EPA-600/2-77-023X
February  1977
Environmental Protection  Technology Series
                                                Research Trt3rtafe:P3rJ<. North

-------
                RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

 Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
 Protection Agency,  have been grouped into five series. These five broad
 categories were established to facilitate further development and application of
 environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
 planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
 The five series are:

     1.    Environmental Health Effects Research
     2.    Environmental Protection Technology
     3.    Ecological Research
     4.    Environmental Monitoring
     5.    Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

 This report has  been  assigned  to the ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION
 TECHNOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and
 demonstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent
 environmentaf degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This
 work provides the new  or improved technology required for the control and
 treatment of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
                    EPA REVIEW NOTICE

This report has been re viewed by  the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, and approved for publication.   Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the'
views and policy of the Agency, nor does mention of trade
names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
                                           EPA-600/2-77-023x

                                           February 1977
         INDUSTRIAL PROCESS  PROFILES

             FOR ENVIRONMENTAL USE:

CHAPTER  24.  THE IRON AND STEEL  INDUSTRY
                            by

           V.S. Katari andR.W.  Gerstle (PEDCo.)

                   Terry Parsons, Editor

                     Radian Corporation
                       P. O. Box 9948
                    Austin, Texas  78766
              Contract No. 68-02-1319, Task 34
                   ROAPNo. 21AFH-025
                Program Element No. 1AB015
              EPA Project Officer:  I.A. Jefcoat

         Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
           Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry
              Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                       Prepared for

        U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             Office of Research and Development
                   Washington, DC  20460

-------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                   Page
INDUSTRY DESCRIPTION 	  1
    Raw Materi al s 	  5
    Products 	  7
    Companies 	  8
    Environmental Impact 	  8
    Bibliography 	,	  11

INDUSTRY ANALYSIS 	  13
    Ore Preparation 	  14
      Process No. 1  Mining 	  16
      Process No. 2  Preliminary Ore Preparation 	  20
      Process No. 3  Ore Concentration 	  22
      Process No. 4  Sintering 	  28
      Process No. 5  Pelletizing 	  32
      Process No. 6  Nodulizing 	  35
      Process No. 7  Briquetting 	  37

    Coke Production 	  38
      Process No. 8  Coal Mining and Transportation 	  40
      Process No. 9  Coal Preparation 	  43
      Process No. 10 Charging of Coke Ovens 	  46
      Process No. 11 Coking 	  49
      Process No- 12 Pushing and Quenching 	  53
      Process No. 13 Coke Handling 	  57

    Coke By-Products Recovery 	  58
      Process No. 14 Primary Cool ing/Reheating  	  60
      Process No. 15 Tar Decanting 	  62
      Process No. 16 Phenol Recovery 	  64
      Process No. 17 Ammonia Still 	  66
      Process No. 18 Ammonia Absorption 	  71

-------
                      TABLE OF  CONTENTS  (Continued)
                                                                    Page

       Process  No.  19  Crystallization and  Filter  Drying  	   73
       Process  No.  20  Light Oil  Recovery  	   74
       Process  No.  21  Fractionation and Refining  of Light Oil  	   76

     Pig  Iron Production  	   78
       Process  No.  22  Blast Furnace 	   80

     Steel  Production  	   89
       Process  No.  23  Electric Furnace  	   91
       Process  No.  24  Open-Hearth  Furnace  	   98
       Process  No.  25  Basic Oxygen Furnace  	   104
       Process  No.  26  Vacuum Degassing  	   109
       Process  No.  27  Continuous Casting or  Ingot Castings  	   Ill
       Process  No.  28  Polling and  Shaping  	   112
       Process  No.  29  Acid Treatment (Pickling)  	   116
       Process  No.  30  Finishing  	   118

APPENDIX A - Raw Materials 	   121
APPENDIX B - Industry Products  	   127
APPENDIX C - Companies 	   139
APPENDIX D - Energy and Utility Requirements  	   179
APPENDIX E - Emission Data 	   183
APPENDIX F - Types and Numbers of Steel  Furnaces 	   195
REFERENCES FOR APPENDICES 	   199
                                   IV

-------
                           LIST OF FIGURES



Fi gure                                                             Page



  1      IRON ORE PRODUCTION	  15



  2     COKE PRODUCTION	  39



  3     COKE BY-PRODUCTS RECOVERY 	  59



  4     PIG IRON PRODUCTION	  79



  5     STEEL PRODUCTION 	  90

-------
                           LIST  OF  TABLES

TABLE                                                             Page

  1      COMPANIES ENGAGED  IN  IRON AND STEEL
          OPERATIONS,  1970	  2

  2     NUMBER OF COKE PLANTS ENGAGED IN RECOVERING  BY-
          PRODUCTS IN  1974	  4

  3     IRON ORE ANALYSIS	  6

  4     ANALYSIS OF TACONITE  ORES 	  6

  5     SUMMARY OF SEVEN LARGEST STEEL  COMPANIES	  9

  6     CONSTITUENTS OF IRON  MINE LIQUID DISCHARGES 	  18

  7     CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SETTLING-POND
          DISCHARGE AT ONE MINE	  19

  8     REAGENTS USED  FOR  FLOTATION OF  IRON ORES	  23

  9     TYPICAL ANALYSIS OF TAILINGS	  25

 10     TYPICAL PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS  OF  TACONITE
          TAILINGS	  26

 11      CONSTITUENTS OF THE STRAND  BURDEN  FOR A
          TYPICAL SUPERFLUXED SINTER	  29

 12     PARTICLE SIZE  ANALYSIS OF PARTICULATE
          EMISSIONS FROM A SINTERING MACHINE	  29

 13     ENERGY CONSUMPTION FOR PROCESSES AT A 2 MILLION
          TPY MAGNETIC TACONITE  PLANT	  33

 14     PARTICLE SIZE  DISTRIBUTION  	  33

 15      HOURLY INPUT AND OUTPUT  RATES FROM NODULIZING
          KILN AT EXTACA 	  35

 16      TYPICAL NODULIZING PROCESS  OPERATING TEMPERATURES	  36

 17      NODULIZING ENERGY  REQUIREMENTS, PER  KILOGRAM OF
          NODULES 	  35

 18      CHEMICAL ANALYSES  OF  WATER  AT DIFFERENT MINE SITES 	  42

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

TABLE                                                              Page

 19     ANALYSIS OF A TYPICAL COKE OVEN CHARGE,
          DRY BASIS	   43

 20     TIME-WEIGHTEN AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS OF  GASES
          INSIDE THE LARRY CAR	   47

 21     TYPICAL YIELDS FROM ONE TON OF COKING COAL 	   50

 22     EMISSION FACTORS FOR COKING AND COKE OVEN
          PUSHING	   52

 23     PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR COKE OVEN
          EMISSION SAMPLE DURING TYPICAL PUSH AT
          MAJOR NORTHWEST INDIANA STEEL CO. 	   54

 24     SCREEN ANALYSIS OF QUENCH-TOWER PARTICULATES 	   55

 25     AVERAGE ANALYSIS OF QUENCH WATER SAMPLES 	   55

 26     ANALYSES OF WEAK AMMONIA LIQUOR FROM THREE PLANTS 	   67

 27     ANALYSES OF WASTE LIQUOR FROM AMMONIA STILLS 	   69

 28     EXAMPLE OF BLAST FURNACE MATERIAL BALANCE 	   81

 29     UTILITIES REQUIREMENTS OF A SELF-CONTAINED BLAST-
          FURNACE PLANT WITH TWO FURNACES, PRODUCING A TOTAL
          OF 3810 NET TONS OF HOT METAL PER DAY	   83

 30     CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF DRY, BLAST-FURNACE FLUE
          DUST	   84

 31     SIZE ANALYSIS OF FLUE DUST FROM U.S. BLAST FURNACES 	   85

 32     ANALYSIS OF FURNACE GAS ..	   85

 33     POLLUTANTS IN WASTEWATER FROM BLAST FURNACE 	   87

 34     PRODUCTION DATA FOR A PARTICULAR ELECTRIC FURNACE
          SHOP	   93

 35     OPERATING DATA FOR A PARTICULAR ELECTRIC FURNACE SHOP ....   93

 36     CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF ELECTRIC FURNACE DUSTS 	   94
                                    Vll

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

TABLE                                                             Page

  37     CHANGES IN COMPOSITION OF ELECTRIC FURNACE DUST
          DURING A SINGLE HEAT ........ ............. ..... ...... ..   95

  38     PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF EMISSIONS FROM A
          PARTICULAR ELECTRIC-ARC FURNACE .......................   95

  39     HEAT BALANCE OF A MODERN OP EN- HEARTH FURNACE
          kcal/ton OF STEEL ....... _______ ..... . .......... ..........   99

  40     PARTICIPATE EMISSION' - UNCONTROLLED ... .............. ....   TOO

  41     PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF EMISSIONS FROM
          QPEI-BEARTH FURNACES ....... ....... ........ .............   101

  42     CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF OPEN-HEARTH PARTICIPATE
          EMISSIONS, OXYGEN LANCING .... .........................   102

  43     CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF BASIC OXYGEN FURNACE STEEL-
          MAKING DUST rROM THREE U.S. PLANTS,  WEIGHT PERCENT ....   T06

  44     PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF RED DUST FROM BASIC
          OXYGEN FURNACES .......................................   107

  45     CALCULATED GAS COMPOSITION FOR 91-TON BOF BLOWN AT
          6000 LITERS/SEC. 02 RATE FOR 20 MINUTES ...............   1Q7

  46     DUST AND METAL ANALYSES FOR VACUUM-TREATED STEELS .......   HO

  47     POWER CONSUMTPION IN ROLLING OR SHAPING MILLS ...........   113

  48     QUANTITIES OF SOLID AND WATER WASTE FROM TYPICAL
          ROLLING MILL ........... . ..............................   114

A-l     IRON ORE MINED IN THE UNITED STATES ............ , ........   1 22

A-2     CONSUMPTION OF MATERIALS OTHER THAN IRON ORE IN
          IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY - 1973 ....... . ................   123

A-3     ORIGIN OF COAL RECIEVED BY COKE-OVEN PLANTS IN THE
          UNITED STATES IN 1974 BY PRODUCING STATE AND VOLATILE
          CONTENT  . .............................................   124
A-4     ANALYSIS OF LIMESTONE FROM COLUMBUS, OHIO
B-l     AVERAGE GRADE OF SINTER PRODUCED IN 1968 NORTHEASTERN
          IRON ORES (DRY BASIS)  k .................. .............   1 28
                                   viil

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

TABLE                                                              Page

B-2     TYPICAL TACONITE CONCENTRATE PRODUCT ANALYSIS  	 12g

B-3     COMPOSITIONS OF PELLETS PRODUCED IN 1968 (DRY  BASIS)  	 130

B-4     CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF NODULIZED PRODUCT,  AVERAGE  	 131

B-5     SUMMARY OF THE COKE INDUSTRY IN THE UNITED  STATES
          IN 1974	 132

B-6     TYPICAL SIZES OF COKE	 133

B-7     TYPICAL PROPERTIES OF COKE	 134

B-8     YIELDS AND ANALYSES OF PRODUCTS OF CARBONIZATION
          PROCESS	 135

B-9     COMPOSITION OF HIGH-TEMPERATURE COKE-OVEN TAR  	 136

B-10    ANALYSIS OF CRUDE AMMONIA LIQUOR	 1 37

C-l     IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES	 140

C-2     DIRECT REDUCTION PLANTS IN OPERATION AND ON ORDER
          AS OF DECEMBER 1974	 163

C-3     U.S. IRON ORE PRODUCERS, SALIENT DATA	 164

C-4     MINE AND PLANT EXPANSIONS - IRON AND STEEL  INDUSTRY
          IN USA - 1975	 169

C-5     MAJOR CAPTIVE STEEL COAL MINES	 170

C-6     COKE-OVEN PLANTS IN THE UNTIED STATES ON DECEMBER  31,1973. 172

C-7     SUMMARY OF COKE-OVEN OPERATIONS IN THE UNITED  STATES  IN
          1974 BY STATES	 178

D-l     ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN THE STEEL INDUSTRY -  1972	 180

D-2     WATER REQUIREMENTS OF THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY  -  1964.. 181

E-l     QUANTITIES OF POLLUTANTS DISCHARGED FROM IRON  AND  STEEL
          INDUSTRY BEFORE TREATMENT IN 1971 	 184

E-2     SUMMARY OF WASTE STREAMS (NON-RADIOACTIVE)  RELEASED
          FROM IRON AND INDUSTRY  	 185
                                   IX

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

E-3     METAL ANALYSIS OF EMISSION TESTS (CONDUCTED IN 1973)
          ON VARIOUS PROCESSES AT A MAJOR NORTHWEST STEEL PLANT ..186

E-4     ANALYSIS OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGE FROM IRON  ORE MINING
          AND CONCENTRATION OPERATIONS AT ONE MILL  	  187

E-5     SOURCES OF MILL WASTEWATER AT RESERVE MINING 	  187

E-6     POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS EMISSIONS FROM COKE PLANTS 	  188

E-7     CHEMICALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN EMISSIONS  FROM COKE
          QUENCHING AND DIRECT COOLING OPERATION	  191

F-l     ELECTRIC DIRECT-ARC STEELMAKING FURNACES IN THE
          UNITED STATES, AS OF JANUARY 1, 1970	  196

F-2     BASIC OPEN-HEARTH FURNACES IN THE UNITED STATES 	  197

F-3     BASIC OXYGEN I-ROCESS STEELMAKING FURNACES IN THE
          UNITED STATES, CLASSIFIED INTO CAPACITY RANGES 	  198

-------
                          IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY

 INDUSTRY DESCRIPTION
      The  Iron and Stae= Industry encompasses a variety of processes for
 transformation of iron ore into fabricated iro~ and steel products.  In
 addition to the manufacture of steel products, rest large steel mi Vis
 operate by-product co:Ct? plants producing metallurgical coke and coke by-
 products.  The industry is divided into five segments:  1) ore prepara-
 tion, 2) coke production, 3) coke by-products' recovery, 4) pig iron pro-
 duction, 5) steel manufacturing.
      The  processes involved in ore preparation are iron ore beneflcia-
 tion including minings upgrading and concentration operations; and agglom-
 eration or preparation of the ore for charging into £ blast furnace.
      In the coking seoi-ient, mined metallurgical  coal is prepared for
 charging into coke ovens, coked (nondestructive distillation) and
 quenched.  Coke-oven gas, a by-product from coking, is treated for by-
 product recovery and also used as a fuel.  Crude tar, ammonia, light oil,
 phenol and other by-products of coking are further processed, depending
 on plant design and on markets for specific products.
      Pig  iron production involves production of pig iron from iron ore,
 coke and limestone in a blast furnace.
      The  steel manufacturing segment primarily involves production of
 steel from pig iron and scrap in electric, open-hearth or basic oxygen
 furnaces and finishing operations in which raw steel is shaped, rolled
 drawn, coated or otherwise treated to produce sheets, strips, plates,
 pipe, wire or other forms of steel products.
      Many steel plants generally do not incorporate all combinations
and variations of the operations described in this document.  The  indus-
 try encompasses a variety of plants ranging from small to very large and

-------
from older marginally operating facilities built early in  the  century  to
                                            ' *    -•> ''-' ^   : '  '      *«    A
more efficient modern facilities built or upgraded in recent years.  Table
T shows the numbers of companies involved in various  phasesi of the  inte-
grated iron and steel industry.
                     Table T.  COMPANIES ENGAGED IN
                    IRON AND STEEL OPERATIONS, 1970
          Operation
Operate  steel facilities
Pig  iron (for sale and for in-plant use)
Coke
Raw  steel
Carbon quality steel
Alloy steel
Stainless steel
Steel bars
Wire products
Plates
Pipe and tubing
Cold rolled sheets
Tool steel
Number of
companies
 200
  30
  48
  95
  78
  54
  28
  50
  50
  26
  60
  25
  15
     In 1973, the iron and steel industry employed 672,695 workers, of
whom 511,220 were hourly wage employees and the remaining were salaried.2
In 1974, iron ore mining and preparation units employed 19,804 people of
which 2,460 were in underground mines, 8,202 in surface mines and 9,142
in preparation.mills.*
* Information provided by L.P. Larson, Health and Safety Analysis Center.
  Mining and Safety Administration.  United "States Department of    ;
  Interior, Washington, D.C.  July 22, 1974."

-------
     Total U.S. iron ore requirements in 1973 for blast furnace feed and
other minor uses were 139.24 million tons.*  Of this amount, 92.24
million tons* were produced domestically and 47 million tons* were im-
ported.  Canada supplied approximately 22.68 million tons,* Venezuela
more than 11.79 million tons,* Brazil 2.9 million, Liberia 2.45 million,
Peru 1.35 million, Austria 453.6 thousand, Sweden 305 thousand and Chile
272.15 thousand tons,*  Consumption of Iron ors increased to 147 million
tons* in 1974, and blast furnace pig iron output was 97.44 million tons.*
In the same year, steel production totalled 132 million tons.*  Production
in open-hearth -"urnaces was 36.1 million tons,* in basic oxygen furnaces
82.91 million tons,* and in electric furnaces 28.86 million tons.*3
There were 48 coke plants at integrated iron and steel  facilities in 1974.
Total coke production in that year was 55.87 million tons,* of which 51.2
                                          4
million tons* were used in blast furnaces.   Table 2 shows the number of
coke plants recovering various by-products.
     Major portions of iron ore come from the Lake Superior region.
Other areas of iron ore production are California, Utah, Wyoming, Texas,
Missouri, Alabama, Pennsylvania, and New York.  Combined output of these
                                                                    •3
areas makes the U.S. the world's third largest producer of iron ore.
     Most of the major steel companies own or control domestic mines
that supply at least part of their ore needs.  These companies also have
invested substantially in iron mines in Canada» Venezuela, Chile, Brazil,
Liberia, and Australia.  The major companies producing iron ore in
Canada are owned or controlled principally by U.S. interests.   It  is
estimated that captive mines furnish about 85, percent of the ore used by
the domestic iron and steel industry.
     Trends in iron ore mining are significant.  Taconite pellets are
replacing iron ores, huge open-pit mines are replacing underground mines
and mining is changing from a seasonal to a year-round basis.   Changes  in
steel  manufacturing operations are  equally significant.  Oxygen furnaces,
and to a lesser degree electric furnaces, are rapidly replacing open
* Metric tons  (1000 kg or 2205 pounds) are used throughout this report.

-------
   Table  2.   NUMBER OF COKE PLANTS ENGAGED IN RECOVERING BY-PRODUCTS

                              IN 1974.
By-product recovered
Ammonium sulfate
Ammonia liquor (NH, content)
Diammonium phosphate
Crude coal tar
Creosote oil,, straight distillate
Crude chemical oil (tar acid oil)
Sodium phenol ate (carbolate)
Phenol
Cresol s
Cresylic acid
Pitch
Crude light oil
Benezene, all grades
Toluene, alT grades
Xylene, all grades
Solvent naphtha, all grad.es
Intermediate light oil;
Naphthalene
Pi co lines
Sulfur
Number of plants
Furnace9
41
2
1
48
5
3
15
2
1
1
6
45.
18
1,3
13
10
10
15
1
1
Merchant0
2
4
14
-
4
1
-
-
-
-
6
1
1
1
1
1
-
-
-
Total
43-
6
1
62
5
7
16
2
1
1
6
51
19
14
14-
11
11
15
1
1
Owned by iron and steel companies and produce blast furnace coke for
their own use.

Associated with chemical companies or gas utilities, or operate to
produce coke and coal chemical materials for sale to steel companies or
foundries

-------
hearths; continuous casting eliminates some of the conventional steel
mill operations such as ingots, soaking pits, and slabbing, blooming, or
billet mills.  In addition, mills are producing all grades of steel with
fewer men.
     In the U.S., r :sc steel plants are located in areas of fairly dense
population.  More t'-^r, 200 companies that make iron and primary steel
mill products operate In 37 states.   About 65 to 70 percent of the
Na'ron's steel industry is situated ir, vie great industrial complex
surrounding the lower Great Lakes ports in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
Ohio, and western P^rr.&ylvam'a.  Larg-; "rstegrated steel mills are  also
operated  in  norther.  N^w  York, eastern Pennsylvania, eastern  Mary-
land, and the Birmirgnai'n district of Au-bama; relatively small integrated
steel mills  are operated in southern Illinois, Texas, Colorado, Utah,
and California.
     In 1980, the U.S. ,:;ust produce 175 million tons* of raw steel if
ecor;ofiiic growth is to be maintained.  Consumption of iron ore will
Increase substantially  ;o provide for  rO million tons* more of blast
furnace output as well c.s the  amounts needed  (possibly as much as  5
million tons*} for d-'ract reduction.   3y the year 2000, the demand
for iron ore in the l.i. is projected t,:- rise to 215 million tons* and
                                                                   )tc
                                                                   ,8
domestic production of ore to 127 millici tons.*   The projected total
coke consumption  in 19SO  is estimated t& oe about 70 million tons.*

Raw Materials
     Iron ore,  the ma4:; raw material of th.-s industry,  is a mixture
having  varying  Cjuantitn-s of mineral impurities.  Contaminants that can
be present  in iron ore include  phosphorous, sulfur, titanium, vanadium,
zinc, copper, chromium, nickel, arsenic, lead, tin, and cobalt.   Tables
                                                     910
3 and 4 give typical analyses of different iron ores.      Details of
the major types of ores,  and their characteristics and data on the con-
sumption of other raw materials used are given in Tables A-l and A-2,
Appendix A.  At coke producing  plants, low-sulfur coal is the main raw
* Metric tons  (1000  kg)
                                   5

-------
     Table 3.  IRON ORE ANALYSIS
Kind of ore
Range

Mesabi


Menominee


Labrador

Name

Hanna


Weirton
(Michigan)



Composition, percent
Fe
53.29
to
54.96
51.5
to
54.90
48.58
to
55.51
Si02
8.04
to
10.01
3.02
to
4.23
3.84
to
6.84
A1203
0.43
to
0.57
2.17
to
2.61
0.73
to
1.08
CaO

0.15


0.65

0.02
to
0.15
MgO

0.10


0.90

0.02
to
0.05
P
0.041
to
0.047
0.464
to
0.542
0.054
to
0.117
Mn
0.39
to
0.60
0.17
to
0.33
0.56
to
4.50
Table 4.  ANALYSIS OF TACONITE ORES
Component
Total Iron
Magnetic  Iron
Silicon Dioxide
Manganese
Aluminum Oxide
Calcium Oxide
Magnesium Oxide
Phosphorus
Sulfur
Titanium Dioxide
Avg. percent by weight
      32.0
      24.5
      45.2
       0.3
       0,8
       2.3
       3.0
       0.05
       0.02
       Trace

-------
material.  Details of coke production for use in coke ovens  is  given  in
Table A-3.
     In addition to the ore materials, iron production requires fluxes
such as silica, limestone or dolmite.  Various ferroalloys  (as  alloying
agents) and all types of metal scrap are used in steelmaking.   The pro-
cesses require large amounts of fuel, mainly coke and oxygen.   Statistics
on energy and water consumption in the steel industry are given in Tables
D-l and 0-2. Appendix D.
     A number of metallic elements and compounds may be added to molten
iron or steel to effect specific properties in the end products or to
coat finished products.  Additives are used to remove gases, decrease
inclusions, counteract harmful effects of sulfur, or change  the char-
acteristics of the metal.  The more common additives are aluminum,
chromium, cobalt, columbium, copper, lead, magnesium, manganese, molyb-
denum, nickel, carbon, phosphorus, boron, silicon,tin, titanium, tungsten,
and vanadium.
Products
     The iron and steel industry produces coke; various chemicals  recovered
from the by-product coking process; pig iron; and various grades of basic
steel in such shapes as ingots, blooms, billets, plates, structurals, bars,
wire, coils, sheet, tubing, tinplate, galvanized, and other.
     Pig iron is the product of the blast furnace formed by  smelting
iron ore with a carbonaceous reducing agent, usually coke.   About  90  per-
cent of the pig iron produced in the United States is consumed  in  making
steel; the remainder is used for iron castings.
     Steel is a refined iron-base alloy containing up to 1.7 percent
carbon.  Some principal types of steels are:  1) carbon, 2)  manganese,
3) nickel, 4) nickel-chromium, 5) molybdenum, 6) chromium-molybdenum,
7) nickel-chromium-molybdenum, 8) nickel-molybdenum, 9) chromium,  10)
chromium vanadium, 11) tungsten chromium, 12) silicon manganese, 13)  low
alloy high tensile, 14) stainless, 15) boron intensified, 16)  leaded.
Hundreds of different grades of steel are manufactured.

-------
     Small amounts ot gold, silver, sulfur, copper, cobalt, and phos-
 phate minerals are recovered occasionally as by-products and coproducts
 during  iron mining operations at a few domestic deposits.  Manganese is
 often a coproduct.
     Blast furnace slags are used principally in the construction and
 maintenance of roads, buildings, railroads, and airports; in manufacture
 of  mineral wool; and to some extent in agriculture.  Steel  slags either
 alone or  in blends with blast furnace slags, are used similarly.
     The  integrated iron and steel industries produce coke  and recover
 by-products such as ammonia, tars, light oils, phenols, and benzene.
 Companies
      In 1974  there were more than 86 integrated iron and steel companies
 in  the  U.S. and more than 200 operating entities.  The seven largest com-
 panies  are listed in Table 5.  Table C-l lists all companies in the U.S.
 that produce  iron and steel.  These companies operated 164  blast furnaces
 and four  direct reduction ore plants (Table C-2).
     The  45 ore producing companies as listed in Table C-3  are closely
 associated with the steel companies.  The largest mining areas are in
 Minnesota, with three companies, U.S. Steel's Minntac Plant, Republic and
 Armco's Reserve Mining Co., and Erie Mining Co. (controlled by 5 com-
 panies), producing approximately 40 percent of the ore.  Table C-4 lists
 the recent iron mine and plant expansions in the United States.  A list
 of  the captive steel coal mines in the United States supplying basically
 coal for coking purposes is given in Table C-5.
     Most coke plants were also operated by steel companies at 63 loca-
 tions.  Operations 1n Ohio and Pennsylvania account for 25, of these
 plants, as shown in Tables C-6 and C-7, Appendix C.
 Environmental  Impact
     Wastes from the various operations in steelmaking vary widely in
characteristics and in volume.  The main environmental concerns at iron
and steel  plants pertain to air and water.  An estimated 14.4 million
 tons* of atmospheric particulate and 11.3 tons* of water-borne  suspended
* Metric tons  (1000 kg)

                                   8

-------
        Table 5.   SUMMARY OF SEVEN  LARGEST STEEL  COMPANIES
Company and
headquarters
United States Steel Corp.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Bethlehem Steel Corp.
Bethlehem, Pa.
Republic Corp.
Cleveland, Ohio
National Steel Corp.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Armco Steel Corp.
Middletown, Ohio
Jones & Laugh! in Steel
Corp., Pittsburgh, Pa.
Inland Steel Co.
Chicago, 111.
Totals
Number of
steel
mills
15
8
9
3
8
3
1
47
Tons of steel
produced in
1971a
27,200,000
17,400,000
8,700,000
8,600,000
7,900,000
6,600,000
6,400,000
82,800,000
% of U.S. steel
production
1971
22.5
14.4
7.2
7.1
6.5
5.4
5.3
68.4
Metric tons (1000 kg).

-------
                                                12
 solids  were  discharged from steel mills in 1971.    In addition to
 parti culates,  fluorides, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and sulfur
 oxides  are emitted to a lesser extent by the various steelmaking pro-
 cesses.   The  uncontrolled emissions of selected pollutants discharged
 from the  iron  and steel industry in 1971 and the amounts discharged from
 the industry by region are given in Tables E-l and E-2, Appendix E.
     Coal mining for coke production, and iron ore mining and beneficia-
 tion produce large quantities of tailings and potential water pollution
 problems.  These problems can vary from acid mine drainage to asbestos-
 like fibers  in ore tailings.
     The  principal air pollution problems resulting from coke production
 are sulfur dioxide from combustion of the coal in the coke ovens, partic-
 ulate and gaseous emissions from ovens during charging and pushing, leak-
 age from  doors and lids; and emissions from quenching of the coke with
 waste water.  Carcinogenic hydrocarbons in coke oven smoke have been
 reported.  Principal water pollution problems in coke plant operation are
 in the  wastes  from ammonia stills and light oil decanters, which average
 about 185 liters per ton of coal carbonized and contain phenol, ammonia,
 cyanides, chlorides, and sulfur compounds.    The coal tar storage area
 is also a major source of hazardous emissions in a coke plant.  Many
 control measures are practiced to curb emissions from coke plants.  Since
 the coke  breeze from the various operations is either used within the
 plant or  sold, coke production does not constitute a solid waste problem.
     The  iron  and steel industry, one of the largest users of water in
 America,  requires 110,000 to 150,000 liters of water to produce a ton*
 of steel.  These immense volumes of water accumulate many tons of contami-
 nants including metallic particles, dirt, oil, and grease.    The use
 of water  for cooling causes significant thermal pollution problems.
 Typical coke plants produce about 13 liters of wastewater per ton of
    .          . 15
 coal processed.
     According to recent tests on process stream and stack sampling
conducted at a major northwest Indiana steel company, the steel industry
  Metric ton  (1000  kg)

                                   10

-------
is among the leading contributors to the cadmium burden in the environ-
ment.  The other metal!ics released include lead and zinc.  Potential
mechanisms for the release of cadmium, lead, and zinc-bearing dust in
steelmaking are associated with six major processes:  agglomeration plant,
blast furnace, open-hearth furnace, basic oxygen furnace (BOF), and elec-
tric furnace.  Release of these metals is mainly attributed to No. 2 scrap
steel (containing galvanized and plated metal) melted in the open hearth,
BOF, and electric furnaces; and existence of these metals in trace quanti-
ties in the iron ore, limestone and coal used in these processes.
Table E-3, Appendix E gives the average cadmium, lead and zinc contents
of the emissions from different processes of iron and steel industry.

Bibliography
     1.   Raw Material for the Industry.  In:  Charting Steel's Progress
          During 1970, American Iron and Steel Institute, July 1971.  p.
          3841.

     2.   American Iron and Steel Institute.  Annual Statistical Report.
          1973.

     3.   Hogan, S.J., Iron and Steel-U.S. Output off Slightly in 1974
          from Record Highs of '73.  Engineering and Mining Journal,
          176:207-213, March 1975.

     4.   Coke and Coal Chemicals in 1974 (Preliminary release of
          information pending publication of the Bureau of Mines Mineral
          Yearbook), Mineral Industry Surveys, U.S. Department of Inter-
          ior, Bureau of Mines.  Washington, D.C.  November 11, 1975.

     5.   Coke Producers in the United States in 1974.  U.S. Department
          of Interior, Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C.  November 6,  1975.

     6.   Reno, H.T., and F.E. Brantley.  Iron In:  Mineral Facts and
          Problems, Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government
          Printing Office, 1970.  Page 301.

     7.   The Editors of EMJ.  North American Iron Ore:  Launching of
          Rescue Mission for a Steel Short Economy.  Engineering and
          Mining Journal.  83-85, November 1974.

     8.   Perch, M., and R.E. Muder.  Coal Carbonization and Recovery of
          Coal Chemicals.  In:  Riegel's Handbook of Industrial  Chemistry.
          Seventh Edition, New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company,
          1974.  p. 193-206.
                                   11

-------
9,   Labee, C.J.  Steel  Making at Weirton.   Iron  and Steel  Engineer-
     W1-W60, October 1969.

10,  Lee, 0.  Taconite  Beneficiation Comes  of Age at Reserve's
     Babbitt Plant.   Mining Engineering.  484-488, May 1954.

11.  Cannon, J.S., et al.   Environmental  Steel.   Pollution in the
     Iron and Steel  Industry.   The Council  on Economic Priorities,
     1973.

12.  Ralph Stone  and Company,  Inc.   The Effects  of Air and Water
     Pollution Controls on  Solid Waste Generation, 1971-1985.
     Executive Summary.  Environmental Protection Agency,  Cincinnati,
     Ohio,  EPA-67Q/2-74-095.   December 1974.

13.  Bramer. H.C, Pollution Control  in the  Steel  Industry.
     Environmental Science  and Technology.   1004=1008, October 1971.

14.  Cook, W.R,,  and L,V. Rankin,   Polymers Solve Waste Water
     Problems.  I^on and Steel Engineer,  51:43-46.

15.  Industrial Waste Profiles No.  1 * Blast Furnace and Steel
     Mills.  Volume  III. The Cost of Clean Water.  Federal  Water
     Pollution Control  Administration,  FWPCA Contract Number
     14-12-98, September 28,  1967.

16   Yost, K.J.,  et  al.  Purdue University.  The Environmental
     Flow of Cadmium and Trace Metals,  Volume 1.  National  Sceince
     Foundation,   Project Number PB-229478,  June 30, 1973.
                              12

-------
INDUSTRY ANALYSIS

     The environmental Impact of all aspects of the iron and steel  indus-
try has received wide attention and has been the subject of many industry
and governmental studies.  Emission data, though variable, is available,*
Information for this study was largely obtained from literature.
     Description of five industry segments are presented:  ore prepara-
tion, coke production, by-product recovery, pig iron production, and
steelmaking.  Each segment begins with a basic raw material and ends
with a finished product.  Products from one segment frequently become the
raw material for another segment.
*• A special scientific group has been formed consisting of representa-
  tives of the American Iron and Steel Institute and U.S. EPA to clar-
  ify the emission data controversy.
                                   13

-------
ORE PREPARATION

     Figure 1  illustrates the processes in ore preparation including
agglomeration.  The processes in the order of their discussion are:
          Ore  Concentration
          1.    Mining
          2.    Preliminary ore preparation
          3.    Ore concentration
          Agglomeration
          4.    Sintering
          5.    Pelletizing
          6.    Moduli zing
          7.    Briquetting
                                  14

-------
           1A
              9 GASEOUS EMISSIONS

              -A LIQUID WASTE

              ^ SOLID WASTE
                                FLOCCULATING AGENTS
                                 (WATER
IRON ORE
MINING
"tl,

ORE
PREPARATION
X

ORE
CONCENTRATION
^
                                                                                  9
MISC. RETUI
FLUX
W
CONCEN- \
TDflTCn 1
ORE /
<^S
ORE FINI
COKE f
COAL
AIR
?N«
F
m
i F
INI
:R
INI
;s
:s
	 »p'
i 	 ^,

;s
IN
f
N
S
IN
40
HOC

:s
FU
)IT

:L
IVI
:s






CTUTCDIWC
4

PELLETIZIN6
5

NODULIZING
6

BRIQUETTINQ
7


9
9
9

                          Figure 1.   Iron ore production.
Note:  Material handling  and storage which is not shown on the flow  sheet is
       required throughout pig iron production and has  fugitive emissions,
       liquid waste and solid waste.

