                          54.60

  Insurance and Local Taxes
    @ 2.0% of Investment/Yr                                                      21.06

          Total Manufacturing Cost Per Ton                                     $389.39

          Manufacturing Cost Per Lb. Pigment                                    $ 0.195


 Capital investment based on Contractor's estimates.
 Asr>! raes wage rates and utilities rates of New Jersey area.
 Assumes capital cost of H~SO, plant included.  Does not include solid waste
 handling capital or operating costs.
 See manning table included.

Source;  Contractor's estimates.           65

-------
                                TABLE 22 (Continued)
                              LABOR SCHEDULE
                          o PRODUCTION—SULFATE PROCESS
                                       Supervisors     Operators      Helpers

Feed Preparation Section                    1              12

Digestion and Separation Section.                           4            3

Hydrolysis—Precipitation Section           1              32

Purification Section                        1              11

Calcination—Dry Milling Section            1              11

After Treatment nation                     1              33

Sulfuric Acid Plant                       	              1           	


          Total—Men/Shift                  5             14           12
                                       66

-------
                                  TABLE 23
Ti00 PIGMENT PROFITABILITY— SULFATE
Investment:
Manufacturing

Pigment Selling Price
Gross Profit/Lb.
Gross Profit/Ton
Freight at 5% of List Price Sales/Ton
General, Selling, & Administrative
@ 7.5% of List Price Sales/Ton
Profit Before Taxes/Ton
Profit After Taxes/Ton
Profit After Taxes as % of Sales
$15,000,000
Cost: $0.195
(Rutile) (
\Grade / \
$0.275/Lb.
0.080
160.00
27.50
41.25
91.25
46.62
8.3
PROCESS

70/30 \
Rutile/ Ana tase 1
Mix /
$0.26/Lb.
0.065
130.00
27.50
41.25
61.25
30.62
5.9

(Ana tase ^
Paper
Grade /
$0.24/Lb.
0.045
90.00
27.50
41.25
21.25
10.62
2.2
CASH FLOW
Profit After Taxes/Ton
Plus Depreciation/Ton
Total Cash Flow/Ton
Total Cash Flow @ 25,000 Tons
Investment
Working Capital (3 months'
operating costs)
Payback (Yrs)
% Return on Capital Employed
46.62
54.60
101.22
2,540,000
i EL nnn nnn •- 	
1J,UUU,UUU
2/. -> i nrto i . 	 .. i,
, 4JJ jUUU
17 A 1 1 f. B 7 	 - . .
1 / , *t J J , OO /
6.9
15.0
30.62
54.60
85. 12
2,.JO,000


8.2
12.0
10.62
54.60
65.22
1,630,000
fe-


10.7
9.3
Source:   Contractor's estimates.
                                        67

-------
of smaller dollar size than replacement value is used for depreciation
since most sulfate plants are 20 to 30 years old, and current depreciable
assets are mostly recently replaced process equipment and newly installed
finishing equipment.  A depreciation rate of 9.1% per year is used as this
rate is the highest allowed by the Internal Revenue Service for chemical
industry facilities.  Since all Ti02 grades are sold on a delivered basis,
a freight charge of 5% of list price has been included in Table 23.   General
selling and administrative charges of 7.5% of list price sales reflect
the relatively expensive selling effort required for Ti02 pigments.

        Table 23  shows that depending on grade and price, after tax
profitability ranges from 7.1% down to 2.2% of sales.  In addition,
return on capital could theoretically be as high as 13.7% after tax,
although 11.5%, based on a product mix of 70:30 rutile/anatase grades,
is probably more representative of actual industry performances.

        Tables 23  and 24  detail similar costs and profitability figures
for a 25,000-ton chlorine plant.  The depreciable and replacement invest-
ment basis are considered the same in this case since most chloride plants
not only are relatively new with substantial original book value remain-
ing, but also have experienced the updating of process and finishing equip-
ment found in sulfate process plants.  As seen in Table 25,  while the
after-tax profit percentage is low, 3.6%, the return on capital, at
10.2%, is considerably higher.  By virtue of a large depreciation tax
shield, the chloride process apparently generates substantial cash flow,
despite low-book profits.  It should be noted that chloride profit margins
have shrunk recently, largely due to the dramatic rise in rutile ore
prices, now $175 and higher.  Ore cost comprises over 50% of the cost of
manufacture, and this item has been most responsible for the elimination
of the chloride process' earlier cost advantage over the sulfate process.
Chloride pigment producers are anxious to see this cost drop through either
more widespread use of ilmenite or through successful commercialization
of synthetic rutile production.  An important factor in economical chloride
production is recovery and recycle of chlorine gas after the oxidation
step.  The highly corrosive nature of chlorine makes this step difficult,
but failure to do so can result in extraordinarily high use of make-
up chlorine.

        d.  Raw Materials

        Ready availability of inexpensive raw materials is one of the
key requirements for the continued production of low-cost TiO- pigments.
Economic production via the chloride process has been seriously
threatened by the recent, dramatic increase in rutile ore prices.  In
contrast, ilmenite prices have risen only slightly to $35 per ton.  The
reason for these different behaviors is  the supply/demand balance for
each ore.

        Ilmenite is mined virtually worldwide, with  1971 world production
being almost 2.9 million short tons.  U.S. ilmenite  production has de-
clined from 930,000 tons in 1969  to  680,000 tons in  1971, but worldwide
                                     58

-------
                                     TABLE 24
                    Ti00 MANUFACTURING ECONOMICS—CHLORIDE PROCESS
Basis:


Item
Raw Materials
Rutile
Coke
Chlorine
Chemical Additives
2
Utilities
Water
Electricity
Natural Gas
Refrigeration
Direct Labor
Supervision
Operators
Overhead
@ 100% Direct Labor
Chloride Process
25,000 T/Yr
330 Davs/Yr
Investment
Unit
Ton
Ton
Ton
MGal
kwh
MMBtu
Ton/Day
Man Hr
Man Hr

, 100% of Capacity
(Depreciable and
Replacement) — $21,
$/Unit
175.00
24.00
50.00
0.10
0.014
0.60
3.00
7.50
5.00


330, OOO1
Units/Ton
1.17
0.35
0.21
23
750
10
2.5
0.95
5.4

Maintenance, Labor, and Supplies
@ 6% of Investment/Yr
Depreciation
@ 9.1% of Investment/Yr
Insurance and Local Taxes












1
    @ 2% of  Investment/Yr

          Total Manufacturing  Cost  Per  Ton

          Manufacturing  Cost/Lb  Pigment



 Capital Investment  based  on  Contractor's estimates.
"Assumes wage  and  utilities rates of  New  Jersey.
 See included  manning  table.
                                                                                 $/Ton
                                                                                Pigment
                                                                                204.75
                                                                                  8.40
                                                                                 10.50
                                                                                  7.00
                                                                                230.65
                                                                                  2.30
                                                                                 10.50
                                                                                  6.00
                                                                                  7.50
                                                                                 26.30
                                                                                  7.12
                                                                                 27.00
                                                                                 34.12
                                                                                 34.12



                                                                                 51.19



                                                                                 77.63



                                                                                 17.06

                                                                               $454.01

                                                                                $ 0.227

-------
                      TABLE 24 (Continued)
                    LABOR SCHEDULE
               p PRODUCTION—CHLORIDE PROCESS
Operators                                    Men/Shift

Load in                                          1
Chlorination reactor                             1
Quench, TiCl, recycle, storage                   1
Sludge filter, waste                             1
TiCl, purification                               2
TiCl, vaporizer, preheat, additives              1
Oxidation chamber                                1
TiCl, quench, cyclones, bag filter               1
Chlorine recovery                                1
After treatment                                  4
Bagging, warehouse                               2
Oxygen plant                                     1

                              Total             17
Supervisors

Chlorination, purification                       1
Oxidation                                        1
After treatment                                  1

                              Total              3
                             70

-------
                               TABLE 25
                Ti02 PIGMENT PROFITABILITY—CHLORIDE PROCESS
                      Investment:   $21,330,000
                      Manufacturing Cost:   $0.227/Lb.
Pigment Selling Price
  Gross Profit/Lb.
  Gross Profit/Ton
  Freight at 5% of List Price Sales/Ton
  General, Selling, & Administrative
    @ 7.5% of List Price Sales/Ton
  Profit Before Taxes/Ton
  Profit After Taxes/Ton
  Profit After Taxes as % of Sales
(Rutile Grade)
  $0.275/Lb.
     0.048
    96.00
    27.50

    41.25
    27.25
    13.625
     2.5
                               CASH FLOW
  Profit After Taxes/Ton
  Plus Depreciation/Ton
  Total Cash Flow/Ton
  Total Cash Flow @ 25,000 Tons
  Investment
  Working Capital (3 months' operating costs)


  Payback (Yrs)
  % Return on Capital Employed
    13.62
    77.63
    91.25
 2,281,375
21,330,000
 2,837,500
24,167,500
    10.6
    11.7
                                    71

-------
supply has been filled by increased production in Australia and Norway.
Present reserves of ilmenite are such that, at the present annual world
consumption rate of nearly three million tons, adequate supplies of
sufficient quality ore should be available for nearly 100 years.

        The rutile ore supply situation, however, is not so bright.
Rutile production in recent years has remained constant at slightly
over 400,000 tons and is confined almost exclusively to the east coast
of Australia.  Significant deposits are believed available in Sierra
Leone, but technical problems have hampered attempts to exploit this
source.  There is no rutile ore mined in the U.S.  A large increase in
worldwide chloride pigment process capacity has greatly increased
demand, and present rutile reserves are estimated to be barely 20 years.
These conditions have fostered a rise in rutile ore price from $100 per
ton in 1965 to $180 per ton presently.

        A major hope in the bleak rutile supply situation is the
commercialization of synthetic rutile production.  This process involves
chemical leaching of ilmenite ore to remove iron impurities and to upgrade
the TiO^ content to approximately 90%.  Since nearly two tons of ilmenite
are required to produce one ton of synthetic rutile, waste disposal
considerations will adversely affect the rapid development of domestically
available synthetic rutile, although both Sherwin-Williams and Kerr
McGee are actively pursuing this technology.  Semi-commercial synthetic
plants are in operation in Australia and Japan, and the product has
been tested and found acceptable in most U.S. chloride process pigment
plants.  Chloride producers anticipate that synthetic rutile will begin
to appear commercially by 1975 at $130-150 per ton and feel that this
material will be significant in keeping chloride pigment production
economically viable.

