Gypsum Wallboard

LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS OF GYPSUM BOARD AND ASSOCIATED FINISHING PRODUCTS

Prepared by: George J. Venta, P. Eng. VENTA, GLASER & ASSOCIATES

Ottawa, Canada March 1997

DISCLAIMER Although the ATHENATM Sustainable Materials Institute has done its best to ensure accurate and reliable information in this report, the Institute does not warrant the accuracy thereof. If notified of any errors or omissions, the Institute will take reasonable steps to correct such errors or omissions.

COPYRIGHT No part of this report may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission of ATHENATM Sustainable Materials Institute. Text  1997 ATHENATM Sustainable Materials Institute

ATHENATM Sustainable Materials Institute 112 Brock St. East, P.O. Box 189 Merrickville, Ontario, Canada K0G 1N0 Tel: 613-269-3795 Fax: 613-269-3796 E-mail: [email protected]

The Athena TM Project: Gypsum Board and Associated Finishing Products

CONTENTS PREFACE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1.0

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Research Guidelines ................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Study Structure........................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Report Structure.......................................................................................................... 1-3

2.0

GYPSUM INDUSTRY - AN OVERVIEW..................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Industry Structure....................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Gypsum and Gypsum Board...................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.2 Gypsum Fiberboard.................................................................................................... 2-4 2.1.3 Gypsum Building Plasters.......................................................................................... 2-4 2.1.4 Joint Finishing Products............................................................................................. 2-5 2.2 Gypsum Board Manufacturing................................................................................... 2-6 2.2.1 Extraction 2-6 2.2.2 Calcination Plant......................................................................................................... 2-8 2.2.3 Gypsum Board Plant ................................................................................................ 2-11 2.2.4 Types of Gypsum Board Produced .......................................................................... 2-13 2.3 Gypsum Fiberboard.................................................................................................. 2-15 2.3.1 Gypsum Fiberboard Manufacturing ......................................................................... 2-15 2.3.2 Types of Gypsum Fiberboard Produced................................................................... 2-17 2.4 Gypsum Building Plasters........................................................................................ 2-17 2.4.1 Gypsum Building Plasters Manufacturing................................................................ 2-17 2.4.2 Types of Plasters Produced ...................................................................................... 2-19 2.5 Joint Finishing Products Manufacturing................................................................... 2-20 2.5.1 Ready Mix Joint Compound..................................................................................... 2-20 2.5.2 Dry (Setting) Joint Compound ................................................................................. 2-22 2.5.3 Products Statistics..................................................................................................... 2-23 2.5.4 Joint Paper Tape ....................................................................................................... 2-23 2.6 Gypsum Industry, Energy and Environment............................................................. 2-23 2.6.1 Energy Use and Efficiency ....................................................................................... 2-24 2.6.2 Atmospheric Emissions ............................................................................................ 2-25 2.6.3 Liquid Effluent.......................................................................................................... 2-26 2.6.4 Solid Waste .............................................................................................................. 2-26 2.6.5 Recycling 2-27 References 2-28


3.0

Raw Material Requirements and Transportation........................................................ 3-1 3.1 Raw Material Requirements - Gypsum Board ........................................................... 3-1 3.2 Raw Materials Transportation - Gypsum Board ......................................................... 3-3 3.3 Raw Material Requirements - Finishing Products...................................................... 3-6 3.4 Raw Materials Transportation - Joint Finishing Products........................................... 3-7

4.0

Energy Use - Gypsum Board ........................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Raw Material Extraction and Transportation............................................................... 4-1 4.2 Gypsum Board Manufacturing................................................................................... 4-4 4.3 Finished Gypsum Board Transportation..................................................................... 4-7 4.4 Gypsum Board - Energy Summary ............................................................................ 4-9 4.5 Energy Use in Gypsum Fiberboard (GFB) Production............................................ 4-12 References 4-14

5.0

Energy Use - Finishing Products .................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Joint Finishing Products Raw Material Extraction and Transportation ....................... 5-1 5.2 Joint Finishing Products Manufacturing..................................................................... 5-5 5.3 Joint Finishing Products Transportation..................................................................... 5-9 5.4 Joint Finishing Products - Energy Summary............................................................ 5-11 References 5-19

6.0

Atmospheric Emissions - Gypsum Board...................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Approach .................................................................................................................. 6-1 6.2 Atmospheric Emission Estimates................................................................................ 6-2 6.2.1 Raw Materials Extraction............................................................................................ 6-2 6.2.2 Raw Materials Transportation..................................................................................... 6-4 6.2.3 Gypsum Board Manufacturing................................................................................... 6-4 6.2.4 Finished Gypsum Board Transportation..................................................................... 6-7 6.3 Atmospheric Emissions Summary.............................................................................. 6-9 References 6-20

7.0

Atmospheric Emissions - Joint Finishing Products..................................................... 7-1 7.1 Atmospheric Emission Estimates................................................................................ 7-1 7.1.1 Raw Materials Extraction............................................................................................ 7-1 7.1.2 Raw Materials Transportation..................................................................................... 7-2 7.1.3 Joint Finishing Products Manufacturing..................................................................... 7-5 7.1.4 Finished Associated Products Transportation............................................................. 7-7 7.2 Joint Finishing Products Atmospheric Emissions - Summary.................................... 7-9 References 7-19


8.0

Liquid Effluents ............................................................................................................... 8-1 8.1 Liquid Effluent Estimates - Gypsum Board................................................................ 8-1 8.1.1 Raw Materials Extraction............................................................................................ 8-1 8.1.2 Gypsum Board Manufacturing................................................................................... 8-3 8.2 Liquid Effluent - Gypsum Board Summary................................................................ 8-6 8.3 Liquid Effluent Estimates - Finishing Products .......................................................... 8-6 8.3.1 Joint Compounds........................................................................................................ 8-6 8.3.2 Joint Paper Tape ......................................................................................................... 8-6 References 8-13

9.0

Solid Wastes .................................................................................................................. 9-1 9.1 Solid Wastes Estimates - Gypsum Board................................................................... 9-1 9.1.2 Raw Materials Extraction............................................................................................ 9-1 9.1.2 Gypsum Board Manufacturing................................................................................... 9-2 9.1.3 Total Solid Waste Due to Gypsum Board Production................................................ 9-2 9.2 The Use of Wastes in Gypsum Board Processing...................................................... 9-3 9.3 Solid Wastes Estimates - Finishing Products ............................................................. 9-5 References 9-5

Preface This report was commissioned as part of the continuing program to expand the knowledge base of the ATHENA project. The project was initiated in 1990 by Forintek Canada Corp., with the support of Natural Resources Canada, under the name Building Materials in the Context of Sustainable Development. Work on the ATHENATM project is now being carried forward by the ATHENATM Sustainable Materials Institute, a not-for-profit organization dedicated to helping the building community meet the environmental challenges of the future. The ultimate goal is to foster sustainable development by encouraging selection of the material mix that will minimize a building’s life cycle environmental impact. To achieve that goal the Institute is developing ATHENA, a systems model for assessing the relative life cycle environmental implications of alternative building or assembly designs. Intended for use by building designers, researchers and policy analysts, ATHENA is a decision support tool which complements and augments other decision support tools like costing models. It provides a wealth of information to help users understand the environmental implications of different material mixes or other design changes in all or part of a building. The ATHENATM Institute is continuing the practice of publishing all individual research reports and major progress reports to make the process as transparent as possible and to ensure the research and results are fully accessible. To ensure continuity, previously published reports are being reissued as part of the Institute series. Institute studies and publications fall into two general categories: investigative or exploratory studies intended to further general understanding of life cycle assessment as it applies to building materials and buildings; and individual life cycle inventory studies which deal with specific industries, product groups or building life cycles stages. All studies in this latter category are firmly grounded on the principles and practices of life cycle assessment (LCA), and follow our published Research Guidelines which define boundary or scope conditions and ensure equal treatment of all building materials and products in terms of assumptions, research decisions, estimating methods and other aspects of the work. The integration of all inventory data is a primary function of ATHENA itself. ATHENA also generates various composite measures that can be best described as environmental impact indicators, a step toward the ultimate LCA goal of developing true measures of impacts on human and ecosystem health. We believe this report and others in the series will be of value to people concerned with the environmental implications and sustainability of our built environment. But we caution that individual industry life cycle study reports may not be entirely stand-alone documents in the sense that they tell the whole story about an individual set of products. For example, the report on concrete notes how much steel is used for reinforcing various products, but the life cycle inventory data for those steel products is included in the reports dealing with integrated and mini-mill steel production. There are also transportation and energy production and distribution aspects that are common to many different building projects, and are therefore handled separately within ATHENATM. Please contact us at the address shown on the Disclaimer/Copyright page at the front of this report for more information about the ATHENATM Sustainable Materials Institute, or for other reports in the series.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Forintek Canada Corp. would like to acknowledge Natural Resources Canada for its funding contribution to the ATHENATM Sustainable Materials Project. In addition, Forintek would like to thank all of the research alliance members for their timely work, their assistance and their enthusiasm for the project.

The life cycle study described in this report was carried out by VENTA, GLASER & ASSOCIATES under Forintek Canada Corp. Contract. The author gratefully acknowledges their support. Special thanks go to the managers of the ATHENATM Project, Wayne Trusty of Wayne B. Trusty & Associates Limited and Jamie Meil of JKM Associates for their enthusiasm and guidance. We wish to thank all the major gypsum companies in Canada - CGC INC., DOMTAR GYPSUM, and WESTROC INDUSTRIES LTD. - for their trust and cooperation in providing the necessary data input. Thanks are especially extended to the following individuals for their valuable contributions: Brian Colbert Robert Daly Gerry Harlos Mike Hunter A. Marchand David Shanahan Francis Vrillaud Rick Weber

W.R. Grace & Co. of Canada Ltd. Ontario Hydro Domtar Gypsum CGC Inc. The Beaver Wood Fibre Company Ltd. Westroc Industries Ltd. Domtar Gypsum CGC Inc.

We also want to acknowledge the following provincial and regional authorities and their representatives for their input: Michel de Spot Serge Goulet Bernard Matlock Don Murray Jean Van Dusen Simon Wong

Greater Vancouver Regional District Quebec MOE&F Nova Scotia DOE New Brunswick DOE Manitoba Environment Ontario MOEE

Finally, we want to express our thanks to the GYPSUM ASSOCIATION, to Bob Wessel and Jerry Walker, for their support, willingness to review this study and to provide us with their comments.


1-1

LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS OF GYPSUM BOARD AND ASSOCIATED FINISHING PRODUCTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents cradle to gate life cycle inventory estimates for gypsum board and associated finishing products, and explains how the estimates were developed. The work was commissioned by the ATHENATM project as part of the continuing series of life cycle studies being done to support the ATHENATM environmental decision support tool described in the Preface. ATHENATM relies on life cycle inventory databases, termed unit factors, which include estimates of raw material, energy and water inputs as well as atmospheric emissions, liquid effluents and solid wastes outputs per unit of product. The estimates encompass production activities from raw materials extraction (e.g. gypsum quarrying) through product manufacturing, including related transportation. We have also provided estimates of typical or average transportation modes and distances for the distribution of finished products from relevant manufacturing facilities to the six regions covered by the computer model. The estimates presented in this report were developed by Venta, Glaser & Associates with the assistance and cooperation of the Gypsum Association and its member companies.

1.1

RESEARCH GUIDELINES

To ensure consistent and compatible approaches by the different alliance members, all estimates had to be prepared in accordance with a set of research guidelines first issued in October 1992 and subsequently revised as work proceeded. This research protocol defined information requirements and procedures for the study, such as the following: • • • • • • •

the specific building products; the content of general and detailed industry descriptions; the specific energy forms, emissions and effluents of potential interest; the treatment of secondary building components and assemblies; preferred data types and sources (e.g. actual industry data and data from process studies); the analysis scope, including system boundaries and limits and the level of detail of the analysis; geographic divisions;


• •

1-2

transportation factors to be included when estimating transportation energy use; and a set of standard conventions for dealing with such aspects as non-domestic production, process feedstocks, in-plant recycling and multiple products.

In addition, the research guidelines provided a set of conversion factors and tables of standard factors for calculating energy contents and emissions by fuel type. The analysis limits established for the project in the guidelines are similar to a Level II analysis for energy studies as determined by the International Federation of Institutes of Advanced Studies. These limits typically capture about 90% to 95% of the full impacts of an industry. The life cycle analysis framework, additional unit factors and related impact studies are discussed in detail in the Phase III Summary Report. The Research Guidelines are available under separate cover as part of the full set of project reports and we have not, in this report, duplicated that material by explaining the rationale for all steps in the research and calculation process. For example, the Research Guidelines require that empty backhauls be included when calculating transportation energy use in certain circumstances. Our calculations therefore show the addition of such backhaul mileages without explaining why backhauls should be included. However, we have provided full explanations wherever our calculations do not conform to the guidelines because of data limitations or for other reasons.

1.2

STUDY STRUCTURE

The systems model requires unit factors for the following specific gypsum boards and associated finishing products: • • • • • • • • • • • • •

1/2" regular gypsum board, 5/8" regular gypsum board, 1/2" Type X (fire-resistant) gypsum board, 5/8"" Type X (fire-resistant) gypsum board, 1/2" moisture-resistant (MR) gypsum board, 5/8" moisture-resistant (MR) gypsum board, 5/16" mobile home gypsum board, 1" shaftliner board, 1/2" gypsum fiberboard (GFB), 5/8" gypsum fiberboard (GFB), drying type ready-mixed joint compound, setting type dry joint compound, and paper joint tape.


1-3

Gypsum board and associated jointing products are essential building materials for the Canadian residential, commercial, industrial and institutional housing industries, and we had to fully analyze the gypsum industry before developing unit factors for these products. That fact dictated how our study was structured. Unit factor estimates for the Canadian gypsum board industry were developed and are expressed in terms of material inputs or waste outputs per unit of product. Similar estimates were then developed for the jointing materials required to apply and finish gypsum board-based systems. These two sets of factors have to be combined in the ATHENATM computer model to develop the desired estimates for a specific board application. The analysis procedures and calculations are described in detail in the relevant sections of this report. The key point at this stage is that the study was structured as two separate, but obviously related, analysis streams — one for gypsum board and one for the jointing products of interest.

1.3

REPORT STRUCTURE

The arrangement of this report basically parallels the study structure. Section 2 of the report provides the background information regarding the industry within the framework of the Canadian economy. It discusses in some detail the industry structure, manufacturing processes, types of gypsum board and associated products manufactured and used in Canada. The fact that gypsum board is a composite material, and that its production consists of three distinct and separate manufacturing steps [i.e. partial dehydration (calcination) of gypsum to stucco, paper (to be used as gypsum board facings) manufacturing, and production of gypsum board itself through combination of stucco and paper] affects the discussion of the manufacturing process. Section 2 also introduces the major aspects of the industry with respect to energy consumption and environment, and highlights some of the achievements in this area. Sections 3 through 9 deal with various aspects of raw material balances, energy consumption and environmental issues of the production of the gypsum board as well as the associated joint finishing products. As indicated below, the basic progression in each part involves an overview section followed by a series of sections dealing with each of the environmental impact areas (e.g. raw material use, energy use, emissions, etc.) Results are presented to show regional variations and, as necessary, by production stage (e.g. resource extraction, raw materials transportation, manufacturing and finished products transportation). The following regional breakdown was followed in the study: • • •

West (British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan); Central (Manitoba and Ontario); and East (Quebec and Atlantic Provinces).


1-4

The Research Guidelines prefer separate information for the West Coast and Prairie regions. However, we had to combine these two regions into one, West region, in order to maintain the confidentiality of data provided by manufacturers: there are only two plants on the West Coast and two plants on the Prairies. The report is organized as follows: Section 2

presents an overview profile of the gypsum industry in Canada, including a description of the different production processes, the industry structure in geographic, process and capacity terms, and the general nature of resource and energy use, emissions and other wastes for both the gypsum board and the associated joint finishing materials.

Section 3

details raw material use by the gypsum board industry on a regional basis, and discusses raw material transportation requirements.

Section 4

describes the gypsum board energy use analysis and presents the results, with sub-divisions by region and by stage of production.

Section 5

describes the energy use analysis for associated finishing products and presents the results, with sub-divisions by region and by stage of production.

Section 6

deals with atmospheric emissions associated with gypsum board production on a regional basis by production stage, including the analysis method and results.

Section 7

deals with atmospheric emissions generated by production of associated finishing products on a regional basis by production stage, including the analysis method and results.

Section 8

focuses on liquid effluents associated with production of gypsum board and associated finishing products.

Section 9

deals with solid wastes generated by production of gypsum board and associated finishing products.

At the end of each section, a summary of all the developed unit factor estimates is presented.


2.0

2-1

GYPSUM INDUSTRY - AN OVERVIEW

This section provides an overview of the gypsum board and associated finishing products industry in Canada. It provides basic information on the structure, size, production volumes and geographical distribution of the industry, and its position within the framework of the Canadian minerals as well as construction industries. The basic manufacturing processes for the production of gypsum board, joint compounds, and joint paper tape, are shown and described. Related energy use and efficiency issues, as well as emissions, effluents and waste outputs are also briefly discussed as an introduction to a more detailed description of these aspects and the development of the appropriate unit factors in subsequent sections.