-------
 ORE PREPARATION                                             PROCESS NO.J.
                                 Mining
 1.    Function r- Ore  is mined by open-pit and underground methods, depend-
 ing upon  the shape,  depth, and attitude of the ore body being mined.
 Open-pit  mining is used whenever possible since underground mining requires
 a  larger  investment  per ton of capacity.  Open-pit mining in colder cli-
 mates may be shut-down during severe winters, whereas underground mining
 can be maintained, if so desired, the year around.  Ores are extracted
 by several methods utilizing the basic mining techniques of drilling
 and blasting, and heavy machinery to convey the loose ore into transfer
 systems.   The mining of taconite poses some special problems because of
 its extreme hardness.  Ore is transported from mines to mills by rail
 cars, trucks, truck-trialers, belt conveyors, ore boat carriers or com-
 binations of these car/'iers.
      In underground  mining, ore is transported to the surface by rail
 trams,  trackless shuttle cars, scrapers, or conveyor belts.
 2.    Input Materials - The formations of ore contained in hematite and
 magnetite consist largely of iron oxides, carbonates, and silicates.
 These ores contain approximately 25 to 30 percent iron.   Iron content
 of  taconite is much  lower.  In 1971, 2.45 tons* of crude ore was mined
                          p
 per ton of usable product.   Drilling and dynamite blasting are utilized.
 3.    Operating Parameters - Mining is done at ambient conditions.
 4.    Utilities - The basic utility needs are electricity, water and fuels
 for mobile equipment and drilling.
 5.    Waste streams - The mining wastes consist of vast quantities of
 overburden, rock, and low-grade ore which ore removed in the beneficiation
 mills and concentration of the mined ore.  In the Mesabi Range area of
 Minnesota alone, mining waste dumps cover some 55 million square meters.
 Iron  mines are responsible for little air pollution other than fugitive
 dust  emissions.  Transportation of ores also entails significant emissions
 of  fugitive dust.  It is estimated that as much as 2 percent of  the ore
* Metric tons (1000 kg)

                                   16

-------
can be lost in transport in open cars unles dust-suppressing chemicals

are added.  In open-pit mining, water causes many problems; whenever

possible, water is collected in sumps, pumped from the open-pit mine, and

sometimes used as make-up water.  Mine water may contain significant

quantities of dissolved solids.  The quantities and composition of water

discharged vary from operation to operation.  Table 6 gives the constIT
                                                          4
tuents of iron-mine discharges before and after treatment.   Table 7 gives

chemical characteristics of settling-pond discharge at one open-pit mine

that accumulates water.   Mine water contains varying concentrations of

ammonia, nitrite and nitrate, if nitrogen-based blasting agents are
used.

6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists,
7.   References -

     1.   Kirk-Othmer.  Iron. In:  Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology,
          Volume 12, New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1968.  p. 1-21.

     2.   Klinger, F.L., and H.J. Polta. Iron ore.  In:  Minerals
          Year Book, Volume I, Bureau of Mines.  Washington, D.C., U.S.
          Government Printing Office, 1973.

     3.   Berkowitz, J.B., et al.  Industrial Solid Waste Classification
          Systems.  Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio
          Publication Number 670/2-75-024.  January 1975.

     4.   Claspan Corporation.  Development Document for Effluent
          Limitations Guidelines and Standards of Performance for Ore
          Mining and Dressing Industry.  Point Source Category (Draft).
          Environmental Protection Agency.  Contract No.  68-01-2682.
          April 1975.
                                   17

-------
                      Table 6.  CONSTITUENTS OF IRON MINE LIQUID  DISCHARGES
Parameter
Total suspended
solids
Total dissolved
solids
Chemical oxygen
demand
PH
Oil and grease
Aluminum
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nickel
Sod i urn
Manganese
Zinc
Chloride
Cyanide
Concentration, mq/£
Before treatment
Min
1.000
140.0
0.200
5,00a
1.800
0.003
0.003
0.001
0.001
0.060
0.001
0 020
0.002
0.003
0.023
0.001
0.001
1.000
0.010
Max
5000.0
1880.0
36.0
8.40a
9.000
0.350
256.0
0.010
1.000
178.0
0.100
118.0
2.00
0.100
15.0
18.0
8.0
120.0
0.02
Avg
371.51
436.18
6.470
7.45a
4.511
0.066
85.39
0.007
0.167
13.3
0.018
39.35
1.001
0.024
7.511
2.462
1.869
27.143
0.013
No. of
samples
19
17
10
18
9
7
3
9
12
14
9
3
2
6
2
14
9
14
4
After treatment
Min
1.000
100.0
0.026
6.800a
0.400
0.007
0.002
0.010
0.005
0.008
0.008
0.008

0.010

0.001
0.010
0.900
0.005
Max
30.0
1090.0
42.0
8.500a
20.400
0.350
0.158
0.010
0.370
2.100
0.100
0.029

0.075

6.900
0.340
180.00
0.020
Avg
10.693
390.10
12.116
7.652a
4.313
0.131
0.045
0.010
0.120
0.446
0.023
0.017

0.023

1.720
0.185
33.225
0.011
No. of
sampl e
27
20
20
21
16
9
4
6
10
11
8
3

5

11
5
20
4
a Value in pH units
Note:  Significant figures
as reported in reference.

-------
Table 7.  CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SETTLING-POND
               DISCHARGE AT ONE MINE
Parameter
pH
TSSb
TDSC
CODd
Oil and
grease
Total Iron
Dissolved Ire
Manganese
Sulfate
Average
mine-discharge
concentration,
mq/1
7.9a
6
243
4.5
<5

-
n <0.1
<0.1
-
Average
settling-pond
discharge
concentration,
mq/1
8.0a
8.5
291
15
<5

-
<0.1
<0.1
-
 a  Value in pH units.
   Total  suspended  solids
 c  Total  dissolved  solids
   Chemical  Oxygen  demand
                       19

-------
ORE PREPARATION                                       PROCESS NO. 2
                 Preliminary Ore Preparation
1.   Function -reorder to Increase the iron content, some of the mined
ores are first screened, washed and crushed, then blended,  The undersized
material from the scalping screens having high moisture content are dried
before shipment or, in some cases, sintered at the mine.  Crushing frees
most of the siliceous material from ore, screening removes coarse iron-
poor rock, and blending produces a uniform product from iron ores of dif-
ferent characteristics and compositions by methods known as stacking and
reclaiming.  The blended material is transported by a belt conveyor to a
screening station and then shipped, if at the mine or at the plant, for
usage at the mine or at the plant.
     At some plants treating magnetic taconite ore from the Mesabi Range,
the mine run ore containing a small amount of fines and a heavy proportion
of large blocks is brought in and dumped from high-capacity trucks directly
into the top of a crusher installed at the mine site.  The crushed material
is conveyed to a surge pile, from which it is hauled by rail to concentrat-
           2
ing plants.
2.   Input Materials - Mined ore.
3-   Operating Parameters - Ambient.
4.   Utilities - Electricity, water and fuel.  Grinding of hard taconite
requires about 8 kWh of power per gross ton* of primary feed (See Process 5).
5-   Waste Streams - Dust emissions from crushing and blending operations
amount to about 1 kilogram per ton of ore and have essentially the same com-
                                  3
position as the ore being treated.   Dust emissions contain ferrous or fer-
ric oxide, some silica, and limestone.  Other fugitive dust emissions come
from transportation (conveyors, etc.) transfer points, storage, reclaim and
screening.
     In crushing of taconite ores, 15 to 20 percent of the primary crusher
feed is eliminated and dumped.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
                                    20

-------
7,   References

     1,   Iron Ores,  In;  The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel,
          Ninth. Edition, McGannon, H,E. (ed,).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
          United States Steel Co., 1971.  p. 210-218,

     2.   Merrit, P.C,  Mesabi Enters a New Era.  Mining Engineering,
          p, 93-10.8, October 1965.

     3.   Billings, C.E.  Technological Source of Air Pollution,
          Chapter 14,   In:   Industrial Pollution, Sax, N.I. (ed.).  New
          York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1974.  p, 350-480.
                                   21

-------
 ORE PREPARATION                                          PROCESS NQ.^3
                          Ore Concentration
 1.    Function  - The  quality of iron ores is further improved by concen-
 tration  by  one of  five methods:   washing, jigging, heavy-media separation,
 magnetic separation  (physical operations), and flotation (chemical pro-
 cess).   Washing separates the iron-bearing minerals from gangue materials
 by  techniques  based  on differences in specific gravity.  Jigging involves
 the stratification of ore particles and gangue by subjecting the crude
 ore to alternating upward and downward pulsations of water.  The gangue
 overflows the  jig, while ore particles are removed as an underflow pro-
 duct.  The  methods selected are based on physical and chemical properties
 of  crude ore.  In  heavy-media methods, separation is achieved by sus-
 pending  ore materials in a liquid having an intermediate specific grav-
 ity,  in  which  the  heavier iron mineral will sink and the lighter gangue
 will  float  to  the  surface.  Magnetic separation is mainly used witti taco-
 nite  ores to separate magnetic valuables from nonmegnetic materials.
 Flotation techniques are effective in the separation of fine particles
 of  iron  minerals and gangue preduced by grinding iron ore.! Various
                                                               2
 frothing and modifier agents are used to aid in the separation.   At
 present  only three iron ore flotation plants exist in the United States.
                          o
 Flotation methods  include:
     Anionic flotation of specular hematites
     Upgrading of  natural magnetite concentrates by cationic flotation
     Upgrading of  artificial magnetite concentrates by cationic flotation
     Cationic  flotation of crude magnetites
     Anionic flotation of silica from natural hematites
     Cationic  flotation of silica from nonmagnetic iron formation.
The concentrate is conveyed on belt conveyors to storage facilities.
2.  Input Materials  - At Republic Mine, located on the Marquette  Iron
Range, the  beneficiation plants process roughly 20,000 tons* of low-grade
hematite per day to  produce about 10,000 tons* per day of concentrated
ore, containing 60 to 65 percent iron.  Table 8 gives typical reagents
and their quantities used for flotation of iron ore.2
* Metric tons (1000 kg).

                                   22

-------
          Table 8.  REAGENTS USED FOR FLOTATION OF IRON  ORES
    Type of flotation agent
1.    Anionic flotation of iron oxides(from crude ore)
     Petroleum sulfonate
     Low rosin, tall oil fatty acid
     Sulfuric acid
     No. 2 fuel oil
     Sodium silicate
2«    Catiom'c flotation of hematite (from crude ore)
     Rosin amine acetate
     Sulfuric acid
     Sodium fluoride
     Plant also includes phosphate flotation and pyrite
     flotation steps.  Phosphate flotation employs
     sodium hydroxide, tall oil fatty acid, fuel oil
     and sodium silicate.  Pyrite flotation employs
     xanthate collector
3.    Catiom'c flotation of silicaffrom crude ore)
     Amine
     Gum or starch (tapioca flour)
     Methyli sobutyl carbi nol
4.    Cationic flotation of silica (from magentite
     concentrate)
     Amine
     Methylisobutyl carbinol
 Quantity,  kg/ton* of
 iron ore processed
     0.5
     0.25
     1.25
     0.15
     0.5

     0.2
     0.15
     0.15
  '   0.15
     0.5
 As  required
5.0 grams/ ton
 As required
* Metric  ton  (1000  kg).
                                    23

-------
 3.   Operating Parameters - These concentration processes are usually
 carried out at ambient conditions.
 4.   Utilities - Producing 1 ton* of concentrate from 4 tons* of crude ore
 can  require from 2000 to 20,000 liters of water, depending on the process.
 Upon leaving the process this water can serve to transport the waste
                                  •3
 materials to the tailings' basins.   Data on energy consumption in mining
 and  concentration processes are fragmentary and not well-defined (See
 Process 5).
 5.   Waste Streams - A total of 55 million tons* of tailings is produced
 from more than 100 million tons* of crude taconite mined annually.  TJie
 daily  release of tailings from some mines is:  57,400 tons* at Reserve
 Mining, 61,400 tons* at Erie Mining, and 11,500 tons* at Eveleth Taconite
 Co.  (see Table C-3).  The composition of the-tail ings varies with ore
 seam and the beneficiation processes.  Detailed composition and particle
 size of tailings froir, Reserve Mining's plant at Silver Bay, Minnesota are
                                             4
 given  in Table  9  and Table 10, respectively.   Tailings contain both
                          4
 coarse and fine particles.
     The tailings can cause some fugitive dust emissions.  Drying of
 ore  fines before beneficiation also creates air pollution problems.  Other
 fugitive dust emissions come from conveyors, transfer points, storage,
 reclaim and screening.  Slurry containing gangue materials and frothing
 agents from flotation operations which could present serious pollution
 problems, is usually sent to waste water ponds.
                             5
     According to one report,  iron ore mining and concentration adds
 little to the process water other than hardness.  In some plants, where
a heavy medium of finely divided ferrosilicon is involved, a slight
solubility of iron in plant water may result.  Generally, however,
clarified water from the iron mining industry can be discharged into
public waters.
     The tailings wastewater from low-grade ore concentration contains
about 70,000 to 500,000 milligrams per liter of suspended solids  (98
percent of which settles rapidly).  Large volumes of solids are deposited,
roughly equivalent to three-fourths of the volume of ore mined.  Table
E-4 gives the analysis of wastewater discharge from iron ore beneficiation
  Metric ton (1000 kg).

                                    24

-------
Table  9.  TYPICAL ANALYSIS  OF TAILINGS
Composition
Iron
Silicon
Aluminum
Calcium
Magnesium
Manganese
Titanium
Phosphorus
Sodium
Potassium
Sulfur
Lead
Zinc
Nickel
Copper
Molybdenum
Vanadium
Cobalt
Chromium
Cadmium
Carbon
Hydrogen
Oxygen
Percent
14.93
33.03
0.35
1.67
2.55
0.37
0.030
0.026
0.20
0.08
0.03
0.005
0.004
0.002
0.004
<0.001
<0.001
0.002
0.004
0.0003
0.11
0.10
46.40
                  25

-------
Table TO.   TYPICAL PARTICLE  SIZE ANALYSIS OF TACQNITE TAILINGS*
Size,
microns
6,730
4,760
3,360
2,380
1 ,680
1,190
841
595
420
"17
210
149
105
74
53
45
30
20
10
5
Percent
9,6.7
90.4
81.6
72,8
66.3
61.6
57.5
55.5
53.6
51.9
49.6
45.9
41.7
38.0
34.7
32.5
24.7
18.4
9.3
5.3
             a  From the plant referred to in Table 10.

-------
involving milling, flotation, and agglomeration at one mill.   Asbestos

like fibers found in the drinking water supply in Duluth, Minnesota, are
believed to be due to the wastewater from taconite ore mining and

concentration processes.  Table E-5 shows the sources of mill waste-

water from concentrating low-grade ore at Reserve mine.3

     In a typical practice the tailings are sent to the pond where

coarse tailings are removed and treated in a hydroseparator and a

thickener.  Overflow from the thickener may be pumped back to the

concentrating plant.  Two generally practiced tailings'  disposal  methods

are:  1) ponding with eventual reclamation of the tailings pond, and 2)

direct disposal into Lake Superior (used solely by Reserve Mining).

6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.

7.   References -

     1.   Iron Ores.  In:  The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel.
          Ninth Edition.  McGannon, H.E. (ed.).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
          U.S. Steel Company, 1971.  p. 178 - 239.

     2.   Calspan Corporation.  Development Document for Effluent
          Limitations Guidelines and Standards of Performance for Ore
          Mining and Dressing Industry, Point Source Category (Draft).
          Environmental  Protection Agency.  Contract No. 68-01-2682.
          April 1975.

     3.   Baillod, C.R., G.R. Alger, and H.S. Santeford, Jr. Waste Water
          Resulting from the Beneficiation of Low-Grade  Iron Ore.
          Michigan Technological University. (Proceedings of 25th
          Industrial Waste Conference.  Purdue University.   Lafayette,
          Indiana, May  1970.)  p. 54-59.

     4.   Phillips, N.P., and R.M. Wells.  Solid Waste Disposal  Final
          Report.  Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,  D.C.
          Publication Number 650/2-74-033.  May 1974.  p. 101-115.

     5.   Lewis, C.J. Metal Mining.   In:   Industrial Waste Water Control,
          Chemical Technology, A Series of Monographs, Volume 2, Gurnham,
          C.F.  (ed.).   New York, Academic  Press,  1965.
                                   ?7

-------
 ORE PREPARATION                                       PROCESS NO.  4
                             Sintering
 1.     Function - The fine Iron particles whether in natural  or in  con-
 centrated ores are agglomerated to a size suitable for blast furnace
 charging.   Sintering and pelletizing are by far the most common agglo-
 meration methods.  The sintering process converts materials  such as fine
 ore concentrates, blast furnace flue dust, mill scale, turnings, coke
 fines,  limestone fines, and miscellaneous fines into an agglomerated
 product that  is suitable for blast furnace feed material.  Some water
 may be added  in preparing the agglomerate mix.  The mixture  is deposited
 on  a traveling grate that conveys a bed of ore fines, or other finely
 divided iron-bearing materials, mixed with finely divided coke breeze
 and fluxes.   Combustion air is drawn in, and the mixture is  ignited by
 natural gas of fuel oil.  It burns and forms a fused mass, which is fed
 to  a cooler,  crushed and screened.1  The sinter production rate, which
 depends on  the chemical and physical characteristics of the  raw materials
 as  well as  control exercised in the sinter process, ranges from 0.002 to
 0.0043 ton* per square centimeter (2.00 to 4.00 net tons per square foot)
                           2
 of  grate area per 24 hours.   Table B-l, Appendix B presents average com-
 position of sinter produced in 1968.
 2.     Input Materials - Table 11 lists the constituents of the strand
                                            3
 burden  required to produce 1 ton* of sinter.
 3.     Operating Parameters - Combustion is maintained at a temperature of
 about 1300  to IBOO^.1
 4.     Utilities - Electricity, water and fuel  (gas or oil).
 5.     Waste Streams - The sintering process is a source of significant
 atmospheric emissions.  Particulate emissions are estimated to be  about
                                4
 11  kilograms per ton* of sinter.   Table 12 presents particle  size data
                         5
 of  particulate emissions.
      Total vented gases released during sintering amount to approximately
 1.56  to 2.08 liters per second per kg/hour  (1.5 to 2.0 scfm per Ib/hour)
 of  sinter.  The gases generally leave the machine at a temperature of
*Metric tons (1000 kg)
                                  28

-------
          Table 11.  CONSTITUENTS OF THE STRAND BURDEN FOR A
                      TYPICAL SUPERFLUXED SINTER
     Raw materials
Amount per 1000 kg of
   sinter product
Ore and reclaim
Return fines
Coke
Flux
Water
Sinter (hearth layer)
Air required
    1,000 kg
      500 kg
       50 kg
      250 kg
      120 kg
      250 kg
     3100 m3
          Table 12.   PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS  OF  PARTICULATE
                 EMISSIONS FROM A SINTERING  MACHINE
Screen size,
microns
5
10
20
30
44
Weight retained,
percent
25.1
47.6
14.6
5.8
5.0
Cumulative weight,
percent
25.1
72.7
87.3
93.1
98.1
                                     29

-------
200°C or lower.  Thec.e gases are emitted from the windbox collection ducts
and the bed of the grate..  Emissions from the product cooler range from
0.21 to 1.26 liter per second per kg/hour (0.2 to 0.25 scfm per Ib/hour)
of sinter processed.  Therefore, the total  stack gas flow from sinter
plants can be expected to range from 1.77 to 2.39 liters per second per
kg/haur (1.7 to 2.3 scfm per Ib/hour} of sinter production.
     The average particulate loading is 1.14 grams per cubic meter  (0.50
grain/scf) of gas.  Moisture content of gases ranges from 4.5 to 10
percent, depending on the quantity of water added during preparation of
           o
sinter mix.   The process emits not only sulfur oxides (about 30 to 40
percent of the sulfur in the charge is liberated), but also other
volatile constituents.  The sulfur content of gases could be as high as
2000 ppm.  Hydrocarbon fumes may be evolved if oily scrap  is used in
                          2
preparation of sinter mix.
     In addition to s.nter machines and sinter screens, all conveyor
transfer points, loading points, chutes, and bins handling sinter are
potential sources of fugitive dust.  Many industries control the dust
from these points by using a chemical wetting agent mixed with water.
Electrostatic precipitators, baghouses and scrubbers are used to control
emissions from sintering.  A dry cyclone reduces the emissions to 1.0
kilogram per ton* of sinter; an electrostatic precipitator in series
with a dry cyclone  reduces emissions to 0.5 kilogram per ton* of sinter.*
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - Sintering general -  3-03-008-03.
7.   References -
     1.   Kirk-Othmer.  Iron.  In:  Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology,
          Volume 12, New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,  1968.  p.  1-21.
     2.   Genton, R.G. Steel Mill Sinter Plant.   (Presented at the  65th
          annual meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association,
          June 18-22, 1972.) p. 8.
     3.   PEDCo-Environmental Specialists,  Inc., New Source Performance
          Standards Support Document for the Sintering  Industry -
          Summary Report.  Environmental Protection Agency.  Contract
          Number 68-02-1321.  Cincinnati, August 1974.

*  Metric  ton  (1000 kg)
                                  30

-------
4.   Iron and Steel Mills.  In:  Compilation of Air Pollutant
     Emission Factors.  Environmental Protection Agency, Research
     Triangle Park, N.C., Contract Number CPA-22-69-119.  April
     1973.

5.   Varga, J. Jr., and H. W. Lownie.  Final Technological Report
     on A System Analysis Study of the Integrated Iron and Steel
     Industry.  Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio.  May
     1969.

6.   Exhaust Gases from Combustion and Industrial Processes.
     Engineering Science, Incorporated.  Publication Number PB-
     204861.  Distributed by National Technical Service.  October
     2, 1971.

7.   Frame, C. P., and R. J. Elson.  The Effects of Mechanical
     Equipment on Controlling Air Pollution at No. 3 Sinter Plant,
     Indiana Harbor Works, Inland Steel Company.  Journal of Air
     Pollution Control Association,  p. 600-603.  December 1963.

8.   Billings, C. E.  Technological  Sources of Air Pollution.
     Chapter 14.  In:  Industrial Pollution, Sax, N.I.  (ed.).
     New  York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1974. p. 350-408.
                               31

-------
 ORE PREPARATION                                     PROCESS NO. 5
                            Pelletizing
 1.    Function - Palletizing is used primarily for agglomerating fine
 magnetic concentrations of taconite ores.  The ore is ground, sized and
 mixed with water and binder, then rolled into small balls.  A small
 amount  of fine coal fuel may be added to the pellet mix.  These "green"
 pellets are first dried then heated in a kiln to temperatures between
 1200  and 1370°C to bind the small particles, and finally cooled.  Con-
 trol  of moisture content of the pellets is very important to ensure
 strength.  Normal moisture content runs between 10.0 and 10.25 percent.
 The pellets are conveyed through a weight meter to storage.   The three
 most  important pelletizing systems are the traveling-grate (updraft and/
                                                                          2
 or  downdraft) system, the shaft furnace system, and the grate kiln system.
 2.    Input materials - Magnetite taconites are concentrated and agglom-
 erated  at several locations in Minnesota.  Tables B-2 and B-3, Appendix
 B give  a typical analysis of taconite concentrates charged to pelletizer
 and composition of pellets produced.
 3.    Operating Parameters - Temperatures of 1200 to 1370°C are main-
 tained  at atmospheric pressure.
 4.    Utilities - Electricity, water and fuel (gas or oil) are required.
 As an illustration on a magnetic taconite plant, the heat requirement
                                                                  o
 for pelletizing is 137,400 kilocalories per metric ton of pellets,
 similar processing of hematite requires twice the kilocalories of mag-
                                         A
 netic taconite per metric ton of pellets.   Added to these heat require-
ments 94 kWh of electric power per metric ton of pellets (80,900 kilo-
calories) is required for mining, crushing and concentrating.3 Table 13
gives the energy consumption (according to the process evaluation group
of the U.S.  Bureau of Mines) at a typical magnetic taconite pi ant.^
                                  32

-------
      Table 13.  ENERGY CONSUMPTION FOR PROCESSES AT A 2 MILLION
                      TPY  MAGNETIC TACONITE PLANT3
Process
Mining
Crushing
Concentrating
Pelletizing
Overall utiliti<
. Total
Percent of tota
energy
Electric power, %
7
7
67
15
?s 4
100
1 39

Energy consumption, %
natural gas
-
-
-
88
12
100
61

Both
2
3
26
60
9
100
100

  Total consumption, kilocalories/ton of pellets is 256,000
5.   Waste Streams - Since the concentrates received at pelletizing
plants are usually moist, dust emissions from handling are minimal
problem.  Pelletizing is usually done at the mine site.   Particu-
late emissions are similar to those from sintering plants (Process 4).
                                                                        i
Table 14 shows the particle size distribution of uncontrolled emissions.'
                 Table 14.  PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
               Percent weight
                      1
                      4
                     15
                      5
                     75
Size, microns
     <2
    2-10
   10 - 30
   30 - 50
     >150
6.   EPA Source Classification Code -None exists.
                                   33

-------
References -
     Kirk-Othmer.   Iron.  In:   Encyclopedia of Chemical  Technology,
     Volume 12,  New York,  John Wiley & Sons,  Inc.,  1968.

     Iron Ores.   In:   The  Making,  Shaping and Treating  of Steel,
     Ninth Edition, McGannon,  H.E.  (ed.).   Pittsburgh,  Pennsyl-
     vania, U.S. Steel Company, 1971.   p.  225-226.

     Target:  New Technology to Improve Economics of Iron Ore
     Beneficiation.  Engineering and Mining Journal.  175:65-68,
     December 1974.

     North American Iron Ore:   Launching a Rescue Mission for a
     Steel Short Economy.   The Editors, Engineering and Mining
     Journal.  83-85, November 1974.

     Goldberg, A.J.  A Survey  of Emissions and Controls for Hazar-
     dous and Other Pollutants.  Environmental Protection Agency,
     Washington, D.C.  Publication Number R4-73-021.  February
     1973.  p. 69-75.
                             34

-------
ORE  PREPARATION                                    PROCESS NO. 6
                            Moduli zi.ng
1.   Function  -  In  the nodulizing process ore fines are heated in an
oil- or gas-fired rotary  kiln.  The material moves through the kiln and
is agglomerated  into  lumps by rolling of the charge at temperatures
near the fusion  point of  1260 to 1370°C.1  The ore balls form nodules,
which are then  discharged and cooled.  Nodulizing has no commercial
acceptance.  (Although nodules appear satisfactory for open-hearth use,
they are not acceptable as an agglomerate for good blast-furnace per-
formance largely because  of their nonuniform size and inferior reduc-
ibility.3)
2.   Input materials  - Nodulizing is not as sensitive to feed moisture
                                             2
and particle size as  compared to pelletizing.   Table 15 gives the hour-
ly input rates  to nodulizing kiln (results of 1953 tests) at Extaca's
                                    2
nodulzing plant  using magnitite ore.   Table B-4, Appendix B gives chemical
analysis of nodulized product from Taconite concentrate.

             Table 15.  HOURLY INPUT AND OUTPUT RATES  FROM
                       NODULIZING KILN AT EXTACA
          Material                                 Quantity,  tons*/hr
Average feed rate                                      48.2
Limestone content in  feed                               1.9
Coal  consumed                                           2.9
Average nodule production rate                         46.5
3.   Operating Parameters  - Table 16 gives typical operating statistics
for nodulizing at the plant referred to inTablel5 .
 *  Metric  tons  (1000  kg)
                                   35

-------
           Table  16.   TYPICAL NODULIZING PROCESS
                      OPERATING TEMPERATURES, °C
    Optimum nodulizing temperature
         High-silica ore                              1260-1300
         Low-silica ore                               1345-1370
         Magnetite                                    1260-1290
     Temperature of nodules discharged                  20-150
      from cooler

4.   Utilities - Fuel  consumption  during  nodulizing ranges from 0.56 to
                                            3
1.1 million kilocalories per ton of  product.   Table 17 gives  heat and
power requirements for producing nodules.   (The data in Tables  15, 16
                              2
and 17 are for the same  plant).

  Table 17.   NODULIZING ENERGY REQUIREMENTS, PER  KILOGRAM OF NODULES
Fuel consumption,  calories per kilogram of  nodules:
     For low-silica ore                               668,830
     For magnetite                                    512,790
Power requirements, kWh  per kilogram of nodules              0.018

5.   Waste Streams - No  data are available  on  emissions from nodulzing
processes.  The emissions should be  lower than those from sintering
(See Process Q).
6.   EPA Source Classification  Code  - Nqne  exists,
7.   References -
     1.    Kirk-Othmer.  Iron,  In:  Encyclopedia  of Chemical  Technology,
          Volume 12, New York,  John  Wiley & Sons, Inc.,  1968,  p.  1-21.
     2.    Benett,  R.L.,  R.E. Hagen,  and  M.V. Mielke.   Nodulizing  Iron
          Ore and Concentrates  at  Extaca.  Mining Engineering. 6:32-38,
          January 1954.
     3.    Iron Ores.  In:  The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel,
          Ninth Edition.  McGannon,  H.E.  (ed,),   Pittsburgh,  Pennsyl-
          vania, U.S.  Steel Company, 1971,   p. 226.
                                   36

-------
ORE,.PREPARATION                                      PROCESS NO. 7
                           Briquetting
1,   Function - In the briquetting process, ore fines are mixed with a
binder and formed into compact masses between two rotating rolls.  In
hot-ore briquetting process, minus 1/4 inch hematite, ore fines are
heated to between 870° and 1040°C, and then briquetted while hot in a
                                                         •r\
double-roll briquetting press at loads of 45 to 55 tons.*
2.   Input Materials - Binder substances used are the same as in sinter-
ing for cold briquetting, whereas no binder is used in hot briquetting.
3.   Operating Parameters - Temperatures in the process range from 650
to 980°C for cold briquetting.1
4.   Utilities - External heat is needed.  Data on quantities and type
of fuel are not available.  Electricity is also required.
5.   Waste Streams - Data are not available on emissions from briquetting,
The emissions should be lower than those from the sintering process,
because the mass of material is not heated to as high a temperature as
in sintering.
6.   EPA Source Classification - None exists.
7.   References -
     1.   Kirk-Othmer.  Iron.  In:  Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology,
          Volume 12, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1968. p. 1-21.
     2.   Iron Ores.  In:  The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel,
          Ninth Edition, McGannon, H.E. (ed.), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
          U.S. Steel Company, 1971.  p. 226-227.
* Metric Tons (1000 kg)
                                   37

-------
COKE PRODUCTION
     Coke production is an integral part of major iron and steel oper-
ations.  Coke is charged to the blast furnaces to provide the heat and
carbon required for smelting and reducing the iron ore.  Since approxi-
mately 466 kilograms of coke fs required for every ton of iron produced
in blast furnaces, the coke plants process thousands of tons of coal a
day into coke and coke by-products.  Coke is manufactured by the by-
product method in enclosed slot-type ovens.  The Beehive process is
being phased out because the by-product method is much more efficient
and produces less pollution.
     Many iron and steel companies coke coal obtained from their own
mines.  In 1974, 91.6 percent of the coke used in the industry was
produced at coke plants operated by iron and steel  manufacturers.  Table
B-5, Appendix B presents data on coke and coal products produced in
1974 (See Table C-5, Appendix C, for production data on captive mines
of the steel  industry).  Figure 2 shows the processes of the coke plant
which are described in this section.  These processes are:
     8.   Coal  mining and transportation
     9.   Coal  preparation
    10.   Charging of coke ovens
    11.   Coking
    12.   Pushing and quenching
    13.   Coke  handling and tar condensation
                                  38

-------
                     MATER
                                                                            HATER
                                                                                          V
to
MINING AND 1*
TRANSPORTATION g|


1 / BENE- \
COAL PREPARATION 1— »4 FICIATED' I — *
91 \ COAL /


COAL CHARGING I 	 ,
TO OVEN jjjjr*
COKING
13
[FUEL
AIR

COKE
u
— »
2S?lifiND -* C"KE HANDLING
IJwnulinti jj " u

OVEN GAS
FOR BY-PRODUCTS
Y GASEOUS EMISSIONS


RECOVERY AND COMBUSTION
(SEE FIGURE 3}
$ LIQUID WASTE
9 SOLID HASTE
                                                 Figure 2.  COKE PRODUCTION

-------
 COKE PRODUCTION                                       PROCESS NO. 8
                   Coal Muring and Transportation
 !•    Function  -  Coal  is basically mined by three methods:  1) strip (sur-
 face) mining,  2}  underground  (deep) mining, and 3) auger mining.  The
 methods are dictated  mostly by geological conditions.  Strip mining is
 generally practiced only when the coal seam lies close to the earth's.
 surface.   The  two most wodely used underground mining methods are room
 and pillar and longwall.  Auger mining is relatively inexpensive and
 is  reported to recover 60 to 65 percent of the coal in the part of the
 bed where it is  used.   After mining the coal is broken into lumps suit-
 able for hauling  to the surface by electric locomotives, or in increas-
 ing number of  mines,  by conveyor belts.  In most underground mines, low,
 flat loading machines gather the loose coal onto shuttle cars.  In open-
 pit or surface mining, th« coal is gathered up by large power shovels and
 is  loaded usually on  trucks for hauling to the cleaning plant or rail
 transportation.
      The  run of mine  coal is delivered to the cleaning facilities where
 the coal  is separated from coarse rock and slate by the use of a scalper
 or  breaker or  crusher, then screened and sized.  Depending upon other
 impurities and cleaning desired, the coal is further treated by heavy
 media  washing, diester tables, froth flotation and drying.  The sized
 coal  can  be mixed for direct shipment or is stroed in piles before being
 transported to the coke plant by trucks, rail or barge.
 2.    Input Materials  - In 1974, iron and steel industry's blast furnaces
 consumed  81,420,000 tons* of bituminous and 403,000 tons* of anthracite
      2
 coal.    In its natural state coal contains impurities such as sulfur,
 clay,  rock slate, and other inorganic materials.  Mining processes add
more  impurities in the form of mine rock, dirt, tramp iron, and wood.
 3.   Operating Parameters - Mining is done at ambient conditions.
4-   Utilities - Energy is needed for mining equipment in the form of
electricity, water and fuel.
* Metric tons (1000 kg)
                                  40

-------
5-   Waste Streams - Among the major environmental problems in coal

mines are methane in coal beds and coal dust in the atmosphere of

mines; both present health and safety problems in mining operations.