        The other significant factor in chloride process raw materials
has been the development of Du Font's ability to utilize ilmenite ore
in its chloride plants.  Although this capability has always been tech-
nically feasible, it has been uneconomic due to the high chlorine loss
resulting from chlorinating the 40% of iron oxide present in ilmenite.
Du Pont, however, has developed the ability to minimize chlorine use
and is able to produce chloride pigment for an estimated l-2<: per
pound less than rutile-based chloride processes.  Since ilmenite is
much more widely available than rutile, other chloride producers are
working on both ilmenite beneficiation technology and direct ilmenite
use capability in chloride processing.  Thus far, however, Du Pont
remains the only producer using ilmenite directly.

        The last major source of Ti02 is titanium slag, which is produced
in Canada from plentiful, low-quality ilmenite ores.  The ilmenite used
here is closely intermixed with iron ores, and smelting is employed to
produce pig iron and titanium slag containing 70% to 72% TiC^.  Slag
cannot be used in the chloride process due to the formation of in-
soluble chloride salts which plug up processing equipment.  While other
raw materials such as chlorine, coke, and sulfuric acid are used in
                                     72

-------
Ti02 pigment production, these items are widely available and to not con-
strain the production process to the degree that Ti09 ores do.


    4.  Supply/Demand Balance; Prices

        Industry capacity has been sufficient to supply demand as almost
continual additions to capacity have been made.  Table 26  summarizes
capacity and production figures for recent years and shows that capacity
utilization has been in the 75% to 85% range.  Capacity has been taken
at announced, or nameplate, levels and is higher than effective capacity
due to grade/product mix constraints.  The industry is now facing a
tight-supply situation with NL Industries announcing the  closing of
its chloride facilities in Sayreville, New Jersey.   Du Font's announced
expansions won't be operational until year-end 1973.

        This supply situation is substantially different from that of
1970-71 when over-supply forced a sharp depression in prices.  Table 27
summarizes recent shipment valuation history and confirms industry claims
that the 1970-71 period saw severe price competition, despite stable
list prices.  Demand and prices have improved with the economic recovery
and recent list prices stand at:  standard anatase and rutile grades,
bulk—28.5c per pound;  paper grade anatase—24c per pound.  Most
producers are running at full capacity presently, and shipments are
being made •**•. list prices.
                                     73

-------
                            TABLE 26
              Ti00 INDUSTRY PLANT CAPACITY UTILIZATION
1965




1966




1967




1968




1969




1970




1971




1972
(Thousands
Capacity
713
725
766
746
778
817
805
817
of Tons)
Production
576.7
594.5
589.4
623.7
664.3
655.3
677.8
687.3

Percent
Utilization
81
82
77
84
85
81
84
84
Sources:   Chemical Economics Handbook and Current Industrial Reports,
                                   74

-------
                                                         TABLE  27
Ul
Ti00 COMMERCIAL SHIPMENT VALUES
Z
(Shipments in Thousands of Tons)
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971

Commercial
Shipments
524.5
545.4
542.6
564.4
590.1
560.9
581.2

Total
Value1
274.7
279.7
277.2
288.8
301.1
277.8
262.4

Value/Lb.2
.261
.256
.255
.256
.255
.248
.226

3
List Prices
Anatase Rutile
.25 .26
.25 .26
.25 .26
.25 .26
.26 .27
.26 .27
.26 .26

                             _ V d JLUC;  J-IL  y  L L J_ J_ J. -LWL1.O •
                              Value  in  $  per Pound.
                              Carlot, $ per Pound.

            Source:  Current  Industrial  Reports, U.S. Department of Commerce.

-------
D.  SODIUM BICHROMATE
    1.   Summary

        The U.S. sodium bichromate market has been characterized by
essentially static demand during the past five years at approximately
150,000 tons annually.  The market outlook for the next five years
is for  a slight overall contraction in demand with deteriorating markets
in water treating and textiles (resulting from more stringent water
quality standards) only partially offset by modest demand growth for
chromic acid, chrome colors and catalyst applications.   Very nearly
half of current demand for sodium bichromate is for chrome colors
and chromic acid.  Other uses include leather tanning,  metal treating,
textiles, water treating and catalyst manufacture.  Substitute products
(or processes) exist for most bichromate derivatives, constraining
demand growth.

        There are currently three producers of sodium chromate and
bichromate—Allied Chemical, Diamond Shamrock and PPG Industries.
Aggregate captive requirements of these three companies approximate
35% of  current production.  U.S. producers of sodium bichromate are
dependent on foreign sources, primarily the Republic of South Africa,
for chromite ore, the basic raw material.

        Manufacturing costs are estimated at $212 per ton.  Assuming
GS&A at 5.5% of sales and a weighted average selling price of $262
per ton (including some chrome salt cake by-product credit), the industry
after-tax income in 1972 approximated $18.50 per ton, equivalent to a
7.1% return on sales.

        During the period 1960-1971, actual prices (as calculated from
Commerce Department data for dollar values and tonnages) received by
the industry have remained in a remarkably narrow range between $240
and $255 per ton.  Although confirming Commerce Department data are not
yet available, list price increases made recently probably have been
reflected in somewhat higher plant prices.  These price increases are
believed to have been made possible primarily as a result of a somewhat
less aggressive posture by foreign production sources,  notably Italy
and Japan.  Producers in both these countries are understood to be
facing higher manufacturing costs as a result of more stringent water
pollution abatement standards.  Nonetheless, imports have exceeded
exports in seven of the last ten years.
                                     76

-------
    2.  Market Characterization

        In Table 28  is shown the apparent U.S.  consumption of sodium
chromate and bichromate for the period 1960 through 1972.  For most of
this period, U.S. production, as reported by the Department of Commerce,
has varied between 135 and 155 thousand tons annually.  As indicated,
these data include both sodium chromate and sodium bichromate.  While
some of the sodium chromate produced in the initial phase of the manu-
facturing process is marketed as such (an estimated 15 thousand tons
of bichromate equivalent), most of the sodium chromate filtrate is
further processed to produce sodium bichromate.

        Imports, primarily from the U.S.S.R. and Japan, have varied in
the last several years between 3.5 and 6.5 thousand tons.  The sharp
drop in imports from 1966 to 1967 reflected decreased U.S. demand.  As
a result of the Kennedy round agreements, the import rate of duty was
reduced to $0.87 per pound as of January 1, 1972.

        Exports, primarily to Canada, have trailed imports in recent
years.  In 1972 exports totaled 4.03 thousand tons valued at $0.93 million.
Canada received the bulk (70%) of 1972 exports,  with Colombia next at
very nearly 20%.  For purposes of estimating apparent consumption, we have
ignored changes in stocks of chromium chemicals at producer plants.

        On a long-term basis (in the post-World War II period), apparent
U.S. consumption of sodium chromate and sodium bichromate has increased
at an average annual compound rate of 2.4% per year.  In each of the last
three years, however, consumption has declined;  the outlook is for a
continuation of the recent trend.

        a.  Uses

        In Table  29 is shown the estimated 1971 use pattern for sodium
chromate and bichromate.  Very nearly 50% is consumed in the manufacture
of chrome colors and chromic acid.  In descending order of bichromate
consumption, the most important chromate colors are chrome yellow and
orange, chromium oxide green, molybdate orange,  and zinc yellow and
chrome green.  Production of chromium pigments in 1971 and the estimated
bichromate equivalent requirements is shown in Table 30.    Requirements
for U.S. sodium bichromate in pigment production would have been higher
were it not for the substantial imports of chrome colors.  Imports of
chromium-containing pigments in 1971 included chromium yellow, 6.2
thousand tons; chromium oxide green, 0.9 thousand tons; chrome
green, 0.3 thousand tons; zinc yellow 1.08 thousand tons; and molybdate
orange, 0.3 thousand tons.  Total value of these products and miscellaneous
other chrome colors was $4.5 million, 17% higher than in 1970.

        A major use for chrome yellow is the yellow center strip line for
highways.  Chromium oxide green is used where chemical and heat resistance
is required, e.g., in ceramic colors, for coloring cement and in green
asphalt roofing.  Zinc yellow finds application as a  corrosion inhibitor
                                     77

-------
                             TABLE  28
APPARENT U.S. CONSUMPTION OF SODIUM

Year
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
(Thousands
Production
121.9
120.9
127.5
133.9
137.9
141.0
141.5
135.3
146.0
152.6
153.5
138.2
137.1
of Short Tons,
Imports
1.9
1.6*
2.5
3.5
3.4
18.0
24.1
8.2
11.6
6.5
3.6
6.4
5.7
CHROMATE AND
Na2Cr207'2H
Exports
9.6
7.1
5.0
5.1
6.7
4.0
2.6
3.3
4.8
5.1
4.9
3.1
4.0
BICHROMATE
20)
Apparent
Consumption
114.2
115.4
125.0
132.3
134.6
155.0
163.0
140.2
152.8
154.0
152.2
141.5
138.8
Source;   U.S.  Department of Commerce.
                                  78

-------
                         TABLE 29


ESTIMATED 1971 USE PATTERN FOR SODIUM CHROMATE AND BICHROMATE
                   (Thousands of Tons)




End-Use                                           Consumption


Pigments                                             36.2


Chromic acid                                         32.0


Leather tanning                                      28.0


Metal treating                                       16.2


Textiles and dyes                                    10.1


Miscellaneous                                        19.0
          Total                                     141.5
Source:  Contractor's estimates,
                              79

-------
                                    TABLE 30


PRODUCTION OF CHROMIUM PIGMENTS AND CONSUMPTION OF SODIUM BICHROMATE EQUIVALENT,  1971
                                 (Thousands of Tons)

                                                                 Consumption of
                                                                   Bichromate
     Pigment                      Production                       Equivalent


     Yellow and Orange              '29.0                            14.8

     Oxide Green                      6.6                             9.0

     Molybdate Orange                11.4                             5.9

     Zinc Yellow                      5.6                             5.8

     Chrome Green                     2.7                             0.7
                                     55.3                            36.2
     Source;  U.S. Department of Commerce and  Contractor's estimates.
                                            80

-------
for light metals and steel.  For example, in combination with red lead
it is used in priming structural steel.  It also is part of the
formulation for automotive body prime coats.  Sodium bichromate-based
pigments are also used in printing inks and plastics.

        The second largest outlet for sodium bichromate is for the .
manufacture of chromic acid, produced by reacting concentrated sulfuric
acid with sodium bichromate.  Chromic acid, in turn, is used primarily
in chrome plating processes but also finds use in copper stripping,
aluminum anodizing and for general corrosion prevention.  The automotive
industry represents the major user for chrome plating, although other
durable goods manufacturing such as appliances  also have requirements.
Chromic acid imports have constrained domestic production.