2.1

INDUSTRY STRUCTURE

2.1.1 Gypsum and Gypsum Board Canada has abundant sources of natural gypsum, a relatively soft rock-like mineral that was deposited in ancient seas. Chemically, gypsum is calcium sulfate dihydrate (CaSO4•2H2O) and Canada is the third largest producer of crude gypsum in the world, after the U.S.A. and China, generating about 7.3% of the total annual production of this mineral. In 1994, Canadian shipments of crude gypsum were about 8,110,000 t valued at over $91-million.1 A substantial portion of this production, over 70%, is exported, mainly to the U.S. markets. In Canada, almost 2.5 million tonnes of gypsum were used in 1994. Over 70% of gypsum quarried or mined in Canada comes from Nova Scotia, with the rest originating in Ontario, Manitoba and British Columbia. On the West Coast, some gypsum rock is imported from Domtar Gypsum’s co-owned San Marcos Island deposits in the Baja California area of Mexico. In the U.S., and we assume in Canada as well, about 71 to 75% of gypsum is used in the production of gypsum board, about 2 to 3% for building and industrial plasters, about 14 to 17% in the cement industry, where it is interground with clinker to control cement set, and the remaining 9% in agriculture.2 While natural gypsum represents at this time the overwhelming portion of the Canadian gypsum supply, chemical gypsums are starting to be considered as options to natural gypsum. Synthetic gypsums are most often a by-product of flue gas scrubbing (desulfurization), although co-products of various chemical processes, such as titanium dioxide (TiO2) gypsum, are possible candidates for gypsum board production as well. Synthetic gypsums’ availability and use are new to Canada. Although chemical gypsums have been used overseas for some time, the abundant sources of quality gypsum on this continent were not conducive to a similar practice in Canada or the U.S.A.3 In 1995 a major gypsum board operation, Westroc’s Mississauga plant, switched from gypsum rock to FGD gypsum, a by-product of flue gas desulfurization, from Ontario Hydro’s Lambton Thermal Power Generating Station. This was


2-2

the first such conversion in Canada. It is reported that Westroc’s Montreal plant is also supplementing natural gypsum with FGD by-product gypsum originating from the NYSEG’s (New York State Electric & Gas Corporation) operations in upper New York state. Further, about 230,000 tonnes of marketable FGD gypsum/year will be available shortly from New Brunswick Power Corporation’s Belledune Generating Station 3. Recently CGC started to use some TiO2 byproduct gypsum in its Montreal plant. It is estimated that up to 8-10% of Canadian gypsum board capacity was poised to use non-traditional, by-product sources of gypsum beginning in early 1996. Within the last fifty years, gypsum board, also popularly known as drywall or plasterboard, has become the dominant product for finishing interior walls and ceilings in residential, commercial and institutional buildings. More than 95% of interior walls in Canada and the U.S.A. are finished using this inexpensive building material.3 In 1994, more than 267-million m2 of gypsum board were produced in Canada.4 Quoting the Gypsum Association, Canadian board capacity at the 1994 year end was 345-million m2, which would indicate 77% capacity utilization.2 The total annual North American gypsum board production capacity is 2.7 x 109 m2, or 9.8 m2 per capita, the highest in the world.5,2 In Canada, gypsum board is produced in all provinces with the exception of Prince Edward Island and Saskatchewan. There are three major companies producing gypsum board: CGC Inc., Domtar Gypsum, and Westroc Industries Limited. CGC Inc. is about 75% owned by USG Corporation, the largest gypsum products manufacturer in the world, while Westroc is a part of the BPB family of companies, the second largest gypsum products producer in the world. Domtar Inc. recently announced an agreement to sell its gypsum division to Georgia-Pacific Corporation.6 Typically, a substantial share of Canadian board production, especially from the Quebec and Ontario plants, is exported to New England, New York and Michigan, with some occasional exports to countries like Denmark, Czech Republic, Cuba, Hong Kong, and Brazil as well as to the Middle East. Most of the gypsum board manufacturers are large, vertically integrated operations mining or quarrying their own gypsum rock, and producing not only a range of board products, but most of the associated joint finishing materials as well. While gypsum products manufacturers also often own and operate their own paper mills in the U.S., this is not the case in Canada. Facing papers for gypsum board are made in Canada by only two independent producers, Beaver Wood Fibre Co.’s plant in Thorold, ON, and CPL Paperboard Ltd. in Burnaby, B.C. The rest of the paper needs of the Canadian gypsum board manufacturers are supplied from the U.S.A. Table 2.1 shows the gypsum mining and gypsum board manufacturing operations, and their locations.


2-3

TABLE 2.1: GYPSUM MINING AND GYPSUM PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS, 1994 Company Newfoundland Domtar Inc. Atlantic Gypsum Nova Scotia Domtar Inc. Domtar Inc. Fundy Gypsum Company Limited Georgia-Pacific Corporation Little Narrows Gypsum Company Ltd. National Gypsum (Canada) Ltd. Louisiana-Pacific Corporation New Brunswick Westroc Industries Limited Quebec CGC Inc. CGC Inc. Domtar Inc. Westroc Industries Limited Ontario CGC Inc.

Location

Operation

Flat Bay Corner Brook

Open-pit mining, closed in 1994 Gypsum board manufacture

McKay Settlement Windsor Wentworth and Miller Creek Sugar Camp Little Narrows Milford Port Hawkesbury

Open-pit mining Plaster manufacture Open-pit mining Open-pit mining Open-pit mining Open-pit mining Gypsum fiberboard manufacture

McAdam

Gypsum board manufacture

Montreal St. Jerome Montreal Montreal

Gypsum board manufacture Gypsum board manufacture Distribution terminal only Gypsum board manufacture

Hagersville

Domtar Inc.

Caledonia

Westroc Industries Limited Westroc Industries Limited Manitoba Domtar Inc. Domtar Inc. Westroc Industries Limited Westroc Industries Limited Alberta Domtar Inc. Westroc Industries Limited British Columbia Domtar Inc. Domtar Inc. Westroc Industries Limited Westroc Industries Limited

Drumbo Mississauga

Underground mining and gypsum board manufacture Underground mining and gypsum board manufacture Underground mining, closed in 1995 Gypsum board manufacture

Amaranth Winnipeg Amaranth Winnipeg

Open-pit mining Gypsum board manufacture Open-pit mining Gypsum board manufacture

Edmonton Calgary

Gypsum board manufacture Gypsum board manufacture

Canal Flats Vancouver Windermere Vancouver

Open-pit mining Gypsum products manufacture Open-pit mining Gypsum products manufacture

Source: Adapted from Ref. (1)


2-4

2.1.2 Gypsum Fiberboard Gypsum fiberboard (GFB) is a product that is new to the North American markets, being introduced here in about 1990. GFB products were developed over the last 20 years in Germany, where the product has been quite successful, capturing about 20 to 25% of the total gypsum board market. There are a number of competing processing technologies. What all of these have in common is the fact that the finished board is “paperless”, that is, it does not have any paper facings as does the conventional gypsum board. Instead GFB consists of about 18% ground waste newsprint/magazine fibers uniformly dispersed throughout the gypsum matrix. It is this recycled paper fiber that provides the reinforcement of the matrix instead of the paper skins.17 The only North American GFB operating facility is Louisiana-Pacific’s plant in Port Hawkesbury, NS. The rated annual capacity of the plant using Carl Schenck’s AG technology is about 23million m2 per year, representing about 6.7% of the total gypsum board capacity. The plant’s strategic location allows shipping along the Eastern seaboard of the U.S. Market penetration in Canada appears to be limited at this time, and is perhaps more successful in non-traditional areas (for gypsum-based boards) such as 3/8" thick 4' x 4' sheets of floor underlayment than in competition with conventional gypsum board for wall and ceiling applications. L-P’s literature19 (October 1993) gives production volume as 6.5-million m2, which would indicate capacity utilization of only 28% at that time. The corresponding share of L-P’s FiberBond® GFB would be about 2.8% of the total Canadian gypsum board production and, as the bulk of the finished board is being shipped to U.S. destinations, their market share in Canada is expected to be even smaller.

2.1.3 Gypsum Building Plasters Gypsum building plasters applied over lath were used for centuries to finish interior wall and ceiling surfaces. However, about 30 or 40 years ago, gypsum board replaced plaster as the premier wall-cladding material due to its ease of application and economy factors. Plastering of the wall surfaces requires trained, experienced workers. Although plaster can provide a superior wall surface, these days only a fraction of walls are finished that way. Building plasters have been largely replaced by more economical and easier-to-apply gypsum board systems. Building plasters are formulated products that may contain, in addition to calcined gypsum (stucco), hydrated lime, talc, clay, various chemical additives and admixtures to control product set, handling and application characteristics. Some building plasters may also contain various aggregates: materials such as sand, woodfiber, vermiculite or perlite. While some building plasters are applied over gypsum lath or metal lath, more often veneer plasters are used in thin (1/16" to 3/32") coat applications over a special type of gypsum board for veneer plasters. One-coat as well as two-coat (base and finish coats) systems are available.


2-5

2.1.4 Joint Finishing Products Joint finishing products are an integral part of gypsum board systems. Their role is to finish the joint between the individual sheets of gypsum board in such a manner that even under critical lighting the whole wall (or ceiling) gives an impression of a monolithic surface. Typically a paper joint tape embedded in joint compound is used to “bridge” the joint. (In a relatively new development, some glass mesh tape has been used for the same purpose, especially by the "do-ityourself" market.) Additional application(s) of joint compounds are required to provide a smooth, uniform joint treatment. Joint compounds are highly formulated products consisting of 8 to 12 different raw materials to ensure a joint compound with the right application, performance and appearance characteristics. Although the basic composition of each type of compound is common to all brands within that type, different additives and admixtures make these brand formulations proprietary. Basically, there are two types of joint compounds on the market, • •

drying compounds, and setting compounds.

Drying compounds are usually calcium carbonate-based. The overwhelming majority are produced as “ready mix”, compounded with other ingredients, such as talc, mica, thickeners, resin/latex, perlite, preservatives, and water to produce creamy, easily spreadable paste. These compounds shrink upon drying, and there is, therefore, a need for further applications of the compound and “feathering” of the joint, with proper drying and sanding in between the applications, to obtain a satisfactory joint. Ready mix joint compound is usually applied in three coats. Gypsum board manufacturers specify about 67.4 kg of joint compound per 100 m2 of board (138 lb/MSF).20 (Similarly about 98 m of joint tape is used for 100 m2 of board (300'/MSF).) These amounts already account for small joint compounds and joint tape wastes during their application. Setting compounds are usually stucco-based and, therefore, come only in dry form. They are mixed with water only just prior to their application and, depending on their formulation, they typically then have a 45- or 90-minute “pot” life. As the hardening of these compounds is a chemical reaction rather than a physical one (drying), their shrinkage is substantially lower than that of the ready mix joint compounds. Due to their convenience, ready mix joint compounds are much more popular than the dry powder materials. According to Statistics Canada, 131,844 tonnes of ready mix compounds and 11,877 tonnes of dry powder compounds were produced in 1994.4 Joint compounds are produced and marketed by all three major gypsum board manufacturers, CGC Inc., Domtar Gypsum, and Westroc Industries Ltd. Louisiana-Pacific offers fiber filled ready mix compound compatible with their gypsum fiberboard. There are also a number of independent joint compounds producers, among them Synkoloid in Vancouver and Edmonton, Ontario Gypsum and Bondex in Toronto, Rayproc in Montreal, and Maritime Gypsum in New Brunswick.


2.2

2-6

GYPSUM BOARD MANUFACTURING

Gypsum board is manufactured in a two step process. In the first step finely crushed and ground gypsum, calcium sulfate dihydrate (CaSO4•2H2O), is heated and partially dehydrated (calcined) to calcium sulfate hemihydrate (CaSO4•1/2H2O), called stucco in the industry, also popularly known as “Plaster of Paris”. A unique characteristic of stucco is that when it is mixed with the proper amount of water, it forms a smooth plastic mass which can be molded into any desired shape. When the hardening has been completed, the mass has been chemically restored to its rock-like state. This characteristic has also been used in the development and production of gypsum board. In the second step of the manufacturing process stucco is mixed with a number of additives, foam and an excess amount of water to prepare gypsum slurry which is extruded on a fast moving, continuous board production line between two layers of special gypsum paper. “Raw” gypsum board is then allowed to fully hydrate - calcium sulfate hemihydrate is converted back to dihydrate before it is cut to the desired size and before it enters a “gypsum kiln”, where at elevated temperatures the excess water is driven off. The gypsum board is then stacked, ready to be shipped. The process is described in literature from a number of gypsum board manufacturers as well as equipment suppliers.7-12 The basic manufacturing steps are depicted in Figure 2.1 and summarized below: 2.2.1 Extraction Rock mining/quarrying

Gypsum rock is open pit quarried or (underground) mined, generally by drilling and blasting, then moved to a primary crusher close to the quarry/mine site. The primary deposits of high quality gypsum in Canada are found in the Atlantic provinces, where open-pit quarrying is used. The quarry process begins by first removing the earth over the deposit. Then gypsum rock is drilled and blasted loose to be carried to the processing plant where it is crushed and screened. The largest quarry in the world, National Gypsum's Milford NS operation produces up to 4.5-million tonnes of gypsum a year. Quarrying is also a primary extraction technique used in Manitoba and British Columbia. In south-western Ontario, gypsum is mined in underground mines. There, gypsum lies about 80 to 100 feet below ground level. The deposits lie in flat beds approximately 48" thick, interlayed with limestone. Either mine shafts driven straight into the ground or long sloping tunnels leading through the overburden of soil, clay and limestone rock are used to access the gypsum strata. From there extend “streets”, separated from each other by pillars of rock left to support the roof of the mine. Domtar’s #3 mine in Caledonia recently went to a continuous mining technology using electrically powered machines to cut the rock in place, thus eliminating the use of any explosives. Front-end loaders, diesel-powered shuttle cars, trucks, hoists and conveyor belts are all used in various quarrying and mining operations.


gypsum rock (mined or quarried)

crusher

2-7

screen gypsum bin

or

hammer mill

by-product gypsum (FGD or TiO2) screen Raymond mill

continuous kettle calciner

H2O additives

stucco bin

face paper

back paper

board knife

pin mixer

board kiln

stacking, bundling gypsum board to warehouse & shipping

Fig. 2.1

Flow diagram of a typical gypsum board plant using continuous kettle calcination (adapted from Refs. 7, 8, 9).


2-8

Primary crushing

In the primary crusher, gypsum rock is reduced to approximately 2" - 5" or less in size. From here the crushed rock can be sent to secondary crushing and conveyed directly to the mill, it can be stockpiled, or, as is the situation in most cases because quarry and the production facilities are usually not in the same location, it can be shipped by ship, rail or truck to the manufacturing plant. In Canada only CGC’s Hagersville plant and Domtar’s Caledonia one are located directly on the mine. 2.2.2 Calcination Plant Secondary crushing, drying, milling

After primary crushing, gypsum rock may be sent through the dryers. Normally gypsum rock has 1-3% free moisture content (quarry water). At this moisture content level, it may by-pass the dryer. However, if the moisture content is higher (typically up to 10%), as is often the case if the material has been stockpiled outside, some drying in directly heated rotary dryers is needed in order to reduce moisture to below the 3% level. Secondary crushers, typically hammermills, reduce the rock further to about 1" in diameter. Baghouses are preferred to collect fine particulate matter, although some plants may use electrostatic precipitators or cyclones. These operations usually take place at the plant site. In most of the processes the crushed rock is fed to the roller or other type of mill, where its size is further reduced so that 90% will pass through a 150 µm sieve. The resulting form of gypsum is called landplaster, referring to one of its possible uses. In some processes (Imp Mills, for example) calcination and grinding can be accomplished simultaneously and, in such a case, no prior grinding is required. Rock drying/grinding consumes ~6% of the total energy required to produce gypsum board (not counting energy needed to produce paper skins for the board).13 Other sources of gypsum

Quarried or mined gypsum represents the bulk of the gypsum supply and consumption. However, there are two additional sources of raw gypsum that can be used: waste gypsum (board) and industrial by-product gypsum. The term waste gypsum is understood to mean internally generated plant waste and, more recently, also new construction waste collected and brought back to the manufacturing facilities, primarily in the Vancouver and Toronto metropolitan areas. (No gypsum plants accept any demolition waste due to possible contamination.) When waste gypsum board is used, it has to be broken down, chopped and crushed. A variety of different equipment and techniques are used: Norba crushers appear to be the most efficient and favoured ones. In some cases a portion of paper / paper fibers is removed or screened from the waste gypsum stream. Typically, the gypsum board plants that recycle waste gypsum board use up to about 20% waste in their gypsum stream. Unless prevented by some technical reasons, producers like to do so, as it makes not only environmental, but also economic sense.


2-9

Use of by-product, chemical gypsum is new to the North American continent. In the U.S., by-product gypsum represented only 3.6% of the total gypsum supply in 1994.2 In Canada, Westroc is the first gypsum board producer to use FGD gypsum on any significant scale starting in 1995. Flue gas desulfurization (FGD) gypsum Growing awareness of the environmental damage caused by SO 2 emissions and the resulting acid rain, followed by legislative actions, spurred research and development of a large number of FGD processes. Wet FGD processes are the most popular and the only processes that have the potential to produce board-grade gypsum. These processes are well established and have been implemented at many Japanese and German utilities, and increasingly in North American ones as well. Wet FGD processes use lime or limestone and may or may not produce gypsum co-product. The calcium sorbent reacts with SO 2 to produce calcium sulfite hemihydrate, which can be oxidized to calcium sulfate dihydrate (gypsum). The production of FGD gypsum has four stages: Stage 1 — Desulfurization: The dedusted flue gas is sprayed into a washing tower with a limestone suspension in a counterflow operation. The primary purpose of desulfurization is accomplished by eliminating the SO 2 from the flue gas. The calcium sulfite thus obtained occurs as a sludge in the quencher of the washing tower. Stage 2 — Forced Oxidation: Conversion of the calcium sulfite sludge into gypsum is achieved through its oxidation in the quencher of the FGD reaction vessel using atmospheric oxygen. First, the highly insoluble calcium sulfite reacts with further SO2 to produce calcium bisulfite, easily soluble in water, that subsequently reacts spontaneously with atmospheric oxygen blown into the reactor to produce calcium sulfate dihydrate, i.e. gypsum. This second stage is the operation that leads to the conversion of waste sulfite into a product: FGD gypsum. In the course of this stage, the gypsum crystals increase markedly in size, up to an average of 50 µm. Stage 3 — Gypsum Separation: Large crystals of a desirable size are separated by means of hydrocyclone and collected in a separate vessel. Stage 4 — Washing and Dewatering: Finally, in the last stage, the gypsum crystal suspension is filtered or centrifuged, and the gypsum cake is washed with clean water to remove water soluble substances, especially chlorides, sodium and magnesium ions. Dewatering to less than 10% moisture is achieved by means of vacuum filters or centrifuges. The FGD gypsum thus obtained is a product chemically identical with natural gypsum. FGD gypsum is a salable, commercial grade gypsum suitable for gypsum board manufacturing or any other applications calling for gypsum.