Open coal stockpiles exposed to the weather are responsible for signi-

ficant dust emissions.  Airborne coal dusts are hazardous  itn.
potential for explosion.  Reclamation of strip mined lands, drainage of

acid mine waters, coal cleaning, and soltd waste disposal are other en-
                     3
vironmental problems.   The nature of acid mine water varies from site
                                                                     4
to site.  Several typical mine water analyses are listed in Table 18.

Solid refuse from coal mining consists mainly of insoluble coal, bone,

calcite, gypsum, clay, pyrite, or marcacite and overburden.

6.    EPA Classification Code *• None exists.

7.    References  -

      1.   A Dictionary of Mining, Mineral, and Related Terms.  Thrush,
          P.W. and Staff of Bureau of Mines, (ed.).  U.S. Department of
          Interior, 1968.

      2.   Coke and Coal Chemicals in 1974  (Preliminary release of informa-
          tion pending publication of Bureau of Mines Minerals Yearbook),
          Mineral  Industry Surveys, U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau
          of Mines.  Washington, D.C.  November 1975.

      3.   Hunter, T. W.  Bituminous Coal and Lignite, Minerals Facts and
          Problems,  Bureau of Mines.  Washington, D.C., U.S. Government
          Printing Office,  1970.

      4.   Girard,  L.   "Operation Yellowboy."   (Unpublished report pre-
          pared  by Dorr Oliver,  Inc., for  the  Coal Research Dept. of
          Mines  and Minerals  Industries, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
          1965.)

      5.   Lucas, J. R. and D. R. Maneval.  Plant Waste Contaminants.
          In:  Coal Preparation.  W. L. Midd Series, Leonar, J. W.  and
          D. R.  Mitchell,  (eds.).  New York, American Institute Mining,
          Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers, Inc. 1968.
                                   41

-------
          Table 18.   CHEMICAL ANALYSES  OF WATER AT DIFFERENT  MINE  SITES'
Sample
pH, field
pH, Lab
Iron, ppm
Total iron, field
ferrous lab
Total iron, lab
Acidity, ppm CaCCL
free
total
Alkalinity, ppm CaC03
Manganese, ppm
Silicon dioxide, ppm
Aluminum, ppm
Calcium, ppm
Magnesium, ppm
Potassium, ppm
Sodium, ppm
Chlorine, ppm
Sulfate, ppm
Copper, ppm
A
4.3
3.20

486
454
463

20
850
0
16
35
24
335
0
0
4.0
15
1867
0.3
B
2.9
2.65

828
733
1348

45
5820
0
70
81
595
1263
16
0
2590
2010
12838
0.7
C
4.4
3.65

17
0.5
1.3

15
86
0
10
4
13
89
0
0
4.0
36
301
0.2
Different samples from different locations.
                                   42

-------
COKE PRODUCTION                                       PROCESS NO. 9
                           Coal Preparation
1.   Function ^- Preparation involves the breaking, screening, pulver-
izing, blending, and mixing of the coal.  Incoming metallurgical  coal
from the mine is brought to a breaker building at the coke plant.  The
breaker is provided to remove the refuse from the coal and break up
frozen lumps in winter.  The coal is then screened.  The coarse coal
flows to a rotary crusher and final pulverizing is done in the fine-coal
system.  Low-and high-volatile coals are pulverized separately, and coals
of different volatilities are usually blended to improve the chemical
and physical properties of the coke and to control the pressure on the
oven walls developed during carbonization.  To further increase the uni-
formity and quality of coals to be fed to coke ovens, their bulk density
is controlled.  If the bulk density of the coal is below specification,
oil is added; if the bulk density of the coal is above specification,
water is added.  The coals are then conveyed to coke oven battery coal-
storage bins.
2.   Input Materials - Bituminous coals of high-volutile coal is usually
blended with either or both medium- and low-volatile coals to provide
charge for the coke ovens.  Coals of low ash content, low sulfur content,
and suitable coking properties are used.  A major protion of the pulver-
ized and blended coal  (typically 70 percent) is in particles smaller then
0.49 centimeter.
     Table 19 gives an analysis of typical coke to be charged to an
oven.
     Table  19.  ANALYSIS OF A  TYPICAL COKE OVEN CHARGE, DRY BASIS
     Constituents                                     %
     Water                                           4.0
     Volatile matter                                31.4
     Fixed carbon                                   63.4
     Ash                                             5.2
     Sulfur                                          0.76
     Phosphorus                                      0.008
                                   43

-------
     Open stockpiles of coal  may reach a height of 30  meters  and  cover
up to 500'thousand sq meters.
3.   Operating Parameters - Coal preparation operations are carried out
at ambient conditions.
4.   Utilities - Electrical power is needed for coal  preparation  equip-
ment.
5-   Waste Streams - Coal dust is emitted from crushing, screening,
storage,  reclaiming, conveying, and bin loading operations.  Particulate
emissions increase as surface moisture in the coal decreases.  Emissions
are on the order of 5 kilograms per year per ton* of material stored.
Particle  sizes released to the air average well below 0.1  millimeter,
                                                            4
and suspended fractions are in the range of 1 to 10 microns.
     About 2 to 5 grams of coal are lost for every kilogram of coal
received  (dry basis).  Much of this loss occurs by rainout of fines from
storage piles and by wir.j during outdoor handling and storage.  About  20
percent of the total loss of coal occurs as dust from the pulverizing
and blending operations.   The solids concentration in plant waters
usually ranges between 30 and 110 grams per liter but may reach 200
grams.  Fine coal and mineral  particles such as clays remain suspended
in most plant waters.  These particles vary in size from 28-mesh to
colloidal dimensions; most can be eliminated by thickeners, cyclones,
            A
and filters.    Some of the trace elements contained in the emissions are
beryllium, selenium, arsenic,  lead, cadmium, strontium, titanium, potas-
sium, and sulfur.
6.   EPA Source Classification -
     Coal crushing and handling - 3-03-003-07.
7.   References -
     1.    Manufacturing of Metallurgical Coke and Recovery of Coal
          Chemicals.  In:  The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel,
          Ninth Edition, McGannon, H.E.  (ed.).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
          U.S.  Steel Company,  1971.  p. 104-116.
     2.    Kirk-Othmer.   Carbonization.  In:  Encyclopedia of Chemical
          Technology, Volume 4.  John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.
          1968.
* Metric ton (1000 kg)
                                  44

-------
3.     Varga,  J. Jr., and H. W.  Lownie. Sources of Air Pollution In:
       Final Technological  Report on A Systems Analysis Study of the
       Integrated Iron and Steel Industry. Battelle Memorial Institute,
       Columbus, Ohio.  May 1969.

4.     Barnes, T. M., A. O. Hoffman,  and H. W. Lownie. Evaluation of
       Process Alternatives to Improve Control of Air Pollution  from
       Production of Coke. Battelle Memorial Institute.  Columbus,
       Ohio, January 31, 1970.

5.     1974, Keystone Coal  Industry Manual.  New York, Mining Infor-
       mation Services of The McGraw Hill Publications,  1974.
                                   45

-------
 COKE  PRODUCTION                                         PROCESS NO. 10 .
                          Charging of Coke Ovens
 1.    Function -  Prepared coals are carried from the coke-oven battery
 coal-storajge bins to the coke oyens in larry cars with three to five
 hoppers matching the openings for coal charging in each oven.  All modern
 by-product  coke  ovens are designed to take a definite volume of coal per
 charge.   Two types of larry cars are used:  the gravity discharge larry,
 and the mechanically unloaded larry.   Charging is accomplished through
 openings  in the  top of the coke oven.  To prevent escape of the gases
 from  the  oven during charging, gas-cleaning devices ( mechanical or ven-
 turi  scrubbers)  have been installed on the larry cars.  A steam-jet aspi-
 rator is  used in most plants to draw gases from the space above the charged
 coal  into a gas  collecting main.   Some newer batteries use pipeline
 charging, for preheated coal.
 2.    Input  Materials - A specified volume of coal, typically 16 to 20
 tons,* is charged to the oven for each coking operation.  Bethlehem Steel
 Corporation, Burns Harbor, Indiana, has a charging capacity of 39.4 cu.
                                                        o
 meter (1,391 cu. ft. or approximately 35 tons) per oven.
 3.    Operating Parameters - Prepared coal is charged at ambient condi-
 tions.
 4.    Utilities - Energy is needed for material transportation and for
 preheating  when done.  Quantitative data is not available.
 5.    Waste  Streams - The analytical properties of the coal have no appar-
                                                               o
 ent significance on the quantities of emission during charging.   Dust
 is evolved  when the larry car is filled with coal and weighed.  Charging
 the coal  to ovens results in some smoke.  Under the conditions of charging
 some  of the hydrocarbons contained in coal are directly volatilized  (an-
 thracene, phenanthrene, and naphthalene).  Some coals break down  to yield
methane and lighter aromatic compound such as benzene.  Some emit hydro-
gen and are rapidly coked to graphite.  Small, porous globules of coke
carbon (coke ball) are sometimes emitted in the charging g^ses.   The
  Metric ton (1QOQ kg)

-------
gases contain some nitrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen,
                   4
methane, and steam.   Charging coal into the oven accounts for 6Q to 70
percent of total emissions from oven batteries.  Unsubstituted polynu-
clear aromatics constitute up to 3 percent of the collected volatiles or
4 to 6 percent of the benzenersoluble portion of the collected volatiles
                                      c
emitted during the charging operation,
     Table 20 gives the conditions to which larry car operators are
                                 3
exposed inside the operator'^ cab  and this provides an indication of
pollutant concentrations in this area.
     Currently, the following methods are in use for the reduction of
charging smoke:  1) external collection and cleaning of gases from the
larry car, 2) collection of gases  in a gas collecting system, with
standard larry car charging, 3) "staggered" charging which consists of
charging each oven port separately under negative pressure, and 4) pipe
line charging.
 Table  20.  TIME-WEIGHTED AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS OF GASES INSIDE THE
                 LARRY CAR  (BASED ON 8-HOUR WORK DAY)
          Substance                               Quantity
          Coal  tar pitch                            0.2 mg/m
          SOp                                       5.0 ppm
          H2S                                      10.0 ppm
          CO                                       50.0 ppm

     Emissions  from oven charging  contain on the order of 0.75 kilogram
particulate, 0.02  kilogram  SO^, 0.6 kilogram carbon monoxide, 2.5 kilogram
hydrocarbons, 0.03 kilogram NO  and 0.02 kilogram ammonia, per ton coal
        fi
charged.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - 3-03-003-02.
7.   References -
     1.   Manufacture of Metallurgical Coke and Recovery of Coal Chemicals.
          In:  The Making,  Shaping, and Treating of Steel, Ninth Edition,
          McGannon, H.E. (ed.).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S. Steel
          Company, 1971.  p. 118-128.
                                   47

-------
2.   Coal and Coke.  In:  Watkins Cyclopedia of the Steel Industry,
     Twelfth Edition,  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Steel Publication,
     Inc. 1969.  p, 46t

3.   Stoltz, J. H.  Coke Charging Pollution Control Demonstration.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Contract No. CPA 70-162.
     March 1974.

4.   Barnes, T. M., A.  0. Hoffman, and H.  W. Lownie.   A Final
     Report on Evaluation of Process Alternatives to  Improve Control
     of Air Pollution From Production of Coke.  Battelle Memorial
     Institute, Columbus, Ohio.  May 1969.

5.   Smith,  W.  M.  Evaluation of Coke Oven  Emissions.   Air Pollution
     Control Association.  (Presented at the Annual Meeting, 63rd,
     St. Louis, Mo.  June 14-18, 1970.)

6.   Iron and Steel  Mills.   In:  Compilation of Air Pollution Emis-
     sion Factors.   Environmental  Protection Agency,  Research
     Triangle Park,  N.C.   Contract Number  CPA-22-69-119.   April
     1973.
                              48

-------
COKE PRODUCTION                                   PROCESS NO. 11
                               Coking
!•   Function' - Coke is the residue of destructive distillation of coal.
Coal is heated tn the coke ovens (with no air in the oven) by adjacent
chambers or flues using;  1) some of the gas recovered from the coking
operation, 2) cleaned blast-furnace gas, or 3) a mixture of coke-oven
and blast-furnace gases.  The reduction starts at the side walls and con-
tinues toward the center, when it reaches the center all the coal in the
oven is converted to coke.  The end doors are opened and a ram then pushes
the incandescent coke out of the oven through a coke guide and into the
quenching car.  The oven is generally left open for several minutes to
burn off the carbon collected on the roof around the charging holes.  A
typical coke oven is 9.1 to 13.1 meters long, 1.8 to 4.3 meters high,
and 28 to 56 centimeters wide.  Some newer units are 15.2 meters long and
6.6 meters high and 46 centimeters wide.  The coke oven operates with a
coke conversion factor of approximately 70 percent depending upon the
type of coal carbonized, carbonization, temperature and method of coal-
chemical recovery.  The newer ovens have capacities of 34 tons or more
of coal per oven.  Coke ovens are constructed in gourps and called bat-
teries.  At some plants, a battery contains more than 100 ovens.  Coking
time requires approximately 17 hours but newer refractory techniques are
permitting coking to take place in 14-5 hours or less.
     During carbonization, about 20 to 35 percent by weight of the ini-
tial charge of coal is evolved as mixed gases and vapors.  The gas con-
taining volatile matter sent to the collecting main through an opening
at the top of the oven.  Table 21 gives the coke and coke chemical yields
from one net ton* of coking coal.
2.   Input Materials - Feed to the coke oven is prepared coal and com-
bustion gas.  Approximately 35 percent of the coal gas produced is returned
to the oven.
                                                                      o
3.   Operating Parameters - Carbonization temperature is about 1150°C.
* Metric tons  (1000 kg)
                                   49

-------
Table 21.  TYPICAL YIELDS  FROM  ONE TON OF COKING COAL
      Blast-furnace coke
      Coke breeze
      Coke-oven gas
      Tar
      Ammonium sulphate
      Ammonia  liquor
      Light oil
544 - 634 kg
 45 -  91 kg
270 - 325 m3
 30 -  45 liters
  9 -  13kg
 57 - 132 liters
  9 -  15 liters
                           50

-------
Heat input to the coke oven at a temperature of 1350°C is 690,000 kcal/ton
(2,780,000 Btu/ton) of coal.  Stack and radiation losses are 131,000
kcal/ton (527,000 Btu/ton) of coal, i.e. 19 percent losses.3
4.   Utilities - Overall heat requirement for coal  carbonization amounts
to 560 to 640 kcal/kg (1000 to 1150 Btu's per pound) of coal.2
5.   Haste Streams - Emissions of  gas and dust are released; 1) when the
oven ports are opened to charge the coal (Process 10), 2) during the
coking by leakage through doors and ports, and 3) when the hot coke is
pushed from  the oven (Process 12).
     Several  investigators  report  the presence of suspected carcinogenic
hydrocarbons (i.e. polycyclic or polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons) in
coke oven smoke.  Prominent among  these  is benzo(a)pyrene.
     Table  22 gives emission factors for coking and coke oven pushing or
discharging.   A complete list of  chemicals present in coke oven off-
gases is given  in Table E-6, Appendix E.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - 3-03-003-03 - oven pushing.
7.   References -
     1.   Manufacture of Metallurgical Coke and Recovery of Coal Chemicals.
          In:  The Making,  Shaping and Treating of Steel, Ninth Edition,
          McGannon, H.E.  (ed.).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.  U.S. Steel
          Company.  1971.   p. 105-177.
     2.   Kirk-Othmer.   Carbonization.   In:  Encyclopedia of Chemical
          Technology, Volume 4, Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1966.
          p.  400-423.
     3.   Roland Kemmetmueller, Pres. American Wagner - Biro Co., Inc.
          Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Iron and Steel Engineer.  October
          1973.
     4.   Boyland, E.   Polycyclic  Hydrocarbons, British Medical Bulletin,
          202, 1964.
     5.   Iron and Steel Mills, In:  Compilation of Air Pollution Emission
          Factors, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
          Park, N.C.  Contract Number. CPA-22-69-119.  April 1973.
                                   51

-------
Table 22..  EMISSION FACTORS FOR COKING AND COKE OVEN PUSHING
Pollutant
Participate
CO
HCa
N02
Ammonia
Coking cycle
Discharging
(kg/ton* of coal charged)
0.05
0.3
0.75
0.005
0.03
0.3
0.035
0.1

0.05
       Expressed as methane.
     * Metric ton (1000 kg)
                                52

-------
COKE PRODUCTION                                     PROCESS NO,  12
                           Pushing and Quenching
1.    Function  - Red-hot coke from the oven is pushed into a quenching
car and taken to a quenching station, where a water spray system of
water cools the coke.  Although a dry quenching method is available,
and is used exclusively in Russia, all but one or two plants in  the U.S.
use wet quenching principally for economic and operating reasons.  The
usual practice is to achieve an average moisture content of 2 1/2 percent
in the metallurgical coke after screening,
2.    Input Materials -  All the coke product from coke ovens is  quenched.
3.    Operating Parameters - Ambient conditions are maintained.
4.    Utilities - Approximately 15 to 20 percent of quench spray  water is
evaporated in quenching and increasing the moisture content of the quench
                                     2
coke, and the remainder recirculated.   The amount of water for  evaporation
                                                              2
and moisture content to the coke is about 500 liters per ton*.    Electri-
city is used by pumps and transferring equipment.
5.    Waste Streams - Pushing emissions vary with the degree of coking.
Well-coked coal will smoke very little when pushed into the quench car,
while poorly coked "green" coke will cause excessive smoke.  Particulate
emissions for pushing operations were presented in Table 22 and  amount
                                    4
to about 0.3 kg/ton of coal charged.   At one plant 21.5 percent of the
particulate from pushing operations was larger than 74 microns.   The
distribution of those particle less than 13.5 microns in size is shown
in Table 23.5
     Baffles have been installed near the top of Some quenching  station
stacks  to minimize carryover of entrained dust and water droplets out
of the  top of the stacks by the steam generated in quenching.  Most of
the solids, in the form of coke breeze, are either used within the plant
or sold.  Table 24 gives a screen analysis of the particulates generated
at the  quench of one coke plant.  Table 25 gives an average analysis of
quench  water samples.   The average weight of particulates emitted during
a 2-minute quench cycle at one plant was calculated to be  2.7 kilograms.
  Metric ton  (1000  kg)

                                   53

-------
     Table 23.   PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR COKE OVEN EMISSION
    SAMPLE DURING  TYPICAL  PUSH AT MAJOR NORTHWEST INDIANA STEEL CO.
Size, microns
13.5
8.6
5.6
4.0
2.5
1.3
0.8
0.5
% by weight of total sample
collected on plates
31.3
27.7
12.3
9.1
7.3
7.3
3.8
1.0

4*-5
fo.S
I*. 5
il.t
11. (
H.«

These emissions could be reduced to less then 0.4 kilogram by installation
of baffles.6
     The volume of the contaminated wastewater averages  about 335 to 335
liters per ton of coke.   Analysis of coke wash water at  one plant showed
that the suspended solids exceeded 350 ppm and chloroform-extractable
                           g
materials exceeded 260 ppm.   Table E-7, Appendix E, gives a complete
list of chemicals potentially present in the emissions from quenching
and direct cooling.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - 3-03-003-04.
7.   References -
     1.    Manufacture of Metallurgical Coke and Recovery of Coal  Chemicals.
          In:   The Making,  Shaping and Treating of Steel.   Ninth  Edition,
          McGannon,  H.E.  (ed.).   Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania, U.S. Steel
          Company, 1971.   p.  130.
     2.    Ess,  T.J.   The Modern  Coke Plant.   Iron and Steel Engineer.
          C3-C36.  January 1948.

     3.    Gollmar, H.A.   Coke and  Gas Industry.   Industrial Engineering
          Chemistry.   39:596-601.   1947.
     4.    Iron  and Steel  Mills,  In:  Compilation of Air  Pollution Emission
          Factors, Environmental  Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park
          N.C.   Contract Number,  CPA-22-69-119.  April 1973
                                  54

-------
Table 24.  SCREEN ANALYSIS OF QUENCH-TOWER PARTICIPATES
Screen size
Mesh
6
16
30
50
100
200
-200
Microns
3327
1167
589
298
147
74
-74
Weight
Retained
0
1
9
35
39
13
3
Dercent
Cumulative
0
1
10
45
84
97
100
   Table  25.  AVERAGE ANALYSIS OF QUENCH WATER SAMPLES
Contaminants
Phenols
Sul fates
Chlorides
Total ammonia
Cyanides
Total solids
Concentration, ppm
776
1066
1954
2517
98
5214
                              55

-------
5.   Yost, K.J., et al.   Purdue University.   The Environmental  Flow
     of Cadmium and Other Trace Elements:   Volume 1.   National
     Science Foundation.   PB-229478.   June 30,  1973.

6.   Barnes, T. M., A.  0. Hoffman, and H.  W.  Lownie.   A Final
     Report on Evaluation of Process  Alternatives to  Improve Con-
     trol of Air Pollution from Production of Coke.   Battelle
     Memorial Institute,  Columbus, Ohio.   May 1969.

7.   Results of analysis  of a series  of quench  water  samples by 1)
     Allegheny County Bureau of Air Pollution Control,  2)  U.S.
     Steel Clairton works, 3) Pennsylvania Department of Health -
     Division of Sanitary Engineering,  4)  The University of Pitts-
     burgh - Department of Occupational Health.

8.   Kozar, R.  S.   Environmental  Pollution Control.   Blast Furance
     and Steel  Plant.  598, August 1970.
                               56

-------
COKE PRODUCTION                                PROCESS NO. 13
                            Coke Handling
]'   Function -The quench car brings the quenched coke to the coke warf, where
it is dumped in a  thin layer for drying and for detection of unquenched
coke (by visual inspection),  Unquenched coke is sprayed with water.
When cool, the coke is fed onto a conveyor belt and transferred to a
screening station  for separation into sizes.   Tables B-6,and B-?7, Appen-
dix B give typical sizes and properties of coke produced in the screening
and separation step.
2.   Input Materials - Quenched coke is fed to the coke wharf, and con-
veyed to crushers, and then to storage.
3.   Operating Parameters - Coke is cooled under ambient conditions.
4.   Utilities -  Electricity for the quench car, conveyor drives, crushers
and screens.  Water for additional quenching is used as required.
5.   Waste Streams - Coke dust may be released at the transfer points
or  in mechanical  operations such as screening.  Size of particulates
released to  air  is well below 0.1 millimeter, and the suspended fractions
are  in  the range  of  1  to  10 microns.  Coke handling losses are typically
                       2
less then 0.01 percent.
6.   EPA Source  Classification Code - None exists.
7.   References  -                		  ._	
     1.   Manufacture of Metallic Coke and Recovery of Coal Chemicals.
          In:  The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel, Ninth Edition,
          McGannon, H.E.  (ed.).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1971. p. 133-
          134.
     2.   Barnes,  T.M., A.O.  Hoffman, and  H.W. Lownie.  A  Final Report
          on Evaluation of  Process Alternatives to  Improve Control  of
          Air Pollution from  Production of Coke.  Battelle Memorial
          Institute, Columbus, Ohio.  May  1969.
                                   57

-------
COKE BY-PRODUCTS RECOVERY
     Although most coke-oven plants in the United States are equipped to
process tar and light oil, the extent to which an individual plant
produces the various products depends upon economic conditions and size
of the plant.
     Figure 3 shows the coke by-products recovery segments.   The processes
described in the following section are:
     Primary cooling/reheating
     Tar decanting
     Recovery of phenol
     Distillation of ammonia
     Ammonia absorption
     Crystallization and filter drying
     Light oil recovery
     Fractionation and refining of light oils
     Table B-8, Appendix B,  presents  yields  and analysis of  products  of
coking and recovery processes.
                                   58

-------
                            wu-os m
en
                                                   MMXIIA RECOVERED
                                                   FIION AWONIA STILL
                                                   (om.v IN USE OF
                                                   SWIDIRECTU PSOCESS)
1

1 — *

MtWNI*
ABSORPTION It


                                                        sunnic
                                                           Kit
                                                                                                                               /PTOOUCTS\
                                                                                                                                  ">f   |
                                                                                                                                II6KT Oltl
                                                                                                                                mntmnsN
                                Figure  3.   Coke  by-products recovery.
                                                                                                                   9 GASEOUS EMISSIONS

                                                                                                                   ^LIQUID WASTES

                                                                                                                   <> SOLID WASTES

-------
COKE PRODUCTION                                       PROCESS  NO.  14
                      Primary Cooling/Reheating
1.   Function •<• The hot gases resulting from carbonization  leave the  coke
oven through a standpipe into a collecting main.   The  gases and  vapors
are sprayed with weak liquor (flushing liquor)  to reduce the temperature
and volume.  As a result of this cooling,  most  of the  tar is condensed
and is decanted along with the unevaporated flushing liquor into an
adjacent tank.
     The coke oven gas and uncondensed vapors are passed from  the collect-
ing main to either a direct or indirect primary cooler for  further cooling.
As the gas cools, tar and ammonia liquor are condensed.   This  mixture of
condensed liquor flows to the decanter (Process 15).   The gas, with a small
amount of resulting tar fog, then passes through a steam-driven  centrifu-
gal gas exhauster, which .emoves some of the remaining tar  fog and passes
the gas to an electrostatic precipitator.   In the precipitator,  the final
traces of tar are removed.   The gas is treated  in a reheater where its
temperature is raised and then passes through an ammonia scrubber (Process
18).  The collected tar is added to the decanter (Process 15).
     Depending on the sulfur content of the coal  used  in the ovens, the
coke oven gas may contain 9 to 17 grams hydrogen sulfide per cubic meter.
Some plants partially or completely strip the sulfur compounds from the
         2
coke gas.
2.   Input Materials - The gas formed in coking may be usied as fuel  or
further treated.  The quantities treated in primary coolers depend on the
demand for by-products.  The input gas analysis to the cooler is about
50 percent hydrogen, 27 percent methane and the remaining 23  percent
ethane, benzene, CO,,, CO, 02 and Np.
3.   Operating Parameters - A slightly reduced  pressure is maintained in
the collecting main to prevent loss of the gases.  The weak ammonia  spray
reduces the temperature of gas from 600°C to about 100°C.   The tempera-
ture of the gases is dropped to 30°C in the cooler and raised to  60°C in
the reheater.   Pressure varies from 30 cm. water below atmospheric pres-
                                   60

-------
sure to a discharge pressure of 1.8 kilograms per square centimeter.3
A precipitator is placed either before or after the exhauster to collect
condensed organic droplets.
4.   Ut i1it ies - The heat transferred from the hot gases to the cold
liquor is recovered by indirect heat exchange with circulating water.
Energy is required for operating the exhauster, electrostatic precipita*-
tor and reheater,
5.   Waste Streams - Some parti.culate is evolved through leaks in the
equipment,
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
7.   References -
     1.   Kirk-Othmer.  Carbonization.   In:  Encyclopedia of Chemical
          Technology, Volume 4, New York, Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1968,  p.
          400-423.
     2.   Sollmar, H.A.  Coke and  Gas Industry.  Industrial Engineering
          Chemistry.  39:596-601.  1947.
     3.   Griswold, J.  Chemical Engineering Series, Fuels, Combustion,
          and  Furnaces.  McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc.  1946.
                                   61

-------
 BY-PRODUCTS  RECOVERY                                  PROCESS NO. 15
                            Tar Decanting
 1,    Function  -  The  tar condensed in the collecting main is decanted
 along with the unevaporated flushing liquor into an adjacent tank where
 tar settles  to the  bottom and leaves through a valve into the tar decan-
 ter.  The flushing  liquor is passed to settling tanks.  The ammonia liquor
 condensed in the primary coolers, together with the tar removed by the
 exhauster and  precipitator, is also added to the tar decanter where the
 tar is  separated from the weak ammonia liquor by decantation.  Part of
 weak ammonia liquor is pumped back to the collecting main sprays, another
 part is passed to the cooling coils of the primary cooler, and the
 remainder is sent to  an ammonia still.  From the crude tar collector in
 the decanter,  pitch sludge settles to the bottom and is mechanically
 raked out for  disposal, usually by burning as fuel,  Settled crude tar
 is  sent to a separate plant for secondary processing by distillation,
 where naphthalene is  obtained as the main product.
      The yields of  tar vary among plants with the kind of coals car-
 bonized and  the carbonizing temperatures.  The yield in 1972 averaged
 45  kilograms of tar per ton of coal.  Generally from 4 to 5 percent by
 weight  of the  coal  carbonized is recovered as tar.  The relative quan-
 tities  of tar  tapped  depend upon a number of economic factors, such as
 availability and current market for tar and tar distillate.  Crude tar
 contains a large number of chemical compounds.  One source includes 348
 compounds that have been identified in tar.  Some of the large plants
 recover a number of tar derivatives, including creosote oil, cresylic
 acid, cresols, naphthalene, phenol, pyridine, and medium and hard pitch.
 Table B- 9,  Appendix  B, presents the composition of coke oven tar.
 2.    Input Materials  - Weak ammonia liquor and condensed tar from the
 collecting main, the  exhauster, and the precipitator are the feed to the
 decanter.  The input  liquor contains from 1 to 5 grams suspended solids
and dissolved  tarry compounds including phenols and tar acids (expressed
                      o
as phenols)   per liter.
                                   62

-------
3.   Operating Parameters - Ambient.
4.   Utilities - None required,
5.   Waste Stream - Pitch sludge is a waste stream if not burned as
fuel.  There is some odor at the decanter.  Ammonia and organic fumes
are strong at the sumps where decanted liquor and other flush liquor is
collected for recycling to the collecting main sprays.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
7.   References -
     1.   Sheridan, E. T.  Coke and Coal Chemicals.  In:  Minerals Year-
          book, Volume I and II, Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C., U.S.
          Government Printing Office, 1972.
     2.   Ammonia and Ammonium Salts, Chapter 10.  In:  Coal, Coke, and
          Coal Chemicals, Chemical Engineering Series, New York, McGraw-
          Hill Co., Inc., 1950.  p. 309.
     3.   Varga, J. Jr., and H. W. Lownie.  Final Technological Report
          on A Systems Analysis Study of the Integrated Iron and Steel
          Industry.  Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio.  May
          1969.
                                   63

-------
BY-PRODUCTS RECOVERY                                     PROCESS  NO.  ]_6
                            Phenol  Recovery
1.   Function - Two processes are available to recover phenol,  the vapor-
recirculation process and the solvent extraction process.  In the solvent
extraction process weak ammonia liquor recovered with the volatile products
of coal carbonization is contacted countercurrently in a scrubber with
benzene or light oil to remove phenol (phenols are more soluble in benzene
or light oil than in water).  The weak ammonia liquor and light oil  flows
are maintained in the ratio of approximately 1.25 oil to 1.0 liquor.
The phenol-free liquor flows to a storage tank for further processing
(Ammonia Still, Process -U).  The phenolized benzene or light oil is
washed with caustic soda in a tower.  After a week or two, the caustic
in the light oil caustic washer is saturated with sodium phenolate,  which
is drained into a carbola+-e concentrator.  The sodium carbolate in the
concentrator is boiled to remove entrained solvent and moisture.   It is
then neutralized with carbon dioxide to liberate crude phenols and phenol
           2
homologues.
      The vapor-recirculation method is operated in conjunction with the
ammonia still.  Ammonia is removed from the weak liquor in the "free leg"
(See Ammonia Still, Process 17) of the ammonia still.  So-called "free"
ammonia and acidic gases (HLS, CO^ and HCN) and a minimum amount of phenol
are removed in this step.  The ammonia liquor leaving the base of the free
leg is transferred to the dephenolizing unit where phenols are removed by
vaporization with steam followed by extraction with caustic soda.  Phenols
are recovered from the sodium phenolate solution.  The dephenolized liquor
is transferred to the "fixed" led of the ammonia still.
2.    Input Materials -  Weak ammonia liquor, benzene or light oil, caustic
soda  and  carbon dioxide  or sulfuric acid are inputs to the solvent extraction
process.   In  the vapor-recirculation process weak liquor from the free
leg of the ammonia still  is treated with steam and caustic soda.  The
                                                                2
input ammonia liquor contains 0.5 to 3.0 grams phenol per liter.   The
pH of the liquor should  be within a range of 6.5 to 9.0 for optimum
                                    64

-------
                o
dephenolization.   A phenol removal efficiency of 95 to 98 percent is
achieved.
3.   Operating Parameters - The solvent extraction process is carried
at ambient conditions.  The vapor-recirculation process is conducted at
100°C.
4.   Utilities  - Electricity is required for pumping.
5-   Waste Stream - Particulate may be  emitted.  The scrubber and washer
create some wastewater that must be treated.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
7.    References -
      1.    Carbone,  W.E.   Phenol  Recovery  From  By-Product  Coke Wastes.
           Sewage and  Industrial  Wastes.   22:200-205.   February 1950.
      2.    Manuafacture of Metallurgical Coke and  Recovery of Coal
           Chemicals.   In:   The Making,  Shaping and  Treating  of Steel,
           Ninth Edition, McGannon, H.  E.  (ed.).   Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
           U.S.  Steel  Company,  1971.-
     3.   Heller, A.N. et  al.  Some Factors in the  Selection of Phenol
          Recovery  Process.  (Proceedings of Twelfth Industrial Waste
          Conference.  Purdue  University.  May 14,  1957).  p. 103-122.
                                    65

-------
 BY-PRODUCTS  RECOVERY                                      PROCESS NO. 17
                            Ammonia Still
 1.    Function  - Ammonia  is transferred to the vapor phase from aqueous
 solution  by  distillation and treatment with alkali.  The ammonia present
 in  weak  liquor is  in  two forms classified as "free" and "fixed".  The free
 ammonia  is that which is readily dissociated by heat, such as ammonium
 carbonates,  sulfides  and cyanides.
      The  fixed ammonia requires the presence of strong alkali to effect
 displacement of the ammonia from the compound in which it is present;
 examples  include ammonium chloride, thiocyanate, ferrocyanide, sulfate.
 In  the ammonia still  "free" ammonia and acidic gases are removed by
 passing weak ammonia  liquor down through a column over a series of plates
 equipped  with  bubble  caps and overflow pipes.  The liquor is heated by
 an  upward flow of  steam which vaporizes ammonia and volatile acidic gases.
 The vapors leave the  top of the "free leg" of the ammonia still and pass
 to  the dephlegmator.   In the dephlegmator the vapors are partially cooled
 and excess water is removed and returned to the still.  The vapors leaving
 the still consist  of  10  to 25 percent ammonia.  Most of the balance is
 water vapor  with some acidic gases and neutral oils.  Liquor leaving the
 "free leg" of  the  ammonia still may be sent to the dephenolizing unit if
 the weak  liquor was not  dephenolized by solvent extraction before being
 fed to the ammonia still.  Weak liquor from which phenols and "free"
 ammonia have been  removed will be treated with "milk of lime" (calcium
 hydroxide solution).  The calcium hydroxide reacts with fixed ammonium
 salts, primarily ammonium chloride, according to the following reaction.