        The third most important outlet for sodium bichromate is leather
tanning.  With the exception of heavy cattle hides, where vegetable
tanning is used, chrome tanning is the most important treatment for all
hides (i.e., calfskins, goat- and kidskins, sheep- and lambskins).
Chrome tannage is used in shoe uppers, glove leathers, garment leathers,
and bag leather.  In the tanning process, sodium bichromate is reduced
with glucose to make the solutions of chromium salts employed in chrome
leather tanning.

        Various metal treating and finishing processes are the next most
important outlet for sodium bichromate.  For example, a solution of
sodium bichromate and sulfuric acid is used in the bright dipping of
brass and copper to remove oxide scale.  Another important use in metal
finishing is in the formation of chemical conversion coatings to provide
corrosion protection and decorative effects, as well as to provide a
good base for painting metal surfaces.

        In the textile industry, sodium bichromate is used in a variety
of ways.  ?or example, among its applications are mordanting of wool,
dyeing nylon and wool, dyeing with chromate colors, as an after-
treatment on cotton to retard fading of dyes during washing and for
stripdyed wool.

        A miscellaneous category of uses, including chemical applications,
wood preservative applications and corrosion control, accounted for
approximately 13% of U.S. sodium bichromate consumption in 1971.
A small quantity of sodium bichromate is used in the oxidation of
various organic chemicals, including Pharmaceuticals.  The bleaching of
fats, oils, and waxes also uses the bichromate as an oxidant.  Perhaps
the major chemical use for sodium bichromate is in  the manufacture of
catalysts.  Chromates and bichromates are an important ingredient in
the preservatives and fire retardants used by the wood preserving in-
dustry.  Chromates are also used to inhibit corrosion in recirculating
water-based systems (e.g., in cooling towers and large central air
conditioning facilities).
                                      81

-------
        b.  Substitute Products

        The primary substitution effect is represented by alternate
materials (or processes) for derivatives of sodium bichromate rather
than for the bichromate per se.  As an example, aluminum or high-impact
plastics can be substituted for chrome plated trim on motor vehicles.
(It should be noted that processes have been developed to chrome plate
plastics, e.g., ABS, although uncoated plastics are also used in automo-
bile trim.)  As another example, cadmium yellow can be used in place of
chrome yellow pigments.  Market growth for chrome leather is limited by
lower cost substitutes, specifically, the poromeric materials.  Tin-
free steel cans coated with chrome compete with aluminum cans and seam-
less, deep-drawn steel cans coated with tin.  The existence of these
alternate materials both limits market growth and represents a constraint
on higher sodium bichromate prices.

        c.  Captive Requirements

        Table 31  presents Commerce Department data for sodium chrpmate
and bichromate production, shipments, and shipment value for the period
1960 to 1971.  Excluding inventory fluctuations and losses, the
difference between total production in any given year and the quantity
of shipments reflects the amount of sodium bichromate consumed at the
producing plants for derivative manufacture.  In recent years, this
has amounted to about 50,000 tons or approximately 33% of total production.
Including inter-plant transfers, captive consumption by the industry
approximates 35% of production.
    3.  Supply Characterization

        a.  Manufacturing Routes and Economics

        Sodium chromate and bichromate are made by calcining chrome ore
(chromite) with soda ash or with soda ash and lime.  More specifically,
sodium chromate is manufactured by calcining a mixture of chromite ore,
lime, and soda ash.  The sodium chromate, if desired, can be recovered
by leaching and crystallization.  Sodium bichromate is produced by
treating a sodium chromate solution with sulfuric acid.  Sodium bichromate
and the sodium sulfate by-product produced are separated and recovered
by crystallization.  Sodium bichromate is the principal commercial product
because it is usually priced to cost less per unit of CrO- than sodium
chromate.

        As indicated, chromium chemicals are produced from chromite ore,
the term chromite being a general one used to designate chromium-bearing
spinel.  The composition of chromite varies widely, usually with in-
clusions of magnesia, alumina, and silica.  Although distinctions are
not clearcut, there are three broad grades of chromite—high chromium
chromite, a metallurgical grade; high-iron chromite, which is the
chemical grade; and high-aluminum chromite, the refractory grade.  Chromite
                                    82

-------
                              TABLE 31
Year

1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
SHIPMENTS OF
Production
(M Tons)
121.9
120.9
127.5
133.9
137.9
141.0
141.5
135.3
146.1
152.6
153.5
138.2
ouLULUM CHROMATE

Quantity
(M Tons)
89.1
85.2
97.0
88.2
99.6
103.7
94.2
94.0
100.0
97.5
103.2
88.2
AND BICHROMATE
Shipments*
Value
($ MM)
22.7
20.5
24.8
21.2
22.9
24.2
23.9
23.0
23.9
23.1
24.8
21.9

Unit Value
($/Ton)
254.77
240.61
255.67
240.36
239.92
233.37
253.72
2.44.68
239.00
236.92
240.31
248.30
*Including interplant transfers.






Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce.
                                     83

-------
has not been mined in the U.S. since 1961, when a small tonnage was
produced under the government's Defense Production Act.  With the ex-
ception of government stockpile releases, U.S.  producers of chromium
chemicals are therefore dependent on foreign sources.   No commercially
feasible process for upgrading domestic chromite bearing materials to
compete with foreign ores has been developed.

        Most of the known world reserves are located in the Republic
of South Africa and Southern Rhodesia.  The embargo on chromite from
Southern Rhodesia, brought about by United Nations action in 1966 and
an Executive Order in 1967, resulted in the U.S. turning to the U.S.S.R.
for some of its chromite requirements.  Most of the chemical grade
chromite, however, comes from the Republic of South Africa.

        Estimated manufacturing costs for sodium bichromate are
shown in Table 32.   The manufacturing cost estimates are based on
a plant with 150 tons per day capacity and an investment (assuming the
plant was built in 1960) of $5.7 million.  The indicated manufacturing
cost  is $212.  Included in this total is the cost of producing by-
product sodium sulfate, amounting to approximately $20 per ton of
bichromate.

        Assuming a 1972 selling price for sodium bichromate of $245
per ton, plus by-product credit for 0.8 tons of sodium sulfate valued
at $17, the total unit sales value is $262.  Taking GS&A at 5.5% of
sales, the indicated after-tax profit is $18.50 per ton for an after-
tax return on sales of 7.1%.

        b.  Supply/Demand Balance

        The producers of sodium bichromate are shown on Table  33.  The
two largest producers, Allied Chemical and Diamond Shamrock, have heavily
integrated positions, both with respect to raw materials and
derivative products.  For example, Allied is a major producer of soda
ash and sulfuric acid, and, along with Diamond Shamrock, is a major
producer of chromic acid.  Similarly, Diamond Shamrock produces both
soda ash and sulfuric acid and several other derivatives of sodium
bichromate in addition to chromic acid.  PPG Industries produces soda
ash at Corpus Christi and has nominal captive outlets  for  the sodium
bichromate in pigments.  Hercules, Inc., had produced bichromate in a
small  (approximately 30  tons per day) plant in Glens Falls, N.Y., for
captive consumption in pigment manufacture.  This facility has been
closed.

        The newest facility of the three producing plants  is Diamond
Shamrock's.  Diamond Shamrock brought its Castle Hayne, North Carolina,
facility on-stream late  in  1971.  The new plant replaced two older,
less efficient plants at Painesville, Ohio, and Kearny, New Jersey.
Including Diamond's new  facility, total  industry capacity  is estimated
at  175,000 tons per year.  Compared with  reported production of  137-
138,000  tons per year, the industry operating rate in  both 1971  and
1972 was slightly under  80%.


                                    84

-------
                                TABLE 32
                ESTIMATED 'MANUFACTURING COST, SODIUM BICHROMATE

       Production:  150 Tons/Day sodium bichromate
       Operation:   330 operating days
       Investment:  $5,700,000 (Assuming plant was built in 1960)
Item

Raw Materials

  Chromite (44% Cr203)
  Soda Ash (Na2C03)
  Lime (CaO)
  Sulfuric Acid (66°Be)

Utilities

  Power
  Fuel
  Water

Direct Labor

  Supervisors
  Operators
  Helpers

Overhead

Maintenance

Maintenance Supplies

Depreciation

Taxes and Insurance
Units
short ton       19.00
100 Ib           2.40
short ton       20.50
short -ton       26.00
MKwh            15.00
MMBtu            0.70
MGal             0.10
Man-hr           7.50
Man-hr           5.00
Man-hr           3.75

60% Direct Labor
                                                                       Cost
US$/Unit    Units/Ton    (US$/Ton Product)
              1.30
             17.00
              0.80
              0.50
              0.50
             40.00
             14.00
              0.17
              3.40
              6.00
24.60
40.80
16.40
13.00
 7.50
28.00
 1.40
 1.30
17.00
22.50

24.48

 5.50

 4.00

 3.52

 1.50
                                         Total Manufacturing Cost
                                              211.50
Source:  Contractor's estimates.
                                    85

-------
                               TABLE 32 (Continued)
CREDIT FROM NOT PRODUCTING
                                                 AS A BY-PRODUCT
                         Units
                         US$/Unit    Units/Ton
US$/Ton
Utilities
Power
Water
Direct Labor
Supervisor



MKwh 15.00 0.10 1.50
MGal 0.10 ,t.QO 3.00

Man-hr 7.50 0.30 2.20
Man-hr 5.00 1.00 5.00
Man-hr 3.75 2.00 7.50
Maintenance Supplies
                                                        0.50
Maintenance Labor
                                                        0.20
Tax and Insurance
                                                        0.10
Source:   Contractor's estimates.
                                                                      20.00
                                     86

-------
                                TABLE 33
                       PRODUCERS OF SODIUM BICHROMATE
         (Thousands of Tons Hydrous Sodium Bichromate Equivalent)
Company
Location
Capacity
Allied Chemical Corp.
Baltimore, Md.
   75
Diamond Shamrock Corp,
Castle Hayne, N.C.
   70
PPG Industries, Inc.
Corpus Christi, Tex.
                                                                     30
          Total
                                      175
Source:  Trade sources.
                                      87

-------
    4.  Prices

        A comparison of list prices versus actual prices as calculated
from the Commerce Department data on reported value and quantity of ship-
ments is shown in Table 34.   Throughout the period, actual unit values
realized by producers have been less than list prices.   For example,  in
1971 the actual price was 12.4 cents per pound versus a list price of
16.0 cents per pound.

        List prices were increased by approximately 1 cent per pound in
1973 as they were in 1970 and 1971.  Although shipment values for the
industry for 1972 are not yet available from Commerce Department, actual
prices received by producers are believed to have declined slightly.   We
have assumed an average industry plant price of $245 per ton in 1972 for
our profitability estimates.