2-10

Processing of by-product gypsum by gypsum board producers poses challenges of its own. Due to its very fine particle size and residual moisture, handling of by-product gypsum can be difficult. Even if modern filtration presses and centrifuges are used for dewatering, gypsum’s moisture content is in the 8 to 10% range when delivered to the gypsum board plants. Typically, by-product gypsum has to be dried prior to its calcination using a flash dryer or a fluidized bed dryer, requiring a major modification/up-grade of the existing natural gypsum handling operation. Drying of byproduct gypsum with 10% moisture content requires about 0.55 GJ of thermal energy and 0.04 GJ of electrical energy per tonne.14 Calcination

Calcination is perhaps the most important step of the gypsum processing and gypsum board manufacturing process. During the calcination, gypsum that in its dihydrate form contains 21% by weight of chemically bound water is heated and converted to stucco, calcium sulfate hemihydrate: heat

CaSO4 • 2H2O ———> CaSO4 • 1/2 H2O + 1 1/2 H2O Although different types of equipment are available for calcination of gypsum, calcination kettles that can be operated in either batch or continuous mode are the most commonly used equipment in North America. To produce gypsum board stucco, continuous calcination kettles are usually used with a throughput of 300 to 500 tonnes a day. Although several designs are available, the basic principle involves an externally heated cylindrical vessel with a height greater than its diameter, enclosed within a refractory shell and complete with stirrer, flues and internal baffles. Kettles can be fired by coal, oil, or gas. Gypsum (landplaster) is fed into the kettle from the top. Heat is introduced from a firebox below and flows upward around the vessel. In submerged combustion kettles, a modern type of a continuous kettle, a tube is installed so that combustion gases are discharged into the calcining mass. The kettle contents boil violently, as chemically bound water is released as steam at around 120°C. Heavier stucco tends to settle at the lower section of the kettle from where it is continuously discharged through a plunging tube into a hot pit where cooling occurs. In practice due to the inability to heat all the particles of gypsum uniformly, the dumped stucco will often contain small amounts of uncalcined gypsum as well as of completely dehydrated anhydrite. The modern continuous calcination kettles require about 0.9 GJ to 1.0 GJ of energy per tonne of finished stucco.15 In older, less energy-efficient kettles, the energy consumption can be as high as 1.3 GJ/tonne. Corresponding electrical energy requirements are given as between 0.01 GJ/tonne and 0.03 GJ/tonne. Calcination consumes ~27% of the total energy required to produce gypsum board13, and represents the second most energy-intensive step of the gypsum board manufacturing process. Other types of calciners can be used, but lag in popularity behind the continuous calcination kettles. At one time, counter-current direct heating rotary kilns, similar to those used in Portland cement manufacturing, were used by the gypsum industry. Due to the improved design and energy


2-11

efficiency of the calcination kettles, most of the rotary kilns in the gypsum industry were replaced. Now only Atlantic Gypsum in Corner Brook is using such a kiln. Domtar Gypsum is using Imp mills (flash calciners with simultaneous impact hammermill grinding) in some of its operations, and Louisiana-Pacific’s gypsum fiberboard operation in Port Hawkesbury employs a Claudius Peters flash calciner that incorporates a ring ball grinder in its design. The energy efficiency of rotary kilns is similar to large continuous kettles, while that of flash calciners is reported to be slightly better. Raymond mill, stucco bins

After stucco has cooled it is elevated to bins from where, in some plants, it is fed to a Raymond Mill for further grinding to get the fineness needed. In the Raymond Mill stucco is ground by rolls running centrifugally against the stationary outer ring. 2.2.3 Gypsum Board Plant The layout of a gypsum board plant is usually U-shaped with the board line from the paper roll stands to the board cut-off knife forming one side of the U, the transfer station its bottom, and the board dryer returning parallel to the board line its other side.11 Mixing

Stucco for gypsum board production is blown from the supply bins (or mill) to the board plant. The amount of stucco is metered and fed to the stucco feed system. Dry board additives and admixtures such as starch, accelerator, retarder, and other ingredients depending on the type of board being made, are conveyed and blended with the stucco in a mixing screw conveyor. The blended dry materials, water with premixed liquid additives such as water reducers, and pregenerated foam are fed directly into the pin mixer, and the resulting slurry is deposited in a number of streams on the paper as it starts to form the board. To achieve the right fluidity of the slurry, a volume of water in excess of the amount needed for complete hydration has to be used. (This excess “water of convenience” will later be driven off during the drying process.) Two small edge mixers are often used to prepare and deposit higher density slurry for the board edges, to improve their strength and handling properties. Paper

Gypsum board is frequently described as a sandwich, with gypsum in its core and paper as its facings. Making the paper for gypsum board is as complex a process as making the gypsum board itself.9 The raw materials used are waste paper from newspaper, magazines, and old corrugated cardboard. Waste paper is fed by conveyor into a pulper, a large “blender” that disintegrates and dissolves the old paper into a pulp, a slurry of paper fibers. The paper slurry is then cleaned of various contaminants such as bailing wires, staples, glue and ink, before it is fed into the papermaking machine. Two types of paper making equipment, i.e. rotating cylinders or Fourdrinier flat wire machines, can be used to produce gypsum paper.


2-12

A cylinder machine rotates a large drum through a vat of pulp slurry. A wide felt belt passes over the top of the turning drum of a cylinder. The cylinder pulls the pulp up and presses it against the bottom of the felt, where it sticks to form a single ply of paper. It takes nine cylinder-made plies pressed together to make a single continuous sheet of gypsum board paper.9 The characteristics of the pulp entering the vats determine whether the system produces cream stock, called “ivory”, used for the face of the gypsum board or gray stock, which makes the back side. The Fourdrinier method uses two machines instead of nine to make a two-ply paper with the same performance characteristics as nine-ply, cylinder made paper. The pulp slurry is systematically fed onto a continuously running wire screen (the Fourdrinier). As the screen moves forward, water drains from the pulp to create the paper. One Fourdrinier machine makes the surface (top) ply, which may be cream or gray stock depending on the pulp mixture. The second machine produces the gray (bottom) ply. From this point, both systems operate in the same way. In the press section, the paper plies are pressed together to squeeze out the excess water. Next, they enter a series of high-temperature dryers where any remaining water is removed. The “bone dry” paper enters what is called a “calender stack”, where different chemicals or treatments are applied to the top and bottom surfaces to create the specific finishes required. For example, a dye and sizing agent will be added to the top surface to produce the moisture-resistant characteristics for the moisture resistant (“green”) board. The face and back paper each weigh about 45 to 55 lb/MSF. On the basis of one source16 that estimates the energy content of gypsum board paper prepared from recycled stock at about 25.4 GJ/tonne, we can extrapolate the related energy input into the finished gypsum board at about 12.4 MJ/m2 of board. Gypsum board line

The paper is placed on racks beside the pin mixer, where stucco slurry has been mixed with water. The racks run above and below the exit of the pin mixer, so that the stucco slurry can be sandwiched between the paper. The stucco slurry is then spread onto the ivory-coloured face paper on a moving belt and covered, or sandwiched, with the top paper, or “gray back”, to be formed into gypsum board at the master roll. As the board passes along the belt line the edges are formed, shaped and sealed. The proper identification is printed on the “gray back”. The long continuous sheet of gypsum board now travels about 200 to 275 meters on moving belts and roller conveyors while setting (hydrating). The long board line is needed to allow the slurry time (about four minutes) to harden before it is cut. By the time the end of the conveyor is approached, the stucco slurry has set; hydrated back to gypsum. Knife, transfer station

An automatic device trips a knife that cuts each board to the correct length. The individual boards are now transferred, inverted, turned over, stacked six or even eight layers high and sent slowly back to the drying kiln.


2-13

Gypsum board drying kiln

In the drying kiln, the excess amount of water introduced into the slurry mix in the pin mixer in order to have the slurry of the correct working characteristics, has to be driven off. Oil, gas or even electricity can be used as the source of heat in kilns. Drying of the gypsum board in the kiln consumes more energy than all the other steps of the gypsum board manufacturing process combined, representing ~67% of the total.13 The temperature and humidity in the kiln are closely controlled in three or four separate sections, first a lot of heat, then gradually less. After some 60 minutes of drying the board emerges at the “take-off” end of the machine where it is inspected, taped in two-panel bundles, stacked and taken to the warehouse, ready for shipment. 2.2.4 Types of Gypsum Board Produced The industry has developed and is producing a range of different gypsum boards for different applications. National Standard CAN/CSA-A82.27-M91 covers gypsum board, defines its various types and specifies their composition and special properties. The types of gypsum board covered include: • • • • • • • • • • •

gypsum board (regular gypsum board) type X gypsum board (fire-resistant gypsum board) vinyl-faced gypsum board foil-backed gypsum board gypsum backing board water-resistant gypsum board gypsum coreboard gypsum sheathing gypsum base for veneer plaster gypsum lath exterior gypsum soffit board

While some of the above boards, such as regular or type X, are produced in large volume, some of the other materials are specialties only. Furthermore, many of the above boards are made in different thicknesses: 1/2" and 5/8" gypsum board are among the more popular ones. Statistics Canada does not provide a detailed breakdown for the volume of different boards produced, distinguishing only between plain gypsum board, gypsum board covered with vinyl or other substances, and sheathing.4 U.S. statistics are published by USDI Bureau of Mines2, and the breakdown of various boards is more detailed. It states that of the prefabricated products, based on surface area, • • • • •

63% was regular gypsum board, 24% was fire-resistant type X gypsum board, 5% was 5/16" mobile home board, 3% was water- and/or moisture-resistant board, and the remaining 5% covered lath, veneer base, sheathing, predecorated, and other types of board.


2-14

Of the gypsum regular board, • •

82% was 1/2", and 10% was 5/8".

A detailed breakdown of gypsum board consumed in the U.S.A. is given in Table 2.2, and in the absence of similar Canadian data we will assume a similar split for Canada as well. TABLE 2.2: TYPES OF GYPSUM BOARDS SOLD OR USED IN THE U.S.A., 1994 Product

Lath: 3/8" 1/2" other

Thousand square feet

Thousand tonnes

Value [US $]

% (based on area)

6,886 137 5,867

4 > 0.5 5

1,410 24 407

0.0297 0.0006 0.0253

12,890

10

1,841

0.0556

Veneer base

419,149

374

36,667

1.8070

Sheathing

286,166

242

33,544

1.2337

Regular gypsum board: 3/8" 1/2" 5/8" 1" other (1/4", 7/16", 3/4")

918,125 11,885,323 1,466,834 172,079 128,872

711 9,357 1,225 155 101

69,102 1,487,447 57,282 31,905 16,470

3.9582 51.2395 6.3238 0.7419 0.5556

Total regular board

14,571,233

11,548

1,662,206

62.8189

5,526,219

5,157

460,985

23.8244

87,066

78

27,872

0.3754

1,226,687

843

117,345

5.2884

Water-resistant board

658,432

558

84,529

2.8386

Other

407,790

382

27,168

1.7580

23,195,632

19,192

2,452,158

100.0000

Total lath

Type X gypsum board Predecorated board 5/16" mobile home board

Grand total Source: adapted from Ref. (2)


2.3

2-15

GYPSUM FIBERBOARD

2.3.1 Gypsum Fiberboard Manufacturing The basic raw materials for the production of gypsum fiberboard in Louisiana-Pacific’s plant in Nova Scotia are local natural gypsum, waste newsprint/magazine stock from the U.S./Canadian east coast, and perlite from Greece or New Mexico.18 Various additives and admixtures such as lime, starch, accelerators, etc., are used as well. The board has a 3-layer composition: the surface layers contain paper fibers and stucco, the core layer also contains expanded perlite, which helps to control the board density by reducing its overall weight by 20 to 25%. Raw materials preparation

The basic material flow is shown in Fig. 2.2. The waste paper bales are transported to the plant site by barge. (The barge also takes the finished product back to the consumers in the more populated areas on the east coast.) The waste paper is broken down first in a shredder to 2" x 2" clippings. The hammermill reduces the particle size further to about 1" x 1" pieces, which are subsequently milled down to fibers and wetted. Perlite arrives by truck and is expanded in four parallel lines to about eight times its original volume. In a primary blender, perlite is mixed with water, and in a secondary blender wet fibers are added to wet perlite. Natural gypsum comes to the plant from the local Nova Scotia mine by rail.18 Gypsum rock extraction, preparation and calcination is done in a similar manner as for conventional gypsum board, and as discussed in Sections 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 above. Board forming and pressing

It is in the raw materials streams mixing, board forming and pressing, that GFB processing differs from gypsum board manufacturing. The process is considered to be “semi-dry”, the amount of water added to the raw materials (fibers and perlite) and on the line just before it enters the press is carefully controlled and is close to the theoretical amount needed for stucco hydration. The three layers and related three raw material blends are kept separate in handling and deposition on the line, and can be identified in the finished product. The forming station consists of three conveyor belts, one for each surface layer and one for the core layer. In each layer a weight-controlled layer of prewetted fibers or prewetted fibers and perlite is formed and a weight controlled layer of stucco is put on the top. Unmixed layers of wet and dry materials are conveyed to the mixing heads in front of the press, and spread onto the press belt. The board is produced in a continuous roller type COE Manufacturing (Washington Iron Works) press. The press is about 30 meters long, and the residence time of the board in the press is about 3 minutes. As the stucco setting characteristics are accelerated by means of additives, the initial board setting is finished before the board leaves the press.


gypsum rock (mined or quarried) or

crusher

2-16

screen gypsum bin

by-product gypsum (FGD or TiO2) Raymond mill

waste paper

paper shredding

screen

additives

Claudius Peters flash calciner

perlite

perlite expansion

moisture

stucco bin fiber mills

blending

spreading surface layers fibres

spreading centre layer fibres & perlite

mixing

mixing

cross cut saw forming belt

continuous press

stacking, bundling

GFB to warehouse & shipping

Fig. 2.2

board dryer

Flow diagram of a gypsum fiberboard (GFB) plant with a Claudius Peters flash calciner (adapted from Refs. 18, 34).


2-17

Board line, kiln dryer

After the press, the continuous ribbon of the “green board” is cut to 22- or 24-foot-long pieces using a high pressure water jet, and after about 15 minutes spent moving on the conveyor and completing the hydration in a manner similar to that of conventional gypsum board, GFB enters the first heating zone of an 8-deck Dornier dryer. The dryer has a screen belt as a carrier and jet nozzles to distribute the hot air evenly onto the boards. It has 17 heating zones, each individually controlled. The source of heating energy is propane gas. The residence time of the board in the kiln dryer is about 25 minutes, and the final board moisture content is about 0.8%. A finishing area for final trim and cutting, application of seal coat, stackers etc. follows the dryer.18 2.3.2 Types of Gypsum Fiberboard Produced Louisiana-Pacific is producing three types of gypsum fiberboard: • • •

1/4" and 3/8" FiberBond® GFB floor underlayment, 1/2" and 5/8" FiberBond® GFB exterior wall sheathing, and 1/2" and 5/8" FiberBond® GFB board.

As noted in Section 2.1.2, we estimate that all L-P’s FiberBond® GFB products combined have a 2.8% share of the total Canadian gypsum board production.

2.4

GYPSUM BUILDING PLASTERS

2.4.1 Gypsum Building Plasters Manufacturing As noted in Section 2.1.3, gypsum board largely replaced plaster as the premier wall-cladding material. Their market share in Canada is limited, and their manufacturing process is discussed here only briefly. Extraction, crushing, milling, calcination, stucco milling

The gypsum plasters manufacturing process, with the exception of final milling, formulating and bagging, is the same as that of gypsum board. Steps 1 through 5 of the gypsum board production, i.e. extraction and preparation of raw materials, their crushing and milling, and the calcination process with subsequent grinding in a Raymond mill, as described in Section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 are the same. (However, some gypsum facilities use separate production lines and smaller batch kettle calciners to give them more flexibility in producing plaster stucco. Another reason for a separate line is that the inclusion of paper fibers from the recycled gypsum board construction waste in building plasters is undesirable.) Fig. 2.3 shows a flow diagram of the gypsum plaster manufacturing process.


gypsum rock (mined or quarried)

crusher

2-18

screen gypsum bin

or

hammer mill

by-product gypsum (FGD or TiO2) screen tube mill

batch kettle calciner

additives

stucco bin

stucco bin

stucco bin

weighting / mixing belt

mixing & packing stations building and industrial plasters to warehouse & shipping

Fig. 2.3

Flow diagram of a gypsum building and industrial plasters manufacturing plant with a kettle calciner (adapted from Ref. 7).


2-19

Plaster Manufacturing - Grinding / Tube mill

Raymond mill stucco is passed through a tube mill. This is a long tube filled with iron balls of various sizes which grind the stucco to the required fineness. Plasters require stucco of higher surface area than gypsum board stucco. Additives / Plaster mixer / Packer

Plaster additives such as lime, talc, clays, and various admixtures regulating plaster set, are mixed with the tube mill stucco in the plaster mixer to produce plaster of the desired handling, application and performance properties. The building / veneer plasters (or industrial plasters) are then bagged in the packer and taken to the warehouse for shipment.3 2.4.2 Types of Plasters Produced The market for building/veneer plasters is small. Some gypsum manufacturers produce plasters in Canada, others bring them from the U.S. There is little information in the public domain regarding the size and regional distribution of veneer plasters in Canada. In the U.S.A. 553,000 tonnes of plasters were produced in 1994 vs. 19,200,000 tonnes of gypsum board.2 The above tonnage for plasters, however, is the total for building and industrial plasters, which normally split the total production in about a 60 to 40 ratio. Our estimate, based on some Gypsum Association breakdowns between different types of materials, is that in the U.S. the following volumes of different calcined gypsum products were produced in 1994 (Table 2.3). TABLE 2.3: CALCINED GYPSUM PRODUCTS SOLD OR USED IN THE U.S.A. IN 1994 Product

Volume [tonnes]

%

155,400 148,900 24,700

0.79 0.75 0.13

Sub-total Building Plasters

329,000

1.67

Sub total Industrial Plasters

224,000

1.13

Total Building and Industrial Plasters

553,000

2.80

Prefabricated Products (Gypsum board)

19,192,000

97.20

TOTAL CALCINED GYPSUM PRODUCTS

19,745,000

100.00

Regular Plasters Veneer Plasters Gauging Plaster & Keene's Cement

Source: adapted from Ref. (2)

In the absence of similar Canadian data we will assume that plaster products have a similar share of the market in Canada, athough there are some indications that they are used here even less than in the U.S. However, as the total of all building plasters represents only 1.67% of the total calcined gypsum products, we will omit them from development of detailed unit factor estimates, and concentrate instead on a variety of gypsum boards dominating the gypsum products markets.


