United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 2771 1
EPA-600/2-79-074
SW-740
April I979
Research and Development
Environmental and
Resource Conservation
Considerations of Steel
Industry Solid Waste

-------
                 RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES


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

    1. Environmental Health Effects Research

    2. Environmental Protection Technology

    3. Ecological Research

    4. Environmental Monitoring

    5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

    6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)

    7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development

    8. "Special" Reports

    9. Miscellaneous Reports

This report has been assigned to the  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series.  This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment,  and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental 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 reviewed 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-600/2-79-074

                                                             SW-740

                                                           April 1979
            Environmental and  Resource
            Conservation Considerations
           of  Steel  Industry Solid Waste
                                 by
                    V.H. Baldwin, M.R. Branscome, C.C. Allen,
                    D.B. Marsland, B.H. Carpenter, and R. Jablin

                         Research Triangle Institute
                             P.O. Box 12194
                   Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
                          Contract No. 68-02-2612
                              Task No. 73
                 Program Elements No. 2DB662, 1AB604, and 1BB610
                           EPA Project Officers:

        John Ruppersberger                             William J. Kline

Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory                    Office of Solid Waste
  Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry                     Washington, D.C. 20460
   Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                             Prepared for

                  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                Offices of Research and Development and Solid Waste
                         Washington, DC 20460

-------
                                    FOREWORD

     The iron and steel industry generates a wide variety of solid wastes.
Iron and steelmaking plants, containing process facilities such as coke plants,
blast furnaces, steelmaking furnaces, and steel finishing operations, generate
slags, sludges, scales, and dusts.  The different types of solid waste which
are generated vary widely in their potential environmental hazard.
     As a result of implementation of the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act,
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and other Federal and State laws
regarding public health and the environment, solid wastes have become an
increasing concern.  EPA is committed to a solid waste management program that
will not only protect public health and the environment but will maximize the
use/reuse of waste materials.  Specifically, management technologies which
recycle solid waste and thereby contribute to energy and resource conservation
are actively encouraged.
     The purpose of this report is to identify the origins, nature, and quan-
tities of solid wastes generated  in the iron and steel industry as well as
characterize the current waste disposal practices and resource recovery poten-
tial of the wastes.  Special emphasis has been given to potential changes and
alternatives to current industry  practice which may increase resource recovery
and reduce the environmental impact of solid waste disposal.
Steffeft Plehn
Deputy Assistant Administrator
 for Sol id Waste
        Burchard
)irector, Industrial
Environmental  Research Laboratory/RTF
                                      111

-------
                                    ABSTRACT

     This report examines the solid wastes generated by the iron and steel
industry relative to the impact of Section 4004 of the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act.  The quantities, properties, and origin of wastes are
estimated using flow diagrams, material balances, and generation factors.  Of
the estimated 140 million metric tons of solid waste (including in-plant mill
scrap) produced annually, 80 percent is either recycled or reused.
     Waste disposal practices are discussed, and a potential for groundwater
pollution is identified.  The capital cost to collect leachate from non-
hazardous wastes which could potentially endanger the groundwater is estimated
to increase the current landfill costs by 40 percent, but this cost is less
than one percent of the estimated future overall environmental cost.
                                       IV

-------
                                TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD                                                                    iil
ABSTRACT                                                                     iv
FIGURES                                                                      ix
TABLES                                                                       xi
ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS                                                xv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT                                                             xvi
     1.0  SUMMARY                                                             1
     2.0  INTRODUCTION                                                        4
     3.0  CONCLUSIONS                                                         5
     4.0  RECOMMENDATIONS                                                     6
     5.0  INDUSTRY CHARACTERIZATION                                           7
          5.1  Description of the Steelmaking Processes                       7
          5.2  Industry Overview                                             14
               5.2.1  Number of Plants                                       14
               5.2.2  Size and Capacity Distribution                         14
               5.2.3  Geographic Location of Plants                          15
          5.3  General Economic Status of the Industry                       15
               5.3.1  Capital Expenditures by the Steel Industry             24
               5.3.2  Status of the Six Largest Integrated Steel
                      Producers                                              24
                         U.S. Steel                                          24
                         Bethlehem Steel                                      27
                         National Steel                                      28
                         Republic Steel                                      28
                         Armco Incorporated                                  29
                         Inland Steel                                         30
                         Pollution Control Expenditures                      31
     6.0  WASTE CHARACTERIZATION                                             33
          Representative Iron and Steel Plant                                34
          6.1  Analysis of Processes that Generate Waste                     36

-------
                      TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd)
7.0
     6.1.1  By-Product Coking
     6. .2  Sintering
     6. .3  Blast Furnace Ironmaking
     6. .4  Basic Oxygen Steelmaking
     6. .5  Electric Arc Steelmaking
     6. .6  Continuous Casting and Primary Rolling
     6. .7  Hot and Cold Rolling
     6. .8  Finishing Operations
6.2  Magnitude of Solid Waste Generation
     6.2.1  National Solid Waste Generation
     6.2.2  Slags
     6.2.3  Iron Oxide Solid Waste
     6.2.4  Solid Waste Generation by State
     6.2.5  Solid Waste Generation by Geographical Region
6.3  Solid Waste Projections
     6.3.1  Effect of Air Regulations
     6.3.2  Effect of Water Regulations
     6.3.3  Effect of Industry Growth
THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF IRON AND STEEL SOLID WASTES
7.1  Treatment and Disposal Practices
          7.1.1
          7.1.2
          7.1
          7.1
        .3
        .4
        .5
            Slag Treatment and Disposal
            Sludge Treatment and Disposal
            Dust Treatment and Disposal
            Scale Treatment and Disposal
     7.1.5  Miscellaneous Waste Treatment and Disposal
7.2  Current Disposal Facilities
     7.2.1  Prevalence of Types of Disposal Practices
     7.2.2  Estimate of the Number of Landfills
     7.2.3  Present Disposal Costs
7.3  Environmental and Health Assessment of Current Disposal
     Practices
     7.3.1  Water Quality Requirements of RCRA
     7.3.2  Water Extraction of Solid Waste Materials
     7.3.3  General Information on Soil Attenuation and
            Leachate Movement
     7.3.4  Groundwater Analysis from Iron and Steel
            Landfills
     7.3.5  Descriptions of Selected Steel Industry Dump
            Sites
37
39
39
43
45
45
47
50

52

52
53
60
66
66

71

72
74
74

77

78

78
80
82
83
83

85

85
86
87
                                                                        89

                                                                        90
                                                                        91

                                                                        95

                                                                       101

                                                                       110

-------
                      TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd)


                                                                      Page

     7.4  Impact of Section 4004 RCRA Criteria                         114

          7.4.1  Landfill Site Monitoring for Enforcement of
                 Groundwater Standards                                 116
          7.4.2  Model Facility                                        120
     7.5  Alternative Disposal Practices for the  Iron and
          Steel Industry                                               133

          7.5.1  Sole Source Aquifers                                  134
          7.5.2  Waste Separation                                      134
          7.5.3  Artificial Liners                                     136
          7.5.4  Surface Waters                                        137
          7.5.6  Flood Plains                                          138
          7.5.7  Safety                                                139
          7.5.8  Other Criteria                                        139
8.0  IRON AND STEEL RECOVERY AND RECYCLING                             140

     8.1  Waste Treatment and Recycle                                  141

          8.1.1  Coke Plant Wastes                                     141
          8.1.2  Iron and Steelmaking Slags                            142

                    Air-Cooled Slag                                    142
                    Granulated Slag                                    144
                    Expanded Slag                                      145
                    Steel Slag                                         145

          8.1.3  Iron Oxide Recycling                                  147

                    Agglomeration Processes                            148
                    Direct Reduction Processes                         151
                    De-oiling                                          155

          8.1.4  Waste Pickle Liquor                                   156

                    Acid Regeneration                                  157
                    Acid Recovery                                      158
                    Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration                     158
                    Spray Roaster Type Process                         159
                    Fluidized Bed Roaster                              159
                    Sliding Bed Regeneration                           159
                    Operational Aspects of Regeneration                160
          8.1.5  Scrap Recovery                                        161

     8.2  Effect of Process Changes on Waste Production                162

          8.2.1  Changes Not Reduced to Practice                        163
          8.2.2  Processes Not Widely Used                             165
          8.2.3  Processes in Substantial Current Use                  165

                                 vii

-------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd)


                                                                           Page

               8.2.4  Description of Process Changes                         166

                         Blast Furnace Burden Preparation                   167
                         Fuel  Injection in the Blast  Furnace                168
                         Dehumidification of the Blast                      169
                         External Desulfurization of  Iron                   169
                         Direct Reduction of Iron (DRI)                      174
                         Preheating Scrap for Steelmaking                   179
                         Superheating Molten Iron for the BOF               179
                         Replacement of Open Hearth  Furnaces                181
                         Continuous Casting                                 181

               8.2.5  Effect of Process Changes on the Model Plant           182

                         Analysis of Process Changes                         183
                         Analysis of Resource Consumption                   185
                         Analysis of Solid Waste Generation                 192
               8.2.6  Future Iron and Steelmaking                           192

          8.3  New Direction Suggested by Recent U.S.  Patents               193

               8.3.1  Blast Furnace Slag                                    195
               8.3.2  Steelmaking Slags                                     196
               8.3.3  Blast Furnace Dust and Sludge                          196
               8.3.4  Steelmaking Dust and Sludge                           197
               8.3.5  Rolling Mill Wastes                                   198

REFERENCES                                                                  199

INDEX                                                                       207
                                    viii

-------
                                     FIGURES

Figure                                                                    Page
1         Flow diagram for a typical  2.5  Megatonne  plant                      8
2         Diagram of a blast furnace                                         10
3         Size and capacity cumulative distributions  of two  types  of
          steel plants                                                      16.
4         Size distribution of companies  that account for ~  90%
          national capacity (raw steel) by company                           17
5         Raw steel capacity of integrated companies                         18
6         Raw steel capacity by EPA region                                  19
7         Distribution of iron and steelmaking facilities                   20
8         Cash flow of the steel industry compared  to other  industries       21
9         Waste production from typical plant with  2,500,000 tonnes of
          steel per year                                                    35
                                                   /
10        Material flow for coke plant in production  of 2,500,000
          tonnes of steel per year                                          38
11        Material flow for sinter plant in production of 2,500,000
          tonnes of steel per year                                          40
12        Blast furnace material flow in production of 2,500,000 tonnes
          of steel per year                                                 42
13        Basic oxygen process material flow in production of 2,500,000
          tonnes of steel per year                                          44
14        Electric arc furnace material flow in production of 500,000
          tonnes of steel per year                                          46
15        Continuous casting, soaking, primary rolling material flow
          in production of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel  per  year               48
16        Hot and cold rolling in production of an  overall total of
          2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year                                49
17        Tin plating, galvanizing material flow for  2,500,000 tonnes
          of steel per year                                                 51
18        Illustration of relationships within the  hydrologic system         102
19        Abandoned gravel pit with a clay layer at its base                103
20        Diagram of a sanitary landfill  with leachate collection            121

                                     ix

-------
                                FIGURES (cont'd)

Figures                                                                    Page
21        Cost factors for various landfill  sizes                            126
22        The cost of waste impoundment as a function  of the  number
          of years of landfill  capacity for three  rates  of waste
          generation                                                        127
23        Annual  costs of capital  for optimum sized  landfills for
          various rates of waste generation                                 128
24        Waste-dust grate-kiln direct reduction  process flowsheet           152
25        Two versions of the injection process for  direct steelmaking       164
26        Sulfur  balance for a typical blast furnace                        171
                                 p
27        Ground  plan of Mag-coke  desulfurizing  plant                      172
28        Schematic representation of the desulfurizing  facilities of
          the torpedo-top-injection method                                  173
29        Schematic flow diagram of the Midrex Process                      175
30        Flowsheet of the Midrex Process                                   175
31        Continuous casting, soaking, primary rolling material flow
          in production of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year               184
32        Electric arc furnace material flow in production of
          500,000 tonnes of steel  per year                                  186
33        Basic oxygen process material flow in production of
          2,50*0,000 tonnes per year of steel                                187
34        Blast furnace material flow in production  of 2,500,000
          tonnes  of steel per year                                          188
35        Material flow for coke plant in production of  2,500,000
          tonnes  of steel per year                                          189
36        Waste production from typical plant with 2,500,000  tonnes
          of steel per year                                                 190
37        Melt shop, caster, rolling mill layout  for 100,000  ton per
          year facility                                                     194
38        Cast billet, intermediate shapes, and finished round              194

-------
                                     TABLES
Table                                                                     Page
1         Capacity Estimates by Process                                      14
2         Gross Income                                                      22
3         Imports:  % of Domestic Consumption                                22
4         Summary of Financial Statements                                    23
5         Financial  Summary of Six Integrated  Steel  Companies                24
6         Comparison of Financial Ratios                                     26
7         United States Steel                                               27
8         Bethlehem Steel                                                   28
9         National Steel                                                    29
10        Republic Steel                                                    29
11        ARMCO                                                             30
12        Inland Steel                                                      31
13        Pollution Control Expenditures                                     32
14        Individual Process Outputs for  Production  of 125,000,000
          Tonnes of Steel Per Year                                          53
15        Waste Generation Factors and Quantities for a Typical
          2,500,000 Tonne Year/Plant                                        54
16        Nationwide Waste Generation for 125,000,000 Tonnes of
          Steel Per Year                                                    56
17        Summary of Waste Generation for 125,000,000 Tonnes of  Steel
          Per Year              '                                            57
18        Iron and Steelmaking Slags                                        59
19        Chemical Analysis of Blast Furnace Dusts                          61
20        Composition of Blast Furnace Sludge                                62
21        Chemical Analyses of EOF Residues—Sands                          63
22        Chemical Analyses of BOF Residues—Fines                          64
23        Estimated State Distribution of Iron and Steel  Capacity           67
24        Estimated State Distribution of Wastes Generated From
          125,000,000 Tonnes Steel Production                                68
                                    x.i

-------
                                 TABLES (cont'd)

Table                                                                      Page
25        Waste Generation by Geographical  Region                            69
26        Iron Oxide Wastes Available for Regional  Treatment (Not
          Presently Recycled)                                                70
27        Order of Magnitude Estimate of Regional Plant Economics            70
28        Estimated Dust Generation to Air Under Present Controls            73
29        Impact of Future Air Regulations on Solid Waste                    73
30        Impact of Future Water Regulations on Solid Waste                  75
31        Projected Waste Generation in 1983                                 75
32        Quantity of Slag Sold and Value (1976)                             79
33        Slag Disposition From 125,000,000 Tonnes of Steel Per Year         80
34        Quantities of Slag at Selected Sites                               80
35        Sludge Disposition From 125,000,000 Tonnes of Steel Per Year       81
36        Dust Disposition From 125,000,000 Million Tonnes of Steel
          Per Year                                                           82
37        Scale, Disposition from 125,000,000 Tonnes of Steel Per
          Year                                                               83
38        Estimate of Major Landfills                                        87
39        Landfill Costs                                                     87
40        Cost Estimate of Present Disposal                                  89
41        A Listing of Permissible Criteria of Selected Leachate
          Components for Public Water Supplies                               91
42        Results of Aqueous Extraction Tests of Coke Plant Wastes           93
43        Results of Aqueous Extraction Tests of Iron and Steel Slags        94
44        Results of Aqueous Solubility Tests of Iron and Steel Sludges      96
45        Results of Aqueous Solubility Tests of Iron and Steel Dusts        97
46        Results of Aqueous Solubility Tests of Miscellaneous Iron
          and Steel Wastes                                                   98
47        Selected Leachate Components in the Groundwater of Various
          Iron and Steel Waste Landfills                                    104
48        Analysis of Groundwater from the Property Boundary (E,l)          106
49        Analysis of Groundwater from Valley Well  Below Slag Dump (E,2)    106
                                    xii

-------
                                 TABLES (cont'd)


Tables                                                                     Page

50        Analysis of Seepage Spring Water from a Dumpsite (A,7)            107
51        Polynuclear Aromatic Fluorescence Analysis                        107
52        Water Pollutants of Environmental Concern in Groundwater
          Seepage Site A                                                    108
53        Water Pollutants of Environmental Concern Detected in a Well
          at the Base of a Slag Dump Site E                                 109
54        Water Pollutants of Environmental Concern at the Property
          Boundary of an Iron and Steel Landfill  Site E                     109
55        A Comparison of Pollutant Levels in a Stream Flowing Through
          a Large Iron and Steel Landfill Site E                            110
56        Water Pollutants Common to Five Water Samples from Two Iron
          and Steel Landfill Sites                                          111
57        Summary of Estimated 4004 Criteria Costs                          115
58        Cost Factors for Surveying and Monitoring a Typical Two
          Acre Site                                                         119
59        The Cost of Landfill Liners  for  Various Sized Landfills           123
                                                    s
60        Landfill Costs for Nonhazardous  Waste Leachate Collection
          and Removal                                                       124
61        Cost Factors for the Model Impoundment  Facility                   125
62        Capital Cost to Line Landfills  for Various  Production
          Segments of the Iron and  Steel  Industry                          130
63        Capital Cost to Line Landfills  for Various  Production
          Segments of the Iron and  Steel  Industry                          131
64        A Summary of the Yearly  Capital  Cost to Construct  Lined
          Landfill Facilities for  Iron and Steel  Wastes  (Steelmaking
          Slags Excluded)                                                   132
65        A Summary of the Yearly  Capital  Cost to Construct  Lined
          Landfill Facilities for  Iron and Steel  Wastes  (Steelmaking
          Slags Included)                                                   132
66        Office  of Solid Waste  List of Hazardous Iron and  Steel Wastes     135

67        Uses of Air-Cooled  Blast  Furnace Slag  (1976)                      143
68        Uses of Granulated  Blast  Furnace Slag  (1976)                      144
69        Uses of Expanded  Blast Furnace  Slag  (1976)                        145

70        Steel Slag  Uses  (1976)                                           147

71        Cost Estimate  for  Waelz  Process                                   155
                                    xi-ii

-------
                                 TABLES (cont'd)

Table                                                                      Page
72        Use of Direct Reduced Pellets in EAFs                             176
73        Direct Reduction Installations in North America                   177
74        Implementation and Development of Direct Reduction (DR)
          Processes                                                         178
75        Regional  Distribution of Direct Reduction Plants and
          Projects                                                           178
76        Effect of Superheat on Typical BOF Materials Balance and
          Production                                                        180
77        Effect of Process Changes                                         191
                                    xiv

-------
                          ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS

BF             Blast Furnace
BFHM           Blast Furnace Hot Metal, i.e., molten iron as produced by the
               BF
BOF            Basic Oxygen Furnace
BOP            Basic Oxygen Process - refers to the BOF or Q-BOP method of
               steelmaking
EAF            Electric Arc Furnace
Megatonne      Specifies one million metric tons
OH             Open Hearth Furnace
Q-BOP          A special type of BOF with oxygen blown through holes in the
               bottom of the furnace
RCRA           Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
Tonne          Specifies a metric ton of 1000 kg
                                       x,v

-------
                            ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

     This report presents the results of work performed under EPA Contract 68-
02-2612, Task 73.  The major funding for this work was provided by the Office
of Solid Waste with the balance from the Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory, Research Triangle Park.  The purpose of this work is the deter-
mination of the nature and quantities of waste residues in the iron and steel
industry.  The research was conducted in the Energy and Environmental Research
Division of the Research Triangle Institute.  Vaniah H. Baldwin served as the
Project Leader.  Members of the Industrial Process Studies Section who
participated in the development and presentation of the findings include:
Marvin R. Branscome, C. Clark Allen, David B. Marsland, David W. Coy, and Ben
H. Carpenter.  Richard Jablin, Jablin & Associates, prepared the basic process
characterizations and process modifications to reduce waste quantities.
     The valuable assistance of Mr. Charles Duritsa of the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Resources—Pittsburgh Office—was greatly
appreciated.  Also the help and cooperation of many individuals in various
steel companies is acknowledged.
     John Ruppersberger served as the EPA Project Officer, a responsibility
which was shared by OSW's Jan Auerbach and William Kline.  The guidance and
direction of these three individuals is gratefully acknowledged.
     Further, we acknowledge the American Iron and Steel Institute for their
thorough review of this report.
                                       xvi

-------
                                  1.0  SUMMARY

     The iron and steel industry is characterized by the number of batch
processes which are both labor and capital  intensive.   The decline in profit
margins, together with the estimated cost of environmental control requirements,
could limit the industry's ability to expand to meet the projected steel
demand.   The cost of environmental control  requirements for air and water
greatly  exceed, the current cost of environmental control for solid waste
disposal facilities.
     The iron and steel industry produces an estimated 140 million annual
tonnes of waste (including metallic scrap)  approximately 80 percent of which
is currently either recycled or reused.
     Large integrated iron and steel plants contain coke plants and blast
furnaces which produce sludges, slags, dusts, and organic wastes.  Also,
these different wastes vary widely in their potential  environmental hazard.
For example, certain coke plant wastes are hazardous due to their polycyclic
organic  content, whereas the blast furnace slag is relatively inert.  In
addition, the form of the various wastes are distinctly different including
scrap metal, bricks, slag, sludges, dusts, and liquids.  Requirements for
waste transportation and disposal as well as recycle and reuse depend upon
these physical waste characteristics.
     Most of the iron and steel wastes which are currently neither recycled
nor reused are deposited in facilities which do not provide for leachate
collection.  Most of the disposition of nonhazardous waste is on-site with
approximately 30 percent off-site and 6 percent handled by contract disposal.
The groundwater under some of these sites is not suitable for drinking due to
dissolved solids, oil, pH, ammonia, chromium, manganese, phenols, cadmium, and
other components.  Many of these components have been identified through
various  water extraction procedures on the individual  wastes.  The water
extracts for almost every type of iron and steel waste contained materials
which could make the groundwater unfit for human comsumption.

-------
     There are substantial  differences in the landfill  requirements  for  hazardous
and nonhazardous wastes.   Considering only the potential  for  groundwater
endangerment at the property boundary (unfit for human  consumption,  among  other
criteria) of previously unendangered groundwater, a hazardous waste  can  possess
a significant probability of groundwater endangerment,  and  liners  are  required
for disposal.  Some nonhazardous wastes may possess the potential  for  groundwater
endangerment and landfill liners may be appropriate to  protect  the groundwater
at those sites.  If the management of the sanitary landfill elects not to  use
effective liners and groundwater monitoring indicates endangerment of  the
groundwater as a result of the landfill operations, either  closure of  the
landfill site, corrective procedures, or legal exemption is required.  Closure
and corrective action are expensive alternatives and would  tend to encourage
the use of liners for some nonhazardous wastes.
     The use of lined landfills for steel wastes with controlled discharge of
the collected leachate was assumed for calculating Section  4004 compliance in
this report, since this method of landfill operation would  restrict  the
contamination of groundwater by the leachate.  Excluding blast  furnace slag,
bricks, and rubble, proper landfill management under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act of 1976 CRCRA) for nonhazardous wastes will  increase  the
current cost of disposal ($58 million) by $21 million,  an increase of  40 per-
cent.  This is less than one percent of estimated future air  and water pol-
lution controls.  On this basis it is expected that the compliance of  the
steel industry with Section 4004 RCRA criteria will have little impact on
overall steelmaking economics.
     If the lined landfill ing of steelmaking slag is required,  this  would
increase disposal costs by $1.50 per tonne.  This additional  cost of disposal
is comparable to the value of steel slags for construction  purposes  and  should
provide an additional economic incentive toward the use of  steel slag  rather
than the disposal of it.  Additional economic incentives for  more extensive
recycling of iron oxide wastes is also expected. 'The industry  is also starting
to direct its efforts toward some more basic changes in steelmaking  which  will
provide more continuous processing and greater enclosure of the processes.

-------
These improvements in steelmaking processes will increase the efficiency of
production as well as reduce environmental problems including the generation
of solid waste.
     The iron and steel industry has accumulated enormous quantities of solid
waste from its operations in former years.  Because of the large volume
involved, it would not be economically feasible to relocate these wastes to a
lined landfill.  The alternative would be to prepare the surface of the
existing disposal pile in such a manner as to retard or prevent the infiltra-
tion of surface waters.  Acceptable methods would include grading, paving,
etc.  Costs to accomplish this have not been included in the report because
they will have to be determined on a site-by-site basis.
     Iron oxide wastes create the most difficult disposal problems because of
their physical size and chemical contaminants.  At present, of the 14,000,000
tonnes generated annually, only 55 percent is recycled.  The barrier to in-
plant recycling is essentially that of economic feasibility.  In certain
portions of the country, regional treatment plants may be profitable; however,
anti-trust regulations present a legal obstacle.

-------
                           2.0  INTRODUCTION


     The U.  S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency  is required, under RCRA (PL

94580),  to characterize and provide minimum criteria for  industrial solid

waste management practices.  The study of the iron  and  steel  industry is in
support  of these requirements.

     In  assessing the magnitude of the solid waste  disposal problem and

determining the areas of greatest urgency, several  topical concerns must be

addressed.  These include:

     1.   Industry characteristics—the number of firms  and plants,
         their  size, location distribution, products, and general
         economic status.

     2.   Waste  characteristics—identification  and  description of
         all  wastes generated by the iron and steel  industries
         including each waste stream and intermedia transfers and
         the use of this information in  pinpointing a representative
         iron and steel plant.
     3.   Treatment and disposal—descriptions of present  treatment
         and disposal practices, analysis of  the prevalence of on-
         site vs. off-site disposal, assessment of  the  impact of
         Section 4004 RCRA criteria, the impact of  current air and
         water  regulations, and evaluation of alternative disposal
         practices for the industry.
     4.   Industrial waste recovery—identification  of current
         practices and assessment of methods,  including patents,
         in which industrial  waste can be recovered, such as  energy,
         raw material resource, etc., and volume of wastes produced,
         and/or alter its form so as to  have  a  lesser impact  on the
         environment, and enhance resource conservation and resource
         recovery.

-------
                           3.0  CONCLUSIONS
1.   Although most iron and steel  wastes  are not  listed  as  hazardous, the
    available leachate testing data indicate that  leachate control  is
    needed  to protect the groundwater for almost every  type of  iron and
    steel waste.   The data indicate that leachate  is  produced which is
    unfit for human consumption and can, therefore, potentially endanger
    the groundwater.
2.   Most iron and steel wastes are currently deposited  in  facilities which do
    not provide for leachate collection.

3.   Proper  landfill management under RCRA for nonhazardous iron and steel-
    making  wastes, using leachate collection would cost approximately 40
    percent more  than current landfill methods,  but is  relatively  low in
    cost when compared to air and water pollution  control.
4.   There is substantial variability in the potential for  environmental
    endangerment  among the various producers within the same waste classi-
    fication.  This is consistent with differences in raw  materials,
    process variables and type of product.

5.   Technology has been developed to recycle or use most iron  and  steel
    wastes.  Approximately 80 percent are currently either recycled or  reused.
6.   Iron oxide wastes present the greatest difficulties in recycling.
    Approximately 55 percent are currently recycled.

-------
                              4.0  RECOMMENDATIONS


1.   An  investigation of the effects of raw material  quality  and  process
    variables on iron and steel waste characteristics  should be  undertaken
    to  identify the origins of the hazardous  components  of wastes.   For
    example,  alkali in ore can cause cyanide  formation in  the reducing
    conditions of blast furnace operation. A centrally  sponsored program
    would  avoid costly duplication of effort.

2.   The organic components of certain iron and steel wastes  which can be
    leached should be identified, due to the  possibility of  polycyclic
    organic materials in those extracts.

3.   Sources of low volume, perhaps intermittent,  wastes  should be identified
    so  that those wastes can be characterized.

4.   Extraction testing should be conducted on iron  and steel wastes.
    Current data are incomplete.

5.   Hazardous wastes such as coke plant tar should  not be  placed with non-
    hazardous wastes in lined landfills.  This practice  could conceivably
    require expensive treatment of leachate and any liner  failure could  be
    hazardous.

6.   Investigation into economical methods of accomplishing in-plant recycling
    of  iron oxide wastes should be undertaken.  Methods  would include de-
    oiling the waste, dezincification, and agglomeration.

7.   Legal  barriers to regional plants for treating  iron  oxide wastes should
    be  removed.

-------
                         5.0  INDUSTRY CHARACTERIZATION

5.1   DESCRIPTION  OF THE STEELMAKING PROCESSES
     This  study is  concerned with the entire sequence of steelmaking opera-
tions beginning with the coke ovens and ending with hot and cold rolling into
finished products.
     Figure  1  is  a  flow diagram for a typical integrated 2.5 megatonne plant,
that is, a plant  producing 2.5 million metric tonnes of steel per year.
Although ironmaking begins with the blast furnace, one of the raw materials
charged into the  blast furnace is coke and, therefore, the coke oven is
indicated  as the  starting point for any sequential examination of the overall
process.
     Coking  is carried out in brick ovens averaging 45 centimeters wide, two
to six meters high  and 10 to 15 meters long.  Up to 100 ovens are built
together forming  a  coke oven battery.  Finely ground coal is charged into the
oven through a system of fill holes, which are then sealed with lids.  The
charge is  baked at  about 1,100°C for about 18 hours.  Volatile chemicals are
removed from the  coal  and a porous solid mass of carbon remains.  The chemi-
cals driven  from  the coal exit the oven through standpipes.  These pipes join
a main which conveys the products to the gas by-product processing plant.
Here the by-products are removed as oils, tars, pitch, and ammonia, and the
cleaned gas  is utilized as fuel.  At the end of the cokemaking cycle, the
doors are  removed from the oven, the coke is pushed out and quenched with
water. The  processing and handling of coke produces a fine powder referred to
as coke breeze.   The coke itself presents no environmental problem, although
certain plants have a solid waste problem with coke breeze when adequate
facilities for utilizing it are unavailable.  Significant hazardous waste
problems arise in the coke by-product plant, however, where waste streams
contain polycyclic  aromatic compounds and other carcinogenic materials.

-------
                      Coal
                     On
                     Flux
                                              dust recycled to sinter
                                                              Scrip
                                                            1.002.700
                             .Sbg

                             'Sludge
           ELECTRIC
              ARC
           FURNACE
•Stag

 Dun
                                                             Steel
                                                             500.000
                                        2,500,000 S Scrap

                             • Salt
                  Shapes 1.350.000
                                                             Shapes 790.000
                                       Shape*
                                       2.HO.OOO
                                  1.900.000
                                                  Salts 240.000
                               HOT
                             ROLLING
.Sludge
.Seal*
• Scrap
                                  1.800.000
                                                _•> Sales 1.098.000
                                  702.000
                              COLD
                             ROLLING
. Sludge

. PicktoWaiK
                            700.000
                                   (Z038 Mcgatomn tteel a>a
-------
     The blast furnace design In present use originated around 1870;  however,
operating practices in the past 20 years have changed,  resulting  in a tripling
of its output.   The greatest change is the utilization  of sinter  and  pellets.
Sinter is a mixture of powdered iron ore and other iron containing dust,
limestone, and coke breeze burned on a moving grate,  forming lumps of fused
material suitable for blast furnace charging.  Pellets  are agglomerated pieces
of iron ore or concentrate that can be sized before charging to the blast
furnace.
     The blast furnace is the ironmaking system for the steel plant.   It  is
loaded from the top with pelletized iron ore, sinter, limestone and other
fluxing substances, and coke (Figure 2).  A blast of very hot air,  sometimes
enriched with oxygen and fuel oil or gas, is blown into the bottom  of the
furnace and a complex set of chemical reactions result in the production  of
molten iron containing 3 1/2 to 4 percent dissolved carbon.  The molten
product is blast furnace hot metal (BFHM).  In some cases, BFHM is  poured into
molds to make small ingots of metal referred to as pig iron.  The limestone
and fluxing agents melt and react with or otherwise trap the sand,  coal ash,
and other impurities to form a slag that amounts to 20 to 40 percent  of the
quantity of metal produced.  Slag is a secondary product from the blast
furnace and is currently used primarily as road bed and construction  fill.
     The blast of hot air through the furnace carries a great deal  ofdust out
with it.  This blast contains carbon monoxide and is valuable as a fuel.
Utilization of the offgas as a fuel to preheat the blast air requires that the
dust be completely removed, therefore, blast furnace dust does not appear as
an uncontrolled"emission.  Since this dust contains many raw materials of
value, it is recycled to the sinter plant where it is reincorporated with the
raw material input to the furnace.
     The steelmaking processes involve the removal of carbon from the blast
furnace hot metal to below 2 percent, in some cases below one-tenth  percent.
It may also involve the addition of other metals to form specialized alloys.
The major reactor for producing steel from hot metal is the basic oxygen
furnace (BOF).
     The BOF, a relatively recent development, is a pear-shaped vessel about
10 meters in diameter.  The furnace  is charged with up to 30 percent scrap

-------
                                             — Stack
                     Figure 2.  Diagram of a blast furnace.

metal, the balance being hot metal from the blast furnace, with some fluxing
materials, as necessary.  A lance is lowered to just above the surface of the
metal, and oxygen is blown at supersonic velocities.  In 12 minutes to an
hour, depending on furnace design, the carbon, sulfur, and silicon are burned
out of the hot metal and steel is formed.  This process emits tremendous
quantities of dust and fume and is equipped with air pollution controls.  Dust
laden air is collected in hoods and the dust is removed.  If dry control
techniques are utilized, the waste stream is in the form of dust.  This dust
is typically very fine and, therefore, difficult to recycle.  If a wet control
system is used, the dust appears as a sludge waste stream.  The slag output
                                       10

-------
of the BOF is  a waste problem, as it is not immediately suitable for some
construction fill  purposes due to its potential  for expansion.   Often some of
the slag is recycled to the blast furnace because of its iron,  manganese, and
lime content.   The Q-BOP is a modification of the BOF, in which oxygen is
blown through  the metal from tuyeres located in the bottom of the furnace.
     The electric arc furnace (EAF) is the second major producer of steel.
This furnace is a refractory-lined vessel with three graphite electrodes mounted
vertically that can be lowered into it.  The EAF is a flexible device that can
be utilized with oxygen lancing and other techniques to produce steels from
scrap or hot metal, or to produce high purity steels and alloys.  The majority
of EAF charges do not involve hot metal but consist solely of scrap steel.  A
small amount of limestone flux is also added to the furnace, thereby producing
a slag waste stream.  Dust is evolved from the furnace to a degree that
requires air pollution control equipment—usually a dry collection system.
The EAF dust is apt to be particularly high in zinc and other toxic metals,
thus causing difficulties in recycle and disposal.
     Steel produced from iron and scrap metal is converted to a useable form
by primary rolling, or continuous casting.  If primary rolling is to be done
the metal is cast into large ingots about 60 to 80 centimeters square and
weighing 10 to 50 tonnes.  The ingots are removed from their molds when they
are solid but still hot and then placed  into a soaking pit, a top opening type
furnace.  The bottom of this pit is covered with a layer of coke breeze before
the ingot is put in.  The steel ingot remains in this soaking pit until it is
homogeneous in temperature.  Then it is  removed and sent to primary rolling.
Soaking pit slag is formed by metal oxides that flake off the ingot and fuse
with the coke breeze.  It is removed periodically and landfilled.  This slag
is not comparable with ironmaking or steelmaking slag in that it is composed
of metal oxides and carbon.
     Primary rolling converts the hot steel ingot into a form that can be
further processed:  into slabs 60 to 150 centimeters wide and 5 to 23 centi-
meters thick;  billets (5 by 5 to 13 by  13 centimeters);  or blooms  (15 by 15
to 30 by 30 centimeters).  Bars can also be produced and the metal can be sent
directly to rolling mills for producing  structural shapes.  During primary
rolling, high pressure water  sprays remove the oxide film that continuously
                                       11

-------
forms on the red hot metal  and also cool  the rollers.  These sprays produce
waste scale and sludge.   The scale consists of large pieces of iron oxide that
have sloughed off the ingot.  These are usually returned to the blast furnace
as raw material.  Sludge consists of very fine pieces of iron oxide dispersed
in the water used for cooling and cleaning the metal.
     In the primary rolling process the ends of the slabs or billets are
metallurgically defective and are cut off.  This amounts to eight or more
percent of the metal becoming scrap.  The final product of primary rolling is
usually cooled and stockpiled for further processing according to facilities
and market needs.
     Continuous casting  is the alternative method of producing shapes from
liquid steel.  This method is becoming popular because it produces a higher
yield of steel product than with primary rolling, about 94 percent compared to
81 percent.  As a result, the waste stream is accordingly smaller.  In con-
tinuous casting, the molten steel is poured into a small ladle or tundish.  A
continuously controlled  valve in the bottom of the tundish pours the metal
into a water-cooled mold—usually made of copper.  The metal solidifies along
the surfaces of this mold and slides out of it through a system of guide
rollers where it is further cooled with water sprays thereby producing either
a billet or a slab.  After solidification, the metal is cut into lengths by
traveling torches, and sent to cooling racks to cool to room temperature.  The
waste stream output from this process consists of scrap and scale, since the
metal always continues to oxidize to iron oxide while hot.  This scale is
smaller than that from primary rolling and usually ends up in a sludge with
the cooling water.
     Nearly 90 percent of the shapes produced by primary rolling or continuous
casting are processed further by hot rolling.  The stored slabs or billets are
transferred to the hot rolling mill where the first operation is to reheat
them in a furnace to a temperature that allows flexibility for shaping.  After
reaching a suitable temperature, around 1200°C, the steel is transferred to
the rolling mills and further squeezed to the desired shape and dimension.
Since the metal is hot and continuously oxidizes, the process of scale removal
with high pressure water streams is again employed.  The result is a waste
stream of scale and sludge as in the case of primary rolling.  The sludge
                                       12

-------
produced is  often contaminated with oil  from the pressurized lubrication
system on the  bearings of the rollers.   Trimming and cutting also produce
scrap in this  operation.   About 50 percent of the output from the hot rolling
mill  is in a form desired by some customers and is sold at this point.  The
remainder proceeds to a cold rolling operation.
     The hot rolled steel has a black to gray-black coating of iron oxide  on
its surface.  Before cold rolling can be pursued, this oxide coating must  be
removed.  This is done by a process called pickling in which the metal  is
dipped into  sulfuric or hydrochloric acid.  For example, coils of 0.3 to 0.6
centimeter thick steel sheet, weighing about 30 tonnes, are unrolled and
welded into  a  continuous strip which passes through the pickle tanks.  The
metal travels  about 122 meters (400 feet) in a vat of acid at about 6 meters
per second (1100 feet per minute) if hydrochloric acid is used, or about half
that speed if  sulfuric acid is used.  At the end of the pickle line, the metal
is rerolled  into coils which are then sent on to the cold rolling mill. The
pickling operation produces waste acid, referred to as spent pickle liquor,
which has 10 to 25 percent iron in the solution.  This is a problematical
waste stream as it produces a large quantity of gelatinous sludge if it is
neutralized.  A large pickling line may produce as much as 500 liters (130
gallons) of  spent acid per minute, 24 hours a day.
     Cold rolling accomplishes three things.  First, the metal is reduced  to
the thickness  desired by the customer; second, the metal acquires a smooth
desirable surface finish and third, the cold metal is hardened by a metal-
lurgical transformation.  The rolling operation generates heat requiring  that
the rollers  and the metal be cooled with water.  In this case, plain water
cannot be used but rather an emulsion of oil and water is required.  The
cooling water  must be processed to remove tramp oil and also some sludge.   The
quantity of the sludge produced is a very small fraction, less than one percent
of that produced by hot rolling.  After the cold rolling process, the product
usually goes directly to the customer unless it is to be given further
finishing with zinc, tin, or other coatings.
                                        13

-------
5.2  INDUSTRY OVERVIEW
5.2.1  Number of Plants
       By updating information contained in the 1977 Directory of Iron and
Steel Works,3 the EPA Effluent Guidelines 1977 Industry Survey,4 and by
drawing upon other information on sinter plants,  estimates of the numbers of
operating plants in the U.S. in 1977 were obtained.  There were 169 operating
plants making either iron or steel or both.  There were 153 plants making
steel using either hot metal and scrap steel or just scrap steel.  There were
28 integrated plants that is, plants making coke, sinter, iron and steel, and
operating rolling mills.  There are 19 major and 72 smaller firms (91  total)
engaged in iron and steelmaking.
     Table 1 provides estimates of the number of plants at which each of the
basic operations (coking, sintering, blast furnace ironmaking, and steelmaking)
are conducted together with the estimated total annual capacity.  This Table
also shows that 50 plants were using continuous casting in 1977.

                     TABLE 1.  CAPACITY ESTIMATES BY PROCESS
Process
Coke
Sinter
Blast Furnace (BF)
Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF)
Open Hearth Furnace (OH)
Electric Arc Furnace (EAF)
Continuous Casting
No. of
Plants
46
35
57
35
19
120
50
Estimated Capacity
(megatonnes/yr)
58.4
50.2
95.0
88.3
22.9
31.8
21.3
5.2.2  Size and Capacity Distribution
       Statistical investigation of the plant size and capacity distributions
shows that the industry is divided into two distinctly different processing
types:  relatively small plants with EAF's and large complexes with BOF's,  and

                                       14

-------
some open  hearths.   For  this  reason,  separate distributions  have  been  developed
for those  two  types  and  are shown in  Figure 3 for use in  determining either
the percent  of total  plants or the percent of total  capacity less than the
indicated  size.   The frequency distributions shown are log-normal.
     Figure  4  shows, by  Corporation,  the size distribution of the plants  that
account for  approximately 90 percent  of national  capacity.  Capacity accounted
for by the integrated steel companies is shown in Figure  5,  along with that  of
plants with  only EAF's.   The latter collectively provide  a significant portion
of national  capacity and industry solid wastes.
     Raw steel  capacity  by EPA region is shown in Figure  6.
     In Summary:   Two large corporations, U.S. Steel and  Bethlehem account for
35.6 percent of national  capacity; five medium-sized corporations (LTV, Re-
public, National, Armco,  and Inland)  account for 36 percent; small  corporations
and minipi ants account for 28 percent.
5.2.3  Geographic Location of Plants
       Figure  7 geographically displays U.S. steelmaking  facilities with the
number of  plants in  each state identified.  Black areas represent locations  of
major steel  plants.   The close-dot shading of Pennsylvania,  Ohio, and  Indiana
indicates  that these states account for 54 percent of the total capacity;
horizontal shading,  that Illinois and Michigan account for 18 percent.  Wide-
dots identify  Alabama, California, Colorado, Kentucky, New York,  Texas, Utah,
and West Virginia as accounting for 24 percent.   Unshaded states  collectively
represent  less than  5 percent.
5.3  GENERAL ECONOMIC STATUS OF THE INDUSTRY
     The general economic status of the iron and steel industry is an  important
factor to  be considered  in implementing adequate control  and resource  recovery
practices.  The industry's cash flow, used for capital expenditures, dividends,
and debt reduction,  has  declined relative to other industries since 1974, and
in 1976, measured only 132 percent of its 1967 value (Figure 8).   In contrast,
the Standard and Poor's  400 Industries collectively measured 200 percent of
their 1967 value, and the paper industry measured 218 percent of its 1967
value.   Cash flow is defined as net earnings plus depreciation and amorti-
zation.
                                       15

-------
•g
  10,000
5.000   3,000  2.000
 1.000       500    300   200


Sze of Plant (1,000 ton)
                                                                       100
      Figure  3.  Size  and capacity cumulative  distributions  for two types
                  of steel plants.
                                          16

-------
       25 r-
       20.
       15-
u
<
LL
a
       10-
        5 -
•
-


_

-
^
j

-------
   cc
   111
   a.
   1
CO
                                                               'TYPICAL 2.5 MEGATONNE

                                                                       PLANT"
                                          o
                                          Tl
                                          m
                                          rn
                                                                                                           -  5
                 USS   BETH.   LTV-   REP.   NAT'L ARMCO   IN-  WHEEL- Kaiser

                            LYKES                    LAND  Pitts.
Lone   CF&I   Inter-   EN-   Electric

Star         Lake  VIRO   Arc

                  DYNE   Only
                                               INTEGRATED STEEL COMPANIES



                                      Figure 5.   Raw  steel  capacity of Integrated companies.

-------
<£>
      90
      70
      60
      50
      30
      20
                                                                                                         TON
                                                                                                      NEW VCHK
                                                                                                     'PHILADELPHIA
                                                                         ^^    VTA   VTA
                                                                                                                  -,60
                                                                                                                    GO
                                             4567

                                                       EPA REGION

                                          Figure 6. Raw steel capacity by EPA Region.
                                                                                                                    40
                                                                                                                    30
                                                                                                                        O

                                                                                                                        I
                                                                                                                    20
                                                                                                                    10
                                                                                                        V STf
10

-------
".  ,   	••  ,*'
     — - .*,*> -"•••
20 to 30 Mcgatonnas/yr
10 to 20 Mcgatonnes/yr
 1 to 10 Megatonncs/yr
                                                     Figure 7.  Distribution of iron and steelmaking facilities.

-------
              220
              200
              180
5   160
          B
          ^
          
-------
     The reduction of the profit margins may be approximated  by  focusing on the
decline of gross income—defined as revenue minus  operating costs—before the
deduction of depreciation, interest, and income tax.
     Table 2 shows gross income expressed as a percent  of sales  and illustrates
the decline in this gross return over the past 20  years.   Clearly, the trend of
declining in profit margins predates pollution control  expenses.

                            TABLE 2.  GROSS INCOME8'9
Years
1955-59
1960-64
1965-69
1970-74
1975-77
Gross Income
cent of Sales
19.0
16.6
15.4
12.3
9.7
as a Per-
(avg.)





     Imported steel has decreased the share of the U.S.  market  for  the domestic
steel industry and, at the same time, has restricted price  increases.  Imports
are expected to fall off in 1978 as the trigger pricing  mechanism takes
effect.10
     Table 3 presents the quantity of imported steel, as a  percentage of
domestic production, for the period 1973-1978.

     	TABLE 3.  IMPORTS:  % OF DOMESTIC CONSUMPTION10
     Year      1973      1974      1975      1976      1977     1978 EST.
     %         12.4      13.4      13.4      14.1      17.8     14.5
     Predictions for the near term,  from Standard and  Poors'  Industry Surveys,
are for a profit gain in 1978, but the improvements  are  expected to fall short
of what is considered to be required for modernization,  expansion, and divi-
dends.  A further improvement is expected through 1979 if the economy does not
slip into a recession and steel imports do not rebound.