                2NH4C1 + Ca(OH)2 + heat -> 2NH3 + 2H20 + CaC12

The ammonia  is stripped from the solution by steam in a process similar to
that  used to remove free ammonia from the original weak liquor.  The vapors
leaving the  ammonia still are added to the gas stream in the semidirect
process  and  sent to Ammonia Absorption (Process 26).  Alternatively,
concentrated ammonia  liquor may be produced.  If concentrated liquor is
produced  the acidic gases are separated by scrubbing the vapors from the
                                     66

-------
still with an alkali.  The organic matter is separated by condensation
and washing with organic solvents or with solid absorbents.   Table B-10,
Appendix B, gives an analysis of crude liquor from one plant.
2.   Input Materials - Weak ammonia liquor is treated in the ammonia still.
The quantities of ammonical liquor and its composition depend on the carbon-
ization temperature, moisture content and chemical make-up of the coal
                                                                           1  O  Q
charged.  Table 26 gives analysis of weak ammonia liquor from three plants.  ''

          Table 26.  ANALYSES OF WEAK AMMONIA LIQUOR FROM THREE PLANTS
                                (grams per liter)
Composition
Ammonia, total
free
fixed6
Sulfide as H2S
Carbonate as C02
Thiosulphates as
Cyanides as HCN
Sulphates as H2S204
Total Sulphur as S
Total phenols
Tar material
Chemical oxygen
demand
Biochemical oxygen
demand, 5-day
Oils
Thiocyanates
Plant Aa
6.54
3.35
3.19










Plant Ba
7.06

0.138
0.81









Plant Cb
5.6

0.29
1.10
0.03
0.17
0.82
2360 ppm
Trace

•


Estimated0
4.8


0.05


2.7

12.4
10.2
1.2
0.8
       Reference  1.
       Reference 2, analysis of liquor before phenol removal.
       Reference 3, analysis of liquor before phenol removal.
       Ammonium carbonate, bicarbonate, sulfide, cyanide and carbamate.
       Ammonium chloride, thiocyanate, ferrocyanide, thiosulfate and sulfate,
                                      67

-------
     Milk of lime used contains about 40 grams of lime per liter of
solution.   From 1 to 1.25 kilograms lime are consumed per ton* of coal.
carbonized.
     Yields of ammonia produced by carbonizing coal  in by-product coke
                                              * 4
plants range from 2.5 to 3.0 kilograms per ton .
3.   Operating Parameters - Vapors leave the top of  the still  at tem-
peratures of 98 to 104°C.5
4.   Utilities - About 200 kilograms of steam at 14  kg/sq cm (200
psig) "and 38°C superheat are required in a 2800-ton*-per-day-capacity
coke plant.
5.   Waste Streams - The waste sludge is alkaline, has brown or red-
brown color, and contains about 0.03 gram ammonia and 1.0 gram lime per
liter.1'4
     The waste volume depends on the amount of steam added, method of
recovery, strength of ammonia liquor, and volume of  milk of lime added.
Approximate wastes produced per ton* of coal carbonized are:  80 liters
if only condensed ammonia liquor is charged to the still, and 340 liters
if gases are scrubbed with water to collect ammonia  and the resultant
solution is charged to the still along with condensed ammonia iiquor.
The waste produced from the first process amounts to 150 to 160 percent
of the original liquor volume and contains 10 to 20  percent by volume
of milk of lime.
     All  the fixed ammonium salts of the original liquor are converted
to the corresponding calcium compounds, the chloride, sulfate, thiosul-
fate, and thiocyanate.  Some of the organic matter present in the original
liquor is left in the still waste, but the total  concentration is greatly
reduced and physical conditions altered.   Waste contains about 1000 to
2500 parts per million of phenols. '  Analyses of wastes produced from
                                        1 3
ammonia still  are presented in Table 27. '
* Metric ton (1000 kg)
                                    68

-------
      Table 27.   ANALYSES OF WASTE  LIQUOR FROM AMMONIA STILLS

                           (grams  per liter)
Composition
Ammonia, total
free
fixed
Alkalinity as CaO
PH
Chemical oxygen demand
Biochemical oxygen demand,
5-day
Sulfide as H2S
Carbonate as C02
Oils
Phenols
Cyanides
Thiocyanides
Plant Aa
0.041
N.A.
N.A.
1.57







Plant Ba
0.0034
0. 0034

1.44



0.75
0.37



Estimated
0.3



10.7
6.0
4.2
0.17
1.15
0.025
0.55
  Plants referred to in Table 27 Reference 1.
  Reference 3, phenols are not extracted from the input materials.

6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
7.   References -

     1.   Wilson, Jr. P.J.  Ammonical Liquor.   Chapter 32.   In:   Chemistry
          of Coal Utilization, Volume II, Lawry, H.H.  (ed.).   New York,
          John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1945. p.  1371-1392.

     2.   Elliott, A.C., and A.J. Lafreniere.   Solvent Extraction of
          Phenolic Compounds from Weak Ammonia Liquor.  Waste and Sewage
          Works.  R325-R332, 1964.

     3.   Fisher, C.W., R.D. Hepner and G.R. Tallon.  Koppers Company,
          Inc., Coke Plant Effluent Treatment Investigations.  Blast
          Furnace Steel Plant.  315-320.  May 1970.
                                   69

-------
4.   Ammonia and Ammonium Salts.   Chapter 10.   In:   Coal,  Coke and
     Coal Chemicals, Chemical  Engineering Series,  Wilson,  Jr.  P.O.,
     and J.H. Wells, (eds.).   New York, McGraw Hill  Book Co.,  1950.
     p. 289-333.

5.   Manufacture of Metallurgical  Coke and Recovery  of Coal  Chemicals.
     In:   The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel,  Ninth  Edition,
     McGanhon, H.  E. (ed.).   Pittsburg, Pennsylvania.   U.S.  Steel
     Company, 1971.


6.   Ess, T.J.  The Modern Coke Plant.  In:  Iron  and  Steel  Engineer.
     C3-C36, January 1948.

7.   Gollmar, H.A.  Coke and  Gas  Industry.  Industrial  and Engi-
     neering Chemistry.   39:596-601.   1947.
                              70

-------
BY-PRODUCTS RECOVERY                                         PROCESS NO. 18
                              Ammonia Absorption
1.   Function - Ammonia formed during coking is recovered by reaction with
sulfuric acid to form ammonium sulfate.  Ammonia exists in the gas phase
and in aqueous solution in ammonia liquor.  The ammonia-containing gas that
is scrubbed with dilute sulfuric acid may be:
            (1)   the total vapor, after condensation of tar (direct process),
            (2)   ammonia which has been removed from the gas by scrubbing.
                  with water and then from the scrubber water and dilute ammonia
                  liquor by disillation and treatment with alkali (indirect
                  process), or
            (3)   ammonia removed from the liquor produced during carbonization
                  by distillation and alkali treatment and added to the gas stream
                  (semi-direct process).
     The semi-direct process is used most extensively at present.  The ammonia
may be contacted with dilute sulfuric acid nearly saturated with ammonium sul-
fate in a spray tower in the Otto or Wilputte  processes, or by bubbling the gas
through a large tank filled with liquid called a saturator (usually built
before 1930).  In any case ammonium sulfate crystals precipitate from the
saturated ammonium sulfate - sulfuric acid solution and form a slurry.  The
slurry is sent to a crystallizer (Process 19)  to complete the precipitation
process and allow crystal growth.  In the Otto process pyridine and other tar
bases are recovered separately from the ammonia.  The gas from the. saturator
is sent to the acid separator for removal of any mist carryover, and then to
the light oil recovery plant (Process 20).
2.   Input Materials - Gases from the electrostatic precipitator and gaseous
ammonia from the still are inputs to the process.  For one kilogram of
ammonia present in the input gases, 2.88 kilograms of sulfuric acid are used.
3.   Operating Parameters - The gases enter the absorber at about 55°C.
4-   Utilities - The gas-liquid contactor requires electricity for pumping
and fans for gas transport.
5.   Waste Streams -  Some particulate is evolved.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
                                       71

-------
7.   References -

     1.   Ralph Stone and Co.,  Inc.   Forecasts of  the  Effects of Air and
          Water Pollution Controls on Solid Waste  Generation.  Environ-
          mental  Protection  Agency.   Publication Number PB-238819.
          December 1974.

     2.   Manufacture of  Metallurgical Coke and Recovery  of  Coal Chemicals,
          In:   The Making, Shaping,  and Treating of  Steel, Ninth Edition,
          McGannon,  H.  £.  (ed.).  Pittsburg,  Pennsylvania.   U.S. Steel
          Company, 1971.
                                      72

-------
BY-PRODUCTS RECOVERY                                  PROCESS NO. 19
                   Crystallization and Filter Drying
1.   Function - The ammonium sulfate crystals precipitated in the crys-
tal! izer accummulate as a slurry in the bottom.  The slurry is removed
from the crystal!izer and pumped to the slurry tank where the salt settles
the liquid overflows and returns to the ammonia absorber.  Prom this
tank crystal sulfate slurry is fed to centrifugal dryers or a rotary
filter dryer.  In the rotary filter dryer, the liquor fs removed and
hot air, under slight vacuum, dries the sulfate.  The liquor is pumped
back to the ammonia absorber.  Chemically pure ammonium sulfate is a
white salt that contains 25.78 percent ammonia.  The commercial salt
varies in color from white to tan and contains 25.0 to 25.7 percent ammon-
ia.  The final dried material contains approximately 0.1 percent water.
The free acid content of the finished sulfate ranges from 0.05 to 0.3
                  2
percent by weight.
2.   Input Materials - Solution from absorber.
3.   Operating Parameters - The hot air to the dryer is maintained under
slight vacuum.
4.   Utilities - Not available.
5-   Waste Stream - A fine mist of sulfuric acid may be evolved.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
7.   References -
     1.   Manufacture of Metallurgical Coke and  Recovery of Coal  Chemicals,
           In:  The Making, Shaping and Treating  of  Steel, Ninth  Edition,
          McGannon, H.E.  (ed.).   Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania, U.S.  Steel
          Company,  1971.  p.  168-170.
     2,   Ammonia and Ammonium Salts.  Chapter 10.   In:  Coal, Coke  and
          Coal Chemicals.  Chemical Engineering  Series,  New York,
          McGraw-Hill Co., Inc.,  1950.
                                    73

-------
BY-PRODUCTS RECOVERY                                   PROCESS  NO.  20
                             Light Oil  Recovery
1.   Function1- The gases leaving the ammonia absorber at 50 to 60°C are
cooled to 20°C in a tower by direct contact with water.   The gas is then
scrubbed in a tower with petroleum wash oil which removes the light oil
from the gas.  The gas, free from all by-products, then flows to the
gas holder.  The wash oil, enriched with 2 to 3 percent light oil,  is
preheated to a temperature of 100 to 140°C and then distilled with
direct steam to remove about 90 percent by volume of light oil.  The
mixture of light oil and steam passes out the top of the still  through
separators which remove water, and finally through a condenser to crude
storage.  The debenzolized wash oil leaving the bottom of the still is
cooled and the water and impurities are removed.   The oil  is recirculated
to the gas absorber.
     The light oil is a clear yellow brown oil containing well  over a
hundred constituents, most of them in very low concentrations.    Princi-
pal usable constituents are benzene (60-85%), toulene (6-17%):  xylene
(1-7%) and solvent naphtha (0.5-3%).  Light oil constitutes approximately
1 percent of the coal carbonized.
2.   Input Materials - Gas from the absorber, water and petroleum wash
oil.  Wash oil comsumption may run 0.07 to 0.1 kilogram per ton of coal
carbonized, while a circulation rate of 400 to 800 liters per ton of
coal carbonized may be used.  About 80 grams of steam are used  per  liter
                                   2
of wash oil in the stripping still.
3.   Operating Parameters - Temperature of the gas entering the scrubber
is 15 to 30°C.  Temperature of the wash oil entering the process is  17
to 32°C.  The petroleum wash oil normally used for this absorption  pro-
cess has a boiling range of 270 to 350°C.
4.   Utilities - Approximately 1400 kilograms of steam at 14.0  kg/sq.
cm. (200 psig) and 38°C superheat are required for a plant with 2800  tons
                   2
of coking capacity.
5.   Waste Stream - Some particulate is evolved.  Liquor containing tar
is disposed of, but quantities generated are not available.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
                                    74

-------
7.   References -

     1.   Manufacture of Metallurgical Coke and Recovery of Coal Chemicals.
          In:  The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel, Ninth Edition,
          McGannon, H.E. (ed.).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S. Steel
          Company.  1971.  p. 165-177.

     2.   Ess. T.J.  The Modern Coke Plant.  Iron and Steel Engineer.
          C3-C36, January 194&.
                                    75

-------
BY-PRODUCTS RECOVERY                              PROCESS NO.  21
                Fractionation and Refining of Light Oil
1.    Function - Light oil may be sent to a secondary products  recovery
plant that produces benzene, toluene, xylene and other compounds.  The
light oil fraction is washed with concentrated sulfuric acid,  neutra-
lized with an alkali, and fractionated into desired products.
Fractionating and refining of light oil is accomplished over a considerable
range of  temperatures.  The light oil charge is heated in a still by gra-
dual  increase in temperature.  At a still temperature of 65°C, a product
containing benzene, and some carbon bisulphide is evolved.  At 80°C, a
product of crude benzene is evolved; at 110°C, crude toluene;  at 120 to
140°C, light solvent naphtha; and at 150°C, heavy solvent naphtha.  The
residue in the still is wash oil and naphthalene, the latter solidifying
when  cooled.  Usually complete fractionation is not carried out; three
fractions are more usual.  When pure compounds are required the fractions
may be redistilled.
      About 60 percent of the light oil produced is refined at coke
plants.  The principal products are:  benzene, toluene and xylene.  The
                                                       9
remainder of the light oil is sold to other processors.
2.    Input Materials - Light oil.
3.    Operating Parameters - Fractionation is carried out at temperatures
from  65 to 140°C.
4.    Utilities - No data available.
5.    Waste Streams - Wastes from refining light oils include acid
and alkali after washing  light oil  with sulfuric acid and caustic
soda.    Particulate is also emitted.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
7.   Reference -
     1.    Ess,  T.J.   The  Modern Coke Plant.  Iron and Steel Engineer
          C3-C36, January 1948.
                                    76

-------
2.   Perch, M., and R.E. Muder.  Coal Carbonization and Recovery of
     Coal Chemicals.  In:  Riegel's Handbook of Industrial Chemistry,
     Seventh Edition, New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1974.  p.
     103-206.

3.   Gollmar, H.A. Coke and Gas Industry.  Industrial Engineering
     Chemistry.  39:596-601, May 1947.
                               77

-------
PIG IRON PRODUCTION.


      Figure 4 illustrates the pig iron  production  in  a  blast furnace,

A very limited amount of iron is porduced as  sponge iron by another method
                        i       •',';•    ,    -1.,-    '    '"•   '• -;'  "•'' •••         '• '•-
called direct reduction.   Due to its  limited  application,  this method

is not described in this report.
                                    78

-------
             AGGLOMERATED ORE PRODUCT
                (FIGURE 1)
             IRON ORE 	
             MISC. RETURNS	
             SLAG	—	
             FLUX 	
             FUEL 	
             OXYGEN 	
             COKE (FIGURE 2)
BLAST FURNACE
           22
                         Figure  4.   Pig  iron porduction.
Note:   Material  handling and  storage which is not  shown
        on the flow sheet is required throught pig  iron
        production  and has fugitive emissions, liquid
        waste, and  solid waste.
                               9 GASEOUS EMISSIONS

                               ^ LIQUID WASTES

                                 SOLID WASTES

-------
PIG IRON PRODUCTION                                 PROCESS NO.  22
                           Blast Furnace
1.   Function - The agglomerated product and ore are stockpiled.   In
colder climates three to four months supply is stored.   From storage,  it
is moved to surge hoppers at the blast furnace where it is weighed  and
transferred to the top of the blast furnace by skip hoist or by  belt  con-
veyor.  Coke, and limestone used in blast furnaces  are  not stored near
the furnace area in large quantities, and if possible,  are consumed dir-
ectly as the are received.  Charging of the furnace is  automatically
controlled.
     The blast furnace reduces the iron ore to produce  pig iron.   Iron-
bearing materials (iron ore, sinter pellets, mill  scale,  iron or steel
scrap), coke, and fluxes (limestone;and others) are charged into the  top
of the furnace in a fixed pattern of coke to ore to stone.  The  heated
blast air is introduced into the furnace above the  hearth line through
tuyeres.  In some instances fuel oil, powdered coal, natural  gas or
oxygen is blown into the bottom.  The iron ore descends down the furnace
and is reduced and melted by the countercurrent flow of hot reducing
gases created by the partial combustion of coke.  Hot metal from the  fur-
nace is tapped into torpedo cars and weighed on the hot metal track scale.
After the metal is transferred to a charging ladle, a crane transports
it to the steelmaking vessel.  Molten slag  is removed  from the  furnace
through separate tapping holes which are at an higher elevation  than  the
molten iron tap hole.  The slag discharged from the blast furnace is  col-
lected in slag pits or slag timbles.  The hot molten pig metal typically
contains 4.1 percent C, 0.9 percent Si, 0.026 percent S, 0.296 percent P
and 0.35 percent Mn.   Analysis of limestone and coke used in blast fur-
naces is given in Tables A-4 and A-5, Appendix A.
2.   Input Materials - In the United States in 1973, an average of 1.676
tons of metalliferous materials wer consumed in blast furnaces for each
                      2
ton pig iron produced.
     Table 28 lists approximate inputs and outputs of one blast furnace.
                                   80

-------
          Table  28.   EXAMPLE  OF  BLAST  FURNACE MATERIAL BALANCE
     Material
Weight, tons'*
INPUTS
  Iron bearing burden
     Iron ore
     Flux sinter
     Scrap
  Flux
     Limestone
     Gravel
  Fuel
     Coke
     Natural gas
  Blast
     Air
     Moisture
OUTPUTS
  Hot metal
  Slag
  Runner scrap
  Top gas
  Moisture
  Dust and sludge
0.3075
1.226
0.099

0.008
0.008

0.514
0.021 (0.027 million liters)

1.639 (1.254 million liters)
0.016 (0.019 million liters)

1.0
0.25
0.006
2.461 (1.8 million liters)
0.079 (0.093 million liters)
0.042
* Metric tons (1000 kg)
                                     81

-------
 3.   Operating Parameters - The furnace operates at about 1540°C.  Many
 of  the older furnaces operate at top-pressures of about 7030 kgs/sq meter
 (10 psii).  Newer plants operate at top-pressures of 14,060 kgs/sq meter
 (30 psi) and future furnaces at 42,200 to 49,200 kgs/sq meter (60 to 70
 psi).3
 4.   Utilities - Table 29 shows the daily utility requirements of a typi-
                      1 4
 cal  two-furnace plant. '   This blast furnact plant operation consumes an
 average of 50.7 kilowatt-hours of electricity per ton of pig iron pro-
 duced.  This blast furnace plant requires an average of 429 liters per
 second per blast furnace for recirculation, make-up and service water.
 In  addition to this amount, 658 liters of water per second per furnace
 are needed for boiler house, turbine, condenser, and use as potable water.
 5.   Waste Streams - Particulate emissions from blast furnaces are mini-
 mal  since a high degree of particulate emission control is necessary to
 keep the stoves (heat exchangers) from plugging.  Without controls, about
                                                          5
 75  kilograms of particulate per ton of product is emitted.   Particulates
 are also emitted during each tap, and these emissions enter the atmos-
 phers by passing through the sides and roof of the cast house.  Blast
 furnace slips, which create emissions that bypass the control devices,
 occur occassionally.  Table 30 presents composition data for collected
                   fi                                            fi
 blast furnace dust;  Table 31 gives a size analysis of the dust.   The
 collected dust is usually utilized as feed to the sinter machine.  Com-
 position and size distribution of particulates escaping to the atmosphere
 were not available.
     About 6 tons* of gases are evolved for every ton of iron produced
 from the blast furnace.  Table 32 gives an analysis of gases produced at
 one  plant.   Heating value of the raw gas (produced at the plant mentioned
 in Table 32) is 800 kilocalories per cubic meter (90 Btu/ft3) and the mois-
 ture content is 2 percent.  The gases leave the furnace with a dust con-
centration of 27.5 grams per cubic meter (12 grains per cubic foot).    Part
of this gas is used for heating purposes.  The gases leave the furnace  at
temperatures of 180 to 280°C.  The flow rate of the gases is a function
of the coke feed rate.  Total gas volume increases linearly with increase
of the coke feed rate.
* Metric tons (1000 kg)

                                   82

-------
CO
co
                  Table 29.  UTILITIES REQUIREMENTS  OF  A  SELF-CONTAINED BLAST-FURNACE PLANT WITH TWO FURNACES,
                                    PRODUCING A TOTAL OF  3810 NET TONS* OF  HOT  METAL PER DAYa
              Utility
Recirculating water
Make-up water
Other service water
Water to utilities (boiler house, turbine
  condensers, etc.)
Potable water
Coke-oven gas
Natural gas for heat
Natural gas for heat (3 months)
Boiler house fuel
  Fuel oil
  Blast-furnace gas
Compressed air at 5.6 kgs/sq. .cm. (80 psi)
Steam at 14.1 kgs/sq. cm. (200 psi) and 38°C
 (100°F) superheat
AC electricity - purchased
DC electricity - own-produced
                                                                   Quantity required daily
                                                    English
16,012,800 gal.
   259,200 gal.
 3,326,400 gal.
29,952,000 gal.

    72,000 gal.
 1,008,000 cu.  ft.
   172,000 cu.  ft.
20,448,000 cu.  ft.
                                                             172,800 gal.
                                                         446,400,000 cu. ft.
                                                           1,152,000 cu. ft.
                                                           9,600,000 Ib
                                                             151,200 kilowatt hours
                                                             42,000 kilpwatt hours
                                    Metric
60.61 x 10° liters
0.981 x 106 liters
12.59 x 106 liters
113.37 x 106 liters

0,273 x 106 liters
28.55 x 103 cubic meters
4.87 x 103 cubic meters
0.579 x 10  cubic meters
                                0.654 x 106  liters
                                12.640 x  10  cubic meters
                                          Q
                                32.63 x 10   cubic meters
                                4,354,560 kilograms
                                151,200 kilowatt hours
                                42,000 kilowatt hours
         a Volumes of gases refer to 16°C (60°F)  and  1  kg/sq. cm.  (30 in. Hg), unless otherwise specified.
         * Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
     Table  30.  CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF DRY, BLAST-FURNACE FLUE DUST
Component3
Iron
Ferrous oxide
Silicon dioxide
Aluminum oxide
Magnesium oxide
Calcium oxide
Sodium oxide
Potassium oxide
Zinc oxide
Phosphorus
Sulfur
Manganese
Carbon
Weight percent
Range for several plants
36.5 - 50.3
N.A.
8.9 - 13.4
2.2 - 5.3
0.9 - 1.6
3.8 - 4.5
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
0.1 - 0.2
0.2 - 0.4
0.5 - 0.9
3.7 - 13.9
Midwest plant
47.10
11.87
8.17
1.88
0.22
4.10
0.24
1.01
0.60
0.03
N.A.
0.70
N.A.
N.A. - not available
a
 Tests on blast furnace scrubber samples from a plant in Midwest Indiana,
 showed the presence of cadmium 14 ppm.4
                                     84

-------
   Table 31.  SIZE ANALYSIS OF FLUE DUST FROM U.S.  BLAST FURNACES3
Size
U.S. series sieve
20
30
40
50
70
100
140
200
-200
Microns
833
589
, 414
295
208
147
104
74
-74
Range, percent
2.5 - 20.2
3.9 - 10.6
7.0 - 11.7
10.7 - 12.4
10.0 - 15.0
10.2 - 16.8
7.7 - 12.5
5.3 - 8.8
15.4 - 22.6
Dust collected in participate control  devices.
                 Table 32.   ANALYSIS OF FURNACE  GAS
              Constituent

                 co
                 CO
                 CH
 Percent
by volume

   15.8

   25.6

    3.0
                                    85

-------
     Dry cyclones, wet scrubbers,  and electrostatic  precipitators are
used for controlling emissions from blast furnaces.   Venturi scrubbers
or electrostatic precipitators clean blast furnace flue  gas to  a parti-
culate concentration of 0.023 grams per cubic  meter.8
     Wastewater from the blast furnace plant includes furnace cooling
water and scrubber water.  The furnace cooling water leaves the furnace
and scrubber water.  The furnace cooling water leaves the furnace
essentially as received except for the heat added.   The  scrubber water
contains mainly ammonia, phenol, cyanide, fluorides, and carbon monoxide.
                                                  9
Table 33 shows typical liquid waste emission rates.
     Slag from the blast furnace is tapped periodically.  The slag  is
handled usually in one of four ways:  directly into  cinder ladles and
conveyed to a dump area or to other nearby processors; granualted;  direct-
ly to cooling pits; or into lightweight aggreagate.   Slag contains  sul-
fide compounds that are f.-ntted during quenching.  Approximately 0.25
of slag are produced for each kg.  of pit iron.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code -
Blast furnace ore charging - 3-03-008-01.
Blast furnace agglomerates charging - 3-03-008-02.
7.   References -
     1.   The Manufacturing of Pig Iron.  In:   The Making, Shaping  and
          Treating of Steel, Ninth Edition.  McGannon, H.E.  (ed.).
          Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S. Steel Company,  1971.   p.  428
     2.   Reno, H. T.  Iron and Steel.  In:  Minerals Yearbook, Bureau
          of Mines, Washington, D.C., Government Printing Office,  1973.
     3.   Uys, J. M., and J. W. Kirkpatrick.  The Beneficiation of Raw
          Materials in the Steel Industry and Its Effects upon  Air
          Pollution Control.  Journal of Air Pollution Control  Associa-
          tion,  p. 20-27, January 1963.
     4.   Yost, K.J. et al.  Purdue University.  Flow of Cadmium and
          Trace Metals.  Volume I.  National Science Foundation.
          Project Number PB-229478.  June 30, 1973.
                                    86

-------
     Table 33.   POLLUTANTS IN WASTEWATER FROM BLAST FURNACE
Waste material
Suspended solids, kg
Phenols, gms/ton
Cyanides, gms/ton^
Fluorides, gms/ton
Ammonia, gms/ton^
Old planta
/tond 28.2
7.8
9.9
16.4
7.8
Typical plant-
22.2
7.3
9.4
15.3
7.3
Advanced plant0
37.9
7.4
9.4
15.3
7.4
a Utilizing older, relatively inefficient processing technology.
  May have more than one blast furnace with daily capacities  of
  1000 tons* of iron.
c Operating at an advanced technology, has one or more blast  fur-
  naces with daily capacities of 1000* tons or more iron and  fully
  automated with raw materials fed under computer control.
d Per metric ton of pig iron product
                                     87

-------
5.   Iron and Steel Mills.  In:  Compilation of Air Pollution
     Emission Factors.  Environmental Protection Agency.  Contract
     Number CPA-22-69-119.  April 1973.   p. 7.5-4.

6.   Varga, J. Jr., and H. W.  Lownie.  Final Technological Report
     on A Systems Analysis Study of the Integrated Iron and Steel
     Industry.  Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio.   May
     1969.