2.5

2-20

JOINT FINISHING PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING

To apply gypsum board and to finish joints, drywall nails or screws are needed, as well as drywall tape and joint compound. Gypsum board manufacturers20 provide typical usage for these associated finishing products as follows: • • •

ready mixed joint compound: setting joint compound: paper tape:

67.4 kg/100 m2 35.2 kg/100 m2 98 m/100 m2.

Similarly, the approximate usage for various fasteners is as follows: • • • •

drywall nails 1 1/4": 2.20 kg/100 m2 1 5/8": 2.81 kg/100 m2 drywall screws 1 1/4": 2.07 kg/100 m2 1 5/8": 2.73 kg/100 m2.

2.5.1 Ready Mix Joint Compound Ready mix joint compounds represent over 90% of the total joint finishing materials used in Canada. Their formulas are proprietary, nevertheless they share the same major raw material components, and their development is as much an art as it is a science. An experienced formulator is critical to their success. Generic formulations used in the development of the unit factors in this study are shown later. The two main constituents of ready mix are: • •

water, acting as a vehicle, and calcium carbonate (CaCO3), finely ground limestone, functioning as a filler.

These two raw materials represent about 80 to 90% of the total composition. In some formulations a portion of limestone is replaced by gypsum. Other components whose share is above 2% (by weight) of the total can include: • • • •

talc, mica, specialty clays, such as attapulgite or kaolin, and resin (latex), usually polyvinyl acetate, functioning as a binder.

Lightweight formulas can contain perlite. The joint compound formulas are completed with different admixtures and additives, such as cellulosic thickeners, starches, surfactants, dispersants, flocculants, and preservatives (antibacterial and antifungal agents); all of these being used in minute quantities only. Typically, ready mix compounds contain about 65% solids. Virtually all of these, as indicated, are industrial minerals that are quarried or mined, crushed and ground to the appropriate fineness. Joint compound manufacturers generally purchase rather than mine the raw materials. The basic manufacturing process is depicted in Fig. 2.4 and summarized below.


dry raw materials in bulk

2-21

bagged dry raw materials & additives

resin water

ribbon mixer

dry powder mixer pump discharge

weigh scale & inspection station

pulverizer

packer

packer

valve bags

pails or box containers

palletizer weigh scale & inspection station warehousing & shipping

Fig. 2.4

Flow diagram of a joint compound producing plant (adapted from Ref.7).


2-22

Industrial minerals extraction & preparation

The main component, calcium carbonate, is abundantly available. Limestone is mined by open-pit methods, requiring no special equipment. Overburden is removed using bulldozers, draglines, or hydraulic shovels. The rock is drilled and blasted. The broken stone is loaded into dump trucks and hauled to the primary crushers, or it is loaded onto a conveyor and carried directly to a portable or permanent crusher. For most uses of limestone, it must travel through a secondary crusher and be sized. Where fine particle size is required, as in joint compounds, it has to be ground.16,21 Other industrial minerals used, such as talc, mica and clays are extracted and prepared in a similar manner. The mining and production of gypsum have been discussed under gypsum board (Section 2.2.1). Latex binder

The only raw material accounting for more than 2% of the mass of the ready mix joint compound composition other than industrial minerals is a latex binder, usually polyvinyl acetate (PVA). Polyvinyl acetate is prepared by introducing a benzene solution of vinyl acetate with a catalyst into a jacketed vessel. The mixture boils at 72°C, and the vapours are returned to the kettle. After about five hours at a gentle boil, the reaction mixture is run to a still and the solvent and unchanged vinyl acetate are removed by steam distillation. The molten resin is run into drums, where it solidifies, or is extruded into rods and sliced into flakes.22 It is usually supplied to the joint compound manufacturers in the form of a 55 to 60% solids emulsion. The precursor of polyvinyl acetate, vinyl acetate is manufactured by reacting ethylene, derived usually from natural gas, with acetic acid in the vapour phase over a palladium catalyst. The reaction takes place in a fixed-bed tubular reactor and is highly exothermic. When the reaction is conducted under the correct conditions, the only significant by-product is CO2. Enough heat is recovered as steam to perform the recovery distillation. The reaction occurs at 175 to 200°C under pressure of 475 to 1,000 kPa. 22 Ready mix joint compound manufacturing process

Limestone, and sometimes the other larger volume components, are stored in bulk facilities. Limestone is weighed as are the other dry raw materials, and often pre-mixed in a dry blender. Dry premix is fed via weigh hopper and screw conveyor into wet blenders, either a paddle- or a continuous-ribbon-type. Liquid ingredients (water, PVA emulsion) are distributed through a piping system. Following the blending operation, finished ready mix compound is transferred into holding tanks, either by gravity or using Moyno pumps, usually de-aerated under vacuum, and packaged either in pails or in lined boxes. 2.5.2 Dry (Setting) Joint Compound Gypsum stucco accounts for about 70 to 75% of the total formulation in setting compounds. Calcium carbonate and mica are other major ingredients, while clays, starches, gels, hydrated lime, accelerators and retarders are typical additives used in smaller quantities. Perlite can be used in


2-23

lightweight formulas, as well. The main formulation components, gypsum stucco, calcium carbonate and mica are extracted, prepared, and in the case of gypsum, calcined to stucco, as described in detail in previous sections. All the ingredients are weighed and mixed in dry paddle or V-shell blenders. Dry setting compounds are shipped in bags, and they are offered in a range of different set times, 45-minute and 90-minute ones being the most popular. Recently some lightweight setting compounds have become available as well. 2.5.3 Products Statistics Canadian production volumes for joint filler compounds in 1994 are shown in Table. 2.4.4 TABLE 2.4: PRODUCTION OF JOINT FILLER COMPOUNDS, 1994

Ready mix Dry powder

SCG Code

1994 Production [tonnes]

2520.20.90 2520.10.13

131,844 11,877

Source: adapted from Ref. (4)

2.5.4 Joint Paper Tape Most joint tape is manufactured from paper similar to the “ivory” bleached paper used as facing of the board. Papermaking raw materials and production were discussed in Section 2.2.3 under “paper” for gypsum board. Paper is cut into proper widths (typically 2 1/16"), sanded and buffed, and perforated. All paper joint tape is creased in the middle to accommodate taping of inside corners. Joint tape is sold in rolls, either boxed in bulk, unpackaged, or wrapped in plastic. Use of paper joint tape is the most widespread, although a small quantity of glass mesh tape pioneered by a Canadian company, Bayex Division of Bay Mills Ltd., is used mainly by the DIY market. Statistics Canada does not provide their relative market share, but it is apparently growing.

2.6

GYPSUM INDUSTRY, ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

Like any industry, gypsum board manufacturing uses energy resources and emits some pollutants to the atmosphere. It also generates some liquid effluents and solid wastes. At the same time, gypsum board is perhaps one of the more environmentally friendly building products because of: • •

the long established use of recycled newsprint and cardboard in the production of its paper facings, essentially 100% recycling of in-plant and increased volume of construction waste gypsum board back into production, and


•

2-24

the recent development of synthetic (by-product) gypsum replacing some of the natural gypsum.

2.6.1 Energy Use and Efficiency Energy used for drying/grinding of gypsum raw materials (~6% of total energy), gypsum calcination (~27%) and gypsum board drying (~67%) constitutes a major cost in gypsum board production (around 18% of the total direct manufacturing costs).13 As a result, the industry made major, conscientious strides to reduce their energy consumption, especially following the oil cost increases during the 1970’s. A shift from batch kettle calcination to continuous kettle calcination, and optimization of the firing process significantly improved efficiencies and energy consumption. Modern well-designed continuous kettles such as are used in most of the North American facilities require approximately 1 GJ/tonne of hemihydrate.15 Recent development of improved calcination methods, such as kettles with submerged combustion and conical kettles offer further improvements in energy efficiencies. Energy input of 0.65 GJ/tonne was measured for 72% purity gypsum calcined in a conical kettle.23-25 (Table 2.5) TABLE 2.5 TYPICAL EFFICIENCIES AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION OF DIFFERENT CALCINATION KETTLES Type of Kettle

Batch Continuous Continuous with submerged combustion Conical

Energy Efficiency

Energy Consumption [GJ/tonne] @ 72% purity

@ 90% purity

55 65

0.98 0.82

1.21 1.02

75

0.71

0.88

90

0.65

0.70 @ 81.5%

Source: adapted from Refs. (23-25)

Judicious selection of fuels as well as insulation, a sophisticated temperature control regime and heat recirculation/recovery on the gypsum board drying kilns implemented following the energy crisis also resulted in energy efficiency improvements. Industry data indicate an average expenditure of 36.3 GJ/tonne of paper produced.28 This can vary from about 28.2 GJ/tonne if the paper is produced in an integrated mill, to 39.0 GJ/tonne if it is produced in a pulp mill followed by a paper finishing mill. However, the gypsum industry has been using paper made from recycled newspaper and cardboard since the 1950’s; a long time before it became environmentally “popular”. It is estimated that paper products manufactured from recycled material require approximately 27 to 44% less energy than from virgin wood, depending largely upon whether the paper is bleached or unbleached.28 It is assumed that for the gypsum board industry, which uses bleached kraft paper, the energy savings is probably in the 30% range16, bringing the energy content from 36.3 GJ/tonne down to about 25.4 GJ/tonne. As about 100 lb of


2-25

paper is used per MSF of board (0.5 kg/m2), a contribution of about 12.45 MJ/m2 of gypsum board can be attributed to the paper. 2.6.2 Atmospheric Emissions Mining of gypsum, as well as its crushing, grinding, and handling in the plant, including the calcination step of the process, result in particulate emissions. Similarly extraction and processing of other industrial minerals, such as calcium carbonate, talc, mica and clay, used in the joint compound manufacturing, will cause some particulate emissions. Energy consumed in the extraction process, in the raw materials transportation, as well as gypsum board manufacturing and subsequent shipping to the markets, will result in emissions of CO2, CO, SO2, NOx, CH4 and VOCs, as in any process where energy is used. However, gypsum calcination produces less NOx than production of such materials like cement or lime where high temperatures result in significant thermal NOx. In contrast, gypsum calcination requires relatively low dehydration temperatures, in the 120° to 140°C range. Below 1000°C no significant thermal NOx is generated.26 As far as CO2 is concerned, during the gypsum calcination there is only fuel CO2 generated. In gypsum processing, there is no dissociation of the calcium sulfate molecule as is the case in the calcium carbonate calcination in the cement and lime manufacturing, and therefore no chemical (calcination) release of CO2. The handling and blending of dry raw materials for gypsum board in plant operations, as well as the cutting of the finished board result in some particulate release. Bag houses and other emission controls are employed to minimize particulate release. In the production of a moisture (water) resistant gypsum board, asphalt or wax emulsions are usually used to treat the board (albeit in very small quantities). Their precursors are petroleum products and a variety of pollutants, including VOCs and hydrocarbons are released during the drilling, extraction, and cracking of petroleum. However, the amount of such releases that would be attributable to gypsum board are negligible. Regular or type X gypsum board itself does not contain any VOCs, however, there is some indication in the literature that gypsum board can absorb VOCs released from other building materials used during construction, and then release them at a slower rate back into the indoor air.16 There appears to be a lot of confusion on this subject, with no definitive conclusion at this time. Like gypsum board manufacturing, joint compounds production contributes to the particulate emissions, as it uses mainly dry powder ingredients. Particulates are released in the extraction and processing of the raw materials (calcium carbonate, gypsum, talc, mica, clays, perlite), and in their handling and blending in the manufacturing stage. Ethylene, the precursor of PVA used as a binder in the ready mix joint compounds, will contribute to emissions of VOCs and benzene, a highly regulated, known carcinogen. But again, only a very small amount of such releases would be ultimately attributable to joint compounds on a per unit basis. The uncontrolled emission factor for VOCs is 8.35 kg/tonne of ethylene, and the uncontrolled emission factor for benzene is 1.11 kg/tonne of ethylene. The controlled emission factor for benzene is 0.0845 kg/tonne of ethylene.16


2-26

2.6.3 Liquid Effluent In comparison with most of the paper manufacturing, gypsum paper production using recycled paper stock substantially reduces water usage and associated effluent discharges, which could otherwise result in increased turbidity from suspended solids, increased alkalinity, reduced BOD, and increased deoxygenation. Most of the paper used in the production of gypsum board is postindustrial newsprint. When such paper is deinked, residues end up in leftover sludge. About one-fifth of the wastepaper material is drawn off as sludge, which contains not only ink residues, but also fillers, clay, fiber fragments, and other materials. The inks on the newsprint, however, are typically non-toxic, and the sludge from many deinking mills is being used by farmers as clayheavy soil conditioner.28 While there are closed water-loop process technologies available, and many end-of-pipe control improvements were implemented over the last few decades with respect to effluent releases from the paper mills, some problems still remain. Nevertheless, the paper industry record in general is improving. Canadian paper mills (all combined) reduced their total suspended solids (TSS) discharges from 2,106 tonnes/day in 1978 to 816 tonnes/day in 1985. Discharges of BOD fell from 3,337 to 1,961 tonnes/day during the same period of time, while production increased from about 51,000 tonnes/day to 74,000 tonnes/day.29 In the gypsum board manufacturing process, apart from quarry water and stormwater generated in the extraction of gypsum rock, there is very little liquid effluent. (If by-product gypsum is used, such material may have to be washed by its producer to reduce the soluble salts [Na+, Mg++, Cl-] content for gypsum to be acceptable by the gypsum board plant.). The paper manufacturing process, including that of gypsum facing paper, is a large generator of liquid effluent containing suspended solids and organic pollutants. (On average, in the production of pulp and paper, each tonne of paper requires about 100 m3 of process water, although the actual amount consumed depends on the production process.29 Ready mix joint compounds manufacturing operates in a closed loop system; consequently no liquid effluent is generated with the exception of a very low, non-measured effluent from the occasional washing of the production equipment and area. 2.6.4 Solid Waste Extraction of gypsum rock, in contrast to many other quarrying and mining operations, generates very little waste, as gypsum rock is usually used in its entirety in the manufacturing process, without any separation of the impurities, refining or smelting of the desired materials from the rock. In the few operations where some beneficiation of the rock is required, the main contaminant is usually limestone, which is resold as aggregate for road building or similar applications.


2-27

A small amount, typically 5% to 10%, of waste gypsum board is generated in its production during the start-ups, due to the production of off-specs board, and due to the cutting and trimming of the board. As already noted, all the in-plant generated solid waste is recycled back into production. Some of the off-specs board is cut and used for sleutters to support pallets of the finished board, thus eliminating the need to use 4" x 4" wood supports. In joint compound production no other solid waste is generated than the raw materials packaging. Most often, however, the packaging paper bags are shipped back for recycling. 2.6.5 Recycling The use of industrial by-products (FGD or TiO2 gypsum) and post-industrial waste (waste paper, gypsum board construction waste) as raw materials in the production of gypsum board was already mentioned. In our calculations, energy associated with transport of gypsum board construction waste back to the production facility is accounted for. This recycling and reuse of by-products and wastes is one of the major strengths of the gypsum industry. As noted in Section 2.1.1, in 1995 Westroc’s Mississauga plant became the first Canadian gypsum board plant operating entirely on FGD by-product/waste gypsum, with a number of other operations supplementing their gypsum rock supply with by-product gypsum, or construction waste gypsum. In at least two Canadian metropolitan areas, Vancouver and Toronto, construction gypsum board waste is banned from landfill sites. It is being collected by recyclers, and supplied back to the gypsum board manufacturing plants. An alternate use for construction waste, according to the Gypsum Association, includes agricultural applications and animal bedding material.16 Beneficial re-use of either by-product or waste construction gypsum reduces pressure on scarce landfill sites. The availability of free, or very inexpensive by-product gypsum, is changing the gypsum industry. In years to come, it is expected that more and more FGD gypsum will be used where it makes economic and geographic sense.3 In 1992 in the U.S.A. over 25.5 GWe of coal-fired power generating plants were already operating, under construction, or planned to be equipped with wet lime/limestone scrubbers generating FGD gypsum. It is expected that by the end of the decade some 7.3-million tonnes of FGD gypsum could be available.31,32 To put that number in perspective, it represents about one-third of the total U.S. annual consumption and almost one-half of its gypsum mining output. Other sources forecast an eventual U.S. production of synthetic gypsum as high as 32-million tonnes annually.33 In Canada 1.5 GWe power generating capacity already is or soon will be similarly equipped.30 Canadian FGD gypsum production capability, estimated on the basis of Canadian vs. U.S. wet lime/limestone scrubbing capacity, appears to be in the 500,000 tonnes/year area. This figure seems to correspond well with the FGD gypsum generating forecasts expected from the Ontario Hydro’s Lambton and New Brunswick’s Belledune power stations.


2-28

REFERENCES 1. 2. 3.

4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

18.

19. 20. 21.

O. Vagt, “Gypsum and Anhydrite”, Canadian Minerals Yearbook, 1994, Natural Resources Canada, Ottawa, 1995. “Gypsum”, Annual Review 1994, Mineral Industry Surveys, U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Mines, Washington, DC 20241, August 1995. G.J. Venta, R.T. Hemmings, “FGD Gypsum Utilization: A Strategic Approach to Reuse”, Proceedings , Paper 95-WA80.03, Air & Waste Management Association 88th Annual Meeting & Exhibition, San Antonio, TX, June 18-23, 1995. “Gypsum Products”, December 1994, Statistics Canada Catalogue 44-003/ISSN 0380-7223, Vol. 45, No.12 G.J. Venta, R.T. Hemmings, E.E. Berry, “A North American Perspective on Recycling and Reuse of Waste and Industrial By-Products in Building Materials”, Proceedings of ReC’93 International Recycling Congress, Geneva, Switzerland, January 1993. Toronto Star, November 10, 1995. “Gypsum / Magic Mineral”, CGC Inc. “The Story of Gypsum / How Gyproc is made”, Domtar Gypsum. “How Gypsum is made”, Construction Dimensions, February 1991, pp.34-37. “The Gypsum Industry and Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) Gypsum Utilization: A Utility Guide”, EPRI Report TR-103652, prepared by NYSEG and ORTECH, February 1994. “Board Machinery”, The COE Manufacturing Company, Bulletin 7000. “Board Production - Plant Design, Operational Layout, Manufacturing”, Combustion Engineering, Inc. Bulletin No. 123. L.M. Luckevich, “Microwave Drying of Gypsum Board”, paper presented at the 81st Annual Meeting and Convention of the Canadian Ceramic Society, Montreal, PQ, February 1983. F. Wirsching, “Calcium Sulfate”, Ullmann’s Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry, 5th edition, 1985, Vol. A4, pp. 555-584. R.J. Wenk, P.L. Henkels, “Calcium Compounds (Calcium Sulfate)”, Kirk Othmer Scientific Encyclopedia, 1978 edition, Volume 4, pp.437-448. “Gypsum Board Systems: Technical Report”, Topic I-9250, AIA Environmental Resource Guide, July 1993. G.J. Venta, “Gypsum Fiberboard: A High Performance Specialty Board”, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Inorganic-Bonded Wood and Fiber Composite Materials, Spokane, WA, September 28-30, 1992, pp.66-77. G. Natus, “Gypsum Fiberboard Production in Nova Scotia”, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Inorganic-Bonded Wood and Fiber Composite Materials, Moscow, ID, October 15-17, 1990, pp.85-87. “FiberBond® Fiber-Reinforced Gypsum Panels”, Louisiana-Pacific, October 1993. “Gypsum Construction Handbook”, 3rd edition, USG, 1987, p. 61. “Building Materials in the Context of Sustainable Development - Raw Material Balances, Energy Profiles and Environmental Unit Factor Estimates for Cement and Structural Concrete Products”, Report prepared by CANMET and Radian Canada Inc. for Forintek Canada Corp., October 1993.