                                       22

-------
     A summary of the financial statements of companies representing approxi-
mately 90 percent of the raw steel production is provided in Table 4 and
underscores the recent profit squeeze faced by the steel industry.

      TABLE 4.  SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS* (ALL DOLLARS IN MILLIONS)9

REVENUE
Employment Costs
Materials, Supplies, etc.
Depreciation, amortization
Interest on long term debt
Taxes other than income
Income taxes
(Gain) loss on discon-
tinued operations, sales
of assets
TOTAL COSTS
Net Income
% of Revenue
Current Assets $
Current Liabilities
Total Assets
Total Liabilities
Equity
Current Assets/Current
Liabilities
Li abilities/ Equity
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
1977
39,787.4
14,418.6
22,129.0
1,528.5
594.3
597.1
(452.4)
949.1
39,764.2
23.2**
0.06
12,356.6
6,800.6
35,413.7
17,776.3
17,637.4
1.82
1.01
2,857.6
1976
36,462.4
13,273.6
19,175.7
1,378.4
480.7
560.8
265.7
(9.9)
35,125.0
1,337.4
3.7
11,828.6
6,114.5
33,564.0
15,536.7
18,027.3
1.70
0.86
3,252.9
1975
33,676.3
11. 883.1
17,373.6
1,272.8
382.5
515.7
653.7
32,081.4
1,594.9
4.7
10,750.4
5,311.2
30,419.9
13,227.7
17,192.2
1.88
0.77
3,179.4
1974
38,243.6
11,858.5
19,900.3
1,327.2
353.7
482.6
1,846.1
35,768.4
2,475.2
6.5
12,212.5
6,729.5
29,506.4
13,263.2
16,243.2
1.81
0.82
2,114.7
1973
28,863.2
10,201.3
14,450.5
1,262.6-
357.4
452.5
866.7
27,591.0
1,272.2
4.4
9,512.2
4,965.0
26,132.7
11,619.2
14,513.5
1.92
0.80
1,399.9
*Companies  representing  90  percent  of  raw  steel  production.
**Reflects  substantial impact of  permanent plant closings.
                                        23

-------
5.3.1  Capital Expenditures By The Steel Industry
       Capital expenditures for replacement and modernization, modest capacity
increase, and pollution abatement will approximate $3 billion per year through
     8                                                  n
1980.   An AlSI-funded study by the A. D. Little Company   estimates a capital
cost of $24 billion for 1978-1985 to replace 40 million tonnes of raw steel
capability based on a historical replacement rate of 3.5 percent.  However,
this report adds to the $24 billion estimate the cost of environmental control
requirements for air and water, which increases the 8 year total  to $28.9
billion with no growth in capacity.  Based on the results of 1973-1977, cash
flow from net profits and depreciation would be $26.4 billion so  that, with  no
growth, the industry would fall short of capital, via internal generation, by
about $2.5 billion.11
5.3.2  Status of the Six Largest Integrated Steel Producers
       The six corporations with the greatest raw steel capacity  are listed  in
this section as U.S. Steel, Bethlehem, National, Republic, Armco, and Inland.
These companies accounted for nearly two-thirds of 1977 raw steel production.
     Table 5 is a comparative financial summary of the six corporations.
These data are used in compiling Table 6, which provides financial ratios for
the six companies, for all reporting companies, and for the whole industry
(from Dun's review) for comparison.
     However, with the recently approved merger of Lykes-Youngstown with LTV
Corporation (Jones and Laughlin Steel), the resulting corporation has a raw
steel capacity that ranks third nationally.  Financial information on this new
corporation is not included due to a lack of comparative data.
     Brief descriptions of company employment and capital spending projects
follows.
U.S. Steel
     U.S. Steel produces steel at 13 locations with a total corporate employ-
ment of 165,845 in 1977.  The company is engaged in extensive planning for a
new location in northwestern Ohio with a capacity of 2.73 million net tonnes
per year.  The investment cost is estimated at $1,430 per annual tonne
                                       24

-------
       TABLE 5.  FINANCIAL SUMMARY OF SIX INTEGRATED STEEL COMPANIES5'12
                                 (all dollars in millions)

Net Sales
Operating Margin3
Net Income
Capital Expenditure
Total Assets
Current Assets
Current Liabilities
Total Liabilities
Short Term Debt
Long Term Debt
Total Debt
Net Worth (Equity)
Invested Capital
Year
77
76
77
76
77
76
77
76
77
76
77
76
77
76
77
76
77
76
77
76
77
76
77
76
77
76
USS
9609.9
8607.8
1665.4
1887.7
137.9
410.0
864.7
957.3
9914.4
9167.9
3040.3
2791.2
1712.5
1637.4
4772.7
4038.9
250.0
195.3
2550.2
1959.9
2800.2
2155.2
5141.7
5129.0
7941.9
7284.2
Bethlehem
5370
5248
506.8
762.1
(18.7)
168
551.9
406.6
4898.9
4977.5
1495.7
1615.2
978.5
822.5
2720.0
2284.9
3.3
12.9
1154.8
1023.1
1158.1
1036.0
2178.9
2692.6
3337.0
3728.6
National
3138.9
2840.5
347.9
343.0
60.1
85.7
161.7
270.9
2827.6
2798.0
989.2
995.5
554.6
574.8
1546.6
1534.9
19.3
21.8
722.3
743.8
741.6
765.6
1281.0
1263.1
2022.6
2028.7
Republic
2909.4
2545.6
427.3
390.6
41.0
65.9
155.5
248.7
2406.3
2333.1
834.7
788.2
384.4
434.4
1072.3
1014.2
17.8
13.9
452.3
372.2
470.1
386.1
1334.0
1318.9
1804.1
1705.0
ARMCO
3549.2
3151.0
415.7
390.7
119.8
123.7
146.4
272.0
2882.8
2833.6
1053.8
1039.9
577.3
509.5
1419.8
1427.5
110.3
139.2
643.0
667.2
753.3
806.4
1463.0
1406.1
2216.3
2212.5
Inland
2681.6
2388.2
391.9
431.9
87.8
104.0
282.0
303.8
2302.4
2070.1
691.4
627.9
364.7
324.5
1155.7
965.5
13.2
11.0
614.0
480.5
627.2
491.5
1146.7
1104.7
1773.9
1596.2
aRevenue from sales minus manufacturing expense
bNet worth plus total debt
                                           25

-------
                                               TABLE 6.  COMPARISON OF FINANCIAL RATIOS5'12
N>
                                USS    Bethlehem   National    Republic    ARMCQ    Inland    90% of Industry8     Dun's Review (Dec. 1977)b
Current Assets
Current Debts
1977
1976
1.78
1.70
1.53
1.96
1.78
1.73
2.17
1.81
1.83
2.04
1.90
2.13
1.82
1.70
(3.01)
2.25
(1.80)
     Net Profits
     Net Sales

     Net Prof its
     Net Worth
     Liabilities
     Net Worth
X  100
X  100
1977
1976

1977
1976

1977
1976
1.4
4.8

2.7
8.0

0.93
0:79
     Operating Profit      1977   743.9
     (millions of dollars)   1976  1030.2

     Capital Expenditures  1977   864.7
     (millions of dollars)   1976   957.3
     Planned Capital
     Expenditures
     (millions of dollars)
         1978      NA
 (0.3)c
  3.2

 (0.9)
  6.2

  1.25
  0.85

294.5
561.4

551.9
406.6
                  500
  1.9
  3.0

  4.7
  6.8

  1.21
  1.22

319.7
327.5

161.7
270.9
                     NA°
  1.4
  2.6

  3.1
  5.0

  0.80
  0.77

245.8
217.8

155.5
248.7
                      225
  3.4
  3.9

  8.2
  8.8

  0.97
  1.02

325.2
294.3

146.4
272.0
  3.3
  4.4

  7.7
  9.4

  1.01
  0.87

256.4
300.7

282.0
303.8
2.4C
3.7

5.5C
7.4

1.01
0.86
                     121.0     290
 (5.7)      4.1     (2.2)


(15.1)      9.1     (6.2)


 (0.60)     0.83   (1.25)
      a Represents companies with 90% of raw steel production^
      b Represents 52 companies of blast furnaces, steel works, and rolling mills; the middle number represents the median, and the numbers in parenthesis
      represent the upper and lower quartile.
      ^Excluding pretax losses from plant closings
      dNA= Not Available

-------
 (including raw materials,  transportation, and support facilities).  The
 company reportedly  awaits  a  cost-price relationship suitable to justify the
 investment.
     Recently completed  projects  include installation of two EAFs, two slab
 casters, a plate mill, rehabilitation of five coke oven batteries, blast fur-
 nace enlargement at Braddock,  PA, a new pipe mill, and an electrogalvanizing
 facility.  Planned  projects  include a 182 tonne Q-BOP and a 4,545 tonne per
 day blast furnace at Fairfield, Alabama, air and water quality control facilities,
 taconite expansion, hot  strip  mill, coke oven gas processing facility, a new
 coke oven battery,  rehabilitation of two more coke batteries, and boiler
                             l ?
 emission control facilities.

	     TABLE 7.  UNITED STATES STEEL ($MM)7'12'13
                       1st Quarter
                         1978           1977      1976      1975      1974
Sales
Operating Profit
% of Sales
Pretax Profit (Loss)
% of Sales
Net Income (Loss)
% of Sales
Capital Expenditures
Raw Steel (million
tonnes)
% of Industry
2,427.9
68.9
2.8
( 91.7)
( 3.8)
( 58.7)
( 2.4)
— -
—

• «•
9,610
743.9
1.1
101.8
1.1
137.9
1.4
864.7
26.2

23.1
8,608
1,030.2
12.0
518.3
6.0
410.3
4.8
957.0
25.7

22.1
8,171
1,170.8
14.3
823.6
10.1
559.7
6.9
787.4
24.0

22.6
9,140
1,537.4
16.7
1,033.3
11.2
630.4
6.9
508.3
30.8

23.3
Bethlehem Steel
     Bethlehem operates eight steel producing plants.  A partial  shutdown was
announced at the end of 1977 due to a reduction in capacity at the Lackawanna,
N.Y. plant from 4.4 to 2.5 million tonnes per year, and at the Johnstown, Pa.
plant from 1.6 to 1.1 million tonnes per year, resulting in a reduction of
employment to 93,000 persons.  Competition from imports, flood damage (Johns-
town), and marginal operations where investment to modernize and  add pollution
control equipment could not be justified were cited as reasons for the shut-
downs .
                                       27

-------
     Projects include a new basic oxygen furnace at Burns Harbor,  a  blast
furnace at Sparrows Point, a scrap melter at Lackawanna,  a novel coke  quench
car, two water treatment plants, a new bar mill, and a new plate mill.
                                                      12
capital expenditures were cut by $128 million in 1977.

                     TABLE 8.  BETHLEHEM STEEL ($MM)7'12'13
Planned
1
Sales
Operating Profit
% of Sales
Pretax Profit (Loss)
% of Sales
Net Income (Loss)
% of Sales
Capital Expenditures
Raw Steel (million
tonnes)
% of Industry
st Quarter
1978
1,380.9
97.7
7.0
1.1
0.0
1.1
0.0
—
—

---
1977*
5,370.0
294.5
5.5
(120.3)
( 2.2)
( 18.7)
( 0.3)
551.9
15.1

13.3
1976
5,248.0
561.4
10.7
194.0
3.7
168.0
3.2
406.6
17.2

14.7
1975
4,977.2
597.6
12.0
283.0
5.4
242.0
4.9
674.3
15.9

15.0
1974
5,381.0
866.3
16.4
616.1
11.4
342.0
6.4
524.2
20.3

15.3
*Before nonrecurring writeoff of $791 million before taxes.

National Steel
     National Steel has three basic steel producing plants with approximately
36,000 employees.  Projects underway include a water quality control  system,
coke battery improvements, and blast furnace rebuilding at the Weirton, W.Va.
plant, a continuous slab caster at the Great Lakes Division, a wastewater
treatment plant, a novel coke pushing emission control system, and new coke
                                12
oven facilities at Granite City.
Republic Steel
     Republic Steel has six steelmaking plants with a total corporate employ-
ment of 41,000.  Two bottom blown basic oxygen furnaces (Q-BOP) were recently
installed at the Chicago plant and marked the end of open hearth steel pro-
duction for Republic.  Other projects include a continuous silicon annealing
line, 10 high speed grinders with air pollution controls to eliminate scarfing
at the Canton, Ohio plant, and a suppressed combustion air cleaning system for
                                       12
the basic oxygen furnaces at Cleveland.
                                       28

-------
                      TABLE 9.  NATIONAL STEEL f$MN07'12'13
                           1st Quarter
                              1978        1977
           1976
          1975
                     TABLE 10.  REPUBLIC STEEL ($MM)7'12'13
           1974
Sales
Operating Profit
% of Sales
Pretax Profit
% of Sales
Net Income
% of Sales
Capital Expenditures
Raw Steel (million tonnes)
% of Industry
846
50.4
6.0
1.6
0.0
2.4
0.2
_._
—
___
3,138.9
319.7
10.1
68.2
2.2
60.1
1.9
161.7
8.5
7.5
2,840.5
327.5
11.5
95.0
3.3
85.7
3.0
270.9
9.8
8.4
2,241.2
174.6
7.8
63.6
2.8
58.1
2.6
313.3
7.8
7.4
2,727.8
427.4
15.7
334.4
12.3
175.8
6.4
182.0
9.6
7.3
                           1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
Sales
Operating Profit
% of Sales
Pretax Profit
% of Sales
Net Income
% of Sales
Capital Expenditures
Raw Steel (million
tonnes)
% of Industry
831.2
61.9
7.4
31.8
3.8
9.8
1.2
—
—

---
2,904.4
245.8
8.4
41.6
1.4
41.0
1.4
155.5
8.4

7.4
2,545.6
217.8
8.6
41.0
1.6
65.9
2.6
248.7
8.7

7.5
2,333.3
251.1
10.8
91.4
3.9
72.2
3.1
200.0
8.0

7.5
2,741.4
438.7
16.0
298.6
10.9
170.7
6.2
102.5
9.6

7.3
Armco Incorporated
     Armco has eight steel producing plants with 33,000 employees.   In  1977,
steel accounted for 68 percent of corporate sales and 41  percent of the
operating profits.  Net income as percent of sales has ranged from  3.4  to  3.9
percent for 1975-1977, down from 6.4 percent in 1974.
     Recently completed capital projects include melting, casting,  and  billet
facilities at Kansas City, Mo., argon oxygen reactor at Butler,  Pa., and a
coal mine and processing plant in West Virginia.  Appropriations have been
                                       29

-------
approved for hot metal desulfurization at Ashland,  Ky.,  a  fine  coal cleaning
circuit at Big Mountain Coal, Inc., and expansion of Union Wire Rope facili-
ties.  Capital expenditures have been used with emphasis on modernization
                     12
instead of expansion.

	TABLE 11.  ARMCQ. INC.  ($MM)7>12>13	
                         1st Quarter
                           1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
Consolidated:
Sales
Operating Profit
% of Sales
Pretax Profit
% of Sales
Net Income
% of Sales
Capital Expenditures
Steel Alone:
Sales
Operating Profit
% of Sales
Net Income
% of Sales
Capital Expenditures
Raw Steel (million tonnes)
% of Industry
946.2
86.1
9.1
45.3
4.8
30.2
3.2
—









3,549.2
325.2
9.2
121.1
3.4
119.8
3.4
146.4
~
3,399.4
176.5
7.3
86.3
3.6
98.1
7.2
6.2
3,151.0
294.3
9.3
116.0
3.7
123.7
3.9
272.0

2,093.8
150.3
7.2
51.2
2.4
236.1
6.8
5.8
3,046.8
368.3
12.1
172.1
5.6
116.7
3.8
255.5

1,956.6
170.0
8.7
12.0
0.6
212.5
6.4
6.0
3,190.1
512.6
16.1
351.7
11.0
203.6
6.4
104.6

2,202.4
396.1
18.0
112.7
5.1
81.3
8.1
6.1
 Inland  Steel
      Inland Steel's only producing plant is their Indiana Harbor Works in East
 Chicago,  Indiana.  Total employment at Inland is 35,200.  79 percent of the
 company's steel  is shipped to the surrounding five state areas—Illinois,
 Indiana,  Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
      Inland is presently in the middle of a $2 billion expansion program
 started in 1974  and continuing through the mid !980's that is designed to
 increase raw  steelmaking capacity by 2.3 million annual tonnes.  The first
 phase of $800 million  expenditure is scheduled for completion in 1979 and

                                       30

-------
includes a new blast furnace, coke oven battery,  boiler-blower  house, environ-
mental controls, and raw materials facilities.   This will  result  in a 1.0
million tonne increase in capacity.  The second phase of $1.2 billion will
include a plate mill, improvement to the hot strip mill  and EOF,  a coke oven
battery, and slab casting machine.  A 1.3 million tonne increase  in capacity
                                  12
is expected from the second phase.

	TABLE 12.  INLAND STEEL (SMM)7'12'13	
                         1st Quarter
                           1978         1977      1976      1975       1974
Sales
Operating Profit
% of Sales
Pretax Profit
% of Sales
Net Income
% of Sales
Capital Expenditures
Raw Steel (million
tonnes)
% of Industry
756.5
61.2
8.1
28.6
3.8
24.2
3.2
___
___

— __
2,681.6
256.4
9.6
93.1
3.5
87.8
3.3
282.0
7.8

6.2
2,388.2
270.9
11.3
155.6
6.5
104.0
4.4
303.8
7.9

6.2
2,107.4
245.1
11.6
126.9
6.0
83.3
4.0
222.5
7.3

6.2
2,450.3
376.5
15.4
273.0
11.1
148.0
6.0
101.4
8.0

5.5
Pollution  Control  Expenditures
     Table 13  gives  a  comparison  of  the  amount expended by the six integrated
steel  companies  for  pollution control.
                                        31

-------
ro
                                        TABLE 13.  POLLUTION CONTROL EXPENDITURES12
                                                       (all dollars in millions)

Pollution Control Expenditures, 1973-1977 $
Pollution Control Expenditures, est. 1978 $
Total Capital Expenditure, est. 1978 $
Raw Steel Produced, 1977 (millions tonnes)
% of Domestic Steel Production, 1977
uss
410
196
LT.870d
26.2
23.1
Bethlehem
322
85
500
15.1
13.3
National
NA8
53°
NA
8.5
7.5
Republic
NAb
45
225
8.4
7.4
ARMCO
168
16
121
7.2
6.2
Inland
153
44
290
7.1
6.2
    aNA = not available
    b$330 million in place 1977
    cTotal of $105 million estimated 1978 and 1979
    "LT. less than ($870 million is previous 5 yr. average)

-------
                           6.0  WASTE CHARACTERIZATION

     This study is primarily concerned with the waste materials produced by
the iron and steel industry which are not likely to be hazardous subject to
regulation under Subtitle C of RCRA.  All wastes are identified, however,
including those now proposed by EPA as hazardous (Subtitle C, Sec.  3001).  The
term "solid waste" means any garbage, refuse, sludge from a waste treatment
plant, water supply treatment, or air pollution control  facility and other
discarded material, including solid, liquid, semi-solid, or contained gaseous
materials resulting from industrial activities, but does not include industrial
discharges which are point sources subject to permit under the Federal  Water
Pollution Control Act  (FWPC) Section 402, as amended.  Solid wastes in this
industry include slag,  scrap, sludge, scale, and dust.  This section charac-
terizes them in four categories:  coke plant wastes, iron oxide wastes, slag,
and scrap.  Waste production can be related to steel production through emis-
sion factors.  Flow sheets are provided  to identify the source of each waste
relation to the processing operations.   Wastes to air, land, and water are
considered.
     Waste production  by state, region,  and nation is given together with
information on its eventual disposition.
     The EPA Office of Solid Waste has proposed  (40 CFR 250, 12/18/78) that
certain iron and steel  wastes be listed  as hazardous.  A discussion of the
potential hazard from  these wastes is reported by Enviro Control, Inc.
Although data are presented in this report which may be relevant to the
classification of hazardous wastes,  the designation of wastes for inclusion
in the listings is not within the scope  of this  investigation.  Therefore, the
costs, requirements, and impact of hazardous waste disposal are not considered
in this investigation.  All industry waste streams not listed in the 12/18/78
proposal are considered subject to Section 4004  RCRA requirements.
                                        33

-------
Representative Iron and Steel Plant
     Figure 9 shows the product movement in a "typical" 2.5 megatonne inte-
grated iron and steel .plant.  The diagram shows tonnages for the various
intermediate products as well as the final delivered output.  It assumes that
all steel is made by the BOF and EAF.  The OH is omitted from this considera-
tion because it is a declining technology.
     It should be recognized, however, that the elimination of the OH from the
diagram is an arbitrary constraint which is imposed on the typical plant.  It
is expected that certain of the open hearths in the United States are of
relatively modern vintage, are equipped with environmental controls, and
operate with a substantial degree of efficiency.  The production of OH wastes
on a state and nationwide basis is included in the solid waste listings.
     Each of the individual processes, i.e, the coke oven, the blast furnace,
etc. are diagramed in greater detail in subsequent process diagrams.  These
process diagrams are not formal material balances.  They are presented to
illustrate quantities of waste arising from the given throughput and are based
on generation factors that may vary significantly from plant to plant.  The
number of significant figures used does not imply an obtainable accuracy; they
are given merely as a convenience to allow closure within these installations.
The diagrams show intermedia transfers of materials and are keyed to tables
which show tentative materials produced and indicate the influence of compli-
ance with present and future air and water pollution control regulations.
As will be noted in greater detail in Section 6.3, the total quantity of solid
waste generated in the iron and steel industry will be relatively unaffected
by compliance with anticipated air and water regulations.
     The first step in characterization was to identify those wastes that pre-
sent difficult problems for disposal.  For example, coke breeze is relatively
low in volume and is essentially completely recycled or reused at the present
time.  Coke by-product wastes are low volume but some are hazardous.  Scrap,
although high in tonnage, is also recycled or reused.  Blast furnace slag is
90 percent recycled or reused, whereas only an estimated 45 percent of steel-
making slag is recycled.  Of the iron oxide materials, the amounts which are
landfilled or stockpiled are 39 percent of the dusts, 43 percent of the scales
                                       34

-------
2610  -«	
Organic Sludga
                    1.268.300 Coal
                   	I
                        Coke
      32,000 Bre«ze -*	
1.970,000 Ore
  and Pellets
 40,000-*	
 Sludge
                i

210.000 Coke
Oven Gas
Sinter
10,000 Coke


691.000 Sinter
                         Blast
                        Furnace
    I
   t
557.000
  Slag
 41.000-*-	
 Sludge
1.600,000 Iran
521.000
 Scrap
         Basic
        Oxygen
        Furnace
                   *
                290,000
                  Slag
                                       Electric
                                         Arc
                                       Furnace
            ..  2,000.000 Steel
                           60.000 Slag
       80 Sludge-*

    2.500 Sludge "*
       ,, 500,000 Steri
                                        2,500.000 Steel
                                          Continuous Casting
                            Primary Rolling
                240,000 Sales -*—


      3,100 Sludge-*—'•	



                1,098,000 Sales -*•
                                                        -*- 43.000 Scrap"
                                                   2,140.000 Steel
                                                            223.450 Scrap
                                 V 1.900.000 Steel
                               Hot Rolling
      140.000 (Wet)-
         Sludge
       110 Sludge  -*-
                                                           •*- 62.350 Scrap
                                   1.801,200 Steel
                                                 v 703.200 Steel
                                 Pickling
                               Cold Rolling
                475.000 Sales -*•
      1.400 Sludge-*-
       530 Sludge   -<-
                                                   700.000 Steel
                                               Caivanizing
                                                Tin Plating
                                                                  •*• 14,500 Oust

                                                                  -*- 25,400 Dust
                                                                  -»•  6,500 Dust
                                                                                                -». 6,900 Sole
                                                                                -*-  60.600 Scale
                                                                                -*» 23.400 Soaking Pit
                                                                                          Scale
                                                                                ->-  32,900 Scale
                                                                                -*-  40 Scale
                                                             -*-125.000 Galvanized Product
                                                             •*• 100,000 Tin Plated Product
        Figure 9.  Waste production frojn typical plant with 2,500,000 tonnes of stesl per year (all numbers in tonnes).
                                                         35

-------
(which include soaking pit scales), and 53 percent of the sludges.  These
numbers present some indications of where the solid waste disposal problems
lie.
     The fact that a substantial portion of steelmaking slag is not used in a
productive manner is not as serious a loss of resources as with respect to
iron oxide waste.  The steelmaking slag may have, in many cases, substantially
little intrinsic value.  The iron oxide waste, however, represents a loss of
metallic value, not only of iron, but also of zinc, tin, and other metallies.
     The presence of zinc and tin in the iron oxide waste is of particular
significance.  Their presence in any substantial amount makes the waste un-
acceptable for conventional recycling to sintering and eventual return to the
blast furnace.  On the other hand, if they could be removed and recovered as a
separate metallic component, then the iron oxide could be recycled.  The
problem of recovering these metals lies essentially in the realm of economics
and plant size.  For economical removal of these metals from the iron oxide
and subsequent reprocessing of the iron oxide into a form suitable for
recycle, the process plant must handle larger amounts of wastes than are
produced in the largest steel plant currently in operation.  This leads to the
consideration of regional treatment for processing iron oxide waste in certain
selected areas of the United States.
     Additional information on all of these considerations is provided in the
following subsections.
6.1  ANALYSIS OF PROCESSES THAT GENERATE WASTE
     This section contains descriptions of the individual processes which
appeared on the flow sheet in Figure 9.  Estimates are provided for material
flow of the various products and of the waste material that is produced.
Where applicable, intermedia transfers of solid waste material are shown.
Solid wastes are shown in larger print on the individual diagrams since they
are of primary concern.
     An integrated steel mill performs all the operations needed to convert
the raw materials (iron ore, coal and flux material) into finished products.
Principal operations consist of coking, sintering, blast furnace ironmaking,
                                      36

-------
steelmaking via the BOF or EAF, continuous casting, hot and cold rolling,  and
various finishing operations.  The major operations are described in  the
following sections.
6.1.1  By-Product Coking
       Figure 10 shows a block diagram for a typical coking operation.  Of
particular interest in this study is the coal charged to the coke oven, the
coke which is produced, and the breeze which is a solid waste.
     The by-product coke oven heats coal in the absence of air to distill  off
the volatile matter and to leave coke as a solid residue.  The hot coke is
quenched with water and then diverted to the blast furnace where it acts  as
the fuel and reducing agent in the ironmaking process.  During the coke
quenching and handling operations, a solid coke waste (breeze) is produced.
     The gas which leaves the oven is diverted via a gas main to the by-
product plant where it is cooled, thereby condensing waste liquors and tar
products.  Subsequent processing separates light oils which are invariably
sold as by-products and ammonia which may be sold as anhydrous ammonia or
ammonium sulfate.  In view of current regulations regarding sulfur, it is
usually removed either as elemental sulfur or sulfuric acid.
     The processing of waste liquor customarily involves the use of distil-
lation followed by biological oxidation.  If lime is used in the distillation
process a lime sludge is formed; however, the use of sodium hydroxide avoids
the generation of this waste.  The biological oxidation process normally  pro-
duces a biological sludge.
     Recent emphasis on the control of emissions to the atmosphere from the
coking process has been directed toward the charging operation, the leakage
from doors, and coke pushing.  The control systems for charging and door
leakage can be arranged so as to direct emissions back into the oven and,
therefore, do not produce a solid waste as such.  The pushing emissions con-
trol, in contrast, captures the emissions in a control device and produces a
solid waste.  This waste, which is mostly fine carbon particles, is small in
quantity, approximately 0.5 kg per tonne  (one pound per ton) of coke produced.
     The only coke plant waste which may, with some confidence, be classed as
nonhazardous is coke breeze.  All other coke plant wastes contain either  oil,
                                      37

-------
Gi
00
                                   5,700 Uncontrolled Particulate
                                           Emissions
          1,268,343 Coal
                               Coke
                               Oven
32,000 Breeze
 (recycled, sold)
                                             900,000 Coke
                                           (to Qlast Furnace)
                                                                        210,000 Coke Oven Gas (to coki oven underfilling, sinter plant, etc.)
                                                                       Oleum Wash Waste,
                                                                          Neutralization
                                                                             Waste*
By-Product
  Plant
         540 Still Lime Sludge
                (landfillcd)
                                                                                   540 Tar Tank Sludge
                                                                                        (landfillcd)
                                                                                                                 Biological
                                                                                                               Treatment
                                                                                                                  Plant
                      'Quantity unknown, from light oil refining operation.
                                                                                                          1530 Sludge
                                                                                                            (landfilled)
                                                                                                                                                     72,100 Products
                                                                                                                                                     (Tar, Sulfate, Light Oil)
                                                    45,900 Water from Coke Oven
                                                   	». Final Effluent
                                                                                                                                                         33 Solids
                                        Figure 10.  Material flow for coke plant In production of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year (all numbers in tonnes).
                                                                                                                                              1

-------
tar, or other toxic compounds which could be classed as hazardous.  In a
typical integrated steel plant, all of the coke breeze is recycled or used.
     In summary, the coke plant produces both potentially hazardous and non-
hazardous wastes.  Currently, the nonhazardous wastes are typically recycled
or reused, leaving the hazardous wastes as a disposal or stockpiling problem.
6.1.2  Sintering
       Figure 11 shows a material flow sheet for the sintering plant with the
various charge materials indicated.  Some of the sinter is used to form a
hearth-layer which protects  the sintering grates.  The windbox exhaust is
indicated as passing through a cyclone and electrostatic precipitator (ESP).
Alternative control devices  are scrubbers and baghouses.  The discharge-end
emissions are generally controlled by means of a baghouse.
     The purpose of the sintering process is to agglomerate fine oxide ma-
terials into lumps necessary for charging into the blast furnace.  These
materials include fine ores, various recycled fine oxide waste materials from
iron- and steelmaking operations, fuel (often in the form of coke breeze), and
limestone for fluxing purposes.  In the sintering process, the material is
mixed, placed on a slowly moving grate and ignited.  A downflow of air through
the bed into the windbox below consumes the carbon, thereby maintaining igni-
tion and fusing the fine materials into sinter lumps.  The lumps are crushed,
cooled, screened, and delivered to the blast furnace.  The screening operation
separates fines, but these are recycled to the sintering machine.
     Dusts are generated in  two general locations in the process:  (1) the
windbox where dusts are collected in the windbox hopper and in the final air
pollution control devices, and (2) the discharge-end where dusts are generated
by breaking, screening, and  handling operations.  Nearly all of the dust from
the windbox which is collected is recycled entirely within the sintering
operation.  In some cases, the very fine dust which is collected by the bag-
house at the discharge-end is recycled as well; in other cases it is land-
filled.  In any event, the quantity of this dust is comparatively small.
6.1.3  Blast Furnace Ironmaking
       In the blast furnace, the various charge materials are delivered to the
top of the furnace and travel slowly down to the hearth.  The operation is

                                       39

-------
•fa-
O
                                 13,600 Dust ^
                                (recycled to sinter)
 179,000 Flux       	»•

 34,000 Coke        	»

 028,520 Ore        	»

 105,000 Dust, Scale           >

• 369,000 Sinter Finei          fr
               -182,000 Hearth layer        >

                111,500 Water       	+
                                                  Sinter
                                                  Plant
                                                                              141,3CO Combustion, Calcination Gasos, Gaseous Emissions
                                                                              111,500 Water Vapor
                                                                                  207 Dust to Air
                                                                                 Windbox
                                                                                 Exhaust
                                                                              (dust laden)
                                                                                                                               9 Dust to Air
                                                                                                                        Baghouse
Cooling
 Screen
Transfer
                                                                                               Hearth
                                                                                                Layer
                                                                                               182,000
              Fines
            369,000
                                                                                                                                      900 Dust
                                                                                                                                    (very fine dust,
                                                                                                                                    most landfillod)
091,000 Sinter (to Blast Furnace)
                                          Figure 11.  Material flow for sinter plant in production of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year (oil numbers in tonnes).1

-------
essentially a continuous one, but molten iron is extracted at intervals of 3
to 4 hours.  The charge normally consists of coke from the coke ovens, sinter,
pellets, lump ore, limestone, etc.  An upward flowing current of hot air burns
the carbon and creates conditions in which the iron oxide is reduced to iron,
and flux is melted to remove impurities.  When the furnace is tapped, the iron
is removed through one set of runners and the molten slag to another.
     After iron, the greatest quantity of solid from the blast furnace is
slag.  This material is usually crushed and processed to remove the entrained
iron which is recycled to the blast furnace.  As will be noted in Figure 12,
approximately 90 percent of the slag is used as an aggregate concrete, road
ballast, etc.  The remainder is disposed of in landfill operations.
     The gas leaving the top of the furnace passes through a cyclone, commonly
called a dust catcher, and a high energy scrubber before it is diverted to
various fuel consumers such as the blast furnace stoves which heat the hot
blast, blast boilers which produce steam, etc.
     Dry dust which is discharged from the dust catcher is recycled by means
of the sintering process.  The same is true for some of the sludge which is
collected from the clarifier that serves the wet scrubbing system.  However,
in the case of the sludge it is sometimes not used in the sintering plant
because of the somewhat greater difficulties experienced.  The reasons for the
difficulties lie in the finer nature of the particles and in the oil which may
be contained in the sludge.  This oil becomes vaporized in the sintering
process, thereby causing a visible emission at  the windbox end which  is very
difficult to capture.
     Recent environmental regulations have  necessitated total systems to
collect particulates of iron oxides and  kish which are generated during the
casting of iron from the blast furnace.   Kish is flakes of carbon emitted by
molten iron.  These emissions, which amount to  about 0.3 kg/tonne of  iron, are
generally captured by baghouses and delivered in the form of dry dust.  Most
blast furnaces in the United States at  this time do not capture casting emis-
sions so that the addition of control equipment will cause an increase,
although slight, in the generation of solid waste.
                                       41

-------
                                                                                                    Water
                                                                                        High Energy
                                                                                        Wet Scrubber
                                                               4,153,600 Top Gas + Oust
              25,400  DUST-
             (recycled to sinter)
                                           Dust
                                         Collector
-p.
ro
      691,000 Sinter

  1,970.000  Ore, Pellets

       128,000  Fluxes
        900.000  Coke	»

    Z.647,000 Air Blast  	».
                                                  Top Gas
                                                   + Dust
  Blast
Furnace
                                         1
                                 1,600,000 Hot Metal
                                   (to steel making)
  Settler
  Clarifier
(Treatment)
   Filter
                                                                    "557,000 SLAG
                                                                     (used as aggregate, cement, ballast)
                                                                                                                                 Water Recycle
                                                                                                                                         4,113,524 Top Gas (to stoves, boilers)
                                                                                                                                         34 Dust
                                     ^Effluent
                                     "42 Solids
                                                                                     "*•    40,000 SLUDGE
                                                                                        (5.000 landfill; 35.000 recycled
                                                                                             to sinter or stocked)
                                                                                                                                                1ft t R
                                      Figure 12.  Blast furnace material flow in production of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year (all numbers in tonnes).  '

-------
6.1.4  Basic Oxygen Steelmaking
       As shown in Figure 13, the inputs to the BOF are molten iron (hot
metal), scrap, flux, and oxygen.  The process is essentially a chemical  one in
which a jet of pure oxygen impinges on the bath of molten iron to oxidize the
carbon and silicon in the iron thereby generating the heat necessary to  melt
the scrap and purify the steel.  The metallurgy of this batch process is
highly controlled and the results are quite predictable.  The process cycle
time is called a heat and may be completed in 30 minutes to one hour.
     Upon completion of the heat, the molten slag is poured into a pot which
is carried to the end of the shop, dumped on the ground, and cooled.  Alter-
natively the slag can be carried from the shop to a remote area for disposal.
Magnetic separation is employed to recover metal!ics from the slag and recycle
them to the blast furnace.  Because the slag is high in lime and dissolved
iron oxide, some companies recycle a portion of it back to the blast furnace.
In other facilities, the slag may be used for road ballast and the like;
however, most steelmaking slag is landfilled.  Steelmaking slags may be  wetted
and aged six months to stabilize them before they are suitable for construc-
tion fill.
     The diagram of Figure 13 shows a wet gas cleaning system with associated
settler/thickener to remove fine oxide particulates from the offgas.  These
particulates are very fine in size and, depending on the type of scrap used,
may contain significant quantities of zinc and lead.  If so, it is usually not
feasible to recycle them to the sinter plant.  Therefore, the majority of
steelmaking dusts from the BOF are either landfilled or stockpiled, thereby
losing a potentially valuable resource.  Control of BOF emissions may be
achieved by a dry ESP, but the problem of solid waste disposal is essentially
the same as with the wet unit.
     In addition to the gas cleaning system shown in Figure 13, a BOF usually
employs equipment for collecting kish from the pouring of molten iron into the
shop ladle and from the shop ladle into the furnace.  There is also a trend
toward the provision of control equipment to capture fugitive emissions  that
escape from the vessel mouth during the furnace blow and during tapping.
These emissions are covered in a subsequent section which relate to the effect
of future air pollution control on solid waste.
                                       43

-------
1,600,000 Hot Metal-

 499,000 Scrap


 292,221 Flux



 190,000 Oxygen
 Basic
 Oxygen
Furnace
                              290,000 SLAG
                            (iron recovered; estimate
                               50% used, recycled)
                                                                                 250,000 OFF-GAS
                                                                                    200 OUST
                                                                                                   Water
                                                                                           WET
                                                                                         CLEANING
                                                                                          SYSTEM
-•-2,000,000 STEEL
                                                                                                Settler
                                                                                              Thickener
                                                    1
                                             41,000 SLUDGE
                                         (50% landfilled, balance stocked
                                                  or recycled)
                                                                                                                        Water Recycle
                                                                                                                                     Effluent
                                                                                                                                    21 Solids
                                                                                                                             •Nationally. 19'/« dry systems
                                                                                                                                        6154 wet systems
                                                                                                                                        20% semi-wet systems
                           Figure 13,  Basic oxygen process material flow In production of 2.000,000 tonnes per year of steel (all numbers In tonnes).'8

-------
6.1.5  Electric Arc Steelmaking
       In an EAF, steel is made by melting and refining scrap using electric
arcs struck from carbon electrodes.  For the most part the solid wastes that
result from EAF operation are similar to those which are generated by the BOF.
The slag and its disposition as well as the steelmaking fumes and their
disposition are very similar to those materials in the BOF.  The basic dif-
ference in the solid waste picture for the EAF is that there is little use of
molten iron and therefore, no system for recovery or disposal of kish.  Figure
14 shows material flows for the production of 500,000 tonnes of steel per
year, equal to one-fifth the total production for the model plant.
     Many EAF facilities are housed in completely enclosed buildings which are
vented to baghouses and collected particulates may be finer than that obtained
from the BOF.  In addition, there may be carbonaceous and oily fumes which
result from the melting of oily scrap.  Finally, because the electric arc
furnace relies solely  on scrap and may be employed in the production of high
alloy steels, the dust may contain a higher percentage of zinc and other
metallies than is present in BOF dust.
6.1.6  Continuous Casting and Primary Rolling
       Molten steel from the steelmaking furnace is tapped into a teeming ladle
from which it is poured  into ingot molds or a continuous caster.  In the ingot
mold route, the steel  is partially cooled in the molds, the mold is stripped
from the ingot, the ingot placed in a soaking pit and reheated to rolling
temperatures, and then introduced  into the primary rolling mill from which the
semi-finished product  emerges.  In the continuous caster, the steel is poured
through the mold which directly forms the semi-finished shape, the latter
passing through the bottom of the mold and cut into suitable lengths.
     The yield of semi-finished steel is less in the ingot mold route than the
continuous casting route.  This loss of yield is a result of two factors.  (1)
The individual ingots  after being  rolled to the semi-finished shape contain im-
perfections which are  rolled into  the ends of the semi-finished shape.  These
ends must be cropped and scrapped.  (2) There is a loss of steel from oxide for-
mation in the soaking  pit.  This loss in yield in conjunction with the energy
required to fuel the soaking pit furnace, results in increased cost of

                                      45

-------
   521.000 SCRAP
   45.640 FLUX
                               140 DUST
                                TO AIR
                                   DRY
                                  SYSTEM'
                                   FUME
ELECTRIC
  ARC
FURNACE
                             60,000 SLAG
                        (iron recovered, balance landf tiled,
                             10% other uses)
                                                               6,500 DUST (landfilled)
                                                         •+-500.000 STEEL (to shaping operation)
                           •Nationally, 76% dry systems
                                   15% wet systems
                                    9% semi-wet systems
                                                                                   Ifi
       Figure 14. Electric arc furnace material flow in production of 500.000 tonnes of steel per year (all numbers in tonnes).

production as  compared  to the continuously cast semi-finished steel.   In
consequence, continuous casting is gradually  replacing  the ingot mold-primary
rolling mill route of making semi-finished steel.
      Both processes of  converting  molten steel  into semi-finished steel result
in a  generation of mill  scale and  scrap.  The generation  of these wastes is
much  larger  in the ingot route than in the continuous casting route.   However,
in each case the wastes are essentially 100 percent recycled or stocked for
future use.
                                           46

-------
     The ingot method of making semi-finished steel  results in an  additional
solid waste in the soaking pit, called soaking pit scale or slag.   This waste,
largely because of the refractory content,  is landfilled.  There are  also
small amounts of iron oxide sludge which are produced and these are generally
landfilled.  All of these situations are diagramed on Figure 15.
6.1.7  Hot and Cold Rolling
       The process of converting semi-finished steel into a finished  product
involves heating it in a reheat furnace followed by hot rolling to the desired
physical shape.  In the case of structural  shapes, the finished product  is
most often taken from the hot mill, cut to specific size and sold.  In the
case of strip and sheet, the hot roll product is sometimes sold; however, it
is often pickled, a process to remove scale by immersion in a bath of sulfuric
or hydrochloric acid and then cold rolled to achieve the desired character-
istics of gauge tolerance, surface finish, and metallurgy.
     Figure 16 shows a typical sequence for producing steel from the  finishing
mills.  Steel, entering from the left of the diagram, passes through  the hot
rolling process.  A portion of it is sold directly from this process. Another
portion, approximately 39 percent is pickled, rinsed to remove the acid  solu-
tions and cold rolled.  Of the cold rolled products, approximately 68 percent
is sold directly from the mill and the remainder passes on to galvanizing,
tinning, and other coating processes.
     The hot rolling finishing mills produce the same type of solid waste as
is produced in the primary mill.  These wastes are scraps, mill scale, and
sludge.  The difference between the waste products of the two types of mills
is that solid waste from the finishing mills are finer and smaller in quantity
than those from the primary mills.  The disposal of wastes from both  mills  is
essentially the same.
     There are two wastes which are produced by the pickling process, namely
waste pickle liquor and pickle rinse water.  Both are acidic and contain
dissolved metallic compounds, principally iron.  If sulfuric acid pickling  is
used the metallic salt is ferrous sulfate; if hydrochloric acid is used  it  is
ferrous chloride.  Either one, upon neutralization produces a sludge  which
has little value, is typically impounded in lagoons, and is very difficult  to

                                       47

-------
 80 F Steel
2,000.000
EAF Steel
 500,000
                                                             Water
                                      840,000
                      Steel
                   2,500.000
                     1,660,000
                                                     Continuous
                                                       Casting
43,000 Scrap

          1
                                 Recycle Water

                                          790,000
                Scale Pit
                  Filter
                                                       (95% tandlilledl
                                                                                   •Effluent
                                                                                    20.5 Solids
                   6,900 Scale (recycled or stocked)
                                     Water
          SO Sludge
                                                                                               Water
                                                 Recycle
                                                                           Primary
                                                                           Rolling
                                                                    223,450 Scrap
                                                                      Cropends
                                   23,400 Soaking
                                      Pit Scale
                                      (landfilled)
                                                                                         1,350,000
                                              Oil Skimmer
                                               Scale Pit
                                                Filter
                                                        L
                                                                                                                   240,000 Sales,
                                                                                                                     Transfers
                                                                                                               Shapes
                                                               2,140.000
                    1,900,000
                   'To Hot Rolling
                                                                                                                    2,500 Sludge
                                                                                                                    (95% landfilled)
-*-E«luent
    50 Solids
 (oil recovered,
  recycled)
                                                                                     60,600 Scale
                                                                                    (recycled or stocked)
   Figure 15.  Continuous casting, soaking, primary rolling material flow in production of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year (all numbers in tonnes).
                                                                                                                                             16

-------
-p.
UD
1,098,000 Pickling
Wa
Steel ^
1,900,000

^
ter

Sales,!
t

Hot
Rolling
I
52,360 Scrap

\


i
£

r



Oil Skimmer
Scale Pit
Filter




3,100 J








i





F
'ransfers Soli
i
703,200^

\
ition Water
' i *
Siilfijrie fl?id „. x vVat^r
Pickling Rinse


Lime
Hluan* T '
*436 Solids






32,900 Scale
(recycled or stocked)
i >
Sludge
(95% landfillcd)









Waste Pickle Liquor f
to Ujitiide
Contractor
r

Neutrali-
zation
Lagoon


'



140,000 Sludge (Wet, Lagooned)
(est. 3,000 as iron)


Emulsion 125,000 to
Sp
i
ray Galva
t
700,220 r Cold
Rolling
Lcid Rinse Water


i

700,000



nizing
j, 475.000
Sales


100,000 Tin Plate


OH Skimmer
Neutrall-
z,ation


i '



-Water/Oil Recycled
73 Solids in Outfall

40 Scale
(landfill)

110 Sludge
(landfill)




                        Rgure 10.  Hot and cold rolling In the production of on overall total of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year (all numbers In tonnes),
                                                                                                                                                  16

-------
dewater due to the formation of an iron hydroxide and water complex.  Because
of the presence of various metallics, some of them heavy metals, the waste
may be considered hazardous.
     An EPA survey of 16 plants revealed the following for spent liquor:
          Recycled, regenerated, or reused                  7.4%
          Untreated disposal                               60.8%
          Neutralized on-site                              20.5%
          Contract hauler                                  11.3%
Untreated disposal includes deep-well injection, dumping on a slag pile, and
direct discharge.  The quantity of sludge shown in Figure 16 (140,000 tonnes)
                                                                          1Q
is the wet weight based on neutralizing spent sulfuric acid pickle liquor.
     In the cold rolling operation, an emulsion of oil and water is used to
cool the rollers and the steel sheet as it is rolled thinner.  The oil becomes
contaminated with scale and sludge.  In the more modern mills, there are
internal facilities for purifying the oil so that it may be recycled.  In
others, the oil is sent outside for reprocessing.  In either case, it is
necessary to dispose of the waste scale and sludge.  Because of the substan-
tial oil content, some of these wastes may be considered hazardous.
6.1.8  Finishing Operations
       Finishing operations comprise a wide variety of operations including
metal forming, cutting and shearing, galvanizing, tin plating, etc.  Electro-
galvanizing and tin plating (Figure 17) may produce scrap metal which is
recycled or otherwise reused.  The latter operations may produce a solid waste
sludge which contains significant amounts of zinc, lead, tin, etc., depending
upon the nature of the process involved.  These sludges originate from electro-
plating methods and are not formed in the hot dip technique.  The value of the
metallic content is sufficient to economically justify recovery and recycle of
the metals, usually by an outside vendor.  In the case of tin plating, even
the rinse water is sent outside for metal recovery.  (The tin plating and
galvanizing sludge quantities are small and are based on generation factors for
sludge resulting from residuals from cleaning lines and from neutralization of
acid rinse water used in the plating operation at the water treatment plant.)
                                       50

-------
                                                Acid, Alkaline Dips
                                                   and Rinses
From Cold Rolling
   225,000
                            100.000
                            Steel
                            125,000
                            Steel
                                                     Cleaning
                                        Acid, Alkaline Dips
                                            and  Rinses
                                                 Cleaning
                                                                                                                  *•  ~ 100,000 Tin Plated
                                                                       Wastewater
Galvanizing
                                                                                                  Rinsewater  (Tin Recovered, Recycled)
                                                                                                         Treatment
                                                                                                           Plant
                                                                                                        530 Sludge
                                                                                                          (landfilled)
-*-  ~ 125,000 Galvanized
                                                                                                      ^  Zinc Recovered, Recycled
                                                                                                 Treatment
                                                                                                   Plant
                                          "Effluent
                                           15.6 Solids
                                                                                                                                       -»- Effluent
                                                                                                                                           12.5 Solids
                                                                                             1,400 Sludge
                                                                                               (landfilled)
                                                                                                                            1 fi
                         Figure 17. Tin plating, galvanizing material fJow for 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year (all numbers in tonnes).