        For the period shown, actual prices have varied very little.  The
static price pattern reflects low demand growth, competition from imports,
the availability of substitute materials for derivative products, and
an over-capacity situation in the industry.  Static plant prices have
been offset somewhat during this period by declining costs for the
chromite ore.  Bichromate producers are believed to have  written favorable,
long-term contracts for chromite ore.  These contracts, however, will be
phasing out over the next several years.  Renegotiations will probably
be at higher levels, reflecting both increased ore costs and higher ocean
freights.
                                     88

-------
                             TABLE 34
           ACTUAL VS. LIST PRICES FOR SODIUM BICHROMATE


Year
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
Granular, bags,
2
(Cents per Pound)
1
List Price
13.00
13.00
13.00
13.00
13.00
13.00
14.00
14.00
14.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
16.00
17.25
carlots, truckloads, works.


2
Actual Price
12.74
12.03
12.78
12.02
12.00
11.67
12.69
12.23
11.95
11.85
12.02
12.42
Not available
Not available


quantity of shipments.
                                  89

-------
E.  POTASSIUM BICHROMATE
        While sodium chromate and sodium bichromate are by far the major
chromium chemicals, a number of other chromium compounds are also pro-
duced from chromite ore.  These secondary chromium chemicals include
potassium chromate and potassium bichromate, ammonium bichromate, and
chromium potassium sulfate.  There are no government data for any of these
materials on an individual basis.  Commerce Department does report on
an annual basis the dollar value of shipments for "other chromium
compounds."  In 1971, the most recent year for which data are available,
the shipments of other chromium compounds were valued, f.o.b. plant,
at $9.5 million.  This dollar total has varied between $9.5 and $10.5
million for the last five reporting years.

        Although potassium chromate and bichromate are the most important
of the secondary chemicals, production of the potassium compounds in
the U.S. only totals 3,000 tons annually.  There are a variety of
miscellaneous uses for potassium chromate and bichromate, the most im-
portant of which are pigments and reagent grade materials.  Allied is
the only U.S. producer of importance.

        Potassium chromate and bichromate can be made by a process
similar to that for producing sodium bichromate by substituting potassium
carbonate for sodium carbonate in the raw material mix.  However,
potassium bichromate is normally made from sodium bichromate and potassium
chloride.  Estimated manufacturing costs for potassium bichromate are
shown in Table  35.   The sodium bichromate has been charged into the
potassium bichromate process essentially at manufacturing cost.  As
indicated, total manufacturing costs were estimated at $402.75 per ton.
Assuming plant netback at $475 per ton (the list price for potassium
bichromate is 24c per pound) and GS&A at 5% of sales, the after-tax
profit per ton is $24 per ton.  This would be equivalent to an after-
tax return on sales of 5.0%.
                                     90

-------
                                TABLE 35

           ESTIMATED MANUFACTURING  COST. POTASSIUM  BICHROMATE
           Production:   15 Tons/Day  of Potassium Bichromate
           Operation:    330 Working  Days
           Investment:   $2,400,000  (Estimated)
Item                       Units     US$/Uni_t     Units/Ton

Raw Materials

  Sodium Bichromate         ton         212          1.2
   (content in solution)
  Potassium Chloride        ton          35          0.7

Utilities

  Power                    MKwh          15          0.3
  Fuel                     MMBtu        0.7            15
  Water                    MGal         0.1            10

Direct Labor

  Supervisors              man-hr       7.50         0.6
  Operators                man-hr       5.00           3
  Helpers                  man-hr       3.75           3

Overhead
                                           Cost
                                     (US$/Ton Product)


                                         254.40

                                          24.50
                                           4.50
                                          10.50
                                           1.00
                                           4.45
                                          15.00
                                          11.25

                                          30.00
Maintenance Labor

Maintenance Materials
                                           4.00

                                           4.00
Depreciation
                                          31.95
Tax and Insurance
(1-1/2% of Investment)
7.20
                                    Total Manufacturing Cost
                                         402.75
                                     91

-------
               III.  IMPACT ANALYSIS—INITIAL STUDY PRODUCTS
A.  ALUMINUM CHLORIDE

    1.  Treatment Costs

        As developed in the effluent guideline development document,
water treatment costs for aluminum chloride producers total $3.77 annually
per ton of product for E.P.P., B.P.T., and B.A.T.  This amount would
apply to plants operating on a chlorine-rich basis to produce yellow
aluminum chloride, which is preferred for the manufacture of some dye
and pigment intermediates.

        Aluminum chloride plants operating on either a stoichiometric
or aluminum-rich basis would have less waste chlorine stack gas and there-
fore lower pollution abatement costs.  At least one producer is able to
manufacture and sell 28% aqueous aluminum chloride solution derived
from its scrubber effluents.

    2.  Price Impact

        The maximum treatment cost of $3.77 per ton represents approxi-
mately 1.3% of the current selling price of aluminum chloride.  Although
capacity utilization (at about 65%) , captive usage, and demand growth
are relatively low, and therefore act as price increase constraints,
these factors are outweighed by the low level of foreign competition,
the absence of substitute products, and the existence of only a few
products all with equal treatment costs.   (All producers of yellow aluminum
chloride will be faced with approximately the same water effluent charges.)
Some level of price increase is therefore possible, and producers of
aluminum chloride should be able to cover at least part of  their added
treatment costs.  Any costs which could not be passed on as a price in-
crease would have to be absorbed by the manufacturers.

    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        No plant shutdowns are expected as a direct result  of additional
water pollution abatement costs.  Given the moderate degree of integration,
the fact that plants with a water pollution problem will have already
made a large investment in air pollution abatement equipment, and a
relatively high emotional commitment on the part of the aluminum chloride
producers, the very low level of added cost for water  treatment is  too
small to result in plant shutdowns.
                                     93

-------
B.  ALUMINUM SULFATE

    1.  Treatment Costs

        Water treatment costs for nonexemplary aluminum sulfate plants
are estimated to be $0.93 per ton of product above existing B.L.P.
treatment, or $1.72 per ton total.  This added cost will raise average
treatment level to zero discharge of process or cooling water effluent,
which in this case is equivalent to E.P.P.   Additional investment for
a 40 ton-per-day plant is estimated to be $60,000.

        The treatment process which will effect zero discharge involves
clarification and additional pond settling of mud and digestion wastes,
followed by recycle of process water.  Depreciation and operating costs
exclusive of power account for 46% and 23% respectively of total treat-
ment costs.

    2.  Price Impact

        Since there are no suitable substitute products, foreign com-
petition is minimal, and market share is concentrated among several
producers, water treatment costs will probably be passed on as small
price increases.  The amount of the increases, however, will vary with
each producer's local competitive situation.  Although before-tax treat-
ment costs are small relative to product price, the cost per ton of
product  is highly dependent on plant capacity, which varies from
5,000 to 70,000 tons per year for individual facilities.  Such a dis-
parity in capacity will enable the large producer to cover his unit
treatment costs with a smaller price increase than the small producer
will require.

        The nature of the aluminum sulfate market, however, will probably
allow most smaller producers to continue operations at reduced profit
levels.  Many small plants have been located near paper mills in order
to supply aqueous aluminum sulfate economically for paper manufacture.
Despite higher unit production costs, a smaller plant can supply at a
lower delivered cost than a larger, more distant plant can, due to the
cost of transporting water solution.  Aluminum sulfate is sold dried
and bagged only where plants and  customers are widely scattered, and  the
product must be transported long  distances.  It is anticipated, therefore,
that larger producers will raise  prices to cover  their increased costs
as fully as possible.  Smaller producers will probably raise prices only
to the point where  they can still marginally undersell their larger, more
distant competitors—a point which most likely will not permit the small
producer  to fully recover his costs, but which will allow continued
operation at lower  profitability.   In any case, it is not expected
that prices need be raised more  than 5% due  to water  treatment costs.

    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        Recent years have seen the  closing of  some small plants and
a trend toward larger, more efficient facilities.  As demand for aluminum
                                    94

-------
sulfate as a water treatment chemical increases, the trend toward larger
plants should continue.  A large scale shutdown of small aluminum sulfate
facilities, however, is not expected to occur as the result of anticipated
increases in water treatment costs.

        A very few marginally profitable plants may shut down, but these
plants probably would have shut down anyway as a result of competition
from larger plants.  These occurrences will most likely be limited to
situations in which a small plant cannot raise prices enough to remain
profitable, while still underselling a larger, more distant competitor,
and added water treatment costs represent the final negative factor against
continued operation.

        Industry capacity should continue to be sufficient to supply demand,
and no increase in imports, with accompanying detrimental effects on
balance of payments, is anticipated.
C.  CHLORINE AND CAUSTIC SODA
    1.  Treatment Costs
        As estimated in the effluent guideline development document, the
cost of water treatment for a 175 ton-per-day mercury cell plant to
achieve effluent conditions equivalent to B.L.P. is $2.14 per ton of
chlorine produced.  B.L.P. was defined in the effluent guideline develop-
ment document as reduction of mercury to less than 0.5 pounds per day.
For the exemplary plant investigated, the same investment, and there-
fore the same cost, was sufficient to reduce mercury to E.P.P. standards,
i.e., less than 0.15 pounds per day.  An incremental cost of $0.60 per
ton of chlorine above E.P:P. was estimated for catalytic conversion of
sodium hypochlorite to sodium chloride, bringing the mercury cell plant
to B.P.T. control level.  An incremental cost of $0.86 per ton above
E.P.P. was estimated to achieve zero discharge through use of B.A.T. and
involved B.P.T. treatment plus evaporation and reuse of sodium chloride.

        Similarly, the effluent guideline development document has
estimated that the unit cost (in terms of chlorine) to achieve B.L.P.
standards for a 2300 ton-per-day diaphragm cell plant is $0.038 per ton,
the treatment being restricted to settling ponds.  The incremental cost
for this same plant over and above B.L.P. to achieve E.P.P. standards is
$0.254 per ton of chlorine.  This same unit is estimated to achieve
B.P.T., but the assumption is made that there are no incremental operating
costs associated with B.P.T. because hydrochloric acid value is
equated to cost.  There is an incremental investment of $430 thousand
estimated above E.P.P. to cover the installation of the hydrochloric
acid plant for the chlorine tail gas.  Finally, the incremental unit
cost above B.L.P. to utilize B.A.T. standards for this plant is
estimated at $0.52 per ton of chlorine.
                                     95

-------
        As a percent of the estimated $100.90 industry average revenue
in 1972 per ECU (1.0 tons of chlorine plus 1.1 tons of caustic soda),
the before-tax unit cost above B.L.P. and E.P.P. (which are equal) for
the mercury cell plant is 0.59% for B.P.T. and 0.85% for B.A.T.  The
comparable ratio for the diaphragm cell plant is 0.25% for E.P.P. and B.P.T.
and 0.52% for B.A.T.  Compared to the average industry profit margin of
$4.12 per ton for mercury cell plants (estimated in the initial study
project) the incremental after-tax cost for B.P.T.  in the mercury cell
plant represents 7.3% of unit profits while B.A.T.  represents 10.4% of
industry profits.  The comparable figures for the diaphragm cell plant
(using $4.33 per ton as average unit profit) are 2.93% for both E.P.P.
and B.P.T. and 6.03% for B.A.T.