2-29

22. “Gypsum Board Systems: Technical Report”, Topic I-9250, AIA Environmental Resource Guide, July 1993, p.24, adapted from G.T. Austin, “Shreve’s Chemical Process Industries”, 5th edition, 1984. 23. A.G.T. Ward, “Methods of Reducing Energy Requirements in Kettle Calcination”, Ciments, Betons, Platres, Chaux, No.728 - 1/81, pp. 51-56. 24. R. Lewis, “Improved Methods of Calcination”, Ciments, Betons, Platres, Chaux, No.753 2/85, pp. 99-105. 25. R. Lewis, “Improved Calcining Process for Gypsum”, Zement-Kalk-Gips, 38, No 5/1985, pp. 250-255. 26. J. Zelkowski, “Kohleverbrennung”, VGB Technische Vereinigung der Grosskraftwerksbetreiber e.V., Band 8 der Fachbuchreihe “Kraftwerkstechnik”, VGB-B008 1986. 27. American Gas Association, “Industrial Sector Energy Analysis: The Paper Industry”, February 1988. 28. “The Tellus Institute Packaging Study Project: Summary”, Tellus Institute, November 1991. 29. ‘The State of Canada’s Environment”, Chapter 14 - Industries, Pulp and Paper Production, Government of Canada, Ottawa, 1991, pp. 14-18/19. 30. H.N. Soud, M. Takeshita, “FGD Handbook”, Chapter 4 - FGD Installations on Coal-Fired Plants, IEACR/65 Report, IEA Coal Research, London, January 1994. 31. G.J. Venta, R.T. Hemmings, “FGD Gypsum Utilization: Bridging the “Two Solitudes”, Proceedings of 11th International Symposium on Use and Management of Coal Combustion By-Products (CCBs), American Coal Ash Association, Orlando, FL, January 15-19, 1995. 32. W. Ellison, R.A. Kuntze, “Expanding of Markets for Gypsum Byproducts”, Proceedings of Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, Inc., 1993 Annual Meeting, Reno, NE. 33. J.A. Walker, “Gypsum - The Miracle Mineral: Brief History and Prospects”, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Inorganic-Bonded Wood and Fiber Composite Materials, Spokane, WA, September 26-28, 1994, pp.39-40. 34. “Schenck Gypsum Fiberboard Plant – Future-Oriented Technologies for Innovative Panels”, Carl Schenck AG bulletin V 0224.


3.0

3-1

RAW MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS AND TRANSPORTATION

This section provides a brief overview of raw material requirements for gypsum board and associated products production in Canada on a regional basis. The section also provides an overview of transportation distances and typical modes used to move raw materials to the gypsum plants, again on a regional basis. Transportation data underlying the overview was used to develop corresponding energy estimates presented in Section 4.0. Data on actual raw material requirements, transportation distances and modes was provided to VG&A by the three major gypsum board producers for all their plants listed in Table 2.1 (preceding section). However, we are treating the individual plant data as confidential and all data presented in this report is therefore shown as averages, typically weighted averages on a regional basis. The weights used to develop these and other estimates presented in later sections are the actual utilized capacities for 1995 as provided directly by the producers. For the Newfoundland plant which did not provide detailed raw material and transportation data, we estimated transportation distances and modes based on the industry and market general information. For the one GFB plant in Nova Scotia that did not provide this data directly, we made assumptions based on their published information18.

3.1

RAW MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS - GYPSUM BOARD

Gypsum board formulations are essentially identical from one region of the country to another, and from one part of the North American continent to another. The differences between raw materials from one producer to another are also rather insignificant. Generally, board formulations consist of 48% to 55% gypsum stucco, around 2% to 5% paper, and 42% to 46% water, on a mass basis. As discussed in Section 2, gypsum stucco, the primary raw material in the board production, is produced through calcination of gypsum. One tonne of gypsum rock (or by-product) yields about 830 kg of stucco. In other words, 1.2048 tonnes of gypsum is needed for 1 tonne of stucco. Paper used as facings of gypsum board is made from recycled waste paper; it is assumed that 1.1 tonnes of raw materials (waste paper) is needed to produce 1 tonne of gypsum paper. These factors are included in relevant calculations and estimates. While a number of admixtures and additives, such as accelerators, retarders, plasticizers, glass fibers, potash, dextrose, starch, emulsions, paper pulp, clay and perlite are used, depending on the type of gypsum board produced (standard, fire resistant (type X), or moisture resistant), their aggregate amount is only between 0.9% and 2.5%. None of the individual additives reach the 2% limit recommended as a cut-off level in the ATHENATM project Research Guidelines, and therefore their specific energy and emissions estimates were not developed.


3-2

In contrast to conventional gypsum board, gypsum fiberboard, due to the nature of its process (semi-dry technology), uses substantially less water. To lower the GFB product weight and to approach that of gypsum board, expanded perlite is used in the core layer of the board. Typical gypsum board formulations for ten (10) different gypsum board products are shown in Table 3.1 in kg of raw materials per m2 of finished board. Table 3.2 provides the same breakdown in percentages. These breakdowns by type of product and board thickness are used throughout the development of the unit factor estimates in all subsequent sections.

TABLE 3.1 GYPSUM BOARD GENERIC FORMULATIONS / AVERAGE RAW MATERIALS USE (KG/M 2 OF FINISHED BOARD) 1/2" regular

5/8" regular

1/2" type X

5/8" type X

1/2" MR

Stucco Paper Water Other Perlite

6.3610 0.4715 5.4273 0.1108 0.0000

8.3057 0.4773 6.8308 0.1493 0.0000

6.3329 0.4507 5.3773 0.2761 0.0000

8.4239 0.4649 6.8967 0.1523 0.0000

6.9755 0.4847 6.6290 0.3674 0.0000

TOTAL (wet weight)

12.3706

15.7632

12.4370

15.9378

14.4566

8.0632

10.2867

8.1854

10.5066

9.0406

5/8" MR

5/16" mobile home

1" shaftliner

1/2" GFB

5/8" GFB

Stucco Paper Water Other Perlite

8.9438 0.5070 8.4140 0.4712 0.0000

4.4665 0.4887 4.2246 0.1050 0.0000

15.6671 0.4887 11.9824 0.2118 0.0000

6.8432 1.5207 1.4147 0.2766 1.3306

8.4911 1.8869 1.7554 0.3432 1.6510

TOTAL (wet weight)

18.3360

9.2848

28.3500

11.3859

14.1276

(dry weight)

11.4840

5.8642

19.0585

11.1908

13.9762

(dry weight)


3-3

TABLE 3.2 GYPSUM BOARD GENERIC FORMULATIONS / AVERAGE RAW MATERIALS USE (% BREAKDOWN)

Stucco Paper Water Other Perlite TOTAL (wet weight)

Stucco Paper Water Other Perlite TOTAL (wet weight)

3.2

1/2" regular

5/8" regular

1/2" type X

5/8" type X

1/2" MR

51.42 3.81 43.87 0.90 0.00

52.69 3.03 43.33 0.95 0.00

50.92 3.62 43.24 2.22 0.00

52.85 2.92 43.27 0.96 0.00

48.25 3.35 45.85 2.54 0.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

5/8" MR

5/16" mobile home

1" shaftliner

1/2" GFB

5/8" GFB

48.78 2.77 45.89 2.57 0.00

48.11 5.26 45.50 1.13 0.00

55.26 1.72 42.27 0.75 0.00

60.10 13.36 12.43 2.43 11.69

60.10 13.36 12.43 2.43 11.69

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION - GYPSUM BOARD

Gypsum

There are major differences in transportation distances between the sources of gypsum and the gypsum board plants for different gypsum operations. Some of the plants, such as the large CGC operations in Hagersville, ON, and Domtar’s plants in Caledonia, ON, are built on sites adjoining their sources of gypsum. All other plants receive gypsum from quarries, mines or sources of byproduct gypsum from some distance. Some operations use a combination of different sources of gypsum, most often supplementing natural rock gypsum with synthetic gypsum. Table 3.3 provides weighted average distribution of the sources of gypsum for the three geographical regions as of 1995. As can be seen, natural gypsum is still the dominant source of raw material, with some synthetic being used both in the Central and East regions. In 1996, further expansion of FGD gypsum utilization is expected in the East region. The contribution of the recycled waste board, both of the internally generated waste and construction waste collected in major metropolitan areas and trucked to the plants, is also indicated. Legislative actions preventing landfilling of gypsum board construction waste in the Vancouver and Toronto metropolitan areas are the main reason for the higher “external” recycled content in the West and Central regions. In the manufacturing process, recycled gypsum board is commingled with other sources of gypsum and handled in the same manner. This source of gypsum does not have to be “extracted”, however, its contribution to the unit factor estimates at all process stages, i.e. to raw materials transportation and manufacturing, is included.


TABLE 3.3

West Avg. Central Avg. East Avg. CANADA

3-4

DISTRIBUTION OF GYPSUM SOURCES BY GEOGRAPHICAL REGION (%) Natural Gypsum

Synthetic Gypsum

Recycled / external

Recycled / internal

86 85 81 85

0 7 10 6

8 4 2 4

6 4 7 5

There is a wide variability in transportation distances, which in some cases also determine the mode of transportation. In the West region, while most of the natural gypsum is moved by truck, one west coast operation using gypsum from Baja California moves it by ship. Current cost structure does not favour rail transport; there is only one plant in this region (and in Canada) transporting gypsum from the quarry to the plant by rail at this time. In the Central region, all the plants are either adjoining their sources of natural gypsum, in which case they use either electric conveyors or trucks, or are within economic trucking distance of the quarries. In the East region of the country, where most of the natural gypsum comes from the Atlantic provinces, the distance and actual board plant location determines the choice of either truck or marine (or marine/truck combination) of gypsum transportation. All the synthetic and recycled gypsum from external sources is transported, at this point, by truck. Table 3.4 shows weighted average distances by mode of transport for the three sources of gypsum for the three geographical regions. The favourable location of the Central region plants relative to gypsum supplies makes this the most efficient region in terms of raw material transportation energy use, as will be shown in the next section. TABLE 3.4 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES FOR GYPSUM (KM) BY MODE OF TRANSPORT Natural Gypsum


Synthetic Gypsum

Recycled Gypsum / external

ship

rail

road

total

road

road

1436 656 507

184 6 47

274 44 231 144

1894 44 893 698

0 34 3 18

46 15 9 21


3-5

Paper

In estimates of distances and modes of transport of gypsum board paper, two items have to be considered: • •

transportation of waste paper to the paper mill for recycling, and transportation of finished paper from the mill to the board producer.

Based on information from one of the two Canadian suppliers, and known locations of other paper mills, we assume that an average shipping distance for waste paper to paper mill is 150 km, and that all shipping is exclusively by truck. Weighted average shipping distances for the finished gypsum paper are shown in Table 3.5. In some cases ivory and gray paper are coming from different paper mills, explaining the differences between the two sets of numbers. All gypsum paper is shipped by road transport, with distances ranging from 50 to 2,500 km. TABLE 3.5

AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES FOR PAPER (KM)


ivory paper

gray paper

654 457 835 594

843 351 497 506

Gypsum Fiberboard Raw Materials

Waste paper fibers for reinforcement of GFB are barged along the eastern seaboard from an average distance of 1,100 km. Perlite rock is shipped from Greece from an average distance of 9,500 km. Backhaul

Based on our discussions with the producers, we made the following assumption regarding the backhaul associated with transportation of raw materials: • • • • •

gypsum: waste paper to paper mill: finished paper (truck): waste paper to GFB plant (ship): perlite (ship):

no backhaul, no backhaul, 75% backhaul 75% backhaul, 75% backhaul

Appropriate multiples of the transportation distances were used in estimates of the energy and atmospheric emissions unit factors.


3.3

3-6

RAW MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS - FINISHING PRODUCTS

Joint compound formulations are similar from one manufacturer to another, from one region of the country to another. As indicated in Section 2.5.1, the two main constituents of the ready mix compounds are finely ground limestone and water, with smaller amounts of talc, mica, specialty clays and resin binders. The differences between various proprietary formulas are related to minute additions of various admixtures and additives, and the details of the formulations are closely guarded secrets. Nevertheless, the basic formulations are available from raw materials suppliers, companies such as Dow Chemicals, Nacan Products, Reichhold Chemicals, Lorama Chemicals, and others, and as such are readily available and well known. Typical ready mix joint formulation, based on information from various raw materials suppliers, is shown in Table 3.6, expressed both in per cent (by weight) and in kg per m2 of gypsum board, taking into account standard usage of 0.674 kg of compound per 1 m2 of board. TABLE 3.6 READY MIX JOINT COMPOUNDS GENERIC FORMULATION / AVERAGE RAW MATERIALS USE Raw Material

[%]

[kg/m 2 of gypsum board]

Water Clay Talc Mica Calcium carbonate PVA resin Other

34.6 1.7 3.8 3.5 52.3 4.0 0.1

0.23320 0.01146 0.02561 0.02359 0.35250 0.02696 0.00068

100.0

0.67400

Total

Setting joint compounds, as discussed in Section 2.5.2, are comprised primarily of calcium sulfate hemihydrate (plaster), calcium carbonate (limestone) and mica, with small additions of clays, starch, gels, lime and other chemicals. The type of plaster used for production of setting compounds is often calcined under different conditions than the stucco for gypsum board production. This socalled “β plaster” is available only from a few calcination plants across North America, and often it is shipped to the joint compound production facilities over some distance. Typical formulation for the setting joint compound, considering its approximate usage of 0.352 kg/m2 of board, is shown in Table 3.7. Joint paper tape (see Section 2.5.4) is produced from recycled paper (newspaper, magazines and cardboard) stock, being essentially the same material as the “ivory” bleached paper used for facing of gypsum board. In estimating relevant unit factors, we will therefore use the same assumptions and numbers as for the “ivory” gypsum paper. As already indicated in Section 2.5, approximate usage of paper tape is about 0.98 m/m2 of gypsum board.


3-7

TABLE 3.7 SETTING JOINT COMPOUNDS GENERIC FORMULATION / AVERAGE RAW MATERIALS USE Raw Material

[%]

[kg/m 2 of gypsum board]

Gypsum plaster Calcium carbonate Mica Clay Other

48.5 36.5 7.2 5.0 2.8

0.17072 0.12848 0.02534 0.01760 0.00986

100.0

0.35200

Total

3.4

RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION - JOINT FINISHING PRODUCTS

Joint compound manufacturing plants are located in all three geographical regions of the country. The raw materials, with the exception of plaster, resin binder and chemical additives, are usually sourced from the local distributors of industrial minerals. However, the particular grades of raw materials are often shipped to the local distributor from some distance. Detailed information regarding the transportation distances are not available. On the basis of rather limited information, we will assume following distances:

TABLE 3.8 ESTIMATED TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES FOR JOINT COMPOUNDS RAW MATERIALS (KM)

Water Clay Talc Mica Calcium carbonate PVA resin Gypsum plaster

West

Central

East

1200 3500 2000 500 100 1800

2000 800 2000 500 100 2000

2000 300 2000 100 100 2000

Calcium carbonate, plaster and resin binder are usually shipped in bulk, and we will assume no backhaul, other materials are shipped in bags, and we will assume 100% backhaul. All transport is by truck, with the exception of plaster, 50% of which is shipped by rail in the Central and East regions.


3-8

For the joint tape raw materials (waste paper) transport, we assume the same average shipping distance of 150 km by truck as for the gypsum paper for board facings discussed in Section 3.2. Further we assume that finished “ivory” paper is shipped to the joint tape producer for its conversion the same average distance as the regular “ivory” paper is shipped to the gypsum board producers (Table 3.5), with a 75% backhaul.