-------
6.2  MAGNITUDE OF SOLID WASTE GENERATION
     Using an annual output of 125 million tonnes of steel product as a basis,
the wastes produced are examined from the standpoint of the nation, individual
states, and specific geographical regions.  The various wastes which are pro-
duced are categorized in such a manner as to reflect their alternate present
use, reuse, or disposal.
     In dealing with steel plant wastes, a key consideration is the fact that
they are generally low in intrinsic value with respect to their weight.  The
cost of transporting them any distance becomes a substantial percentage of
their ultimate value.  It is, therefore, generally desirable to recycle the
wastes within the plant that produces them.  One possible exception is scrap
iron which has a relatively high value and, under certain economic situations,
may be shipped over long distances.  Other waste materials such as slag and
iron oxide, if not used within the plant that produce them, are normally
consumed in the immediate geographical area or disposed of on-site.  The
implications of these facts will be examined in greater detail in subsequent
sections.
6.2.1  National Solid Waste Generation
       In determining waste quantities, the first step was to establish the
tonnages produced by the individual processes for an ingot production of 125
million tonnes per year.  These are presented in Table 14.  The values were
developed from production data for the year 1977.
     The corresponding quantities of solid wastes generated were estimated
using generation factors (emission factors) derived from data presented by
Dravo   and Calspan.    These factors are given in Tables 15 and 16.  Minimum
and maximum quantities shown were obtained by examining the range of genera-
tion factors for individual plants listed the Dravo and Calspan report.  '
The estimated quantity is derived from an average or typical generation factor
that was felt to be the most reliable and is referenced in Table 15.  Applying
the generation factors of Table 15, the nationwide waste quantities for an
annual total production of 125 million tonnes of steel were calculated (Table
16).
                                       52

-------
      TABLE  14.   INDIVIDUAL PROCESS  OUTPUTS  FOR  PRODUCTION OF 125,000,000
      =_=	TONNES OF STEEL PER YEAR*   (ALL NUMBERS IN TONNES)
               BOF                                    77,400,000
               OH Steel                                19,700,000
               EAF Steel                              27.900,000
               Total  Steel  Production                 125,000,000
               Coke                                   48,500,000
               Sinter                                 35,100,000
               Blast Furnace                          81,300,000
               Continuous Casting                     15,300,000
               Soaking                                87,200,000
               Primary Rolling                        87,200,000
               Hot Rolling                            84,800,000
               Cold Rolling                           34,400,000
               Galvanizing                              5,300,000
               Tin Mill                                  6,400,000
                                 g
       *Based on 1977 production.

     Table 17 summarizes the annual generation of solid  wastes for 125 million
ingot tonnes  of production into four categories:   (1) coke  plant wastes,  (2)
slag, (3)  iron oxide wastes (including dusts), and (4) scrap.
     As  noted in the table, both coke breeze and metallic scrap are essen-
tially recycled or reused in a useful manner.  From the  standpoint of
disposal,  these two items are taken care of, in most cases, by present
practices, and for this reason need no further consideration.   Slag and  iron
oxide wastes  are not fully utilized and will be covered  in  greater detail.
6.2.2  Slags
       There are two types of slag wastes, ironmaking and steelmaking.   Table
18 shows the various components which make up a typical  ironmaking slag  and a
range of basic oxygen furnace steelmaking slags.  There is  a wide  variation in
the range of compositions for the basic oxygen furnace slags.   The nature of
the slag varies depending upon the metallurgy of the process involved,  upon the
impurities in the feed  materials to the process, principally sulfur, and upon
the end product.                        53

-------
TABLE 15.  WASTE GENERATION FACTORS AND QUANTITIES FOR A TYPICAL  2.500.000 TONNE  YEAR/PLANT16'1*20
                     Quantity of Haste,  tonnes/yr
Generation
Factor
Waste
Coke Breeze
Still Lime Sludge
Tar Sludge
Coke Treatment
Plant Sludge
Blast Furnace Slag
Blast Furnace Dust
Blast Furnace
Sludge
Blast Furnace Dust
and Sludge
EAF Slag
EAF Dust
BOF Slag
BOF Dust, Sludge
Sinter Fines
Sinter Dust
Continuous Casting
Scale
Continuous Casting
Sludge
Soaking Pit Scale
Primary Mill Scale
Primary Mill Sludge
Hot Rolling Scale
Hot Rolling Sludge
Minimum
17




345
11
3

25

25
2
230
16

6









,300
315
90
___

,600
,200
,200

,600

,000
,925
,000
,000
—
,910
158

—

—
—
—
—
—
RTI
32


1

556
25
40

65

60
6
290
41
369
14
6



23
60
2
32
3
Estimate
,400.
540
540
,530

,800
,360
,000

,460

,000
,500
,000
,000
,000
,511
,900

80

,400
,600
,500
,900
,100
Maximum
45


1

820
54
44

72

164
8
400
60

44
19



54




,000
540
540
,710

,800
,500
,800

,000

,500
,000
,000
,000
—
,224
,750

—

,900
—
—
—
—
(tonne/ tonne) Reference
of product Reference Product
0
0
0
0

0
0
0

0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0

0
0
0
0
0
.036 (1
.000604 (2
.0006 (3
.0017 (3

) Coke
1 Coke
Coke
Coke

.348 (2) Ironu
.01585 (1},(2) Iron
.025 (2), (4) Iron


.04085 (D,(2),(4) Iron


.120 (2) EAF Steel
.013 (1.
•145 . (2(
.0205° (V
.527 (3,
i EAF Steel
i BOF Steel
BOF Steel
Sinter
.021 (1) Sinter
.0087 (2) C.C. Steel


.000104 (2) C.C. Steel

.015 (3
.0449 (2
.00187 (2

S.P. Steel
P.M. Steel
P.M. Steel
.0183 (2) H.R.M. Ste
.00174 (2) H.R.M. Ste

-------
TABLE 15.  fconf dl



Waste
Cold Rolling Scale

Cold Rolling Sludge

Galvanizing Sludge

Tin Plating Sludge

Bricks, Rubble

a, TOTALS
in
Quantity


Minimum
___

338

—

—

—

684,636
of Waste, tonnes/yr


RTI Estimate Maximum
40

110

1,350

530

250,000

1,885,151 1,791,264
Generation
Factor
(tonne/tonne)
of product
0.000052

0.00016

0.0108

0.00532

0.1





Reference9
(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(5)




Reference
Product
C.R.M.
Steel
C.R.M.
Steel
Finishing
Steel
Finishing
Steel
Total
Steel

 (1)  Dravo Corporation,  1976
 (2)  Calspan Corporation,  1977
 (3)  RTI Estimate
 (4)  Datagraphics, 1976
 (5)  AISI

 Factor applies separately  to dust  and  sludge.

cAlso agrees with the ratio of national  slag  to  iron production.

-------
     TABLE 16.   NATIONWIDE  WASTE GENERATION FOR 125,000,000 TONNES OF STEEL

                PER YEAR (WASTE QUANTITIES IN THOUSANDS OF TONNES PER YEAR)
Disposition3
Waste
Coke Breeze
Ammonia Still Lime Sludge
Tar Sludge
Coke Treatment Plant Sludge
Blast Furnace Slag
Blast Furnace Dust
Blast Furnace Sludge
EAF Slag.
EAF Dust0
EAF Sludge
Open Hearth Slag
Open Hearth Dust
BOF Slag.
EOF Dust0
BOF Sludge
Sinter Fines
Sinter Dust
Continuous Casting Scale
Continuous Casting Sludge
Soaking Pit Scale
Primary Mill Scale
Primary Mill Sludge
Hot Rolling Scale
Hot Rolling Sludge
Cold Rolling Scale
Cold Rolling Sludge
Pickle Liquor Sludge
Galvanizing Sludge
Tin Plating Sludge
Scrap Metal
Bricks and Rubble d
Fly and Bottom Ash
TOTALS
Generated
1,750
30
30
80
28,300
1,290
2,030
3,350
290
70
4,790
270
11,220
490
1,100
18,500
740
130
1.6
1,310
3,920
160
1,550 "
150
2
6C
350C
60
30
42,300
12,500
380
137,179.6
Landfilled
0
30
30
80
2,800
170
270
2,550
280
67
2,400
160
5,600
250
550
0
40
0
1.1
1,310
0
150
0
140
2
6
350
60
23
0
12,500
380
30,199.1
Stocked
0
0
0
0
0
120
190
0
0
0
0
70
0
120
286
0
0
40
0
0
1,180
0
450
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,456
Recycl ed ,
Reused
1,750
0
0
0
25,500
1,000
1,570
800
10
3
2,400
40
5,600
120
264
18,500
700
90
0.5
0
2,740
10
1,100
10
0
0
0
0
7
42,300
0
0
104,514.5
                                              16
20
Disposition is based on estimates by Calspan,1"  Dravo,tu and  RTI.

DEAF and BOF dust/sludge distribution based on  number  of wet and dry collection

 systems used.
                                                        ?n
cValue, 350, derived from Dravo estimate of 400 for 1974.

 Based on coal usage for production of steam.
                                       56

-------
TABLE 17.   SUMMARY OF  WASTEGENERATION FOR 125,000,000 TONNES OF STEEL PER  YEAR  (THOUSANDS OF
           TONNES PER  YEAR)a
Waste
COKE PLANT
Coke Breeze
Ammonia Still Lime Sludge
Tar Sludge
Water Treatment Plant
Sludge
Total
SLAG
Ironmaking
Steel making
Total
IRON OXIDE
Dust:
Sinter
Ironmaking
Steel making
Total
Sludge:
Ironmaking
Steel making
Mill
Total
Generated
1,750
30
30
80
1,890
28,300
19,360
47,660

740
1,290
1,050
3,080

2,030
1,170
758
3,958
Landfilled
30
30
80
140
2,800
10,560
13,360

40
170
690
900

270
617
730
1,617
% Stocked %
100
100
100
7
10
55
28

6
13 120 9
66 190 18
29 310 10

13 190 9
53 286 24
96
41 476 12
Recycled
or Used
1,750
1,750
25,500
8,800
34,300

700
1,000
170
1,870

1,570
267
28
1,865
%
100
93
90
45
72

94
78
16
61

78
23
4
47

-------
    TABLE 17.   (cont'd)
(Jl
00
Waste
Scale:
Soaking Pit
Mill
Total
Total Iron Oxide
SCRAP
Metallic Scrap
Rubble, Brick
Total
GRAND TOTAL
Generated

1,310
5,602
6,912
13,950

42,300
12,500
54,800
118,300
Landfilled

1,310
2
1,312
3,829

12,500
12,500
29,829
% Stocked

100
1,670
19 1,670
27 2,456

100
23
25 2,456
Recycled
% or Used

30 3,930
24 3,930
18 7,665

42,300
42,300
2 86,015
%

70
57
55

100
77
73
    'Disposition is based on estimates by Calspan16, Dravo20, and RTI.

-------
                      TABLE 18.   IRON AND STEELMAKING SLAGS
                          Ironmaking Slag
COMPOSITIONS - %
   18
               Basic Oxygen Furnace Slag
Slag Component
FeO
Si02
A1203
CaO
MgO
MnO
Cr2°3
P2°5
S
Other
Slag ratio (basicity)0
Average
___
35.3
12.8
41.2
8.3
—
1.4
1.0
1.03
Allegheny-Lud.a
20.7-26.4
20.4-22.9
0.7-1.2
39-40.8
9-10.2
2.7-3.6
0.4-0.6
0.3-0.6
0.03-0.04
—
2.1-2.3
Wheel ing-Pi tt.b
15-30
9-13
0.1-0.3
32-42
5-10
4-8
0.1-0.3
—
- 3.3-3.9
 Based on two analyses, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
 General ranges, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
cSlag ratio = (%CaO +• %MgO) * (%Si02 + %A1203)

     Steelmaking slag differs from ironmaking slag in two essential respects.
The steelmaking slag contains significant quantities of iron oxide whereas
ironmaking slag contains less than 1 percent iron oxide.  Also, the slag
ratio, or basicity, of steelmaking slag is considerably higher than ironmaking
slag.  These two facts are important in relationship to the end use of the
slag.  Because ironmaking slag is less basic, it is more useful for construc-
tion purposes such as road building, railroad ballast, and concrete aggregate.
In contrast, the steelmaking slag is not readily adapted to those purposes.
However, the iron content of steelmaking slag and its high basicity make it
useful for recycle as a charge material for the blast furnace.  The chemical
composition of the two slags thus substantially affect their end use and
disposal.
                                       59

-------
     The slag data in Table 17 indicates that 90 percent of ironmaking slag is
recycled and 10 percent is land-filled.  It would not be unreasonable to assume
that the land-filling operation, in large part, was carried out deliberately to
provide additional space in the steelmaking operations rather than as a
necessity to get rid of unwanted materials.  For example, filling operations
are going on at one steel company on the shore of Lake Michigan and at another
on the Chesapeake Bay.  In contrast, only 45 percent of the steelmaking slag
is reused whereas 55 percent is landfilled.  Because steelmaking slag has high
basicity and is rather limey, care must be taken when placing it in the ground
that the disposal site is at a distance from a receiving body of water.  If
such care is not taken, it is possible that a heavy rain may leach lime from
the slag and create an effluent which is high in pH.
6.2.3  Iron Oxide Solid Waste
       In the steel industry the apparently nonhazardous solid wastes which
create the greatest disposal problem are iron oxide wastes.  The production
and disposal of iron oxide waste is summarized in Table 17 in the categories
of dust, sludge, and scale.  Within each category there are subcategories
which define the source of the waste as, for example in the case of dust,
sinter, ironmaking, and steelmaking.  Each of these categories and subcate-
gories describe an iron oxide waste which is distinctive from the standpoint
of composition, particle size, moisture content, and contaminants.  Each
presents its own problems, or lack of them, in respect to the potential for
recycle or reuse.
     Tables 19, 20, 21, and 22 present chemical analysis of the blast furnace
dust, blast furnace sludge, BOF sand, and BOF fines respectively.  An exam-
ination of these tables reveals a number of pertinent facts, as follows:
     1.   A particular solid waste, for example blast furnace dust,
          is quite variable from facility to facility and even with-
          in the facility itself.  In the case of this dust, the
          iron content varies from-5.9 to 54.0 percent, a spread
          of almost one order of magnitude.
     2.   In a given process, the larger particles may have a sub-
          stantially different composition than the finer particles.
          For example, in the BOF under Plant E, the sands have an
          iron content of about 33 percent whereas the fines have a
          iron content of about 44 percent.  The contrast is even
                                       60

-------
                                  TABLE 19.  CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF BLAST-FURNACE OUSTS
                                                      (percent by weight)
Reference
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
22
22
21
21
21
23
23
23
23
24
25
26
27
27
28
29
30
31
ID
C

E

F

H

1

L



MW
US

Primary

Secondary




O.K.

Germ.
U.S.
O.K.
O.K.

Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High

Low
High
Low
High
Low
High



Low
High




Fe
31.4
38.2
29.0
31.3
49.4
54.0
25.8
35.6
16.8
20.8
20.4
46.8
36
50
47.1
36.5
50.3
20.0
49.9
5.9
43
32.2
27.0
23.6
31.5
51.0
50.0
29.0
43
39.2
C
28.5
32.4
34.4
36.1
17.3
20.3
44.8
50.7
28.7
43.7
20.0
53.6
3.5
15
n.d.
3.7
13.9
6.6
50.0
11.2
33.9
28.5
21.4
41.1
10.0
30.0
11.0
25.4
2.5
20.56
S
0.14
0.28
0.36
0.39
0.33
0.42
0.16
0.34
0.10
0.75
0.23
0.66
0.2
0.4
n.d.
0.2
0.4
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
0.2
n.d.
0.2
0.2
0.7
0.2
0.54
3.4
0.35
Pb Sn
0.01 0.01
0.01 0.04
0.02 <0.01
0.03 0.03
0.06 0.04
0.08 0.04
0.02 <0.01
0.03 0.02
0.01 0.04
0.01 0.04
0.05 <0.01
0.15 0.04
n.d.b n.d.
n.d. n.d.
n.d. n.d.
n.d. n.d.
n.d. n.d.
0.001 n.d.
0.28 n.d.
0.05 n.d.
3.4 n.d.
n.d. n.d.
0.01 n.d.
0.01 n.d.
0.2 n.d.
0.3 n.d.
0.1 n.d.
< 0.05 n.d.
0.02 0.01
0.01 5 < 0.01
Zn
0.07
0.09
0.05
0.12
0.17
0.21
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
n.d.
n.d.
0.5
n.d.
n.d.
0.08
2.7
0.08
11.5
0.45
0.05
0.08
0.7
0.8
is
0.15
0.4
0.08
Mn
0.06
0.15
0.11
0.16
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.08
0.42
1.52
0.15
0.20
0.5
1.0
0.7
0.5
0.9
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
0.5
.1.1

0.4
1.0
n.d.
0.34
n.d.
1.41
Na20
0.07
0.10
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.09
0.08
0.13
0.07
0.11
0.15
0.33
n.d.
n.d.
0.2
n.d.
n.d.
0.095
0.52
0.04
1.4
n.d.
n.d.

n.d.
n.d.
0.3
6.4
n.d.
0.32
K20
2.3
4.5
1.6
2.6
0.4
1.2
1.0
1.6
0.02
0.8
1.8
3.0
n.d.
n.d.
1.0
n.d.
n.d.
0.48
1.82
0.30
5.4
n.d.
n.d.

0.5
1.5
0.2
n.d.
n.d.
0.77
AI203
2.0
5.4
1.7
1.7
1.1
1.5
0.8
6.1
1.7
2.5
2.4
7.6
2
15
1.9
2.2
5.3
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
2.5
1.2

2.6
6.5
n.d.
13.2
3.8
1.37
CaO
4.2
5.4
2.4
3.0
1.8
6.0
2.7
5.4
7.1
8.7
3.7
11.0
3.8
28
4.1
3.8
4.5
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
3.1
5.2

6.0
7.0
4.5
9.4
n.d.
5.38
MgO
2.2
3.0
1.1
1.2
2.4
3.1
0.6
1.8
1.9
2.5
2.1
2.6
0.2
5
0.2
0.9
1.6
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
0.7
2.2

1.0
2.0
0.3
0.07
n.d.
1.93
SiO, As Sb Se

7.6 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01a

5.2 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01

E.4 0.02 0.01 0.01 [sic]

5.4 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01

11.1 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01

7.2 <0.02 <0.0t <0.01
8
30
8.2
8.9
13.4
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
n.d.
6.9
7.3

9.8
11.0
6.S
11.6
n.d. 0.001
7.28
aSi02, As, Sb, and Se shown (or only one sample.
 Not determined.

-------
                                 TABLE 20.  COMPOSITION OF BLAST-FURNACE SLUDGE, PERCENT BY WEIGHT (DRY BASIS)
ro
Reference
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
24

32
32
27
21



10
C

D
E

F

1

M

Japanese
Japanese
German


UK
USA




Low
High

Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High



Low
High

c
d
e
f
Fe
25.6
29.4
21.8
40.7
43.0
38.9
39.6
24.7
30.2
27.5
35.6
45
28.6
27.5
40.2
61.0
33.6
42.9
10.1
13.5
6.0
C
27.7
29.8
40.9
21.1
24.3
18.3
18.9
30.2
40.5
20.9
35.1
5.5
40.8
17.8
1.1
16.0
23.3
15.6h
_
16.0h
-
S
0.19
0.47
0.25
0.46
0.46
0.78
0.94
0.25
0.68
0.63
1.01
4.6
0.3
2.0
0.08
0.3
—
0.4
1.9
1.3
1.4
Pb
0.09
0.13
0.10
0.13
0.19
0.09
1.02
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.07
0.03
-
4.2
_
-
0.3
-
_
—
• , " -Tm
Sn
<0.01
0.01
0.06
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.03
0.01
-
n.d.
_
-
—
-
_
—

Zn
0.50
1.11
1.6
0.26
0.38
2.1
2.6
0.04
0.07
0.08
0.14
0.2
0.5
9.5
0.2
0.3
0.7
O9
1.2
0.9
1.2
Mn
0.06
0.14
0.07
0.10
0.17
0.01
0.02
0.10
0.29
0.06
0.17
b
0.3

—
-
0.4
0.49
1.67
0.85
1.15
N,20
0.05
0.08
0.11
0.04
0.04
0.08
0.09
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.08
-
-

—
-
—
0.2
9.2
1.6
9.8
K20
1.1
1.9
1.9
0.9
1.2
0.6
0.9
0.4
0.6
0.6
1.2
-
-

—
-
0.5
0.6
20.9
2.7
22.4
AI2°3
3.6
4.7
2.6
2.1
3.1
0.3
0.3
1.7
2.2
1.8
2.3
6.2
3.0

2.1
3.9
2.8
4.4
6.9
15.6
6.7
CaO
4.4
3.0
3.2
2.8
3.2
3.5
4.0
4.0
5.6
4.7
8.2
7.7
2.7

3.1
4.6
7.5
3.6
6.4
7.1
4.7
MgO
2.4

1.8
0.9
1.2
2.2
2.3
1.5
2.0
1.2
1.9
-
0.7

0.9
5.9
1.1
1.7
8.0
9.9
9.3
S!02 As Sb Si
9.3a <0.02a <0.01a <0.01a

9.7 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01
6.28 <0.028 <0.018 <0.01a

6.5a <0.02a <0.018 <0.01a

7.88 <0.02a <0.01a <0.018

7.58 <0.028 <0.01a <0.01a

0.007
6.1

4.1
8.5
10.5



. ... . .„ -_-j. 	 — —
        0 Determined (or only one sample.
          Blanks mean not determined or not reported.
        c Sludge from washers.
          Dust in gas leaving washers.
        e Sludge from wet precipitator.
          Dust in gas leaving precipitator.
        9 Not detected by standard methods.
          Loss on ignition.

-------
u>
                                              TABLE 21.  CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF BOF RESIDUES-SANDS20
                                                                     (weight %-dry)
Plant
Ab


Ec


1




J




Sample
Filter cake8
1
2
Sludoob
1
2
Sludged
1
2
3
4
Sludgod
1
2
3
4
Fe

59.1
50.6

35.0
32.4

52.9
46.1
47.3
55.5

53.7
66.4
61.6
59.3
C

0.9
1.8

1.0
2.0

1.6
1.1
1.0
0.9

0.6
0.4
0.7
0.5
S

0.02
0.04

0.06
0.08

0.10
0.09
0.06
0.02

<0.01
<0.01
0.01
0.01
Pb

0.02
0.2.1

0.01
0.02

<0.01
0.01
<0.01
<0.01

<0.01
<0.01
0.01
0.01
Sn

0.10
0.10

0.02
0.04

0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01

<0.01
0.01
<0.01
0.01
Zn

0.01
0.01

0.3
3.3

0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01

0.03
0.05
0.05
0.08
Mn

0.61
0.52

0.67
0.72

0.32-
0.28
0.36
0.88

0.16
0:25
0.47
0.33
Na20

0.03
0.11

0.03
0.03

0.04
0.03
0.03
0.01

0.01
<0.01
0.01
0.01
K20

0.03
0.18

0.14
0.16

0.08
0.07
0.05
0.05

0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
AI203

0.13
0.38

0.62
0.53

0.25
0.21
0.25
0.25

0.15
0.08
0.13
0.15
CaO

15.9
11.4

23.7
20.8

16.1
15.2
15.4
13.8

5.4
2.8
5.4
9.2
MgO

2.0
1.8

2.1
1.6

8.3
4.8
5,7
3.6

1.7
0.79
1.8
2.1
Si02 As Sb Se

3.4 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01


13.0 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01


2.8 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01




3.7 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01



         8 Rake classifier and scrubber fines combined.
         b Settling basin.
         CQ-BOP
          Rake classifier.

-------
                                           TABLE 21 CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF BOF RESIDUES-FINES20

                                                                (weight %-dry)
en
4*
Plant
Ea


F


G




1




K




*Q-BOP.
b Scrubber.
CESP.
Sample
Sludgeb
1
2
Du$tc
1
2
Sludge13
1
2
3
4
Sludge5
1
2
3
4
Sludgob
1
2
3
4



Fe

45.2
43.9

58.3
60.4

60.2
60.7
61.9
61.8

55.6
56.5
57.4
55.6

53.4
61.2
57.5
56.2



C

2.9
3.1

0.7
0.5

1.4
1.5
1.3
1.2

1.7
1.4
1.3
1.6

1.5
1.5
1.1
2.6



S

0.18
0.44

0.04
0.01

0.20
0.17
0.15
0.13

0.14
0.13
0.13
0.11

0.10
0.10
0.07
0.15



Pb

0.13
0.09

0.05
0.04

1.8
1.7
1.6
1.4

0.04
0.07
0.06
0.05

0.73
0.60
0.29
0.60



Sn

0.02
0.04

0.02
0.03

O.OS
0.04
0.04
<0.01

<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01

0.05
0.02
0.01
0.02



Zn

12.8
13.7

0.24
0.12

2.0
1.7
1.6
1.4

0.07
0.07
0.09
0.07

4.5
3.5
1.4
3.7



Mn

0.58
0.55

0.12
0.13

0.50
0.52
0.41
0.37

0.36
0.50
0.59
0.34

0.12
0.08
0.14
0.35



Na20

0.07
0.05

0.27
0.35

0.11
0.07
0.07
0.07

0.11
0.09
0.11
0.09

0.16
0.13
0.11
0.13



K20

0.27
0.23

1.2
0.70

0.31
0.29
0.22
0.27

0.12
0.12
0.12
0.12

0.35
0.47
0.27
0.37



AI203

0.30
0.25

0.09
0.08

0.08
0.09
0.11
0.08

0.11
0.08
0.08
0.09

0.17
0.55
0.17
0.25



CaO

5.6
5.9

7.6
6.0

3.6
4.2
3.4
3.6

6.9
6.1
5.7
6.5

6.0
8.9
6.4
4.6



MgO

0.66
0.60

0.61
0.61

0.98
0.99
0.80
0.75

2.0
2.4
2.0
2.6

1.1
1.2
1.4
1.0



Si02 As Sb Se

1.8 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01


2.8 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01


1.6 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01




2.3 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01




2.0 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01







-------
          more marked in respect to zinc content in which the sands
          have a zinc content of 2 percent and the fines a zinc con-
          tent of about 13 percent.

     Physical characteristics of the wastes are almost as important  as  chemical

compositions.  The fine participate sludges are much more difficult  to  recycle

than the coarse dry dusts.  If oil is present in any substantial quantity

along with the sludge, difficulties are imposed on the sintering process.

     Table 17 indicates that, of the total iron oxide in all categories, 55

percent is recycled or reused and 45 percent is landfilled or stocked.   In

this connection, the word "stocked" should be used with some discretion.   In

some steelmaking facilities, where iron oxide is said to be stocked  for a

future use, this indeed represents a true fact.  In other plants the same
terminology may be used as euphemism when disposal is the actual intent.

     If steelmaking dusts and sludges are considered by themselves,  of  a total

generation amounting to 2.2 million tonnes per year, 80 percent is either

landfilled or stocked and only 20 percent is reused.  Many problems  are

associated with recycling these wastes.  A few of the key ones are as follows:

     1.   Zinc and lead in the dust are carried into the sinter and
          from there to the blast furnace, where it interferes with
          flue operations of the blast furnace and causes premature
          destruction of the furnace lining.

     2.   The very fine particulates cause handling problems and
          interfere with smooth operations of the sintering process.

     3.   The iron content of steelmaking fines is usually small
          although often highly variable.

     4.   The tonnage of waste iron oxide generated in a single steel-
          making facility is too small to economically support a
          sophisticated and technically correct process for recovering
          the waste and converting it to a useful form.  For this
          reason, there have been investigations into the regional
          concept of treating these wastes, bearing in mind that their
          relatively low intrinsic value is an impediment to trans-
          porting them any distance.  Thus, any regional concept can
          serve only a limited geographical area.  This concept is dis-
          cussed further in Section 6.2.5.
                                        65

-------
6.2.4  Solid Waste Generation by State
       Table 23 provides information on the distribution of iron and steel-
making capacity by state.  In preparing the Table, the capacity values reported
to EPA by each plant in the United States were summed to obtain a total of 158
               4
million tonnes.   This total was then adjusted to the AISI industry estimate of
143 million tonnes (158 million tons).
     In recent years production has been less than capacity and, therefore,
Table 24 shows the waste that would be generated in each state if the national
production were 125 million tonnes per year.  This provides a numerical re-
ference point that, in any given year of the current decade, is close to actual
production.
     This production was then multiplied by the generation factors of Table 15
to obtain the waste generations shown in Table 24.  Examination of the Table
indicates that the first five states listed, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Ohio,
Illinois, and Michigan account for over 70 percent of the total solid waste
produced.
6.2.5  Solid Waste Generation by Geographical Region
       There are six geographical regions in the United States in which the
density of iron and steelmaking facilities is high.  These regions, in their
order of density, are Chicago, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Youngstown,
and Birmingham.  Table 25 analyzes the generation of slag, iron oxide waste,
and organic sludge for each of the geographical regions based on an annual
national production of 125 million tonnes.  The data on slag and organic
sludge is presented for general information.  The data on iron oxide waste is
of more significance because it provides the basis for regional plants specifi-
cally designed to process them.
     Table 26 shows the quantities of iron oxide wastes available for treatment
in a regional plant.  These quantities are now landfilled or stockpiled.  They
were determined by subtracting the quantities recycled from the quantities
generated (Table 25).  Percentage recycle for sludge is 47; for dust, 61; and
for scale, 57.
     Table 27 indicates some of the economic considerations which go into the
evaluation of the regional treatment concept.  It assumes that commercial

                                       66

-------
TABLE 23.
ESTIMATED STATE DISTRIBUTION OF  IRON AND STEEL CAPACITY
fTuniKflNrv; nc TnwMircW'^
                       OF
STEELMAKING CAPACITY
State
Pennsylvania
Indiana
Ohio
Illinois
Michigan
Maryland
Texas
New York
Al abama
West Virginia
California
Kentucky
Utah
Colorado
Missouri
South Carolina
Washington
Georgia
Florida
Delaware
New Jersey
Tennessee
Oklahoma
Oregon
Connecticut
Nebraska
Mississippi
Minnesota
Iowa
Arizona
Arkansas
North Carolina
Rhode Island
Hawaii
Virginia
Wisconsin
TOTAL
No. of
Plants
44
7
19
15
6
3
12
9
6
2
9
4
1
1
1
3
3
2
3
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
169
Blast
Furnace
21 ,392
18,493
16,105
8,343
8,118
5,559
993
3,681
3,345
2,313
2,102
1,635
1,664
1,257
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
95,000
Basic
Oxygen
14,428
21 ,004
14,812
9,603
9,466
2,867
0
4,031
3,735
3,656
1,200
2,086
0
1,430
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
88,318
Electric
Arc
6,647
925
3,993
4,483
1,905
136
4,181
497
346
275
753
647
0
300
889
745
717
616
582
434
376
330
312
234
208
208
186
156
150
130
121
120
55
52
52
52
31,813
Open
Hearth
7,992
1,910
4,970
0
0
2,831
1,003
273
0
0
1,794
0
2,093
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22,866
Total
Steel
29,067
23,839
23,775
14,086
11,371
5,834
5,184
4,801
4,081
3,931
3.747
2,733
2,093
1,730
889
745
717
616
582
434
376
330
312
234
208
208
186
156
150
130
121
120
55
52
52
52
143,000
                                  67

-------
TABLE 24.  ESTIMATED STATE DISTRIBUTION OF WASTES GENERATED FROM 125,000,000
           TONNES STEEL PRODUCTION (ALL NUMBERS IN THOUSANDS OF TONNES)
State
Pennsylvania
Indiana
Ohio
Illinois
Michigan
Maryland
New York
Texas
A1 abama
California
West Virginia
Utah
Kentucky
Colorado
Missouri
South Carolina
Washington
Georgia
Florida
Delaware
New Jersey
Tennessee
Oklahoma
Oregon
Connecticut
Nebraska
Mississippi
Mi nnesota
Iowa
Arizona
Arkansas
North Carolina
Hawai i
Rhode Island
Virginia
Wisconsin
TOTAL
Slag
10,404
8,554
8,056
4,124
3,768
2,605
1,695
1,540
1,484
1,228
1,164
933
809
580
95
79
76
65
62
47
40
36
34
25
22
22
20
17
16
14
13
13
6
6
6
6
47,664
Sludge
839
827
687
383
354
201
66
57
152
88
125
49
79
55
4
2.8
3.5
3.1
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.1
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.7
2.0
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
3,990
Dust
694
556
452
273
207
231
91
80
111
82
92
61
51
39
8
7
6.8
5.8
5.5
4.1
3.5
3.1
2.9
2.2
2.0
2.0
1.7
1.5
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
3,083
Scale
1,510
1,151
1,184
679
505
312
232
244
192
195
148
122
136
88
39
20
42
28
11
11
14
13
7
14
12
4
4
9
3
8
7
2
3
3
3
3
6,958
                                    68

-------
                       TABLE 25.  WASTE GENERATION BY GEOGRAPHICAL REGION
No. of
Region Plants
Chicago (includes
Northern Indiana)
Pittsburgh (includes
Weirton, WV, and
Steubenville, OH)
Cleveland (includes
Lorain, OH)
Philadelphia
15

27


.4

5
Center
South Chicago

Pittsburgh


Cleveland

Fairless Hills
Maximum
Miles
To Slag
Center
30

40


22

60

11,774

8,709


3,102

2,747
Iron
Oxide
SI udge
Iron
Oxide
Dust
Scale
(thousands of tonnes)
996

673


265

173
748

312


153

187
1,467

1,166


415

356
Organic
Sludge

28

41


8

7
     (includes  Bethle-
     hem,  PA)

2   Youngstown,  OH
     (includes  Warren,
     OH)

    Birmingham,  AL
     (includes  Gadsden,
     AL)
Youngstown
Birmingham
10      1,824     114
55      1,503     132
122
111
309
192
11

-------
  TABLE 26.  IRON OXIDE WASTES AVAILABLE FOR REGIONAL TREATMENT (NOT PRESENTLY
             RECYCLED)
Geographical
Region
Chicago
Pittsburgh
Cleveland
Philadelphia
Youngstown
Birmingham
Recovery Plant
Location
South Chicago
Pittsburgh
Cleveland
Fairless Hills
Youngstown
Birmingham
Available Iron Oxide Quantities
(thousands of tonnes per year)
Sludge
528a
357
140
92
60
70
Dust
292b
200
60
73
48
43
Scale
631°
501
178
153
133
83
Total
1,451
1,058
378
318
241
196
 Based on 47% recycle of generated sludge.
 Based on 61% recycle of generated dust.
cBased on 57% recycle of generated scale.
       TABLE 27.  ORDER OF MAGNITUDE ESTIMATE OF REGIONAL PLANT ECONOMICS

                                                         Per Tonne of Waste
1.
     Pellets produced at $25/tonne iron content;
     (assumes 56% iron content of waste)
2.   Zinc recovered at $204/tonnei
     (assumes 6% zinc content and 90% recovery)
3.   Landfill Charge
4.


5.


6.
     Minus Production Cost
     TPY of waste)

     Gross Value
                    TOTAL $ GENERATED

                          16
(for 350,000 dry
                            $
                                                         $
                            $
  14.00


  11.02


   1.50

  26.52

- 23.32
   3.20
                                                          16
     If the waste transportation cost is $0.06/tonne-mile,   at the break
     even value the waste can be transported 53 miles ($3.20 * 0.06) from
     the source to the treatment plant.
                                       70

-------
quality pellets will be produced  from iron oxide dust at $25 per tonne of iron
content and that zinc will  be  recovered at $204 per tonne.  If the iron pellets
are prereduced in the process,  the value will increase.  The landfill charge
of $1.50 per tonne is the assumed present cost of disposing of the iron oxide.
As noted, the production costs  for the plant, excluding transportation, were
obtained from data provided by  Calspan.16  The calculation indicates a poten-
tial gross value of $3.20 per  tonne of waste.  This would allow, at break even
value, the waste to be transported 53 miles from the source of generation to
the treatment plant.  No transportation costs are provided for the finished
product because it is assumed  that the treatment plant would be located
adjacent to the ironmaking  facility where the product could be used.
     The data in Tables 26  and  27 must be used with care.  They represent a
first order of magnitude approximation to the economics of the process.  Some
factors which may upset the calculations are given below:
     1.   The percent usage factor in Table 26 is an average for the
          entire industry.   The particular percent usage will vary
          from plant to plant and from one geographical region to
          another.
     2.   The value of the  pellets will vary depending upon whether
          or not they are prereduced.
     3.   The production costs, including capital, will vary from area
          to area depending upon  labor rates, fuel costs', etc.
     4.   The production costs  will vary from region to region depending
          upon the size of  processing plant.  The larger the production
          throughput of the plant, the smaller will be the unit cost.
     5.   Within a region,  the  cost of transporting the waste from the
          originating plant to  the process plant will depend not only
          on the distance,  but  also upon the available method of
          transport, whether trucks, railroads, etc.
     In spite of the uncertainties in the economics as listed above, the rough
calculation indicates that  the  concept of a regional plant for processing iron
oxide waste may have value  in certain specific locations in the United States.
6.3  SOLID WASTE PROJECTIONS
     The information in the preceding sections covered the present conditions
in the iron and steel industry  in regard to the generation and disposition of
nonhazardous solid waste.   This section provides a projection of the growth
                                        71

-------
that may be anticipated in the future.  The projections are based on the
expected impact on solid waste generations, of air and water pollution control
regulations, and expected changes in steel production.
6.3.1  Effect of Air Regulations
       In order to determine the maximum possible effect that implementation
of air pollution control may have on the generation of solid waste, calcula-
tions were made on the assumption of 100 percent future control.  This degree
of control is not likely to be achievable but its use provides an estimate of
the maximum amount of solid waste that may be produced by the imposition of
new regulations.
     Table 28 presents calculations on present particulate pollution for five
processes, namely coke plant, sinter plant, blast furnaces, BOF, and electric
arc furnaces.  Present air pollutant loads would become additional solid waste
under future control.  Not included in these calculations is the consideration
of fugitive emissions from storage piles, road traffic, etc.  It is recognized
that these fugitive emissions may be comparatively large in quantity; however,
the type of control envisioned would not generate solid waste.  Such control
would include elimination of emissions at the source, equipment modifications,
sweeping and wetting down of roadways, watering of storage piles, etc.  Such
controls would tend to retain the dust at its source of generation, rather
than transferring it to a solid waste disposal problem.
     The five processes were chosen as those that would contribute the most to
solid waste generation through additional air pollution control.  This is a
simplification in that removal of non-particulates may also generate some
additional solid waste in water treatment facilities.  However, non-particu-
late removal is not expected to contribute a significant quantity relative to
the assumed 100 percent control of the five processes shown.
     Table 29 presents a summary of additional solid wastes which would be
generated by the entire industry under future more stringent air regulations.
It is assumed that the waste from the coke plant being essentially carbon
wastes, could be recycled within the confines of the producing plant.  The
iron oxide wastes would be very fine and quite difficult to treat; however,
the tonnage is very small in comparison to the tonnage of solid waste that is
                                       72

-------
       TABLE 28.   ESTIMATED DUST GENERATION TO AIR UNDER  PRESENT CONTROLS

     1.   Coke Plant                         48,500,000 tonnes/yr .|
          Emission Factor:                   1.0 kg/tonne pushing  -,
                                             2.0 kg/tonne quenching
          Dust Emitted:                      145,500 tonnes/yr

     2.   Sinter Plant                       35,100,000 tonnes/yr
          Emission Factor:                   0.16 kg/tonne of feed
          Dust Emitted:                      11,870 tonnes/yr

     3.   Blast Furnace                      81,300,000 tonnes/yr    „
          Emission Factor:                   11 mg/scm from flue gas
                                             0.3 kg/tonne from  cast  house
          Dust Emitted:                      26,117 tonnes/yr

     4.   Basic Oxygen Furnace               77,400,000 tonnes/yr     b
          Emission Factor:                   0.1 kg/tonne from  offgas
                                             0.48 kg/tonne from tapping,5
                                               charging,  metal  transfer
          Dust Emitted:                      44,890 tonnes/yr

     5.   Electric Arc Furnace               27,900,000 topnes/yr
          Emission Factor:                   0.28 kg/tonne
          Dust Emitted:                      8,590 tonnes/yr

     a8 of 9 plants in EPA survey had emissions less than 0.16 kg/tonne feed.

     bWorst case in EPA survey of 5 plants.

     cWorst case in EPA survey of 6 plants.
	TABLE 29.   IMPACT OF  FUTURE AIR  REGULATIONS ON SOLID WASTE ,

                           Additional Quantities of Solid Waste (tonnes/year)5

                                      Carbon Wastes         Iron Oxide Wastes
Process                                (tonnes/yr)             (tonnes/yr)


Coke Plant                               145,500
Sinter Plant         .                     —                    11,870
Blast Furnace                             —                    26,117
Basic Oxygen Furnace                      —                    44,890
Electric Arc Furnace                      —                     8,590

TOTALS                                   145,500b                 91,467

Present Process Waste  Landfilled             17,189,000

%  Increase                   " 	0-5

aEstimate  is for  national  total  production  rate of 125,000,000 tonnes of  steel
 per year.

 It is anticipated that coke plant wastes will  be  recycled.

cLandfilled waste excluding rubble and  brick.
dAssumes strictest possible regulations, that is,  zero emissions.

                                       73

-------
presently being land-filled.  The impact of future air regulations on process
waste is an increase of 0.5 percent.
6.3.2  Effect of Water Regulations
       Table 30 provides an analysis of the generation of solid waste which
results from compliance with future water pollution control regulations for
the iron and steel industry.  Two simplifying assumptions were made in computing
the data in the Table.  The first is to assume that the industry presently
generates solid waste derived from wastewater treatment equivalent to the 1977
water pollution control regulations.  Even though the effluent quality for
some plants still does not comply with these regulations, other effluents in
compliance exceed them in other respects.  Therefore, for the purpose of
estimating sludge generation, this first assumption is reasonably close to the
current situation.  A check with the EPA Permits Division in November 1978
revealed that only 20 plants are not meeting the 1977 regulations and are on a
timetable for compliance.    The second simplifying assumption is that the
ultimate control imposed upon the steel industry will generate no more solid
waste than from the 1983 regulations.  If control requirements extend beyond
these regulations, for example to include the concept of "zero discharge,"
there will be a substantial increase in the tonnage of solid waste, greater
than indicated by the Table.
     Table 30 indicates that the imposition of future water pollution control
measures will create 29,700 tonnes annually from suspended solids.  Assuming
that these are not recycled, they will add approximately 0.2 percent to the
process wastes which are presently landfilled.
6.3.3  Effect of Industry Growth
       Projections of growth in the iron and steel industry have, in recent
years, been invariably wrong.  In 1974, for example, experts were predicting a
phenomenal growth.  At the present time, many experts are seeing a leveling
off, or perhaps even a decline.  Nevertheless, the current consensus is that a
                                                          37
2.5 percent growth in production appears to be reasonable.    IF steel indus-
try production grows by 2.5 percent, then it is reasonable to expect that the
generation of solid waste will grow by approximately the same amount.

                                       74

-------
        TABLE 30.  IMPACT OF FUTURE WATER REGULATIONS ON SOLID WASTE19'38
Operation
BPCTCA (1977)a   BATEA (1983)'
(Suspended Solids kg/tonne)
  Product    New Sludge*
(tonnes/yr)  (tonnes/yr)
Coke
Blast Furnace
Basic Oxygen
Electric Arc
Continuous Casting
Primary Mill
Hot Rolling
Pickling
Cold Rolling
Galvanizing
Tin Plating

Present Process Waste
% Increase with 1983
0.0365
0.0260
0.0104
0.0104
0.0260
0.0371
0.2420
0.0469
0.1042
0.1250
0.1250

Landfilled
Regulations
0.0104
0.0130
0.0052
0.0052
0.0052
0.0011
0
0.0026
0.1042
0.0104
0.0104

17,189,000
0.2
48,500,000
81,300,000
77,400,000
27,900,000
15,300,000
87,200,000
84,800,000
34,400,000
34,400,000
5,300,000
6,400,000

tonnes/yrc

1,266
1,057
402
145
318
3,139
20,522
1,524
0
607
733
29,713


*New Sludge = (BPCTCA - BATEA) x Product
aBPCTCA - Best Practicable  Control Technology Currently Available
bBATEA - Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
cLandfilled waste excluding rubble and  brick.