7.   Labee, C. J.  Steel Making at Weirton.  Iron and Steel
     Engineer. October 1969.

8.   Bramer, H. C.  Pollution Control in the Steel Industry.
     Environmental Science and Technology.  1004-1008, October 1971

9.   Industrial Waste Profiles No.  1  - Blast Furnace and Steel
     Mills.  Volume III.   The  Cost  of Clean Water.   Federal Water
     Pollution Control Administration.  FWPCA Contract Number 14-
     12-98.  September 28, 1967.   p.  55.
                               88

-------
STEEL PRODUCTION
     Pig iron is refined into steel in furnaces by reducing the level
of impurities, carbon content, and adding alloying compounds.  Modern
steelmaking processes utilize a large percentage of steel scrap in addi-
tion to molten pig iron and various alloying compounds.  Molten steel
from the furnaces is usually teemed tnto ingot molds for further process-
ing.  The ingots are then subjected to roughing and finishing operations.
Figure 5 illustrates the processes of steel manufacturing.
     The three basic types of steel furnaces are in use:  electric, open-
hearth, and basic oxygen.  A significant number of open-hearth and elec-
tric furnaces also incorporate oxygen lancing because it permits higher
production rates.  The four majon phases of furnace operations are charg-
ing, meltdown, refining, and teeming.
     Atmospheric emissions vary substantially among these phases of fur-
nace operation and are increased by the use of oxygen lancing.  From the
standpoint of potentially hazardous emissions, however, the composition
of furnace emissions is primarily a function of the grade of steel being
produced (i.e., the amount and type of alloying compounds charged to the
furnace) and the scrap metal charge.
     Tables F-l through F-3, Appendix F give details of types and numbers
of steel furnaces and their capacities in the United States.
                                     89

-------
                                                                                                   r (MTMB:  TW. IMC.
                                                                                                            CMKM»«nc«
win
r*a
lIKJ-URt
«.lf»I15
wi^lfcs
KU»
                           Figure  5,   Steel production
9 GASEOUS EMISSIONS

^ LIQUID WASTES

A SW.ID HASTES

-------
STEEL PRODUCTION                                     PROCESS NO. 23
                        Electric Furnace
1.   Function - Two types of electric furnaces, the arc furnace and the
induction furnace, are used to produce steel.  The arc furnace is used
to produce high-alloy steels, as well as a considerable amount of mild
steel.  The induction furnace produces primarily speciality and high alloy
steels with no real emission problems and therefore is omitted in the re-
mainder of this report.
     Cranes with special designed drop-bottom buckets are used to charge
raw materials and alloying materials into the furnace.   Charging is done
usually through the swing-out roof of the arc furnace.  Some units are
charged through their doors or openings or via a chute.  Practically all
modern arc furnaces for steel making are top-charged.  At the time of charg-
ing, the electrodes are moved out of the way.  After charging of the molten
metal, light and heavy scrap, alloying material, and fluxes, the furnace
roof is returned to close the arc furnace and the electrodes are lowered
                                          2
to about 2.5 centimeters above the charge.   Many times a bank is built
in front of the arc furnace doors with refractory material (dolomite)
to form a dam that keeps molten metal from slopping out of the doors.
As current is applied through the electrodes, the charge is melted.  Oxi-
dation occurs in varying degrees, from the time molten metal begins to
form, until l;he entire charge is in solution.  During this period phos-
phorus, silicon, manganese, carbon, and other materials are oxidized.
Slagging commences to form and is carefully controlled throughout the
operation.  Oxygen lancing is often used to increase production rates.
At the end of the process, the electrodes are raised.  In taping, depend-
ing on the type of furnace, fixed or tilting, the tap hole is opened or
the furnace is tilted so that the steel is tapped from the furnace into
a ladle.  Slagging practice varies from shop to shop.  Slag removal may be
done prior to tapping, during, or at the end of the tap.  A crane moves the
ladle either to the pouring platform, where the steel is poured into molds,
                                                           2
or to continuous casting, or to a vacuum-degassing station,  or to a gas-
                                   91

-------
eous  decarburization vessel (ADD).
2.    Input Materials - Table 34 gives production data for a particular
                      3
electric furnace shop.   Because of their current-carrying capacity,
graphite electrodes are used almost exclusively in electric steelmaking
furnaces.
3.    Operating Parameters - The charge is tapped at 1570°C, but if vacuum
degassing or other processes follow the tapping temperature could be as
much  as 100°C higher.  Table 35 gives operating data of a particular
                      3
electric furnace shop.   The furnace operates at essentially atmospheric
pressure.
4.    Utilities - The utilities required vary considerably depending on
a number of factors:  practice; furnace size; product grade; vacuum de-
gassing or other processes following.  Table 35 gives the power require-
                                        3
ments for a particular e^ctric furnace.   Depending on furnace efficiency,
and hot metal practice, electric furnace requires about 247 to 375 kilo-
                                               5
                                               2
watt-hours of power per ton of steel  produced.    Approximately  50  to  75
liters of cooling water per second is required.'
5.   Waste Streams - Particulate emissions from electric furnaces con-
sist primarily of oxides of iron, manganese, aluminum, calcium, magnesium
and silicon.  Tables 36 and 37 present typical data on composition of
                                      4
emissions from some electric furnaces.   Many new electric furnace instal-
lations use baghouses for controlling emissions.   Table 38 gives parti-
                                                                C -7 o
cle size distribution of emissions from an electric-arc furnace.
The uncontrolled particulate emission rate is approximately 4.6 kilograms
per metric ton of metal without oxygen lancing and about 5.5 kilograms
per ton of metal produced with oxygen lancing.  Other emissions inclu'de
gaseous fluorides at 0.006 kilogram per ton* arid particulate fluoride
                                             g
at 0.119 kilogram per ton* of metal produced. !
     Depending upon the amount of pig iron used in the charge, about 9
                                                                       Q
kilograms of carbon monixide gas is emitted per ton* of metal produced.
The gases generated during the meltdown and refining steps of furnace
   Metric ton (1000 kg)
                                    92 -

-------
Table 34.  PRODUCTION DATA FOR A PARTICULAR ELECTRIC FURNACE SHOP
Charge, kg
Hot metal charge
Total charge
Burnt lime
Raw limestone
Number of charges
Net ingot per heat
Percent hot metal
Percent yield
Practice
Cold charge
0
181,400
3,600
6,000
3
164,835
0
90.4
35% hot metal
63,500
181,400
•
3,600
6,400
2
161,387
34.8
88.5
50% hot metal
90,700
181,400
3,600
6,400
1
159,845
49.8
87.7
 TABLE 35.  OPERATING DATA FOR A PARTICULAR ELECTRIC FURNACE SHOP
                                       Practice
Charge
kWh per heat
02 per heat, liters
kWh per net ingot
02 per net ingot, liters
Tap to tap hr per heat
Ingot tons per tap to tap hr
Number of heats per roof
Number of heats per side wall
Kilograms electrodes per net
ingot tons (metric)
Cold charge
75,000
3,346,000
375
18,400
4.58
36.02
90
105
4.76
35% hot metal
53,100
3,158,000
263
17,800
3.58
45.09
70
95
4.13
50% hot metal
48,000
4,769,000
247
27,100
3.17
50.44
60
90
4.13
                                93

-------
       Table 36.  CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF  ELECTRIC  FURNACE DUSTS

                          (percent by weight)
Element or
Compound
FeO
Fe2°3
Cr203
MnO
NiO
PbO
ZnO
Si02
A1203
CaO
MgO
S
P
C
Alkalies
Sample designation
A
4.2
35.04
0.00
12.10
0.30
N.A.
N.A.
8.80
12.90
14.90
7.90
0.26
0.10
2.30
1.20
B
N.A.
50.55
0.56
12.22
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
5.76
5.85
2.60
7.78
tr
0.28
N.A.
4.76
C
N.A.
52.62
0.00
5.34
tr
3.47
8.87
6.78
2.55
6.72
3.49
0.59
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
D
N.A.
52.05
0.15
1.29-2.58
tr
0.81-1.08
1.24-2.48
3.85
14.61
1.40-4.20
1.66-4-98
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
E
N.A.
50.05
13.87
N.A.
3.18
N.A.
N.A.
5.50
N.A.
9.80
6.64
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
2.50
F
4 - 10
19 - 44
0-12
3-12
0-3
0-4
0-44
2 - 9
1 - 13
5-22
2-15
0 - 1
0 - 1
2 - 4
1 - 11
Note:  N.A. - not available, tr - trace
       Sample A - Single 20-ton furnace.   Plant specializing  in  tool  and
                  die steels.
       Sample B - Representative sample from plant with four  75-ton and two
                  200-ton furnaces producing low-alloy and stainless  steels,
       Sample C - Single 100-ton furnace producing low-alloy  steels for
                  plate.
       Sample D - Single 100-ton furnace producing low-alloy  steels for
                  plate.
       Sample E - Single 70-ton furnace producing stainless steel.
       Sample F - Representative samples from multiple-furnace shop.
                  Furnaces vary in size from 4 to 200 ton producing low-
                  alloy and stainless steels.
                                     94

-------
Table 37.  CHANGES IN COMPOSITION OF ELECTRIC FURNACE DUST

                   DURING A SINGLE HEAT
Product
Melting
Ore oxidation
Oxygen lancing
Refining
Composition, weiqht percent
Fe203
56.75
66.00
65.37
26.60
Cr203
1.32
1.32
0.86
0.53
MnO
10.15
5.81
9.17
6.70
Si02
9.77
0.76
2.42
tr
CaO
3.39
6.30
3.10
35.22
MgO
0.16
0.67
1.83
2.72
A1203
0.31
0.17
0.14
0.45
P2°5
0.60
0.59
0.76
0.55
so2
2.08
6.00
1.84
7.55
   Table 38.  PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF EMISSIONS FROM
           A PARTICULAR ELECTRIC-ARC FURNACE
                     (percent by weight)
Size, microns
0-3
0-5
3 - 11
5-10
n - 25
10 - 20
>25
20 - 44
>44
Reference
9

71.9

8.3

6.0

7.5
6.3
10

67.9

6.8

9.8

9.0
6.5
11
18

64

7

n


                                95

-------
operation are collected at temperatures  ranging from 650  to  980°C.
     As stated earlier, emission composition is dependent upon  the  type
of steel produced and composition of the charge.
     Some spilling may occur when the slag is transferred to slag pro-
cessing operations.
     Particulate collected in the emission control  systems is sometimes
recycled to the sintering operation (much of it not recyclable  because
of zinc contamination).  Water pollution is not a problem unless a  scrubber
is used, at which time high solid loadings are encountered.   Occasionally,
extremely high contents of suspended solids, on the order of 5000 ppm,
may be present in the cooling water.
6.   EPA Source Classification -
Electric-arc furnace with lancing - 3-03-009-04.
Electric-arc furnace without lancing - 3-03-009-05.
7.   References -
     1.   Yard, E. M., and P. D. Nyajust.  Open-Hearths  Replaced by
          Electric Furnaces.  Iron and Steel Engineer.  72-75, July  1967.
     2.   Electric Furnace Steelmaking.   In:  The Making, Shaping and
          Treating of Steel, Ninth Edition, McGannon, H.  E.  (ed.).
          Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S. Steel Company,  1971. p.  549-
          583.
     3.   Rankin, W. M.  Electric Furnace Steel Production,  Houston
          Works, Armco Steel Corp.  Journal of Metals 104-107,  May  1968.
     4.   Varga, J. Jr., and H.  W. Lownie.  Final Technological Report
          on a Systems Analysis Study of the Integrated Iron and Steel
          Industry.  Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus,  Ohio.   May
          1969.
     5.   Bramer, H.E. Pollution Control in the Steel Industry.
          Environmental Science and Technology.  1004-1008,  October
          1971.
     6.   Coulter, R. S. Smoke,  Dust, Fumes Closely Controlled in
          Electric Furnaces.  Iron Age.   January 14, 1954.
     7    Erickson, E. 0.  Electric Furnaces Steel Proceedings.  11:
          156-160 (1953).
                                   96

-------
8.   Dok, H.  Journal of Air Pollution Control Association.  5:23-
     26 (1955).

9.   Iron and Steel Mills.  In:  Compilation of Air Pollutant
     Emission Factors.  Environmental Protection Agency, Research
     Triangle Park, N.C.  Contract Number CPA-22-69-119.  April
     1973.  p. 7.5-5.

10.  Brough, J. R., and W. A. Carter.  Air Pollution Control of an
     Electric Furnace Steel Making Shop.  Journal of Air Pollution
     Control Association.  167-171, March 1972.

11.  Miller, J. R.  Impurities in Iron Ore, 1004-1008, Battelle
     Memorial Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio.
                               97

-------
STEEL PRODUCTION                                      PROCESS NO.  24
                       Open-Hearth Furnace
1.   Function - Open-hearth furnaces accounted for 26.4 percent of steel
production in 1973.   Although oxygen lancing is widely used to increase
open hearth production rates, electric furnaces and basic oxygen furnaces
(EOF) are currently preferred.  An open-hearth furnace can produce 30 to
60 tons* of steel per hour compared with 300 or more tons* of steel  per
hour in a BOF.
     The feed, consisting of limestone, light and heavy scrap, and normal-
ly molten pig iron, is charged to the reverberatory furnace and heated.
Cold pig iron is used when molten pig iron is not available.  In normal
practice a predetermined quantity of iron ore is charged to provide low-
cost iron units and oxygen for controlling the carbon content of the
bath when the charge is melted.  Silica, manganese, phosphorus, and sul-
fur impurities are oxidized and form into slag.  The oxidized forms of
chromium, vanadium, aluminum, titanium, tungsten, columbium, and zinc
may also be present in the slag.  The elements that may be present, such
as copper, nickel, molybdenum, cobalt, tin, and arsenic are held in the
iron because iron would have to be completely oxidized before these ele-
ments could be removed by oxidation.  Some carbon in the charge is con-
verted to carbon monoxide.  Calcination of limestone produces carbon
dioxide.  When the molten steel bath is analytical at the grade of steel
required, the molten contents of the furnace are tapped through the tap
hole into the steel ladles.  The alloying, recarbonizing, and deoxidizing
materials are added to the molten metal before the slag starts flowing.
The molten metal is poured into ingot molds for the particular final
                                        2
product.  Slag is tapped into slag pots.
2.   Input Materials - Limestone, scrap, pig iron, molten iron, oxygen
and alloying, recarbonizing and deoxidizing agents are used.  The amounts
of hot metal  (molten pig iron) and scrap in the charge vary depending
on availability of metal and scrap.  The amount of iron ore charged in-
* Metric tons (1000 kg)

                                   98

-------
creases with the amount of molten iron used.  Limestone varies from 5
to 8 percent of the metallic charge.  Oxygen consumption ranges from
6,000 to 12,000 liters per ton* during oxygen lancing, with corresponding
saving in tap to tap time of 10 to 25 percent and a decrease in fuel
                                                         2
consumption of 18 to 35 percent using oxygen roof lances.
3.   Operating Parameters - The finishing temperature of steel in an
open-hearth steel furnace is about 1595°C, varying according to com-
                            2
position and grade of steel.   The time required for charging and
                                                   3
melting down of the scrap ranges from 2 to 4 hours.
4.   Utilities - Heat is usually supplied by combustion of fuel oil.natur-
al gas, tar, or combinations of these.  Table 39 gives a typical heat
                                      2
balance of modern open-hearth furnace.   About 21,000 liters of water
per ton of finished steel is used at open-hearth furnace plants; most of
it is for indirect cooling.   The furnace consumes about 8 kWh of elec-
                                   2
tricity per ton* of ingot produced.
        Table 39.  HEAT BALANCE OF A MODERN OPEN-HEARTH FURNACE,
                            kcal/ton* OF STEEL
Heat input
Heat supplied to
the furnace by
the combustion of
fuel
Heat originating
by chemical re-
actions in the
bath


Total
Quantity
890,000

110,000



1,000,000
Heat output
Sensible heat lost in
stack gases

Heat absorbed and
utilized for plant
use.

Heat actually used
to make steel
Heat lost by radia-
tion, escape of hot
gases through doors
etc., through system.

Quantity
150,000

267,000

250,000
333,000
1,000,000
 * Metric ton  (1000  kg)
                                     99

-------
5.   Waste Streams - Emissions from each open-hearth furnace depend
upon the furnace operation and type of charge in each furnace; and may
vary during the cycle and from cycle to cycle.  Emissions from open-
hearth operations include particulates anf fluorides.  Fluoride emission
rates depend on the fluorspar content of the fluxes.  Uncontrolled par-
ticulate emissions from a furnace without oxygen lancing are about 4.2
kilograms per ton of product; with oxygen lancing, emissions range from
4.7 to 11.0 kilograms per ton*. These emissions include 50 grams of
gaseous fluoride and 15 grams of particulate fluorides per ton of pro-
duct.   Tests conducted at major northwest Indiana steel plant showed
a particulate concentration of 0.204 grams per cubic meter in a stack
gas with a flow rate of 742 cubic meters per minute.
     The flow rates of gases range from 300 to 2100 cubic meters per minute.
Gas temperatures range from 240 to 980°C; gases must be cooled before
entering air pollution control equipment.
     Table 40 presents typical dust loadings of gas flow at different
                      Q
times of the meltdown.

            Table 40.  PARTICULATE EMISSION - UNCONTROLLED
Function
Meltdown
Hot melt addition
Lime boil
Oxygen lancing
Refining
Gas flow rate,
cu meter/sec
28
30
31
-
30
Dust loading,
grams/cu meter
1.78
4.30
6.18
Up to 11
0.48
Table 4] gives particle size distribution from open-hearth furnaces and
Table 42 presents data on chemical composition of particulate emissions.     '
* Metric ton (1000 kg)
                                    100

-------
        Table 41.  PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF EMISSIONS FROM
                          OPEN-HEARTH FURNACES
                               (percent)
<5y
50
46
50-55
5-10y

22
25-30
10-20y
Balance
17
15-20
>20u
Few
15
Bal
     According to one Russian report, gases from steelmaking open-hearth
furnaces contain very small amounts of carcinogens due to the high
                                    12
temperature occuring in the furnace.
     Electrostatic precipitators (98% removal efficiency) are the prin-
cipal choice for emission control, although venturi scrubbers and bag-
                                              12
houses (99% removal efficiency) are also used.
     About 8.5 to 10 kilograms of solid waste (dust collected in solid
forms) per ton* of steel  are generated.     Depending on the  amount of
other metals present, such as zinc, this dust may be discarded or re-
turned for sintering.  The only potential water pollution source occurs
when a scrubber is used to control emissions.  The other source of waste
water is the blowdown from the waste heat boiler if used.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code -
Open-hearth with oxygen lancing - 3-03-009-01.
Open-hearth without oxygen lancing - 3-03-009-02.
7.   References -
                                ^                                   *
     1.   Reno, H. T.  Iron and Steel.   In:  Minerals Yearbook, Bureau
          of Mines.  (Preprint from the  1973)  Washington, D.C., U.S.
          Government Printing Office, 1973.
     2.   The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel, Ninth Edition.
          McGannon, H. E.  (ed.).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S. Steel
          Company, 1971.    p.  525, 534,  635.
 *  Metric  tons  (1000  kg)
                                   101

-------
                 Table 42. CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF OPEN-HEARTH PARTICIPATE  EMISSIONS, OXYGEN LANCING
                                                   (percent by weight)
Element
or
Compound
Fe2°3
FeO
Total Fe
Si02
A1203
CaO
MgO
MnO
Mn
CuO
Cu
ZnO
Zn
PbO
Pb
Sn02
Cr
Ni
P2°5
P
S
Alkalies
U.S. Steel Corp.
Edgar Thomson
89.07
1.87
63.70
0.89
0.52
0.85
n.a.
0.63
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
1.70
n.a.
0.50
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
0.47
n.a.
0.40
1.41
Homestead
88.70
3.17
n.a.
0.92
0.67
1.06
0.39
0.61
n.a.
0.14
n.a.
0.72
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
1.18
n.a.
0.92
n.a.
Steel Co. of Canada
Hilton Works
n.a.
n.a.
63.5 - 68.0
1.16 - 1.56
0.15 - 0.44
0.68 - 1.06
0.32 - 0.44
n.a.
0.43 - 0.55
n.a.
0.11 - 0.16
0.26 - 2.04
n.a.
n.a.
0.50 - 0.95
n.a.
0.06 - 0.11
0.03 - 0.05
n.a.
0.06 - 0.12
0.34 - 0.70
0.56 - 1.71
United Kingdom
United Steel Co.
88.5
2.2
n.a.
0.4
0.4
0.9
1.5
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
0.3
1.4
n.a.
Germany
Dillingen
79.65
0.31
55.90
0.47
0.52
0.88
1.86
0.61
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
1.52
n.a.
2.69
2.72
U.S. plant9
n.a.
n.a.
59.40
2.00
0.48
1.85
1.12
n.a.
0.28
n.a.
0.08
n.a.
0 - 3.0
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
0.07
n.a.
0.15
2.78
2.88
n.a. - data not available
aAverage for U.S. Plant.

-------
3.   Midwest Research, Inc.  Particulate Pollutant System Study.
     Volume III.  Handbook of Emission Properties.  Contract Number
     CPA-22-59-104.  May 1971.

4.   Bramer, H. C. Iron and Steel.  Chapter 14.  In:  Industrial
     Waste Water Control, Chemical Technology, A Series of Mono-
     graphs.  - Volume 2, Gurnham, C. F. (ed.).  New York, Academic
     Press.  1965.

5.   Iron and Steel Mills.  In:  Compilation of Air Pollutant
     Emission Factors.  Environmental Protection Agency, Research
     Triangle Park, N.C.  Contract Number CPA-22-69-119.  April
     1973.  p. 7.5-4.

6.   Yost,  K. 0.  et al.   Purdue  University.  The Environmental Flow
     of  Cadmium and Other  Trace  Metals:  Volume 1.  National
     Science  Foundation.   Publication Number PB-229 478.  June 30,
     1973.

7.   Engineering  Science,  Inc.   Exhaust Gases  from Combustion and
     Industrial Processes.  Washington, D.C.,  October 1971.

8.   Varga, J. Jr., and H. W.  Lownie.  Source  of Air Pollution.
     In:   Final Technological  Report on A System Analysis Study of
     the Integrated  Iron  and  Steel  Industry, Battelle Memorial In-
     stitute, Columbus, Ohio.  Contract Number PH 22-68-65.  De-
     partment of  Health,  Education, and Welfare.  May 15, 1969.
     V-ll  p.

9.   Bishop,  C. A. Some Experience  with Air  Pollution Abatement In
     the Steel  Industry.   Blast  Furnace Steel  Plant.  40:1448-1453,
     December 1952.

10.  Bishop,  C. A., W. W.  Campbell, D. L. Hunter, and M. W. Light-
     ner.  Successful  Cleaning  of Open-Hearth Exhaust Gas with a
     High-Energy  Venturi  Scrubber.  Journal  of Air  Pollution Con-
     trol  Association.  February 1961.

11.  Schneider, R. L.  Engineering,  Operation and Maintenance of
     Electrostatic Precipitators on Open-Hearth Furnaces.  Journal
     of  Air Pollution Control  Association. 83-87, August 1963.

12,  Shapritsky,  V. N.  Zashchita Atmosfery  ot Zagryazneniya
     natserogennymi Veshchestvami.  Controlling Atmospheric Car-
     cinogenics.   Text in  Russian.   Stal., No. 10:961-963, 1972.

13.  Wai den Research  Corporation.   Systems Study of Conventional
     Combustion Sources in the Iron and Steel  Industry.  Environ-
     mental Protection Agency.   April 1973.

14.  Ralth Stone  and  Co.,  Inc.   Forecasts of the Air and Water  Pol-
     lution Controls  on Solid  Waste Generation.   Environmental
     Protection Agency.   PB No.  238 819.  December  1974.
                              103

-------
STEEL PRODUCTION                                        PROCESS NO.  25
                          Basic Oxygen Furnace
1.   Function - The basic oxygen process-BO F, (as well  as moderation
processes Kaldo or  Q-BOF) is being used increasingly because of its high
production rates, simplicity and efficiency of operation.  The BOF is
predominant.  Molten iron from the blast furnaces is brought to the basic
oxygen furnace shop in railroad submarine ladle cars and steel scrap is
brought in by both rail and truck.  Fluxes such as burnt lime, limestone,
burnt dolomite and fluorspar are handled by conveyor.  A furnace charge
could be scrap (30%), molten iron (70%), and fluxes.  Oxygen is introduced
through a water cooled lance and is blown onto the charge under pressure
generally from 9.84 to 12.66 kg/cm.   The process converts the hot metal
into steel by oxidation of carbon, phosphorus, silicon,  sulfur, and other
impurities in the iron.  The steel is tapped into a teeming ladle and
alloying materials are added.  The slag is tapped into slag pots.  The
overhead crane removes the teeming ladle from the transfer car and the
molten steel is teemed into ingot molds, or if continuous casting follows
the teeming, the ladle is brought to the continuous casting aisle and
located over the tundish and teemed; or to the vacuum degasser for removal
of hydrogen and oxygen gases in the molten steel.  The slag pot receives the
slag from the BQF and is moved to the slag dump yard.
2.   Input Materials - Molten iron, scrap, fluxes, oxygen and alloying
agents are used.  A hot metal to scrap ratio of 3.4 to 1 has been used,
but varies from shop to shop dependent on availability of hot metal  or
scrap.  Basically, the iron contains 0.2 to 2.0 percent silicon, 0.4 to
2.5 percent manganese, and up to 0.4 percent phosphorus.
3.   Operating Parameters - The BOF process is exothermic and no additional
heat is required.  Refining occurs at approximately 2000°C at atmospheric
pressure.
4-   Utilities - Steelmaking with the basic oxygen furnace may require
only 50 minutes, compared to 8 to 12 hours for the open-hearth furnace
                                  104

-------
with the same tonnage.   Electricity is required for the oxygen plant,
vent gas fans, conveyors, furnace tilt mechanism, and other equip-
ment.
5-   Waste Streams - Particulate emission rates are so high that all
basic oxygen units utilize high-efficiency particulate control devices.
About 23 kilograms of particulate are produced per ton* of product, and
about 0.1 kilogram of gaseous fluorides per ton.*  Most of the furnace
emissions are controlled by either venturi scrubbers of electrostatic
precipitators.2
     Table 43 gives the chemical composition of dust of three basic
oxygen furnaces.3
     The dust particles oxidize further outside the furnace vessels
and produce fine red dust, whose size distribution is given in Table
44.   Operation of basic oxygen furnaces may cause emission of flaking
black material called "kish".  Kish forms spontaneously whenever hot
metal with carbon content greater than 4.5 percent is cooled below the
liquid temperature.  This results in the formation of solid Fe~C, which
                                                  j-           -5
is unstable and decomposes into graphite and iron.   Usually the kish is
formed when the hot metal is transferred into and out of the ladle.
     Gas effluents ranging from 944,000 to 570,000 liters/sec are
emitted from the basic oxygen furnace at temperatures between 1600 and
1900°C.  These gases carry 140 kilograms or more of oxide dust per
minute.  Most of the dust is very finely divided, the particles ranging
in size from 0.1 to 1 micron.6  About 20 to 30 kilograms of Fe203 are
ordinarily collected per ton of steel produced.   Table 45 gives the
calculated composition of gases leaving the furnace on the basis that
                                                                  •Q
there  is 100 percent of blown oxygen converted to carbon monoxtde.
     Treatment of wastewaters from steelmaking by  the basic oxygen
process  requires use of chemical coagulants or similar methods, which
seldom  can remove all particulate matter.  Magnetic agglomeration has
                                                                q
proved  to be particularly effective  in treating BOF wastewaters.'
6.   EPA Source Classification  Code  -  BOF General  - 3-03-009-03.
* Metric tons (1000 kg)

                                  105

-------
 Table 43.  CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF BASIC  OXYGEN  FURNACE STEELMAKING

             DUST FROM THREE U.S. PLANTS,  WEIGHT  PERCENT
Element or
compound
FeO
Fe2°3
Fe
Mn304
Mn
Si02
A1203
CaO
MgO
S
P
P2°5
Cu
Zn
Typical
1.5
90.0
N.A.
4.4
N.A.
1.25
0.2
0.4
0.05
N.A.
N.A.
0.03
N.A.
N.A.
BOF dust from
U.S. plants
N.A.
80.00
N.A.
N.A.
0.35
2.00
0.15
5.10
1.10
0.12
0.10
N.A.
0.04
trace
N.A.
- N.A.
56.0
N.A.
1.2
1.9
0.4
3.1
N.A.
0.09
0.2
N.A.
0.03
1.93a
N.A.
N.A.
57.68
N.A.
1.54
1.29
0.13
3.59
0.63
0.12
0.09
N.A.
N.A.
4.80a
Note:  N.A. - data not available
  The high zinc content in the dust is due to the use of galvani/ed
  steel  scrap in the BOF charge.
                                   106

-------
        Table 44.  PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION  OF  RED  DUST  FROM
                         BASIC OXYGEN FURNACES
          Size of particle
     Smaller than 400 mesh
     From 140 to 400 mesh
     From 40 to 140 mesh
     Larger than 40 mesh
Percent
   74
   10
   15
    1
About 40 percent of dust is smaller than 5 microns  and  20 percent is
less than 2 microns.
           Table 45.   CALCULATED GAS COMPOSITION  FOR  91-TON  BOF
          BLOWN AT 6000 LITERS/SEC.  (12,000 SCFM)  02  RATE  FOR 20 MINUTES

CO
co2
°2
N2
Total
Converter emissions
Total heat
kg
5,400
1,300
-
-
6,700
1 i ters
456,000
167,000
-
-
623,000
Peak rate
£/sec
11,300
0
-
-
11,300
Peak gas flow
rates after
combustion,
A/ sec (Std.)
Tight hood
(10% com-
bustion)
10,000
11,300
0
2,100
23,400
Open hood
(20% excess
air)
0
11,300
1,100
. 25,600
38,000
 Metric  tons
                                   107

-------
7.    References -

     1.    The Pneumatic  Steelmaking Processes.   In:   The Making,  Shaping
          and Treating of Steel,  Ninth  Edition,  McGannon,  H.  E.  (ed.).
          Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania, U.S.  Steel Company, 1971.   p.  473-
          497.

     2.    Iron and Steel  Mills.   In: Compilation  of Air  Pollution
          Emission Factors.   Environmental  Protection Agency  Contract
          Number CPA-22-69-119.   April  1973.   p. 7.5-5.

     3.    Varga,  J.  Jr.,  and  H. W.  Lownie.  Emission  Characteristics.
          Appendix C.   In:  Final Technological  Report on  A Systems
          Analysis Study  of the Integrated  Iron and  Steel  Industry,
          Battelle Memorial Institute,  Columbus, Ohio.  Contract  Number
          PH-22-68-65.  Department  of Health,  Education and Welfare.
          May 15, 1969.   C-78 p.

     4.    Henschen,  H. C. Wet vs  Dry Gas  Cleaning  in  the Steel  Industry.
          Journal of Air  Pollution  Control  Association,  p. 338-342,
          May, 1968.

     5.    Haltgram,  R.  Fundamentals of Physical Metallurgy,  New  York,
          Prentice Hall,  1952.

     6.    Parker, C, M.   BOP  Air  Cleaning Experiences.  Journal of the
          Air Pollution Control Association.   August  1966.  p.  446-448.

     7.    Wheeler, D.  H.  The Iron  and  Steel Industry.  In:   Proceedings
          of  the  Electrostatic Precipitator Symposium.  Sponsored  by  the
          Division of  Process Control Engineering, Air Pollution  Control
          Office, Environmental Protection  Agency.   February  23-25, 1971.

     8.    Industrial Gas  Cleaning Institute, Inc.  Air Pollution  Control
        •  Technology and  Costs in Nine  Selected Areas.  Environmental
          Protection Agency,  Contract No. 68-02-0301.  September  1972.

     9.    Bramer, H. C. Pollution Control in the Steel Industry.
          Environmental Science and Technology.  1004-1008, October
          1971.
                                 108

-------
STEEL PRODUCTION                                        PROCESS NO. 26
                           Vacuum Degassing
1.   Function - In the steelmaking process the liquid steel  may absorb
gases, particularly hydrogen, from the atmosphere and from raw materials.
Oxygen and nitrogen combine with alloying elements to form oxides, cyano-
nitride, or nitride compounds.  All of these impurities are partially
removed by vacuum degassing, which is done by three methods:  stream
degassing, circulation degassing, and ladle degassing.  The effective-
ness of any vacuum degassing process depends upon the surface area of
liquid steel exposed to low pressure.  Because the degassing operation
reduces the temperature of liquid steel, it is necessary to carry out
the operation at temperatures higher than the normal tapping temperature.
The molten degassed steel is either continuously cast into slabs or billets
or is cast into ingots for subsequent forming.
2.   Input Material - Molten steel is the only input material.  Alloying
additives are added after degassing.
3.   Operating Parameters - In the stream degassing method the tank is
evacuated to a absolute pressure of 0.05 to 0.500 nm Hg.  In this method
the liquid steel is tapped with 10 to 55°C superheat.  In the induction
stirred ladle degassing method the liquid steel, with 21 to 66°C superheat
is exposed to pressures ranging from 0.075 to 0.200 mm Hg, depending upon  the
grade of steel.  The steel to be degassed by the recirculation degassing
method is superheated from 20 to 80°C above the tapping temperature and
the pressure in the vessel gradually decreases to the range of 300 to 600
microns.
4.   Utilities - No data available.
5.   Waste Streams - About 5 kilograms of particulate are emitted from
degassing a 100-ton* heat (charge).  Composition of the dust that settles
in the vacuum chamber depends on the alloying elements in the steel and
their respective vapor pressures.  Analysis of dust generated during vacuum
degassing, and analysis of the metal in the laddie after treatment are
given in Table 46.
* Metric tons (1000 kg)

                                  109

-------
   Table 46;  DUST AND f^ETAL ANALYSES  FOR VACUUM-TREATED STEELS
Material
Steel in ladle
Dust
Steel in ladle
Dust
Elements, weight
C
0.33
1.66
0.33
1.69
Mn
0.73
46.30
0.83
47.70
Si
0.25
1.63
0.26
1.40
Ni
2.86
0.38
0.17
0.13
Cr
0.99
0.36
1.01
0.38
aercent
V
0.22
0.01
0.23
0.04
Mo
0.53
0.03
1.21
0.09
Cu
0.17
1.60
0.14
1.20
Fe
17.60
15.50
     The composition of off-gases from stream degassing,  which  varies  with
grade of steel  and extent of the vacuum treatment,  can  range  from 18 to
50 percent carbon monoxide, 20 to 70 percent hydrogen,  negligible amounts
to 30 percent wate, 1  to 20 percent oxygen,  15 to  75  percent  nitrogen, and
1  to 6 percent carbon dioxide.  The composition of off-gases  from recir-
culation degassing is up ^o 80 percent carbon monoxide,  up  to 20 percent
                                              2
carbon dioxide, and up to 15 percent hydrogen.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
7.   References -

     1.   The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel.  Ninth Edition.
          McGannon, H.E. (ed.).   Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,  U.S. Steel
          Company. 1971.

     2.   Varga, J. Jr., and H.  W. Lownie.  Emission  Characteristics.
          Appendix C.   In:  Final Technological Report  on A Systems
          Analysis Study of the Integrated Iron and Steel Industry.
          Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio.   Contract Number
          PH-22-68-65.  Department of Health, Education and -Welfare.
          May 1969.  C97-C121 p.
                                 110

-------
STEEL PRODUCTION                                       PROCESS NO. 27
                      Continuous Casting or Ingot Castings^
1.   Function - The molten steel (degassed or not) either is cast contin-
uously into products of the desired shape or is cast into ingots for sub-
sequent forming.
     In continuous casting process a laddie of steel is brought and posi-
tioned over the tundish which is over the water cooled copper mold.  The
laddie nozzle is opened and the tundish is filled with molten steel to the
desired depth.  Then the tundish nozzles are opened to permit molten steel
to enter the molds.  The casted strand passes through a cooling chamber,
straightening mechanism, and cutting device where it is cut into the desired
lengths.
     In conventional ingot making the molten steel is tapped into a refrac-
tory lined steel laddie.  The laddie is moved by an overhead crane to a
pouring platform where the steel is then teamed into a series of molds of
the desired dimensions.  Alloying materials and deoxidizers may be added
during the tapping of the charge or in the molds.  The steel solidifies
in each of the molds to form a casting called ingot.
2.   Input Materials - Molten steel.
3.   Operating Parameters - None exists.
4.   Utilities - No data available.
5.   Waste Streams - Continuous casting and ingot making contributes very
little to air pollution.
6.   EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
7.   References -
     1.   The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel.  Ninth Edition.
          McGannon, H.E. (ed.).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S. Steel
          Company.  1971.
                                  Ill

-------
STEEL PRODUCTION                                       PROCESS NO.  28
                           Rolling and Shaping
1-   Function - The temperature of steel  ingots are raised in a soaking
pit furnace to prepare it for hot working (rolling).   In the furnace the
steel is heated until it is plastic enough for rolling to desired shape.
After the ingots are rolled into billets, blooms, or  slabs, they are
cooled and inspected.  Surface defects are removed by grinding, chipping,
peeling, or scarfing.  Reheating furnaces are used for raising tempera-
ture of slabs, blooms, or billets for rolling into sheets, coils, or
other shapes.
2.   Material of construction - Ingots.
3.   Operating Parameters - Soaking pits  may have a hearth area of 10 to
30 square meters.  Hearth areas of reheating furnaces range from a few
square meters to 400 square meters.  The  normal temperature range for
heating ingots is betwee.i 1180 and 1340°C.
4-   Utilities - Furnaces are fired with  either blast furnace gas, coke-
oven gas, natural gas, fuel oil or a mixture.  Consumption of fuel  per
ton* of steel varies from approximately 111,100 to 555,600 kilocalories,
depending on the temperature of the charged steel.   Water consumption
in rolling or shaping operations ranges from 7600 to  26,500 liters per
                 7
                 1
       2
minute.   Table 47 indicates the range of power consumption in rolling
or shaping mills.
5.   Waste Streams - Data is not available on the emissions that occur
during charging and removing of ingots, or during firing.   Particulate
emissions are considered to be negligible, unless the pits are fired
with fuel other than gas.  During breakdown of the ingots  by rolling
into billets, blooms, or slabs, there can be some emission  of steam,
which is confined in the building.  Grinding and chipping  generate
particulates which are confined in a building adjacent to  this area.
Airborne particles released fram scarfing are extremely fine.
                                  112

-------
    Table 47-   POWER CONSUMPTION IN  ROLLING OR SHAPING MILLS**
 Operating unit
     kWh consumed per
      ton* of product
 Blooming mill
 Slabbing mill
 Plate mill
 Merchant mills
 Wide strip mill
13 5, based on blooms
10-12, based on slabs
30-40, based on plates
40-80, based on product
45-65, based on product
 * Metric tons (1000 kg)
** Covers the power used by the main drive motors,  and does
   not include that used for auxiliaries such as table, fan,
   etc.
                            113

-------
      Loss of metal  is  from 3  to  6  percent  in scarfing of billets, up to
 2.5 percent in  scarfing  of slabs,  and  up to 7  percent for blooms.  Losses
 of gas in scarfing  of  slabs range  from 0.46 to 10  grams per cubic meter.
 Many scarfing operations control particulate emissions with fabric fil-
 ters. ' Emissions during  reheating  of steel billets and slabs are mistures
 of carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen and moisture from  the com-
                        3
 bustion of natural  gas.
                                                             4
      Typical large  rolling mill  wastes  are shown in Table 48.
      Table 48.   QUANTITIES OF SOLID AND WATER  WASTE FROM TYPICAL
                ROLLING MILL (IRON  AND  STEEL  INDUSTRY)
Mill
Slab
Hot-strip
Blooming
30" billet
21" billet
Hot scarfer
Solids load,
kg/ton* of product from
each processing
15.00
25.00
9.50
14.60
14.60
25.00
Waste water,
£/ton*
3,000
25,000
10,000
6,000
6,000
5,000
     The steel mill wash waters may contain from 1000 to 2000 milligrams
suspended solids per liter.  The metal  composition of suspended solids
                                    c
roughly reflects the furnace charge.
     Most scale and oil  produced in rolling mills are recovered in crude
settling chambers called scale pits.
6.    EPA Source Classification Code - None exists.
Finishing/Soaking Pits - 3-03-009-11.
7.    References -
     1.    The Making,  Shaping and Treating of Steel.   Ninth Edition.
          McGannon, H.E. (ed.).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S. Steel
          Company,  1971.
                                   114

-------
2.   Bramer, H.C. Iron and Steel.  Chapter 14.  In:  Industrial
     Waste Water Control, Chemical Technology, A Series of Mono-
     graphs - Volume 2, New York, Academic Press, 1965.