4.0

4-1

ENERGY USE - GYPSUM BOARD

In this section, we explain and present the estimates of energy use developed for all manufacturing stages of the gypsum board production from the raw materials extraction and transportation to the gypsum board processing. For completion, the estimates of energy associated with finished board transportation are also shown, although these are fully handled by ATHENATM. All of the results are presented and discussed in terms of weighted regional averages using the 1995 actual gypsum board production levels as weights. Various tables show total energy use by region and process stage and we also show the breakdown by energy type because that information is directly relevant to the estimation of atmospheric emissions in a subsequent section of the report. 4.1

RAW MATERIAL EXTRACTION AND TRANSPORTATION

In estimates of energy consumption associated with extraction of gypsum, we had to take a number of factors into consideration: • • • •

relative distribution of natural, synthetic and recycled gypsum in the three regions, use of 1.2048 tonnes of gypsum rock (or by-product) for 1 tonne of stucco, the fact that some primary processing (primary crushing, drying) usually takes place at the quarry site, in production of commercial grade synthetic gypsum, the use of steam in the dewatering system, and the need for some additional power (e.g. for effluent treatment) that would not have to be used if by-product gypsum were landfilled.1

The differences between the “extraction” energy of natural and synthetic gypsum, as well as the source of energy in the quarries and mines (diesel fuel (road) vs. electricity), greatly affect the regional weighted averages. We did not receive detailed information from all the quarrying operations; for the missing quarries we assumed that it takes 0.027 GJ to extract one tonne of gypsum.2 (Or, multiplying by the factor 1.2048: it takes 0.0325 GJ to extract a sufficient amount of gypsum to produce 1 tonne of stucco.) Table 4.1 shows weighted average energy consumption for gypsum extraction and primary processing (crushing, drying) at the source site, expressed in GJ per tonne of stucco. TABLE 4.1 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR GYPSUM EXTRACTION (GJ/TONNE OF STUCCO)


diesel - road

coal

oil

electric

total

0.0293 0.0051 0.0293 0.0177

0.0000 0.0043 0.0000 0.0021

0.0000 0.0000 0.0057 0.0018

0.0118 0.0547 0.0145 0.0332

0.0411 0.0641 0.0495 0.0548


4-2

The use of diesel-road fuel and a portion of the electric power is directly associated with the actual extraction. Coal, oil, and a portion of electric power usage is due to the primary processing. Most of the mines/quarries process gypsum rock on site prior to its transport to the board manufacturing plants; only few operations ship it “as is” to the plants, where it is crushed. In the absence of detailed information, we will assume that all the primary processing is conducted at the extraction site. In this approach, we will not understate the total energy usage at the gypsum source site, although it will create some distortion in terms of atmospheric emission estimates associated with electricity use, primarily in the East region. The estimates of electricity use developed in this report will be translated in the Sustainable Materials Project calculation model into the mixture of primary energy forms used to generate the electricity at the relevant generating facilities and emission factors will be calculated on that basis. To make this adjustment, the model assumes electricity comes from the relevant regional electrical grid. Therefore, when we assume gypsum from Nova Scotia is used in Quebec, the model will assign those electricity estimates to the Quebec grid and will estimate emissions accordingly. The estimates will likely be different from those that would be made assuming use of electricity from the Nova Scotia grid. Again, the lack of data precludes our doing anything to avoid this problem and we believe it will in any case be relatively minor in terms of the overall atmospheric emission estimates for gypsum production. As an example, the estimates of gypsum extraction energy use, expressed in MJ per square meter of finished 1/2” regular gypsum board on a weighted average basis by region and for Canada as a whole, are shown in Table 4.2. A complete set of tables for all types of gypsum boards is shown in the summary at the end of this section. TABLE 4.2 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR GYPSUM EXTRACTION (MJ/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)


diesel - road

coal

oil

electric

total

0.1898 0.0331 0.1895 0.1145

0.0000 0.0279 0.0000 0.0134

0.0000 0.0000 0.0368 0.0117

0.0765 0.3538 0.0940 0.2152

0.2662 0.4147 0.3203 0.3546

Transportation - Gypsum

The transportation energy use estimates were made by applying the following combustion energy factors from the Research Guidelines: Mode

Fuel

Energy Consumed (MJ/tonne-kilometre)

Truck Rail Ship

Diesel - Road Diesel - Rail HFO - Marine

1.18 0.49 0.12


4-3

The above factors were applied to the individual raw material tonnages required per tonne of stucco on a plant-by-plant basis using haul distance estimates provided by the companies, and those numbers were later converted to per square meter of finished board, using the formulations as shown in Table 3.1. The distances were adjusted for all modes except conveyors (electricity) to account for empty or partial backhauls in accordance with the research guidelines. The weighted regional averages shown in the tables below were then calculated from the individual plant estimates. TABLE 4.3 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR GYPSUM TRANSPORTATION (GJ/TONNE OF STUCCO)


diesel-road

diesel-rail

HFO-marine

electricity

total

0.8851 0.2646 0.7088 0.5212

0.2175 0.0000 0.0000 0.0534

0.4152 0.0000 0.1897 0.1465

0.0000 0.0005 0.0000 0.0002

1.5179 0.2651 0.8985 0.7214

TABLE 4.4 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR GYPSUM TRANSPORTATION (MJ/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)


diesel-road

diesel-rail

HFO-marine

electricity

total

5.7281 1.7124 4.5872 3.3733

1.4079 0.0000 0.0000 0.3458

2.6873 0.0000 1.2275 0.9480

0.0000 0.0030 0.0000 0.0015

9.8233 1.7154 5.8148 4.6686

Transportation - Paper

Weighted regional averages for energy consumption associated with transportation of both the waste paper as raw material for the paper mill, and of the finished gypsum paper from the paper mill to the gypsum board plant, are shown in Tables 4.5 and 4.6.


4-4

TABLE 4.5 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR PAPER TRANSPORTATION (GJ/TONNE) Waste Paper


Finished Paper

diesel-road

diesel-road

HFO-marine

total finished paper

0.3894 0.3894 0.3894 0.3894

1.1040 0.5959 0.7486 0.7565

0.0000 0.0000 0.0088 0.0021

1.1040 0.5959 0.7574 0.7586

TABLE 4.6 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR PAPER TRANSPORTATION (MJ/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD) Waste Paper


4.2

Finished Paper

diesel-road

diesel-road

HFO-marine


0.1836 0.1836 0.1836 0.1836

0.5206 0.2810 0.3530 0.3567

0.0000 0.0000 0.0041 0.0010

0.5206 0.2810 0.3571 0.3577

GYPSUM BOARD MANUFACTURING

As noted in Section 2 during the discussion of the gypsum board production process, board manufacturing consists of three separate processes: • • •

calcination of gypsum to stucco, gypsum paper manufacturing, and gypsum board production.

In the development of the energy estimates related to gypsum board manufacturing, we considered all these three production steps separately, before eventually combining them into the total manufacturing energy factors. Fairly detailed information regarding use of energy in the calcination of gypsum to stucco as well as for the manufacturing of gypsum board was made available from the three major Canadian producers for all their plants. Energy consumption estimates were developed and tabulated by both the processing step and by the type of energy used. Calcination energy consumption data are shown in Tables 4.6 – 4.9.


4-5

TABLE 4.6 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN STUCCO PREPARATION BY PROCESS STEP (GJ/TONNE OF STUCCO)


secondary crushing

drying

grinding

calcination

stucco grinding

stucco transport

total stucco preparation

0.0510 0.0401 0.0277 0.0399

0.6377 0.2893 0.5030 0.4250

0.0250 0.0253 0.0201 0.0240

1.1631 0.9145 1.2102 1.0449

0.0125 0.0030 0.0062 0.0061

0.0476 0.0688 0.0464 0.0584

1.9369 1.3412 1.8137 1.5984

TABLE 4.7 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN STUCCO PREPARATION BY PROCESS STEP (MJ/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR BOARD)


secondary crushing

drying

grinding

calcination

stucco grinding

stucco transport


0.3304 0.2597 0.1793 0.2582

4.1267 1.8722 3.2553 2.7505

0.1618 0.1640 0.1302 0.1555

7.5272 5.9185 7.8319 6.7626

0.0810 0.0197 0.0404 0.0396

0.3081 0.4455 0.3005 0.3778

12.5352 8.6797 11.7375 10.3442

TABLE 4.8 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN STUCCO PREPARATION BY ENERGY FORM (GJ/TONNE OF STUCCO)


natural gas

oil

diesel

electricity


1.3135 0.8198 0.7690 0.9291

0.4591 0.1981 0.5191 0.3375

0.0000 0.1692 0.3775 0.1765

0.1643 0.1540 0.1481 0.1552

1.9369 1.3412 1.8137 1.5984

TABLE 4.9 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN STUCCO PREPARATION BY ENERGY FORM (MJ/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR BOARD)


natural gas

oil

diesel

electricity


8.5007 5.3055 4.9770 6.0131

2.9714 1.2821 3.3592 2.1844

0.0000 1.0951 2.4428 1.1424

1.0630 0.9970 0.9586 1.0042

12.5352 8.6797 11.7375 10.3442


4-6

Some data were also obtained from one of the Canadian producers of gypsum paper, which was supplemented with some additional information.3 Nevertheless, there is not sufficient information available to develop regional weighted averages for the gypsum paper production. Therefore we have assumed that the energy use associated with the paper manufacturing is the same in all three regions. (Table 4.10) This brings some error into our estimates, however considering that similar processes and the same energy sources are used by all gypsum paper producers, this distortion will be minimal. TABLE 4.11 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN PAPER PRODUCTION BY ENERGY FORM (GJ/TONNE OF PAPER)

CANADA

natural gas

oil

electric

total paper

11.6047

0.6108

2.9148

15.1302

TABLE 4.11 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN PAPER PRODUCTION BY ENERGY FORM (MJ/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR BOARD)

CANADA

natural gas

oil

electric

total paper

5.4720

0.2880

1.3744

7.1344

Energy associated with the production of gypsum board itself, as per information provided by Canadian gypsum board producers, is shown, as an example, for 1/2" regular gypsum board, in Table 4.12. TABLE 4.12 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN BOARD MANUFACTURING BY ENERGY FORM (MJ/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR BOARD)


natural gas

oil

electric

total board manufacturing energy

14.6351 14.4121 10.7640 13.6108

3.8536 2.5886 7.5119 4.0546

0.4096 0.3562 0.4645 0.3947

18.8984 17.3569 18.7404 18.0601

Total energy use associated with the three process steps of 1/2" thick regular gypsum board manufacturing is summarized in Tables 4.13 and 4.14.


4-7

TABLE 4.13 TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE ASSOCIATED WITH PRODUCTION OF GYPSUM BOARD BY PROCESS STEP (MJ/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR BOARD)


paper production

stucco production

board production

total energy

7.1344 7.1344 7.1344 7.1344

12.5352 8.6797 11.7375 10.3442

18.8984 17.3569 18.7404 18.0601

38.5680 33.1710 37.6124 35.5387

TABLE 4.14 TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE ASSOCIATED WITH PRODUCTION OF GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM (MJ/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR BOARD)


diesel - road

natural gas

oil

electric

total energy

0.0000 1.0951 2.4428 1.1424

28.6079 25.1897 21.2130 25.0959

7.1131 4.1587 11.1590 6.5271

2.8471 2.7276 2.7975 2.7733

38.5680 33.1710 37.6124 35.5387

Detailed tables summarizing energy usage for ten types of gypsum boards under consideration, by process stage and region as well as by energy form and region, are shown at the end of this section, in Tables 4.25 to 4-44.

4.3

FINISHED GYPSUM BOARD TRANSPORTATION

The last energy use category covers the transportation of finished gypsum board products from gypsum board plants to Canadian market distribution centres. As in the case of raw material transportation, information about transportation distances, modes and geographical market distribution was provided by the three major gypsum board producers for all their plants. Based on our knowledge of the Canadian gypsum board markets, some assumptions had to be made regarding the relative share of the market between the various producers, as well as to include the remaining minor regional or specialty manufacturers. The Research Guidelines state that finished product transportation data should be provided in kilometres by mode of transport for average haul distances to Halifax, Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, Calgary and Vancouver from the relevant production points. The Guidelines further noted that “relevant production points” would be the facilities typically serving each of the cities. Based on the information received from the gypsum board manufacturers, we concluded:


• •

4-8

Vancouver is served by local plants by truck, Calgary is served 90% by the plants located in Alberta by truck, with 10% of the board shipped by rail from the Central region, Winnipeg is similarly served by local plants (85%), and 15% by rail from the Central region, Toronto is supplied exclusively by truck from local operations, Montreal is served mainly (80%) by truck from local plants, with the remaining 20% shipped also by truck from the Central region, and Halifax is supplied by plants located in Atlantic provinces (40%), either by truck or by ship, as well as by rail from either the Central region or the Quebec part of to East region.

• • • •

The weighted average transportation distances by mode shown in Table 4.15 were then developed using the distances of each plant from the designated cities. Following discussions with the board producers, we assumed that only 20% backhaul is involved in truck transportation, whereas 100% backhaul is the rule for both the rail and the marine transportation of the finished board. These backhaul assumptions are already reflected in the distance numbers in the Table 4.15. TABLE 4.15 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES BY MODE FOR FINISHED GYPSUM BOARD (KM) Average Distances & Transport Mode Truck

Rail

Ship

Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

90 225 90 153 288 279

0 300 400 0 0 847.5

0 0 0 0 0 110

Transport factors [MJ/tonne-km]

1.18

0.49

0.12

note:

appropriate backhaul factors included in the distances

The ATHENATM computer model calculates the energy consumption associated with the finished products transportation from the plant gate to the market, taking into consideration distances and transport mode. Here, just for illustration, we show the energy estimates (Tables 4.16 and 4.17 for 1/2" regular board). The distances by mode, as per Table 4-15, were multiplied by the relevant tonne-kilometre energy consumption figures. We should emphasize that the averages in Tables 4.15, 4.16 and 4.17 only reflect where gypsum board is produced and how it is moved. They do not reflect gypsum board consumption levels in any of the cities. Both tables can be interpreted by thinking in terms of the embodied final transportation mileage and energy in a representative or average tonne of board (or square meter of board) landed in any one of the six cities.


4-9

TABLE 4.16 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION ENERGY FOR FINISHED GYPSUM BOARD (GJ/ TONNE)


Truck

Rail

Ship

diesel-road

diesel-rail

HFO-marine

0.1062 0.2655 0.1062 0.1805 0.3398 0.3292

0.0000 0.1470 0.1960 0.0000 0.0000 0.4153

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0132

Total

0.1062 0.4125 0.3022 0.1805 0.3398 0.7577

TABLE 4.17 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION ENERGY FOR FINISHED GYPSUM BOARD (MJ/ M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR BOARD)


Truck

Rail

Ship

diesel-road

diesel-rail

HFO-marine

0.8563 2.1408 0.8563 1.4557 2.7402 2.6546

0.0000 1.1853 1.5804 0.0000 0.0000 3.3485

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1064

Total

0.8563 3.3261 2.4367 1.4557 2.7402 6.1095

We have omitted national averages from Tables 4.15 to 4.17 because national averages would be unduly distorted by the absence of any weights to take into account relative consumption levels in different cities and regions. If consumption is not taken into account, the high transportation energy associated with moving gypsum board to cities like Halifax or Calgary would be given too much implicit weight when calculating national averages. In contrast, the earlier sub-sections deal strictly with aspects of production, and actual production capacities provide an adequate weighting mechanism even at the national level. The omission of national averages at this stage, and subsequently, has no bearing in terms of our ultimate focus which is on unit factors for gypsum board delivered to the individual cities.

4.4

GYPSUM BOARD - ENERGY SUMMARY

This section summarizes all the preceding energy estimates associated with the production of gypsum board by processing stage and by energy form in MJ/m2 of board. The summaries are presented for a “cradle to gate” LCA used by the ATHENATM model, as well as, for illustration, for a “cradle to market” LCA. Tables 4.25 and 4.26 cover 1/2" regular gypsum board discussed in detail above. The following tables (4.27 to 4.40) provide the same summary information for other common types and thicknesses of gypsum board, as selected and discussed in Section 2.


4-10

The relative distribution of the energy used in production of gypsum board by the process step is shown as a percentage of the total energy use for the six cities under consideration in Table 4.18 and graphically in Fig. 4.1 for 1/2" regular board as an example. For other types of board, relative energy distribution would be similar. The total manufacturing stage (consisting of the paper production, gypsum calcination and board production itself) is obviously the most significant as far energy consumption is concerned, varying between different areas in the 73% to 89% range. This is followed by the raw materials transportation, showing a rather wide range from about 6% to 21%. This wide range is the result of some plants producing board right at the gypsum source site, whereas other board operations have to ship gypsum from thousands of kilometres away. Gypsum extraction and the initial on-site processing represents the lowest energy expense of the four processing stages. Of the three manufacturing steps, the gypsum board manufacturing constitutes the highest share of the total manufacturing energy use at around 50%, followed by gypsum calcination (around 30%) and paper production (approximately 20%). This relative distribution of the manufacturing energy use is shown for 1/2" regular gypsum board in Table 4.19 and graphically illustrated in Fig. 4.2.

TABLE 4.18 PER CENT OF ENERGY USE IN GYPSUM BOARD PRODUCTION [1/2" BOARD] BY PROCESS STAGE (%) Gypsum Extraction Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

Total RM Total Board Transportation Manufacturing Transportation

0.53 0.51 1.09 1.11 0.68 0.64

20.96 19.98 5.71 5.86 13.51 12.61

76.80 73.20 86.83 89.12 79.98 74.63

1.71 6.31 6.38 3.91 5.83 12.12

TOTAL

100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

TABLE 4.19 PER CENT OF ENERGY USE IN MANUFACTURING STAGES OF GYPSUM BOARD PRODUCTION [1/2" BOARD] BY PROCESS STAGE (%)

West Region Central Region East Region

Paper Manufacturing

Stucco Manufacturing

Board Manufacturing

Total Manufacturing

18.50 21.51 18.97

32.50 26.17 31.21

49.00 52.33 49.83

100.00 100.00 100.00


4-11

Extraction RM Transport Manufacturing

% of total energy use

100

Board Transport

80

60

40

20

0 Vancouver

Calgary

Winnipeg

Toronto

Montreal

Halifax

City

Fig. 4.1:

Breakdown of Energy Use in Gypsum Board Production [1/2" Board] by Process Stage (%)

% of total manufacturing energy

60 50 40

West Central East

30 20 10 0 Paper

Stucco Manufacturing

Board of

Fig 4.2Breakdown of Energy Use in Manufacturing Stages of Gypsum Board Production [1/2" Board] by Process Stage (%)


4.5

4-12

ENERGY USE IN GYPSUM FIBERBOARD (GFB) PRODUCTION

All of the previous parts of this section discussed primarily conventional, paper faced gypsum boards. Most of what was said is also valid for paperless gypsum fiberboard (GFB), although there are some substantial differences in the formulations and in the raw materials used, as well as in the manufacturing process itself. GFB is manufactured only in one location in all of North America at this time, in Louisiana-Pacific’s plant in Nova Scotia, and this was taken into consideration for both the raw materials and the finished product transportation. As the manufacturer decided not to provide any information for this study, some additional assumptions had to be made based on our knowledge of the process and the published information. Raw Materials Extraction

In GFB production only locally available natural gypsum is used (together with 10% internal waste recycling). Gypsum extraction energy for the Eastern region, expressed per tonne of stucco, was adjusted accordingly. For perlite, the other industrial mineral used, we assumed extraction energy of 0.027 GJ/tonne of rock, in the form of diesel-road fuel, and the electrical energy input based on the gypsum rock extraction. TABLE 4.20 WEIGHTED AVERAGE EXTRACTION ENERGY FOR GYPSUM AND PERLITE USED IN 1/2" GFB PRODUCTION Gypsum extraction diesel

electric

Perlite extraction

total gypsum

diesel

[GJ/tonne of stucco] 0.0305

0.0117

0.0834

0.0423

0.3008

total perlite

diesel

electric

TOTAL RMs

[GJ/tonne of perlite] 0.0270

[MJ/m2 of board] 0.2175

electric

Total extraction

0.0108

0.0378


0.0144

0.0503


0.0977

0.3511

Raw Materials Transportation

Specific conditions related to the GFB operation were considered. These include rail transportation of the locally quarried gypsum, marine transportation of the perlite rock from overseas, and both the local transportation by truck of the collected waste paper and its shipping by barge from these collection points along the Eastern seaboard.4 It was assumed that other raw materials are locally available in Nova Scotia, and supplied by truck. Appropriate backhaul assumptions were made as well. The resulting energy estimates for 1/2" GFB are shown in Table 4.21.