     An estimate of waste generation  is provided  in Table 31 and is based on a
yearly growth rate of 2.5 percent.  The impact of air and water regulations
that was discussed in previous sections has  been  included in the dust and
sludge estimates.
                  TABLE  31.   PROJECTED WASTE  GENERATION  IN  1983
                              (MILLIONS OF TONNES)
Waste
Slag
Dust, Sludge
Scale
1977
43.3 •
6.4
6.3
1983
50.3
7.6
7.3
                                        75

-------
     In summary, the projection for growth in the generation of solid waste
from iron and steel making is as follows:
          1.  from air regulations 0.5 percent,
          2.  from water regulations,  0.2 percent, and
          3.  from production growth,  2.5 percent per year.
                                       76

-------
          7.0  THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF IRON AND STEEL SOLID WASTES

     This section describes the current waste disposal practices of the  iron
and steel industry and identifies sources of environmental impact from these
practices.  The impact of the criteria for sanitary landfills on the iron  and
steel industry is assessed and alternative disposal practices are identified
which would be in compliance with Section 4004 of RCRA.
     Solid wastes are currently defined to include not only solids and liquids
which are not reused, but also solids and liquids which are reused if the
material is placed into or on any land or body of water such that any con-
stituent may enter the environment.  This broad definition of solid waste
could include such facilities as raw material storage, waste treatment lagoons,
slag processing facilities, and leaking pipes or sewer lines.  Although  the
environmental impact from each of these solid wastes cannot be assumed to  be
negligible, the only solid waste disposal which has been considered is
conventional landfill ing.
     Current landfill operations are generally conducted such that any leachate
which is formed may enter the groundwater, but some of the wastes have been
put in lined landfills with leachate collection.  Most of the nonhazardous
waste is estimated to be disposed of on-site with approximately 30 percent
disposed of off-site and 6 percent handled at contract disposal sites.
     The water extract of various iron and steel wastes contain components
which can, under some circumstances, endanger health when ingested in drinking
water in high enough concentrations.  Some of these components include oil,
cadmium, chrominum, lead, mercury, phenols, and cyanide.  There is a variability
not only among different types of wastes, but also among various samples of
the same type of waste.  The proposed rules not only require the groundwater
at the property boundary to meet any promulgated National Interim Primary
Drinking Water Standard, but it also requires that the water not be made un-
fit for human consumption, which includes aesthetic as well as health factors
                        53
not currently regulated.    The use of lined landfills for steel wastes  with
                                       77

-------
controlled discharge of the collected leachate is assumed, since this method
of landfill operation would restrict the contamination of groundwater by the
leachate.
7.1  TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL PRACTICES
     The types of disposal practices utilized in dealing with steel  industry
solid wastes have been broken down into three categories:  (1) reuse or re-
cycling, (2) stockpiling for potential reuse, and (3) dumping with no intent
for reuse.  For the category of dumping, the general term "landfill" has been
used to describe a solid waste dump site to avoid overlapping or ambiguous
terminology.  Within the disposal site may be pits, lagoons, ponds,  basins,
filled-in ravines, mounds, or heaps of varying size and number.  These sites
that are used by the steel industry are usually large land areas that receive
solids, liquids, and sludges, and for the most part, are not lined facilities
designed to prevent leachate movement with provisions for leachate collection
and groundwater monitoring.
7.1.1  Slag Treatment and Disposal
       Slag is a waste generated by iron and steelmaking but serves  as a
valuable raw material for the slag processing industry.  It is processed at
101 major iron and steel furnace slag plants and also at an undetermined
number of smaller plants  Some of the major processors and their locations are
listed below:39
     International Mill Service              Heckett Co. (CA, IN, NY)
      IL>                        E.G. Levy Co. (MI, IN)
     U.S. Steel Corporation                  R,,**ai« ci=»n f*nn
     (WV, PA, OH, UT, IL)                    Buffal° Slag (NY)
     Duquesne Slag (PA)                      Vulcan Materials (AL, IN)
     Blast furnace (iron) slag is sold as three general physical types:  air-
cooled, granulated, and expanded.  Air-cooled slag is produced by pouring
molten slag into a slag bank or pit; after solidifying and cooling,  the slag
is excavated, crushed, and screened.  Iron is magnetically removed and.recycled.
This type of slag is produced at 48 plants and accounts for 70 percent of the
slag sold (Table 32).
                                       78

-------
               TABLE 32.  QUANTITY OF SLAG SOLD AND VALUE  (1976139
Type
Air -Coo led*
Granulated*
Expanded*
Steel making
TOTAL
# of Major
Processing
Plants
48
11
7
35
101
Millions
of Tonnes
20.8
1.5
1.4
6.0
29.7
Millions
of Dollars
59.8
3.5
6.6
9.7
79.6
Avg. Value
$/tonne
2.88
2.33
4.71
1.62
2.63
*From blast furnace (ironmaking)

     Approximately 10 percent of the blast furnace slag that is  produced  is
landfilled; however, even in these cases it serves a constructive purpose.
For example, one major plant is using its slag as on-site fill material for
future plant expansion, but the site qualifies as a landfill due to  the
various wastes (e.g., dust and oily and organic sludge) mixed in during the
dumping operation.  Other plants pile the slag in mounds for future  sale  or
use it to dike a landfill area.  Some old slag dump sites are being  mined to
recover the slag to meet the increased demand.
     Steelmaking slag is processed at 35 major plants but in much smaller
quantities than ironmaking slag.  This slag is usually water cooled, crushed,
and iron is recovered for recycling.  Steelmaking slag is sometimes  recycled
to the blast furnace to recover iron, manganese, and lime values, and finds
some use in construction for unconfined bases, fill, and highway shoulders.
Its utility is much more limited than ironmaking slag because it can undergo
                                                     39
uncontrolled expansion due to hydration of free lime.    It is estimated  that
45 percent of the Steelmaking slag is used or recycled and that  55 percent is
landfilled.  The landfilled slag often is used for dikes, landfill bases, and
for layering or mixing with dust and sludge.
     Slag generation and disposition based on the national production of  125
million tonnes of steel per year is provided in Table 33 and indicates that
over 13 million tonnes per year of slag is disposed of in landfills.
                                       79

-------
  TABLE 33.  SLAG DISPOSITION FROM 125,000,000 TONNES OF STEEL PER YEAR
             (THOUSANDS OF TONNES)	
Source          Generated       Landfilled    %     Recycled, Used     %
Ironmaking
Steel making
TOTAL
28,300
19,360
47,660
2,800
10,560
13,350
10
55
28
25,500
8,800
34,300
90
45
72
     A category for "stocked" slag was omitted due to the difficulty in deter-
mining the difference in landfilling (or dumping) and stockpiling.   Many
companies that may describe the disposal site as a stockpile have accumulated
large quantities of slag over a period of years.  A report prepared in 1976
for the Federal Highway Administration to examine the availability of wastes
for use as highway materials estimated the quantities available at a few slag
           48
dump sites.    This information is listed in Table 34 and shows that six
locations in Pennsylvania have 93.5 million tonnes (103 million tons) in slag
piles.

                TABLE 34.  QUANTITIES OF SLAG AT SELECTED SITES48

Company
U.S. Steel

Bethlehem
Lukens
Bethlehem
Slag Dump
Bethlehem
Kaiser

Location
Pittsburgh, PA

Bethlehem, PA
Coatesville, PA
Johnstown, PA
Vanderbilt, PA
Buffalo, NY
Fontana, CA
Slag
Type
Iron
Steel
Steel
Steel
Steel
Iron
Steel
Iron and
Quanti ty
(millions of tonnes)
40.9
18.2
12.7
4.5
13.6
3.6
4.1
Steel 18.2
7.1.2  Sludge Treatment and Disposal
       Sludge is generated by water treatment facilities in which solids are
removed from process wastewater and from the water used in wet pollution
control equipment.  The wastewater goes through a series of treatments that
                                      80

-------
may include settlers, thickeners, oil skimmers, scale pits,  polymer addition
to aid settling and dewatering, clarifiers, and filters.   The type  of treat-
ment is plant specific and may involve almost any combination of the above
for treating water from various processes individually or in central  treatment
plants.  The resulting sludge is recycled, landfilled, stocked,  or  put into a
lagoon for additional dewatering before disposal.  The use of lagoons and
holding ponds is widespread with each major plant having  at least one such
facility.  A total of 16 lagoons and ponds were identified in 13 major plants,
and each plant generated some sludge that was landfilled.  '
     Complete sludge disposition data was available from 17 plants.  This data
indicated that 13 plants practiced recycling, 10 had stockpiles  on-site for
potential reuse, and all 17 landfilled at least a portion of their  sludge.
The disposition of sludge is provided in Table 35 and is  based on the national
production of 125 million tonnes of steel.  Sludge from the rolling mills and
steelmaking furnaces accounts for 1.3 million tonnes of the estimated 1.6
million tonnes of sludge landfilled yearly.

TABLE 35.  SLUDGE DISPOSITION FROM 125,000,000 TONNES OF STEEL PER  YEAR16'20
           (THOUSANDS OF TONNES)
Source
Ironmaking
Steelmaking
Rolling Mills
TOTAL
Generated
2,030
1,170
758
3,958
Landfilled %
270
617
730
.1,617
13
53
96
41
Stocked
190
286
476
%
9
24
12
Recycl ed
1,570
267
28
1,865
%
78
23
4
47
     Some of the techniques used by individual plants are listed below to
illustrate the variety of sludge handling procedures.
          Plant A - mixed with dust and slag in landfill
          Plant B - spread over slag pile
          Plant C - mixed with dust and scale, then stockpiled
          Plant D - placed in pits in the landfill area, then covered
                    with slag
                                       81

-------
          Plant E - randomly dumped with organic sludge and other wastes
                    in a large landfill
          Plant F - placed in lined landfill with leachate collection
7.1.3  Dust Treatment and Disposal
       Dust is collected by dry air pollution control  equipment used in the
sinter plant, blast furnace, and steelmaking furnaces.   Estimates of dust
generation and disposition are given in Table 36.  Sinter and blast furnace
dusts are generally recycled, but steelmaking dust is  mostly landfilled and
accounts for 73 percent of the 1.2 million tonnes of dust whis is not recycled.

TABLE 36.  DUST DISPOSTION FROM 125,000,000 MILLION TONNES OF STEEL PER YEAR16'20
           (THOUSANDS OF TONNES)
Source
Sinter
Ironmaking
Steelmaking
TOTAL
Generated
740
1,290
1,050
3,080
Landfilled
40
170
690
900
%
6
13
66_
29
Stocked
120
190
310
%
9
10
Recycled
700
1,000
^170
1,870
%
94
78
11
61
     Dust disposition data was available from 17 major plants and revealed that
16 practiced recycle, 6 had stockpiles on-site, and 7 landfilled a portion of
their dust.
     Some specific dust handling techniques practiced by individual  plants are
described below:
          Plant G - mixed with scale and stockpiled
          Plant H - mixed with water to prevent wind transportation
                    and placed in a holding pond
          Plant I - EOF dust is recycled by using select scrap in
                    the BOF to keep zinc content down
          Plant J - dust is "stored" in the ground by covering with
                    a layer of dirt
          Plant K - covered with BOF slag
                                       82

-------
7.1.4  Scale Treatment and Disposal
       Scale is generated in the rolling operations and is usually collected
in scale pits or settling basins.  These settlers serve as a preliminary
treatment of direct contact process water that is used for cooling, scale
removal, and flushing.  The heavy coarse pieces settle out and the very fine
scale is removed in subsequent water treatment as a sludge.
     Most of the scale generated in the rolling mills is recycled or stocked
for potential recycling.  Some of the stockpiled scale is not recycled immedi-
ately due to a high oil content that causes problems of hydrocarbon emissions
and fouling of fabric filters in the sinter plant.  In some cases this scale
is sent through a de-oiling process prior to delivery to the sinter plant.
Approximately 70 percent of the mill scale is recycled, 30 percent stocked,
and a small quantity is dumped (Table 37).  That portion disposed of in a
landfill is generated by the cold rolling operation and has a high oil con-
tent, but it is only 0.04 percent of the mill scale produced.

TABLE 37.  SCALE, DISPOSITION FROM 125,000,000 TONNES OF STEEL PER YEAR16'20
	(THOUSANDS OF TONNES)
Source          Generated     Landfilled    %    Stocked    %    Recycled   %
Soaking Pit
Rolling Mills
TOTAL
1,310
5^602
6,912
1,310
2
1,312
100
— T_,6_7_0
19 1,670
^ ^
30
34
_ •»
3JL30
3,930
•••_
ZP_
57
     Soaking pit scale, also called soaking pit slag, is iron oxide scale
fused with the coke breeze or dolomite (calcium magnesium carbonate) that has
been placed in the bottom of the soaking pit.  This scale may be contaminated
with refractory or other material and is usually landfilled.
7.1.5  Miscellaneous Waste Treatment and Disposal
       Plant debris, trash, rubble, and refractory from relining of furnaces
are landfilled.  AISI estimated that these wastes are generated at a rate of
10 percent of the steel produced (200 pounds per ton), so that the national
                                        83

-------
production of 125 million tonnes of steel would give 12.5 million tonnes of
           40
this waste.    Eight plants reported to state agencies regarding the disposi-
tion  of miscellaneous debris and the quantities totaled approximately 5
percent of the steel produced.  In three cases the waste was disposed of by
means of contract disposal, in another three at an off-site landfill, and in
two at an on-site landfill.
     Fly ash and bottom ash (or clinker) are solid wastes generated in coal-
fired boilers.  In many cases the boilers are fueled with coke oven and blast
furnace gases supplemented by oil or natural gas.  The use of these fuels does
not produce a solid waste.  However, Dravo found that three of the ten plants
visited used one or more coal-fired boilers that generated fly ash and bottom
    20
ash.    Information on these wastes was obtained from state agencies for six
plants and their rate of generation was approximately 13 kg per tonne of
steel.  Two of these plants landfilled the ash on-site and the other four off-
site.
     Grinding and scarfing dust arises from the removal of surface defects
during the finishing operations.  Battelle estimated in 1976 that there were
43 facilities with air pollution controls on these surface finishing opera-
      41
tions.    The quantity of dust as reported by Dravo ranged from a negligible
amount to 0.1 percent of the steel produced, and was unknown in three of the
                                20
six plants reporting this waste.    Based on the Dravo report, the quantity of
this waste generated and landfilled is believed to be small.
     Spent pickle liquor was discussed briefly in Section 6.1.7 and the sludge
                                                                   20
from neutralization was estimated as 350,000 (dry) tonnes per year.    An
estimated 800,000 tonnes of pickle liquor solution is generated from the over-
all production of 125 million tonnes of steel.    An EPA survey revealed that
                                                                      19
over 60 percent of the spent liquor was disposed of without treatment.    A
change from deep-well disposal to neutralization would, therefore, cause a
significant increase in the amount of sludge that must be disposed of in
landfills.  The disposal problem is complicated by the fact that hydrated
metal oxides from the neutralization process usually will not dewater to more
than 10-20 percent solids, so this sludge is not really a solid but a pseudo-
              42
plastic fluid.    The previously cited EPA document states that the pickling
of one million tons of steel, upon neutralization of the spent pickle liquor,
                                       84

-------
could result in 200,000 tons of wet sludge, which would require 150  acre-feet
                         19
of permanent fill volume.
     In Pennsylvania, most pickle liquor is handled by two contract  haulers
who use the following disposal technique:
     1.  Pickle liquor is placed in a lagoon and neutralized;
     2.  The liquid is floated off and the sludge is left in place in
         the unlined lagoon, and
     3.  When the lagoon is full, it is covered with a sloping top of
         soil and revegetated.
7.2  CURRENT DISPOSAL FACILITIES
7.2.1  Prevalence of Types of Disposal Practices
       Published data was reviewed and supplemented with data from state
agencies to obtain estimates of the number of disposal sites and percentages
of wastes disposed of on-site, off-site, and by contract disposal.   The data
base for the prevalence of different types of sites consisted of the 13 plants
visited by Dravo   and Calspan   and 20 plants for which information was  pro-
vided by state agencies in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan,  and
Ohio.  The various disposal facilities for the 33 plants included 28 on-site,
11 off-site, and 10 contract disposal sites.  The total for contract disposal
does not include slag processors or those contractors handling spent pickle
liquor only.
     The use of on-site landfills appears to be a function of plant  location
and land availability.  Many plants located in Chicago and Pittsburgh  have
off-site dumps, use contract haulers, and only use available plant property
for stocking wastes for potential recovery.  Plants located in Indiana,
California, Alabama, New York, and some areas of Pennsylvania take advantage
of available on-site or nearby off-site property for landfills.  For example,
a company in the Pittsburgh area has one large off-site landfill serving  four
plants, while in eastern Pennsylvania another extensive steelmaking  complex
has five landfills on its own property.
     Contract disposal is used routinely in combination with on- or  off-site
disposal.  Based upon a sample of 10 contract haulers, the types of  wastes
eliminated via contract disposal (excluding slag, oil, pickle liquor)  were:

                                       85

-------
plant rubble, debris, miscellaneous wastes (4), sludges (4), and soaking pit
slag (2).  The contractors and their locations are listed below:
     Bairstol Central Teaming Co. (IL)       Liquid Engineering Co. (IL)
     Browning-Ferris Industries (PA)         Pittsburg and Lake Erie
     Cinders Co. (IL)                          Railroad Co. (PA)
     E.C. Levy Co. (MI)                      Sanitary Landfill Co. (PA)
     Indiana Sanitation Co. (IN)             Vogel Co. (PA)
     Industrial Disposal (IN)
     Complete data on the quantities of waste disposed of by each method was
available for 17 plants.  These quantities were summed and the percentage of
total nonhazardous waste eliminated via each of the three disposal categories
was estimated as 65 percent on-site, 29 percent off-site, and 6 percent by
contract disposal.
7.2.2  Estimate of the Number of Landfills
       To estimate the number of major landfill sites, it was necessary to
establish the number of major iron and steelmaking plants.  A review of the
industry revealed that there were approximately 50 plants using blast furnaces,
basic oxygen furnaces, or open hearths (often in combination with electric arc
furnaces).  In addition, 13 of the 103 plants using only EAF's have capacities
exceeding 500,000 tonnes of steel per year and were arbitrarily included as
major plants.  The total of 63 major plants to be used as the basis for esti-
mating the number of landfills account for more than 90 percent of steel
production.
     The estimate of landfill sites for these plants included 53 on-site, 21
off-site and 19 off-site landfills belonging to contract haulers.  Details of
this estimate and the data base are provided in Table 38.  Disposal by con-
tractors does not include slag, pickle liquor, or waste oil processors.
     The data base used for estimating the percent of total waste going to
each type of landfill was explained in Section 7.2.1 and included 17 plants
for which complete quantity and disposiation data were available.
                                       86

-------
                     TABLE 38.  ESTIMATE OF MAJOR LANDFILLS

No. of Major Plants
On-Site
Off -Site
TOTAL
Contract Disposal*
Data Base
33
28
11
39
10
Estimate
for Total
63
53
21
74
19
% of Total
Waste
> 90
65
29
94
6
     *Excludes slag, pickle liquor, and waste oil processors

7.2.3  Present Disposal Costs
       Present disposal costs of solid wastes are variable due to differences
in land and transportation costs, mode of operation, landfill size, and
quantity of waste landfilled.  Some typical costs (including capital, operating,
and maintenance costs) are given in Table 39 and show a range of $0.82 to
$5.50 per tonne for most wastes.
                            TABLE 39.  LANDFILL COSTS
Cost ($ per tonne)
Reference
Comments
0.82 - 5.50
4.40

1.10 - 5.50
1.65+pickup+trans-
 portation
4.40 - 11.00

20.00 - 24.00
Mantel 1
                                    44
A.D. Little Co.
               11
Chester Engineers
                 45
Private contractor
                 45
Chester Engineers

Calspan Corp.
                  46
Sanitary landfill
Average of all waste
 disposal
Sanitary landfill
Natural clay base

Pickle liquor by con-
 tractor
Oily wastes by con-
 tractor
                                       87
                               Environmental
                              Protection Agency
                                 Region 9
                              SEP 2 7 1979
                                                              wassL

-------
     A private contract disposal company stated that their basic disposal
charge for material brought to their fill site (with a natural  clay base)  is
$1.65 per tonne ($1.50 per ton).  By private contract with the  steel  mills,
other items are priced to include pickup, processing for scrap  removal,
hauling, and dumping.  These rates would be added to the basic  charge and  are
confidential.    The charges for pickup and transportation alo'ne could double
the basic disposal charge.
     A.D. Little reported an average disposal cost of $4.40 per tonne ($4.00
per ton), but noted that the costs varied significantly among the 130 steel
plants in their survey.    Chester Engineers' study of wastewater residue
management in Allegheny County (PA) estimated that the cost for disposal  in
landfills ranged from $1.10 per tonne for a 5,000 tonne per day operation  to
$5.50 per tonne for a 60 tonne per day operation.  The same study reported the
cost of pickle liquor disposal by contract hauler as $4.40-$11.00 per tonne
($0.02-$0.05 per gallon); this includes neutralization and disposal in a
       45
lagoon.    The costs for oily wastes handled by contract haulers is provided
for comparison and may range up to $20-$24 per tonne ($0.10-$0.12 per gal-
lon).16
     In estimating present disposal costs, it is assumed that nonhazardous
wastes are disposed of in unlined landfills.  Although some claim to have  a
clay base, few have provisions for leachate collection.  One exception that
was discovered in the survey of state solid waste agencies was  in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, where lined impoundment with leachate collection  is required for
some nonhazardous wastes before a new landfill site is approved.
     For most of the large steel companies, the on-site dumping costs are
estimated at $1.20 to $2.00 per tonne (average of $1.60) and off-site costs
are estimated at $2.00 to $3.00 per tonne (average of $2.50).  Disposal at the
contractor's site was estimated at $3.30 per tonne by doubling  the basic
charge of $1.65 to include pickup and transportation.  Disposal of spent
liquor was estimated at $7.70 per tonne as the midrange of the  values in Table
39.
     An estimate of the amount of solid waste landfilled is provided in Table
17 and totaled 17.3 million tonnes of process waste and about 12.5 million
                                       88

-------
tonnes of miscellaneous wastes to give a total  of 29.8 million tonnes.   A
breakdown of estimated disposal costs is provided in Table 40 by disposal
location and includes pickle liquor since this  is a relatively large volume  of
waste.  The total cost to the industry for disposal of major solid wastes is
approximately $65 million.

	TABLE 40.  COST ESTIMATE OF PRESENT DISPOSAL	
                    Quantity
Disposal Type   (tonnes of millions)
Estimated Cost
($ per tonne)
Total Cost
($ millions)
On-site
Off -site
Contractor
Pickle liquor
by contractor
19.4
8.6
1.8
0.8
1.60
2.50
3.30
7.70
TOTAL
31.0
21.5
5.9
6.2
64.6
7.3  ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT DISPOSAL PRACTICES
     Present disposal practices include recycling or reuse, stockpiling, and
landfill ing.  The major impacts on the environment from the latter two methods
result from wind transportation, surface run-off, and subsurface migration of
leachate.
     Wind transportation of dusts from storage piles and landfills can be
minimized by proper attention to configuration (exposed surface area), topo-
graphic location (windbreak, despressions), moisture content, and spraying
with various chemicals.*  Surface run-off  can likewise be controlled by proper
attention to location, climate, and method of operation.  Of primary interest
in the environmental assessment of solid waste disposal is the subsurface
migration of leachate.  The balance of this section will deal with leachate
                                                                         52 53
characteristics and assessment with respect to criteria outlined in RCRA.  '
*The method of transporting  the dusts is  important.  Open trucks tend to
 redisperse them.
                                        89

-------
 7.3.1   Mater Quality Requirements of RCRA
        The major impact of RCRA on the waste disposal  practices  of  the  iron
 and steel  industry is the potential  damage to the  groundwater.   Groundwater
 criteria provide for the prevention  of endangerment  at the  property boundary
 of the disposal  site.    Endangerment is  defined as  the introduction of any
 substance into the groundwater in such a  concentration that additional  treat-
 ment is necessary for a current or future user of  the  water,  or  the water is
 unfit  in any way for human consumption.53  Maximum contaminant levels are set
 forth  in promulgated National  Interim Primary Drinking Water  Standards.
     Table 41  lists various permissible criteria of  selected  leachate components
 in drinking water.   Contamination beyond  these limits  makes the  water undesir-
 able for human consumption. Organic leachate components are  also of concern
 because certain  coke plant wastes are known  to contain polycyclic aromatic
 hydrocarbons.   National  standards for suspected carcinogens such as polycyclic
 aromatic hydrocarbons have not been  promulgated due  to a lack of information
 about  health effects.     Specific organic compounds  which are currently moni-
 tored  have been  selected on the basis of  the  likelihood of  occurrence in
 treated water,  the  toxicity data, and availability of  practical  analytical
 methods.   EPA is  actively investigating suspected  carcinogens and future water
 standards  may  reflect this  activity.   The World Health Organization drinking
 water  standards  permit only 0.0002 mg/£ of polynuclear aromatic  hydrocarbons.55
 Pennsylvania Department  of  Environmental  Resources data indicate that from 3-
 10 mg/A of oil and  grease (organics)  are  found  in  the  extracts of most iron
 and  steel  wastes.
     One of the major ways  that RCRA  serves to  manage  waste disposal facilities
 is the  elimination.of  hazardous waste  from the  nonhazardous waste disposal
 facility.   Elimination of these hazardous materials from the landfill site
 reduces  the  required  treatment of the  leachate  and could reduce the potential
 health  hazard  if  the  liner  for the landfill were to fail.   For these and other
 reasons, one of the criteria for  classification of hazardous waste is the
 potential  for a component to leach out  in concentrations 10 times that of
drinking water standards.  One major consideration for the special  designation
of a waste as hazardous  is to assure that such waste is delivered to a landfill
which conforms to proper management practices.
                                      90

-------
       TABLE 41.   A LISTING OF PERMISSIBLE CRITERIA FOR SELECTED COMPONENTS
                  FflP PIIRI TT UflTFD CIIDDI TFC 54
FOR PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES.
     Constituent
                              Permissible Criteria  (mg/£)
     pH
     Arsenic
     Barium
     Cadmium
     Chromium
     Fluoride
     Iron (filterable)
     Lead
     Manganese (filterable)
     Selenium
     Si 1ver
     Total dissolved solids
     Zinc
     Carbon chloroform extract
     Cyanide
     Oil  and grease
     Phenols
     Mercury
                                  6.0-8.5
                                  0.05a
                                  1.0a
                                  o.oioa
                                  0.05a
                                  1.2 (63.9-70.6°F)
                                  0.3
                                  0.05a
                                  0.05
                                  0.01a
                                  0.05a
                                500.0
                                  5.0
                                  0.15
                                  0.05, 0.2
                                Virtually absent
                                  0.001
                                  0.002a
     National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations
7.3.2  Water Extraction of Solid Waste Materials
       Water extraction tests were reported by six plants to PDER (Code A, B,
E, F, G, and H) as well as from an EPA survey58 (C) and ASTM15 (D).  These tests
differ from the proposed EPA Extraction Procedure in that distilled water was
used, whereas the proposed EPA procedure uses a limited amount of acetic acid
for pH control.  Higher levels of heavy metals are expected from these tests
when acetic acid is used.  The ASTM leachate values were reported by Enviro
Control15 with additional ASTM testing provided by AISI.  Although ASTM
tested the wastes with several different types of water, only the 48 hour

-------
extraction with carbon dioxide saturated reagent water is included in this
report.
     Coke plant wastes include coke breeze, tar sludges, and pitches from
various tar storage and processing operations, ammonia still lime sludge,
cooling tower sludge, and biological treatment sludge.  Due to the widely
diverse processes which can be used to treat the coke by-product gases, the
number of wastes, the amounts generated, and even the composition are expected
to vary from plant to plant.  In general, coke plant wastes are expected to be
hazardous with the possible exception of coke breeze.  The results of the
aqueous extraction of four coke plant wastes are presented in Table 42.  With
the exception of pH, the results are best expressed as the ratio of the amount
of material in the extract divided by the permissible criteria (i.e., number
of times drinking water standards).  The permissible criteria used to develop
Table 42 was the largest concentration presented in Table 41 and may differ
from legal requirements.  This approach is used to provide a uniform method
for assessing potential aesthetic and health impacts on the environment from
leachate, and is not used for the classification of a waste as hazardous.
     The tar decanter sludge contains relatively large amounts of oil and
grease as well as phenols.  Ammonia still lime sludge contains cyanides,
phenols, and may contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in concentrations
high enough to be of concern.  The water extract from cooler sludge contained
relatively large amounts of oil and phenols.  Some tar is also expected in the
oil from the extract.  In general, coke plant waste should be given special
consideration because of the carcinogenic nature of the coke oven gas from   -
which they originate and the potential of phenols and cyanides to endanger the
groundwater.  Most coke plant solid wastes are hazardous and require segre-
gation from nonhazardous wastes.
     Slags are the major solid waste generated by the iron and steel industry.
They are commonly used in a variety of fill applications as well as being
disposed of in landfills.  The results of aqueous extraction tests for various
iron and steelmaking slags are presented in Table 43.  Although the results are
generally incomplete, a number of conclusions can be drawn.  The steelmaking
slags from the BOF, the open hearth, and the EAF are generally of more environ-
mental concern than the blast furnace slag.  For example, the pH is much
                                       92

-------
10
CO
           TABLE 42.  RESULTS OF AQUEOUS EXTRACTION TESTS OF COKE PLANT WASTES.  (Results are
                      expressed in the amount detected divided by the permissible criteria.
                      No analysis designated X.)

Tar Decanter
Sludge C
A
Ammonia Still
Lime Sludge C
Cooler Sludge A
Coke Breeze, Mine
Solids
X
0.36
X
0.12
0.2
PH
(units)
8.9
7.8
11.5
6.7
10.4
Oil
1320.0
60.0
X
60.0
33.0
Phenols
5xl05
1.3xl05
2xl04
T2xl05
0.0
Cyani des
3.0
<0.04
990.0
0.2
0.0
Cd
X
<3.2
X
<4.0
0.0
Cr
<0.2
<3,7
0.4
<2.2
0.0
Pb
< 4.0
9.6
10.0
<10.2
0.0
         Refuse G

-------
TABLE 43.  RESULTS OF AQUEOUS EXTRACTION TESTS OF IRON AND STEEL SLAGS.   (Results
           are expressed 1n amount detected divided by permissible criteria;   No
Material
Blast Furnace
Slag




BOF Slag






Open Hearth
Slag


EAF Slag


Source
A
9
C
b
b
b
A
E
F
C
D
D
D
C
D
D
D
C
D
D
Solids
3.7
X
X
X
3.7
X
2.2
0.3
0.7
X
X
1.4
1.3
X
X
X
3.5
X
X
0.65
Oil
20
X
X
X
X
X
27
X
30
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cd
<3.2
1.3
X
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<3.2
<2.0
0.0
X
<1.0
<1.0
X
X
<1.0
1.0
0.0
X
0.0
0.0
Cr
<3.7
0.0
<0.2
<1.2
0.6
<1.0
<3.7
<1.0
4.2
3.0
<1.0
<0.2
X
1.0
0.0-2
2.0
0.0
5.4
2.2-6.4
5.2
pH
(units)
5.0
8.8
10.6
X
11.9
10.1
12.2
12.5
9.4
12.5
9-11
9.0
12.4
12.5
X
11.0
12.5
12.4
X
11.0
Pb
<4.4
1.2
<4
1-4.6
3.6
i.o
<4.4
7.0
0.0
4.0
<0.2-1.6
1.2
X
6.0
0-3.0
3.0
0.0
8.8
0.0
0.0
Phenol
< 5
X
X
X
X
X
<23
<26
0.0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

-------
higher for steelmaking slags than blast furnace slags.   Leachate components  of
possible concern are organic materials, chromium, lead, and phenols.   Steel -
making slags require special consideration because of the high pH.   Heavy
metal components in the leachate are a function of the acidity of the water  in
contact with the slags.
     Iron oxide wastes include dust and sludges from air pollution control
facilities.  Some of the water extraction tests on the sludges are presented
in Table 44, and data from the dust are presented in Table 45.  It is interes-
ting to note that oil and grease were found whenever the extract for oil  was
examined.  Relatively large amounts of phenols were found in the blast furnace
sludge and dust.  The extract from BOF dust also contained phenols.
     The extract from air pollution dust and sludges was examined for many of
the wastes.  In each waste examined, the extract did not meet drinking water
standards when only three metals were considered.  In some cases, however, the
test results were inconclusive.  Based upon these data, iron and steelmaking
dust and sludges should be impounded with leachate collection wherever the
groundwater needs protection.
     Additional iron and steel wastes are presented in Table 46 with the
results of the extract testing.  With the possible exception of grate ash
which was incompletely tested, the extract from the wastes did not meet the
National Interim Primary Drinking Water Standards.  A high level of chromium
was reported in the melt shop rubble, slab dust, mill scale, and soaking pit
slag.  Relatively high levels of oil and grease were reported whenever the
extract was tested for organic extracts.   The acid rinse sludge and the slab
grinder dust contained relatively high levels of phenols.  For these reasons
most of the miscellaneous wastes reported in Table 46 require special impound-
ment of leachate wherever the leachate may endanger the groundwater.
7.3.3  General Information on Soil Attenuation and Leachate Movement
       The previous section discussed water extraction results of steel wastes
that are used to estimate leachate composition.  However, for the purpose of
assessing the impact of leachate on the environment, it is important to under-
stand the mechanisms that may alter the leachate and the factors that affect
the accurate measurement of this impact on groundwater.

                                        95

-------
      TABLE 44.  RESULTS OF AQUEOUS SOLUBILITY TESTS OF IRON AND STEEL SLUDGES.  (Results are expressed

Material
Blast Furnace
Sludge
EOF Sludge


Open Hearth
Sludge
EAF Sludge

Source
A
C
G
C
H
D
C

Solids
1.6
X
0.7
X
X
X
X
PH
(units)
9.5
9.5
9.6
10.4
11.0
5.4-6.9
11.5

011
67.0
X
X
X
X
X
X

Phenols
14.0
400.0
X
X
X
X
X

Cyanides
25.0
X
X
X
X
X
X

Cd
3.2
X
X
X
X
1.0
X

Cr
3.34
0.4
3.6
1.8
1.4
1.0
1880.0

Pb
4.0
4.0
X
4.0
X
1.0-2.0
40.0
UD

-------
TABLE 45.  RESULTS OF AQUEOUS SOLUBILITY TESTS OF IRON AND STEEL DUSTS.   (Results are expressed in
           amount detected divided bv the permissible criteria.   No analysis  designated X.)
Material
Blast Furnace
Dust
Open Hearth
Dust


EAF Dust


BOF Dust
Precipitator
Baghouse





Source
A

C
B
D
D
B
C
G

A
A
E
D
D
D
D
Solids
X

X
X
X
19.0
X
X
15.0

8.0
10.4
0.8
X
X
6.1
X
PH
(units)
11.7

8.9
7.2
6.3-7.2
6.8
11.9
12.6
7.0

12.4
8.2
12.5
11.5-12
12.5
12.1
12.5
Oil
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
13.0

53.0
20.0
X
X
X
X
X
Phenols
250

X
X
X
X
X
X
0

28.0
40.0
X
X
X
X
X
Cyani des
<1.5

X
X
0.02-0.4
X
X
X
4.2

0.4
0.03
X
X
X
X
X
Cd
X

X
255
63-360
330
3.5
X
353

<3.2
<3.2
X
<1 .0
<1 .0
1.0
<1 .0
Cr
0.6

0.6
0.0
0-1.0
0.0
2400
6.8
25,000

<37.4
9.52
2.0
25-66.4
< 2.0
25.2
< 0.2
Pb
5.0

8.0
18.0
12-30
66.0
3.2
3000
6.0

<4.4
8.2
142
3.8-4.8
30-38
4.8
38.4

-------
oo
      TABLE 46.   RESULTS OF AQUEOUS SOLUBILITY TESTS OF MISCELLANEOUS  IRON AND STEEL  WASTES.
                 (Results are expressed in the amount detected divided by the permissible criteria.   No
                 analysis designated X.\
Material
Melt Shop
Rubble
Slab Grinder
Dust
Slab Dust
Incinerator Ash
Grate Ash
Boiler Bottom
Ash
Fly Ash
Mill Scale
Soaking Pit Slag
Wastewater
Sludge
Lagoon Sludge
Hot Mill Sludge
Acid Rinse
Sludge
Source
G
G
G
G
B
D
B
D
D
G
G
C
C
G
D
C
G
Solids
0.6
0.14
1.6
0.5
X
X
X
7.7
X
X
0.37
X
X
0.20
0.1
X
X
pH
(units)
11.3
6.6
4.9
10.2
8.0
6.5
8.4
4.9
7.8
8.7
11.1
9.6
9.5
6.8
7.2
6.6
X
011
37.0
43.0
27.0
20.0
X
X
X
X
X
X
50.0
3.3
X
157.0
2.6
X
X
Phenols
0.0
150.0
0.0
0.0
X
X
X
X
X
X
0.0
X
X
0.0
X
0.0
55.0
Cyanides
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
X
X
X
X
X
X
0.0
X
1.9
0.0
X
0.0
0.0
Cd
0.0
0.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
X
0.0
X
<5.0
X
0.0
X
X
0.0
6.3
0.0
0.0
Cr
26.6
0.4
308.0
1.0
0.0
X
0.5
<0.2
X
34.8
0.6
1.0
28.0
2.4
<10.0
2.4
0.2
Pb
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
X
3.6
12.4
<6.0
0.0
0.0
<4.0
<4.0
0.0
X
0.0
0.0

-------
    TABLE 46.   (cont'd)

Material
Settling Basin
Sludge
Brick Bat
Material
Scrubber Slurry

Source
D

D

D

Solids
X

0.7

2.1
pH
(units)
7.3

6.4

9.24

Oil
X

X

X

Phenols
X

X

X

Cyani des
X

X

X

Cd
<1.0

X

X

Cr
<1.0

X

X

Pb
3.0

X

X
vo

-------
     As leachate moves through subsurface soils, several mechanisms can affect
the nature and, consequently, the environmental  impact of the leachate.  One
of these is ion exchange and adsorption by clay and organic soils that may
adsorb and retain metallic ions.  For example, the cations of sodium,  potas-
sium, magnesium, iron, manganese, and ammonia may be attenuated by cation
exchange reactions on adsorptive surfaces in soil.  Another mechanism  is metal
fixation in which metal ions bind irreversibly to the soil, or substitute with
other ions of similar radii in the mineral structure.  Metal cations can also
react with phosphate, carbonate, or sulfide to yield a precipitate of  low
           47
solubility.    Heavy metals in their metallic state are generally insoluble,
but the heavy metal salts (as from electroplating or pickling), may be quite
soluble.  Ammonia that is present in leachate is oxidized to nitrate under
aerobic conditions by certain bacteria and may be nitrate by the time  it
reaches groundwater.
     The fate of organic leachate constituents is not well documented  since
few have been identified and their toxicity is unknown.  Organics may  come
directly from the solid waste or from decomposition products and are probably
                                                  50
subjected to adsorption and microbial degradation.
     These mechanisms are described to show the fate of some leachate  constitu-
ents and not as a means of groundwater protection.  They are often unpredictable
in their effect, and once the soil capacity for a particular mechanism has
been exceeded, a constituent may have an unobstructed path to the groundwater.
     Some other factors that affect leachate movement and consequently affect
monitoring and sampling requirements for environmental assessment are  sum-
marized below:
     1.  Geohydrologic conditions:  Under some circumstances leachate  will
         percolate rapidly, as through coastal plains sand, or through
         channels that may have developed in limestone.  In other cases, it  ^g
         may move only a few feet per year through soils of low permeability.
     2.  Climat.ic conditions:  Leachate will move differently depending on
         whether or not the soil is frozen, the amount of annual precipitation,
         and frequency of brief periods of intense rainfall in a dry climate.
         In some states with over 70 percent of the steel wastes (IL,  IN, MI,
         PA, OH), the annual rate of rainfall exceeds-the potential rate of
         evapotranspiration by 5-20 inches per year.
                                       100

-------
     3.  Disposal methods:  The type of disposal  method,  whether  lagoon,
         pit, dump, or landfill and the site preparation  affect the  rate
         of leaching.
     4.  Type of wastes:  Some important waste types are  (a)  solid,  sludge,
         or liquid (as in a lagoon with a continuous leachate plume),
         (b) organic or inorganic, and (c) water soluble  or insoluble.  For
         those components lighter than water, placement of wells  is  critical
         in that leachate may float on top of the zone of saturation and
          move past the sample well inlet.
     5.  Age of site:  This is relevant in that leachate  percolation may
         take several months to reach the groundwater.
     6.  Miscellaneous:  Some cases may require more than the minimum  of
         three wells when there is more than one aquifer, or where complex
         geologic or groundwater flow conditions exist.  The influence of
         nearby wells, changes in aquifer depth,-and groundwater  velocity
         also affect leachate migration and required sampling frequency.
     The effects of these factors are shown graphically in Figure 18 which
illustrates the importance of locating ponds (or lagoons), streams, and under-
lying geologic structure.  Climatology, surface runoff, discharge zones, and
aquifer recharge are other factors that are shown to affect the complex inter-
relationship of the hydrologic system and must be considered in locating or
evaluating landfill sites.
     Figure 19 is presented to underscore the need for a  scientific study  of  a
landfill site.  The confident placement of groundwater wells (labeled  GW-1,
GW-2, GW-3) may provide a false security while the. dangerous leachate  plume  is
moving undetected into the groundwater.
7.3.4  Groundwater Analysis From Iron and Steel  Landfills
       Groundwater analysis was provided to PDER by several iron and steel
companies in Pennsylvania (Table 47).  When these results are compared with
the leachate from individual wastes, both the groundwater and leachate extract
contain large quantities of oil and grease.  There is also close agreement in
pH since the average pH of the leachate extract  differs from the groundwater
monitoring data by only 0.2 pH units.  The problems with the water in  meeting
drinking water standards include alkalinity  (high pH), excessive dissolved
solids, and significant amounts of chromium.  The overall quality of the ground-
water was difficult to assess because of the lack of testing for  heavy metals
such as cadmium, and for the composition of the organic material  in the extracts.
                                        101

-------
o
r-o
        £ VAPOTRANSPIRATION
                                                                                                           WETLANDS
                         EVAPORATION
                                            ,     ,   .

                                           '  '       '
                                                                     '
                                            WATER-TABLE  AQUIFER
                                           CONFINING LAYER
                                        ARTESIAN  AQUIFER
  J     IT
—I—, .  i
                                  Figure 18. Illustration of relationships within the hydrologic system.51

-------
                                GW-K
C '
to
                                                                                                   GW-3
                                                                                    K.A.uiA^.'.^^'n-^ y^;. iV:**^-,'^
                                                  Rgure 19. Abandoned gravel pit with a clay layer at its base.50

-------
     TABLE 47.  SELECTED LEACHATE COMPONENTS IN THE GROUNDWATER OF VARIOUS  IRON AND  STEEL
                WASTE LANDFILLS.  (Results expressed in amount measured  divided by permissible
                criteria.*  No analysis desicmated X.)
Site, Sample
Position
A.l
A.2
A,3
A,4
A, 5
A, 6
A.7
B.I
B,2
B.3
C,l
0,1
E.I
E,2
Solids
4.5
4.2
3.9
5.1
5.1
6.3
X
5.0
5.8
5.4
1.6
X
X
X
Oil
206.0
100.0
33.0
40.0
60.0
120.0
13.5
60.0
67.0
120.0
0.53
81.0
14.9
22.5
pH
(units)
7.5
7.7
10.3
7.5
7.4
7.5
X
12.3
12.3
12.1
11.4
12.2
X
X
Ammonia
0.1
0.34
0.18
0.22
0.24
0.1
X
6.4
<5.8
4.5
X
1.8
X
X
Cr
0.8
0.8
1.2
2.2
0.8
2.6
1.2
0.8
1.0
0.8
X
0.4
0.8
0.6
Mn
54.0
26.4
2.2
72.2
97.0
117.0
6.0
2.2
1.8
2.2
X
0.0
0.2
10.0
Phenols
<12.0
<13.0
<10.0
<10.0
<10.0
<13.0
X
<10.0
<30.0
<10.0
4.9
X
X
X
Cd
X
X
X
X
X
X
0.0
X
X
X
<2000
X
0.0
0.0
*This is equivalent to "number of times permissible criteria."

-------
     Five water samples were obtained from two landfill  sites for additional
testing.  These sites are discussed in detail  in Section 7.3.5 as plants A
and E.  Plant A provided water (A,7) from a seepage spring that was suspected
of containing leachate from the landfill.  A well located at the edge of land-
fill E and at the highest elevation in the site was sampled (E,l).  A valley
well was sampled, located 250 ft below and 1600 ft south of the well, at the
edge of the site at the head of a stream (E,2).  This well is also at the edge
of, and 200 ft below the top of an established slag dump.  A stream which
enters the site was sampled (E,3), together with a downstream sample (E,4).
This particular stream collects the drainage from the site.
     The purpose of this sampling was to obtain information concerning ground-
water pollution from iron and steel solid wastes.  The state agency involved
received some information about groundwater quality at these sites.  This
investigation provided a more detailed groundwater analysis, with particular
emphasis on the organic chemicals in the groundwater, and a total elemental
analysis by spark source mass spectrometery.
     The water samples were subjected to a solvent extraction scheme developed
by RTI that separates the sample into six fractions:  acids, bases, insolubles,
nonpolar neutrals (NPN), polar neutrals  (PN)> and polynuclear aromatics (PNA).
Each of these fractions, except the insolubles, were subjected to gas chroma-
tograph, mass spectrometer analysis.  This was done for each groundwater
sample.
     Tables 48, 49, and 50 indicate the number of compounds found in each
fraction, the lowest and highest concentration of the individual compounds,
and the total concentration of compounds in each category.  The mass spectra
of the fraction which separates the PNAs indicated that most of the components
are not PNA's.
     The PNA fractions from the five water samples were subjected to a naphtha-
lene sensitized PNA fluorescence test as prescribed by EPA (Table 51).  This
test is sensitive and detected low levels of PNAs in the groundwater at the
property boundary (E,l), the upstream sample (E,3), the downstream sample
(E,4), and the groundwater seepage (A,7).  The upstream site (E,3) is about
1.5 KM from a very large slag dump that is the highest elevation point of the
region.  Although the levels detected were reliable only within a factor of  3,

                                       105

-------
       TABLE 48.  ANALYSIS OF GROUNDWATER FROM THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY (E.I)



                                                APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATION (ppb)
Compound Category
Acid (A)
Base (B)
Polar Neutral (PN)
Nonpolar Neutrals (NPN)
Polynuclear Aroma tics (PNA)*
SAMPLE TOTAL
No. of
Components
4
5
0
15
8

Range of Single
Component
13-38
24-100
—
20-565
10-41

Total
106
284
—
1633
200
2223
*The components found in this fraction are not PNAs.  They are probably NPNs.