    2.  Price Impact

        Chlorine/caustic producers have the theoretical option of
attempting to recover water treatment costs through price increases
for chlorine and/or caustic soda.  In our judgment, the opportunity for
defraying some or all the water treatment costs through higher chlorine
prices is better than via raising caustic soda prices.  Both capacity
utilization and captive usage are atypically high on average for chlorine.
Demand growth is good (at 6% per year) and foreign competition is non-
existent.  Although there are a relatively large number of producing
companies (approximately 30), the water pollution abatement costs faced
by mercury plants are not significantly different than those for diaphragm
plants.  The difference is insufficient to put the mercury plants at a
significant disadvantage if prices were to be raised only to cover the
water treatment costs experienced by diaphragm cell plants.

        More severe constraints exist for price increases in caustic
soda.  Except for periods of abnormally low chlorine demand  (e.g.,
that experienced in the 1970-71 recession),  caustic soda has usually
presented a disposal problem to most chlor-alkali producers.  Because
normal caustic soda demand growth has been insufficient to match  caustic
soda supply  (which, in turn, is a function of chlorine demand),  the
excess caustic has been sold in competition with other sodium alkalis,
notably soda ash, at distressed price levels.  We expect a long-term
continuation of the caustic soda excess and therefore continued  down-
side pressure on caustic soda prices.

    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        On the basis of the treatment costs estimated in the effluent
guideline development document  (and mentioned above.), and based  on the
conclusion that most if not all of the nominal  incremental costs  for
water  treatment will be passed on through chlorine price increases,
we foresee no plant shutdowns for producers who have  already achieved
B.L.P.  However, an estimated  13% of  the mercury cell plants have not
yet made  this investment.  Instead of the $0.136 per  ton incremental  costs
mentioned above to reach B.A.T., these producers would be faced  with  a
$3.00 per ton cost.  Some of these producers, assuming that  they tend  to
be marginal plants, but probably no more  than 5% of  the industry (one  or
two plants), would be subject  to shutdown.


                                     96

-------
D.  HYDROCHLORIC ACID

    1.  Treatment Costs

        Treatment costs have been supplied for the chlorine burning
process only, a method which accounts for at most 12% of total U.S. hydro-
chloric acid production.  For a 40 ton-per-day chlorine-burning facility
the total cost to apply B.A.T. is $0.30 per ton of product (100% HC1),
and the incremental cost above B.L.P. is $0.05 per ton.  The treatment
process involves neutralization of weak acid effluent which is generated
only during plant startup.  According to the effluent guideline develop-
ment document there is no steady-state waterborne effluent.

        Additional investment required for B.A.T. for the 40 ton-per-day
plant is only $5,000.  Depreciation and operating costs exclusive of
power account for 35% and 47% respectively of the total annual treatment
cost of $4,250.

        By-product production of hydrochloric acid from hydrocarbon
chlorination  (which accounts for 88% of total production) was not covered
in the effluent guideline development document.  The effluent guideline
development document indicated, however, that there are no water treat-
ment costs directly attributable to by-product production.

    2.  Price Impact

        Due to its overwhelming preponderance of production capacity, the
by-product route controls hydrochloric acid supply and prices.  By-
product acid will not have  to bear the direct water treatment costs which
burning plant acid will; hence, it is not anticipated that the treatment
costs incurred by a small industry segment will be passed on as general
price increases.  The likelihood of no increase is further supported
by the presence of many producers holding fragmented market shares and
the fact that, despite a recent trend toward a more balanced supply/
demand situation, production has exceeded consumption by as much as  32%
since 1961.   This situation has been brought about by by-product acid
supply being  a function not of hydrochloric acid demand, but of the  non-
related demand for chlorinated hydrocarbons and has had a strongly de-
pressing effect on hydrochloric acid prices.  The decreasingly small
portion of the industry which is faced with water treatment costs,
therefore, will be hard pressed to seek relief in the form of price
increases and will be forced  to absorb these costs.

    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        Only  those direct producers not in a chlor-alkali complex  face
plant shutdown possibility  as the result of water treatment costs.   The
weak acid waste stream from direct production in a complex can be  used
to neutralize caustic waste from other parts of  the complex, and the
producer essentially incurs no waste treatment cost.
                                    97

-------
        There is only one known isolated,  direct burning plant in the
country, and it is located near a larger chlor-alkali complex which pro-
vides a readily available site for waste acid disposal at nominal cost.
The fact that there are no direct burning hydrochloric acid plants
unable to dispose of water wastes at nominal cost leads us to conclude,
therefore, that water treatment costs will not directly result in shut-
downs of direct-burning hydrochloric acid plants.
E.  HYDROFLUORIC ACID

    1.  Treatment Costs

        As estimated in the effluent guideline development document, total
treatment costs for a 40 ton-per-day hydrofluoric acid plant to achieve
E.P.P., B.P.T. and B.A.T. are $4.04, $4.89 and $12.95 per ton, respectively.
Costs for B.L.P. were estimated at $3.57 per ton.  Annualized costs to
to bring the industry to E.P.P., B.P.T. and B.A.T., respectively, from
B.L.P.  therefore would amount to $0.47, $1.32, and $9.38 per ton.  As a
percent of the estimated average industry's 1972 selling price of $370
per ton, the annualized treatment costs for E.P.P., B.P.T. and B.A.T.
would be 0.13%, 0.36% and 2.54%, respectively.

        The initial study project suggested a range for after-tax pro-
fitability on sales of 4% to  10%.  Taking 5% as average, the after-tax
profit  margin on a $370 netback price would be $18.,50 per ton.  The
after-tax treatment cost as a percent of this profit margin for E.P.P.,
B.P.T.  and B.A.T. is  1.30%, 3.57% and 25.4%, respectively.  New investment
in  treatment facilities for E.P.P.,  B.P.T. and B.A.T. as a percent of
net fixed plant investment is 0.60%,  1.00% and 1.50%, respectively.

    2.  Price Impact

        Conditions in the hydrofluoric  acid industry are such  that price-
increase constraints  are  low.   Specifically,  there are  no  economically
viable  substitute products for  hydrofluoric acid  in  its major  end-use
applications.   Captive usage  is  exceptionally high at about  75%  of  current
consumption.   Similarly,  plant  utilization is high at nearly  85%  of  the
392,000 tons  of  in-place  capacity  at the end  of  1972.   Demand  growth  is
strong  at  5%  to 7% per year.   Imports  have been  negligible so  that  there
has been no  threat of foreign competition.   (Imports of hydrofluoric  acid
from  Mexico will  very probably  increase in  the  future,  however.   Four
U.S.  companies  have  announced plans  to  build  acid plants  in  that country
with  the  apparent  intent—initially at  least—of  using  the  acid  captively
 for U.S.  derivatives  manufacture.   There  is  the  long-term possibility
 that  increased pressure  will  be brought to bear  by Mexico  for manufacture
 of  the derivatives  of hydrofluoric acid in Mexico as well.)   The price
 elasticity of demand for hydrofluoric acid  is low.   Market  shares are
 relatively concentrated  with  two producers, Allied and Du Pont,  accounting
 for more than 50% of capacity.
                                     98

-------
        All of the foregoing considerations suggesting little or no
constraint  on price increases by far outweigh the two identified
conditions tending to constrain price increases, viz. the relatively large
number of producers (nine) and the fact that price is the primary
basis for competition.  Moreover, the magnitude of the price increase
necessary to defray treatment costs even for B.A.T.  (2.54% of the estimated
industry selling price) is less than one-half cent per pound.

    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        Since we have concluded that the industry would be able to pass
on the treatment costs through price increases we must also conclude that
there will be no plant shutdowns on the basis of the treatment costs
provided us.  The magnitude of these treatment costs on an after-tax basis
as compared with industry profitability and cash flows and the magnitude
of the treatment investment compared with net fixed  investment for the
industry support this conclusion.  Moreover, industry conditions do not
suggest the possibility of plant shutdowns.  The industry is heavily in-
tegrated to downstream products (as inferred from the high captive usage),
there are no overwhelming additional environmental costs to be defrayed
and producers have an emotional commitment to the product.
F.  HYDROGEN PEROXIDE
    1.  Treatment Costs
        Based on the information developed for hydrogen peroxit'e in the
effluent guideline development document, treatment costs to a   .eve
B.A.T. are small relative to average selling price.  For the electrolytic
process, a process used by only one U.S. plant, the annual incremental
treatment cost above E.P.P. and resulting in zero discharge would be
approximately $0.39 per ton, or 0.07% of the current average selling
price of about $596 per ton.  The organic process, which is employed by
five plants, leads to somewhat higher incremental costs for water
pollution abatement.  The incremental annual cost to achieve zero dis-
charge via this process is $0.86 per ton.  This added cost is also re-
latively small (0.14%) compared to the average selling price of
lydrogen peroxide.

    2.  Price Impact

        Although the potential impact on prices from water pollution
abatement costs is small, producers of hydrogen peroxide may have
difficulty in passing even these nominal costs on to customers  through
a price increase.  The concentrated nature of the industry and  the low
level of substitute products are factors which would normally make it
possible for producers to pass on increased costs, but the low  level of
capacity utilization (ca. 70%), low captive use (ca_. 30%), some
pressure on prices from foreign competitors, and differences in manu-
facturing costs due to plant size and processes used, are all factors
which will make difficult any move to pass on the added treatment costs.
                                    99

-------
    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        On the other hand, plant shutdowns as a direct result of
such relatively small added water pollution abatement costs are also
unlikely.  The added costs may put some additional economic pressure on
those producers whose plants are small and thus suffer diseconomies of
scale.  Additional plant shutdowns may occur as a result of normal
economic forces, and thus smaller and/or older plants may be closed or
placed on standby as capacity is adjusted to current demand.