4-13

TABLE 4.21 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR 1/2" GFB RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION Gypsum

dieselrail

Waste Paper

dieselroad

Perlite

Other RMs

RMs Transport

HFOmarine

waste paper total

HFOmarine

diesel road

0.1650

0.5544

1.4250

0.4720

0.2509

0.8431

1.8961

0.1306

diesel road

dieselrail

HFOmarine

TOTAL

0.7227

0.2828

2.1471

3.1526

[GJ/tonne [GJ/tonne] of stucco] 0.0413

0.3894


0.5922

GFB Manufacturing

In GFB production four separate manufacturing steps have to be considered: • • • •

gypsum calcination, perlite expansion, paper defiberization, and board production.

For gypsum calcination we used the weighted average energy estimate [GJ/tonne of stucco] developed for the East region in Table 4.6. For the rather energy-intensive perlite expansion, W.R. Grace provided an average estimate of 3500 BTU/lb (= 8.1337 GJ/tonne).5 As far as the paper defiberization is concerned, we assumed that this is covered by the electrical energy input into the paper production from Table 4.11. Finally, for the board manufacturing itself, we used factors (developed in a client confidential GFB technical study) of 0.9555 for fuel use and 3.15 for power consumption for production of GFB vs. conventional gypsum board of the same thickness.6 The resulting energy estimates for manufacturing of 1/2" GFB are presented in Tables 4.22 and 4.23.

TABLE 4.22 AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN MANUFACTURING OF 1/2" GFB BY ENERGY FORM Energy [MJ/m2 of board]

natural gas

oil

diesel-road

electricity

TOTAL

33.7609

3.6956

2.6875

6.9504

47.0943


4-14

TABLE 4.23 AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN MANUFACTURING OF 1/2" GFB BY PROCESS STEP Gypsum calcination

Paper defiberization

Perlite expansion

[GJ/tonne of stucco]

[GJ/tonne of paper]

[GJ/tonne of perlite]

1.8137

2.9148

8.1337

4.4325

10.8229

Board manufacturing

TOTAL manufacturing

18.9259

47.0943


Finished GFB Transportation

GFB board produced in L-P’s Nova Scotia plant is intended mainly for the markets along the Eastern seaboard of the U.S.A. Nevertheless, it is also available through local distributors across Canada. In estimating energy embodied in finished GFB transportation, we assumed that to Halifax it is shipped by truck (20% backhaul) and to the rest of the country by rail (100% backhaul). Using the appropriate distances between Port Hawkesbury and the six regional cities under consideration


[km]

[mode]

5840 4878 3538 1816 1276 360

rail rail rail rail rail road

The ATHENATM model calculates the energy factors associated with the GFB point of manufacture to the market. In the study, we provided the finished product transport energy estimates, based on the above distances and transport modes combined with the relevant transport factors from Table 4.15, just for illustration:


4-15

TABLE 4.24 ENERGY EMBODIED IN TRANSPORTATION OF FINISHED 1/2" GFB diesel-road

diesel-rail

[GJ/tonne] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

0.4248

2.8616 2.3902 1.7336 0.8898 0.6252 [GJ/m2 of board]


4.7538

32.0235 26.7484 19.4005 9.9580 6.9969 -

GFB Energy Summary

Total energy estimates associated with the production of 1/2" and 5/8" thick gypsum fiberboard by processing stage and by energy form in MJ/m2 of board are summarized in Tables 4.41 to 4.44.

REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4.

5. 6.

Communication from R.S. Daly, Ontario Hydro, dated February 27, 1996. Canadian Industry Program for Energy Conservation (CIPEC), Ministry of Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, 1989. “Gypsum Board Systems: Technical Report”, Topic I-9250, AIA Environmental Resource Guide, July 1993. G. Natus, “Gypsum Fiberboard Production in Nova Scotia”, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Inorganic-Bonded Wood and Fiber Composite Materials, Moscow, ID, October 15-17, 1990, pp.85-87. Oral communication from B. Colbert, W.R. Grace Construction Products Division, August 9, 1996 “Gypsum Fiberboard (GFB): Technical Assessment Report”, Venta, Glaser & Associates, confidential client report, October 1991/July 1994.


TABLE 4.25

West Central East

4- 16

ENERGY USE IN 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]


Gypsum Extract.

RMs Transport

Manufacturing Paper Stucco

Board

Total Manufact.

0.2662

Total to Gate

Board Transport

Total to Market

10.5276

7.1344

12.5352

18.8984

38.5680

49.3618

17.3569

33.1710

35.7657

18.7404

37.6124

44.2882

0.8563 3.3261 2.4367 1.4557 2.7402 6.1095

50.2181 52.6878 38.2024 37.2214 47.0284 50.3977

0.4147

2.1800

7.1344

8.6797

0.3203

6.3555

7.1344

11.7375

TABLE 4.26A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East

Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total To Gate

6.6221 3.3051 7.7562

1.4079 0.0000 0.0000

2.6873 0.0000 1.2317

28.6079 25.1897 21.2130

0.0000 0.0279 0.0000

7.1131 4.1587 11.1958

2.9235 3.0843 2.8916

49.3618 35.7657 44.2882

TABLE 4.26B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total To Market

7.4784 8.7629 4.1615 4.7609 10.4964 10.4107

1.4079 2.5932 1.5804 0.0000 0.0000 3.3485

2.6873 2.6873 0.0000 0.0000 1.2317 1.3381

28.6079 28.6079 25.1897 25.1897 21.2130 21.2130

0.0000 0.0000 0.0279 0.0279 0.0000 0.0000

7.1131 7.1131 4.1587 4.1587 11.1958 11.1958

2.9235 2.9235 3.0843 3.0843 2.8916 2.8916

50.2181 52.6878 38.2024 37.2214 47.0284 50.3977


TABLE 4.27

West Central East

4- 17

ENERGY USE IN 1/2" TYPE X GYPSUM BOARD BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]


Gypsum Extract.

RMs Transport


Board

Total Manufact.

0.2719

Total to Gate

Board Transport

Total to Market

10.7048

6.8197

12.8010

18.8984

38.5191

49.4958

17.3569

33.0404

35.6597

18.7404

37.5466

44.3287

0.8693 3.3765 2.4736 1.4778 2.7817 6.2020

50.3651 52.8723 38.1334 37.1375 47.1104 50.5308

0.4235

2.1959

6.8197

8.8638

0.3271

6.4550

6.8197

11.9864

TABLE 4.28A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN 1/2" TYPE X GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]

West Central East

Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Gate

6.7165 3.3449 7.8856

1.4378 0.0000 0.0000

2.7443 0.0000 1.2575

28.5468 25.0608 21.0772

0.0000 0.0284 0.0000

7.1634 4.1732 11.2551

2.8871 3.0524 2.8533

49.4958 35.6597 44.3287

TABLE 4.28B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN 1/2" TYPE X GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Market

7.5858 8.8897 4.2142 4.8227 10.6673 10.5804

1.4378 2.6410 1.6043 0.0000 0.0000 3.3992

2.7443 2.7443 0.0000 0.0000 1.2575 1.3656

28.5468 28.5468 25.0608 25.0608 21.0772 21.0772

0.0000 0.0000 0.0284 0.0284 0.0000 0.0000

7.1634 7.1634 4.1732 4.1732 11.2551 11.2551

2.8871 2.8871 3.0524 3.0524 2.8533 2.8533

50.3651 52.8723 38.1334 37.1375 47.1104 50.5308


TABLE 4.29

West Central East

4- 18

ENERGY USE IN 1/2" MR GYPSUM BOARD BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]


Gypsum Extract.

RMs Transport


Board

Total Manufact.

0.3021

Total to Gate

Board Transport

Total to Market

11.8696

7.3344

14.2226

18.8984

40.4553

52.6270

17.3569

34.5393

37.4338

18.7404

39.3923

46.9092

0.9601 3.7292 2.7321 1.6322 3.0724 6.8500

53.5871 56.3563 40.1658 39.0660 49.9816 53.7592

0.4705

2.4239

7.3344

9.8481

0.3635

7.1534

7.3344

13.3175

TABLE 4.30A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN 1/2" MR GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East

Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Gate

7.4384 3.7005 8.7430

1.5974 0.0000 0.0000

3.0491 0.0000 1.3970

29.9055 26.0572 22.0363

0.0000 0.0316 0.0000

7.5211 4.3393 11.6610

3.1155 3.3051 3.0718

52.6270 37.4338 46.9092

TABLE 4.30B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN 1/2" MR GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Market

8.3985 9.8387 4.6606 5.3327 11.8154 11.7194

1.5974 2.9264 1.7720 0.0000 0.0000 3.7543

3.0491 3.0491 0.0000 0.0000 1.3970 1.5164

29.9055 29.9055 26.0572 26.0572 22.0363 22.0363

0.0000 0.0000 0.0316 0.0316 0.0000 0.0000

7.5211 7.5211 4.3393 4.3393 11.6610 11.6610

3.1155 3.1155 3.3051 3.3051 3.0718 3.0718

53.5871 56.3563 40.1658 39.0660 49.9816 53.7592


TABLE 4.31

West Central East

4- 19

ENERGY USE IN 5/8" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]


Gypsum Extract.

RMs Transport


Board

Total to Manufact.

0.3478

Total to Gate

Board Transport

Total to Market

13.5467

7.2223

16.3767

23.6229

47.2220

61.1164

21.6961

40.2580

43.5112

23.4256

45.9824

54.5451

1.0924 4.2433 3.1086 1.8572 3.4958 7.7942

62.2089 65.3597 46.6199 45.3684 58.0409 62.3393

0.5418

2.7114

7.2223

11.3397

0.4185

8.1442

7.2223

15.3346

TABLE 4.32A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN 5/8" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East

Vancouver Winnipeg Halifax

Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Gate

8.4443 4.1814 9.9753

1.8394 0.0000 0.0000

3.5109 0.0000 1.6079

34.9391 30.4860 25.4966

0.0000 0.0364 0.0000

8.9906 5.2023 14.1181

3.3921 3.6051 3.3472

61.1164 43.5112 54.5451

TABLE 4.32B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN 5/8" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Market

9.5368 11.1754 5.2738 6.0385 13.4711 13.3619

1.8394 3.3515 2.0162 0.0000 0.0000 4.2718

3.5109 3.5109 0.0000 0.0000 1.6079 1.7437

34.9391 34.9391 30.4860 30.4860 25.4966 25.4966

0.0000 0.0000 0.0364 0.0364 0.0000 0.0000

8.9906 8.9906 5.2023 5.2023 14.1181 14.1181

3.3921 3.3921 3.6051 3.6051 3.3472 3.3472

62.2089 65.3597 46.6199 45.3684 58.0409 62.3393


TABLE 4.33

West Central East

4- 20

ENERGY USE IN 5/8" TYPE X GYPSUM BOARD BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]


Gypsum Extract.

RMs Transport


Board

Total manufact.

0.3528

Total to Gate

Board Transport

Total to Market

13.7119

7.0339

16.6113

23.6229

47.2682

61.3329

21.6961

40.2321

43.5129

23.4256

46.0137

54.6769

1.1158 4.3340 3.1751 1.8969 3.5706 7.9608

62.4487 65.6669 46.6880 45.4098 58.2475 62.6377

0.5496

2.7312

7.0339

11.5021

0.4245

8.2387

7.0339

15.5542

TABLE 4.34A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN 5/8" TYPE X GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]

West Central East

Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Gate

8.5365 4.2223 10.0962

1.8657 0.0000 0.0000

3.5611 0.0000 1.6308

34.9538 30.4409 25.4453

0.0000 0.0369 0.0000

9.0386 5.2187 14.1740

3.3771 3.5942 3.3306

61.3329 43.5129 54.6769

TABLE 4.34B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN 5/8" TYPE X GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Market

9.6523 11.3260 5.3381 6.1191 13.6668 13.5552

1.8657 3.4102 2.0593 0.0000 0.0000 4.3631

3.5611 3.5611 0.0000 0.0000 1.6308 1.7695

34.9538 34.9538 30.4409 30.4409 25.4453 25.4453

0.0000 0.0000 0.0369 0.0369 0.0000 0.0000

9.0386 9.0386 5.2187 5.2187 14.1740 14.1740

3.3771 3.3771 3.5942 3.5942 3.3306 3.3306

62.4487 65.6669 46.6880 45.4098 58.2475 62.6377


TABLE 4.35

West Central East

4- 21

ENERGY USE IN 5/8" MR GYPSUM BOARD BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]


Gypsum Extrac.

RMs Transport


Board

Total Manufact.

0.3873

Total to Gate

Board Transport

Total to Market

15.0480

7.6713

18.2360

23.6229

49.5303

64.9656

21.6961

41.9945

45.5928

23.4256

48.1724

57.6791

1.2196 4.7371 3.4705 2.0733 3.9027 8.7014

66.1852 69.7027 49.0633 47.6662 61.5818 66.3804

0.6033

2.9951

7.6713

12.6271

0.4660

9.0407

7.6713

17.0756

TABLE 4.36A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN 5/8" MR GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East

Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Gate

9.3664 4.6319 11.0799

2.0482 0.0000 0.0000

3.9095 0.0000 1.7902

36.5444 31.6174 26.5792

0.0000 0.0405 0.0000

9.4495 5.4106 14.6399

3.6476 3.8924 3.5898

64.9656 45.5928 57.6791

TABLE 4.36B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN 5/8" MR GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Market

10.5860 12.4154 5.8515 6.7052 14.9826 14.8606

2.0482 3.7364 2.2509 0.0000 0.0000 4.7690

3.9095 3.9095 0.0000 0.0000 1.7902 1.9418

36.5444 36.5444 31.6174 31.6174 26.5792 26.5792

0.0000 0.0000 0.0405 0.0405 0.0000 0.0000

9.4495 9.4495 5.4106 5.4106 14.6399 14.6399

3.6476 3.6476 3.8924 3.8924 3.5898 3.5898

66.1852 69.7027 49.0633 47.6662 61.5818 66.3804


TABLE 4.37

West Central East

4- 22

ENERGY USE IN 5/16" MOBILE HOME GYPSUM BOARD BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]


Gypsum Extract.

RMs Transport


Board

Total Manufact.

0.1881

Total to Gate

Board Transport

Total to Market

7.6688

7.3938

8.8546

11.8115

28.0599

35.9168

10.8480

24.3730

26.3592

11.7128

27.3977

32.2919

0.6228 2.4190 1.7721 1.0587 1.9929 4.4432

36.5396 38.3358 28.1313 27.4179 34.2847 36.7351

0.2929

1.6932

7.3938

6.1312

0.2263

4.6678

7.3938

8.2911

TABLE 4.38A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN 5/16" MOBILE HOME GYPSUM BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Gate

4.9101 2.4880 5.6559

0.9945 0.0000 0.0000

1.8983 0.0000 0.8714

20.8227 18.4263 15.9141

0.0000 0.0197 0.0000

4.8059 2.8220 7.3922

2.4853 2.6032 2.4583

35.9168 26.3592 32.2919

TABLE 4.38B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN 5/16" MOBILE HOME BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Market

5.5328 6.4670 3.1108 3.5467 7.6487 7.5865

0.9945 1.8566 1.1494 0.0000 0.0000 2.4352

1.8983 1.8983 0.0000 0.0000 0.8714 0.9488

20.8227 20.8227 18.4263 18.4263 15.9141 15.9141

0.0000 0.0000 0.0197 0.0197 0.0000 0.0000

4.8059 4.8059 2.8220 2.8220 7.3922 7.3922

2.4853 2.4853 2.6032 2.6032 2.4583 2.4583

36.5396 38.3358 28.1313 27.4179 34.2847 36.7351


TABLE 4.39

West Central East

4- 23

ENERGY USE IN 1" SHAFTLINER BOARD BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]


Gypsum Extract.

RMs Transport


Board

Total Manufact.

0.6532

Total to Gate

Board Transport

Total to Market

24.8321

7.3938

30.7560

37.7967

75.9466

101.4319

34.7137

63.4038

69.1116

37.4809

73.6736

89.2869

2.0240 7.8616 5.7595 3.4408 6.4768 14.4405

103.4559 109.2935 74.8711 72.5524 95.7637 103.7274

1.0175

4.6903

7.3938

21.2962

0.7860

14.8273

7.3938

28.7989

TABLE 4.40A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN 1" SHAFTLINER BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]

West Central East

Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Gate

15.2497 7.4509 18.2698

3.4544 0.0000 0.0000

6.5935 0.0000 3.0161

55.7984 47.5128 39.4103

0.0000 0.0683 0.0000

15.2963 8.6214 23.6545

5.0395 5.4582 4.9361

101.4319 69.1116 89.2869

TABLE 4.40B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN 1" SHAFTLINER BOARD BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M 2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural gas

Coal

Oil

Electricity

Total to Market

17.2737 20.3098 9.4750 10.8918 24.7467 24.5443

3.4544 6.2560 3.7355 0.0000 0.0000 7.9145

6.5935 6.5935 0.0000 0.0000 3.0161 3.2677

55.7984 55.7984 47.5128 47.5128 39.4103 39.4103

0.0000 0.0000 0.0683 0.0683 0.0000 0.0000

15.2963 15.2963 8.6214 8.6214 23.6545 23.6545

5.0395 5.0395 5.4582 5.4582 4.9361 4.9361

103.4559 109.2935 74.8711 72.5524 95.7637 103.7274


TABLE 4.41

West Central East

4- 24

ENERGY USE IN 1/2" GFB BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

RMs Extract.