    TABLE 49.  ANALYSIS OF GROUNDWATER FROM VALLEY WELL BELOW SLAG DUMP (E.2)



                                                APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATION (ppb)
Compound Category
Acid (A)
Base (B)
Polar Neutral (PN)
Nonpolar Neutral (NPN)
Polynuclear Aromatics (PNA)*
SAMPLE TOTAL
No. of
Components
6
4
12
17
4

Range of Single
Component
29-96
30-105
35-51
16-533
7-17

Total
343
260
484
2237
48
3372
*The components found in this fraction are not PNAs.  They are probably NPNs.
                                       106

-------
        TABLE 50.   ANALYSIS OF SEEPAGE SPRING WATER FROM A DUMPSITE  (A.7)
                                               APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATION  (ppb)
Compound Category
Acid (A)
Base (B)
Polar Neutral (PN)
Nonpolar Neutral (NPN)
Polynuclear Aromatic (PNA)*
No. of
Components
4
5
6
16
21
Range of Single
Component
40-70
17-42
6-10
18-296
13-67
Total
246
152
45
887
703
SAMPLE TOTAL                                                          2033

*The components found in this fraction are not PNAs.  They are probably NPNs.

              TABLE 51.  POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC FLUORESCENCE ANALYSIS
                                              PNA Spot             PNA Sample
Sample      Unsensitized      Sensitized      Concentration      Concentration*
E,l
E,2
E,3
E,4
A,7
None
None
None
None
None
Very light
None
Very light
None
Strong
1 ng/yl
< 1 ng/yl
1 ng/yl
< 1 ng/yl
1-10 ng/yl
3 ppb
< 3 ppb
11 ppb
< 3 ppb
3-30 ppb
*GC/MS analyzed indicated no PNAs at the 10 ppb level.

the concentrations were 15 to 55 times the International Standards for Drinking
Water (PNA, 0.2 ppb).
     The groundwater seepage sample from Site A contained arsenic and chromium
which were roughly equivalent to the permissible criteria of the National
Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations.    The concentrations of the other
elements in the water were either below the permissible criteria or not
covered by the regulations.  The method used was spark source mass spectro-
metry which did not include mercury and indium.  Table 52 lists those elements
which were found  in sufficient quantities to be of some environmental concern.
                                        107

-------
            TABLE 52.  WATER POLLUTANTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN IN
                       GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE SITE A
CONCENTRATION, ppm (mg/A)
Component
Chromium
Arsenic
Nickel
Iron
Silver
Strontium
Zinc
Copper
Cobalt
Manganese
Potassium
Magnesium
Lithium
Seepage
0.06
0.05
0.02
0.6
0.005
0.9
0.08
0.02
0.002
0.3
>10
>10
0.04
MATEa
0.25
0.05
0.01
0.005
46
0.1
0.05
0.25
0.1
30
90
0.33
ME6b
0.05,0.05°
0.01,0.05C
0.0006
0.3C
0.005
0.027
0.02
0.01
0.0007
0.02
0.075
0.083
0.0003
          aMinimum Acute Toxic Effect, water
           Multimedia Environmental Goal, water
          Permissible Criteria

These concentrations were generally not substantially greater than minimum
concentrations for acute toxic effects (MATE, a hazard to human health or to
ecology induced by short term exposure to emissions).  All of the concentra-
tion could not be considered compatible with Multimedia Environmental  Goals
(MEGs), necessary to prevent certain negative effects in the surrounding
populations or ecosystems.  A similar trend was observed in the groundwater of
Company E, both under a slag dump (Table 53) and at the property boundary
(Table 54).  The concentrations of manganese and lithium are great enough to
pose a potential environmental hazard under the slag dump, although they are
not present in these concentrations at the property boundary well.
     Several elements were apparently added to the stream as it flowed through
Site E.  Table 55 indicates that for each of the inorganic components  which
were present in concentrations sufficient to be of environmental concern, the
concentration increased as it passed through the site.  This was not true for
each component concentration of the stream, since the organics, silicon,
aluminum, and titanium decreased.
                                       108

-------
TABLE 53.  WATER POLLUTANTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL  CONCERN DETECTED
           IN A WELL AT THE BASE OF A SLAG  DUMP  SITE E
CONCENTRATION, ppm (mq/i)
Component
Strontium
Zinc
Nickel
Cobal t
Manganese
Potassium
Al umi num
Magnesium
Lithium
Well Water
1.0
0.06
0.008
0.004
0.5
0.09
0.06
MATE3
46
0.1
0.01
0.25
0.1
30
1
90
0.33
"MEGb
0.027
0.02,5.0C
0.0006
0.7
0.02
0.75
0.073
0.083
0.0003
 Minimum Acute Toxic Effect, water
 Multimedia Environmental Goal, water
cPermissible Criteria
 TABLE 54.  WATER POLLUTANTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN AT THE
            PROPERTY BOUNDARY OF AN IRON AND STEEL LANDFILL
            SITE E
Component
Strontium
Arsenic
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Cobal t
Iron
Titanium
Potassium
Aluminum
Magnesium
Lithium
CONCENTRATION
Well Water
0.06
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.006
0.7
0.1
2
0.2
>10
0.01
, ppm (mg/a)
MATE3
46
0.05
0.1
0.05
0.01
0.25

0.82
30
1
90
0.33

MEGb
0.027
0.01
0.02,5.0°
0.01
0.0006
0.7
0.3C
0.083
0.75
0.073
0.083
0.0003
aMinimum Acute Toxic Effect, water
Multimedia Environmental Goal, water
Permissible Criteria
                             109

-------
       TABLE 55.  A COMPARISON OF POLLUTANT LEVELS IN A STREAM FLOWING
                  THROUGH A LARGE IRON AND STEEL LANDFILL SITE E
CONCENTRATION, ppm (mg/i)
Component
Strontium
Selenium
Arsenic
Nickel
Cobalt
Manganese
Potassium
Al umi num
Magnesium
Lithium
Upstream
0.1
< 0.008
< 0.003
< 0.01
< 0.001
0.004
> 10
0.07
3
0.009
Downstream
1
< 0.007
< 0.02
< 0.05
< 0.03
0.5
> 10
0.09
> 10
0.6
MATE3
46
0.025
0.05
0.01
0.25
0.1
30
1
90
0.33
MEGb
0.03
0.005
0.01,0.05°
0.0006
0.0007 r
0.02,0.05°
0.075
0.073
0.083
0.0003
     aMinimum Acute Toxic Effect, water
      Multimedia Environmental Goal, water
     cPermissible Criteria

     Table 56 summarizes the environmental pollutants of concern which were
common to the five different water samples.  Although the slag dump cannot be
identified as the source of the groundwater pollution at the property boundary,
those pollutants of environmental concern present in the groundwater were
detected in significantly greater concentrations downstream than upstream.
Most of the environmental pollutants of concern in Site A were also of environ-
mental concern in Site E.
     In summary, the groundwater did not meet the permissible criteria (Table
41) at any of the sites, and in many cases exceeded those criteria by one to
two orders of magnitude.  Special liners are required for the landfills so
that the leachate may be collected if groundwater protection is required.
7.3.5  Descriptions of Selected Steel Industry Dump Sites
       This section provides descriptions of selected steel industry dumps to
provide insight into current disposal practices and the potential or proven
adverse effects on the environment.  It is important to note that RCRA requires
the closing of sites classified as "open dumps" within five years of the pro-
mulgation of disposal criteria.

                                     110

-------
   TABLE 56.   WATER POLLUTANTS COMMON TO FIVE WATER SAMPLES  FROM  TWO  IRON AND
              STEEL LANDFILL SITES
CONCENTRATION, ppm
Component
Strontium
Arsenic
Nickel
Cobalt
Manganese
Potassium
Lithium
Boundary
Well
Site E
0.6
0.02
0.02
0.006
0.01
2
0.01
Slag Dump
Well
Site E
1.0
0.009
0.008
0.004
0.5
>10
0.6
Upstream
Site E
0.1
0.003
0.01
0.001
0.004
>10
0.009
(mg/A)
Downstream
Site E
1
0.02
0.05
0.03
0.5
>10
0.6

Seepage
Site A
0.9
0.05
0.02
0.002
0.3
>10
0.04
     Plant A operates two sites comprising over 400 acres that have been in
use for the past 40-50 years.  The wastes dumped on these sites include iron
and steelmaking slags, dusts, sludges, fly ash, waste acid, coke plant tars,
oils and sludges, miscellaneous debris, and waste oils.  A hydrogeologic
survey contracted for by the plant revealed serious seepage and contamination
and attributed the problem to random disposal techniques, mixing of wastes,
runoff, and rainwater leaching.  The study recommended the elimination of
specific wastes, erosion control, containment structures downstream of the
seepages, and closure by revegetation.  According to the contractor, the
potentially hazardous wastes which are currently deposited at the site are
blast furnace sludge (cyanide), BOF slag and ESP dust (high pH), coal fines
(ammonia, phenol), and tar decanter sludge (tar, phenol).  The remaining life
of the site was estimated as five years and the state agency plans to have the
site closed as soon as an alternate site is approved.
     Plant B is part of a specialty steel company that recently applied for
and received a permit to operate a lined landfill for solid waste disposal.
These wastes include incinerator ash, BOF sludge, acid rinse sludge, and hot
rolling mill sludge.  The landfill is to be prepared by removal of the top-
soil, installation of a clay liner, and the addition of two feet of BOF slag
                                        111

-------
as a leachate base.  Drains and diversion channels will be constructed under
the impoundment dike, and these gravel drainage trenches will be lined with 30
mil Hypalon plastic.  The leachate drainage will be collected in a Hypalon-
lined holding pond where a one day holding period will allow solids to settle
and the supernatant (overflow) will be discharged to the river.   Four ground-
water monitoring wells will be installed and analyses will be reported
quarterly; the holding pond will afford an additional monitoring point before
the overflow is discharged.  To meet future disposal needs, the holding pond
may be filled in with slag and sludges with drainage to the next stage holding
pond.  The expected life of this site is 25 years.
     Plant C has a state approved landfill which is an unlined facility that
receives primarily steelmaking slag, but small quantities of oily mill sludge,
pickle liquor sludge, water treatment sludge, and ESP dust are also dumped.
The method of operation is to mix the dust and sludge and spread this mixture
over the disposal area which is diked with slag.  A hydrogeologic survey re-
vealed that water infiltrates the soil down to impermeable bedrock, then moves
downslope along the bedrock-soil interface.  Surface water is collected in a
stream and moves through the base of the site into a swamp.  Two water obser-
vation wells are installed, one to monitor background water at a depth of 70
feet and one down gradient at a depth of 200 feet.
     It is important to note that Plant C conducted tests to demonstrate to
the state that slag effectively removed hazardous components in the sludge.
The results showed that iron, cyanide, and some phenol were removed through
multiple passages of water through a column containing five feet of slag and
one inch of sludge.  No phenol was detected in the leachate after five days,
and it was presumed the phenolics were destroyed.  The study also suggested
that although some of the sludge is 50 percent oil, the oil was effectively
controlled by the slag through some unknown mechanism.  Their study also found
that the sludge was impervious to water, and concluded that the horizontal
layering of sludge on top of the slag would effectively prevent water passage
through the sludge and greatly reduce leaching tendencies.  The company plans
to use the permitted area for solid waste disposal for the next 50 years.
     An important environmental aspect of steel industry dump sites is the
presence of deep mines in the major steel producing states of Pennsylvania,
                                       112

-------
Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois.  Exposed pyrite (FeSg) in these mines  oxidizes  to
sulfuric acid and can yield mine drainings with a pH less than 2 which  can
compound disposal monitoring problems.  For example, Plant D has been dumping
dusts, slag, sludges, and pickle liquor along a four mile stretch of their own
property.  Sludges are presently put into pits, but this procedure  is being
used without a state permit.  The serious leaching problems that exist, are
complicated by leaching coal refuse and acidic mine drainings in the area.
     Company E is in the process of fulfilling state requirements to continue
operation of a large dump site that has received steel wastes for about 75
years.  Presently blast furnace slag, BOF sludge, EAF and OH dust,  and  fly ash
are being deposited, and in the future, water treatment plant sludges will be
landfilled.  Plans include lined impoundment at an elevated location for these
sludges which are composed primarily of oil, grease, and finely divided mill
scale.  Impoundment for other wastes were constructed in ravines by diking the
lower ends of the ravines to prevent flow.  A basin lined with bituminous
material was constructed and used for ferro-manganese furnace fines.
     An extensive hydrogeologic survey was conducted for this 500 acre  site
and revealed some of the following characteristics:
     1.  Several springs, swamps, and streams were identified.
     2.  Surface and deep mines and mining spoils were located.
         (The area underneath had been mined out and abandoned.)
     3.  The depth to groundwater ranged from 0 feet  (springs)
         to 48.5 feet.
     4.  Major groundwater flow is through permeable sandstone
         and open joints.
     5.  Groundwater samples contained sulfate, aluminum,  iron,
         phenol, manganese, and cyanide.
The life of this site is estimated at 50 years.
     Plant F is currently disposing of wastes by filling in a lake bordering
their property, and then using that area for plant expansion.  Blast furnace
slag is the major waste deposited, but miscellaneous dusts and sludges are
mixed in and used for fill material.  A permeable  barrier  of  blast furnace
slag with steel supports and concrete cap extends  into the lake to mark the
future  limits of the fill area.  The  company plans to use  the 300 acres of

                                        113

-------
lake between the fill and barrier as their solid waste disposal  site  for  the
next 20 years.  This procedure is not environmentally sound based  on  RCRA
criteria for solid waste disposal, since the criteria require the  prevention
of direct discharges into surface waters of unchanneled leachate seepage, when
possible.
7.4  IMPACT OF SECTION 4004 RCRA CRITERIA
     The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act provides for the promulgation
of regulations for the criteria for determining which facilities shall  be
classified as sanitary landfills and which shall be classified as  open  dumps.
The general current practice in the iron and steel  industry is the dumping  of
wastes in unlined sites.  The major impact of Section 4004 is to require  the
disposer to control the leachate migrating toward the groundwater.
     All steel plant waste, with the possible exception of bricks, rubble,  and
certain trash items are anticipated to have leachate which is unfit for human
consumption.  Contaminants such as oil and grease,  dissolved solids,  fluorine,
chromium, manganese, lead, iron, phenol, cyanide, cadmium, zinc, and  mercury
have been identified in some of the various iron and steel wastes  at  concen-
trations greater than the permissible criteria.
     Although most steel plant wastes are not classified as hazardous,  avail-
able leachate and/or water extraction test data have shown the extract  to be
unfit for human consumption.  In view of these facts and in evaluation  of
environmental endangerment, a lined landfill would  be required for these
wastes.  However, hazardous wastes are specifically excluded from  landfill
under Section 4004, since they are regulated under  Subtitle C of RCRA.  A
major economic impact may result if contaminants must be removed from the
collected leachate.  The leachate disposal method assumed for nonhazardous
wastes is controlled discharge to waterways or recycle back through the land-
fill.
     Discarded steelmaking slag would need liners because of the high pH  of
the water extract, the dissolved solids in the extract, and the organic
compounds as well as inorganic elements.  However,  the slag does not  require
lined landfill ing if it is used as a salable product, for resource recovery,
or if the state has exempted the disposal area from groundwater requirements

                                      114

-------
under Case 2 of the proposed rules.  Since steelmaking slags are a  major
landfilled waste, two calculations were performed on the economic impact of
the proposed criteria with and without the required lined landfill ing of steel
slag.
     The impact of Section 4004 on the iron and steel industry was  calculated
assuming the following:  the criteria requires the lined landfilling of certain
wastes, the removal of the leachate resulting from rainfall on these wastes,
and the controlled discharge of the water which is collected.  Therefore, the
cost of the criteria would be the cost of converting an existing landfill into
an area for the collection and removal of leachate and would require a sub-
stantial capital investment.  The criteria do not specifically require changes
in current solid waste disposal practices such as the transportation of wastes,
employment of landfill personnel, or purchase of land for waste disposal.  It
should be pointed out that the costs of Section 4004 do not include those
costs incurred as a result of hazardous waste disposal, which may be more
expensive than for nonhazardous wastes.
     The estimated annual capital cost for lining nonhazardous waste landfills
is $6.9 million (Table 57).  The cost of a lined landfill for steel slag dis-
posal is approximately twice that of nonslag nonhazardous waste disposal.
Although some economies of scale are achieved with increasing waste disposal
volume, when steel slag is placed  in a lined landfill, the overall  cost is
still three times as high.  The estimated cost  is relatively low for two major
reasons.  One primary consideration is that only the cost of converting a
potential landfill site to a lined landfill was considered.  The second major
factor is that the majority of iron and steel wastes are currently either
recycled, sold, or used in a manner consistent with the objectives of RCRA.

               TABLE 57.  SUMMARY  OF ESTIMATED  4004 CRITERIA COSTS



Enforcement
A-Steel Slags
Excluded
B-Steel Slags
Annual
Capital
Cost
($ Millions)
6.9

21.1
% Current
Environ-
mental
Costs
0.63

1.9
% Future
Environ-
mental
Costs
0.2

0.6


% of
Sales
0.01

0.04
% of
Current
Disposal
Costs
12

38
   Included

-------
     When the estimated implementation costs of Section 4004 are compared with
other costs in the industry, it is apparent that those costs would not be a
significant factor in the compliance ability of the industry. .This cost is
also relatively low in comparison to either the current or projected environ-
mental costs and extremely small when compared to the percent of sales.  On
this basis it is expected that the criteria will have little impact on either
the cost of products or the economics of production.
     Current disposal costs are estimated for 30 million tonnes of nonhazardous
waste at an average cost of $1.90 per tonne or $58 million.  As Table 57
shows, this represents a small fraction of current and future environmental
costs.  Current annual environmental operating costs were estimated as $8 per
                                                                    59
ton of ste,el, including the cost of air and water pollution control.    The
long term environmental costs, including disposal of nonhazardous solid waste,
are estimated as $3,620 million per year.    This estimate is consistent with
the Council on Wage and Price Stability's estimate of $18-33 per ton.
     Section 4004 will, however, have a major impact on the disposal practices
used by the industry and substantially increase the cost of present land
disposal systems.  It is estimated that the capital costs for developing
leachate collection facilities alone will double the disposal costs of those
wastes placed in lined landfills.
7.4.1  Landfill Site Monitoring for Enforcement of Groundwater Standards
       The cost of enforcement monitoring for groundwater contamination will
                                                                            50
range from several thousand dollars to several tens of thousands of dollars,
and will be higher than for assessment monitoring.  One of the reasons for
this is that quantitative data will be necessary regarding leachate contam-
ination at a landfill site.  There must be sufficient evidence to prove beyond
any reasonable doubt that the contamination exceeds applicable standards and
that this excess is caused by the land disposal site.  This wide range of
possible costs is due to the differences in site conditions and state laws.
Monitoring for zero discharge laws requires sampling devices immediately
adjacent to the downgradient landfill edge or beneath the site whereas more
costly monitoring would be involved in cases concerning property line laws.
In these cases, several monitoring wells at various distances and depths
                                       116

-------
downgradient as well as comprehensive surveys, especially depth to ground-
water, will directly affect the installation costs of sampling devices.
     The proposed EPA rules state that as long as leachate may enter ground-
water in such quantities and concentrations that the groundwater quality may
be endangered, monitoring of groundwater, prediction of leachate migration,
and a current and acceptable contingency plan for corrective action are re-
quired.    The prediction of leachate migration can be determined only by
interpretative monitoring which differs from detective monitoring which only
establishes the presence or absence of contaminants.    Interpretative
monitoring determines the extent of damage by leachate and prescribes remedial
action.
     A major limitation to monitoring and characterizing the nature of the
groundwater pollution lies in the nature of the plume itself.  The pollutants
which leach out in different parts of the landfill may have different impacts
on the groundwater quality.  Due to the nature of the formation of the plume,
there is severely limited radial mixing.  Thus, there may be a wide range of
unpredictable variations in contaminant concentrations within a plume of
leachate-enriched groundwater.
     A number of factors serve to complicate the prediction of leachate migra-
tion.  Wide variations have been observed in leachate concentrations over
short distances and time periods and sampling at additional points implies the
installation of additional monitoring wells.  Before installation can take
place, however, determination of the flow rate and groundwater direction are
prerequisites.  Because groundwater flow rates are slow, data must be col-
lected over long periods of time in order to perform a comprehensive analysis
of the landfill.  Conditions such as fractured rock are so unpredictable as to
frustrate  an intensive monitoring effort.  As a result, interpretative
monitoring which determines the extent of damage and prescribes remedial
action is  not considered practical for every disposal facility.    Detective
monitoring, however, can be useful to establish the presence of contaminants.
The technique will establish the need for additional monitoring if necessary
and a plan for remedial action.
     A minimally acceptable monitoring well network should consist of the
following:    one line of three wells downgradient from the landfills pene-
trating the entire saturated thickness of the aquifer, one well immediately
                                       117

-------
adjacent to the downgradient edge of the field area screened so that it inter-
cepts the water table, and one well  completed in an area upgradient from the
landfill so that it will not be affected by potential  leachate migration.
Every effort should be made to have a minimum of five  wells at each landfill
and no less than one downgradient well for every 76 meters of landfill
frontage.
     Even if wells are sited according to the background information described
here there is a high probability that one or more of them will not intercept
the plume of leachate-enriched groundwater due to the  anisotropic nature of
the aquifer material.  Also, the operation of the landfill can significantly
influence concentrations of pollutants observed in the monitoring wells since
the location of a pollutant in the landfill determines the location of  the
leachate from that waste in the overall leachate plume.  Depending upon the
hydrogeological nature of the landfill site, the leachate plume may be  con-
fined to the landfill site or it may travel long distances.  Also the plume
may divide into multiples, move into different aquifers or reverse its  direc-
     50
tion.    If the monitoring program is to be effective, it must account  for all
possible leachate movement.
     When monitoring is to be used as an early warning system, sampling in the
zone of aeration is desirable.  This type of monitoring is most appropriately
done directly beneath the landfill where the leachate is migrating downward to
the water table.  The devices to be used should be in place before construction
of the impoundment facility thus avoiding the possibility of creating other
potential leakage sources by drilling through the landfill.  Pressure vacuum
lysimeters are used to monitor the zone of aeration.  Some of the advantages
of this device are that it is inexpensive, reliable, and standard water analyses
can be made.
     Table 58 presents various cost factors for surveying and monitoring a
typical two acre landfill site.  Although the cost of a hydrogeological survey
would be dependent upon location, typical costs might be $13,000 per site.
This cost does not include the cost of locating a suitable site.  The place-
ment of three five-well clusters with a 1.5 meter screen in each well and four
lysimeters in the zone of aeration under the landfill  is estimated to cost an
                                       118

-------
              TABLE 58.  COST FACTORS FOR SURVEYING AND MONITORING
                         A TYPICAL TWO ACRE SITE
                                                            Cost ($)
          Location, mapping, surveya                        2,000
          Soil studya                                       1,400
          Geology (4 borings)3                              4,200
          Hydrology (4 wells)3                              3,800
          Flooding, Climatology3                              600
          Discharge to groundwater survey3                  1,200
           (6 sets of analyses)
          Monitoring Wells (3) 5 well cluster               9,200
            1.5 meter screen
                        j»»
          Lysimeters (4)  installed under the               1,300
            landfill                                       	
          TOTAL                                            24,300

          3Green Engineering, Pittsburgh, PA, 197860
           EPA Procedures Manual, inflated at 10 percent per year to 1978
          CRTI estimate, 1978

additional $10,000.  This brings the total estimated cost for surveying and
monitoring to $24,300.  An additional $3,000 is estimated to be required
annually for quarterly water analyses.  This cost as well as the expense of
obtaining the samples to be analyzed should be considered an operating
expense.  Therefore, the total cost to the industry for Section 4004 would be
the capital plus operating costs.
     The cost of the hydrogeological survey and well installation is a capital
expense and is included in the cost of the facility.  Twenty percent of the
excavation and grading costs is allocated for the survey and wells.  For the
model plant of 2.5 million tonnes of steel per year, the 20 percent survey
allocation would be $27,000 for a landfill holding one year of waste produc-
tion.  For an average sized EAF plant of 600,000 tons per year, the development
of a 3 year disposal facility would result in an allocation of $24,000.
Therefore, this 20 percent estimates the survey and monitoring well expenses
and represents about 20 cents per cubic meter of solid waste.

                                       119

-------
     Within the accuracy of the expected capital costs, the estimated $3,000
annual analytical costs are not expected to be a significant contribution and,
therefore, are not included in the economic analysis.   The analytical  costs
become a significant aspect of overall landfill costs  if the key indicators
demonstrate a potential problem with groundwater quality.  If this is the
case, then more extensive testing would be required and its cost would be
dependent upon state regulations.  With iron and steel  wastes, some of the
leachate constituents of interest are as follows:
                    1.  Lead
                    2.  Chromi urn
                    3.  Cadmi urn
                    4.  Oil and Grease
                    5.  Polycyclic Organic Materials
                    6.  Benzo(a)pyrene
                    7.  Cyanide
                    8.  Phenols
                    9.  Mercury
These constituents are some of those found in iron and steel wastes; the
National Interim Primary Drinking Water Standards, however, do not as yet
include polycyclic organic materials or benzo(a)pyrene.
7.4.2  Model Facility
       The cost of lining solid waste landfills has been developed by con-
sidering the development costs for a model facility.  The overall operating
costs of a landfill include land, labor, earthmoving equipment and trucks,
lining, groundwater monitoring, as well as other factors.
     A major cost component is the development of those lined landfill facili-
ties which will be required to eliminate leachate endangerment to the environ-
ment.  The approach taken has been to isolate the actual costs of converting
an existing landfill into a site providing for the collection and removal of
leachate.  Figure 20 is a sketch of a model facility with leachate control.
The facility, however, is not to be confused with the  recommended or required
method of leachate control and is presented only to provide an order of magni-
tude estimate of lined landfill costs.
     The model facility is lined with 0.6 meters of clay and sealed with
bentonite.  A drainage system is installed in the bottom of the facility and

                                      120

-------
                                                                     "^         S^^g^^
GRAVEL
DRAIN  SYSTEM
Figure 20.  Diagram of a sanitary landfill with leachate collection.

-------
covered with gravel for drainage and protection of the pipes.   The type of
drainage system used would depend on the nature of the wastes.   For example,
water entering an impoundment facility storing coke tar collects on the
surface of the tar.  In many cases slag could be used in place  of gravel,
reducing the cost.  The water drains to a concrete sump and is  pumped out.
     Leachate treatment is not considered in this analysis, only controlled
discharge in an environmentally acceptable manner.  If the leachate were
hazardous, the wastes would not be subject to the proposed criteria but would
be subject to Subtitle C "Hazardous Waste Management."  It is  both conceivable
and probable that the annual cost of treating the Teachate may  exceed the  annual
cost of constructing an environmentally acceptable lined landfill facility.
     In the Figure, excavated earth was used to form peripheral dikes, in-
creasing the potential landfill volume.  The leachate collection drains were
assumed to be placed at 2 meter intervals with two major collection drains
crossing the length' of the landfill.  A fixed cost for the sump and pump was
established as $4,340.  Landfill facilities which would require a more
effective pump are considered to cost enough so that upgrading  of the pump
would add little to the overall cost.
     The excavation cost was based on the concept of moving earth from the
trench to form dikes which double the storage volume of the trench and have a
26.5° slope.  The height of the dike would be as deep as the excavation trench
for the large volume landfills of interest.  For example, a small EAF plant
producing 200,000 tonnes of steel per year could be expected to generate 2,500
m  of waste per year.  An impoundment volume large enough to store 10 years
supply of waste would contain 25,000 m .  The dimensions of the impoundment
facility could be 10 meters deep, 80 meters long, and 40 meters wide.  Ex-
cavated earth from a 5 meter deep trench would provide enough material to
build a 26.6° dike and cover the filled site.
     After the trench is dug, clay liner is installed at an estimated $2 per
cubic meter and compacted.  Then a bentonite layer is mixed with the surface  of
the clay.  The piping is positioned in the bottom of the trench and covered
with gravel.  Additional gravel is used on one end of the trench.  With the de-
velopment of the model lined landfill costs as a function of the dimensions of
                                      122

-------
the landfill, the costs were calculated for a variety of landfill  sizes.   The
shape of the landfills were selected as 4:2:0.5, the length to width to depth
ratio.  Eight different sized landfills were selected for this same shape.
The results are presented in Table 59.
     i
       TABLE 59.  THE COST OF LANDFILL LINERS FOR VARIOUS SIZED LANDFILLS
                  (L:W:D) = (4:2:0.5)
     Volume                                            Cost/Volume
     Cubic Meters               Cost ($)               ($/Cubic Meter)
256
864
4,000
13,500
32,000
108,000
500,000
1 ,688,000
11,500
15,900
31,700
67,600
126,000
328,000
1,208,000
3,584,000
45.0
18.4
7.91
5.0
3.93
3.04
2.41
2.12
     The cost of the larger landfill is expected to be somewhat higher than
the model indicates due to the somewhat excessive depths obtained with a LWD
ratio of 4:2:0.5.  The disposal of dusts and sludges could be impractical in
depths of 25 meters unless special techniques were used.  Steel slags could be
used as intermediate cell cover, for example.
     Table 60 presents several estimates for operating a facility with leachate
impoundment.  The cost of impounding metallurgical solid wastes was estimated
by Agarwal, et al.    A square pond was formed on level land by earthen dikes
and PVC sheet.  The expenses for developing a storage pond in a canyon or
ravine surrounded by a large earthen dam were expected to be substantially
less than costs for level land.  The .typical integrated iron and steel plant
generates 36,000 metric tons of nonhazardous solid wastes.  Bricks and rubble,
as well as slag are not considered in the landfilled wastes.  A 180,000 m
impoundment lagoon that provides for 5 years' waste production was estimated
as costing $250,000.  The annual cost of financing the project at 12 percent
                                       123

-------
      TABLE 60.  LANDFILL COSTS FOR NONHAZARDOUS WASTE LEACHATE COLLECTION
                 AND REMOVAL.  (Generated In the Model Plant, dollars per
                 metric ton, 2.5 Megatonne production, specific gravity
                 of waste-2.0)
     Reference                                             $/Metric Ton

     Calspan, operation costs3                                 7.5
     Arthur D. Little, Inc., operation costs                  10.0
     RTI, impoundment costs only0                              1.9
     RTI, pond impoundment costs only                          1.46
     Calspan, impoundment costs only                           1.6

     aAnnual impoundment and waste segregation is considered, as well as
      the cost of hauling, labor, etc.
      Based on contract hauling costs.
     cCost of converting an existing site for sanitary landfill leachate
      collection and removal.
      Difference in landfill cost due to impoundment, excavation excluded.

interest is $69,000.  The cost per metric ton, with a specific gravity of 2.0,
is $0.96.  This cost is based on 1973 dollars and was estimated as $1.46 per
tonne in 1977 dollars using a 10 percent inflation rate.  The cost estimate for
the lagoon is provided for comparison with the cost of the model facility.
     RTI's estimate of the lined landfills costs for the model plant was based
on the estimated cost of a model facility (Table 61).  Clay is assumed to be
available on site, and the costs of the other components include transportation
costs.  Bentonite is used in addition to the clay to provide additional pro-
tection.  Special earth additives may be required to reduce the permeability of
the compacted earth in many sites.  The component costs are expected to be site
specific because of transportation costs and local availability.
     The cost per volume as a function of volume was used to prepare Figure 21.
Although the economics are expected to be very sensitive to the volume, it is
relatively insensitive for the large landfill volumes.
     The expense of developing a lined sanitary landfill is a capital expense.
However, if a landfill facility is developed each year, it could be considered
                                        124

-------
           TABLE 61.   COST FACTORS FOR THE MODEL IMPOUNDMENT FACILITY
1.   Excavation3                        2(LWD/2)e
2.   Grading3                           0.4 (LW-2 DW-2 DL+D2)
3.   Survey and Testing3                2Q% of (1) + (2)
4.   Clay Baseb                         (2.0)(0.61)(LW+2.47 DW+2.47  DL+4D2)
5.   Bentonite Surface Layer3'0         1.8 (LW+2.47 WD+2.47 DL+4D2)
6.   Drains3                            6.00 (2L-4D+0.5 LW+2D2-LD-WD)
7.   Graveld                            9.10 (0.61 LW+0.15 WD-1.22 DL+2.44D2)
8.   Bentonite Cover3'0                 1.8 (LW+2DW+2DL+4D2)
9.   Earth Coverb                       0.4 (LW+2DW+2DL+4D2)
10.  Concrete Sump                      2,340
11.  Pump                               2,000
12.  Electrical, pump piping, etc.      2,000
13.  Contingency                        30% of the above

3Calspan                       Building Construction Cost Data 1978
b                             e
 RTI                           L,W,D are the average length, width,  and depth
°EPA^2                         1n me^ers*

an annual cost.  If a facility is built and financed which can be used for the
disposal of 10 years waste, then the annual cost is the cost of the  repayment
of principal plus interest.  This method permits the producers of relatively
small volumes of waste to take advantage of some of the economies of scale
evident in Figure 21.  A disadvantage to lining a large area is that a
plant is paying for disposal volume which is not used in the immediate future.
Thus, there is a "trade-off" between the additional cost of a small  facility
and the additional interest charges from a large facility.  Figure 22 presents
optimization curves for three different sizes of plants:  a small (1,000
 3                                           3
m  of waste per year waste), medium (10,000 m  of waste per year), and large
                     2
steel plant (50,000 m  per year).  The small plant has an optimum landfill
size equivalent to 5-10 years waste production but the medium and large steel
plants economically operate with landfills sized for 2-5 years production.
The values obtained for the optimum costs in Figure 22 are plotted in Figure
23.  This relationship is used to develop the industry's cost for compliance
with RCRA Section 4004.
                                       125

-------
ro
en
                                                             Volume  of Landfill
                                                            (Cubic Meters  x  1000)
                                                   Figure 21. Cost factors for various landfill sizes.

-------
          o
          (O
                     15
ro
           3 J-
           O O)
           Q.4J
           O •«-
            J3
          +J 3
           V) t_>
          r— Q.
           fO
          4-> I/)
          •r- S~
           O. 
-------
INJ
00
        •3:8
        •r—
        D. O
        fO •!-
        O JO
 o

4-> OJ
 (/) O.
 o
O V)

r— JO
 fO r—
 3 r—
 C O
               10
                                                                  10
                                                                                  30
60
100
                                                     Annual Waste  Generation
                                                      (Cubic  Meters x 1000)
                                                                             for various rates of waste generation.

-------
     The steel industry is divided into two types of plants, (1) facilities
comprised of relatively small EAF's and (2) facilities containing large blast
furnaces, BOF's, and open hearth furnace plants.  For each of these types, the
total production was divided into tenths and a cost figure, using Figures 21
and 23, was developed for a typical plant in each production division.
Summation of the individual costs provided the estimate of the cost to the
industry.  Table 62 summarizes the costs for the segments of the two plant
types.
     The annual capital cost for converting landfills from open dumps to
lined landfill sites is estimated to be $6.92 million.  This represents 0.014
percent of the selling price of steel (6 company average, $397.77 per ton in
1977).  This amount is not expected to have a significant economic impact on
the steel industry; however, this impact could be severe for contract haulers,
especially considering the required capital investments in Table 59.
     Table 63 summarizes the cost of capital needed to develop larger sanitary
landfill sites for slag.  A typical integrated iron and steel plant would
require approximately $400,000 per year to line steelmaking slag and other
nonhazardous wastes landfills.  This figure represents a cost of $0.16 per ton
of steel.  Tables 64 and 65 summarize landfill facility costs in view of the
current practice of discarding half of the steelmaking slag and the annual
landfill cost when this slag is excluded.
     The estimated annual capital cost for steelmaking slag that is currently
landfilled is $14 million, increasing the annual capital cost of landfill
facilities threefold.  The estimated annual cost for landfill ing all wastes,
excluding bricks, rubble, trash and blast furnace slag is $21 million.  This
figure represents 0.042 percent of the selling price of steel.  If steelmaking
slag is discarded rather than used as a product, then it should be disposed of
in a sanitary landfill.
     The economic impact is also contingent upon the regulations developed to
control hazardous and nonhazardous wastes.  For example, a state may declare an
aquifer under a nonhazardous waste landfill for use other than as a drinking
^ater supply per Section 257.3-3(b) (1) of RCRA.  In this case, there would be
                                      129

-------
00
o
               TABLE 62.  CAPITAL COST TO LINE LANDFILLS FOR VARIOUS PRODUCTION SEGMENTS OF THE'
                          IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.*  (The Industry 1s divided Into tenths by the
                          amount of steel oroduced for two tvoes of olants.)
Cumulative Fraction
of Production
0.1
0.2
0.3
0,4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Average Costs ($/m )
Average Costs ($/tonne)
(S.G. = 2.0)
EAF
Plant Size
(1000 Tonne
of Steel /Yr)
0-160
160-250
250-350
350-450
450-600
600-750
750-1000
1000-1200
1200-1500
1500-



Only
Landfill
$/m3
8.4
6.4
5.8
5.4
5.1
4.8
4.6
4.4
4.3
4.2
5.34
2.67

Plants with BF,
Plant Size
(1000 Tonne
of Steel /Yr)
0-1600
1600-2300
2300-2500
2500-3000
3000-3500
3500-4000
4000-4750
4750-5700
5700-7200
7200-



BOF, OH
Landfill
$/m3
4.2
4.0
3.8
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
3.58
1.79

          *Steelmaking Slags Excluded

-------
     TABLE 63.  CAPITAL COST TO LINE LANDFILLS FOR VARIOUS PRODUCTION SEGMENTS OF THE
                IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.*  (The Industry 1s divided Into tenths by the
                amount of steel produced for two types of plants.)
Cumulative Fraction
of Production
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
o
Average Costs ($/m )
Average Costs ($/tonne)
(S.G. = 2.0)
EAF
Plant Size
(1000 Tonne
of Steel/Yr)
0-160
160-250
250-350
350-450
450-600
600-750
750-1000
1000-1200
1200-1500
1500-



ONLY
Landfjll
$/m
5.1
4.4
4.2
3.9
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
3.84
1.93

Plants with BF,
Plant Size
(1000 Tonne
of Steel/Yr)
0-1600
1600-2300
2300-2500
2500-3000
3000-3500
3500-4000
4000-4750
4750-5700
5700-7200
7200-



BOF, OH
Landfill
$/m
3.3
3.1
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.74
1.37

*Steelmaking Slags Excluded

-------
  TABLE 64.  A SUMMARY OF THE YEARLY CAPITAL COST TO CONSTRUCT LINED LANDFILL
             FACILITIES FOR IRON AND STEEL WASTES.*  (Steelmaking Slags
             Excluded.)
Quantity Steel
(106 Mg/Yr)
EAF Only Plants 24.2
OH, BOF Plants 100.8
All Iron and 125.0
Plants
Quantity Waste Costs
(106 Mg/Yr) ($/Mg) ($ x 106)
0.621 2.67
2.94 1.78
3.55 1.94
1.66
5.26
6.92
*Principal + financing costs
  TABLE 65.  A SUMMARY OF THE YEARLY CAPITAL COSTS TO CONSTRUCT LINED LANDFILL
             FACILITIES FOR IRON AND STEEL WASTES.*  (Steelmaking Slags
             Excluded.

EAF Only Plants
OH, BOF Plants
All Iron and
Steel Plants
Quantity Steel
(106 Mg/Yr)
24.2
100.8
125.0
Quantity Waste
(106 Mg/Yr)
3.171
10.94
14.11
Costs
($/Mg) ($
1.93
1.37
1.50
x 106)
6.12
15.0
21.1
*Principal + financing costs
                                       132

-------
no economic impact from Section 4004.  However, another state could require an
artificial liner, multiple liners for contingency purposes, monitoring of
groundwater movement near the site, and leachate treatment facilities.  These
requirements could pose a significant impact, particularly on a smaller plant.
7.5  ALTERNATIVE DISPOSAL PRACTICES FOR THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
     The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act provides for the promulgation
of regulatory criteria for determining which facilities shall be classified as
sanitary landfills and which shall be classified as open dumps.  Any manage-
ment practice which constitutes the open dumping of solid waste is prohibited,
and all open dumps will be either closed or upgraded to meet the criteria of
                                                         52
Section 4004 with an acceptable timetable for compliance.    The criteria
provide that a facility is classified as a sanitary landfill and not an open
dump only if there is no reasonable probability of adverse effects on health
safety, or the environment, and if it is located, designated, constructed,
                                                                  52 53
operated, completed, and maintained as prescribed by the criteria.  '
     The major adverse effect is groundwater contamination.  The law provides
protection through the requirements that the landfill not make the water unfit
for human consumption, that the groundwater user does not need to increase
water treatment before use, and that it is unnecessary for a future user to
                                                                     53
use more extensive water treatment than would otherwise be necessary.
     One method of preventing groundwater endangerment is to use the site's
natural hydrogeologic conditions and soil attenuation mechanisms.  However,
soil attenuation alone may not provide definite assurance of the quality of
the leachate plume from iron and steel wastes.  The other technique for
preventing endangerment of the groundwater is the collection of leachate
through the use of artificial liners where the leachate is removed, recircu-
                                 53
lated, or treated as appropriate.
     A state may designate a groundwater source for use other than as a human
drinking water supply if it is impractical for use as such or if alternative
                                      53
drinking water supplies are available.    Under these circumstances, the
waters of an adjacent state or county must not be endangered by the landfill.
When a groundwater source is designated for another use, the state may specify
                                       133

-------
what groundwater quality must be obtained at the disposal  site's property
boundary.  This special designation could be useful in situations where a
state wishes to maintain an existing landfill, when artificial  liners would
serve no useful purpose, or in site specific cases when the nature of the
waste and the landfill location is neither a danger to the environment nor
expected to contaminate wells.
     One type of special use of iron and steel wastes is land modification and
improvement by selected landfill ing.  There are examples of iron and steel
plants increasing their size through such operations.  States could permit the
regulated use of these wastes for land reclamation by special groundwater
source designations.
7.5.1  Sole Source Aquifers
       The location of sole source aquifers must be considered when examining
alternative disposal practices.  Section 1424(e) of the 1974 Safe Drinking
Water Act makes it possible for EPA to designate areas which are principally
dependent upon an aquifer for drinking water supply.  Aquifers are geological
formations which yield significant quantities of water to wells or springs.
They are replenished through recharge zones which permit rainfall and surface
runoff to enter the aquifer.  In the recharge zone, the aquifer is especially
sensitive to contamination from a disposal site.  Disposal sites should not be
located in the recharge zones of sole source aquifers when feasible alterna-
tives exist.  The feasibility of the alternative site is to be determined by
technological and economic factors.  When a landfill is to be permitted in the
recharge zone of the sole source aquifer, special precautions must be taken so
that it is located, designed, constructed, operated, maintained, and monitored
to prevent endangerment to the aquifer.
7.5.2  Waste Separation
       The separation of hazardous and nonhazardous wastes should also be
considered when evaluating alternative disposal practices.  The ma'jor effect
of RCRA on current iron and steel mill waste disposal practices is the isola-
tion of hazardous waste material.  These wastes, are not to be placed in a
sanitary landfill but in special lined hazardous waste landfills.  Removing
                                       134

-------
the hazardous materials from the sanitary landfill  reduces significantly the
probability of environmental damage.  The leachate which is collected from the
nonhazardous waste material is less than 10 times the drinking water standards
for many of the criteria pollutants.  Although this level  of environmental
pollutants does not guarantee the controlled discharge into streams under an
NDPES permit, in some cases the dilution factor would be sufficiently great
for the collected leachate to be directly discharged into surface water
systems.
     The hazardous waste materials produced by iron and steel mills include
some of the coke plant wastes, ferromanganese blast furnace dust and sludge,
EAF dust and sludge, and selected steel finishing wastes.  The steel plant
wastes published in the proposed hazardous waste regulations are presented in
Table 66.