        There has been a trend in the industry to phase out the
electrolytic plants, the economics of which are unfavorable compared
to those operating by the organic process.  The lower incremental
cost for the electrolytic plant to achieve zero discharge may retard,
rather than hasten, the decision to close this plant.
G.  LIME
    1.  Treatment Costs
        There are no waterborne wastes from the lime manufacturing
process, and some plants (about 25% of the industry) have no water-
borne wastes at all.  According to the effluent guideline development
document, those plants which do have waste-bearing water effluents are
those which use wet scrubbing of gaseous effluent to remove entrained
dust.  While no costs were developed in the effluent guideline development
document for wet  scrubbing or treatment of scrubber effluents, the cost
of installing a dry collection system (thereby avoiding waste-bearing
water effluent) in a plant of 108,000 tons-per-year capacity was estimated
at approximately $1.28 per ton annually.  This cost of $1.28 per ton is
taken as the maximum cost for zero discharge of waterborne wastes.  It
is recommended in the effluent guideline development document  that water
scrubbing and elimination of waterborne wastes be used whenever the
total cost of such treatment is less than $1.28 per ton.  One  large
plant plans to install a recovery system on the wet scrubber waste
stream, the cost of which will be covered by product value obtained,

     2.  Price Impact

        The annual treatment cost of $1.28 per ton for lime producers not
currently using dry collection techniques represents a significant added
cost relative to the average plant price for lime, which is
approximately $16.00 per ton.  A price increase of 8% would be required
on lime produced at these plants to cover the cost of water pollution
abatement.  Given a situation in which some lime producers will incur
these costs while others will not, a price increase of this magnitude
would only be tenable in a captive or quasi-captive situation  in which
a lime substitute  (such as limestone in agricultural use) was  not
available, in which lime from another source could not be obtained
at a lower  (i.e., existing) price level, and in which the price
increase could be passed on or absorbed by the lime consumer.  In view
                                    100

-------
of the nature of the lime industry, the large number of plants widely
scattered throughout the country, and the competitive nature of industries
using lime, such a situation is unlikely.  A more probable situation would
be one in which a lime producer using dry collection techniques, and not
faced with increased water pollution abatement costs, would supply lime,
on a freight-equalized basis, which could be priced lower than that supplied
by a lime producer currently equipped with wet scrubbers.  In summary,
depending on the local supply/demand balance, a few plants may be in a
position to pass on nearly all of the added treatment cost, many others
only a fraction of the additional cost, and still others will be unable
to pass on any added cost at all.  Chances for success of some attempt
to raise prices by affected lime producers will be improved by currently
high capacity utilization and by forecasts of future growth.

    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        According to information developed in the effluent guideline
development document approximately 25% of all lime plants are equipped
for dry bag collection of particulates.  It is also reported that
recovery of product which would otherwise be lost offsets the annual
pollution abatement cost.  The remainder of the industry has plants which
use wet scrubbing, electrostatic precipitation, or some other method
of dust control.  Of the plants using wet scrubbers, only those classified
as commercial (as opposed to captive) plants have been identified in
the initial study project.  These plants represented approximately 25%
of the commercial plants identified in the study, and are the plants most
likely to be affected by the implementation of more rigorous standards
for waterborne wastes.

        Typical profitability levels in the lime industry are reported
to be from 4% to 6% of average selling price.  At approximately $16.00
per ton, this would mean a maximum after-tax profit per ton of slightly
under $1.00.  Thus, if none of the added cost could be passed on, a
producer forced to absorb up to $0.64 per ton after tax for water
pollution abatement, would be left with less than half his normal profit
from the sale of lime.  Such a cut in profit levels for some producers
could be the determining factor in a plant shutdown decision.

        On this basis, we would expect that from four to ten plants may
be closed.  Since average employment in the lime industry is 35 persons
per plant, this number of plant closings would mean that from 140
to 280 persons could be displaced.  Fortunately, most plants having wet
scrubbers are located reasonably close to urban areas and therefore in
areas with potential employment alternatives.
H.  NITRIC ACID

    1.  Treatment Costs

        As reported in the effluent guideline development document,  there
are no direct waterborne process wastes and usually no waterborne wastes
from air pollution abatement procedures in nitric acid manufacturing.


                                    101

-------
However, minor contamination of aqueous plant effluent may result from
leaks, spills, and washdowns.  It is also reported that 95% of the
industry plants are at B.L.P. and that an incremental annual cost of
$0.22 per ton would be required to install B.A.T.

        It should be pointed out that these treatment costs, as developed
in the effluent guideline development document,  apply only to pro-
ducers of commercial grade nitric acid (up to 70% concentration), and
that the costs do not cover treatment of waterborne wastes from ancillary
(cooling tower and boiler blowdown) effluent streams.  In addition, nitric
acid water treatment costs were assumed to be the same as those for
sulfuric acid, since nitric acid cost figures were not available.

    2.  Price Impact

        Approximately 90% of U.S. nitric acid production is captively
consumed; the remaining 10% is 'typically offered for sale at a considerable
discount from list price through long-term negotiated contracts.  Based
on dollar value and tonnage of 1971 shipments and interplant transfers,
as reported by the U.S. Department of Commerce, the average selling price
for nitric acid was $67 per ton.  The reported maximum treatment cost
for nitric acid, at $0.22, is approximately 0.3% of this average selling
price.  With both relatively low capacity utilization (ca. 75%) and demand
growth, and with price as the main basis for competition, an across-the-
board price increase to cover full incremental treatment costs is unlikely.
The ability of indi* idual producers to raise prices will depend on the
competitive situat^o  within each local market.  However, some plants
will undoubtedly be .orced to absorb most of the added water treatment
cost.

    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        While some nitric acid plants may be shuj '  .••*" over the next
several years as a result of normal economic fort~s  i- is unlikely that
the impact of added water pollution abatement cof:tj, as development in
the effluent guideline development document, wil1 ~>e a significant
decision factor.  Plant shutdown decisions will  '.re likely be based on
such factors as low local capacity utilizat-.on, technological obsolescence
of older plants, and the much higher cost of air pollution abatement.
I.  SULFURIC ACID

    1.  Treatment Costs

        Water treatment costs were estimated for plants using both sulfur
burning and refinery acid sludge, which together account for 82% of
all sulfuric acid plants.  B.A.T. costs for sulfur burning were estimated
at $0.12 per ton of product and for sludge regeneration at $0.50 per ton
in both cases as increments above B.L.P. costs.  For a 140,000 ton-per-
year sulfur burning plant water treatment facilities investment is
                                    .02

-------
$110,000, representing 3% of existing net plant.  A 262,000 ton sludge
plant, however, would require an additional investment of $1.15 million
or 45% of existing net plant.  The burning plant's water treatment
operating costs are estimated at $24,000 per year, of which two-thirds
is depreciation, with no direct operating or power costs.  The sludge
plant, on the other hand, will incur annual costs of $197,500 for B.A.T.,
with depreciation accounting for $125,000 and operating costs exclusive
of power amounting to only $10,000.  The treatment process in both plants
entails neutralization of weak acid and isolation and containment of
suspended solids.

    2.  Price Impact

        We believe that water treatment costs can be passed on as a price
increase.  The amount and conditions for increase, however, are different
for the two types of plants covered.  Sulfur burning plants, the majority
of which produce acid for non-refinery use, should incur water treatment
costs which amount to only 0.6% of present selling price.   Since these
plants are concurrently encountering substantial air pollution control
costs, it is expected that the relatively nominal water treatment costs
will be passed on as part of joint air/water pollution control ^osts.
Exact amounts of price increases will be dependent on local competitive
conditions and the total amount of joint treatment costs to bf passed on.

        Refinery sludge plants, however, are in a special situa i m in
that they are performing a service primarily for petroleum refinv _s
who have no economical alternative for waste acid disposal.  One sludge
acid plant frequently handles the acid sludge streams of several refinery
complexes since it is not economical for any but the largest refineries
to have their own acid plants.  Due to the sludge plant's higher in-
vestment and operating costs, higher prices are artificially maintained
to provide the sludge operator with a profit equivalent to burning
plants.  In addition to air pollution costs comparable to those of
sulfur burning, it is anticipated, therefore, that all of the water
treatment costs, which amount to 10% of current selling price, will be
passed on to refiners as price increases.  Only the largest refiners will
have the option of constructing their own sludge plant rather than accept
higher prices.

    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        Plant shutdowns due to water treatment costs alone are unlikely
except for some sludge plants.  For most non-sludge plants water  treatment
costs are not of sufficient magnitude to be the direct cause for plant
shutdown.  Some refinery sludge plants (no more than three or four)
however, may face shutdown as a result of two special situations.  In
addition to returning fre.-'n acid to local refineries, most sludge
plants sell regenerated acid to commercial markets with  the percentage
of commercial business r?nging from 10% to 100%.  Since sludge
producers face higher water treatment costs, the occasional producer
dependent on a large percentage of commercial demand will be at a compe-
titive disadvantage to the sulfur burning producer.  The sludge


                                    103

-------
producer must cover high fixed costs through high capacity utilization,
a condition which could be difficult to maintain if competitive
burning plants under-price the sludge manufacturer.   Due to water
treatment costs, therefore, a sludge producer may face reduced
profitability in the commercial market, either through reduced sales
margins or through smaller capacity utilization, sufficient to warrant
shutdown.

        The other problem facing the sludge producer is the possibility
of a refinery switching to captive sludge acid regeneration.  This action
is not likely since only a few refineries are large enough to economically
operate their own acid regeneration plants.  In addition, multi-site
refiners may be reluctant to antagnoize sludge producers by going to
captive acid regeneration at one location while continuing to utilize
the sludge converter at another site.
                                     104

-------
                 IV.  IMPACT ANALYSIS—ADDITIONAL PRODUCTS


A.  CALCIUM CARBIDE

    1.  Treatment Costs
        The calcium carbide manufacturing process has no direct
waterborne wastes, the only sources of effluent contamination being cooling
tower blowdown and ion exchange requirements.  One producer of calcium
carbide uses the dry bag collection technique for air pollution abate-
ment and has no significant water pollution abatement costs.  The value
of material recovered affects treatment costs in this case.  Another pro-
ducer, not yet having installed air pollution abatement equipment, is
understood to be considering the dry bag approach.

        The remaining two producers of calcium carbide, using water
scrubbing for air pollution abatement, and representing approximately
85% of industry capacity, would have to isolate the scrubber effluent,
remove suspended solids, and further treat the water before discharge.
The annual operating expenses for such a scrubber effluent system are
sufficiently large relative to after tax net income to make installation
of a dry bag collection system—which, according to the effluent guideline
development document, pays for itself from collection and recycling of
raw materials and product—attractive even to those producers who have
already installed scrubbers.  For a small (50,000 ton per year) plant,
the investment in B.A.T. for wet scrubbers would be approximately $54,000,
or 1.4% of net fixed investment.  The annual treatment costs before tax,
would be approximately $1.94 per ton.