3.   Varga, L. Jr., and H. W. Lownie.  Final Technological Report
     on A Systems Analysis Study of the Integrated Iron and Steel
     Industry, Gurnham, C.F. (ed.).  Battelle Memorial  Institute,
     Columbus, Ohio.  May 1969.

4.   Industrial Waste Profiles No. 1 - Blast Furnace and Steel
     Mills. Volume III.  In:  The Cost of Clean Water.   Federal
     Water Pollution Control Administration.  FWPCA Contract Number
     14-12-98.  September 28, 1967.

5.   Sittig, M.   Iron.   In:   Pollutant Removal  Handbook.   New
     Jersey, Noyes Data Corporation, 1973.   p.  251-257.

6.   Bramer, H.  C.  Pollution Control in the Steel  Industry.
     Environmental Science and Technology.   1004-1008,  October
     1971.
                              115

-------
STEEL PRODUCTION                                           PROCESS NO.  29
                    Acid Treatment (Pickling)
1.   Function - The oxidized surface of the hot-rolled steel  is cleaned
by acid treatment (pickling) in preparation for cold rolling.    The metal
is then rinsed with water to remove the bulk of the contaminants from the
pickled product.
2.   Input Materials - Sulfuric acid or hydrochloric acid is  used for
pickling.  Consumption of acid varies over a wide range from  a low of
about 0.5 kilogram per ton* to a high of about 25 kilograms per ton*.
The volume of water used for rinsing is in the range of about 200 to
                                     o
400 liters per ton* of steel pickled.
3.   Operating Parameters - No data available.
4.   Utilities - No data available.
5-   Waste Streams - Acid fumes occur during pickling.3  Water discharge
from the pickling operation generally includes spent strong pickle liquor
and the acidic rinse water, which must be neutralized before  it can be
safely discharged.  An estimated 150,000 tons of pollutants are expected
from pickling processes in 1975.  A typical pickling process  produces
waste water containing 2.25 kilograms of free acid and 8.4 kilograms of
combined acid per ton* of ingot.
     Iron concentration in waste pickle liqour is about 70,000 milli-
grams per liter.   Spent pickling solutions and acid rinse waters differ
widely in quantity, composition, and concentration.  Acid rinse waters
have the same relative proportions of iron salts and free acid pickling
solution, but are much more diluted.  10 to 15 percent of acid used in
pickling is discharged in rinse waters.    Spent sulfuric acid pickling
solutions contain free acid, ferrous sulfate, undissolved scale and dirt,
and trace metals.  Spent sulfate pickling solutions are discharged at
30 to 90°C.    Pickling tanks emit pungent and corrosive mist  and vapor.
     Potential  liquid waste streams, other than spent pickle liquor,
are suspended particles of waterborne scale, lubricating oil, and pick-
ling rinse water.
* Metric tons (1000 kg)

                                  116

-------
     Strong pickle liquors and rinse waters are often neutralized with

lime.  Sludge resulting from lime neutralization of spent pickle liquor

is a principal solid waste problem.  Lagoons filled with the material,

which never dries, constitute a major problem at many mills.

6.   EPA Source Classification Code -

Finishing/Pickling - 3-03-009-10

7.   References -

     1.   The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel.  Ninth Edition.
          McGannon, H.E. (ed.),  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.  Steel
          Company, 1971.

     2.   Kemmer, F.N. Pollution Control in the Steel Industry.   In:
          Industrial Pollution Control Handbook, Lund, H.F. (ed.).
          New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1971. p. 16.

     3.   Varga, L. Jr., and H.W. Lownie.  Final Technological  Report
          on a Systems Analysis Study of the Integrated Iron and Steel
          Industry, Furnham, C.F. (ed.).  Battelle, Memorial Institute,
          Columbus, Ohio.  May 1969.

     4.   Ralph Stone and Company, Inc.  Forecasts of the Effects of Air
          and Water Pollution Controls on Solid Waste Generation.
          National Environmental Research Center.  Publication Number
          PB-238-219.  December 1974.

     5.   Sittig, M.  Iron.  In:  Pollutant Removal Handbook.  New
          Jersey, Noyes Data Corporation, 1973.  p. 251-257.

     6.   Bramer, H.C.  Iron and Steel.  Chapter 14.  In:  Industrial
          Waste Water Control, Chemical Technology, A Series of Mono-
          graphs - Volume 2, New York, Academic Press, 1965.

     7.   Bramer, H.C. Pollution Control in the Steel Industry.
          Environmental Science and Technology.  1004-1008, October
          1971.
                                  117

-------
 STEEL  PRODUCTION                                        PROCESS NO. 30
                               Finishing
 1.   Function - Finishing operations primarily consist of treating the
 semifinished steel products of costs, plates, billets, blooms by hot or
 cold working and processing to the final form.  Some of the sheet and
 tin finishing operations are:  tempering, tin plating, galvanizing, chrome
 plating, coating, polishing, continuous annealing.  Other finishing oper-
 ations concern tube or pipe mills, bars, wires, and rails; and their
 treatment.  Treatment may include rolling, piercing, reheating, welding,
 pickling, washing and plating.
 2.   Input Materials - Steel is the primary input material.
 3.   Operation Parameters - No data available.
 4.   Utilities - Some power requirements are 95 to 110 kWh per ton* for
 5 stand cold reduction mill, 42 kWh per ton* for tinning operations and
 33 kWh per ton for sheet-mill galvanizing.
 5.   Waste Streams - Solid waste is evolved from internally generated
 scrap  and as a result of tank cleanouts or precipitates from wastewater
 treatments.  Scrap is essentially all reused, but can result in waste*
 water  treatments.  Essentially all scrap is reused, but can result in
 wastewater problems in reclaiming operations.. Emulsified'oil from cold
                                                          2
 rolling presents a difficult wastewater treatment problem.   New tin
 plating plants produce an estimated 0.073 liters of wastewater, 0.032
 kilograms of chromium and 0.008 kilograms of tin per ton* of steel ingot.
 Galvanizing plants are estimated to produce 0.018 lite'rs of wastewater
                                                            q
 containing 0.0013 kilograms of zinc per ton* of steel ingot.
 6.   EPA Source Classification Data - Finishing/other - 3-03-009-20.
 7.   References -
     1.   The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel, Ninth Edition,
          McGannon, H.E. (ed.).  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S. Steel
          Company, 1971
     2.   Kulujian, N.J. Compliance Status Evaluation of  Iron and  Steel
          Facilities in New York.  PEDCo-Environmental Specialists,  Inc.
          Contract Number 68-02-1321.  Environmental Protection Agency.
          April 1975.
* Metric ton (1000 kg)

                                  113

-------
2.    Bramer, H. C.  Pollution Control  in the Steel  Industry.
     Environmental  Science and Technology.   1004-1008,  October
     1971.

3.    Industrial Waste Profiles No.  1  - Blast Furnace and Steel
     Mills.  Volume III.  The Cost of Clean Water.   Federal  Water
     Pollution Control Administration.  FWPCA Contract  Number 14-
     12-98.  September 28, 1967.
                              119

-------
  APPENDIX A





RAW MATERIALS
       121

-------
           Table A-l.   IRON ORE MINED IN THE UNITED STATES
                                                          1
   Di stri ct
 Type of
   ore
Approximate percent of
  total tonnage mined
Lake Superior
Birmingham, Alabama

Chattanooga, Tennessee
Adirondack, Northern New York
Northern new Jersey and South
  Eastern New York
Lone Star, Texas
Iron Mountain, Missouri
Vulcan, California
Cornwall, Pennsylvania
Sunrise, Wyoming
Iron County, Utah
Hematite
Hematite
  brown
  Brown
Magnetite
Magnetite
Hematite
  Brown
Magnetite
Carbonate
          48
           7

           1
           4
           1
                                    122

-------
Table A-2.  CONSUMPTION OF MATERIALS OTHER THAN IRON ORE IN
               IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY - 19732
     Major material
      Fluorspar
      Limestone
      Lime
      Other fluxes
      Oxygen
      Coal:
       In production of coke
       In production of steam0
       Other purposes
      Quantity
   0.561  million  tons
   21.80  million  tons*
   7.080  million  tons*
   0.820  million  tons*
6092.  billion liters*

  77.64 million tons*
   3.81 million tons
   0.53 million tons*
        Includes coal  consumed in generating  electric  power.
       ^Metric tons (1000 kg)
                                123

-------
  Table A-3.  ORIGIN OF COAL RECIEVED BY COKE-OVEN PLANTS  IN THE

  UNITED STATES IN 1974 BY PRODUCING STATE AND VOLATILE CONTENT3'3
Source of coal
Al abama
Arkansas
Colorado
111 inois
Kentucky
Maryland
New Mexico
Ohio
Oaklahoma
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Utah
Virginia
West Virginia
Total
Volatile content
High
2,488
•»,
1 ,554
4,035
14,564
-
925
41
165
18,588
169
1,863
1,744
14,262
60,398
Medium
3,955
-
399
-
-
-
-
-
175
1,103
-
-
1,065
2,886
9,583
Low
-
178
486
-
*»<
7
-
-
3
5,172
-
-
1,748
9,558
17,152
Total
6,443
178
2,439
4,035
14,564
7
925
41
343
24,363
169
1,863
4,557
26,706
87,133
Volitile matter on moisture - free basis;  high-volatile - over 31 percent;
medium-volatile - 22 to 31  percent; and low-vplatile - 14 to 22~percent.


Cumulative of individual  county production in the state
                              124

-------
Table A-4.  ANALYSIS OF LIMESTONE FROM COLUMBUS,  OHIO
Constituent
Si09
2
A1203
CaO
MgO
P
S
Percent
0.06

0.04
30.83
22.27
-
0.020
                       125

-------
    APPENDIX B





INDUSTRY PRODUCTS
      127

-------
              Table B-l.   AVERAGE GRADE OF SINTER PRODUCED IN 1968

                        NORTHEASTERN IRON ORES (Wt, %, DRY BASIS}5
                 Fe     P     Si02     Mn
                                         CaO     MgO
Benson
 sinter

Benson Non-
 Bessemer
 sinter

Port Henry
 sinter
63.91  0.026   5.47    0.30     3.02     1.39   0.26   O.Q.3Q
62.60  0.199   4.31    0.16     2.74     1.28   0.26,   0.030
66.17  0.14G   3.94
!  1.22      1.16    0.26
                                   128

-------
Table B-2.  TYPICAL TACONITE CONCENTRATE PRODUCT ANALYSIS
Composition
Fe
Si02
CaO
MgO
A12°3
Mn
Percentage
64.55
9.2
0.53
0.67
0.55
0.22
                            129

-------
    Table B-3.   COMPOSITIONS  OF  PELLETS PRODUCED IN 1968, (Wt. %, DRY

Minntae
pellets
Reserve
pellets
Erie
pellets
Eveleth
pellets
Birch Lake3
pellets
Cornwel 1
pellets
Morgantown
pellets
( Grace
Mine)
Fe
65.12

62. 56

63.91

65,39

62.48

64.92

65.83



P
0.011

0.028

0.012

0.012

0.023

0.006

0,010



Si02
5.50

8.76

7.22

5.50

9.00

3.30

3.18



Mn
0.16

0.27

0.23

0.14

0.22

0,08

0,08



A12°3
0,42

0.47

0.31

0.29

0.54

1.50

0.61



CaO
0.25

0.44



0.19

0.50

0.90

0.55



MgO
0.59

0.51



0.30

0.65

1.50

1.54



S
0.002









0.009

Q.OQ9



Pellets produced from concentrates originated with magnetic taeonites.
                                   130

-------
Table B-4.  CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF NODULIZED PRODUCT,  AVERAGE3'7
Composition
Moisture
Fe
Si02
Mn
P
CaO
Percent
0.12
62.99
7.33
0.29
0.020
2.44
       Taconite concentrate is used as input to the kiln.
                             131

-------
          Table B-5.  SUMMARY OF THE COKE INDUSTRY
               IN THE UNITED STATES IN 19748
   Material
      Quantity
Coke produced:
   At merchant plants
   At furnace plants
          Total
Coke breeze produced
Coal carbonized:
   Bituminous
   Anthracite
Average yield of coke of total
  coal carbonized, %
Coke used in blast furnaces
Coke breeze used in agglomerating
  plants
Coal chemical materials producted:
  Crude tar
  Ammonia
  Crude light oil
  Gas
    4,632,000 tons
   50,466,000 tons*
   55,865,000a tons*
    4,621,000 tons*
   81,420,000 tons*
      403,000 tons*

        68.28
   51,200,000 tons*
    1,334,000
2,564,137,000 liters
      519,000 tons*
  822,920,000
   27,392,000 x 106liters
a About 1-4 percent of this amount is produced in beehive ovens.
* Metric tons (1000 kg)
                             132

-------
        Table B-6.   TYPICAL SIZES OF COKE
Variety of Coke
   Size,  cm
Foundry
Blast furnace
Breeze
Various sizes,  >8
8 x 0.75
through 1.9
                       133

-------
Table B-7.  TYPICAL PROPERTIES OF COKE9

Moisture, %              2
Volatile matter, %       0.5-2
Fixed carbon, %          87 - 91
Ash, %                   5-9
Heating value,           7050 - 7350
   kcal/kg
                   134

-------
       Table B- 9.   COMPOSITION OF HIGH-TEMPERATURE12
                       COKE-OVEN TARa
                                          Percent by weight
Liquor                                         1.6-5.8
Benzol                                         0.1-0.3
Toluol                                         0.1-0.4
Xylol                                          0.1-0.5
Total tar acids (phenols, cresols,
  xylenols)                                    2.0-3.9
Total tar bases (pyridine, picolines,
  quinolines)                                  1.4-2.0
Naptha (coumarone, indene)                     0.4-2.0
Crude naphthalene                              7.7-11.7
Methyl naphthalene oil                          2.1-2.9
Biphenyl oil                                   0.9-1.5
Acenaphthene oil                               1.4-2.8
Fluorene oil (fluorene, diphenyl
  oxide)                                       1.9-3.6
Anthracene-heavy oil (anthracene,
  phenanthrene, carbazole)                     9.6-12.3
Pitch                                          60.2-64.2
Distillation losses                            0.9-2.8

a Ranges of composition of five typical tars from "The Coal
  Tar Data Book."  The Coal Tar Research Association, 2nd
  Ed., Section Al, 2-4, 1965.
                              136

-------
 Table B-8.   YIELDS AND ANALYSES OF PRODUCTS OF CARBONIZATION PROCESS
                                                                    10,11


Product
Coke





Gas







Ammonia


Tar



Liquor



Light oils

Cyanogen
Carbon disulphide
Hydrogen sulphide


Constituent
Ash
Carbon
Hydrogen
Sulphur
Nitrogen
Totals
C02
CO
CH4
C2H4
N2
H2
02
Totals
Hydrogen
Nitrogen
Totals
Carbon
Hydrogen
Oxygen
Totals
Moisture
Oxygen
Hydrogen
Totals
C6H6
(Equivalent)
C2N2
cs2
H2S
Percent of
coal
by weight
7.210
61.711
0.469
0.683
0.270
70.343
1.042
3.154
7.468
1.529
0.385
1.366
0.717
15.661
0.040
0.183
0.223
4.687
0.327
0.436
5.450
3.310
3.107
0.388
6.805
1.102

0.078
0.013
0.325
Analysis
percent of product
by weight
10.24
87.76
0.66
0.96
0.38
100.00
6.66
20.14
47.69
9.76
2.46
8.72
4.57
100.00
17.9
82.1
100.0
86.0
6.0
8.0
100.0
48.70
45.60
5.70
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0

Yield
kg per ton*
72.10
617.12
4.69
6.83
2.70
703.44
10.42
31.54
74.68
15.29
3.85
13.66
7.17
156.61
0.40
1.83
2.23
46.87
3.27
4.36
54.50
33.10
31.07
3.88
68.05
11.02

0.78
0.13
3.25
* Metric ton (1000 kg)
                                    135

-------
Table B-10.  ANALYSIS OF CRUDE AMMONIA LIQUOR13

    Specific gravity                        1.1055
    Ammonia, total, percent                22.47
             free, percent                 22.20
    Pyridine, grams per liter               2.79
    Sulfides as H2$, grams per liter       53.3
    Organic matter, cc N/50 KMnO,        103,300
     per liter
                        137

-------
APPENDIX C





COMPANIES
      139

-------
                Table  C-l.   IRON AND  STEEL  PRODUCING  FACILITIES
                                                               14
Company - Plant
AUn Hood Steel
Coke and Chemical Plant
Blast Furnaces
Ivy Rock Plant


Allegheny Ludlum Ind., Inc.
Allegheny Ludlum Steel Corp.





Dunkirk & Watery! let Works







AJax Forging & Casting Co.


New Hartford Works



Location
Conshohocken, Pa.
Swede! and, Pa.
Swedeland, Pa.
Ivy Rock, Pa.


Pittsburgh, Pa.






Dunkirk & Water*
vliet, Pa.






Ferndale & Detroit
Michigan

New Hartford, N.Y.



No. Of
agglomerating
facilities

3



















•






No. of
blast
furnaces


2

























Type of
furnace



Basic Oxygen



Hot bla^t cupola
Basic On furnace
Electric Arc

Vacuum reduction

Electric Arc

Vacuum melt
Induction
Vacuum Melt
electrode

A.O.D. Vessel
Electric Arc

Induction
Vacuum Melt
Induction

Consumable
electrode
Steel producing
No. of
furnaces



2



1
2
5

1

4


1

7

1
2

6
5

8

Steel
grade



Carbon,
low
alloy

Iron
Alloy
Alloy &
stain-
less
Refining
stainless
Carbon,
alloy, &
stainless,

Stainless

Alloy &
Stainless
Stainless
Alloy

Alloy
Specialty
steels

Specialty
Steels
Size 1 Coke
tons*/heat production



150



55/hr
80
80 (2)
70 (2)
55 (1)
80

25 (2)
15 1
2 (1)

1/5 or 1


1/2 to 11
25
1 & 4

1/4 to 2
'!(!)
0.5-2.5(3)
5


Yes








-








!








*Metric ton (1000 kg)

-------
                     Table C-l(continued).  IRON MID STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES
                                                                               14
Company - Plant
American Compressed Steel
CQCGU

Araco Steel Corporation
Ashland Works
Butler Plant
Hamilton Plant
Houston Works
Kansas City Works
Mlddletown Works

Sand Springs Works
Baltimore Works


Torrance Plant
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Etlwanda, Ca.
Mlddletown, Ohio
Ashland, Ky.
Butler, Pa.
Hamilton, Ohio
Houston, Texas
Kansas City, Mo.
Mlddletown. Ohio

Sand Springs, Okla.
Baltimore, Md.


Torrance, Ca.
No. of
agglomerating
facilities



1


1








No. of
blast
furnaces



2

2
1

1






Type of
furnace
Electric Arc
Electric Arc

Basic 02
Electric Arc

Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Basic Open
Hearth
Basic 0?
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Vacuum Arc Re-
melt
Ar-Og Reactor
Electric Arc
Steel PH
No. of
furnaces
1
3

2
3

6
4
6
2
2
3
2
1
2
jductlon
Steel
grade
Carbon
Carbon,
Alloy

Carbon,
Alloy
Carbon,
alloy
stainless

Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
Alloy
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon
Size
tons*/heat
6
15 & 18

180
165

117 (2)
175 (4)
125 (2)
150 (2)
310
200
70
Super-alloy, 25 (2)
stainless 40.0 (1)
Superalloy,
stainless 10
Superalloy, 20/40
stainless
Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
22.5 (1)
10.0 (1)
Coke
production





yes
yes

yes






Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                                    Table C-l(continued).  IRON AND  STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES
                                                                                                 14
ro
            8 No. of strands.
            * Metric  tons (1000 kg)
Company - Plant
Atlantic Steel Company
Babcock i Mil cox Co.



Bethlehem Steel Corp.
Bethlehem Plant

Steel ton Plant
Sparrows Point Plant

Lackawanna Plant

Johnstown Plant
Location
Atlanta, Ga.
Beaver Falls, Pa.


Bethlehem, Pa.
Bethlehem, Pa.

Steel ton, Pa.
Sparrows Pt. Md.

Lackawanna, N.Y.


No. of
agglomerating
facilities



4a


6a

6?

Z*
No. of
blast
furnaces



4


10

6

4
Type of
furnace
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Argon Oxygen
Electroslag
remelt
Basic oxygen
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Open hearth
furnaces
Basic 82
Basic open
hearth
Basic oxygen
Basic open
hearth
Steel pro
No. of
furnaces
2
9
1

2
6
5
7
2
8
3
8
iduction
Steel
grade
Carbon
Carbon,
alloy
stainless
Stainless
Stainless
& high
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon ,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Size
tons*/heat
85
2S (2
50 (2
75 (2
100 (3
25
"3
270
7 (I)
28 (1)
50 (4)
5 0)
15 (1
150 (3.)
420
220
190 (3)
190 (5)
300
180
Coke
production



Yes


Yes

Yes

Yes

-------
                       Table C-l(continued).  IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING  FACILITIES
                                                                                  14
•fa
CO
Conpany - Plant
Burns Harbor Plant
Los Angeles Plant
Seattle Plant
Norgantown Plant
Border Steel Rolling Hills,
Inc.
Borg-Uarner Corporation
Chicago Heights Works
New Castle Works
Braeburn Alloy Steel Dlv.
Braeburn Works

Cabot Corporation
Machinery Division at
Pampa
Location
Westchester Twsp.,
Ind.
Los Angeles, Ca.
Seattle, Wash.
Morgan town, Pa.
El Paso, Texas
Chicago, 111.
Chicago Hts, 111.
New Castle, Ind.
Braeburn, Pa.
Braeburn, Pa.

Boston, Mass.
Pampa, Texas
No. of
agglomerating
facilities



6


1


No. of
blast
furnaces
2
3







Type of
furnace
Basic oxygen
Electric Arc
Electric Arc

Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Vacuum consumable
electrode arc
remelt
Electric Arc
Steel production
No. of
furnaces
2
3
2

2
2
4
2
1
1
Steel
grade
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy

Carbon,
low alloy
Carbon
Carbon,
alloy
stainless
Carbon,
alloy

Alloy
Size
tons*/heat
300
75(1)
100 (2)
120

25
30
9 (2)
12 (2)
10
11
10
Coke
production
Yes








            * Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                       Table C-l(continued).  IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES
                                                                                 14
Company - Plant
Cameron Iron Works, Inc.

Carpenter Technology Corp.
Carpenter Steel 01 v. -
Reading



Bridgeport Plant

Ceco Corp. (The)
Letnont Works
H11 ton Works
Birmingham Works
Location
Houston, Texas
Reading, Pa.
Reading, Pa.



Bridgeport, Conn,

Chicago, 111.
Lemon t, 111.
Hilton, Pa.
Birmingham, Ala.
No. of
agglomerating
facilities










No. of
blast
furnaces










Type of
furnace
Electric Arc
Vacuum Induction
Vacuum consumable
Electric Arc
Vacuum Induction
Consumable elect.
Steel production
No. of
furnaces
1
2
20
5
2
10
Electroslag remelt 2
Argon-oxygen decai
Electric Arc
Ar - Og Decarb.
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
•b. 1
2
1
3
3
2
Steel
grade
Carbon,
alloy
Specialty
alloys
Specialty
alloys
Alloy,
stainless
Alloy,
stainless
Alloy,
stainless
Alloy,
stainless
Alloy,
stainless
Alloy,
.stainless
Alloy,
stainless
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon,
high
strength,
low alloy
Size
tons*/heat
60
25 & 60
16 - 34
14
7.5 (1)
7.5 (1)
2.5 (2)
iffi
15
15
42
50
30
20
14
Coke
.production










* Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                      Table C-l(continued).   IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES14
Company - Plant
CF & I Steel Corporation
Pueblo Plant

Roebllng Plant
Columbia Tool Steel Co.
Chicago Heights Works
Continental Steel Corp.
Kokomo Works
Copperweld Corporation
Copperweld Specialty
Steel Co.
Crucible Inc. (subsidiary
Colt industries)
Alloy Division
Stainless Steel D1v.


Location
Pueblo, Colo.
Pueblo, Colo.

Roebllng, N.J.
Chicago Hts, 111.
Chicago Hts. 111.
Kokomo, Ind.
Kokomo, Ind.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Warren, Ohio
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Midland, Pa.
Midland, Pa.


No. of
agglomerating
facilities
1










No. of
blast
furnaces
4






2


•
Type of
furnace
Basic oxygen
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Electric Arc

Electric Arc
Top oxygen
Top oxygen
converters
Electric Arc
ADD Refining
Electrode vacuum
Steel production
Ho. of
furnaces
2
1
3
2
2

7
2
5
1
9
Steel
grade
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon
Tool stee
Carbon

Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Stainless
Alloy,
stainless
Size
tons*/ heat
118
120
43
1 5 (1)
8 (1)
175

45 (3)
75 (4)
100
75 (4)
25 (1)
100
10 (4)
2.5 (1)
10 (2)
4 (1)
2.5 (1)
Coke
production
Yes






Yes



* Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                        Table C-l(continued).   IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES14
Conpany - Plant

Specialty Metals Dlv.



Cyclops Corporation
Empire Detroit Steel
Div. (Mansfield Plant)


Portsmouth Division
Bridgeville Plant



Location

Syracuse, N.Y.



Pittsburgh, Pa.
Mansfield, Ohio

Portsmouth, Ohio
BridgevUle, Pa.



No. of
agglomerating
facilities












No. of
blast
furnaces







2




Type of
furnace
Curved-mold
cont.
Electric Arc
Electric Inductloi
Vacuum melting
Induction
Vacuum melting
electrode arc
remeltlng
Basic open
hearth
Electric Arc
ADD Refining
vessel
Basic open
hearth
Electric Arc
Vacuum arc
remelt
Vacuum Induction
Electroslag re-
fining
Steel production
No. of
furnaces
1
5
i 1


5
2
1
5
3
2
1
1
Steel
grade
Stainless
Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Carbon ,
alloy,
stainless
Alloy,
stainless
Alloy,
stainless
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Alloy,
stainless
Carbon
Stainless
& spedalt
Specialty
grades
Specialty
grades
Specialty
grades
Size
tons*/heat
100
35 (1)
15 (4)
1
1.5
10
170
100
100
320
40 (1)
X 20 (2)
6
1.7
4
Coke
production







Yes




* Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                       Table C-l(continued).  IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES14
Company - Plant
Donner-Hanna Coke Corp.
Eastern Stainless Steel Co.
Baltimore Works

Electralloy Corp.
011 City Works



Elliott Bros. Steel Co.
Florida Steel Corp.
Tamps Works
Indiantown Works
Croft Works
Location
Buffalo, N.Y.
Baltimore, Md.
Baltimore, Md.

New York, N.Y.
Oil City, Pa.



New Castle, Pa.
Tampa, Fla.
Tampa, Fla
Indianatown, Fla.
Croft, N.C.
No. of
agglomerating
facilities



*






No. of
blast
furnaces
•









Type of
furnace
Electric Induc-
tion
Electric arc

Electric Arc
Ar-Oj vessel
Vacuum Induction
Electric Induction
Gas fired
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Steel production
No. of
furnaces
2
3

1
2
1
2
2
3
2
2
Steel
grade
Alloy &
stainless
Alloy &
stainless





Carbon
Carbon
Carbon


Size
tons* /heat
3 1/4
15
50

f!

35
20
30
3
.75
.25
18
50
20
25
35
i)
i)

11
i)
i)
ii
30 (1)
35 (1)
25
30
!!
Coke
production
Yes









* Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                                 Table C-l(continued).   IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES
CO
Company - Plant
Ford Motor Company
Rouge Works
Georgetown Steel Corp.
Harrlsburg Steel Co.
(Dlv. of Ha r sco Corp.)
Harrlsburg Works
Hawaiian Western Steel
limited
Ewa Works
Heppenstall Company
Nldvale - Heppenstall Co.

Industrial Products Group
Coke Plant
Chattanooga Dlv.
Location
Dearborn, Mich.
Dearborn, Mich.
Georgetown, S.C.
Harrisburg, Pa.
Harrlsburg, Pa.
Ewa, Hawaii
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia, Pa.

Woodward, Ala.
Woodward, Ala.
Chattanooga, Tern.
No. of
agglomerating
facilities






.

No. of
blast
furnaces
3







Type of
furnace
Basic oxygen
Electric Arc
Basic open
hearth
Electric Arc

Electric Arc
Vacuum electrode


Steel production
No. of
furnaces
2
3
3
1

3
3


Steel
grade
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon

Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Carbon,
alloy,
stainless


Size
tons*/heat
240
65
50
15

40 (1
80 (1
140 (1
5 (2)
55 (1)


Coke
production
Yes





Yes
Yes
           * Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                              Table  C-l(continued).   IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES14
Company - Plant
Inland Steel Co.
Indiana Harbor Works



Inter lake Incorporated
Chicago Plant
Erie Plant
Toledo Plant
R1verda1e Station Works
Wilder Works

International Harvester Co.
South Chicago Works

Iowa Steel Mill, Inc.
Wilton Works
ITT Harper, Inc.
Norton Grove Works

Location
Chicago, 111.
East Chicago, 111.



Chicago, 111.
South Chicago, 111.
Erie, Pa.
Toledo, Ohio
Chicago, 111.
Wilder, Ky.

Chicago, 111.
S. Chicago, 111.


Wilton, Iowa

Morton Grove, 111.

No. of
agglomerating
facilities

1











1






No. of
blast
furnaces

8




2
1
2




3






Type of
furnace

Bask open
hearth
Basic oxygen
Electric arc





Basic oxygen
Electric Arc


Basic oxygen


Electric

Electric Arc
Electric Induction
Steel
Ho. of
furnaces

19
4
2





2
3


2


1

2
1
production
Steel
grade

Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy




Carbon
Carbon,
alloy

Carbon,
alloy



Stainless
Stainless
Size
tons*/heat

210 (12)
335 (7)
255 (2)
210 (2)
120





75
85


130
,



10 (1)
4 (1)
1
Coke
production

Yes




Yes
Yes
Yes




Yes






-p.
vo
        * Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                                  Table C-l(continued).   IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES
Company - Plant
Jessop Steel Company
Washington Works




Green River Steel -
Owensboro Works
Jones * Laugh! in Steel Corp.
Aliquippa Works Division
Pittsburgh Works Division

Location
Washington, Pa.
Washington, Pa.




Owensboro, Ky.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Aliquippa, Pa.
Pittsburgh, Pa.

No. of
agglomerating
facilities






1


No. of
blast
furnaces






5
4

Type of
furnace
Electric Arc
Electric
induction
Electric
induction
vacuum melt
Electric
induction emit
Ar - 0-2 vessel
Electric Arc
Basic oxygen
Basic open hearth
Electric Arc
Steel
No. Of
furnaces
4
1
1
2
1
2
3
6
1
production
Steel
grade
Carbon,
stainless
alloy tool
steel
Carbon &
alloy tool
steel
Carbon &
alloy tool
steel
Carbon &
alloy tool
steel
Stainless
Carbon,
alloy
stainless
Carbon,
high
strength,
alloy
Carbon,
high
strength &
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
stainless
Size
tonstheat
16 (1)
14 (2)
8 (1)
1/2
1
2 1/2
20
60
207
340
2
Coke
production

~




Yes
Yes

en
          *  Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                       Table C-l(continued).  IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES1
Company - Plant
Cleveland (fork's D1v.

Warren Works

Jorgensen Co., Earle M.
Seattle Works
Joslyn Stainless Steels
Fort Wayne Works

Judson Steel Corp.
Emeryville Works
Kaiser Steel Corp.
Fontana Works
Location
Cleveland, Ohio

Warren, Rich.

Seattle, Hash.
Seattle, Htsh.
Ft. Hayne, Ind.