    TABLE 66.  OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE LIST OF HAZARDOUS IRON AND STEEL WASTES
Coking                         Decanter tank tar, toxic, organic.
                               Decanter tank pitch sludge, toxic, organic.
                               Oleum wash waste, corrosive.  Caustic
                               neutralization waste, corrosive.  Ammonia
                               still lime sludge, toxic.
Ironmaking                     Ferromanganese blast furnace dust, toxic,
                               reactive.  Ferromanganese blast furnace
                               sludge, toxic.  EAF dust, toxic.  EAF
                               sludge, toxic.
Steel Finishing                Alkaline cleaning waste, corrosive.  Waste
                               pickle liquor, corrosive.  Cyanide bearing
                               wastes from electrolytic coating, toxic.
                               Chromate and dichromate wastes from chemical
                               treatment, toxic.
     A hazardous waste is hazardous because of its inherent characteristics.
Current EPA characteristics for the classification of hazardous wastes are
ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity.  Additional waste may
be classified as hazardous when other criteria, such as mutagenicity, are
developed.
                                       135

-------
7.5.3  Artificial Liners
       Leachate is formed by water infiltrating a landfilled waste.   The
leachate migrates through the soils under the solid waste and is attenuated by
ionic change, filtration, adsorption, complexing, precipitation, and bio-
          64
gradation.    If the voids in the soil are filled with water, the leachate
moves to the groundwater where there is little dilution unless a natural
geologic mixing basin exists.  Natural purification processes have limited
ability to remove contaminants because of the limited number of adsorptive
sites and exchangeable ions.  Natural leachate treatment is also time depen-
dent; lower flowrates are more efficiently attenuated.  A site's hydrology is
extremely important since it determines, to a large extent, leachate formation
and dispersion.  Soil permeability is a measure of the rate at which water can
move through it.  Coarse soils such as gravel and sand are generally more
permeable than fine grained soils such as silts and clay, but not necessarily.
For example, small amounts of fines in sand and cracks in clay can reverse the
respective permeability.
     An artificial liner may be employed to control the leachate movement.
One of the most commonly used is a well-compacted clay soil, one to three feet
                                     64
thick kept moist to prevent cracking.    If sufficient clay soil is not avail-
able locally, natural clay additives may be mixed with it.  The use of
additives requires testing to determine the optimum type and amounts.  For
cohesion!ess soils, or situations where the necessary degree of compaction is
not practical, liners can be constructed of asphalt or polymer membranes.
     Polymer membranes have not generally been used for solid waste disposal
sites, therefore, limited data are available regarding long term effectiveness.
The membrane covering should consist of a fine textured material which can be
placed with a dragline, conveyor, or truck.  Heavy equipment cannot move over
the liners until they are protected with six to eight inches of cover.    A
side slope of at least three to one is necessary to assure stability of the
cover materal on the slope.  Before the liner is put in place, the slopes
should be graded and any debris that might damage the membrane should be
                                                    65
either removed or covered with a fine textured soil.    The liner should cover
the sides of the basin to reduce the potential for lateral leachate movement.
Perforated pipes should be placed along the center lines of the disposal basin
                                       136

-------
and covered wth granular materials such as coarse sand or gravel.   The top of
the filled area is covered to reduce rainfall  infiltration and the water which
does not enter the landfill is removed by the drainage pumps and a sump located
at one of the lower corners of the sanitary landfill.  The water is pumped out
of the landfill for treatment or controlled discharge.  If consideration is
only given to collecting the leachate and not controlled discharge, the
potential damage that the leachate represents may be considerable.    A pond
of leachate with a high concentration of contaminants may buildup in the land-
fill.  A rupturing of the liner would release a high volume of this leachate.
7.5.4  Surface Waters
       The objectives of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of
1972 are the restoration and maintenance of surface water quality.  Accord-
ingly, all point source discharges of pollutants such as collected leachate,
surface runoff, and diverted groundwater must comply with state NPDES permit
requirements.  The permit requirements are site specific in that they depend
upon the designated use of the surface water and the water flowrate.  The
criteria also require the prevention of contaminated discharge into surface
waters of nonpoint sources when possible.
     Leachate seepage and surface runoff should be collected through ditches
or trenches.  The amount of water which enters the landfill site or moves
laterally as groundwater into the deposited refuse should be controlled.  The
possibility of water entering a landfill site must always be taken into account.
Water contamination by infiltration is of concern when the solid waste is
placed where there is relatively unhindered flow from the solid waste to the
surface of groundwaters and when the distance from the landfill to the surface
water is unusually short.  The waste should not be placed where there is
standing water, over coarse soils or fractioned bedrock, or near wells or
surface bodies of water.  Special precautions should be taken to minimize
water pollution for such sites.  Diversion of the surface water will reduce
mud and standing water on the site as well as reduce leachate production.  A
conduit can be provided to channel streams through or under a landfill to
eliminate contact with the solid waste.  Runoff from the landfill should be
diverted to one central point where it can be discharged to a water body or

                                        137

-------
treated prior to discharge.  One technique is to build a simple diversion
barrier at the top of the sanitary landfill to keep runoff from entering the
fill surface.  The top cover material of the sanitary landfill  should be
graded to reduce the residence time of the surface water, since the quantity
of water which infiltrates the landfill is a function not only of the per-
meability and the thickness of the cover but the length of time the water
stands on the surface.
     One of the basic concepts of sanitary landfill design is that groundwater
and the deposited solids should not be allowed to interact.  It should not be
assumed that the leachate will always be diluted in the groundwater since the
flow in the aquifer is usually laminar with little mixing.  *    When issuing
landfill permits, many states require that groundwater and deposited solids be
from two to thirty feet apart.  Approximately five feet will  remove enough
readily decomposed organics and coliform bacteria to make the leachate
bacterialogically safe.    Mineral pollutants from iron and steel wastes,
however, can travel long distances through soil or rock formations.  The
proposed rules for site selection for hazardous wastes require at least 1.5
meters (5 feet) above the historical high water table.
     It is often possible to lower the groundwater in freely draining, gravelly,
and sandy soils.  Drains, canals, and ditches are frequently used to intercept
an aquifer and channel it to the surface or a recharge area at a lower ele-
vation.    Temporary methods of lowering the groundwater such as wells are not
advisable because the wastes can become saturated with water after the pumping
ceases.  Also, highly permeable soils that can be readily drained will offer
little resistance to leachate movement.
     A major preventative measure for reducing the possibility of the pollu-
tion of surface waters are to locate the site a safe distance from streams,
lakes, wells, and other water sources.  The landfills should not be located
above the kinds of subsurface stratification that will lead the leachate to
water sources such as fractured limestone.
7.5.6  Flood Plains
       If a facility is located in a lowland or relatively flat area adjoining
inland and coastal waters which are inundated by a flood which has a one per-
cent or greater chance of reoccurring in any year, then the facility must meet
                                       138

-------
three criteria:  (1) it must not increase the flooding upstream by preventing
the flow of water across the landfill  site; (2) the landfill  also must not
reduce the water storage capacity of site, which increases the flooding down-
stream; and (3) the flood water must not inundate the waste material.
     The acreage of the flood plain consumed by the land disposal site should
be minimized.  The nature of the waste should also be considered and the
permissible wastes in a flood plain should be limited to the more inert types.
     A landfill located in a flood plain should be protected by dikes  and
liners.    The top of the dike should be wide enough for maintenance work to
be carried out and may be designed for use by collection and landfill  vehicles.
     The location of sanitary landfills in flood plains are discouraged since
the wetlands, surface water, and groundwater may be more sensitive to effluents
from the landfill.  The EPA feels that although the environmental impact of an
                                                                          53
individual site may be minimal the cumulative effect could be significant.
7.5.7  Safety
       Surface ponding of certain coke plant wastes and other liquid wastes
are not acceptable if the gases produced from the liquid either by sublimation
or evaporation cause either a public nuisance or endangerment of the health.
The use of hazardous organic liquids for dust control is also undesirable for
these reasons.  One major criteria for a sanitary landfill is the controlled
access to the disposal site.  Complete prohibition of access to unauthorized
users is the most effective means of minimizing the risk of injury to other
persons.  In most cases there is little economic impact on solid waste dis-
                                                     53
posal operation in accomplishing site access control.    Potential harm to the
landfill personnel can be minimized with proper training and safety practices.
7.5.8  Other Criteria
       Whenever possible environmentally sensitive areas should be avoided.
Other areas that are sensitive include active fault zones and karst terrain,
wetlands, and endangered species habitats.  Sensitive areas may not be used
unless it is demonstrated that the facility will not jeopardize the biological
life in the area.  Lined landfills should not be located over future mining
sites, abandoned mining sites, or unstable surfaces due to the potential
rupturing of the liner.
                                        139

-------
                    8.0   IRON AND  STEEL  RECOVERY AND RECYCLING

      There are  four basic  categories of solid waste from iron and steelmaking:
 coke  plant wastes,  slags»  iron  oxides,  and  scrap.  Essentially all scrap is
 recycled to the steelmaking furnaces.   Coke plant wastes are also recycled to
 various  operations  with  the exception of wash oil and tar sludges which are
.only  partially  recycled  and lime  sludge which is landfilled.  Ironmaking slag
 and,  to  a minor extent,  steelmaking slag as well, are sold for by-product use.
 The remaining steelmaking  slag  is either partially recycled to the blast
 furnace  or landfilled.   A  substantial portion of the iron oxide wastes,
 especially steelmaking dusts and  sludges are landfilled; the rest are recycled
 to the sinter plant.
      At  present, various waste  recovery processes are being implemented to
 increase the utilization of iron  oxide  wastes.  These include pelletizing of
 the wastes to make  them  suitable  for charging into the blast furnace, direct
 reduction to remove and  recover otherwise deleterious zinc and lead, and de-
 oiling to facilitate the use of certain iron oxide sludges in the entire plant.
      Various changes in  the iron  and steelmaking process, primarily implemented
 because  of economics, are  also  reducing the consumption of raw materials and
 the generation  of waste  products. These changes include continuous casting for
 better yield of semi-finished product,  preheating of scrap and molten iron to
 consume  more scrap  in steelmaking furnaces, and various modifications to
 improve  ironmaking  in the  blast furnace.  The latter include external desul-
 furization of iron, burden preparation, and fuel injection in the tuyeres.
 Direct reduction of iron ore is also growing because it requires less invest-
 ment  than the blast furnace/coke  oven alternative.
      The full implementation of the above process changes in the industry would
 increase the consumption of scrap (23 percent) and reduce the consumption of
 coal  (35 percent) and fluxes (24  percent).  It would also reduce waste genera-
 tion  in  terms of coke plant wastes (35  percent), iron oxides (14 percent),
                                        140

-------
ironmaking slag (34 percent), and home scrap (22 percent).  The reduced
generation of scrap, combined with its increased consumption would provide an
incentive for scrap recovery.
8.1  WASTE TREATMENT AND RECYCLE
     This section discusses the current practices used to recycle wastes
including special treatment and handling procedures.  Some of the most common
methods of resource recovery and recycle are described, as well as identifica-
tion of promising new uses for waste materials.  One example of how the iron
and steel industry can increase the resource recovery from other segments of
the economy is discussed briefly.
8.1.1  Coke Plant Wastes
       Coke plant wastes, particularly tars and oils, should be recycled or
burned in an oxidizing atmosphere whenever possible.  Although the composition
and quantity of these wastes is determined by the recovery and operating
practices used, the ones of interest are:  coke breeze and residues, by-
product coke gases and tar sludge, ammonia still lime sludge, and wash oil
sludge.
     A wide variety of processes exist to capture and treat by-product coke
gases and various combinations of these processes are practiced throughout the
industry.  Due to the carcinogenic and toxic nature of coke oven by-products,
special environmental considerations should be given to them.
     Coke breeze is small particles (36 kg per tonne of coke) screened from
the coke before it is charged to the blast furnace.  These particles are too
small to be charged into the top of the blast furnace because the furnace
draft would only blow them out the top.  Also, the breeze could interfere with
the permeability of the burden.  The breeze and residue from pollution control
devices are recycled through the sinter plant as fuel, recharged into the coke
oven, used as soaking pit lining, or, infrequently, briquetting.  It is sold
as product only when there is an excess.
     Tar sludge collects in the tar decanter and various storage tanks.  Par-
ticulates entrained in the tar and coal and coke fines collected during coal
charging accumulate in the sludge also.  The composition of the sludge is

                                       141

-------
expected to be suitable for recycle into the coke ovens or agglomeration
processing in a reducing atmosphere.
     Ammonia still lime sludge is formed when tar and oils in the ammonia
water encapsulate the particles in the lime slurry.  In general, this sludge
is disposed of by landfill ing.
     Wash oil sludge accumulates in the oil used to scrub light oils from the
coke oven gas.  Currently the sludge is either burned in an open hearth
furnace or recycled through the coke ovens.
8.1.2  Iron and Steelmaking Slags
       One-third of the industry-generated solid waste is slag.  Slags are
required in metallurgical processing to remove unwanted elements such as
sulfur and phosphorus and also to protect the metal from reacting with the hot
      18
gases.    Apart from the metallurgical use, slags have a wide variety of non-
metallurgical uses also.  There are three major types of blast furnace slags:
air-cooled, granulated, and expanded.
Air-Cooled Slag
     Molten blast furnace slag is permitted either to run into a pit or trans-
ported in ladles and poured on the ground some distance away from the furnace.
With either method, the slag is cooled and quenched with water to hasten the
process.    After cooling the slag is dug, crushed, and screened to the desired
aggregate and used for a variety of purposes.  A magnetic pulley is often used
to recover iron for charging into the blast furnace.
     Some of the major useful properties of this slag are weathering and
abrasion resistance and its noncorrosive nature.    Table 67 presents a summary
of the uses of air-cooled slag.  It is immediately obvious that nearly all the
slag consumed in the United States is in the construction industry.  The major
uses include highway and airport construction as well as railroad ballast.
     Whenever slag is economically available, it is used extensively as a
coarse aggregate in many types of concrete.    Because of the voids in the
slag, it is a preferred material for high strength and light weight.  The slag
aggregate pavements are reported to exhibit unusually high skid resistance.
Slag has a unique combination of resistance to polishing and abrasive texture.

                                       142

-------
               TABLE 67.   USES OF AIR-COOLED BLAST FURNACE (1976)
Use
Cement aggregate
Bituminous construction
Highway and airport
construction aggregate
Concrete block aggregate
Railroad ballast
Mineral wool
Roofing cover material
Roofing granules
Sewage trickling filter
Agricultural
Other uses
TOTAL
Quantity
(thousand
tonnes)
1753
3691
9713
270

689
189
12
10.9
55
988
20,820
Percentage
8.4
17.7
46.6
1.3
16.5
3.3
0.9
0.06
0.05
0.26
4.74

Value
($/tonne)
3.27
3.08
2.90
3.39
2.23
3.24
3.9
4.48
6.05
3.66
2.64
2.87
Other uses of slag include the production of a high quality mineral  wool  from
it.  The mineral wool is durable, lightweight, and has a high insulation
value.  Slag is extensively used as the granular material on composition
shingles and roofing.
     Slags have been used to condition soil with respect to basicity and  humus
content.  The lime in the slag is in a useful form since it is slowly leached
out and does not burn like ordinary lime.  Although slags which are  used  for
agricultural purposes are not fertilizer, they do contain some fertilizing
                                                                          18
elements.  Slags have been used as soil conditioners for almost a century.
     Whenever slags are used to condition soil, special consideration should
be given to the long range effect of heavy metals such as cadmium.  Special
criteria have been proposed by EPA for the use of waste for the production of
                 53
food chain crops.    At the present time, the criteria only address  cadmium
but other metals will be addressed in the future, as well as organics.  The

                                       143

-------
current criteria establish the amount of cadmium which can be added per acre,
as well as restrict the use of solid waste which contains greater than 25 ppm
Of cadmium for the production of food chain crops.  Additional slag composi-
tion information may be required to establish the environmental  impact for its
use in agriculture.
Granulated Slag
     Granulated slag is formed when the molten blast furnace slag is rapidly
chilled, thus preventing the formation of crystal structures.  Depending upon
the composition of the slag and the chilling process, the structure can vary
from a friable, popcorn-like structure to grains resembling dense glass.
     Granulated slag has excellent hydraulic properties so that it will set up
similar to cement when compacted in the presence of water.    When properly
compacted, it can be used as a base for pavements, runways, and parking areas
because it increases the support with age.  Table 68 demonstrates the relative
amounts of granulated slag used in a variety of applications.
             TABLE 68.  USES OF GRANULATED BLAST FURNACE SLAG (1976)
Use
Road construction and fill
Agriculture
Cement
Concrete block aggregate
Other uses
TOTAL
Quantity
(thousand
tonnes)
1090
53
79
113
134
1471
Percentage
74.1
3.6
5.4
7.7
9.1

Value
($/tonne)
2.14
3.13
4.22
3.99
1.79
2.34
     Granulated slag is used in the manufacture of portland blast furnace slag
cement.  The slag constituent is between 25 and 65 percent by weight. The slag
cement can be used in combination with portland cement in making concrete and
with lime in making masonry mortar.
                                       144

-------
Expanded Slag
     Expanded slag is obtained by the controlled expansion of molten blast
furnace slag with water or air.  A variety of techniques are employed for
expanding the slag, the physical properties of it depending upon the technique
used for the expansion.  The cellular structure is more pronounced than with
air-cooled slag.  Expanded slag is commonly used as an aggregate for concrete
block manufacturing.  Other uses include lightweight, structural concrete and
use as a lightweight fill.  Slag has good compatibility in concrete mixes and
possesses a number of desirable properties.  For architectural  purposes, the
high sound transmission loss and the light surface texture are desirable.^
The higher insulating values of this type of slag masonry units provide better
protection against condensation on walls and reduce energy requirements for
heating and cooling.  Expanded slag is also very useful for creating embank-
ments since it is easily compacted and has good drainage and an inherent
cementing action.  Some of the uses of this slag are presented in Table 69.

              TABLE 69.  USES OF EXPANDED BLAST FURNACE SLAG (1976)
Use
Concrete block
aggregate
Lightweight concrete
Other uses
TOTAL
Quantity
(thousand
tonnes)
1271
8
77
1356
Percentage
93.7
0.6
5.7

Value
($/ tonne)
5.02
5.74
2.34
4.87
Steel Slag
     Steel slags are fundamentally different from blast furnace slag  and con-
sist of calcium silicates, calcium oxide-ferrous oxide solid solutions,  oxides,
and free lime.  There is variation in composition due to the batch  nature of
the process.  The calcium and magnesium oxides can be hydrated with expansions
of up to 10 percent.  This uncontrolled expansion severely limits  the use of

                                        145

-------
steel slags in Portland cement concretes, since expansion can destroy the
concrete.  Structural failures can result from the indiscriminate use of steel
slag in confined applications.    The hydration of unslaked lime occurs
rapidly (several weeks) but magnesium oxide hydrates more slowly (several
years).
     Aging for a period of at least six months can be useful in controlling
              CO
the expansion.    Several treatments can be used to accelerate the expansion
of the slag, thus reducing the expansion in use.  When the metallies are
recovered by crushing, and water is used in processing, the aging process is
accelerated.    Spent pickle liquor (H^SO,) has been used to .accelerate the
aging of slags, and the effectiveness of the treatment is related to the
contact time with the acid.  This process is also expected to free some of the
heavy metals bound in the steel slag.
     These slags are used mainly for unconfined base fill and highway shoulders
(Table 70).  Steel slag is used as railroad ballast, although in substantially
less quantities than air-cooled blast furnace slag.
     One use of steel slag which has not been fully developed is the formation
of very stable mixtures with asphalt.  Some useful properties of this blend
are good flow, very high stabilities (two to three times greater than current
aggregates), adequate compactability, excellent stripping resistance, and good
wear and skid resistance.
     An increasing amount of steel slag is being recycled to the blast furnace
           on
since  1972.    This is done to recover their iron and manganese contents,
since  these metals are reduced and become part of the iron.  The lime content
                                 18
of the steel slag acts as a flux.    There are conditions under which the
steel  slag cannot be returned to the burden of the blast furnace.  These
include additions during specialty steelmaking, no recycling equipment avail-
able,  non-integrated operations, and unfavorable economics.    With increasing
raw material costs and high disposal costs, it is likely that a higher per-
centage of steel  slags will be recycled in the future.
     Basic open hearth slag has been used, especially in the southern states,
as a soil  conditioner.  The high phosphorous content of the open hearth  slag
resulted from  the high phosphorous content of local ores.   Other open hearth
furnace slags  are used in areas for conditioning already phosphorous-rich soils

                                       146

-------
                        TABLE 70.   STEEL SLAG USES (1976)
Use
Railroad ballast
Highway base or shoulders
Paved area base
Miscellaneous base
Bituminous mixes
Other uses
TOTAL
Quantity
thousand
tonnes )
423
2160
1557
1284
321
244
5989
Percentage
7.0
36.1
26.0
21.4
5.3
4.1

Value
($/tonne)
1.51
1.63
1.66
1.62
1.59
1.54
1.62
because of the amounts of elements such as iron,  boron, zinc,  molybdenum,  and
                                                  18
copper which are needed in states such as Florida.
8.1.3  Iron Oxide Recycling
       Iron oxide wastes in the form of dust, scale, and sludge comprise over
20 percent of the steel industry's process wastes that are landfilled,  and are
probably the most valuable with respect to potential resource  value.  Sinter
and blast furnace dusts are presently recycled to the sinter plant to recover
iron and carbon values.  About 70 percent of the  mill scale can be readily
recycled with the heavy, coarse pieces delivered  directly to the blast  furnace
and smaller pieces incorporated into the sinter mix.  A few plants may  be
unable to use scrap containing zinc and lead in steelmaking so that the dust
can be recycled, or they may segregate the dusts  for those periods of time when
such scrap is used.
     The balance of the mill scale, sludges, and  steelmaking dusts are  not
routinely recycled due to the presence of oil, water, tramp elements  (zinc,
lead, and alkalis), and/or small particle sizes (fines).  These wastes  will be
examined with respect to dealing with the problems of recycle, namely agglomera-
tion to solve the fines or water content problems, tramp element removal, and
de-oiling to eliminate the hydrocarbon emissions  problem.
                                        147

-------
Agglomeration Processes
     Many agglomeration processes are available and have proven successful in
producing hard briquettes or pellets than can be handled, transferred, stored,,
and charged to the blast furnace or steelmaking furnace.  The application of
these processes would be limited to those specific locations where the tramp
element content does not present a serious problem since no provision is made
for zinc and lead removal.
     The Reclaform process was developed by the Reclasource Corporation of
Chicago, Illinois and has been successfully used in a demonstration plant.  A
hot mix of iron and carbon wastes is briquetted with a binder and cured by
baking to form a strong coke bond.  For example, coke breeze, furnace dust,
oily mill scales, filter cakes, and sludges can be agglomerated with a car-
bonaceous binder (e.g., coal tar pitch) to yield a strong, durable briquette.
A 20-day trial was conducted at Crucible Steel (Midland, PA) in which the
briquettes were successfully utilized as 10.5 percent of the blast furnace
burden.    Both iron and carbon values were recovered in the Reclaform test.
The company is developing detailed engineering plans for a 318,000 tonne per
year (350,000 tons per year) plant that is still in the planning stage.  No
commitments have been made for construction, but tentative plans are targeted
for 1981 at a cost of approximately $10 million.  A company spokesman stated
that a 100,000 ton per year facility would be the minimum size that could be
economically feasible, with an estimated capital requirement of $5 million.
     The Pelletech Corporation of Pittsburgh, PA has demonstrated an alter-
native for handling waste fines with a process called the MTU cold-bond pro-
cess.  This procedure takes ground mill scale, blast furnace dust, and steel-
making dust and combines 4-5 percent burnt lime and 1-2 percent silica flour.
These solids are then mixed with water, aged for several hours to assure
complete hydration of the lime, pelletized in the form of balls, and then
dried.  This process was successfully tested during a two week run at Kaiser's
Fontana  (CA) plant where the balls were used as 10 percent of the burden in
the blast furnace.  A Pelletech representative stated the minimum economical
plant size is 150,000 TPY, but he added that research is continuing with hopes
of developing an economical 25,000 TPY process.  The company is currently
                                       148

-------
offering to build, operate, and finance a pelletizing plant with a long term
contract to cover certain fixed charges for any interested steel plant.  The
pellets will be made from iron oxide wastes and will be sold to the steel
                                                          72
plant at a cost less than the value of the contained iron.
     Republic Steel has been operating a 10 ton per hour briquetting facility
using the Aglomet process at its Chicago plant.  Waste materials include blast
furnace dust and sludge, EAF dust, Q-BOP filter cake, mill scale, scarfing
dust, and slag fines.  These wastes are hot-briquetted in a fluidized bed at
870-980°C, and are being stockpiled for a blast furnace test at a later date.
     The COBO process licensed by Sala International is similar to the MTU
process and has been demonstrated in Sweden for pelletizing chromium ore
fines.  This process also uses grinding, blending with lime and silica,
balling, and then hardening to form cement-type calcium silicate bonds.
Although it has not been demonstrated in the steel industry, the COBO process
should be feasible in agglomeration of iron oxide wastes.
     Granges Engineering of Sweden has developed a pelletizing procedure
called the Grangcold process.  Coke breeze, mill scale, and steelmaking dust
are wet ground in a ball mill, mixed with Portland cement, and then balled.
The pellets are hardened in bins for six days, then cured two to three weeks
out-of-doors to complete the hardening process.  No commercial facility has
yet been built to use this process in the handling of plant dusts.
     The Blocked Iron Corporation has developed a carbonate bond pelletizing
process in which the wastes are mixed with coal and 10 percent lime hydrate.
The mixture is balled, dried, and carbonated in a carbon dioxide rich atmos-
phere.  A blast furnace trial has been conducted in which the pellets performed
satisfactorily and no operating difficulties were encountered.
     The Obenchain system is another cold-bonding process that uses a modified
lime-silica combination as the binder.  In April 1971, a pilot plant was
installed in Trenton, Michigan.  During its operation, this plant produced
12,000 tonnes of pellets that were used in McLouth Steel's blast furnaces
for up to 20 percent of the burden.    This operation was stopped due to a
                                                                        74
change in McLouth's operation that reduced the amount of iron ore fines.
                                       149

-------
     A technique for recycling some steelmaking dusts back into the steelmaking
furnaces has been practiced by U.S. Steel.  When used in these furnaces, the
agglomerated product does not have to be as strong as required in the blast
furnace and some tramp elements can be tolerated.  The dry dust is mixed with
water in a balling disc to produce pellets that can be transferred and exposed
to high temperatures without disintegration.  This has been practiced for
three years at U.S. Steel's National-Duquesne plant where almost all of the
EAF dust has been balled and recycled back to the EAF.  No operating problems
have been observed and a benefit of reduced fluorspar usage has been noted.
     Recycling pellets to the steelmaking furnace has two effects.  One is to
supply a portion of the iron oxide which is dissolved in the slag, increasing
the metallic yield.  A negative aspect is that more energy is required to
reduce the iron oxide than it does to melt the scrap, or refine the molten
iron, that it replaces.
     Pellets were produced from open hearth dust at U.S. Steel's Homestead
Works as a partial substitute for the ore charge in the open hearth furnace.
A two-day test revealed no operating problems or changes in yields or heat
times.  The sulfur content of the melt increased 0.003 percent.  An extensive
                                           s
test of this procedure was conducted at U.S. Steel's Youngstown Plant over a
three-month period without operating problems.  The sulfur content of the melt
increased 0.004 percent and required additional lime, but the data suggested
that the open hearth dust could be recycled for an extended period of time in
the open hearth furnace.
     Bethlehem is using similar procedures at its Sparrows Point, MD and
Bethlehem, PA Plants based on their U.S. Patent No. 4,003,736 and No. 4,
004,916.  At Sparrows Point, sludge is collected from wet scrubbers on the
open hearth and BOF furnaces and goes to a thickener.  The slurry is then
spray  dried, fed to an impactor, and agglomerated in a pelletizing disc.  The
agglomerate is recycled back to the BOF or open hearth furnaces.  At the
Bethlehem plant, the steelmaking fume is collected as a dust, mixed with water
in a pelletizing disc, and converted into balls.  These balls are then recycled
through the sintering plant.  The Bethlehem unit turns out 110 tonnes per day
and  the Sparrows Point unit produces 273 tonnes per day.  The cost of installing
                                       150

-------
these pelletizing units can be recovered in savings by reducing the outside
purchase of iron ore and pellets.
Direct Reduction Processes
     Because of their fine size and the presence of zinc, lead, and alkalis,
steelmaking dusts and sludges have been considered unsuitable for recycle
through the sinter plant and blast furnace.  Zinc is particularly troublesome
since it can affect blast furnace productivity by (1) reducing furnace per-
meability and forming scaffolds, (2) degrading refractory lining, and (3)
forming blockages in the gas cleaning.system.    The direct reduction processes
convert steelmaking dusts with a high zinc content to pellets with a high
level of metallized iron and low zinc, lead, and alkali content.  The tramp
elements are volatilized and concentrated in the offgas dust which may be sold
to zinc smelters if the zinc content is high enough.  Several of these pro-
cesses have been tried and proven technically feasible, but the economic
feasibility is still debated in the U.S.
     Full scale application has found wide acceptance in Japan and seven
commercial direct reduction plants are in operation and use processes that are
very similar.  A generalized flowsheet is shown in Figure 24 that is applicable
to the Kawasaki, SL/RN (Stelco-Lurgi/Republic National) and Sumitomo dust
reduction processes.  The waste solids are mixed together, pelletized, pre-
heated on a grate, and then reduced at 1100-1150°C in a rotary kiln.  Carbon
in the dust, added coke breeze or coal serve as reductants.  Approximately 95
percent of the lead and zinc are removed as well as 50 percent of the NagO and
KpO (alkalies).  The metallized pellets are cooled and sent to the blast
furnace, and the zinc oxide dust collected from the offgas can be used by zinc
processors.
     The Kawasaki Steel Corporation recently (1977) installed its third direct
reduction plant at a cost of $24 million.  With a 600 tonne per day capacity,
this required an investment of $110 per annual tonne of output pellets.
     A representative of Kawasaki Steel said that their direct reduction
plants were still in operation and were economical.  He also stated that a
                                                                 78
U.S. engineering firm is negotiating to license their technology.
                                       151

-------
                      WASTE-DUST GRATE-KILN DIRECT-REDUCTION  PROCESS  FLOWSHEET
01
r\»
DRY WET
DUSTS DUSTS
CO,
COKE
YCLE
nr
LfiilH&J
1 DRYER I
lmmm»mium,,tmmmil
t t
|2_M1XER_I
M OR J


:"™<-"™|— -™11 ZINC COLLECTION |
PREHEATER I |
— ,f . ,i j
— 	 " 	 — '""" 1 1 OHF- GAi

t
COOLER I-"*1 "WATER
t^^

SEPAR^

^TION l-«-«np««-nI
                                                     PRODUCT




                              Figure 24. Waste-dust grate-kiln direct reduction process flowsheet.70

-------
     Sumitomo has two plants operating, one that produces reduced pellets for
the blast furnace and one producing dezinced material  for the sinter plant.
The latter type of plant requires lower capital  investment since an existing
sinter plant is used for agglomeration in lieu of building a pelletizing
plant.  However, oxidation of the metallic iron makes  the sintering route
undesirable.  A Sumitomo representative felt that the  use of the zinc dust for
                                                                             79
zinc recovery and strict landfill ing regulations made  the process economical.
     Nippon Kokan K. K. (NKK) has utilized the SL/RN process in a 360,000 TRY
plant since 1974.  Their representative said the plant was still operating and
was economical in 1974, but that the rising cost of energy in recent years may
make the economics marginal.
     The seven Japanese direct reduction recycling plants have an average
capacity of 233,000 tonnes per year, and are located at large steelmaking
complexes.    A regional treatment facility may be required in the U.S. if
American steel companies are to take advantage of the economy of scale (Sec-
tion 6.2.5).  Few individual plants in the U.S. generate 100,000 to 400,000
TPY of dust with a high zinc content and recovery of the zinc may be a
controlling factor in an optimistic economic evaluation.
     A U.S. source estimates an investment cost of $138 per annual tonne of
reduced pellets for a direct reduction plant, and states the energy require-
                                                                  81
ments can range up to 4 million kilocal ories per tonne of pellets.    Some of
this energy will be recovered in blast furnace fuel savings due to the
metallized iron content of the pellets.  Savings on land disposal costs and
credit for the zinc dust would also help to recoup operating expenses.  How-
ever, although several of these processes have been tried and proven tech-
nically feasible, the economic feasibility is still being debated in this
country.
     The Waelz process is a direct reduction technique that has been used for
20 years to refine low grade zinc ores.  The Berzelium and Lurgi companies
have conducted a large scale experiment in Duisburg, Germany, that used iron
and steelmaking dusts.  Mixtures of waste dust containing 40 percent blast
furnace sludge and 60 percent BOF dust that was analyzed at 44-50 percent
iron, 2.5-4.5 percent zinc, 1-2 percent lead, and 3-8 percent carbon were
                                       153

-------
reduced in the Waelz kiln.  The feed was prepared by simple mixing, and after
reduction, the fines were briquetted with sulfite waste liquor as the binder.
These briquettes were used at a rate of 160 kg/tonne iron in the blast furnace
for 16 days and no variations in the metallurgy were noted.
     The experimenters observed that dezincification was possible with a con-
tinuous process, 95 percent of the zinc and 50 percent of the alkalis were
removed, and 95 percent of the iron was metallized.  The advantages of this
process are that it can operate economically on a lower throughput (100,000
TRY) than other direct reduction processes and it is less sophisticated in
that there is no pelletizing before reduction.  The sponge iron product may be
charged to the steelmaking furnace, or it could be briquetted after reduction.
A valuable zinc by-product (Waelz oxide) is recovered from the offgas, and
oily mill scale can be used in the kiln feed with no adverse effects.
     Lurgi provided a cost estimate for the production of reduced pellets at a
                              Op
May 1978 symposium (Table 71).    The processing cost of $240 per tonne does
not appear economical when considering that the Midrex Corporation sells
                                                          83
reduced iron pellets to steel companies at $120 per tonne.    However, other
factors that may improve the economics and must be considered for specific
cases include (1) the availability of reductant (carbon) from coke plant
wastes at a much lower cost, (2) the value of the zinc oxide by-product, and
(3) savings on landfill charges.
     Inland Steel participated in a pilot plant test of the classical Waelz
process in cooperation with Heckett Engineering and the Colorado School of
Mines Research Foundation.  The conclusion was that the process was not
satisfactory for commercial application due to the low compressive strength of
the pellets, loss of iron oxide into the zinc precipitate, and high rate of
recirculation of fines.  Another program was initiated with Heckett Engineering,
Stirling Sintering, and the Krupp Company to investigate the Krupp process, a
modified version of the Waelz process.  The program was technically successful
but commercial application was dependent on the regional plant concept.  The
economics dictated a minimum 364,000 tonnes per year facility to service the
                         84
Chicago area steel mills.
                                       154

-------
        TABLE  71.  COST ESTIMATE FOR WAELZ PROCESS (400.000 TPY PLANT)
                                                                      82
 Expense
    Quantity
(per tonne of feed)
       Cost*
($ per tonne of feed)
Reductant
Heating agent
Electric energy
Water
Binder
Utilities
Brickwork
Repair, maintenance
Personnel
Amortization and interest
270 kg carbon
—
40 kwh
lm3
18 kg
—
1.2 kg
—
0.35 hr

102.40
18.45
5.17
1.85
9.96
0.92
2.58
16.42
12.92
69.19
 Processing cost + amortiza-
 tion + interest
                                239.86
*Assumptions:
     1.   15 percent annual interest.
     2.   Capital costs include 15 percent for infrastructure.
     3.   Includes a briquetting charge of $27.68/tonne.
     4.   Exchange rate of 0.542 marks = $1.00 (1/16/79).
     Obenchain has also developed a direct reduction process that was demon-
strated at an American steel plant.  ESP dust, open hearth dust, and coke
fines were used to produce pellets that were charged to a cupola, melted, and
yielded molten iron.  No commercial application is in use in the U.S., but the
company is planning a 40,000 tonne per year plant in Central America for iron
ore reduction at a cost of $2.1 million.
De-oil ing
     Scale and sludge generated in the rolling operations are contaminated
with oil and grease that make recycling difficult.  Because these materials
contain oil, they may cause excessive stack opacities if recycled to the
sinter plant.  To avoid these problems, the plant often decides to dispose of
                                       155

-------
the waste rather than recover it.  The various options for dealing with the

situation are:

     1.   Dispose of oily scale and sludge to landfill or stock
          for future use.  This causes the loss of a valuable
          natural resource and presents the possibility of ground
          water contamination.
     2.   Recycle through the sinter plant by upgrading the air
          pollution controls for the windbox to cope with the opacity
          problem.  If the control is by baghouse, this is not tech-
          nically feasible because the oil vapors present would lead
          to bag blinding.  If the control is by ESP, the control
          equipment is unable to control the oily vapors.  If the
          control is by scrubber, the capture of oily vapors would
          require an inordinate consumption of fan power and of
          capital to install new control equipment.
          For example, consider an average sized sinter plant which
          produces 6350 MT/day of sinter.  Gas flow would be about
          490,000 MM3/hr.  The existing fan may require 2500 KW to
          provide 1150 mm of suction for process suction, including
          scrubber differential pressure.  In order to effect control
          of oily vapors, another 750 mm of differential would be
          needed, thereby consuming 1500 KW more.  The plant generally
          decides that economics favor the elimination of oily
          materials from the sinter mix over  upgrading the windbox
          controls.
     3.   De-oil the scale and sludge.  There has been considerable
          effort along these lines but generally without success
          to date.  A possible exception  is a process developed by
          Colerapa  Industries, Inc.  (Ravenna, OH) that has been
          used  by  the Steel Company of Canada.  This  process takes
          mill  scale and sludge  that  have  been dredged from  lagoons
          and sends  it through an oil scrubber, screening operation,
          and thickener.  The de-oiled iron oxide is  recycled to
          the sinter plant at a  rate  of  36,000 tonnes per year.   The
          application of this process appears  to  be based on pollution
          control  requirements.    The detailed economics of this
          process  is unavailable.

     The development of  successful methods for de-oiling would be an  advantage

 to resource recovery and to  the  elimination of solid  waste.

 8.1.4   Waste Pickle Liquor

        Steel  finishing  requires  pickling,  or  acid dipping,  to  remove  the black

 oxide  scale that forms  during the process.  This  is  required not only for
                                        156

-------
aesthetic reasons but is a mandatory step prior to cold rolling.   The disposal
of the tremendous quantity of acid consumed in this process is a  major
environmental problem and recovery of the chemical value in waste pickle
liquor has been an objective in past decades.   However, until  1976 there were
                                                                 88
no economical recovery processes available for HC1 pickle liquor.
     The economic changes during the 1970's have generated an  increasing
interest in reassessing the possibilities of pickle liquor recovery.   From
1972 to 1977 the cost of acid and its disposal  have increased  150 percent.
Regeneration costs during this period increased only 50 percent,  and  since
1976, the trend continues to indicate that resource recovery is the more
economical method.
     The pickling of steel was formerly done with sulfuric acid,  which is
still relatively inexpensive.  In recent years, however, the industry has
discovered that hydrochloric acid gives better results in half the time,
thereby enabling an increase in production rates without additional capital
expense.  Much of the industry is now depending on hydrochloric acid  to achieve
their normal production rates.  The elimination of fluorocarbon aerosols, the
manufacture of which produced hydrochloric acid as a by-product,  and  changes
in the oil industry's operating methods, have reduced this supply, and
resulted in prices three times that of sulfuric and supplies of questionable
dependability.  These factors together with environmental requirements to
abstain from spent acid dumping are creating a new interest in acid recycling.
Acid Regeneration
     The Ohio River Valley Sanitation Commission initiated a pilot plant
program in 1952 to make use of the Blow-Know and Ruthner double cycle acid
                     86
regeneration process.    It was reported in 1958 at the general meeting of
                               135
AISI to be a technical success.     It is the only known process that actually
regenerates sulfuric acid from the iron sulfate produced by pickling.
     The iron sulfate is converted to iron chloride in a regeneration plant by
reaction with hydrochloric acid, producing sulfuric acid as a by-product which
is recycled to the pickling plant.  The iron chloride is roasted to recover
the iron oxide for recycle.  The complexity of the process was considered
unsuitable for steel plants.

                                        157

-------
Acid Recovery
     The only successful and continuing process for recovering sulfuric pickle
liquor is an acid recovery process.  This process essentially purifies the
waste pickle liquor (WPL) by removing the FeSO^ so that the unconsumed acid
remaining is available for use.  This reduces acid consumption by 50 percent
in most plants.
     Unlike the case with hydrochloric acid, the buildup of iron sulfate in
t^SO^ solution significantly decreases the activity and reaction speed, and
results in the pickle liquor being discarded when it is still 8 percent HgSCL.
     In the recrystallization process, WPL is cooled to a low temperature,
sometimes after evaporative concentration.  Crystals of iron II sulfate hepta
hydrate form as fast as the solution is cooled.  These are removed by decan-
                         87
tation or centrifugation.    The remaining purified liquor is strengthened by
the addition of acid and returned to the pickle tanks.  The ferrous sulfate
formed can be sold for use in inks, dyes, paints, fertilizers, and as a floc-
culating agent in waste treatment and sewage plants, an expanding market.  In
1976 there were only 20 recrystallization plants in North America, three were
                                                                     19
continuous process systems (2 in Canada) and 17 were batch processes.
Sulfuric acid has always been consumed in proportion to a Nation's produc-
tivity and is still relatively inexpensive at $27/tonne.  Thus, the major
incentive for sulfuric acid recovery is as a solution to the waste disposal
problem.
Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration
     The pickling of steel with hydrochloric acid produces ferrous chloride,
which is dissolved in the pickling acid.  The activity of acid chloride solu-
tions is very high resulting in a usable pickling speed until all but one
percent of the acid is consumed.  The only practical operation that can be
performed on the hydrochloric WPL is to regenerate HC1 from FeCl2.  There are
several processes that differ in approaches but all involve reacting iron
chloride with water in the presence of heat to produce iron oxide and hydro-
chloric acid.
                                       158

-------
Spray Roaster Type Process
     In the Pennsylvania Engineer!ng/Woodall Duckham spray roaster process,
the spent  liquor  is sprayed into the top of a cyclone-like chamber.  Fuel and
air are blown into the bottom of the chamber tangentially.  The liquor under-
goes the chemical reaction at around 1000°C and produces a powder of Fe90o
                                                                       £ J
that falls to the bottom.  HC1 gas and water vapor are also produced and are
passed on  to a scrubber and absorber to recover an aqueous solution of HC1.
The Ruthner Industrieanlagen of Austria also makes these plants.  The major
advantage  of this system is that the fine powder form of Fe203 commands a high
price from the ceramic magnet industry ($176/tonne, 1978).  The disadvantage
of the process is that operational constraints require a roasting chamber at
least 1.83 meters in diameter, making 4 liters per minute the minimum size
reactor that operates satisfactorily.  In all the thermal regeneration methods
for HC1, 752 kilocalories per liter of waste pickle liquor is required.  This
amounts to 1/10 liter of oil per liter of pickle liquor.
Fluidized  Bed Roaster
     In 1936, Lurgi developed a roasting process in which the reactor is a
fluidized  bed of iron oxide.  The waste liquor is sprayed into this and the
Fe304 is recovered in the form of pellets.  This is convenient for handling
but does not command as high a price as the powdered Fe^O.,.  This process is
efficient, recovering 99.5 percent of the acid, with almost complete absence
of iron in the regenerated acid.  Such purity, however, does not improve the
pickling process.
Sliding Bed Regeneration
     The sliding bed reactor was designed to be suitable for small installations
of 20 to 60 liters per minute.  Preheated waste pickle liquor (HC1) is sprayed
on a bed of hot iron oxide that slides down an inclined furnace.  Thermal de-
composition converts iron chlorides into hydrochloric acid and iron oxide in
the combustion zone of the furnace.  The acid is vaporized and absorbed in
water.   At the bottom of the incline a system of buckets collects the oxide
and carries it back to the top of the bed.  Excess iron oxide is removed as
required.

                                       159

-------
Operational Aspects of Regeneration
     Although articles have been written claiming that regeneration of HC1  is
economical, since 1976 the reputation that regeneration is not profitable in
itself is still in wide circulation.  Discussions with an industry source
using spray roasting revealed that, of itself, regeneration is not profitable.
The plants also have a high maintenance factor due to the abrasive nature of
FegOg and corrosion problems which are being solved incrementally.  One manu-
facturer of pickle lines commented that when their customers learned that
regenerating acid cost more than buying acid, they refused consideration of
the topic.
     The economics of acid regeneration are strongly influenced by the market
available for the by-product iron oxide.  The market for iron oxide in the
production of magnets is estimated as 700 tonnes per year, much less than the
industry could produce if all the pickle liquor was regenerated.
     An industry source that does use regeneration revealed that continuation
of the process was based on a wider view than just the cost of acid versus
regeneration.  The reasons given in favor of the process were:
     1.   Regeneration gives the company a guaranteed acid supply.
     2.   Regeneration eliminates disposal problems.  It is cheaper
          than having the spent liquor hauled away in their location.
     3.   As an item of pollution control equipment, regeneration has
          a better payback than any other pollution control system.
This last comment indicates the importance of having acid regeneration systems
classed as pollution control equipment for tax purposes.
     Discussion with one U.S. steel producer presently enjoying cheap  disposal
in a deep well indicated that they are aggressively evaluating possible
methods of regeneration because:
     1.   The cost and supply of HC1 is uncertain for the future.
     2.   Their deep well  could freeze up and be inoperable.
     3.   It appears that drilling another well may not be allowed.
     Ten percent of hydrochloric acid used for pickling in the U.S. is regen-
erated, and 10 percent of sulfuric acid is recovered.  Estimated comparison
                                       160

-------
data with other countries are as follows:  Japan-75 percent, France-40
percent, Germany-45 percent, Austria-50 percent, USSR-20 percent, United
Kingdom-60 percent, Canada-75 percent, and Brazil-45 percent.
     In summary, recycling waste acid has had a difficult development period
in the U.S. probably because of a previous abundance of low cost materials and
environmental standards.  The future of recycling waste pickle liquor in this
country looks promising due to changing conditions in the industry.
8.1.5  Scrap Recovery
       Approximately 30 percent of the waste generation of iron and steel
production is scrap metal.  This metal is completely recycled and used to
produce steel.  EAFs can use a large amount of scrap metal as feed since
energy is required to convert iron oxide to iron and the scrap is already in
metallic form.
     Obsolete scrap is also used in the steel industry.  This scrap comprises
worn out or broken products of the consuming industry and includes stoves,
useless farm equipment, wrecked automobiles, etc.  This scrap requires care-
ful sorting to prevent contamination of the steel in the furnace with
unwanted chemical elements that may be present in the scrap.
     Due to the intrinsic energy value of scrap iron, as well as the material
resource, the use of ferrous scrap from municipal refuse will be briefly
considered.  Scrap shortages are predicted by some experts in the iron and
               on
steel industry.    The amount of ferrous municipal scrap is estimated as 10
million tons annually, 10 percent currently used in ferroalloy and copper
production.
     When incinerated, municipal refuse contains 30 percent ferrous scrap in
the residue.  Incineration increases the copper content of the scrap, since
the copper plates out on the metal.  Incineration can also oxidize some of the
iron as well as alloy the tin so that it cannot be removed.
     Nonincinerated scrap can be altered to recover the iron for use in steel
production.  Magnetic separation is used to reject nonferroiis material, and
the composition of tramp elements is generally lower than for magnetically
separated incinerated scrap.  The aluminum content is somewhat higher in
nonincinerated scrap, however.  The tin can be removed from the nonincinerated

                                       161

-------
scrap, or if the tin content is low enough, simple dilution with virgin
material can lower the tin content in the hot metal to within acceptable
bounds.
     Useful scrap metal for the iron and steel industry can be obtained if the
recovery system is properly planned and operated.  This is a major area where
governmental assistance can prove useful in resource recovery.  Adjustment of
transportation costs could also provide an incentive for scrap recovery.
8.2  EFFECT OF PROCESS CHANGES ON WASTE PRODUCTION
     For the most part, steelmaking technology today is essentially the same
as it was in the past century.  There is still major reliance on the coke
oven-blast furnace route of ironmaking as the first step in the steelmaking
process.  These processes have become larger and their control has become more
sophisticated; however, their basic function has not altered.
     Process changes that have come into wide utilization are sintering for
agglomeration of fine ores and process wastes, the use of pelletized ore, the
BOF to replace the open hearth, and continuous casting to replace conventional
ingots.  Even the BOF is but an update of .the pneumatic process originally
invented by Bessemer.
     The steel industry is starting to direct its efforts toward some more
basic changes in steelmaking.  In general, these new methods will provide more
continuous processing and greater containment of the processes than before.
It is unlikely that these basic changes will come into any substantial utili-
zation before the next century, due principally to the problems of raising the
necessary capital, the conservatism of the steel industry towards the applica-
tion of new technology, and in some cases, the additional energy cost.
     In general, any innovation or improvement in steelmaking that increases
its efficiency and reduces its costs also tends to reduce environmental pro-
blems, including generation of solid waste.  At worst, the effect of the
change on the environment is neutral.  The net effect almost  never results in
deterioration of the environment.
     Changes in iron and steelmaking practices fall into three categories in
respect to their state of implementation in  the  industry.  These categories
are more fully described in the next paragraphs.