        The waterborne wastes from conversion of calcium carbide to
acetylene are significant, and may have an additional impact on those
plants at which acetylene is produced.  Wt have not been provided with
costs for the treatment of effluents which result from acetylene manufacture.

    2.  Price Impact

        Producers of calcium carbide using air bags for air pollution
abatement will have no added costs for control of waterborne wastes.
Producers using water scrubbers and choosing to continue their use,
thereby incurring water treatment costs of $1.94 per ton, or 2.2% of
the estimated $90 per ton average selling price, would have difficulty
in passing the added cost on to  consumers.   Price increase constraints
for calcium carbide are strong, and in view of available substitutes,
current overcapacity, and a declining market, any price increase would
only serve to further reduce demand.
                                    105

-------
    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        While continued plant shutdowns may be expected as a result of
economic forces over the next several years, the effect of water pollution
abatement costs related to the manfuacture of calcium carbide are ex-
pected to be relatively small.  As is the case with many of the other
chemicals in this study, air pollution abatement costs are considerably
larger than those for control of waterborne wastes.  Thus, the marginal
plants have already been culled as a result of air pollution abatement
impact, £  ' those remaining plants which have not installed dry collection
systems, either have sufficient commitment to bear the marginally small
additional cost of scrubber effluent treatment, or to make the initial
investment in a reportedly  profitable air bag system.  In the worst
case, that of a contract supplier operating at the break-even point, it
is estimated that annual cash flow from depreication would cover annual
water treatment operating expenses.

        Calcium carbide plants which immediately convert their product
to acetylene gas have the additional problems of handling  the calcium
hydroxide produced as a by-product.  Water pollution abatement costs
relating to acetylene production have not been supplied to us by EPA and
it is beyond the scope of this report to assess the impact of these
treatment costs.  In general, however, acetylene producing calcium
carbide plants tend to be captive or contract suppliers of calcium
carbide acetylene.

        Finally, as described in an earlier  section of this report,  the
calcium carbide industry faces a continued declining market due  to
causes unrelated to environmental pollution  abatement.  In the normal
product life cycle, calcium  carbide seems  to be well beyond maturity as
more  economical substitute products continue to gain a larger and  larger
market  share.
 B.   SODIUM SULFATE

     1.   Treatment Costs

         Treatment costs  discussed in the effluent  guideline development
 document pertain only to sodium sulfate  produced as  a  by-product  of  sodium
 bichromate manufacture.   These producers collect,  dry,  and  sell the
 by-product, and reportedly have no waterborne wastes or treatment costs
 attributable to sodium sulfate.

         Production  of sodium sulfate as  a by-product of sodium bichromate
 represents approximately 10% of total U.S. production.   The most
 important source is recovery from natural brines,  followed  by pro-
 duction as a rayon  and cellophane by-product.

     2.   Price Impact

         With no water pollution abatement costs assigned to sodium
 sulfate as a sodium bichromate by-product (chrome  cake) no  effect on

                                      106

-------
prices is expected for this product.  It is unlikely, however, that
a sodium sulfate price increase could be sustained in view of the
high level of substitute products, foreign competition, excess capacity
and a statin or declining market.

    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        Zero water treatment costs for producers of chrome salt cake mean
no plant shutdowns.  The bulk of U.S. sodium sulfate production is by
producers for which no treatment costs have been developed, and there-
fore the impact of federal water pollution control costs on most producers
of this chemical is beyond the scope of this report.
C.  TITANIUM DIOXIDE

    1.  Treatment Costs

        a.  Sulface Process

        Two separate treatment approaches for sulfate process plants,
acid neutralization and acid recovery, were discussed in the effluent
guideline development document along with their resu^ctive costs.  To
utilize B.A.T. for a 42,000 ton plant, total treatment costs for
neutralization are estimated to be $98.09 ^cr ton, or 17.2% of current
telling price, and for acid recovery $5u.48 per ton, representing 8.9% of
selling price.  The investment in treatment facilities via either method
is large—$11.5 million for neutralization and $5.5 million for acid
recovery.  These amounts represent respectively 55% and 26% of existing
net plant and indicate the sizeable investment relative to existing
plant required to attain zero discharge of waterborne wastes.

        It.  \_ case of neutralization zero discharge treatment consists
of solids st .ling, full neutralization of the waste acid streams, and
the demineralization and recycle of process water.  Annual costs amount
to $4.12 million of which $2.35 million are operating and maintenance
costs exclusive of power, and $1.15 is depreciation.  The acid recovery
process involves recovery and recycle of strong acid waste plus neu-
tralization and pond settling of the remaining effluent.  Annual costs for
acid recovery are significantly less than those of neutralization and
amount to $2.12 million.  At $445,000, or 21% of the total, energy
costs are high relative to the neutralization option.  Operating and
depreciation costs amount to another $850,000 and $550,000, respectively.

        A major item of concern raised in industry interviews was the
technical feasibility of the acid recovery option.  For a number of years
the industry has been attempting without success to develop an acceptable
acid recovery procedure.  Since treatment costs could be only one-
half of those for neutralization, the EPA-sponsored research in this
area is being watched with interest, but with considerable skepticism.
Due to the uncertainty of successful development of acid recovery
technology, therefore, our sulfate process water treatment cost impact
analysis will be based on the neutralization method alone.

                                    107

-------
        Water treatment costs for B.P.T. are not significantly lower
than for B.A.T.  For the neutralization method, investment drops only
to $10 million and annual costs amount to $3.51 million, or 85% of B.A.T.
costs.  The last incremental step to zero discharge, therefore, is not
signifciantly more expensive than full neutralization, and will probably
not effect price increase/plant shutdown decisions significantly.

        b.  Chloride Process

        Water treatment costs for chloride process wastes are estimated
to be significantly less than those for the sulfate process.  Zero dis-
charge, implicit in B.A.T., can be attained at a cost of $66.79 per ton
for a 25,900 ton plant, which is a typical size plant in the industry.
Total additional investment in treatment facilities for this plant
is $5 million, which represents 23.5% of existing net plant.

        B.A.T. annual treatment costs total $1.73 million, of which
operating and maintenance costs exclusive of power account for $890,000
and depreciation another $530,000.  The treatment process required to
reach this level involves chemical neutralization of waste acid streams,
thickening and land dumping of sludges, and removal of dissolved
chlorides and sulfates through evaporation and recycle of process
water.  B.P.T. treatment, which is the same as E.P.P. and does not
involve soluble chloride and sulfate removal, is considerably less
costly than B.A.T.  At $4 million and $1 million, treatment facilities
investment and annual operating costs respectively are 75% and 58% of
corresponding B.A.T. figures.  Utilization of B.P.T. treatment only,
therefore, could provide substantial relief to chloride producers from
zero discharge requirements.

        c.  Barging and Deep-Welling

        Currently both cloride and sulfate wastes are being barged to sea
by several producers.  Sulfate barging involves deep sea dumping of
strong acid, sludge, and metallic sulfate wastes and costs $8-10
per ton of product.  Chloride waste barging consists of ocean damping
of strong acid and metallic chloride and oxide wastes, and cost$ are
$5-10 per ton of product.  Considerable pressure is being brought to
bear by private groups to stop ocean dumping, and the future of this
alternative is very uncertain.  Use of barging is limited for the most
part to those plants located on the coasts, and it represents a
significant cost advantage over chemical treatment options.

        Deep-welling is currently being used by at least one producer
to dispose of chloride process wastes.  Geological conditions l^mit
deep-welling to certain parts of the country; thus, this method is
not possible for all. producers.  Costs range from $2 to $5 per ton of
product, again significantly lower than chemical treatment costs.
As in barging the future of deep-welling is clouded due to unresolved
questions as to the effects of deep-well wastes on surrounding water
                                    108

-------
table structures.  Clearly, however, if barging or deep-welling is
allowed to continue by EPA, the producers fortunate enough to be
able to utilize either method will incur significantly lower water
treatment costs than those companies having to employ chemical
neutralization methods.

    2.  Price Impact

        It is most probable that some part of water treatment costs would
be passed on as price increases.  There are several major reasons for
this likelihood.  In the face of a strong demand which is projected to
continue for several more years, capacity will remain strained through at
least 1975 when additional production facilities should come on stream.
The,industry is presently at  100% of practical capacity and  is allo-
cating product  to customers.  Secondly,  there are no known substitute
products which match titanium dioxide for cost effective hiding power.
Foreign competition for the foreseeable future will be minimized through
recent currency devaluations, the tight supply situation present in
Europe, and the fact that European producers are themselves beginning  to
feel pollution control pressures.  Lastly the water treatment costs es-
timated for the titanium dioxide industry are among the largest encountered
for any chemical in this study.  Pre-tax B.A.T. costs account for fully
16.8% of sales price for sulfate pigments, and 11.3% of sales price for
chloride pigments.  Applying  these costs against our estimates of industry
profitability, it becomes apparent that price increases would be necessary
to avoid negative profitability as a direct result of water  treatment
costs.

        At the present time the differential between sulfate and chloride
process treatment costs poses a complication in assessing the magnitude
of price increases for titanium dioxide pigment.  The chloride producer,
faced with treatment costs for B.A.T. of $0.033 per pound can obtain re-
lief with a smaller price increase than  the sulfate producer, who must cope
with treatment costs of nearly $0.05 per pound.  Industry sources believe
that, for the next two to three years, the supply/demand situation for
titanium dioxide pigment would permit sulfate producers to raise prices
more than chloride producers  in order to recover their higher water
treatment costs.  Such a differential could not exceed $0.01 to $0.02
per pound, especially in view of the chloride pigment's superior perfor-
mance in many applications, and it could not be sustained if additional
capacity were brought on stream or if imports become more price-
competitive.  It is most probable that chloride producers would raise
prices only enough to cover their own treatment costs, since raising
prices by the same higher amount as sulfate producers may require would
increase chloride process profitability to the point where new
competition would likely be encouraged.  Going to B.P.T.  treatment
would lower the absolute treatment costs for both chloride and sulfate
producers, but would also widen the differential in treatment costs
for the two processes by almost $0.07 per pound.  The sulfate producer
would thus be placed at an even greater disadvantage relative to the
chloride producer.
                                    109

-------
    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        The probability of plant shutdown is difficult to assess because
of the uncertainty in the amount and duration of price increases, and
the resultant profitability effects, based on water treatment costs.
Sulfate producers are most likely to face plant shutdown decisions be-
cause of the age of most sulfate plants and the extremely high treat-
ment facilities' investment projected.  Confronted with an investment
amounting to 50% of existing net plant, and the prospect of long-term
negative profitability if prices cannot be raised to fully cover treat-
ment costs, industry sources report that a shutdown decision would
probably be made.  This decision would be complicated by the prospect of
continued positive cash flow from full capacity operation in the
presently strong market.  However, the recent closing of a chloride
facility by NL Industries, eveji in the face of the presently strong
market, indicates that producers might shut down an operation burdened
with continued negative profitability.