Emeryville, Ca.
Emeryville, Ca.
Oakland, Ca.
Fontana, C*.
No. of
agglomerating
facilities
1







2
No. of
blast
furnaces
2







4
Type of
furnace
Basic oxygen
Electric arc
Electric arc
A.O. vessel
Electric arc
Electric arc
A.O.D. vessel
Electric arc
Basic open
hearth
Steel production
No. of
furnaces
2
2
5
1
2
3
1
1
8
Steel
grade
Carbon,
high
strength
Carbon,
high
strength
Alloy,
stainless
Stainless
Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Stainless
Stainless
Carbon
Carbon &
alloy
Size
tons*/heat
220
170
60
70
40
20 (1)
17 (2)
17
45
225
Coke
production








Yes
* Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                                   Table C-l(continued).  IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES14
en
ro

Company - Plant
Fontana Works
Kentucky Electric Steel Co.
Coal ton Works
Keystone Consolidated
Ind., Inc.
Peoria Works
Liclede Steel Co.
Alton Works
tone Star Steel Company
Lone Star Works
Lukens Steel Company
Coatesville Works

Marathon Letourneau Co.
Longvlew Works
Harathon Steel Company
Tenpe Works

Location

Ashland, fy.
Coal ton, Ky.


Peoria, 111.
St. Louis, Mo.
Alton, 111.
Dallas, Texas
Lone Star, Tex.
Coatesville, Pa.
Coatesville, Pa.

Longvlew, Tex.
Longview, Tex.
Tempe, Ariz.
Tempe, Ariz.
No. of
agglomerating
facilities





-











No. of
blast
furnaces









1








Type of
furnace
L-D Oxygen

Electric arc


Electric arc

Electric arc

Basic open
hearth

Basic open
hearth
Electric arc

Electric-arc

Electric Arc
Steel
No. of
furnaces
3

3


2

2

5

6
4

2

3
D reduction
Steel
grade
Carbon &
alloy
'.,
Carbon


Carbon



Carbon

Carbon,
alloy
Carbon ,
alloy

Carbon,
alloy

Carbon,
alloy

Size
tons*/heat
120

15


170

225

250

145
150 (2)
100 (2)

25

20

Coke
production









Yes
j
: j
I




           * Metric  tons  (1000  kg)

-------
                                 Table C-l (continued).  IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES
                                                                                           14
Company - Plant
NcLouth Steel Corporation



Mesta Machine Company
West Homestead Plant


New Castle Plant


Mississippi Steel Dlv. of
Magna
Corporation

National Forge Company
Irvine Works


Erie Plant

National Steel Corp.
Blast Furnace Dlv.
Location
Detroit, Mich.



Pittsburgh, Pa.
Nest Homestead, Pa.


New Castle, Pa.




Jackson, Miss.

Irvine, Pa.
Irvine, Pa.


Erie, Pa.

Pittsburgh, Pa.
River Rouge, Mich.
No. of
agglomerating
facilities






















1
No. of
blast
furnaces
2





















4
Type of
furnace
Electric Arc

Basic oxygen


Acid open
hearth

Acid open
hearth



Electric Arc


Electric Arc


Electric Arc



Steel production
No. of
furnaces
2

5


4


4




3


2


3



Steel
grade
Carbon ,
stainless
Carbon,
stainless

Carbon,
alloy

Carbon,
alloy



Carbon


Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Carbon,
alloy,
stainless


Size
tons*/heat
200

120


40 (1)
50 (1)
125 (2)
35 (1)
50 (2)
100 (1)


14 (2)
35 (1)

20 (1)
45(1)

35 (1)
75 (2)



Coke
production






















Yes
en
CO
          * Metric tons (1000 kg)

-------
                                 Table C-l(continued).  IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES1
Company - Plant
Ecorse Works

Weirton Plant
Granite City Works
New Jersey Steel &
Structural Corporation
North Star Steel Company
Ramsey County Works
Northwest Steel Rolling
Mills, inc.
Kent Works
Northwestern Steel and
Wire Company
Sterling Works
Oregon Steel Mills
Front Avenue Plant
Rlvergate Plant
\
Pacific States Steel Corp.

Location
Detroit, M1ch.

Weirton, W. Va.
Granite City, 111.
Sayrevllle, N.J.
Ramsey County, M1nr
Kent, Washington
Sterling, 111.
Sterling, 111.
Portland, Oregon

Union City, Ca.
No. of
agglomerating
facilities


2
1
.




No. of
blast
furnaces


4
2





Type of
furnace
Basic oxygen
Electric Arc
Basic oxygen
Basic o,.ygen
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Basic open
hearth
Steel production
No. of
furnaces
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
2
4
Steel
grade
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon 8
low alloy
Carbon &
low alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Size
cons*/heat
200 (2)
300 (2)
150
335
220
65
60
35
150 (1)
250 1)
400 (1)
23
75
150
Coke
production


Yes
Yes





en
         * Metric  tons  (1000 kg)

-------
                                Table C-l(continued).   IRON AND STEEL  PRODUCING  FACILITIES
                                                                                           14
Company - Plant
Phoenix Steel Corp.
J Plate Division
Structural & Tube Oiv.
Porter Company, Ind., H.K.
Conners Steel Div. -
Conners Works
' Nest Virginia Works
Republic Steel Corp.
Youngstown Works
Warren Works

Mass ill on Works
Canton Works

Location
Claymont, Del.
Claymont, Del.
Phoenixville, Pa.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Birmingham, Ala.
Huntington, W. Va.
Cleveland, Ohio
Youngstown, Ohio
Warren & Niles, Ohic

Hassillon, Ohio
Canton, Ohio

to. of
agglomerating
facilities





1




No. of
blast
furnaces




3
1


1

Type of
furnace
Electric Arc
Basic open
hearth
Electric arc
Electric arc

Basix oxygen
Electric Arc

Electric Arc
Vacuum melt
electrode
Steel production
No. of
furnaces
2
4
2
2

2
2

9
8
Steel
grade
Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon
Carbon,
alloy

Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy

Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Alloy,
stainless
& special
steels
Size
tons*/heat
150
150
30
30

150
185

80 (5)
200 (4)
5 to 10
Coke
production




Yes
Yes

Yes


en
tn
          * Metric Tons (1000 kg)

-------
                              Table  C-l(continued).   IRON  AND  STEEL  PRODUCING  FACILITIES
                                                                                         14
Company - Plant
Cleveland District

Buffalo Works
South Chicago Works

Gulf steel Works

Thomas Works
Finkl & Sons Co., A.
Roblin Steel Company
Dunkirk Works
Sharon Steel Corp.
Steel Division


Location
Cleveland, Ohio

Buffalo, N.Y.
South Chicago, 111 .

Gadsden, Ala.


Chicago, 111
N. Tonawanda, N.Y.
Dunkirk, N.Y.
Sharon, Pa.
Sharon, Pa.


Ho. of
agglomerating
facilities
1




1







No. of
blast
furnaces
5

2
1

2




2


Type Of
furnace
Basic oxygen
Basic open
hearth
Basic oxygen
Basic open
hearth
Electric Arc
Basic oxygen
Electric Arc

Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Basic oxygen
(L-D)
Basic oxygen
Electric Arc
Steel production
Mo. of
furnaces
2
4
2
4
3
2
2

2
2
1
2
2
Steel
grade
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy

Carbon,
alloy
Carbon ,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Alloy,
stainless
Size
tons*/heat
220
400
100
250
150
150
185

65
25
150
150
110
Coke
production
Yes


Yes

Yes

Yes





en
       * Metric  Tons  (1000 kg)

-------
                                  Table C-1 (continued).  IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES
                                                                                            14
Company - Plant
Fairmont Coke Division
Coke Plant
Shenango Incorporated
Neville Plant
Sharpsville Plant
Simonds Steel Division
Lockport Works


Soule' Steel Company
Carson Works
Southwest Steel Rolling
Mils
Los Angeles Works
Standard Steel
Burnham Works

Location
Fairmont, W. VA.
Temple ton, Pa.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Neville Island, Pa.
Sharpsville, Pa.
Lockport, N.Y.
Lockport, N.Y.


San Francisco, Ca.
Carson, Ca.
Los Angeles, Ca.
Los Angeles, Ca.
Burnham, Pa.
Burnham, Pa,

No. of
agglomerating
facilities











No. of
blast
furnaces


2
1







Type of
furnace




Electric Arc
Electric
induction
Consumable
electrode
Electric Arc
Electric Arc
Basic elec-
tric arc
Acid elec-
tric arc
Steel Droduction
No. of
furnaces




3
2
3
2
2
2
2
Steel
grade




Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Alloy
Alloy
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Carbon,
alloy
Size
tons*/heat

X


15
1 (1)
600 Ibs (1)
5
15
21 (1)
22 (1)
40 (1)
18 (1)
45 (1)
.70 (1)
Coke
production
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes





i

en
-vl
          * Metric Tons (1000 kg)

-------
                                 Table C-l(continued).  IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES
                                                                                           14
. ..mi.............. 	 -=-==========» i ',',.-:•;
Company - Plant

Structural Metals, Inc.
Sequin Works
Teledyne All vac
Monroe Works


Teledyne Vasco
Vanadium Plant

-
^=g^^~— —
Location

Sequin, texas
Monroe, N.C.
Monroe, N.C.


tatrobe, Pa.
La t robe, Pa.


No. Of
agglomerating
facilities









No. of
blast
furnaces









• • - " — — — — ___^__ —
Type of
furnace
Vacuum
electrode
Electric arc
Vacuum Induction
Vacuum melting
electrode
ESR melting
electrode

Electric
Induction
Electric
Induction
Electric arc
Vacuum melting
electrode
	 — — — —
Steel production
No. of
furnaces
2
2
3
5
5

2
2
1
2
Steel
grade
Alloy,
stainless,
nonferrous
alloy
Carbon
high
strength
high
temp.
high
strength
temp.
high
strength
high temp

Carbon,
alloy
high speed
Carbon,
alloy
high speed
Carbon,
alloy
high speed
Carbon
alloy
high speed
	 mi I'"-!!— - • i_— — -MB-
Size
tons*/heat
11 (1)
23 (1)
25
10.5 (1)
7.5 1
1.5 (1)
7.5
8

1/20 (1)
1/8 (1)
1/2 (1)
1 (D
1
13
6.5
=r i ," "HLBBeasgaaBe8«a
Coke
production









en
oo
         * Metric  Tons  (1000 kg)

-------
                                 Table C-l(continued).  IRON AND STEEL PRODUCING FACILITIES
                                                                                           14
Company - Plant



Col on la Plant


Tennessee Forging Steel
Corp.
Harlman Works

Kankakee Electric
Steel Works
Texas Steel Company



Tlnken Company (The)
Canton Works




Union Electric Steel Corp.
Carnegie & Harmon Creek
Plants
Location



Monaca, Pa.


HarHman, Tenn.
Harrlman, Tenn.

Kankakee, 111.

Ft. Worth, Tex.



Canton, Ohio
Canton, Ohio




Pittsburgh, Pa.
Carnegie & Harmon
Creek, Pa.
No. of
agglomerating
facilities
























No. of
blast
furnaces
























Type of
furnace
Vacuum melting
electrode

Electric arc



Electric arc

Electric arc

Electric arc


Electric arc

Electric Arc

Vacuum melting
electrode


Electric arc

Steel production
No. of
furnaces
1


1



2

2

3


2

7

1



1

Steel
grade
Carbon,
alloy
high speed
Carbon,
alloy
high speed

Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
* 1 !«.* i
alloy &
stainless
Carbon

Carbon ,
alloy,
stainless
Carbon,
alloy,
stainless

Alloy

Size
cons*/heat
1/10


IS



25

22

8 (1)
19 / 1 \
12 (1)
3 (1)
25 (1)
30 (1)

140 (2)
110 (4
60 (1)
19



35

Coke
production



.




















in
            Metric Tons (1000 kg)

-------
                                   Table  C-l(continued).   IRON, AND STEEL  PRODUCING FACILITIES14
o
	
Company - Plant
United States Pipe &
Foundry Co.
Coke Plant
Blast furnace
United States Steel Corp.
Clairton Works
Edgar Thomson-Irvin Works

Fairless Works

Homestead Works
Blast Furnace
Homestead Works -
Steel Division
Johnstown -
Canton Works


Lorain -
Cuyahoga Works
Lorain -
Cuyahoga Works -
Central Fees
• — — —
Location
Birmingham, Ala.
N. Birmingham, Ala.
N. Birmingham, Ala.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Clairton, Pa.
Braddock, Pa.

Fairless Hills, Pa.

Rankin, Pa.

Homestead, Pa.


Johnstown, Pa.


Lorain, Ohio
.
Cleveland. Ohio


No. of
agglomerating
facilities





1

2

1







1




No. of
blast
furnaces


1

1
5

3

4







5

2


"IF ' ' ~~~*"^"TTff'iff-"- ' '
Type of
furnace





Basic oxygen

Basic open
hearth


Basic open
hearth

Electric arc


Basic oxygen




Steel
NO. Of
furnaces





2

9



11


3


2




1 	 J u. i.m.i.ujiM'LJ.|.i. ..u ...... HP ..M . mmm— . i - . -
production
Steel
grade





Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy


Carbon,
alloy

Carbon,
alloy,
stainless
Carbon,
alloy



Tssrftgf" "p 	 i""!]ijma!K
Size
tons*/heat





220

395



320


30(1)
3 (2)

225




Coke
production

Yes


Yes


Yes









Yes




           * Metric  Tons  (1000 kg)

-------
                     Table C-l(continued).   IRON AND  STEEL  PRODUCING  FACILITIES
Company - Plant
National - Ouquesne Works -
McKeesport
National - Duquesne Works -
Ouquesne

Youngstown Works
Duluth Works
Gary Works

South Works



Geneva Works
Torrance Plant
Falrfleld District Works
Location

Duquesne, Pa.



Gary, Ind.

S. Chicago, m.



Geneva, Utah
Torrance, Ca.
Ala.
No. of
agglomerating
facilities
1


1

5

1



2

4
No. of
blast
furnaces
3
4

4

13

8



3

6
Type of
furnace

Basic oxygen
Electric arc
Basic open
hearth

Basic open
hearth
Basic oxygen
Basic oxygen
A.O.D.
4 strand
billet caster
Electric arc
Basic open
hearth
Basic open
hearth
Basic open
'hearth
Steel production
No. of
furnaces

2
5
14

2
6
3
1
1
1
10
4
9
Steel
grade

Carbon,
alloy
Alloy.
stainless
Carbon,
alloy

A
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Stainless
Carbon
Stainless
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Size
tons*/heat


215
20
50
85
i)
i
3,i
163

• •
215
200
200
90
200
100
340

•
11





63
340 (4)
230
150
1}
Coke
production




Yes
Yes





Yes

Yes
* Metric Tons (1000 kg)

-------
                                  Table C-l(continued).   IRON AND STEEL  PRODUCING  FACILITIES
ro
Company - Plant

Texas Works
Washington Steel Corp.
Fitch Works
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel
Corp.
^^^^^riVWIW*-
Steuvenville Plant
Honessen Works
Witteman Steel Mills
Youngstown Sheet &
Tube Company
Campbell Works
Brier Hill Works
Indiana Harbor Works

Location
•
Bay town, Texas
Washington, Pa.
Houston, Pa.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Steubenville, Ohio
Monessen, Pa.
Fontana, Ca.
Youngstown, Ohio
Campbell, Ohio
Youngstown, Ohio
E. Chicago, Ind.

No. of
agglomerating
facilities



1
1
1

1

No. of
blast
furnaces



5
2
4
2
4

Type of
furnace
Basic oxygen
Electric a.c
Electric arc
Basic oxygen
Basic oxygen
Electric
Basic open
hearth
Basic open
hearth
Basic open
hearth
Basic oxygen
Steel production
No. of
furnaces
2
2
2
2
2
1
12
11
8
2
Steel
grade
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon,
alloy
Stainless
Carbon
Carbon,
alloy
Carbon
Carbon &
alloy
Carbon &
alloy
Carbon &
alloy
carbon &
alloy
Size
tons* /heat
200
200
35
275
200
25
210
175
315
290
Coke
production



Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

           * Metric Tons (1000 kg)

-------
             Table C-2.  DIRECT REDUCTION PLANTS IN OPERATION AND ON ORDER AS OF DECEMBER 1974
                                                                                              15
en
Plant - location
Armco Steel, Houston, Texas
Korf Steel, Georgetown, South Carolina
Gilmore Steel, Portland, Oregon
HECLA, Casa Grande, Arizona0
Process
Armco
Midrex
Midrex
SL/RN
Start-up
year
1973
1971
1969
1975
Annual rated capacity,
tons product per year
A
330,000
350,000
300,000

B



65,000
A = In operation.
B = On order.
c Process residues from calcines Teaching-washing  plant  into sponge iron for use as precipitant
  for cement copper production.

-------
                         Table C-3.   U.S.  IRON ORE PRODUCERS,  SALIENT DATA
                                                                         16
Name of operation/
location
Arcturus mine
Marble, Minn.
Black River Falls mine
Black River Falls, Wise
Butler Taconite
Nashwauk, Minn.

Canisteo mine
Coleraine, Minn.

Cedar City mine
Cedar City, Utah
Comstock mine
Cedar City, Utah
Coons Pacific1
Eveleth, Minn.

Eagle Mountain mine
Eagle Mountain, Calif.

Enpire Iron Mining Co.
Ishpeming, Mich.



6-ie Mining Co.
Hoyt Lakes, Minn.




Ownership
managing
partner under-
lined
U.S. Steel

Inland steel
Inland steel
Hanna Mininq
Wheeling Steel
Mesaba-Cliffs
National Steel
Cleveland Cliffs
Utah
International
CF&I Steel

Coons Pacific


Kaiser Steel


Inland Steel
McLouth Steel
Cleveland Cliffs
International
Harvester
Bethlehem Steel
Youngstown S4T
Steel Co. of
Canada
Interlake
Pickands Mather
Haul-
age
(ore)
truck ,

truck
truck


truck


truck

truck
conv
_


truck


truck




truck,
rail




Ore
mined
dtp*)*
na

9,000
22,800


29,450


6, OOOs t

4,700nt

_


30,000


45,000




90,000





Ore
grade Ore
% minerals
na hem

33 mag
21.8 mag


38.10 goe
hem

39.8 mag, hem

51.92 hem
mag
hem


34 . hem
mag

33 mag




32 mag





Cone.
Cone. Cone. methods Agglo
output grade Cone, (pellet mera-
(Itpd)* X methods plants) tion
h-m

3,000 67 - mag. sep. pz
7,100 68 - mag. sep. pz


8,100 "j wash,
h-m

4, OOOs t 58 h-m, mag. -
sep
KB _ _ _

9,500 56-62 wash,
jig,
h-m,
spir
18,000 60 - wash, pz
Jig.h-m,
mag. sep
16,920 66.5 - mag. sep pz
flot
siphon


29,600 62.5 - mag. sep pz





'74
pro- % grade
Pellet Pellets jected final
firing (Hpd)* (Itpd)* product
- - na na

sg 3,000 940,000 64.75
g-k 8,000 2,626,000 66.1


1,200.000 56

-
- na na

950,000 51.92

- na -


sg 6,500 3,791,000 61


g-k 10,085 4,060,000 64.65




vst 29,100 10,600,000 62.5





Total
em-
ploy-
ees
na

239
520


228


na

na

57


1,500


827




2,768





* To convert to metric tons per day multiply by 1.016

-------
                                Table. C-3(cont1nued).  U.S. IRON ORE PRODUCERS, SALIENT DATA16
en
Ownership
managing
Name of operation/ partner under-
locatlon lined
Eveleth Expansion Co.
Eveleth, Minn.



Eveleth Taconlte Co.
Eveleth, Minn.
Grace Mine
Morgan town, Pa.
Gross-Nelson mine
Eveleth, Minn.

Grovel and mine
Randville, Mich.
Hill Annex mine
Calumet, Minn.



Hull Rust mine
Hibbing, Minn.
Jackson County -Iron. Co..
Black River Falls,
Wise.
Llnd-Greenway mine
Grand Rapids, Minn.

Lone Star Steel Co.
Lone Star, Texas
Armco Steel
Steel Co. of
Canada
Oglebay Norton
Dofasco
Ford Motor
Oglebay Norton
Bethlehem Steel

Rhude &
Fryberger

Hanna Mining
Jones &
Laughlin



Rhude &
Fryberger
Inland Steel


Jones &
Laughlin

Northwest
Industries
Haul- Ore
age mined
(ore) (Itpd)*
truck na




truck, 17,000
rail
1-h-d, 7,025
conv
truck 6,000


truck 14,250
truck, 20,000
conv



truck 4,000

truck 7,500
*

truck 20,000


truck na

Ore
grade Ore
% minerals
na na




23.5 mag

41.75 mag,
chalc
48 hem


35 hem,
mag
36.55 goe,
hem,
11m


58 hem

36 mag


30 goe.
hem,
11m
26.68 11m,
sld
Cone. '74 Total
Cone. Cone. methods Agglo pro- % grade em-
output grade Cone, (pellet mera- Pellet Pellets jected final ploy-
(Itpd)* X methods plants) tion firing (Itpd)* (Itpd)* product ees
na na na mag.sep pz g-k na na na




5,567 67.12 - mag.sep pz g-k 5,700 2,300,000 64.4

4,900 66.35 - mag.sep pz vst 4,900 1,160,700 65.4

3,600 54 wash, .... 300,000 54
jig.
h-m
5,850 61 - mag.sep, pz sg 6,000 2,045,000 63
flot
6,000 59.67 wash, .... 940,000 58
h-m,
h-m,
eye,
splr
3,200 54 wash .... 150,000 54

2,700 67.75 - mag.sep pz sg na 920,000 64.91


5,800 58.70 wash, - ... 918,000 58.70
jig,
h-m
3,821 42.10 wash - sn rotary - na 52.60
kilns
na




472

815

55


475
200




49

242


170


132

           * To convert to metric tons per day multiply by 1.016

-------
                    Table C-S(continued).   U.S.  IRON ORE PRODUCERS,  SALIENT  DATA
                                                                                16
Name of operation/
location
Luck Mining Co.
Silver City, N.M.
Maclntyre Development
Tahawus, N.Y.
Mather mine
Ishperaing, Mich.
— ' ' McKinley mine
gj McKinley, Minn.
Meramec Mining Co.
Sullivan, Mo.
Hinntac Plant
Mt. Iron, Minn.
National Steel Pellet
Plant
Keewatln, Minn.
Nevada Barth Corp.
Carl in, Nev.
Pilot Knob Pellet Co.
Ironton, Ho.
Pioneer Pellet Plant
Ishpesing, Mich.
Ownership
managing
partner under-
lined
Private
N L Industries
Republic Steel
Bethlehem Steel
McLouth Steel
Cleveland Cliffs
Sharon Steel
Jones 8
Laugh! in
Bethlehem Steel
St. Ooe Minerals
U S Steel
National Steel
Hanna Mining
Nevada-Earth
Hanna Mining
Haul-
age
(ore)
truck
truck
rail,
hoist
truck
truck,
rail,
conv
truck,
rail
truck,
conv
truck
conv,
Ore
mined
(Itpd)*
180
5,000
7,300
17,000
8,500
110,000
24,000
1,200
5,979
Ore
grade
%
43
28
54.69
56.5
45
22
31
60
34.6
Ore
minerals
hem
mag
hem,
mar
goe,
hem,
Hm
mag
mag
mag
hem,
mag
mag
Cone. Cone.
output grade
(Itpd)* %
none
1,000

12,000
5,500
35,000
7,200
none
5,616
-
62.64

60
69
65
67.2
none
65
Granite City Steel 1-h-d
Republic Steel
Bethlehem Steel
McLouth Steel
Cleveland Cliffs
Sharon Steel



hem,
inar
4,800
60.75
Cone.
methods Agglo
Cone, (pellet mera-
methods plants) tion
-
mag,
sep

wash
mag. sep pz
flot,
fine scr
mag. sep pz
mag. sep pz
mag. sep pz
flot
h-m none pz
'74
pro-
Pellet Pellets jected
firing (Itpd)* (Itpd)*
40,000
261,000(gt)
1.954,000
2,240,000
vst 4,800 na
g-k 35,000 12,500,000
g-k 7,740 2,600,000
105,000
sg 4,080 950,000
g-k 4,616 1,550,000
% grade
final
product
43
62.64
60.22
60
67
65.3
65.7
60
63.46
61.5
Total
em-
ploy-
ees
11
186
575
245
na
2,940
569
20
435
113
* To convert to metric tons per day multiply by 1.016

-------
                 Table C-3(continued).  U.S. IRON ORE PRODUCERS, SALIENT DATA
                                                                             16
Name of operation/
location
Pi tanner mine
Coleraine, Minn,
Republic mine
Ishpemlng, Mi.




Neville mine
Chlsholm, Minn.
New York Division
Star Lake, N.Y.
Rana mine
Klnney, Minn.
Reserve Mining Co.
Silver Bay, Minn.
Rouchleau group
Virginia, Minn.
Sherman mine
CMsholm, Minn.

Sherwood mine
Iron River, Mich.

Stephens mine
Aurora, Mich.
Ownership
managing
partner under-
lined
U. S. Steel

Jones &
Laughlin
Cleveland Cliffs
Wheeling Pitts.
International
Harvester
Pittsburgh
Pacific*
Jones & ?
Laughlin
Rhude &
Freyberger
Republic Steel
Annco Steel
U.S. Steel

U.S. Steel


Inland Steel


U.S. Steel

Haul-
age
(ore)
truck.
conv
truck




truck

truck

truck

truck

truck,
rail
truck,
rail

rail,
conv,
hoist
truck

Ore
mined
(Itpd)*
na

24,200




8,650

9,600

3,600

85,000

na

na


1,600


na

Ore
grade Ore
X minerals
na hem

36 hem
mag




na hem

23.2 mag,
mar
58 hem

24 mag

na hem.
lim
na hem,
11m

54.7 goe,
hem

na na

Cone.
output
(Hod)*
na

Cone.
grade
na

10,400 65.37




na

2,730

2,400

28,500

na

na


na


na





na

66.3

52

64.6

na

na


na


na

Cone.
Methods
Cone, (pellet
methods plants)
wash,
h-m
flot,
elut




wash

mag.sep
splr
wash

mag.sep

crush.
scr,
h-m
wet
scr,
h-m
-


crush,
scr
'74
Agglo pro-
mera- Pellet Pellets jected
tion firing (Itpd)* {Itpd)*
... na

pz g-k na 2,6)0,000




200.000

sn - - 943,000

100,000

pz sg 29,50010,491,583

... na

- na


385,000


- na

I grade
final
product
59.9

65.2




na

65.2

52

Total
em-
ploy-
ees
na

831




226**

509

29

60.76 2,850

58.17

59.18


55


58.10


na

na


109


na

*To convert to metric tons per day multiply  by  1.016

-------
                                            Table C-S(continued).   U.S.  IRON  ORE PRODUCERS,  SALIENT  DATA
                                                                                                                             16
CTl
CO
Name of operation/
location
Sunrise mine
Sunrise, Wyo.

Tilden Mining Co.
Ishpeming, H1ch.




U S Pipe S Foundry Co.
Russcllville, Ala.
Whitney mine
Nibbing, Minn.
Wyoming mine
Virginia, Minn.
Ownership
Managing
partner under-
lined
CFSI Steel


Algoma Steel
Jones & Laughlin
Cleveland Cliffs
bteico coal
Wheeling Pitts.
Sharon Steel
Jim Walter Corp.

National Steel
Hanna Hining
Pittsburgh
Pacific*
Haul-
age
(ore)
rail,
conv.
hoist
truck





truck

truck,
conv
truck

Ore
mined
(Itpd)*
na


36,800





700

20,300

3.200

Ore
grade Ore
% minerals
nu hem


36 hem





48 goe

na goe,
hem
na hem

Cone. Cone.
output grade
(Itpd)* «
2,400nt 48.99


12,300





1,000

13,500

na



65.61





50+

52.6

na

Cone.
methods
jig.
h-m

.





h-m,
flot
wash,
h-m
h-m

Cone.
methods Agglo
(pellet mera- Pellet Pellets
plants) tion firing (Itpd)*



flot, pz g-k 11,000
selec-
tive floe



na

• * *

-

'74
pro-
jected
(Itpd)*
500,000


none





na

700,000

175,000
(cone)
X grade
final
product
48.99


65.90





na

52.6

na

Total
em-
ploy-
ees
225


618





82

337

226**

            na - not available
            hero - hematite
            h-m - heavy media
            mag - magnetite
            mag sep - magnetic separation
            pz - pelletizing
            sg - straight gate
            g-k - grate-kiln
            goe - goethite
            wash - washing
            st - short tons
conv  - conveyor
nt -  net tons
jig - jigging
spir  - spirals
flot  - flotation
1-n-d - load haul dump
siphon - siphonsizers
vsf - vertical shaft furnace
chalc - chalcocite
lira - limestone
eye - cyclones
sid - siderite
gt - gross tuns
fine scr - fine screening
mar - martite
elut - elutriation
** - combined total  for Neville, Wyoming mines
sn - sintering
scr - screening
wet scr - wet screening
floe - flocculation
* - leased for U.S.  Steel
            * To convert  to metric  tons  per day multiply  by  1.016

-------
               Table  C-4.   MINE AND PLANT EXPANSIONS - IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY IN USA - 1975
                                                                                             17
Company
Bethlehem Steel
Cleveland Cliffs
Iron
Cleveland Cliffs
Eveleth Taconite
Hibbing Taconite
Inland Steel
Mitsubishi
U.S. Steel
National Steel
Plant
U.S. Steel
Sovereigh, In.
Krupp
Location
Cornwall, Pa.
Til den, Mi.
Empire, Mi.
Eveleth, Mn.
Hibbing, Mn.
Minorca, Mn.
Klukwan, Al .
Keewatin, Mn.
Virginia, Mn.
Black Mt. , Az.
Project3
co/pp
mi/co/pp
mi/co/pp
co/pp
PP
co/pp
mi/pp
PP
co/pp
mi/pp
Capacity
planned
tpy*
762M
10.2MM
5.4MM
6.1 MM
5.5MM
2.6MM
3.6MM
6.1MM

18.3MM
Start
1975
1974
1974
1976
1976
1978

1977
1978

Notes
Reopening of plant closed down in mid-1973.
Recoverable reserves over 900MM tons of 36%
iron ore. Started up in fourth quarter 1974.
Possible further expansion.
Partners in the expansion are Stelco, Dofasco,
Armco Steel .
Jointly owned by Bethlehem Steel and Pickands
Mather.
The co plant to be built by Bechtel and pp by
Dravo.
Capacity reduced from original 5MM typ of
pellets. Deliveries would start 3-1/2 yr
after construction starts.
NSP is owned by National Steel 85% and Hanna
Mining 15%.

Tentative agreement for partnership.
cr>
       a Abbreviations:   co  -  concentrator,  pp  -  pellet plant, mi - mine, M - thousands,  MM -  millions.
       * Metric Tons  (1000 kg)

-------
                                 Table C-5.  MAJOR CAPTIVE STEEL COAL MINES
                                                                           18
Controlling company
   Operating company
   State
Production,
metric tons,
   1974
 1. U.S. Steel Corp.

 2. Bethlehem Steel Co.

 3. Republic Steel Corp.
 4. Jones & Laugh!in Steel Corp.

 5. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.

 6. Inland Steel  Co.
 7. Kaiser Steel  Corp.
 8. Armco Steel Corp.
 9. Cannelton Industries,  Inc.

10. National Steel Corp.
11. Steel Co. of  Canada
12. CF  & I Steel  Corp.
U.S. Steel Corp.
Bethlehem Mines Corp.
Beth-Elkhorn Coal  Corp.
Republic Steel  Corp.
Jones & Laughlin Steel  Corp.
Gateway Coal Co.
Olga Coal Co.
Buckeye Coal Co.
Youngstown Mines Corp.
Inland Steel Co.
Kaiser Steel Corp.
Armco Steel Corp.
Big Mountain Coal, Inc.
Cannelton Coal  Co. (Div.  of
  Algoma Steel  Corp.)
Maple Meadows Mining  Co.
National Mines Corp.
Pikeville Coal  Co.
CF & I Steel Corp.
Ala., W. Va.,
Ky., Colo.,
Pa., Utah
Pa., W. Va.,
Ky.
Pa., Ky.
Pa.
Pa.
W. Va.
Pa.
W. Va.
111.
N. M., Utah
W. Va.
W. Va.
W. Va.
W. Va.
Pa., Ky.
Ky. E
Colo.
 14,865,306
  8,995,124
  3,111,566
  2,676,797
  1,639,469
    990,758
  1,148,662
    796,553
    419,229
  2,239-, 849
  1,859,365
  1,355,737
    414,949
  1,761,217
      9,504*
  1,754,256
    720,323
    489,655

-------
Table C-5(Continued). MAJOR CAPTIVE STEEL COAL MINES
Control 1 i ng company
13. Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp.
14. Keller Steel Co.
Operating company
W-P Steel Corp.
Buckeye Coal Mining Co.
Industrial Mining Co.
State
W. Va.
Ohio
Ohio
Total

Production,
metric tons,
1974
397,350
93,379
88,054
45,827,102
4989 TPD capacity.

-------
                          Table C-6.  COKE-OVEN PLANTS  IN THE UNITED STATES ON DECEMBER 31, 1973^'19
Name and address of company
Alabama
Alabama Byproduct Corp.
P.O. Box 10246
Birmingham, Alabama 35202
Republic Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 6778
Cleveland, Ohio 44101
Republic Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 6778
Cleveland, Ohio 44101
Empire Coke Co.
2201 First Avenue North
Birmingham, Alabama 35203
U.S. Pipe & Foundry Co.
330 First Avenue North
Birmingham, Alabama 35202
U.S. Steel Corp.
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
Woodward Iron Co.
Division of Mead Corp.
Woodward, Alabama 35189
California
Kaiser Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 217
Fontana, California 92336
Colorado
Colorado Fuel & Iron Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 316
Pueblo, Colorado 81002
Illinois
Granite City Steel Co.
P.O. Box 367
Granite City, Illinois 62041
Inter! ake Inc.
135th Street & Perry Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60627
International Harvester Co.
2800 East 106th Street
Chicago, Illinois 60617
Location
of plant

Tarrant


Gadsden


Thomas


Holt


Birmingham


Falrfleld


Woodward



Fontana



Pueblo



Granite City


Chicago

Chicago


Classifi-
cation
of plant

Merchant


Furnace


Furnace


Merchant


Furnace


Furnace


Furnace



Furnace



Furnace



Furnace


Furnace

Furnace


Major uses of coke
Captive




BF, other
Industrial

BF





BF, foundry,
other in-
dustrial
BF, other
Industrial

BF, foundry



BF



BF, foundry,
other in-
dustrial

BF, other
Industrial

BF

BF


Commercial
sales

BF, foundry,
other industrial


,




Foundry, other
industrial

BF, foundry


Other Industrial


BF, foundry







Foundry, other
Industrial
- .. 	