                                       162

-------
8.2.1  Changes Not Reduced to Practice
       There are a number of radical changes in steelmaking technology which
may have a substantial impact on the generation of solid waste.   They have not
been reduced to practice within the industry and their future is somewhat
uncertain at this time.  For this reason, only a brief description is provided
for each.
     Form-coking is a process alternative to conventional by-product coking.
Its advantage is that it reduces the reliance on metallurgical  grade coals
and, because it is essentially continuous, it is comparatively easy to operate
in an environmentally acceptable manner.   Not only would form-coking reduce
emissions to air and water, but also the  production of solid waste as well.
There are at least 10 distinct form-coke  processes being investigated in the
United States and the rest of the world.   Projections are that two or three
                                                                        90
formed-coke processes will  be available for adoption by the early 1980s.
Widespread implementation probably will not take place until the close of the
century.
     Nuclear ironmaking and plasma arc steelmaking are two technologies in
which the thermal energy for the iron ore reduction process is applied in an
unconventional manner.  In either of these processes, coal or coke would be
used solely as a reducing agent.  In Japan, an eight-year research program has
recently started on nuclear steelmaking.   In the United States, some work has
been done on plasma arc steelmaking, the  biggest problem at present being the
large amount of power consumed in the operation (estimated to be about 2000
kwh/t).
     Direct steelmaking involves the injection of a mixture of coal and iron
into a molten steel bath.  Two versions of the injection process are con-
templated.  In one, electrical energy for the process is supplied by an
inductor.  In the second, heat is supplied by combustion of coal with oxygen
in the injection jet.  Figure 25 shows the two versions.  It is stated that a
                                                            91
30-ton vessel will yield up to 12 tons of raw iron per hour.    This method of
ironmaking, being based on powdered coal, eliminates the need for the coke
ovens.  It is also a method of producing  sulfur-free fuel gas.
                                       163

-------
                                      i ROM ox IDE:
                                      LIME
                                     CORL.
                                      CO,
                                            CH3OH
                              iron otide.

                              Lime.
Figure 25.  Two versions of the injection process for direct steeimaking.
                       164

-------
     Powder metallurgy provides a means of producing finished steel sheet from
the compaction of iron powder.  In this process, powdered steel is produced
under controlled conditions, compacted into the form of a sheet, heat treated
and then finished rolled to the final product.  The process promises low
capital cost, low energy cost, and a drastic reduction in rolling mill wastes,
including solid wastes.  Present-day deterrents toward the advancement of the
process are product contaminants and customer resistance.
     Because the implementation of the above-mentioned processes appears to
lie well in the future, there will be little immediate impact from them on the
generation of solid wastes.  There will, therefore, be no further discussion
or consideration of them in this report.
8.2.2  Processes Not Widely Used
       There are three new practices that fall within this category.  They are
described briefly in the subsequent paragraphs and will be covered in more
detail later on in this report.
     Scrap preheating in the BOF provides thermal  energy which permits scrap
to replace a portion of the molten iron.  In the EAF, scrap preheating can
reduce heat time and consumption of electrical energy.
     Superheating of molten iron before its admission to the BOF provides
additional thermal energy to the process and allows scrap to replace a portion
of the molten iron.  This process is not used by the steel industry since
there are no installations in operation at the present time.  However, the
equipment, a large induction furnace, is widely used in the foundry industry.
     In cases where oil injection is used, dehumidification of the blast for
the blast furnace provides smoother operation and reduction in coke consump-
tion.  Although not in use in the United States, it is currently being
practiced in Japan.
8.2.3  Processes in Substantial Current Use
       There are five new processes that have made substantial inroads into
the steel  industry.  Each of these processes has an impact on the generation
of solid wastes.  Their further and immediate implementation is anticipated.
                                       165

-------
     Burden preparation for the blast furnace consists of several  stages of
sizing and screening for the raw materials prior to their introduction into
the process.  All new blast furnaces are equipped for burden preparation and
many existing furnaces have been retrofitted.  The effect on the process is to
provide smoother operation, reduced coke rate and reduced generation of solid
waste.
     Fuel injection into the tuyeres of the blast furnace provides a means of
replacing an equivalent portion of the coke.  A wide variety of fuels for
injection have been used including gases, oil, and powdered coal.   The
reduction in coke usage is reflected in a reduction in emissions and wastes
from the coke ovens.  Most of the blast furnaces in the United States are
equipped for fuel injection.
     External desulfurization of iron is coming into wide use because it
improves the productivity, coke rate, and flux consumption in the blast
furnace.  From a solid waste standpoint, in addition to reducing emissions
from coke ovens, it also provides a substantial reduction in the generation of
blast furnace slag.
     Direct reduction of iron provides an alternative to the coke oven-blast
furnace route of ironmaking.  At the present time, its use is more prevalent
outside of the United States than in it, there being only three relatively
small domestic installations.  Direct reduction is a relatively clean process
which produces essentially only iron oxide dusts, thereby avoiding the organic
wastes of the coke plant and emissions and slag of the blast furnace.
     Continuous casting to produce semi-finished steel increases product
yield, thereby reducing the generation of scrap and iron oxide wastes in the
primary mill.  A secondary effect of improved yield is a reduction in the
consumption of molten iron and coke as well as their accompanying waste pro-
ducts.  Approximately one-third of semi-finished steel in the United States is
produced by this method.
8.2.4  Description of Process Changes
       This section will discuss each of the process changes which were listed
in Sections 8.2.2 and 8.2.3 above.  The description will cover the nature of
                                       166

-------
the process as well as its effect on other processes in the iron and steel-
making chain.  It will also discuss its effect on the generation of solid
waste as well as the consumption of resources.  Finally, there will be an
indication of the status of applications in the industry, both present and
future.
Blast Furnace Burden Preparation
     The ideal burden for the blast furnace consists of lumps which are
relatively uniform in size and free of fine particulate matter.  The uni-
formity creates a highly permeable bed that permits the free flow of reducing
gases.  The absence of fine material  not only contributes to improved perme-
ability but also reduces the carryover of particulates in the top gases and
the corresponding generation of dusts and sludges.
     Creation of a suitable burden involves the crushing of lumps and the
screening of fines.  The latter operation, in particular, is ideally carried
out as close to the entry of the furnace as is practical.  In this manner, any
fines which are generated in previous handling operations are kept out of the
ironmaking process.  All new blast furnaces will  practice this technology to
one extent or another.
     Another aspect of burden preparation is to produce self-fluxing sinter.
In this technique, the lime requirements of the blast furnace are furnished,
substantially in their entirety, by limestone which has been incorporated into
the sinter and calcined in the sintering process.  It thereby replaces the
introducton of limestone into the blast furnace,  and by virtue of reducing
calcining requirements in that unit,  reduces coke rate.
     In Japan, from 1955 to 1960, the intensive application of burden pre-
paration in the blast furnace reduced the coke rate from 725 kg/MT to 625
      92
kg/MT.    In the United States, probably one-half of the blast furnaces have
essentially complete burden preparation.  It is not unreasonable to expect
that nearly all blast furnaces will adopt this technology within the next
decade.
     Extensive burden preparation has a direct effect on blast furnace opera-
tions in terms of increased production, reduced generation of solid waste
                                       167

-------
oxides and coke consumption.  Its indirect effect lies in the coke ovens
which, having to produce less coke, yield a corresponding reduction in
emissions to air and water and in the generation of solid waste from that
process.
Fuel Injection in the Blast Furnace
     The injection of auxiliary fuel through the tuyeres into the blast fur-
nace is a relatively new technology which initiated in 1961.  To accomplish
fuel injection, an auxiliary circle pipe for the fuel  is provided at the
vicinity of the tuyeres.  Injector pipes are placed within the tuyeres,
terminating near the hearth of the furnace.  The fuel  that is injected through
the tuyeres replaces a part of the coke burden.
     A wide variety of fuels have been injected into blast furnaces.  The
replacement ratio expressed as kilograms of fuel per kilogram of coke saved
varies with the fuel injected.  As a general rule, the replacement ratio for
oil or tar is 1.2:1, coke oven gas 1:1, and coal 1:0.9.  In 1975, American
                                                                            93
mills saved 4 million tonnes of coke while melting 8 million tonnes of iron.
This equates to 50 kg/MTHM, or approximately 7 percent of the U.S. 55 million
tonnes per year of coking capacity.  At the present time, approximately 80 to
85 percent of the blast furnaces in the United States have been retrofitted to
                         94
handle tuyere injectants.
     The newest blast furnaces being built for Bethlehem at Sparrows Point and
for Inland Steel are designed to handle 100 kg/MTHM of injectants and are
expected to operate with coke rates of 500 kg/MTHM.  It will be noted that
these coke rates are almost equal to the best practice in Japan and also that
the injection rate is approximately twice the present average in the United
       95
States.    Within the next decade, it may be expected that nearly all of the
blast furnaces in the U.S. will be equipped for fuel injection and that the
average rate of injection will tend to double.
     Injection of fuel through the tuyeres results in an endothermic reaction
at the hearth level.  Therefore, it is necessary to increase the temperature
of the hot blast concurrent with the injection process.  At the same time it
is necessary to provide storage for the fuel, piping facilities, control
facilities, etc.  When coal is used as an injectant, facilities for pulveriz-
ing it and for avoiding explosions are also required.
                                       168

-------
     Economics provide the incentive for installation of fuel  injection at the
blast furnace.  The principal factor is that the auxiliary fuel  is usually
considerably cheaper than the coke it replaces.   Another factor  is that iron-
making capacity may be increased without the necessity of providing additional
coke ovens.  The environmental advantage for this process is that it reduces
the amount of coke that is produced and, along with this, a corresponding
reduction in emissions to air and water and solid waste generation.  From the
standpoint of fuel conservation, if coal is used as the injectant in the blast
furnace, since it replaces 0.9 pounds of coke, it also replaces  1.4 pounds of
coal at the coke ovens.
Dehumidification of the Blast
     This consists of a dry-type dehumidifier installed at the blast furnace
blower.  Dehumidification provides higher combustion within the  blast furnace,
lowers coke rate and increases pig iron output.   The reduction in coke rate is
approximately 0.75 kg/MT of pig iron for every gram per standard cubic meter
of mositure removed.  Since the mositure in the  air varies with  atmospheric
conditions, the reduction rate will  vary as well.  Under average atmospheric
conditions, the improvement is approximately 10  to 12 kg/MTHM.  As indicated
in the preceding sections, reduction of coke rate in the blast furnace pro-
vides environmental benefits by reduction in output from the coke oven.
External Desulfurization of Iron
     The presence of excessive amounts  of sulfur in steel  produces such detri-
mental effects as cracking during processing and reduced physical  properties.
In order to keep sulfur within reasonable limits, generally accepted as below
0.020 percent in molten iron, it has been necessary to operate the blast
furnace with a large quantity of basic  slag.  In recent years, there has been
a deterioration in the quality of ore and coke which further increases slag
volume.
     It is well known that a leaner, less basic slag increases productivity of
the blast furnace and increases solubility of bosh alkalies.  The  lean flux
rate results in a more permeable, smoother operating furnace and a lower coke
rate.  The slag volume is reduced, but  in contrast the sulfur content of the
iron increases.  In order to achieve the advantages in the blast furnace of
                                       169

-------
the leaner slag and to cope with the sulfur in the metal, a recent development,
essentially starting in 1972, is the external desulfurization of iron.
     There are many desulfurizing techniques and reagents available:   calcium
carbide injection, magnesium-aluminum injection, mag-coke plunging, etc.   Each
technique has its advantages and disadvantages in respect to method of control,
method of operation and operating costs.  All are able to effectively reduce
the sulfur content of molten iron to acceptable levels.
     A blast furnace, when operating in conjunction with external  desulfuri-
zation of iron, can operate with a lean slag.  In a typical situation,  this
type of operation results in a 10 percent decrease in slag volume, a 6 percent
decrease in coke rate, and a 37 percent decrease in flux and a 9 percent
increase in production.
     The operation of the blast furnace with leaner slag and higher sulfur in
the iron results in a number of environmental advantages.  The furnace opera-
tion is smoother, giving rise to fewer emission-causing slips, fewer casting
emissions, and lower slag volume.  Because the coke rate is reduced, there is
a secondary advantage in regard to emissions and environmental problems in the
coke ovens.  In addition, there is conservation of raw material in terms  of
fluxes and coal.  Figure 26 shows the sulfur balance in a typical  blast
furnace in which it will be noted that 78 percent of the sulfur comes from the
coke and 15 percent"from injected fuel oil.
     The process for externally desulfurizing iron involves the consumption of
reagents such as those mentioned above and the production of dust and slag.
However, these are minor in comparison to the savings in the blast furnace,
being on the order of 7 to 10 percent.  On balance, the environmental effects
are definitely on the positive side.
     A number of methods are available which are easy to operate and which
insure positive control of sulfur levels in the iron.  One method, as shown in
                                                      D
Figure 27, consists of loading a plunger with Mag-coke  and dropping it into a
ladle which is filled with molten iron.  Plunging time is about 15 minutes.
Another method (Figure 28) involves the pneumatic injection of the reagent
through an injecting lance into the molten iron.  The carrier gas for the
reagent is an inert gas such as argon or nitrogen.  In both methods, it will
be noted that a baghouse is provided for the collection of emissions,

                                       170

-------
   total  input: 4.64kg  S/l  hot metcl
   figures in kg 5/t hot metal  and %  of the total  input

                  burden  0.34kg-(7.^%)
                         I
    oil
0.68kg (14.6%)'
     slag
 4.16kg  (89.5%)
                                                coke
                                            3.62 kg (78.0%)
 balance  deficit
-0.22 kg (4.8%)
-—flue  dust
   0.02 kg (0.5%)
                                hot metal
                             0.24kg (5.2%)
                Figure 26. Sulfur balance for a typical blast furnace.

                            171

-------
                    10
                 I. Plunger
                2. Hot metal  ladte
                3. Hot meto!  ladle cor
                4. Slog  pot
                5. Slag  sklrnmer
                6. Dust  collecting food
                7. Pit
                8. Torpedo  car
                9. Rail for  torpedo car
               10. Plungej transport  car
I.  Pit
2.  Roll for Torpedo cor
3.  Pulpit
4.  Plunger Transport cor
5.  Dust collecting  duct
6.  Plunder changing  cor
7.  Storage yard of plunger
8.  Jib crcn» for  plunger
9.  Bog filter
                      8
                     -B-
•e
                  11
6^
                                                 n
                                                           04
w
                Figure 27. Ground plan of Mag-Coke  desulfurizing plant
                                172

-------
(D   Desulphurizing  agent  storage  tank




©   Desulphurizing  agent  injection  tank



(D   Reaction aid  storage  tank




©   Carrier gas piping
Injecting lance



Dust collector



Torpedo car
              Figure 28.  Schematic representation of the desulfurizing facilities of the torpedo top-injection method.

-------
     Interest in external desulfurization of iron is rapidly increasing because
of its ability to improve iron composition and to reduce operating cost.   There
is no doubt that the coming decade will see substantial introduction of this
method in the steel industry.
Direct Reduction of Iron (DRI)
     In the United States, the principal direct reduction process is the
Midrex.  Figures 29 and 30 show schematic flow diagrams of this process.   In
it, the oxide feed which is normally lump ore and unreduced pellets flows
continuously down through the reduction furnace.  The reformed gas has the
following approximate composition:  73 percent hydrogen, 16 percent carbon
monoxide, 7 percent carbon dioxide, and 4 percent methane.  It reacts with and
reduces the iron oxide in the reduction furnace.  The reduced iron has about 92
to 93 percent metallization and 1 to 1.4 percent carbon.
     There are other direct reduction processes on the North American Continent.
The HyL process also uses reformed gases.  Unlike the continuous process
previously described, it is a semi-batch process in which the ore is contained
in fixed beds with a multiple number of reactors.  Another process is the SL/
RN process in which carbonaceous material is mixed with the iron oxide material
to form pellets.  After preparation, the pellets flow through a rotary kiln
reactor and then to a rotary cooler from which they are discharged to magnetic
separation facilities.  For all of the processes mentioned above, there is
emissions control from material handling by means of baghouses and from the
circulating gas by means of scrubbers.
     In general, the quantity of emissions and wastes produced by DRI are low
in comparison to other metallurgical processes.  The quantity of dust and
sludge is approximately 3 to 6 percent of the feed material.  In most plants
this is too small for economic recycling and the dusts and sludges are either
landfilled or sold to other users.
     The reduced pellets, also called sponge-iron, is generally used as charge
material for the EAF where it replaces scrap.  The result of this replacement
is increased consumption of electricity.  However, this is balanced by increased
yield, increased productivity, and reduction in residual elements in the
finished product.  There is also an increase in the slag volume as compared to

                                        174

-------
10 »o"-«»ce
Sf»L IECS


  ljSt»l Ct!
    BIOWEB
 I  E9LU**e


DT
I   ICAS
                  ft-
    MJ.N BU'NEHS
V
 1O»CiS
SCKUSSEH
  H.-O  cJ
                                              • PROCESS NlTU«<»lC»S
                 -PROCtSS N1TUB41CAS
                                                                PXOCFSS
                                                                 «f atSSOXS
              82 MTPH
                 IJUD
                 EEI

                  I
                                                                                  oEK«TOI«
BEFOBMfO C»S P|
RE»CWW£0
c.»s
coot IK
1




— -
p

r

«v
REDUCTION '
FUMNACE
t
                                                                             MOUCIOMQOUCI
                                                                                58 MTPH
                    Figure 29.  Schematic flow diagram of the Midrex Process.
                          (Iron and Steel Engineer, September 1978)
                                                                    95
                                   Figure 30.  Flowsheet of the Midrex Process.
                                    (Iron and Steel Engineer, September 1978)

                                                 175
                                                                        96

-------
all scrap practice, the value being approximately equal to that from the BOF.
Typical values are shown in Table 72.

                TABLE 72.  USE OF DIRECT REDUCED PELLETS IN EAFs
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Feed scrap, %
Feed pellets, %
Energy used by furnace kwh/t
Yield of steel, %
Productivity
Residuals, %
100
0
541
87.9
Base
0.46
70
30
575
89.5
+8.3%
0.57
40
60
604
92.6
+7.8%
0.27
20
80
635
92.2
-2.2%
N/A
     At two installations in Japan, a process similar to the SL/RN is used for
recycling iron oxide wastes which are recovered in pollution equipment else-
where in the steel works.  The Japanese report no problem with the presence
of zinc or lead and they also indicate that at least part of the product is
used as feed for the blast furnace where it results in increased productivity
and reduced consumption of coke.  Reported values are an 8.2 percent increase
in production and reduction in coke consumption corresponding to a 10 percent
addition of reduced pellets to the burden.
     In the integrated production of steel from iron ore, the direct reduction/
EAF route has the following environmental advantages in comparison to the
conventional coke oven-blast furnace route.
     1.   DRI eliminates the need for coke ovens and all the
          environmental problems associated therewith.
     2.   Control of DRI emissions is relatively easy to accomplish.
     3.   The slag production from DRI comes solely from the EAF.
          All of the slag from the blast furnace is eliminated.
     4.   DRI may be accomplished by a wide variety of fuels, thereby
          avoiding dependency on metallurgical coals.
     Direct reduction of iron ore is practiced more widely on other continents
than in North America (Table 73).  There are only three installations in the
U.S. and their total production amounts to somewhat less than 1 million tonnes
                                       176

-------
	TABLE 73.  DIRECT REDUCTION INSTALLATIONS IN NORTH AMERICA
                                                       ANNUAL OUTPUT MT
Process Name               Location                United States        Other
Hoskin
Midrex


Accar
HyL





Hogannas
SL/RN
Rockwood, TN
Georgetown Steel
Oregon Steel
Sidbec-Dosco, Can.
Sudbury, Ont. Can.
HYLSA lM)-Monterey, Mex.
HYLSA 2M) -Monterey, Mex.
HYLSA 3M) -Monterey, Mex.
TAMSA- Veracruz, .Mex.
HYLSA(lP)-Puebla, Mex.
HYLSA(2P)-Puebla, Mex.
New Jersey
Stelco, Can.
90,000
410,000
410,000
>1, 000, 000
340,000
95,000
270,000
450,000
235,000
315,000
700,000
70,000
520,000
TOTALS                                              980,000         3,925,000
per year.  Thus, it accounts for approximately 0.8 percent of the ingot tonnage
in the United States.
     The development of DRI has taken place primarily in those parts of the
world where natural gas is plentiful  and cheap and coking coal is essentially
absent.  Table 74 provides a listing  of some of the key factors that affect
the development and implementation of DRI.   The first column lists those
factors that are impeding the development and the second column those which
are promoting it.  With the passage of time, the impetus to DRI will increase
primarily due to the impact of lower  capital costs and to the development of
DRI processes which will use coal  in  preference to natural gas as the fuel.
Table 75 shows direct reduction plants and plans world wide.  It will be noted
that North American capacity is expected to triple by 1985.
                                       177

-------
  TABLE 74.  IMPLEMENTATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF DIRECT REDUCTION  (PR)  PROCESSES
Impeding Factors                                      Promoting  Factors
1.  Steel industry conservatism
2.  High development costs
3.  Limit and cost of natural gas
4.  Low scrap prices versus DR iron
5.  DR iron requires more power than
    scrap in EAF
6.  DR iron has higher gangue—leads
    to high slag in EAF and higher
    loss of FE
7.  Not all ores are suitable for DR
1.   DR/EAF route has  lower capital
    cost than CO/BF/BOF  route
2.   DR iron produces  lower residuals
    and faster heats  in  EAF than
    scrap EAF
3.  - DR/EAF has minimal environ-
    mental impact compared to  CO/
    BF/BOF
    TABLE 75.  REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF DIRECT REDUCTION PLANTS AND PROJECTS
               (Thousands of tonne/vrV*"
1954 to 1975 1976
Region
North America
Latin America
Western Europe
Eastern Europe
Middle East
Africa
Asia
Oceania
World, total
tonne
1970
2400
810
—
—
1150
1194
120
7644
% tonne
25.8 2210
31.4 3130
10.6 850
— —
— • —
15.1 1150
15.6 1344
13 120
100 8804
%
25.1
35.5
9.6
—
—
13.1
15.3
1.4
100
1977 1978
tonne
2935
4825
850
—
3015
1450
1834
120
15029
% tonne
193 2935
32.1 5345
5.7 1650
— —
20.1 4415
9.6 1700
12.2 2409
0.8 120
100 18574
%
15.8
28.8
8.9
—
23.8
9.1
13.0
0.6
100
1979
tonne
2935
8645
1650
2500
4415
1700
4134
120
26099
%
11.3
33.1
6.3
9.6
16.9
63
15.8
03
100
1980 198110
tonne
2935
9065
3650
5000
4415
1700
4134
120
31019.
% tonne
9.4 64S5
29.2 15035
11.7 5700
16.1 5000
14.2 8715
5.5 5100
133 4194
0.4 1520
100 51720
1985*
%
12.5
29.1
11.0
9.7
16.8
9.9
8.1
2.9
100
Distribution by number of installations
North America
Latin America
Western Europe
Eastern Europe
Middle East
Africa
Asia
Oceania
World total
8
8
7
0
0
2
8
1
34
233 9
233 10
20.6 8
— 0
— 0
53 2
233 9
3.0 1
•100 39
23.1
25.6
20.5
—
—
5.1
23.1
2.6
100
11
14
8
0
3
3
11
1
51
21.6 11
27.4 16
15.7 9
— 0
5.9 5
5.9 4
21.6 12
1.9 1
100 58
19.0
27.6
153
—
8.6
6.9
20.7
1.7
100
11
18
9
1
5
4
13
1
62
17.7
29.0
143
1.6
8.1
6.5
21.0
1.6
100
11
19
11
2
5
4
13
1
66
16.7 16
28.8 33
16.7 15
3.0 2
7.6 9
6.0 9
19.7 14
13 3
100 101
15.8
32.7
14.8
2.0
8.9
8.9
13.9
3.0
100
                                        178

-------
Preheating Scrap for Steelmaking
     Scrap preheating is practiced to a limited extent for steelmaking, both
in the EAF and BOF,  In the former case, the preheating, is accomplished by the
combustion of fuels in a unit external to the steelmaking furnace.  It, there-
fore, serves to reduce meltdown time, consumption of electrodes, and consumption
of electric energy,  in this application, preheating has little or no environ-
mental effects.
     In the BOF, scrap preheating is accomplished in the vessel.  Fuel, either
oil or natural gas and oxygen are delivered to the furnace from nozzles of an
auxiliary lance.  Combustion takes place raising the scrap temperature to red
heat.  This method of scrap preheating takes time in the furnace and reduces
productivity.  However, the thermal  energy provided in scrap preheating
permits greater utilization of scrap.  In the BOF under normal  practice the
metallic charge is approximately 30 percent scrap and 70 percent molten iron;
under scrap preheating, the ratios are 40 and 60 percent.
     Scrap preheating in the BOF produces essentially no increase in emissions
or solid waste as compared to the conventional  practice without preheat.
However, it does reduce the amount of molten iron which is consumed thereby
providing a corresponding reduction in the quantity of emissions and discharges
from both the blast furnace and the coke oven.
     The main impetus for extension of this practice in the BOF comes from
consideration of iron production.  If a plant is deficient in blast furnace
capacity and if there is extra time available in the BOF, scrap preheating
provides an inexpensive way to achieve more steel production.  On the other
hand, if the BOF does not have the extra time for preheating, it may be more
desirable to achieve increased steel production by some other method of
increasing ironmaking capacity.  Because of these conflicts, it is expected
that the implementation of scrap preheating in the BOF will proceed at a
moderate pace over the next decades.
Superheating Molten Iron for the BOF
     Superheating of molten iron is performed in a furnace which resembles a
hot metal  mixer.  In the lower region of the furnace, jet-flow inductors
                                       179

-------
provide the necessary heat to increase the temperature to any desired level  up
to 2900°F.  The furnace and the 60-Hz inductors have been used extensively for
heating molten iron in foundries.
     Superheating molten iron serves the same purpose as scrap preheating;
that is, to expand the capabilities of existing BOPs without building new
blast furnaces or coke ovens.  However, it has the advantage in comparison to
scrap preheating, that it does not increase furnace cycle time and, therefore,
does not reduce productivity of the BOF.
     Table 76 shows hot metal, scrap, and other metallic quantities per ton of
raw steel under various conditions.  In conventional BOP practice (Column A)
molten iron comprises about 70 percent of the charge along with 30 percent
scrap.  If hot metal were superheated 400°F, the added energy would permit
melting of about 20 percent more scrap as supplemental coolant, up to about 40
percent of the steel mleted (Column C).  The table shows other alternatives
such as pre-reduced pellets (Column B), cold pig iron (Column E), etc.

 TABLE 76.  EFFECT OF SUPERHEAT ON TYPICAL BQF MATERIALS BALANCE AND PRODUCTION
97

Superheat temp. , °F
Charge-T/T raw steel
Hot metal
Scrap
Cold metal
Pellets
Total metal! ics
Steel production rate
% Base
% Maximum
Base
___
(A)
0.809
0.340
—
—
1.149

100
84
SUPPLEMENTAL COOLANT
Pellets
& Cold
Pellets Scrap Metal
400
(B)
0.791
0.333
—
0.025
1.149

102
86
400
(C)
0.732
0.408
—
—
1.140

110.5
93
400
(D)
0.732
0.308
0.100
0.012
1.153

110.5
93
Metal
400
(E)
0.681
0.287
0.186
—
1.154

119
100
                                       180

-------
     The advantages claimed for superheating molten iron are that it provides
added steelmaking capacity at low cost, it improves scheduling in the BOF and
provides a buffer for smoothing out variations in iron composition.  At the
present time,.there are no installations of this technology which operate in
conjunction with the BOF.  However, it is widely used in iron foundries and is,
therefore, considered proven technology.  It is expected that the advantages of
this practice will result in its acceptance by the steel industry, the rate of
acceptance being impeded by that industry's traditional conservatism.
Replacement of Open Hearth Furnaces
     In 1977  (see Table 14, Section 6.2.1) the production of steel from the
open hearth accounted for approximately 16 percent of the steel output in the
U.S.  It is expected that this production will gradually diminish over the
next two decades due to environmental  pressures and operating cost disadvan-
tages in respect to the BOF which would replace it.
     The principal environmental problem for the more modern open hearth fur-
nace is the extreme difficulty of controlling fugitive emissions from the
furnace during the various stages of charging, melting, refining, and tapping.
The cost disadvantages result primarily from the multitude of open hearth
furnaces in a typical installation in comparison with the highly controlled,
highly productive BOF.  Nevertheless,  the rate of replacement is bound to be
gradual because the more modern open hearth furnaces are relatively efficient
and their replacement cost is becoming greater all  the time.
     The BOF produces less slag (minus 40 percent)  and more iron oxide particu-
lates (plus 50 percent) per ton of steel  than does  the open hearth furnace.
In 1977, if all of the open hearth capacity had been replaced by BOF capacity,
the change in production of solid waste would have  been a slag reduction of
1930 tonnes and an increase in iron oxide of 130 tonnes.
Continuous Casting
     There are two methods of producing semi-finished product in operation
today.   One is to pour the steel into ingot molds,  strip the ingots from the
molds,  reheat them in soaking pits and roll them on a primary mill.  The other
is to pour the steel  in a water-cooled copper mold  that is open at the top and
                                       181

-------
bottom.  The shape of the mold is such as to directly produce the semi-finished
product which is withdrawn continuously from the open bottom.
     The quality of continuously cast steel is equal to that of conventionally
made steel, and often better.  The yield of the semi-finished product as
compared to the ingot route is higher, the manhour requirements are lower,  the
energy requirements are significantly reduced and the use of plant space is
more efficient.
     Because of these advantages, continuous casting has been making inroads
into steelmaking technology.  Starting with the first U.S. installation in
1962, by 1969 U.S. production was 4.5 million tonnes of continuous cast steel
and by 1978, 28.4 million tonnes.  It is estimated that there is a potential
                                                              go
for continuous casting in the U.S. of about 75 million tonnes.    It is not
unreasonable to project that nearly all of this capacity will be provided
within the next two decades.
     The yield of semi-finished steel from molten steel varies depending upon
the nature of the final product whether slab, bloom, etc.  On the average,  the
yield from continuous casting is 94 percent, and from the ingot route 81
percent.  The scrap loss in the ingot route is 13.5 percent and in the con-
tinuous casting route 5.1 percent.  The loss in terms of scale and sludge are
5.2 percent and 0.8 percent, respectively.  The latter change is particularly
significant since a portion of scale and sludge is landfilled or dumped and
thus irrevocably lost to the steelmaking process.
     The environmental advantages of the continuous casting route in terms  of
reduced emissions to air and water and reduced solid waste generation go
beyond the immediate process itself.  Because the molten steel is used more
efficiently, to produce the same volume of finished product, less steel needs
to be made in the steelmaking furnace, less iron in the blast furnace, and
less coke in the coke plant.  Each of these changes has its own environmental
benefits.
8.2.5  Effect of Process Changes on the Model Plant
       In the previous section, descriptions were provided for various process
changes that affect the generation of solid waste and the utilization of
resources.  In order to quantify the potential effects and to put the value of

                                       182

-------
the changes in proper prospective, it is necessary to incorporate them in the
model plant of Section 6.0.
     The model plant of Section 6.0 provides information on the generation of
solid waste from a production of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel  per year.   In this
plant the production of semi-finished steel  is 2,140,000 tonnes per year.  In
order that a fair evaluation of the process  changes be made, and because some
of the changes reflect variations in yield,  the production  of semi-finished
steel has been held constant.  The production figures from  the various units
preceding this point were then derived by working backwards through each of
the processes.  In the various diagrams which follow there  are two values of
quantity shown for each item.  The value without parentheses is the original
value before implementation of the process change; the value in parentheses is
after the process change.
     The results which are shown in the diagrams must be treated with caution.
The quantities shown derive from a number of simplified assumptions.   They
ignore the complications that pertain to implementation of  process changes in
existing facilities where, for example, an otherwise desirable change is
impeded by existing technology, space limitations, lack of  capital, company
conservatism, etc.  Despite the caution, the results do indicate that the
process changes have the capability of making substantial reductions in the
generation of solid waste and that they deserve further investigation.
Analysis of Process Changes
     Each of the process changes described in the preceding section will be
inserted into the model plant and its effect on resource consumption and solid
waste generation will be analyzed.
     Figure 31 shows the effect caused by further implementation of continuous
casting.  The assumption is made that semi-finished steel produced in this
manner will essentially double and thereby provide two-thirds of the product.
The effect on input of molten steel is to reduce the quantity by 4 1/2 percent.
The reduction is distributed on a percentage basis between  the BOF and EAF.
The amount of scrap produced is reduced by 71,500 tonnes and this is reflected
in the charge to two melting units.
                                       183

-------
                                                                      Water
                                             (1,590.000)
                                               840,000
         BO F Steel
         2,000,000
        (1,900,000)
CO
         EAF Steel
                               Steel
                            2,500,000
                            (2,390,000)
          500,000
         (490,000)
                              (800,000)
                              1,660,000
                                                               Continuous
                                                                Casting
43,000 Scrap
  (87,011)
                                 Recycle Water
                                         (1.490,000)
                                           790,000
                Scale Pit
                  Filter
                                                                (150)  ,r
• Effluent
 20.5 Solids
   (38.6)
                    6,900 Scale (recycled or stocked)
                   (12,800)            Water
           80 Sludge
                                                                 (90% landfilled)
            Water
                                                  Recycle
                                                                                      Primary
                                                                                      Rolling
                                       (11,600)
                                            23,400 Soaking
                                                Pit Scale
                                                (landfilled)
                    (107,975) jr
                       223,450 Scrap
                         Cropcnds
                                            (650,000)
                                            1,350,000
                                                                                                                              240,000 Safes,
                                                                                                                                Transfers
Shapes
                                                                 2,140,000
   1,900,000
"""To Hot Rolling
         Oil Skimmer
                                  (1,200)
                                 2,500 Sludge
                                  (95% tandfitled)  (28,200)
                                                 60,600 Scale
                                               (recycled or stocked)'
                                                                                                                            -Effluent
Scale Pit
Filter
» 1 	
bU solids
i -,1251 .,
(oil recovered,
recycled)
i
                           Figure 31.  Continuous casting, soaking, primary rolling material flow in production of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year
                                      (all numbers in tonnes).1 &  (numbers in parentheses represent results of process changes)

-------
     Figures 32 and 33 show the material flow to the EAF and EOF, respectively.
 In these units, pre-reduced pellets make up the scrap deficit, the ratio of
 pellets to scrap being the same in both units.  In the EAF, other changes in
 dust and slag are ratioed to the steel output.  In the .EOF the situation is
 more complicated in that not only is this ratio taken into account but also
 the effect of scrap preheating and superheating of molten iron.  These last
 two cause the ratio of hot metal to total metal!ics in the charge to drop from
 70 to 56.4 percent.
     In Figure 34, the reduction in iron requirements reduce the demand for
 materials in the blast furnace and the production of wastes.  In addition, the
 quantity of slag is reduced another 10 percent in response to the introduction
 of external desulfurization.  Further, the coke requirements are estimated at
 500 kg/MTHM which assumes substantial  implementation of burden preparation, a
 high rate of fuel injection and dehumidification of the blast throughout the
 industry.
     Figure 35 shows the effect on coke oven operations that takes place as a
 result of the reduction in coke requirements.   The amount of coal required,
 the by-products and waste produced all vary in proportion to coke output.
     Figure 36 combines all  of the process into one model plant.  The combined
 effect of the various process changes  becomes  evident.  There is substantial
 change in the quantities of resource material  that is required and wastes that
 are generated.   These are analyzed in  the next two sections.
 Analysis of Resource Consumption
     Table 77 provides a summary of the amount of resource material as well as
 solid waste generation that is required both before the process changes are
 initiated and after they take place.  In addition, there are two columns which
 show the difference in material requirements,  both as actual tonnes per year
 and as percent of initial requirements.  All of the quantities are taken from
 the data in Figure 36.
     The iron ore quantities include charge material from the blast furnace as
well  as that for direct reduction.  There is a slight increase in ore con-
 sumption (2 percent) which results from the introduction of direct reduction
 less the cumulative effects of continuous casting, scrap preheating, and
 superheating of molten iron.  On the other hand, the quantity of scrap consumed
                                        185

-------
                                     (137)
                                      140 DUST
                                       TO AIR
                                           DRY
                                         SYSTEM*
(337.000)
(173,000) Pre-reduced Pellets
 45.640 FLUX
 (51.237)
                                                                              (6,400)
                                                                             " 6,500 DUST (landfilled)
                                           FUME
                                        ELECTRIC
                                           ARC
                                        FURNACE
  (490,000)
-*»500.000 STEEL (to shaping operation)
                              (64,700)
                                   60,000 SLAG
                            (iron recovered, balance landfilled,
                                   10% other uses)
       •Nationally, 76% dry systems
                   15% wet systems
                    9% semi-wet systems
       Figure 32.  Electric arc furnace material flow in production of 500,000 tonnes of steel per year (all numbers in tonnes).
                 (numbers in parentheses represent results of process changes)
                                                    186

-------
                                                                                          (227,000)
                                                                                          250,000 OFF-GAS
                                                                                            200 DUST
                                                                                           (190)
CD
(1,180,000)
1,600,000 Hot Metal-
(613,000)
 499,000 Scrap
(299,000) pellets
 292,221 Flux
 (170,210)

 190,000 Oxygen
  (180,000)
 Basic
Oxygen
Furnace
                                                                                                            Water
                                                                                                    WET*
                                                                                                  CLEANING
                                                                                                   SYSTEM
   (1,900,000)
-^2,000,000  STEEL
                                    (276,000) T
                                     290,000 SLAG
                                   (iron recovered; estimate
                                      50%used, recycled)
                                                                                                  Settler
                                                                                                 Thickener
                                                                                 (39,000)If
                                                                                 41,000 SLUDGE
                                                                             (50%landfilled, balance stocked
                                                                                      or recycled)
                                                                                                                                  Water Recycle
                                                                                                                                              Effluent
                                                                                                                                             *21 Solids
                                                                                                                                               (20)
                                                                                                                                       •Nationally, 19% dry systems
                                                                                                                                                 61% wet systems
                                                                                                                                                 20% semi-wet systems
                                     Figure 33.  Basic oxygen process material flow in production of 2,000,000 tonnes per year of steel (all numbers in tonnes).16
                                               (all numbers In parentheses represent results of process changes)

-------
                                                                                                         Water
                                                                   (3,000,300)
                                                                   4,153,600 Top Gas + Dust
                                                                                             High Energy
                                                                                            Wet Scrubber
                 (18,700)
                25,400 DUST-
                (recycled to sinter)
  Dust
Collector
00
00
        691,000 Sinter

    1.970,000 Ore, Pellets •
              (1,276,000)
          128,000 Fluxes-
                (00,000)
          900,000 Coke -
              (590,000)
      2,647,000 Air Blast
             (1,952,000)
                                                      Top Gas
                                                      •(•Dust
    Blast
  Furnace
                             (370,000)
                         -*-557,000  SLAG
  Settler
  Clarifier
(Treatment)
   Filter
                                                                                                                                      Water Recycle
                                                                                                  (2,970,245)
                                                                                              •»•  4,113,524 Top Gai (to stoves, boilers)
                                                                                                   34 Dust
                                                                                                   (25)
^Effluent
*42 Solids
 (30)
                                                                        (used as aggregate, cement, ballast)
                                       (30.000)
                                       40,000 SLUDGE
                                   (5,000 landfill; 35,000 recycled
                                       to sinter or stocked)
                                 (1,180,000)
                                    1,600,000 Hot Metal
                                      (to steelmaking)
                                             Figure 34.  Blast furnace material flow in production of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year (all numbers in tonnes).16'18
                                                       (numbers in parentheses represent results of process changes)

-------
                                           (3.700)
                                  5,700 Uncontrolled Particulate
                                         Emissions
                                                                                  (138.QQO)
                                                                        210,000 Coke Oven Gat (to coke oven underfiring, sinter plant, etc.)
           (831.842)
         1,268,343 Coal
00
<£>
     (21,000)
32,000 Breeze
 (recycled, sold)
                                                                     Oleum Wash Wast*.
                                                                       Neutralization
                                                                          Waste*
                                                                                 (360)
540 Still Lime Sludge
       (iandfilled)
          (360)
                                                                                 540 Tar Tank Sludge
                                                                                       (landfilled)
                                            900,000 Cake
                                          (to Blast Furnace)
                                             (590,000)
                   •Quantity unknown, from light oil refining operation.
                                                                                                                Biological
                                                                                                               Treatment
                                                                                                                  Plant
                                                                                                         (1.000) *
                                                                                                          1530 Sludge
                                                                                                             (landfilled)
                                                                                                                                  (47,300)
                                                                                                                                   72.100 Product!
                                                                                                                                   (Tar, Sulfata, Light OH)
(30,100)
4 5,900 Water From Coda Oven
Final Efiluent
33 Solids
(22)
                                        Figure 35.  Material flow lor coke plant in production of 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year (all numbers In tonnes).