        We conclude, therefore,, that over the long range one or two
smaller sulfate facilities might shut down as a result of water treat-
ment costs.  The actual closings could be delayed as the producers
attempt to compete in the favorable pigment market as long as possible,
but we feel that the magnitude of investment and annual costs would
eventually make shutdown a necessity.  The chloride producers will
probably be less affected by water treatment costs and we do not
anticipate any chloride facility closings as the direct result of these
costs.

    4.  Impact Analysis Sensitivity

        We have assessed the sensitivity of our impact conclusions for
titanium dioxide if treatment costs are higher than those estimated in
the effluent guideline development document.  We conclude that  if
costs are in fact understated by a factor of four, the impact on the
titanium dioxide industry will be severe and substantial plant shutdown
could be expected especially among sulfate producers.

        With a fourfold increase in treatment costs over those shown in
the effluent guideline development document, pre-tax costs for
B.A.T. would be $0.12 per pound or 45.2% of present selling price for
chloride pigment and $0.19 per pound or 67.2% of present selling price
for sulfate pigment.  Impact on after-tax net income and cash flow is
even more severe.  B.A.T. treatment costs for chloride pigment are
948% and 136% of net income and cash flow respectively, and 932% and
261% respectively for sulfate pigment.  B.A.T. costs would thus exceed
both net income and cash flow, and plant shutdowns would be inevitable.

        Implementing treatment procedures to use B.P.T. only would re-
duce the absolute magnitude of treatment costs, but would widen the
differential between chloride and sulfate costs and subsequent impact
                                    110

-------
effects.  B.P.T. costs pre-tax would be $0.07 per pound, or 25.6% of
selling price for chloride pigment, and $0.16 per pound, or 57.2% of
selling price for sulfate.  Both chloride and sulfate pigment would
show negative profitability, but chloride cash flow  would remain
positive  (after-tax  treatment costs of 78.6% of cash flow).  Sulfate
pigment, with after-tax costs representing 223% of cash flow, would
continue  to show negative cash flow.  We conclude, therefore, that
substantially higher  treatment costs, even with B.P.T. treatment, would
result directly in plant shutdowns, and that the sulfate producers would
be more severely affected.

        As pointed out earlier, it should be possible for producers to
obtain relief by passing some of the treatment costs along as price
increases.  If costs  are adjusted upward by a factor of four, however,
it is doubtful that  this new level of treatment costs could be
passed on in full.   While titanium dioxide has no equally cost
effective substitutes at its present price level, a price higher than
about $0.40 per pound makes substitution by high brightness clays and other
pigments  economically attractive.  Due to the surface properties it
imparts,  especially  in paints, titanium dioxide will not be completely
replaced, but its demand would be curtailed via substitution.  A
secondary limitation  on the magnitude of potential price increases is
price competitiveness of the final product in which titanium dioxide is
used.  Paint prices,  for instance, cannot be raised substantially without
losing business to other wall covering materials such as wallpaper or wood
paneling.  A titanium dioxide price of $0.40 per pound would result in
a $0.15 per gallon increase in paint price, assuming 1.3 Ibs. of titanium
dioxide per gallon of paint and no substitution by cheaper pigments.
                                                 /
        Passing on B.A.T. treatment costs in full would result in a price
increase  to the $0.40 per pound range for chloride pigment and to nearly
$0.48 per pound for  sulfate.  We believe, therefore, that B.A.T. treat-
ment costs would not  be passed along completely.  Passing on B.P.T. treat-
ment costs in full will result in a more tolerable $0.35 per pound price
for chloride pigment, but will still leave sulfate pigment, at nearly
$0.45 per pound, susceptible to replacement by lower cost pigments.
Sulfate producers would most likely be able to recover only $0.07-$0.08
per pound of their treatment costs via a price increase to $0.36-$0.37
per pound.  In this  situation, the industry would be operating with
chloride  producers fully recovering their costs and maintaining existing
profitability and with sulfate producers operating with negative profit-
ability and negligibly positive cash flow.  We would expect, therefore,
that even at B.P.T.  treatment, price increases would not be sufficient
to avoid major impact on titanium dioxide production, especially for
sulfate pigment.
                                    Ill

-------
D.  SODIUM CHROMATE AND BICHROMATE

    1.  Treatment Costs

        The effluent guideline development document has estimated
 treatment  costs for a 164 ton-per-day sodium bichromate plant to achieve
E.P.P., B.P.T. and B.A.T. at $11.66, $16.45, and $16.45 per ton,
respectively.  E.P.P. control involves segregation and chemical treat-
ment for chromium-6, followed by pond settling and discharge of clear
effluent to surface water.  B.P.T. involves evaporation to recover dis-
 solved  sodium  chloride in addition  to E.P.P. control.  The incremental
unit costs above B.L.P. (settling ponds estimated to cost $0.26 per
ton), therefore, are $11.40 per ton for E.P.P. and $16.19  per ton for
 B.P.T.  and B.A.T.

        As a percentage of the estimated 1972 industry selling price of
$245 per ton, E.P.P. costs amount to 4.6% while B.P.T. costs on an
incremental basis amount to 6.6%.  As compared to the estimated 1972
after-tax profit margin of $18.50 per ton, the incremental cost to
achieve E.P.P. effluent standards is 30.8%, while achievement of
B.P.T. standards would represent 43.7% of 1972 unit margins.

    2'.  Price Impact

        On balance, factors constraining price increases in the sodium
bichromate industry outweigh those factors suggesting that price in-
creases are possible.  Specifically, the high occurrence of substitute
product for sodium bichromate derivatives, the tough foreign competition
 (including imports of sodium bichromate per se, as well as imports of
derivatives such as chromic acid and chrome colors) and declining
future demand all argue against the possibility of price increases.
Moreover, abatement cost differences exist among the three producers.
The exemplary plant, for example, has already achieved E.P.P. and need
make only a relatively nominal investment to utilize B.P.T.  These
negatives outbalance those industry factors—viz. the small number of
producers (three) and concentrated market share distribution—which
would tend to make price increases possible.  We conclude, therefore,
that the full cost of water treatment control will not be passed on as
price increases.

    3.  Plant Shutdown Impact

        In view of the conlusion that additional water treatment costs
will be absorbed, there is a possibility that one of the three
sodium bichromate plants will be shut down.  Full absorption of the
treatment costs to achieve B.P.T. would represent very nearly a 50%
reduction in after-tax unit profit margins.  Moreover, there is the
possibility that current margins will be reduced from 1972 levels
 (even without increased water treatment costs) by virtue of higher
future chromite ore prices.  The incremental investment ($1.7 million^
                                     112

-------
for water treatment control is relatively high in comparison to the
investment in existing plant.  The three plants are isolated and could
not achieve treatment economies with other company products.  Finally,
the industry faces in addition to water treatment investment both air
pollution and above normal OSHA costs.  With respect to the latter,
the toxic nature of chromium will require safety measures beyond normal
plant practices.  Although on a superficial basis the industry is integrated
both backward and forward, the raw material requirements—soda ash and
sulfuric acid—are insufficient to justify continued operation on that
basis alone.  Similarly, the primary downstream derivative—chromic acid—
is considered part (and a less important part) of the chromate operation.
If the sodium bichromate plant were considered uneconomic, the chromic
acid facility would be shut down as well.
                                    113

-------
  II CIINK \l  Rl I'OIM
     l).\ I A I'M.I
	,
 Keporl No.
EPA-230/1-73-015
  •i  I MI. ami sni.ink-
          Economic Analysis of Proposed Effluent Guidelines—
          Inorganic Chemicals, Alkali  and Chlorine Industries
          (Major  Products)
  ''  ''• il-niiiwj Oi.;aiii/.itinii N.nneani1 Address
          Arthur  D.  Little, Inc.
          Acorn Park
          Cambridge, Massachusetts   02140
         ini: Or;.-.mi/ation N.ime .ind Addiess
          Office  of  Planning and Evaluation
          Environmental Protection Agency
          Washington,  D.C.   20460
.1. Recipient's Accession No.
                                                                 5. Report Date
                                        6.
                                                                 8. I'erforminj; Organization Rept. No.
                                                                    C-75908
                                        10. Projcvt/Task/Work Unit No.
                                           Task Order No.  8
                                        11. Co
                                           68-01-1541
                                        1.1. Type ol" Report & Period ( oveicd
                                           Final
                                        14
  I s Supplementary Notes
•  li> Ahs-lnicts
j     An analysis  of  the economic impact  of proposed water  effluent guidelines upon 15
;inorganic chemicals was performed based on water treatment  cost data supplied  by  the
 EPA.   The inorganic chemicals included  aluminum chloride, aluminum sulfate, chlorine
 and caustic soda, hydrochloric acid,  hydrofluoric acid, hydrogen peroxide, lime,
 nitric acid, sulfuric acid, calcium  carbide,  sodium sulfate,  titanium dioxide  (chloride
 process), titanium  dioxide (sulfate  process), sodium bichromate, and potassium bi-
jchromate.  A methodology was developed  to systematically  judge the broader economic
 effects on these chemicals, resulting from application of water effluent control,  first
 by assessing the likelihood that treatment costs would be defrayed through price  in-
 creases, and secondly, if price increases were not likely,  the likelihood that plant
 shutdowns would  occur.  Based on this approach and using  the  treatment costs supplied,
 it was concluded that plant shutdowns would occur for mercury cell chlorine/caustic,
 lime, sludge sulfuric acid, sulfate  process titanium dioxide  and sodium bichromate
'if either best practicable technology or best available technology standards were
;imposed on these industries.
  17.  Key words  and Document Analysis.    17a.  Descriptors
            Economic Analysis
            Effluent Guidelines
            Inorganic Chemicals
            Inorganic Chemical Industry
  17b. Identificrs/Open-I.nded Terms
   i- COS Ml I n-lil.'Croup
IS Availaliilih Statement
Limited availability through U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Information Center' Room W327
Waterside Mall, Washington, D.C. 20460
ii> Siviuii, r
Report)
l \; I . ,>
-('< V :, .'. <
.us , ihis
Sll II I)
SN • I Ins
>.! !! I)
21 No el ;'i.-.-
26
-1 I'rii-i
 I OHM N'KS
           . RI-'V. .<-".?)
                                                                             l'SC'OMM-IH  !4s>SM'7

-------