BF


Coal -chemical
materials
produced3

1,5,13


1,5,13,14,15,16,
17,19

1,5,13,14,14A,19


1,5,7,13,18


1,5,13,18


1,5,6,12B,13,19A


1,5,13,14,15,16,
17, 19A


3,5,13,18



1,2,3,5,6,12A,
126,13,14,15,16
17,19

1,5,13,18


1,5,13,19

1,5,13


—I
ro

-------
Table c-6(cont1nued).  COKE-OVEN PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES ON DECEMBER 31. 19731'19
Name and address of company
Illinois, continued
Republic Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 6778
Cleveland, Ohio 44101
Indiana
Bethlehem Steel Corp.
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18016
Citizens Gas & Coke Utility
2020 North Meridian Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 46202
Indiana Gas & Chemical Corp.
13th & Hulman Streets
Terre Haute, Indiana 47802
Inland Steel Co.
30 West Monroe Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
U.S. Steel Corp.
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
Youngs town Sheet & Tube Co.
P.O. Box 900
Youngstown, Ohio 44501
Kentucky
Allied Chemical Corp.
P.O. Box 1013R
Morristown, New Jersey 07960
Maryl and
Bethlehem Steel Corp.
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18016
Michigan^
Allied Chemical Corp.
P.O. Box 1013R
Morristown, New Jersey 07960
Ford Motor Co.
The American Road
Dearborn, Michigan 48121
Location
of plant

Chicago



Burns Harbor

Indianapolis


Terre Haute


Indiana Harbor
.

Gary


Indiana Harbor



Ashland



Sparrows Point


Detroit


Rouge


Classifi-
cation
of plant

Furnace



Furnace

Merchant


Merchant


Furnace


Furnace


Furnace



Merchant



Furnace


Merchant


Furnace


Major uses of coke
Captive2

BF, other
industrial


BF,

Other In-
dustrial




BF


BF, other
industrial

BF, other
industrial






BF, other
Industrial

Foundry, other
industrial

BF, foundry,
other In-
dustrial
Commercial
sales







BF, foundry, other
Industrial

Foundry, other
industrial











BF






BF, foundry, other
Industrial

Other industrial


Coal -chemical
materials
produced^

1,5,6,13,19A



1,5

5


5,13,14,15,16,17


1,5,7,13


1,5, 6, 12,13, 19A


2,5,13,18



2,5^7,13



1,5,13,14,15,16,
18

5


3,5,13



-------
Table C-6(continued).  COKE-OVEN PLANTS IN THE UNITED  STATES ON DECEMBER 31, 19731'19
Name and address of company
Michigan, continued
fireat Lakes Steel Corp.
Detroit, Michigan 48229
Minnesota
(Coppers Co., Inc.
1000 North Hamllne Avenue
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
U.S. Steel Corp.
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
Missouri
Great Lakes Carbon Corp.
299 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10017
New York
Allied Chemical Corp.
P.O. Box 1013R
Morris town, New Jersey 07960
Bethlehem Steel Corp.
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18016
Donner-Hanna Coke Corp.
Abby & Mystic Streets
Buffalo, New York 14220
Ohio
ATrTed Chemical Corp.
P.O. Box 1013R
Morris town, New Jersey 07960
Armco Steel Corp.
Middletown, Ohio 45042
Armco Steel Corp.
Middletown, Ohio 45042
Diamond Shamrock Chemical Co.
1100 Superior Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio 44115
Empire-Detroit Steel Division
Portsmouth, Ohio 45662
Location
of plant

Zug Island


St. Paul


Duluth



St. Louis



Buffalo


Lacka wanna

Buffalo


'
Ironton


Hamilton

Middletown

Raines vi lie


Portsmouth
Classifi-
cation
of plant

Furnace


Merchant


Furnace



Merchant



Merchant


Furnace

Furnace



Merchant


Furnace

Furnace

Merchant


Furnace
Major uses of coke
Captive2

BF





BF, other
Industrial


Foundry, other
industrial


Foundry, other
industrial

BF

BF, other
Industrial


Foundry, other
Industrial

BF

BF

Other in-
dustrial

BF, other
Industrial
Commercial
sales

BF


Foundry, other
industrial

Other Industrial



Foundry, other
industrial


BF, foundry,
other Industrial



Other industrial



BF, foundry,
other industrial

Foundry, other
industrial
Other industrial

Foundry, other
Industrial


Coal -chemical
materials
produced^

1,5,8,13
• V v 9 *^ 9 • v

5


1,5



5



2,5,7,13


1,5,8,13,18

1,5,8,13



2,5,7,13


1,5,13

1,5,8,13, 14, 14A,
15,16,17,18
2,5


5,13

-------
                                                                                                       1  19
                      Table C-6(continued).   COKE-OVEN PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES ON DECEMBER 31,  1973 '

Name and address of company
•
Ohio, continued
Inter! ake Steel Corp.
135th Street & Perry Avenue
Rlverdale, Illinois 60627
Republic Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 6778 >
Cleveland, Ohio 44101
Republic Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 6778
Cleveland, Ohio 44101
Republic Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 6778
Cleveland, Ohio 44101
Republic Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 6778
Cleveland, Ohio 44101
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
P.O. Box 900
Youngstown, Ohio 44501
U.S. Steel Corp.
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
Pennsylvania
Alan Wood Steel Co.
Consholocken, Pennsylvania 19428
Bethlehem Steel Corp.
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18016
Bethlehem Steel Corp.
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18016
Crucible Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 226
Midland, Pennsylvania 15059
Eastern Gas & Fuel Associates
4501 Richmond Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19137

Location
of plant
•miiM>mtt«MiBvm«iiBBH«*«a^Hi^MN

Toledo


Cleveland


Massillon


Warren


Youngstown
•

Campbel 1


Loral n



Swede! and

Bethlehem

Johnstown

Midland


Philadelphia


Classifi-
cation
of plant
•••••^^^•••MttHH^A^^BBMB^Ut

Furnace


Furnace


Furnace

\
Furnace '

•
Furnace


Furnace


Furnace



Furnace
-
Furnace

Furnace

Furnace


Merchant


Major uses of coke
0
Captive*
MMM^^HatfMIMMaHH^BVqB^B^^BVMVIV

BF


BF


BF, other
Industrial

BF


BF, other
Industrial

BF


BF •



BF, other
industrial
BF, other
Industrial
BF, other
Industrial
BF, other
industrial




Commercial
sales
^^••Em^lH^^qvVtlMH^HaBMMMHBBflVMMV^^BI

BF





BF











BF



BF, foundry,
other industrial




BF


Foundry, other
Industrial

Coal -chemical
materials
produced3
^^^•••^MBMHHMmBB^IBMMMnNBHHA

1,5,13,14,15,16


1,5,8,13,14,15,
16,17,19

1,5,13
,
-
1,5,13,19


1,5,13,14,15,
16,17,19

1,5,13


1,5,13



5,13,14A,17

1,5,13,14,15,
16,18,19
1,5,7,12,13,17,
18
1,5,8,13


5


CJ1

-------
                     Table C-6(continued).  COKE-OVEN PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES ON DECEMBER 31, 19731'19
Name and address of company
Koppers Co., Inc.
P.O. Box 739
Erie, Pennsylvania 16512
Jones 8 Laughlin Steel Corp.
Aliquippa, Pennsylvania 15001
Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.
2709 East Carson Street
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15203
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp.
1134-40 Market Street
Wheeling, West Virginia 26003
Shenango Inc.
Neville Island
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15225
U.S. Steel Corp.
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230

U.S. Steel Corp.
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
Tennessee
Chattanooga Coke & Chemical Co., Inc.
4800 Central Avenue
Chattanoota, Tennessee 37410
Texas
Armco Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 1367
Houston, Texas 77001
Lone Star Steel Co.
P.O. Box 35888
Dallas, Texas 75235
Utah
O7 Steel Corp.
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
Location
of plant
Erie


Aliquippa

Pittsburgh


Monessen


Neville Island


Clairton



Falrless



Alton Park
•


Houston


Da inger field


Geneva

Classifi-
cation
of plant :
Merchant


Furnace

Furnace


Furnace


Furnace


Furnace



Furnace



Furnace



Furnace


Furnace


Furnace

Major uses of coke
y
Captive



BF, other
Industrial
BF, other
Industrial

BF


BF, foundry


BF



BF



Foundry



BF


BF, foundry


BF, other
Industrial

Commercial
sales
BF, foundry,
other Industrial





*
Other Industrial


BF, foundry


Other Industrial







Foundry, other
industrial








Other industrial

Coal -chemical
materials
produced^
5


1,5,8,13,14,
14A, 15, 16,17
1,5,8,13


1,5,8,13


1,5,8,13


5,6,6A,9,9A,
10,11,12,126,
13,14,15,16,1
19.19A.21.22
1,5,8,15,19



1,5,13,14,15,



5


1,5,13,14,15,
16,17

1,5,13,14,15,
16,17,19

cr>

-------
               Table  C-6(continued).   COKE-OVEN PLANTS IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  ON  DECEMBER 31,  1973
                                                                                                                       .1,19
Name and address of company
West Virginia
National Steel Corp.
Weirton, West Virginia 26062
Sharon Steel Corp.
P.O. Box 291
Sharon, Pennsylvania 16146
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp.
1134-40 Market Street
Wheeling, West Virginia 26003
Wisconsin
Milwaukee Solvay
Coke Division Pickands Mather
311 East Greenfield Avenue
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53204
Location
of plant
Weirton
Fairmont
East
Steubenvllle
Milwaukee
Classifi-
cation
of plant
Furnace
Furnace
Furnace
Merchant
Major uses of coke
Captive2
BF, other
Industrial
BF
BF
Commercial
sales
Other industrial
Other Industrial
Other industrial
BF, foundry,
other Industrial
Coal -chemical
materials
produced^
1,5,7,8,13,18
1,5,13
1,5,7,8,12,13
5
-•Residential  and commercial heating Included in other Industrial.
•"Coke transferred to  intergrated operations and to affiliated companies.
^Numbers in this column refer  to coal-chemical  materials produced at coke plants  as follows:
   1  - Ammonium sulfate.
   2  - Ammonia liquor (NH- content).
   3  - Diammonium phosphate.
   4  - Monoammonium phosphate.
   5  - Crude coal tar.
   6  - Creosote oil, straight distillate.
   6A - Creosote oil, in coal-tar solution.
   7  - Crude chemical oil  (tar acid oil).
   8  - Sodium phenolate or carbolate.
   9  - Phenol (industrial grades).
   9A - Phenol, all other grades.
  10  - Cresols.
  11  - Cresylic acid
  12  - P1tch-of-tar, soft, (s.p. minus 110°).
  12A - P1tch-of-tar, medium  {s.p. 110° to 160°F).
12B - Pitch-of-tar, hard (s.p. over 160eF).
13  - Crude  light oil.
14  - Benzene,  specification grades.
14A - Benzene,  other industrial grades.
15  - Toluene,  all grades.
16  - Xylene, all grades.
17  - Solvent naphtha, all  grades.
18  - Intermediate light oil.
19  - Naphthalene, crude, solidlfing  under 74°C.
19A - Naphthalene, crude, solidifying from 74° to 798C.
20  - Pyrldine, crude bases.
20A - Pyridine, refined (2°C).
21  - Picolines.
22  - Sulfur.

-------
 Table C-7.  SUMMARY OF COKE-OVEN OPERATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES IN 1974,



                                  BY STATES8
State
Alabama
California, Colorado,
Utah
Maryland and New York
Illinois
Indiana
Kentucky, Missouri,
Tennessee, Texas
Michigan
Minnesota and Wisconsin
Ohio
Pennsylvania
West Virginia
Total in 1974
Plants in
existence
Dec. 31
7
3
4
4
6
5
3
3
12
13
3
63
Coal
carbonized
(thousand
tons)*
6,635
4,817
8,448
2,733
12,467
2,537
4,110
1,181
11,764
21,141
4,774
80,607
Yield
of coke
from coal
(percent)
70.49
62.89
68.61
62.45
66.48
67.74
73.08
70.69
68.64
69.31
69.93
68.42
Coke
produced
(thousand
tons)*
4,647
3,012
5,858
1,735
8,231
1,742
2,957
866
8,022
14,808
3,225
55,103
Metric Tons (1000 kg)
                                   178

-------
           APPENDIX D





ENERGY AND UTILITY REQUIREMENTS
                179

-------
Table :D-1.  ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN THE STEEL INDUSTRY  -  1972
a,20
Major source
Coal, tons
Natural gas, liters
Fuel oil, liters
LP gas, liters

Electricity, kWh
Others
Actual consumption
60.78 x 106
10.5 x 1012
5.42 x 106
3.47 x 108
in
4.72 x 10IU

Percent
63
21.7
6.7
0.1

5.2
3.3
  Total  steel production was 120.88 million metric tons.
  In addition to the coal quantities listed, an additional 11 million
  metric tons of coal were used by coke ovens and boilers with equiv-
  alent Btu's transferred to other than steel consumers in the form of
  electricity, steam and coke oven products.
                                 180

-------
           Table  D-2.   WATER REQUIREMENTS  OF THE  IRON AND

                      STEEL INDUSTRY -  19643'21'
Process/Mill
Blast furnace
Open hearth furnace
Basic oxygen furnace
Electric furnaces
Hot- roll ing mills and related
Cold mills and related
Coke plants
Sanitary, boilers, etc.
Blowers, condensers, etc.
Process water,
liters per ton*
of steel
9,100
33
262
33
15,400
8,700
200


Cooling water,
liters per ton
of steel
19,000
16,100
1,200
2,100
15,400
-
20,800
8,300
64,200
a Total production of steel was 115.3 million tons.   Estimated  process
  water and cooling water reuse were 18.1 and 52.2 percent,  respectively.

* Metric Tons (1000 kg)
                                   181

-------
  APPENDIX E





EMISSION DATA
       183

-------
                  Table  E-l.   QUANTITIES OF  POLLUTANTS DISCHARGED FROM IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY5
                                        BEFORE TREATMENT IN -|97123>24>25>26
                                                  (Thousand metric tons)

Pollutants
Air Pollutants
Particulates
Ammonia
Water Pollutants
Suspended solids
Ammonia
Cyanide
Phenol
FeS04
H2S04

Sintering
882
-
k
470





PROCESS
Materials
handling
545
-
—





Reduction,
blast furnace
4810
-
2464





Steel furnace
Open *
hearth
296
-
3780a





Basic
oxygen
1680
-
—





Electric
arc
166
-
—





Scarfing
163

*•





Pickling






458
123
Rolling
mill


4578





Coking,
by-product
59.2
203
_
2.84
0.41
2.19


CO
        a Total for open hearth and basic oxygen.

-------
Table E-2.  SUMMARY OF WASTE STREAMS (NON-RADIOACTIVE)
          RELEASED FROM IRON AND INDUSTRY22
                  (Percent of total)
Geographic area
New England
Mid-Atlantic
East North Central
West North Central
South Atlantic
East South Central
West South Central
Middle
West
Total metric tons/}
Iron manufacturing
Waste sludge
0.05
0.05
0.56
0.02
0.12
0.03
0.09
0.05
0.03
r 2,720
Consolidated
Steel plant waste
0.02
0.33
0.42
0.02
0.09
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.02
227,000
Coke Plant
Raw waste
0.002
0.33
0.41
0.01
0.07
0.02
0.06
0.06
0.02
36,300
                            185

-------
Table E-3.  METAL ANALYSIS OF EMISSION  TESTS (CONDUCTED  IN  1973)



     ON VARIOUS PROCESSES AT A MAJOR NORTHWEST STEEL  PLANT23
Source test
Sinter plant, ESP dust
Blast furnace, scrubber
sample
Open hearth, ESP dust
Basic oxygen, scrubber
sample
Electric furnace, baghouse
dust
Cadmium
ppm
13
14
250
80
580
Lead
ppm
320
830
18,000
4,600
32,000
Zinc
ppm
820
9,300
157,000
45,000
190,000
                               186

-------
Table E-4.  ANALYSIS OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGE FROM IRON ORE MINING AND

               CONCENTRATION OPERATIONS AT ONE MILL24
Constituent
Lead
Phosphorus
Arsenic
Selenium
Copper
Iron
Manganese
Magnesium
Zinc
Chlorine
Sul fates
Phenol
a Hardness as CaCO
PH
mg/1
0.014
0.002
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.167
1.94
27.6
0.03
10.9
227.0
0.005
o 287
3 7.0
        Table E-5.   SOURCES  OF MILL  WASTEWATER AT RESERVE MINING
                                                               28
   Source
Percent of total  flow
1640 liters per second
       (58 cfs)
Approximate suspended
solids content,  mg/1
 Cyclone overflows

 Primary flotation
  underflows

 Regrind flotation
  underflows

 Dewatering operations

 Pellet plant

 Crusher and  dust
  collection

 Miscellaneous
         17.5

         42.0


         15.5


         14.5

          0.5

          4.0


          6.0
      14,000

     150,000


      40,000


       1,000

       5,000
                                   187

-------
Table E-6.   POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS EMISSIONS



             FROM COKE PLANTS26
Status
Known present/
known hazardous





Known present/
suspected hazardous




Chemicals potentially present
Emission
class
Amines
Combustion gases
Polynuclear
Organometal lies
Fine particulates
Cyanides
Acid and anhydrides
Amines
Carbonyl compounds
Polynuclear
Sul fur compound-,
Specific
components
a + 6 Naphthyl amine
4-aminobiphenyl
Carbon monoxide
Pyrene
Chrysene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(e)pyrene
Dibenzo( a, h) -anthracene
Di benzo (a ,g )f 1 uorene
Nickel carbonyl
Tar
Soot
Hydrogen cyanide
Benzoic acid
Hydroxybenzoic acid
Hydrochloric acid
Ammonia
Ani line
Methyl am" line
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Paraldehyde
Methyl chrysene
Benzo(a)anthraceno
Dimethyl ben zanthracenes
Methyl mercaptan
Ethyl mercaptan
Phase
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
                    188

-------
Table E-6(continued).  POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS EMISSIONS



                   FROM COKE PLANTS26
Status










Suspected present/
known hazardous




Suspected present/
known hazardous









Chemicals potentially present
Emission
class
Trace elements



|
Specific
components
Beryl! ium
Silver metals and soluble
compounds
Mercury
Vanadium
Lead




Heterocycl ics




Hydrocarbons




Phenols




Cadmium
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Pyridine
Alkyl pyridine
Phenyl pyridine
(Mono) Benzofurans
Qu incline
Alkyl quinoline
Al iphatics
01 e fins
Benzene
Toluene
Xylene
Alkyl benzenes
Phenol
o,m,p-cresols
Phenyl phenol
Alkyl phenols
Alkyl cresols
Phase
Gas
Gas

Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gar,
Gas
/"»
Gas
Gas
Gas

Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
                           189

-------
            Table E-6(continued).  POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS EMISSIONS

                              FROM COKE PLANTS26
Status
Emission
 class
                                    Chemicals potentially present
 Specific
components
Phase
                        Polynuclear
                        Sulfur compounds
                        Trace elements

                        Fine particulates


                        Cyanimides
                     BipTienyl
                     Naphthalene
                     Alkyl  naphthalene
                     Phenyl naphthalene
                     Tetralin
                     Methyl tetralin
                     Acenaphtylene
                     Acenaphthene
                     Fluorene
                     Alkyl  anthracenes
                     Phenanthrenes
                     Alkyl  phenanthrenes
                     Coronene
                     Carbazole
                     Acridine
                     Benzocarbazoles
                     Aklylacridines
                     Benzo(a)anthrone
                     Perylene

                     Hydrogen sulfide
                     Thiophenes
                     Methyl thiophcne
                     Carbon disulFide
                     Carbonyl sulfide

                     Selenium

                     Coke
                     Coal

                     Ammonium cyanide
                     Naphthyl cyanide
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas

                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas

                          Gas

                          Gas
                          Gas

                          Gas
                          Gas
                                      190

-------
Table E-7.  CHEMICALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN EMISSIONS FROM



        COKE QUENCHING AND DIRECT COOLING OPERATION26
Status
Known present/
known hazardous






Known present/
suspected hazardous





Chemicals potentially present
Emission
class
Amines
Combustion gases
Phenols
Polynuclear
Organometallics
Fine particulates
Cyanides
Acid and anhydrides
Amines
Inorganic salts
Carbonyl compounds
Heterocyclics
Hydrocarbon
Specific
components
a + 0 Napthyl amine
4-aminobiphenyl
Carbon monoxide
Phenol
Pyrene
Chrysene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(e)pyrene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Dibenzo(a,g)fluorene
Nickel carbonyl
Tar
Soot
Hydrogen cyanide
Benzoic acid
Hydro xybenzoic acid
Hydrochloric acid
Sulfur acid
Ammonia
Aniline
Methyl anilines
Ammonia
Ammonium sulfate
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Paraldehyde
Pyridine
Benzene
Toluene
Xylene
Phase
Gas
Gas
Gas
Aqueous
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Aqueous
Gas
Gas
Gas
Aqueous
Aqueous
Gas/Aqueous
Gas/Aqueous
Gas
Aqueous
Aqueous
Aqueous
Aqueous
                             191

-------
Table E-7 (Continued).   CHEMICALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN EMISSIONS



         FROM COKE QUENCHING AND DIRECT COOLING OPERATION26
Status






















Suspected present/
known hazardous






•;
i








Chemicals potentially present
Emission
class
Phenols
Polynuclear


Sulfur compounds


Trace elements










Organometallics
Cyanides


Heterocyclics







Hydrocarbons





Phenols



Specific
components
o,m,p-Cresol
Methyl chrysenes
Benzo(a)anthracene
Dimethyl benzanthracene
Methyl mercaptan
Ethyl mercaptan
Thiophenes
Beryl 1 i urn
Silver metals and
soluble compounds
Mercury
Vanadium
Lead
Cadmi urn
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Selenium
Nickel carbonyl
Hydrogen cyanide
Ammonium cyanide
Ammonium thiocyanate
Pyridine
Alkyl pyri dines
Phenyl pyri dine
(Mono) Benzofurans
Quinoline
Alkylquinolines
Dibenzofuran
Alkyl dibenzonfurans
Aliphatics
Olefins
Benzene
Tol uene
Xyl ene
Alkyl benzenes
Phenol
o,m,p-Cresols
Phenyl phenol
Xylenols
Phase
Aqueous
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Aqueous
Gas
Gas

Gas/Aqueous
Gas
Gas/Aqueous
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Aqueous
Aqueous
Aqueous
Aqueous
Aqueous
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas
Gas

-------
     Table E-7 (Continued).  CHEMICALS  POTENTIALLY  PRESENT  IN  EMISSIONS

              FROM COKE QUENCHING AND DIRECT COOLING OPERATION26
Status
Emission
 class
                                     Chemicals potentially present
 Specific
components
Phase
                         Polynuclear
                         Sulfur compounds
                         Trace elements
                         Fine particulate:
                         Cyanides
                                              Alky!
                                              Alkyl
                           phenols
                           cresols
                     Biphenyl
                     Naphthalene
                     Alkyl naphthalenes
                     Phenyl naphthalenes
                     Tetralin
                     Methyl tetralins
                     Acenaphthylene
                     Acenaphthene
                     Fluorene
                     Anthracene
                     Alkyl anthracenes
                     Phenanthrenes
                     Alkyl phenanthrenes
                     Coronene
                     Carbazole
                     Acridine
                     Benzocarbazoles
                     Alkylacridines
                     Benzo(a)anthrone
                     Perylene

                     Hydrogen sulfide
                     Thiophenes
                     Methyl thiophenes
                     Carbon disulfide
                     Carbonyl sulfide

                     Selenium
                     Arsenic  (arsenic  tri-
                        oxide, sodium arsenate,
                        sodium arsenite)
                     Barium  (acetate,  chloride,
                        nitrate)
                     Cadmium  (chloride,  nitrate
                        sulfate)

                     Coke
                     Coal

                     Ammonium cyanide
                     Naphthyl cyanide
                          Gas
                          Gas

                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas

                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas
                          Gas

                          Gas
                        Aqueous
                                                                          Aqueous

                                                                          Aqueous
                           Gas
                           Gas

                           Gas
                           Gas
                                    193

-------
            APPENDIX F



TYPES AND NUMBERS OF STEEL FURNACES
               195

-------
         Table F-l .  ELECTRIC DIRECT-ARC STEELMAKING  FURNACES

              IN THE UNITED STATES,  AS OF JANUARY 1,  197027
Capacity
range,
net tons*
1 - 5
6-10
11 - 15
16 - 20
21 - 25
26 - 30
31 - 35
36 - 40
41 - 45
46 - 50
51 - 60
61 - 70
71 - 80
si - :o
91 - "1 00
101 - 120
121 - 140
141 - 160
161 - 180
181 - 200
201 - 225
226 - 250
400
Total
Number
of
furnaces
15
17
44
20
19
14
11
6
8
12
12
13
19
7
12
10
3
22
6
10
2
1
1
284
Source:  Iron and Steel Works Directory of the United States and Canada,
         published by American Iron and Steel  Institute, New York, N.Y.
         (1970).
* Metric tons  (1000 kg)
                                   196

-------
    Table F-2.   BASIC  OPEN-HEARTH  FURNACES IN THE UNITED STATES27



                             (as  of January 1, 1970)
Rated capacity
per heat, net tons*
11 - 30
31 - 50
51 - 70
71 - 90
91 - 110
111 - 130
131 - 150
151 - 170
171 - 190
191-210
211 - 230
231 - 280
281 - 330
331 - 380
381 - 400
401 - 450
451 - 500
501 - 550
551 - 600
Tons* of open-hearth steel produced,
thousands of net tons*
Percent of total raw steel production
Furnaces over 191 -ton* capacity
Furnaces under 191 -ton* capacity
All types including
stationary and filtering type

4
4
2
13
_
76
33
51
61
39
40
33
28
13
7
1
2
1
60,934

43.2
i
225
183
* Metric tons  (1000 kg)
                                   197

-------
Table F-3.  BASIC OXYGEN PROCESS STEELMAKING FURNACES IN THE
       UNITED STATES, CLASSIFIED INTO CAPACITY RANGES27
                  (As of January 1, 1970)
Capacity
range,
net tons*
51 - 75
76 - 100
101 - 125
126 - 150
151 - 175
176 - 200
201 - 225
226 - 250
251 - 275
276 - 300
301 - 325
326 - 350
Number of furnaces
with rated capacities
within range
2
8
10
11
_
15
7
6
4
9
-
2
            * Metric Tons (1000 kg)
                            198

-------
REFERENCES FOR APPENDICES
            199

-------
                         REFERENCES FOR APPENDICES
  1.   Kirk-Othmer.  Iron.  In:  Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, Volume
      12, New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1968.  p. 1-21.

  2.   Annual Statistical Report.  American Iron and Steel Institute -
      1973.  Washington, D.C.  1974.

  3.   Coke and Coal Chemicals in 1974.  Mineral Industry Surveys,  U.S.
      Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines.  Washington, D.C.,
      November 11, 1975.

  4.   Labee, C.J.  Steel Making at Weirton.  Iron and Steel  Engineer.
      W1-W60, October 1969.

  5.   Aiken, G.E., and et al.  Streamlining the North American Toconite
      Industry.  Society of Mining Engineering.  October 1973.

  6.   Lee, Oscar.  Taconite Beneficiation comes of Age at Reserve's Babbit
      Plant.  Mining Engineering.  484-488, May 1954.

  7.   Benett, R.L., R.E. Hagen and M.E. Mielke.  Nodulizing Iron Ore and
      Concentrates at Extaca.  Mining Engineering.  6:32-38.  Jaunary
      1954.

  8.   Coke anc Coal Chemicals in 1974 (Preliminary release of information
      pending publication of Bureau of Mines Minerals Yearbook), Mineral
      Industry Surveys, U.S. Deparment of Interior, Bureau of Mines.
      Washington, D.C.  November 1975.

  9.   Kirk-Othmer.  Carbonization.  In:  Encyclopedia of Chemical  Techno-
      logy, Volume 4, New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1968.

10.   ESS, T.J.  The Modern Coke Plant.  Iron and Steel Engineer.   C3-
     C36.  January 1948.

11.  Light Oil.   Chapter 11.  In:  Coal, Coke and Coal Chemicals.
     Chemical Engineering Series, Wilson, Jr., P.J. and J.H. Wells.
      (ed).  New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1950.  p.  336-337.

12.  Perch, M. and R.E. Muder.  Coal Carbonization and  Recovery, of Coal
     Chemicals.   In:  Riegel's Handbook of Industrial  Chemistry,  Seventh
     Edition, New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1974.  p. 193-206.
                                   200

-------
13.   Wilson, Jr., P.J. and J.H. Wells.  Ammonical Liquor.  Chapter 23.
     In:  Chemistry of Coal Utilization, Volume II, Larvey, H.H. (ed).
     New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1945.  p. 1371-1421.

14.   Directory of Iron and Steel Works of the United States and Canada.
     Thirty-third Edition.  American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington,
     D.C.  1974.

15.   Kotsch, J.A. and C.J. Lakee, Annual Review 1974.  Iron and Steel
     Engineer, D1-D46, January 1975.

16.   Billion Dollar Expansion in U.S. Iron reflects High Demand Forecasts.
     Engineering and Mining Journal,  p. 106-157, November 1974.

17.   1975 E/MJ Survey of Mine and Plant Expansion.  Engineering and
     Mining Journal.  73-78, January 1975.

18.   1974, Keystone Coal Industry Manual.  New York, Mining Information
     Services of the McGraw Hill Publications, 1974.

19.   Coke Producers in the United States in 1973.  Mineral Industry
     Surveys, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines.  Washing-
     ton, D.C., September 1974.

20.   Mimmick, K.L.  The Energy Problems - Where are Our Priorities.
     Iron and Steel Engineer.  63-65, May 1974.

21.   Industrial Waste Profiles No. 1 - Blast Furnace and Steel Mills.
     Volume III.  The Cost of Clean Water.  Federal Water Pollution
     Control Administration.  FWPCA Contract Number 14-12-98.  September
     28, 1967.

22,  Office of Solid Waste Management Programs.  Hazardous Waste Stream
     Data.  Appendix B.  In:  Report to Congress, Disposal of Hazardous
     Wastes, U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency,  1974. p. 47-54.

23.  Yost, K.J. and et al.  Purdue University.  Flow of Cadmium and
     Other Trace Metals.  Volume 1.  National Science Foundation.
     Project No. PB-229478.  June 30, 1973.

24.  Lewis, C.J.  Metal-Mining,  In:   Industrial Waste Water Control,
     Chemical Technology, A series of Monographs, Volume 2, Gurnham,
     C.F. (ed). New York, Academic Press, 1965.

25.  Baillod, C.R., G.R. Alger,  and H.S. Santeford, Jr.  Wastewater
     Resulting from the Beneficiation of Low Grade  Iron Ore.  Michigan
     Technological University.   (Proceedings of 25th Industrial Waste
     Conference.  Purdue University.  Lafayette,  Indiana, May  1970).
     57 p.
                                   201

-------
26.  Cavanaugh, G, and et al,   Potentially Hazardous Emissions from the
     Extraction and Processing of Coal  and Oil,   Environmental Protection
     Agency, Publication No,  650/2-75-038.  April  1974.  p.  69-77.

27.  The Making, Shaping and  Treating of Steel,  Ninth Edition, McGannon,
     H.E. (ed).  Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania, U.S.  Steel Company.  1971.
                                  202

-------
                                TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                         (Please read /nttntctions on the reverse bcjorn completing)
 REPORT NO.
 ;PA-600/2-77-023x
  2.
   NTIS No. PR 266226/AS
                              3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION'NO.
 TITLE AND SUBTITLE
ndustrial Process Profiles for Environmental Use:
 Chapter 24.  The Iron and Steel Industry
                              5. REPORT DATE
                              February 1977
                              6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
 AUTHOR(S)

Terry Parsons, Editor
                              8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
  'ERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
 Radian Corporation
P.O. Box 9948
Austin, Texas 78766
                              10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                              1AB015: ROAP 21AFH-025
                              11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                              68-02-1319, Task 34
 2. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 EPA,  Office of Research and Development
 Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
 Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                              13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                              Initial: 8/75-11/76 	
                              14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                               EPA/600/13
 5. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Chapter authors are V.S.Katari and R.W.Gerstle (PEDCo.).  IERL-
RTP project officer I.A. Jefcoat is no longer with EPA: contact G.Tucker, Mail Drop
63. 919/541-2745.	
 8. ABSTRACT
          The catalog was developed to aid in defining the environmental impacts of
U.S.  indistrial activity.  Entries for each industry are in consistent format and form
separate chapters of the catalog.  The iron and steel industry encompasses a variety
of processes for transforming iron ore into fabricated iron and steel products: most
Large steel mills operate by-product coke plants that produce metallurgical coke and
coke by-products.  The industry is divided into five segments: ore preparation, coke
production, coke by-products  recovery, pig iron production, and steel manufacturing.
Five process  flow sheets and 30 process descriptions characterize the industry.  For
 ach process  description, available data is presented on input materials, operating
parameters, utility requirements,  and waste streams.  Related information, presen-
ted as appendices, includes  raw materials, company, and product data.
 7.
                             KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                DESCRIPTORS
                                          b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                                          c.  COSATI Field/Group
 Pollution
 Industrial Processes
 Chemical Engineering
 Iron and Steel Industry
 Iron Ores
 Coking
Coke
Pig Iron
Steel Making
Process Assessment
Environmental Impact
13B
13H
07A
11F
08G
12 D
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

 Unlimited
                  19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
                  Unclassified
                         21. NO. OF PAGES
                            213
                  20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
                  Unclassified
                                           22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
               203

-------