-------
                                            (732.000}
                                           Iron Oxide
   (1.720)
    2610	
    Organic Sludge
            (21.000)        _
          32.000 Breeze
(1,276.000)
 1.970.000 Iron Oxide
    (29.500)
     40.000-*
     Sludgt
    (39.000)
     41,000-*	
     Sludge
  (138,000)
210.000 Coki
Oven Gas
                                                          • (21.200) Dust
                                                          (14,500)
                                                           14,500 Dust
                                                          (18.700)
                                                        *~ 25.400 Dust

                                                        *•  6.500 Dust
                                                            (6,400)
                       *
                   290.000
                     Slag
                   (276.000)
           (150)
           80 Sludge-*
       (1.200)
        2.500 Sludge -*
                    240.000 Sales -*-


          3.100 Sludge *       — —
                                  (490,000)
                                ,, 500.000 Steel
               2,500.000 Steel
              (2,390,000)
 Continuous Casting
  Primary Rolling
                                                         (12,800)
                                                        -  6,900 Scale
                                                     2,140,000 Steel (2.140.000)
43,000 Scrap  (87,000)    (29200)
                 	*• 60.600 Scale
                        (11.600)
                 	»- 23.400 Soaking Pit
                              Scale
   (108.000)
-*- 223,450 Scrap
         1.900,000 Steel
      Hot Rolling
                    1,098.000 Sales  -*-
         140.000 (Wet)-
             Sludge
           110 Sludge  •
                                                           32.900 Scale
                                                                               - 62,360 Scrap
                                                     1.801,200 Steel
                                                    \ 703,200 Steel
        Pickling
      Cold Rolling
                    475,000 Sales -*-
          1.400 Sludge -*-

          530 Sludge  -*-
                                                           40 Scale
                                                     700.000 Steel
      Galvanizing
      Tin Plating
 -*- 125,000 Galvanized Product

 •*• 100.000 Tin Plated Product
  Rgure 36.  Waste production from typical plant with 2,500,000 tonnes of steel per year (all numbers in tonnes).
                          (All numbers in parentheses represent results of process changes.)
                                                        190

-------
                      TABLE 77.   EFFECT OF PROCESS CHANGES
               Model plant to produce 2,140,000 tonnes annually of
               semi-finished steel
Consumption of
Resource Material
   ANNUAL QUANTITIES-1000 TONNES/YR
Before     After
Change     Change    Difference
                                                                 Difference
Coal
Iron ore
Fluxes
Scrap
Coke gas produced
Light oil produced
Solid Waste Generation
Organic sludge
Iron oxides - total
Dust
Sludge
Scale
Slag - total
Ironmaking
Steel making
Scrap
1268
1970
466
499
210
72.1

2.6
257.5
46.4
87.3
123.8
907
557
350
328.8
832
2008
281
613
138
47.3

1.7
220.9
60.8
73.6
86.5
710.7
370
340.7
257.4
436
-38
185
-114
72
24.8

0.9
36.6
- 14.4
13.7
37.3
196.3
187
9.3
71.4
35
- 2
39
-23
35
35

35
14
-31
16
30
22
34
3
22
increases by 23 percent as a  result of these same factors, continuous casting
acts to reduce scrap while the other two factors increase it.   The additional
scrap is assumed to be available from purchases in the scrap market.  Any
shortfalls in this area would have to be made up by the additional production
of reduced pellets from iron  ore.  The reduction in fluxes derives from the
reduction in steel requirements which take place in continuous casting.  How-
ever, the largest reduction takes place in the blast furnace because of the
widespread introduction of external iron desulfurization.  The reduction in
                                       191

-------
coal essentially reflects the cumulative benefits of process changes which
were introduced in the blast furnace, BOF, and continuous casting.
     Listed under resource material are the by-products produced in the coking
operation.  The principal ones, coke oven gas and light oil, are reduced in
production by the same percentage that applies to the reduction in the con-
sumption of coal.  They are considered resource material because they supply
energy that otherwise might have to be furnished from another source.
Analysis of Solid Waste Generation
     The reduction in the generation of solid waste as a result of the process
changes previously described follows a similar pattern to the reduction in the
consumption of resource material.  The generation of organic sludge, for
example, drops by the same percentage as does the reduction in coal consump-
tion.  A similar comparison exists between total slag and fluxes.  Iron oxide
wastes drop by a somewhat smaller percentage than the previous factors.
     In regard to scrap, there is a substantial change that occurs.  Before
the initiation of the process changes the amount of scrap consumed exceeds
that produced by 170,000 tonnes.  After the process changes are in place, the
difference increases by 2 times to 355,000 tonnes.  In order to achieve
balance, much more scrap will have to be purchased under the latter condition
than under the former.  On balance, this is undoubtedly a positive environ-
mental factor because it will provide incentive for increased efforts in the
recovery of scrap and in the regulations of its export.
     The process changes also create another positive environmental effect in
regard to solid waste generation.  As will be noted on Table 77, the generation
of  the waste in the form of sludge decreases by almost the same amount as the
increase in dust generation.  Since dust is generally easier to handle than
sludge and since its handling does not incur the water pollution problem that
accompanies sludge handling, environmental degradation will be reduced.
8.2.6  Future Iron and Steelmaking
       The iron and steel plant of the future may incorporate radically new
technologies for producing steel.  A method for producing the molten steel
directly from iron oxide, coal, and oxygen has been proposed and described
                                        192

-------
earlier in this report as well  as shown in Figure 25.   There was also dis-
cussion of powder stripmaking in which the molten steel is converted to a
powder which is compacted and rolled into sheet steel.  These two technologies,
in combination, would offer reduction in the physical  size of the plant, its
capital and operating cost and the environmental  effects.  It is relatively
easy to visualize how these processes may be essentially closed to prevent
emissions to the atmosphere, and how they may reduce solid waste generation.
As noted before, the implementation of these and  other technologies will
probably not take place until the next century.  It would certainly be of
benefit to the steel industry and to the environment if the Federal Government
were to provide incentives for their development.
     There is one case where the steel plant of the future appears to be under
                                 DO
construction today in Pittsburgh.    This is a plant designed to produce 20 to
25 TPH of light product such as rebar, rounds, and other merchant products.
     Figure 37 shows a diagram of the process.  In it, scrap is charged to an
EAF from which the molten steel is poured into an 8 foot wheel-belt caster.
From the casting machine the semi-finished bar proceeds through a 14-stand
rolling mill, a looper, and a cooling conveyor.  Figure 38 shows the section
for the as-cast billet, the intermediate shapes and the finished round.  The
remarkable feature of the mill  is that the entire facility, including melting,
casting, and rolling takes place within a space of about 200 square feet.
8.3  NEW DIRECTIONS SUGGESTED BY RECENT U.S. PATENTS
     The patent classes and subclasses that were  searched for this discussion
are as follows.
     Class 65       Glass Manufacturing
          /19       Slag utilization
     Class 75       Metallurgy
          /3        Beneficiation of ores by agglomeration
          /4        Beneficiation by coking
          /5        Beneficiation by sintering
          /24       Pyrometallurgy, treating slag
          /25       Pyrometallurgy, treating flue dust
          /30       Pyrometallugy, iron/steel slags
                                       193

-------
-SCRAP
 HOPPER
A        ELECTRO-MELT
        FURNACE(20-25TPH
r£rt /  (20-25 TPH)

      LADLE TRANSPORT -
        STRAND CONDITIONING
        SECTION INTS>—>^
                               r PINCH ROLL WITH
                               \ FLYING CUT-OFF
                                \  r-
                                              COOLING CONVEYOR-

                                                   LOOP LAYER

                                                     WATER SPRAY-,
                                                                                          EXHAUST FAN
                                              8-8—8-8-8-8-
                                       8 FT WHEEL
                                       BELT CASTER
                                                                               COIL DROP AND
                                                                               COLLECTOR CAR
                                        BELT REELS AND
                                        COOLING LINE
                                                                                     99
               Figure 37. Melt shop, caster, rolling mill layout for 100,000 ton per year facility.
                               (Iron  and Steel Engineer,  September 1978)
             2"8
                                  J
                          6.0 SO M           4.5 SO IN -
                                  I VERTICAL PASS   2. 45* PASS        3. 45° PASS
                                   (SQUARE SHAPE)   (DIAMOND SHiPE    (SQUARE SHAPE
= 8 SO IN
  (AS CAST-    SO SO IM '
                                                  L
                                             45 SO IN
                                                             3 375 SO IN
                                  1 VERTICAL PASS   Z HCS'ZCMa.L °ASS  3. VERTICAL "ASS
                                   (SQUAPE SHAPE)   (OVAL SHAPE!      (ROUWO SHi=E
                    Figure 38. Cast billet, intermediate shapes, and finished round.
                            (Iron and Steel Engineer. September 1978)
                                                                          S3
                                              194

-------
     Class 423      Inorganic Chemistry
          /1 38      Recovering iron group
          /1 39      Recovering by ion exchange
          /1 40      Recovering by precipitation
8.3.1  Blast Furnace Slag
       This stream comprises waste oxides from the ore and the coke,  with lime
and magnesia to lower its melting point and take up sulfur.   The  ratio of slag
to molten iron product has trended downward; one reason is the increased
quality of beneficiated ore pellets,  and another is reduced coke  consumption
made possible by oxygen and/or fuel additions through  the  tuyeres.  Super-
fluxed sinter has had a small  additional  impact.
     "External desulfurization" is a  process improvement which would  further
reduce the volume of slag.  The concept is hardly new, but new materials or
methods may spur its adoption.   Thus  Turkdogan advocates desulfurization in a
first blow in the BOF, and Yoshida recommends oxide-coated magnesium  parti-
cles.106-107
     If the slag is poured into a pit and allowed to cool  slowly, it  is diffi-
cult to break up and use.  Jablin has proposed dry quenching with heat recovery
                       108
in a waste heat boiler.     But most  quenching is with water, and this generates
H2S and a runoff of contaminated water.   At least one  local  control agency
(Allegheny Co., Pennsylvania)  requires the abatement of this nuisance, and
several patents have resulted.   Some  seek to prevent the emission by  adding
reagents to the quench water:   bases  or carbonates, oxidizing agents, and
                                                                   llect
                                         1 nq 1
ferrous salts, e.g., waste pickle liquor.          Others seek to collect the
HgS and oxidize it to by-product sulfur or to water-soluble anions.
Water quenching shatters the slag and produces more surface and more H^S; a
gentler quenching with air, possibly enriched with oxygen, might be  presumed
to freeze in most of the sulfur and oxidize that little which appeared at the
surface.
     In addition to the well-known uses for blast furnace slag, it can be used
                                                                       119
to stabilize the sludge from lime or limestone scrubbing of flue gases.
                                       195

-------
8.3.2  Steelmaking Slags
       In many cases these have been recycled to the blast furnace to recover
iron values.  Zinc oxide is added to the slag by the process outlined in the
Kreiger patents and may cause problems in recycling the slag to the blast
        104 105
furnace.    '     The change in composition of BOF slag, for example, is not
large, and a reducing blow in a separate vessel could make it acceptable for
immediate recycle to the converter; the slag from an occasional blow might
have to be purged.119'120
8.3.3  Blast Furnace Dust and Sludge
       Blast furnace dust is routinely recycled to the blast furnace by way of
the sinter plant; the sludge, being fine and wet, presents a problem.  Since
some water is necessary in the sinter mix, judicious dewatering of the sludge
permits it to be the source of that water.  Alternatively, the sintering
                                                                          121
process may be managed in such a way as to be more tolerant of wet solids.
     But there is no doubt that the finest blast furnace dusts and sludges
require special handling when used for sinter feeds, and various other means
of agglomerating such material to form blast furnace burden have been commer-
cialized over the years.  Lime, portland cement, and coal tar pitch are well-
                                                                         122
known binders, but some thermal processing or at least aging is required.
A novel bonding agent is formic acid in aqueous solution; some heavy metal
                                                                       122 123
oxides dissolve briefly and then re-precipitate as a gelatinous binder.    '
More aggressive thermal treatments, as in rotary kilns, typified by the SL/RN
process, are offered commercially.  Some of these merely coke the iron oxide
and some go as far as direct reduction.
     In the current view none of these processes is economical when applied to
waste oxide reclamation.  But if they were operated at the scale of a formed-
coke plant, the view might be entirely different.  Thus a plant operated
according to an FMC patent admixes a judicious amount of water with the coal
                                                        124
char; clearly this water could contain iron oxide fines.     Incorporating dry
                                                      125
iron oxides was contemplated in an earlier FMC patent.     The problem with
this method of recycling iron oxide wastes is  that, under the  reducing con-
ditions which exist in the coke ovens, the sulfur in the coal  would react  and
                                        196

-------
combine with the iron oxide, thereby adding to the sulfur burden in the blast
furnace.  This is undesirable.
     A PECOR patent discloses that dry or dried waste oxides can be entrained
                                                  i ?fi
into a blast furnace or Q-BOP through the tuyeres.     The expectation is that
most of the recycled material would be incorporated into the metal or the
slag; any which escaped would serve as condensation nuclei, making the emitted
particulate coarser and thus easier to collect.
     The finest blast furnace particulate is a nuisance when collected wet or
dry.  The former is the conventional  choice.  But two novel processes collect
and chemically modify the solids.  A patent assigned to Republic Steel dis-
closes that a hot gas stream containing carbon monoxide and iron values should
be passed through a bed of granular lime; metallic iron and dicalcium ferrite
                          107
(2CaO  ' Fe203) are formed.     Such a product is suitable for recycle to the
blast furnace.  A patent held by Kaiser Steel  advocates passing a similar gas
'through a bed of sufficiently hot coke to yield molten iron, which would be
                        128
expected to agglomerate.
8.3.4  Steelmaking Dust and Sludge
       These solids are not importantly different from blast furnace solids
unless the charge includes scrap with a significant fraction of tramp metals,
especially zinc and lead.  These elements are undesirable in sinter destined
for a blast furnace.  Some have in the past advocated that all such scrap be
rejected.  Proper management might confine the tramp metal to a single col-
lection system and to scheduled times, permitting uncontaminated oxides to be
recycled.  Commercialized systems for purging tramp metals from waste oxides
are described in a previous section.
     There are alternatives.  One advocates using occasional cycles of an EAF
to drive off zinc and lead from agglomerates containing waste oxides, lime-
                               129
stone, and coal or coke breeze.     Others recommend that the waste oxides be
leached with acids such as waste pickle liquor, or with ammoniacal solutions
such as weak ammonia liquor from the coke by-product plant.         Some have
argued, however, that no process short of complete reduction can adequately
decontaminate the waste oxides, because some of the zinc is bound up in stable
mixed oxides of zinc and iron.

                                       197

-------
8.3.5  Rolling Mill Wastes
       Mill scale is conventionally recycled directly to the blast furnace,
and the finer sludge from the hot rolls usually goes to the sinter plant.
When this sludge is contaminated with hydraulic or lubricating oils, the
exhaust from the sinter plant is smokey.  A patent discloses that the smoke
arises near the feed end of the machine and that the smokey exhaust can be
                                                                  133
routed to another portion of the bed which acts as an incinerator.
     Pickling at various stages in the rolling mills was once performed with
sulfuric acid; neutralizing the waste acid usually produced an iron-bearing
calcium sulfate sludge.  Modern practice has largely swung over to hydro-
chloric acid, and there are commercial regeneration processes for the spent
acid.  But rinse waters still constitute a problem and neutralization of these
with lime produces a difficult suspension of iron values in a salty waste-
water.  A patented option is to contact the rinse water with an immiscible
hydrocarbon solvent, such as light oil in this industry, containing a dissolved
amine.
                                       198

-------
                                 REFERENCES


 1.  VemOsdell, D. W., D.  Marsland,  B.  H.  Carpenter, C. Sparacino, and  R.
     Jablin, "Environmental Assessment  of  Coke By-Product  Recovery Plants."
     U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, EPA 600/2-79-016, January  1979
 2.  Babor, J. and A.  Lehrman, General  College Chemistry,  Thomas Crowe!1 Co.,
     N.Y., 1952.
 3.  Directory of Iron and Steel  Works  of  the United States and Canada.  Ameri-
     can Iron and Steel  Institute, Washington, D. C.,  1977.

 4.  Summary of 1977 Effluent Guidelines,  Survey of Steel  Plants.  EPA  confi-
     dential data.

 5.  Varga, J., Jr., "Control of  Reclamation  (Sinter)  Plant Emissions Using
     ESP's."  U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, EPA 600/2-76-002, January
     1976
 6.  Standard and Poor's Industry Surveys.  Steel-Coal:  Basic Analysis.
     September 1977.

 7.  Bradford, C. A.,  Steel Industry Quarterly Review.  Merrill Lynch Report,
     May 1978.

 8.  Prices and Costs  in the United  States Steel Industry. Council on  Wage
     and Price Stability,  Washington, D. C., October 1977.

 9.  Annual Statistical Report for 1977.   American Iron and Steel  Institute,
     Washington, D.C., 1978.

10.  Standard and Poor's Industry Surveys.  "Steel-Coal":  Current Analysis,
     June 1978.
11.  Arthur D. Little, Inc. "Steel and  the Environment:  A Cost Impact  Analysis—
     A Report to the American Iron and  Steel  Institute."   A.D.L.,  Inc.,  C-805
     27, May 1978.

12.  Securities and Exchange Commission, Form 10-K Reports, 1977.

13.  Moody's Industrial News Reports.   April, May, June 1978.

14.  "The Ratios of Manufacturing (Blast Furnaces, Steel Works, Rolling Mills),"
     Dun's Review, December 1977.

15.  Berney, B. W., "Hazardous Waste Listings:  Fully  Integrated Steel  Mills."
     U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, May 1978.
16.  Leonard, R. P., "Assessment  of  Industrial Hazardous Waste Practices in
     the Smelting and  Refining Industry,"  Vol. Ill, Ferrous Smelting and
     Refining, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-SW 145 c.3,  1977.
                                       199

-------
17.  Carpenter, B. H.s et al.   "Pollution Effects  of Abnormal  Operations  in
     Iron and Steel Making, Vol.  2:   Manual  of Practice—Sinter  Plant,"
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/2-78-1186,  January  1978.
18.  McGannon, H. E., The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel,  9th  Ed.,
     Pittsburgh, U. S. Steel,  1971.
19.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Development Document for  Interim
     Final Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Proposed New Source Performance
     Standards for the Forming, Finishing, and Specialty Steel,"  EPA  440/1-
     76-048-b, March 1976.
20.  Pasztor, L. and S. B. Floyd, Jr., "Managing and Disposing of  Residues
     from Environmental Control Facilities in the  Steel Industry," U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 600/2-76-267, October  1976.
21.  Katari, V. S., R. W. Gerstle, and T. Parsons, "Industrial Process Pro-
     files for Environmental Use," The Iron and Steel Industry,  Chap.  24.
     EPA-6002-77-023X, 213 pp., February 1977.
22.  Vandergrift, A. E. and L. J. Shannon.  "Particulate Pollution Systems
     Study," U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,  APTD-0745, May 1971.
23.  British Steel Corporation.  "The Arising and Treatment of BSC In-Plant
     Fines," Swinden Laboratory., Moorgate, Rotherham, 1975.

24.  Saito, Y. "Direct Reduction Process for Recycling Steel-Plant Waste
     Fines,"  Ironmaking Proc., 34_, 464  (1975).
25.  Goksel, A. "Recovery of Iron, Zinc, and Lead from EOF Dust  and Other
     Steel-PIant By-Products," Ironmaking Proc., 30, 126 (1971).
26.  Barnard, P. G. et al.  "Recycling of Steelmaking Dusts,"  Proc. 34th
     Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, U.S. Dept. of Interior,  Bureau
     of Mines, Chicago, 1972, p. 63.
27.  Brinn, D. G.  "A Review of the Literature Concerning the Steel Industry
     and  Pollution," I Background, June  1974.
28.  Wetzel, R. and Meyer, G. "Processing of Steelworks Dust and Slurry,"
     Operation of  Large BOF's. ISF Publication #139, 1971, pp. 44-51.

29.  Dressel, W. M. et al.  "Pre-reduced  Pellets from  Iron and Steelmaking
     Wastes," AIME Preprint 73-B-82,  Chicago meeting, 1973.
30.  British Steel Corp.,  "Recycling  of  Steel Plant Waste Materials," Steel
     Research 1974, British Steel Corporation, 1975.
31.  West, N. G.,  "Recycling Ferrogerious  Wastes," Iron Steel  Int.. 49(3), 1973

32.  George, H. D. and E.  B. Boardman.   "The  IMS-Grangcold Process for
     Agglomerating Steel-Mi11. Waste Material,"  Granges Ore News. Oct. 73,
     p. 13.
33.  Jablin, R. et al.  "Pollution Effects of Abnormal Operations in  Iron
     and  Steelmaking - Vol. Ill,  Blast Furnace Ironmaking, Manual  of  Practice,"
     EPA-600/2-78-118C, June 1978.
                                       200

-------
34.  Lu, W. K. (ed.), "Waste Oxide Recycling in Steel  Plants,"  McMaster Sym-
     posium on Iron and Steelmaking,  McMaster University,  Hamilton,  Ontario,
     May 1974.
35.  Coy, D. W. et al.  "Pollution Effects  of Abnormal  Operations  in Iron
     and Steelmaking - Vol.  VI,  Basic Oxygen Process,  Manual  of Practice,"
     EPA-600-2-78-118f, June 1978.

36.  Personal Communication  with J. Grubbs,  EPA Permits Division,  November 1978.

37.  Personal Communication  with D. Gill, U.  S.  Department of Commerce,
     November 1978.
38.  U. S. Environmental  Protection Agency.   "Development  Document for Effluent
     Limitations Guidelines  and  New Source  Performance Standards for Steelmaking,"
     EPA-440/l-74-024-a,  June 1974.

39.  Evans, J. R. "Slag-Iron and Steel," Bureau of Mines Minerals  Yearbook,
     U.S. Department of the  Interior, 1976.

40.  Personal Communication  with E. Young,  Solid Waste Committee,  American
     Iron and Steel Institute, November 1978.

41.  Varga, J. "Control of Steel  Plant Scarfing Emissions  Using Wet  Electro-
     static Precipitators."   U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency, EPA 600/
     2-76-054, March 1976.

42.  Conner, J. R. "Ultimate Liquid Waste Disposal  Methods,"  Plant Engineering,
     October 19, 1972.
43.  Pittsburgh Office, Pennsylvania  Department of Environmental Resources,
     October 1978.

44.  Mantell, C. L., Solid Wastes: Origin,  Collection, Processing and Disposal.
     John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1975.

45.  Etta, C. F., Water and  Wastewater Residue Management  Study -  Allegheny
     County, Pennsylvania.   The  Chester Engineers,  Coraopolis,  Pa.,  1978.

46.  Personal Communication  with Edward C.  Levy Co.,  Detroit, MI,  October 1978.

47.  Weant, George E. and M. R.  Overcash, "Environmental Assessment  of Steel-
     making Furnace Dust  Disposal  Methods,"   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency,
     EPA 600/2-77-044, February  1977.

48.  Collins, R. J. "Availability of  Mining  Wastes  and Their  Potential For
     Use as Highway Material," Federal  Highway Administration,  FHWA-RD-76-107,
     May 1976.

49.  "The Prevalence of Subsurface Migration of Hazardous  Chemical Sub-
     stances at Selected  Industrial Waste Land Disposal Sites," U.S. Environ-
     mental Protection Agency, EPA 530/SW-634, October 1977.
50.  "Procedures Manual for  Groundwater Monitoring at Solid Waste  Disposal
     Facilities," U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, EPA 530/SW-611,
     August 1977.
                                       201

-------
51.  "Draft Report on Pollutant Evaluation and Effects  for the  Solvent
     Refined Coal Liquefaction Process," EPA Contract 68-02-2162,  May 1978.
52.  Public Law 94-580, October 21, 1976.
53.  Solid Waste Disposal Facilities, Proposed Classification Criteria,  EPA,
     Federal Register, February 6, 1978, Part II.
54.  Report of the National Technical Advisory Committee to the Secretary
     of the Interior, Water Quality Criteria, Federal Water Pollution Control
     Administration, Washington, D. C., April 1968.

55.  International Standards for Drinking Water,  3rd Ed., WHO,  Geneva, 1971.
56.  Permit Application Data, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
     Resources, Pittsburgh, PA.

57.  National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations, EPA Federal
     Register, Vol. 40, No. 248-Wednesday, December  24, 1975.
58.  Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste Practices in the  Metal Smelting
     and Refining Industry, Volume IV, U.S. Environmental Protection, EPA-SW
     145 c.4, 1977.

59.  Prices and Costs in the United States Steel  Industry, The  Council on
     Wage and Price Stability, Washington, D.C.,  October 1977.
60.  Personal Communication with Mike Sydlik, Greene Engineering,  Pittsburgh,
     PA, December 20, 1978.

61.  Agarwal, J. C., H. W. Flood, R. A. Gilberti,  "Preliminary  Economic  Analysis
     of Pollution Control Systems in Metallurgical  Plants," Journal  of Metals.
62.  Geswin, A. J., "Liners for Land Disposal Sites," U.S. Environmental Pro-
     tection Agency, EPA 530/SW-137, March 1973.

63.  Building Construction Cost Data 1978, 36th Edition, Robert Snow Means
     Company, Inc., 1977.
64.  Weiss, Samuel, Sanitary Landfill Technology,  Pollution Technology Review,
     No. 10, Noyes Data Corporation, Park Ridge,  N.J.,  1974
65.  Pavoni, J. L., J. E. Heer, and D. J. Hagerty,  Handbook of  Solid Waste
     Disposal Materials and Energy Recovery, Van  Nastrand Reinhold,  1975, New York.

66.  Metry, A., and F. L. Cross, "Leachate Control  and  Treatment," Environmental
     Monograph Series, Vol. 7, Technomic, Westport,  CO, 1976.
67.  "Processed Blast Furnace Slag," National Slag  Association, NSA 178-1.
68.  "Steel Furnace Slag—An Ideal Railroad Ballast," National  Slag Association,
     Washington, D. C., NSA 173-3.
69.  Emery, John J., "New Uses of Metallurgical Slags," Can. Min.  Metal!. Bul-
     letin, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario,  Decembe'r 1975.

70.  Harris, M. H. "The Use of Steel Mill Waste Solids  in Iron  and Steel-
     making," 86th General Meeting of the American  Iron and Steel  Institute,
     New York, May 24, 1978.
                                       202

-------
71.  Personal Communication,  Mr.  J.  S.  Young  of Reclasource Corp.,  Chicago,  IL.
     January 1979.
72.  Literature provided by Mr.L.  L.  French,  President of Pelletech Corp.,
     625 Stanwix St., Pittsburgh,  PA 15222.

73.  Brinn, D. G., "A Survey  of the  Published Literature  Dealing  with  Steel
     Industry In-Plant Fines  and Their  Recycling."   British Steel  Corp.,
     PB-236 359, August 1974.

74.  Literature Provided by Mr.  W. A. Obenchain,  Obenchain Corporation,
     Pittsburgh, PA., January 1979.
75.  Kreiger, J. W. and C.  E. Jablonski,  "Red Dust  Turned Into Usable
     Product," Pollution Engineering, 3(61),  1978.

76.  West, N. 6., "Recycling  Ferroginous  Wastes:  Practice and Trends."
     Iron and Steel International, June 1976.

77.  "New DR Plant at Chiba Works,"  Iron  and  Steel  Engineer, April  1978.

78.  Personal Communication,  Mr. T.  Katakabe,  Manager, Technical  Control,
     Kawasaki Steel Corp.,  January 1979.

79.  Personal Communication,  Dr. T.  Araki, Technical  Service Manager,
     Sumitomo Metal America,  Inc., January 1979.

80.  Personal Communication,  Mr. T.  Tanaka, Nippon  Kokan  K.K., January 1979.

81.  "Steel Firms Eye Dust  to Pellet System,"  Energy User News, August 8, 1977
     as cited in Reference  1.
82.  Rausch, H. and H. Serbent.   "Beneficiation of  Steel  Plant Waste Oxides
     by Rotary Kiln Processes."   Paper  presented at Sixth Mineral  Waste
     Utilization Symposium, Chicago,  IL., May 2-3,  1978.

83.  Personal Communication,  Don Beggs, Midrex Corporation, Charlotte, NC,
     January 1979.
84.  Holowaty, M. D., "A Process for Recycling of Zinc-Bearing Steelmaking
     Dusts."  Paper presented at Technical Meeting  of AISI, Chicago, IL,
     October 1971.

85.  "Steel Industry Sludge is Being Reused," Environmental Science and
     Technology. 9_, July 1975.

86.  Ruthner, J. J. and Othmar Ruthner, "25 Years of Process Development
     in Hydrochloric Acid Pickling and  Acid Regeneration," AISE Convention,
     Chicago, IL, 1978.
87.  EPA, Metallurgical Process Branch, "Recovery of Spent Sulfuric Acid
     from Steel Pickling Operations," U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency,
     EPA 625/2-78-017.

88.  Wadhawan, S. C., Iron  and Steel  Engineer, October 1978, pp.  48.

89.  Ostrowski, E. J., "Recovery and Use  of Ferrous Scrap from Municipal
     Refuse," AFS Transactions. 85J111),  1977.


                                       203

-------
 90.   "Worldwide Steel  Industry Looks  to  Alternative  for  Coking  Coal,"
      33 Metal  Producing,  January 1977.

 91.   Miller, J. R., "Paxton Discusses All-Coal  Integrated  Steel  Plant at
      the 7th C. C. Furnas Memorial  Conference,"  I  &  S  Magazine,  October 1977.
 92.   Gold, B., "Steel  Technologies  and Costs  in- the  United States and Japan,"
      Iron and Steel Engineer, April  1978.

 93.   "Though Relatively New, Tuyere Injection Is Taking  Important Role in
      Iron Production," 33 Metal  Producing,  March 1977.
 94.   Keenan, G. F. and Morrson,  D.  M., "A Current  Look at  Pulverized Coal
      Injection for Blast Furnaces," Iron and  Steel Engineer, October 1977.

 95.   "Innovation and New Technology Still Mark Japanese  Steel  Industry,"
      33 Metal  Producing,  February 1977.
 96.   Miller, J. R., "Global Status  of Direct  Reduction - 1977,"  Iron and
      Steel Engineer, September 1977.
 97.   Williams, C. H.,  "Superheating for  Energy and Material Conservation
      in Basic Oxygen Steelmaking,"  Iron  and Steel  Engineer, June 1977.
 98.   Deily, R. L., "Casting Raw Steel -  USA," I  &  S  Magazine,  September 1977.
 99.   "Model Concept Mini  Steel Plant Announced for the Pittsburgh Area,"
      Iron and Steel Engineer, September  1978.
100.   "Worldwide Steel  Industry Looks to  Alternative  for  Coking  Coal," 33.
      Metal Producing,  January 1977.
101.   U.S. Patent Office, "Index to the U,.S. Patent Classification," Washington,
      D. C., Superintendent of Documents, 1977.
102.   U.S. Patent Office, "Manual of Classification," Washington, D. C., Super-
      intendent of Documents, 1967.
103.   Field, L. I., and B. E. Lanham, "U.S.  Patent  Office Classification
      Definitions:  Class 75, Metallurgy," Rev.l; Washington, D.  C., Super-
      intendent of Documents, 1967.
104.   Kreiger, J. W. and C. E. Jablonski  (to Bethlehem  Steel),  U.S. 4,003,736
      of January 18, 1977; "Method for Preparing Dry-Collected  Fume for Use
      In Metallurgical  Furnaces," Cl. 75/3.
105.   Kreiger, J. W. (to Bethlehem Steel), U.S. 4,004,916 of January 25, 1977;
      Method for Agglomerating Wet-Collected Fume for Use In Metallurgical
      Furnaces, And Agglomerates Produced Thereby," Cl.75/3.
106.   Turkdogan, E. T.  (to U.S. Steel) U.S.  3,985,550 of  October 12, 1976;
      "Method of Producing Low-Sulfur Steel,"  Cl.75/60.
107.   Yoshida, H. (to Aikoh Co.), U.S. 4,076,522 of February 28, 1978;'"Molten
      Iron Desulfurization Method," Cl. 75/58.
108.   Jablin, R. , U.S. 4,050,884, "Slag Waste On Slag  Quenching Heat  Boiler."
                                       204

-------
109.  Kuntz, J. B., and A.  A.  Spinola  (to  U.S. Steel), U.S. 3,785,292 of
      September 11, 1973.
110.  Rehmus, F. H. (to Jones  and  Laughlin), U.S. 3,900,304 of August 19,  1975;
      "Method of Reducing H2S  Emissions  During Slag Quenching," Cl. 65/19.

111.  Hauser, K. V. and L.  A.  Paulsen  (to  E. C. Levy Co.), U.S. 3,941,585  of
      March 2, 1976; "Process  for  Cooling  Slag and Inhibiting Pollutant
      Formation," Cl.  75/24.

112.  Kuntz, J. B and  A. A. Spinola  (to  U.S. Steel), U.S. 3,761,243 of
      September 25, 1973; "Method  of Quenching Slag," Cl. 75/24.

113.  Nagata, T. (to Nippon Steel),  U.S. 3,938,975 of February 16, 1976,
      "Treatment of Blast Furnace  Slag." Cl. 65/19.

114.  Smyers, W. H. and E.  H.  Manny  (to  Esso Research) U.S. 3,249,402 of
      May 3, 1966; "Recovery of Sulfur From Blast Furnace Slag," Cl. 23/224.
      (Probably reclassified at Cl.  423).
115.  Osborne, F. and  S. P. Kinney (to S.  P. Kinney Engineers), U.S. 3,738,820
      of June 12, 1973; "Method and  Apparatus for the Processing of Molten
      Slag," Cl. 65/19.
116.  Tobias, 6. S. (to Envirotrol), U.S.  3,823,010 of July 9, 1974; "Elimina-
      tion of H2S From Slag Quenching,"  Cl. 75/24.

117.  Massey, M. J. and R.  W.  Dunlap (to Standard Slag), U.S. 3,897,231 of
      July 29, 1975; "Method for Contacting Hot, Viscous, Molten Slag With
      Gaseous Reactants," Cl.  65/19.
118.  Selmeczi, J. 6.  et al, (to Dravo), U.S. 3,920,795  of November 18, 1975;
      "Stabilization of Sludge Slurries,"  Cl. 423/242.

119.  Miller, A. L. (to Koppers),  U.S. 4,009,024 of February 22, 1977;  "Process
      for Regeneration and  Reuse of  Steelmaking Slag," Cl. 75/30.
120.  Miyashita, Y. (to Nippon Kakan), U.S. 4,102,675 of July 25,  1978; "Method
      for Treating Molten Slags in Steelmaking Process," Cl. 75/30.

121.  Cappell, F. (to  Dravo) U.S.  4,067,727 of January 10, 1978; "Sintering
      Process," Cl. 75/5.

122.  Kusner, R. E., and R. W. Muthig  (to  Republic Steel), U.S. 4,063,930  of
      December 20, 1977; "Preparation  of Weatherable Ferrite Aggregates,"
      Cl. 75/3.

123.  Fishburn, R. A.  and F. E. 6. Ravault (to Foseco),  U.S. 4,015,979  of
      April 5, 1977; "Bonding  of Particulate Materials," Cl. 75/25.
124.  Joseph, R. T. (to FMC),  U.S. 3,996,  108 of December 7, 1976; "Briquetting
      of Reactive Coal Calcinate With  High-Temperature Coke-Oven Pitch,"
      tl. 201/6.

125.  Joseph, R. T. and J.  Work  (to  FMC),  U.S. 3,725,034 of April  3, 1973;
      "Method of Producing  Cargon- and Iron-Containing Briquettes," Cl. 75/4.

126.  Maurice, H. W.,  and J. K. Pearce (to PECOR), U.S.  3,948,644  of April 6,
      1976; "Steelmaking Vessel With Dust-Recycling Method and Means,"  Cl. 75/25.

                                      205

-------
127.  Hodge, A. L. and M. P. Fedock (to  Republic Steel),  U.S.  3,721,548 of
      March 20, 1973: "Treatment of Iron-Containing  Particles,"  Cl. 75/25.
128.  Claflin, H. B. (to Kaiser Steel),  U.S.  3,928,023  of December 23, 1975;
      "Method of Treating Off-Gases From Iron Processes," Cl.  75/60.

129.  Ban, T. E. (to McDowell-Wellman),  U.S.  3,262,771  of July 26, 1966;
      "Recovery of Steel and Zinc From Waste  Materials,"  Cl. 75/11.
130.  Barnard, P. G. et al, (to U.S.D.I.),  U.S.  3,676,107 of July  11, 1972;
      "Refining Iron-Bearing Wastes,"  Cl.  75/109.
131.  Kupfer, R. (to Vol Roll AG), U.S.  4,018,680  of April  19, 1977;  "Process
      for Separating Iron, Zinc, and Lead  from Flue  Dust  and/or  Flue  Sludge,"
      Cl. 210/50.

132.  Peters, M. A. (to Hazen Research), U.S. 4,071,357 of January 31, 1978;
      "Process for Recovering Zinc from  Steel-Making Flue Dust," Cl.  75/103.
133.  Cappel, F. (to Metal!gesellschaft  AG),  U.S.  3,857,694 of December 31, 1974$
      "Process for Burining Hydrocarbons and  Cracked Products  in Exhaust  Gases
      from Sintering Machines," Cl. 75/5.
134.  Aue, A. I. et al, (to Gullspangs Electr. AB),  U.S.  3,824,161 of July 16,
      1974; "Method of Extracting Metallic Chlorides,"  Cl.  423/139.
135.  Strassburger, J. H., General  Meeting of the  American Iron  and Steel
      Institute, New York, May 21, 1958.

136.  Labee, C. J., "Sliding Bed HC1 Regeneration  Process," Iron and  Steel
      Engineer, September 1977, p. 91.
                                       206

-------
                                 INDEX
Acid regeneration, 156
Aggolomeration processes, 148

Bast furnace 8, 40, 166
Basic oxygen process, 8, 42

Capacity, steelmaking, 13
Coke, 36, 91, 141
Continuous casting, 11, 44, 180

Direct reduction, 151, 173
Disposal, 84, 130
Dusts, 38, 81, 96, 199
Dumping, 111, 130
Economics, industry, 14
Economics, current disposal,  86,  123
Economics, RCRA,  115, 119, 132
Electric arc, 10, 44
Endangerment, 88
External desulfurization, 168
Extraction testing, 90

Finishing operations, 10, 46, 49
Flood plains, 138
Fuel injection, 167

Generation factors, 51, 53,  71
Groundwater quality, 90, 100, 133
Groundwater monitoring, 103,  116

Hazardous wastes, 32, 114, 134
Hydrogeology, 99

Iron oxides, 40,  59, 147, 195

Lagoons, 76, 122
Landfill costs, 120
Landfill sites, 120, 136
Leachate, 90, 99, 116
Leachate treatment, 114, 120
Liners, landfill, 114, 135

Miscellaneous wastes, 82, 97
Model plant, 7, 33
Model landfill, 120
Oil, 100, 106, 154
Open hearth, 33, 180

Patents, 192
Pickle liquor, 46, 83, 156, 197
Pollution, air, 71
Pollution, water, 73, 90
Pollution, groundwater, 88
Process changes, 161, 163, 181
Regional waste treatment, 64, 65
Recycle processes, 64, 141
Resource conservation, 35, 64,  140
                       186
RCRA, 3, 88, 113, 130

Safety, 138
Scale, 81
Scrap metal, 160, 176
Shaping, 10
Sinter, 8, 38
Slag, 42, 52, 58, 77, 94, 142,  192
Sludge, 79, 95, 195
Sulfur, 168, 194
Surface runoff, 136

Tar, coke, 6, 91, 141
Waste classification, 32, 56
Waste quantities, 55
Waste, listing of, 53, 55
                                      207

-------
                                TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                         (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO. SW-740
 EPA-600/2-79-074
            3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
 Environmental and Resource Conservation Consider-
 ations of Steel Industry Solid Waste
            5. REPORT DATE
            April 1979
            6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
 V.H.Baldwin, M.R.Branscome, C.C.Allen,
 D. B. Marsland, B. H. Carpenter, and R. Jablin
                                                      8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
3. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
                                                      1O. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
 Research Triangle Institute
 P.O. Box 12194
 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
            2DB662, 1AB604, and 1BB610
            11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

             68-02-2612, Task 73
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 EPA, Offices of Research and Development
 and Solid Waste
 Washington, DC  20460
            13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD CC
            Task Final; 5/78 - 2/79
                                                                            COVERED
            14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
             EPA/600/13
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES EPA project off leers: John Ruppersberger (IERL-RTP, 919/541-
 2733); William J. Kline (Office of Solid Waste,  202/755-9120).
  ABSTRACT
              repOrt examines the solid wastes generated by the iron and steel indus-
 try relative to the impact of Section 4004 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
 Act.  The quantities , properties , and origin of wastes which pose a potential problem
 are identified using  flow diagrams , material balances ,  and generation factors . Of
 the estimated 140 million metric tons of solid waste (including inplant mill scrap)
 generated annually,  80% is either recycled or reused.  Waste disposal practices are
 discussed, and the potential for groundwater pollution has been identified. The capi-
 tal cost to collect leachate from nonhazardous wastes which could potentially endan-
 ger the groundwater was estimated to increase the current landfill costs by 40%;
 however , this cost was less than 1% of the estimated future overall environmental
 cost.
17.
                             KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                DESCRIPTORS
                                          b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                        c.  COS AT I Field/Group
 Pollution              Leaching
 Iron and Steel Industry
 Resources            Earth Fills
 Conservation         Circulation
 Waste Disposal
 Water Pollution
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Solid Waste
13B
11F,05C
15E
14G
13C
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

 Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report/
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
    224
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
                         22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
                                         208

-------
"Environmental and Resource                                               EPA-600/2-79-074
Conservation Consideration of                                             SU-740
Steel Industry Solid Waste"                                               September 1979


                                       ERRATA SHEET

Page                                          Correction
                        Change Table 41 title to:  "Permissible Criteria for Selected
                        Components for Public Water Supplies."

  9                     Change last sentence of 2nd paragraph to:  "This blast furnace
                        slag is currently used primarily as road bed and construction fill."

 10                     Below Figure 2 title add:  "(General College Chemistry, 3rd
                        Edition, p. 542, by J.A. Babor and A. Lehrman.  (T.Y. Crowell)
                        Copyright 1929, 1940, 1951 by Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc.
                        Reprinted by permission.)"

 20                     To Figure 7 title add: '©Rand McNally & Company, R.L. 79-Y-77."

 33                     In next to last sentence of 1st paragraph insert "in" between
                        "waste" and "relation."

 34                     Change last sentence of 3rd paragraph to:  "...industry will be
                        only slightly increased by compliance with anticipated air and
                        water regulations."

 91                     Substitute revised Table 41, attached.

 95                     In 2nd sentence of third paragraph change "In each" to "For each."
                        Then add "This causes concern for the potential for groundwater
                        endangerment . "

                        Change last sentence of 4th paragraph to: "...in Table 46 may
                        require the use of a lined landfill wherever the leachate may
                        endanger the groundwater."

114                     Between the two sentences .of the 3rd paragraph add:  "This causes
                        concern for the effect of leachate on the groundwater."  Change
                        the next sentence to "...have been identified in the extract of
                        some of the various iron and steel wastes at concentrations
                        greater than the permissible critieria."

                        In the 2nd sentence of the 4th paragraph, change "would" to
                        "could."

131                     In Table 63  footnote change "Excluded" to "Included."

132                     In Table 65 title change "Excluded" to "Included."

152                     Below Figure 24 title add:  "(M.M. Harris, "The Use of Steel Mill
                        Waste Solids in Iron and Steelmaking."  Copyrighted by American
                        Iron and Steel Institute, 1978. Reprinted by permission.)"

164                     Below Figure 25 title add:  "(Iron and Steel Maker, October 1977)."



                                         Page 1 of 2

-------
"Environmental and Resource                                               EPA-600/2-79-074
Conservation Consideration of                                             SW-740
Steel Industry Solid Waste"                                               September 1979


                                       ERRATA SHEET

Page                                          Correction
 171-173                  Below Figure 26,27,  and 28 titles add:   "(Proceedings:  Symposium
                         on External Desulfurization of Hot Metal.  Reprinted by permission
                         McMaster University.)"

 178                      Below Table 75 add:   "(Iron and Steel Engineer,  September  1977)."

 207                      Substitute revised Index, attached.

 208                      Substitute revised Technical Report Data form, attached.
                                          Page
                                               2 of 2

-------
           TABLE 41.   PERMISSIBLE CRITERIA FOR SELECTED COMPONENTS
                       FOR  PUBLIC MATER SUPPLIES.

    Constituent                                Permissible Criteria (mg/fc)

    pH                                            6.0-8.5b
    Arsenic                                        0.05a'b
    Barium                                        1.0a'b
    Cadmium                                        0.010a'b
    Chromium                                      0.05a'b
    Fluoride                                      1.2  (63.9-70.6°F)b
    Iron (filterable)                             0.3b
    Lead                                          0.05a'b
    Manganese (filterable)                        0.05
    Selenium                                      0.01a»b
    Silver                                        0.05a'b
    Total  dissolved solids                       500.Ob
    Zinc                                          5.0b
    Carbon chloroform extract                     0.15
    Cyanide                                        0.2b
    Oil and grease                               Virtually absent
     Phenols                                       0.001b
    Mercury                                       0.002a

     aNational Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations
     bWater Quality Criteria, Department of Interior, FWCPA54

7.3.2  Water Extraction of Solid Waste Materials
       Water extraction tests were reported by six plants to  PDER (Code A, B,
E, F,  6, and H) as well as from an EPA survey58 (C) and ASTM15 (D).   These tests
differ from the proposed EPA Extraction Procedure in that distilled water was
used,  whereas the proposed EPA procedure uses a limited amount of acetic acid
for pH control.  Higher levels of heavy metals are expected from these tests
when acetic acid is used.  The ASTM leachate values were reported by Enviro
Control15 with additional ASTM testing provided by AISI.  Although ASTM
tested the wastes with several different types of water, only the 48 hour
                                      91

-------
                                  INDEX
Acid regeneration, 157
Aggolomeration processes, 148

Bast furnace 9, 39, 167
Basic oxygen process, 10, 43

Capacity, steel making, 14
Coke, 37, 92, 141
Continuous casting, 12, 45, 181
Direct reduction, 151, 174
Disposal, 85, 133
Dusts, 39, 82, 97, 197
Dumping, 111, 133
Economics, industry, 15
Economics, current disposal, 87, 124
Economics, RCRA, 114, 120, 132
Electric arc, 11, 45
Endangerment, 89
External,desdulfurization, 169
Extraction testing, 91

Finishing operations, 50
Flood plains, 138
Fuel injection, 168
Generation factors, 52, 54, 73
Groundwater quality, 90, 101, 133
Groundwater monitoring, 101, 116

Hazardous wastes, 33, 114, 135
Hydrogeology, 100
Iron oxides, 60, 147, 196

Lagoons, 77, 123
Landfill costs, 120
Landfill sites, 120, 137
Leachate, 90, 100, 117
Leachate treatment, 114, 122
Liners, landfill, 114, 136

Miscellaneous wastes, 83, 98
Model plant, 8, 34
Model landfill, 120
Oil, 95, 101,  155
Open hearth, 34, 181

Patents, 192
Pickle liquor, 47, 84, 156, 198
Pollution, air, 72
Pollution, water, 74, 90
Pollution, groundwater, 90
Process changes, 162, 182

Regional waste treatment, 65, 66
Recycle processes, 65, 140
Resource conservation, 36, 65, 140
          185
RCRA, 2, 33, 89, 114, 133

Safety, 139
Scale, 83
Scrap metal,  161, 179
Shaping, 11
Sinter, 9, 40
Slag, 41, 43,  53, 59, 78, 94, 142
     195
Sludge, 80, 95, 96,  196
Sulfur, 169,  195
Surface runoff, 137

Tar, coke, 6,  92, 141
Waste classification, 33, '57
Waste quantities, 56
Waste, listing of, 54, 56
                                   207

-------
                               TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                         (Fteose nad Imamctions on the revene before completing)
1. REPORT NO. SW-740
 EPA-600/2-79-074
                          2.
                                                      . RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
 Environmental and Resource Conservation Consider-
 ations of Steel Industry Solid Waste
                                                      i. REPORT DATE
                                                      April 1979
                                                     ft. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
 V.H.Baldwin, M.R. Brans come, C.C.Allen,
 D. B. Mars land, B. H. Carpenter, and R. Jablin
                                                       PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
J PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
 Research Triangle Institute
 P.O. Box 12194
 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
                                                      10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                                                      2DB662, 1AB604, and 1BB610
                                                      11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                                                       68-02-2612, Task 73
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS - COSpOTlSered  D/
                     EPA, OSW (WH-565)
                     401 M Street SW
                     Washington, DC  20460
EPA, ORD
IERL (MD-62)
&TP, NC 27711
                                                      13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                                      Task Final; 5/78 - 2/79
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
 EPA/600/13
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES EPA prOJCCt
 John Ruppersberger t IERL-RTP(MD-62),919/541-2733
 Bill Kline . Office of Solid Waste (WH-565).  202/755-9202
                                                                                  :
i« ABSTRACT Ti)e report examines the solid wastes generated by the iron and steel indus
try relative to the impact of Section 4004 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act. The quantities, properties, and origin of wastes which pose a potential problem
are identified using flow diagrams, material balances, and generation factors. Of
the estimated 140 million metric tons of solid waste (including inplant mill scrap)
generated annually, 80% is either recycled or reused. Waste disposal practices are
discussed, and the potential for  groundwater pollution has been identified.  The capi-
tal cost to collect leachate from nonhazardous wastes which could potentially endan-
ger the groundwater was estimated to increase the current landfill costs by 40%;
however, this  cost was less than 1% of the estimated future overall environmental
cost.
17.
                             KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                DESCRIPTORS
                                          b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                                                                   E.  COSATI Field/Group
 Pollution             Leaching
 Iron and Steel Industry
 Resources            Earth Fills
 Conservation         Circulation
 Waste Disposal
 Water Pollution
                                          Pollution Control
                                          Stationary Sources
                                          Solid Waste
             13B      07D,07/
             11F,05C
             15E        13C
             14G
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

 Unlimited
                                          19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisRtport)
                                          Unclassified
             21. NO. OF PAGES
                 224
                                          20. SECURITY CLASS (This pagtj
                                          Unclassified
                                                                   22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (»-7»)
                                         208

-------