RMs Transport

0.3511 0.3511 0.3511 0.3511 0.3511 0.3511

3.1526 3.1526 3.1526 3.1526 3.1526 3.1526


Manufacturing Paper Perlite

Stucco

Board

Total Manufact

4.4325 4.4325 4.4325 4.4325 4.4325 4.4325

12.9129 12.9129 12.9129 12.9129 12.9129 12.9129

18.9259 18.9259 18.9259 18.9259 18.9259 18.9259

47.0943 47.0943 47.0943 47.0943 47.0943 47.0943

10.8229 10.8229 10.8229 10.8229 10.8229 10.8229

Total to Gate

Board Transport

Total to Market

50.5980 50.5980 50.5980 50.5980 50.5980 50.5980

32.0235 26.7484 19.4005 9.9580 6.9969 4.7538

82.6215 77.3464 69.9985 60.5560 57.5949 55.3518

TABLE 4.42A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN 1/2" GFB BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East

Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural Gas

Oil

Electricity

Total to Gate

3.6636 3.6636 3.6636

0.2828 0.2828 0.2828

2.1471 2.1471 2.1471

33.7609 33.7609 33.7609

3.6956 3.6956 3.6956

7.0482 7.0482 7.0482

50.5980 50.5980 50.5980

TABLE 4.42B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN 1/2" GFB BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural Gas

Oil

Electricity

Total to Market

3.6636 3.6636 3.6636 3.6636 3.6636 8.4174

32.3063 27.0312 19.6833 10.2408 7.2797 0.2828

2.1471 2.1471 2.1471 2.1471 2.1471 2.1471

33.7609 33.7609 33.7609 33.7609 33.7609 33.7609

3.6956 3.6956 3.6956 3.6956 3.6956 3.6956

7.0482 7.0482 7.0482 7.0482 7.0482 7.0482

82.6215 77.3464 69.9985 60.5560 57.5949 55.3518


TABLE 4.43

West Central East

4- 25

ENERGY USE IN 5/8" GFB BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]


Manufacturing

RMs Extract.

RMs Transport

Paper

Perlite

Stucco

Board

Total Manufact

0.4357 0.4357 0.4357 0.4357 0.4357 0.4357

3.9117 3.9117 3.9117 3.9117 3.9117 3.9117

5.4999 5.4999 5.4999 5.4999 5.4999 5.4999

13.4291 13.4291 13.4291 13.4291 13.4291 13.4291

16.0224 16.0224 16.0224 16.0224 16.0224 16.0224

23.6574 23.6574 23.6574 23.6574 23.6574 23.6574

58.6088 58.6088 58.6088 58.6088 58.6088 58.6088

Total to Gate

Board Transport

Total to Market

62.9562 62.9562 62.9562 62.9562 62.9562 62.9562

39.9944 33.4063 24.2295 12.4366 8.7385 5.9371

102.9506 96.3625 87.1857 75.3928 71.6947 68.8933

TABLE 4.44A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN 5/8" GFB BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural Gas

Oil

Electricity

Total to Gate

4.5458 4.5458 4.5458

0.3509 0.3509 0.3509

2.6641 2.6641 2.6641

42.0512 42.0512 42.0512

4.5854 4.5854 4.5854

8.7588 8.7588 8.7588

62.9562 62.9562 62.9562

TABLE 4.44B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN 5/8" GFB BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION [MJ/M2 ]

West Central East


Diesel-road

Diesel-rail

HFOmarine

Natural Gas

Oil

Electricity

Total to Market

4.5458 4.5458 4.5458 4.5458 4.5458 10.4829

40.3453 33.7572 24.5804 12.7875 9.0894 0.3509

2.6641 2.6641 2.6641 2.6641 2.6641 2.6641

42.0512 42.0512 42.0512 42.0512 42.0512 42.0512

4.5854 4.5854 4.5854 4.5854 4.5854 4.5854

8.7588 8.7588 8.7588 8.7588 8.7588 8.7588

102.9506 96.3625 87.1857 75.3928 71.6947 68.8933


5.0

5-1

ENERGY USE - FINISHING PRODUCTS

In this section, we provide the estimates of energy consumption for the raw materials extraction and transportation, manufacturing and finished products transportation of the gypsum board joint finishing compounds and joint paper tape. All of the estimates are developed essentially in the same manner as the energy unit factors estimated in Section 4 for gypsum board.

5.1

JOINT FINISHING PRODUCTS RAW MATERIAL EXTRACTION AND TRANSPORTATION

In Section 3.3 generic formulations for both ready mix drying and dry setting compounds were given. While both types of joint compounds are comprised of a number of different raw materials, most of these (limestone, mica, talc, gypsum and clays) are industrial minerals quarried in open pits. We will therefore assume that it takes 0.027 GJ/tonne1 for extraction of these materials, and that all this energy is in the form of diesel fuel (road), as specified in the Sustainable Materials Project Research Guidelines. For gypsum, we take into account the fact that 1.2048 tonnes of gypsum are needed to produce 1 tonne of calcined plaster. (For water and PVA resin we assume no embodied extraction energy, whereas for “other” materials we assume the same energy loading as for the other industrial minerals.) As no detailed regional data are available, we will assume that the same amount of energy is required to extract the required quantities of raw materials all across Canada. Table 5.1 shows average energy consumption for applicable industrial minerals and their primary on site processing for both types of joint compounds, expressed in MJ/kg of compound as well as in MJ/m2 of board (typical usage of joint compound per m2 of gypsum board was shown in Section 2.5). TABLE 5.1 AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR JOINT COMPOUNDS RAW MATERIALS EXTRACTION Ready Mix Compound

Water Calcium carbonate Gypsum plaster Mica Talc Clay PVA resin Other Total

Setting (Dry) Compound

[MJ/kg of compound]

[MJ/m2 of board]

[MJ/kg of compound]

[MJ/m2 of board]

0.00000 0.01412 0.00095 0.00103 0.00046 0.00000 0.00003

0.00000 0.00952 0.00064 0.00069 0.00031 0.00000 0.00002

0.00986 0.01578 0.00194 0.00135 0.00076

0.00347 0.00555 0.00068 0.00048 0.00027

0.01658

0.01117

0.02968

0.01045


5-2

Joint Compounds Raw Materials Transportation

The transportation energy use estimates were made by applying the appropriate combustion energy factors shown earlier (Section 4.1) to the formulations for both the ready mix and setting joint compounds, as shown in Tables 3.6 and 3.7 respectively, taking into account the average raw materials transportation distances, backhaul assumptions, and modes of transport (Table 3.8). Resulting estimates of energy usage associated with the transportation of the ready mix joint compounds raw materials are shown in Tables 5.2 and 5.3, and of the setting compounds in Tables 5.4 and 5.5.

TABLE 5.2 AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR READY MIX JOINT COMPOUNDS RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION (MJ/KG OF COMPOUND)

Water Clay Talc Mica Calcium carbonate PVA resin Other Total note:

West Region

Central Region

East Region

0.00000 0.02285 0.14896 0.07840 0.58576 0.00896 0.00280

0.00000 0.03808 0.03405 0.07840 0.58576 0.00896 0.00280

0.00000 0.03808 0.01277 0.07840 0.11715 0.00896 0.00280

0.84773

0.74805

0.25816

all energy in form of diesel (road)

TABLE 5.3 AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR READY MIX JOINT COMPOUNDS RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION (MJ/M 2 OF BOARD)

Water Clay Talc Mica Calcium carbonate PVA resin Other Total note:

all energy in form of diesel (road)

West Region

Central Region

East Region

0.00000 0.01540 0.10040 0.05284 0.39480 0.00604 0.00189

0.00000 0.02567 0.02295 0.05284 0.39480 0.00604 0.00189

0.00000 0.02567 0.00861 0.05284 0.07896 0.00604 0.00189

0.57137

0.50418

0.17400


5-3

TABLE 5.4 AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR SETTING JOINT COMPOUNDS RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION (MJ/KG OF COMPOUND) West

Gypsum plaster Calcium carbonate Mica Clay Other Total

Central

total (diesel road)

total

1.95552 0.40880 0.16128 0.06720 0.07840 2.67120

East total

diesel road

diesel rail

1.56170 0.40880 0.16128 0.11200 0.07840

1.08640 0.40880 0.16128 0.11200 0.07840

0.47530 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

2.32218

1.84688

0.47530

diesel road

diesel rail

1.56170 0.08176 0.16128 0.11200 0.07840

1.08640 0.08176 0.16128 0.11200 0.07840

0.47530 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

1.99514

1.51984

0.47530

TABLE 5.5 AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR SETTING JOINT COMPOUNDS RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION (MJ/M 2 OF BOARD) West

Gypsum plaster Calcium carbonate Mica Clay Other Total

Central

total (diesel road)

total

0.68834 0.14390 0.05677 0.02365 0.02760 0.94026

East total

diesel road

diesel rail

0.54972 0.14390 0.05677 0.03942 0.02760

0.38241 0.14390 0.05677 0.03942 0.02760

0.16731 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

0.81741

0.65010

0.16731

diesel road

diesel rail

0.54972 0.02878 0.05677 0.03942 0.02760

0.38241 0.02878 0.05677 0.03942 0.02760

0.16731 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

0.70229

0.53498

0.16731

Joint Paper Tape Raw Materials Transportation

As already noted, joint paper tape is essentially the same product as “ivory” paper for gypsum board facings. The average energy consumption associated with the transportation of waste paper as raw material for the paper mill and of the paper stock from the paper mill to the producer to be converted to the joint tape is therefore estimated in a similar manner as for the “ivory” paper for the board production in Section 4.1. Table 5.6 provides resulting estimates in GJ per tonne of paper.


5-4

TABLE 5.6 AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR JOINT PAPER TAPE RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION (GJ/TONNE OF PAPER) Finished Paper for Joint Tape

Waste Paper

West Avg. Central Avg. East Avg.

diesel-road

diesel-road

HFO-marine


0.3894 0.3894 0.3894

0.9652 0.6735 0.8501

0.0000 0.0000 0.0087

0.9652 0.6735 0.8588

The above estimates are then converted to MJ/m of joint tape (52 mm wide) assuming paper weight of 0.2358 kg/m2 (Table 5.7). [For example, for waste paper transportation: 0.3894 GJ/tonne (=MJ/kg) x 0.2358 kg/m2 = 0.09182 MJ/m2 of paper stock for joint tape; m2 of such paper provides 19.23 lineal meters of paper tape 52 mm wide; 0.09182 MJ/m2 / 19.23 m = 0.477 MJ/m of tape.] Taking into consideration typical usage of 0.98 m of tape per m2 of gypsum board, unit factors can be expressed also per m2 of the board (Table 5.8).

TABLE 5.7 AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR JOINT PAPER TAPE RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION (MJ/M OF JOINT TAPE) Waste Paper


Finished Paper for Joint Tape

diesel-road

diesel-road

HFO-marine


0.00477 0.00477 0.00477

0.01183 0.00826 0.01042

0.00000 0.00000 0.00011

0.01183 0.00826 0.01053

TABLE 5.8 AVERAGE ENERGY USE FOR JOINT PAPER TAPE RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION (MJ/M 2 OF BOARD) Waste Paper


Finished Paper for Joint Tape

diesel-road

diesel-road

HFO-marine


0.00468 0.00468 0.00468

0.01160 0.00809 0.01022

0.00000 0.00000 0.00010

0.01160 0.00809 0.01032


5.2

5-5

JOINT FINISHING PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING

Joint compounds manufacturing consists of a number of separate steps, namely through: • • •

industrial minerals processing, resin binder production, and joint compound compounding (processing).

Limestone, talc, mica and clays are subjected to secondary crushing, drying and grinding. Gypsum goes through the same processing, followed by calcination and stucco (plaster) grinding. While we had detailed information regarding energy inputs associated with the production of gypsum / plaster (Section 4.2, Table 4.6), similar detailed data for other industrial minerals used in joint compound production is not readily available. We therefore assumed that energy embodied in secondary crushing, drying and grinding of limestone, mica, talc and clays is the same as that of the weighted Canadian average for gypsum. As all of these industrial minerals are indeed handled and processed in a similar manner, we believe that any error introduced into our estimates by this assumption is negligible. One of the leading PVA resin suppliers to the ready mix joint compound producers provided the total energy associated with the manufacturing of the binder as 200 BTU/lb (0.464 MJ/kg) of resin, with a 20/80 split between electricity and natural gas use.2 Typical electrical power usage needed for compounding / processing (mixing, pumping, resin heating) of the joint compounds was provided by the Canadian producers. Total energy consumption estimates for manufacturing of ready mix and setting (dry) joint compounds were developed and tabulated by both the processing step and the type of energy used. For ease of use, these estimates are presented both in MJ per kg of compound and MJ per m2 of gypsum board. Tables 5.9 to 5.12 show the unit factors for the ready mix compounds, Tables 5.13 to 5.16 do the same for the setting compounds.

TABLE 5.9 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND MANUFACTURING BY PROCESS STEP (MJ/KG OF COMPOUND)

Water Clay Talc Mica Calcium carbonate PVA resin Other Processing TOTAL

secondary crushing

drying

grinding

total minerals processing

resin production

processing

total

0.00056 0.00126 0.00116 0.01732 0.00003 -

0.00600 0.01340 0.01235 0.18449 0.00035 -

0.00034 0.00076 0.00070 0.01043 0.00002 -

0.00690 0.01542 0.01420 0.21224 0.00041 -

0.01855 -

0.05400

0.00690 0.01542 0.01420 0.21224 0.01855 0.00041 0.05400

0.02033

0.21659

0.01225

0.24917

0.01855

0.05400

0.32172


5-6

TABLE 5.10 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND MANUFACTURING BY PROCESS STEP (MJ/M 2 OF GYPSUM BOARD)

Water Clay Talc Mica Calcium carbonate PVA resin Other Processing TOTAL

secondary crushing

drying

grinding

total minerals processing

resin production

processing

total

0.00038 0.00085 0.00078 0.01167 0.00002 -

0.00404 0.00903 0.00832 0.12435 0.00024 -

0.00023 0.00051 0.00047 0.00703 0.00001 -

0.00465 0.01039 0.00957 0.14305 0.00027 -

0.01250 -

0.03640

0.00465 0.01039 0.00957 0.14305 0.01250 0.00027 0.03640

0.01370

0.14598

0.00825

0.16794

0.01250

0.03640

0.21684

TABLE 5.11 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND MANUFACTURING BY ENERGY FORM (MJ/KG OF COMPOUND)

Water Clay Talc Mica Calcium carbonate PVA resin Other Total raw mat. Processing TOTAL

natural gas

oil

diesel road

electric

total

0.00340 0.00760 0.00700 0.10465 0.00371 0.00020 0.12657 -

0.00004 0.00008 0.00007 0.00108 0.00000 0.00127 -

0.00249 0.00557 0.00513 0.07663 0.00015 0.08996 -

0.00097 0.00217 0.00200 0.02988 0.01484 0.00006 0.04992 0.05400

0.00690 0.01542 0.01420 0.21224 0.01855 0.00041 0.26772 0.05400

0.12657

0.00127

0.08996

0.10392

0.32172


5-7

TABLE 5.12 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND MANUFACTURING BY ENERGY FORM (MJ/M 2 OF GYPSUM BOARD)

Water Clay Talc Mica Calcium carbonate PVA resin Other Total raw mat. Processing TOTAL

natural gas

oil

diesel road

electric

total

0.00229 0.00512 0.00472 0.07054 0.00250 0.00013 0.08531 -

0.00002 0.00005 0.00005 0.00073 0.00000 0.00086 -

0.00168 0.00375 0.00346 0.05165 0.00010 0.06063 -

0.00065 0.00146 0.00135 0.02014 0.01000 0.00004 0.03364 0.03640

0.00465 0.01039 0.00957 0.14305 0.01250 0.00027 0.18044 0.03640

0.08531

0.00086

0.06063

0.07004

0.21684

TABLE 5.13 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN SETTING JOINT COMPOUND MANUFACTURING BY PROCESS STEP (MJ/KG OF COMPOUND)

Gypsum plaster Calcium carbonate Mica Clay Other Compounding TOTAL

secondary crushing

drying

grinding

calcination

stucco grinding

processing

total

0.01935 0.01209 0.00238 0.00166 0.00093 -

0.20612 0.12876 0.02540 0.01764 0.00988 -

0.01166 0.00728 0.00144 0.00100 0.00056 -

0.50680 -

-

0.00297 -

0.04320

0.74690 0.14812 0.02922 0.02029 0.01136 0.04320

0.03640

0.38779

0.02193

0.50680

0.00297

0.04320

0.99909

TABLE 5.14 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN SETTING JOINT COMPOUND MANUFACTURING BY PROCESS STEP (MJ/M 2 OF GYPSUM BOARD)


secondary crushing

drying

grinding

calcination

stucco grinding

processing

total

0.00681 0.00425 0.00084 0.00058 0.00033

0.07256 0.04532 0.00894 0.00621 0.00348

0.00410 0.00256 0.00051 0.00035 0.00020

0.17839 -

-

-

-

-

0.00105 -

0.01521

0.26291 0.05214 0.01028 0.00714 0.00400 0.01521

0.01281

0.13650

0.00772

0.17839

0.00105

0.01521

0.35168


5-8

TABLE 5.15 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN SETTING JOINT COMPOUND MANUFACTURING BY ENERGY FORM (MJ/KG OF COMPOUND)


natural gas

oil

diesel road

electric

total

0.45063 0.07304 0.01441 0.01000 0.00560 -

0.16370 0.00076 0.00015 0.00010 0.00006 -

0.08561 0.05348 0.01055 0.00733 0.00410 -

0.04694 0.02085 0.00411 0.00286 0.00160 0.04320

0.74690 0.14812 0.02922 0.02029 0.01136 0.04320

0.55368

0.16477

0.16107

0.11956

0.99909

TABLE 5.16 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN SETTING JOINT COMPOUND MANUFACTURING BY ENERGY FORM (MJ/M 2 OF GYPSUM BOARD)


natural gas

oil

diesel road

electric

total

0.15863 0.02571 0.00507 0.00352 0.00197 -

0.05763 0.00027 0.00005 0.00004 0.00002 -

0.03014 0.01882 0.00371 0.00258 0.00144 -

0.01653 0.00734 0.00145 0.00101 0.00056 0.01521

0.26291 0.05214 0.01028 0.00714 0.00400 0.01521

0.19490

0.05800

0.05670

0.04209

0.35168

Weighted average energy use in gypsum paper production was discussed in Section 4.2, and shown in Table 4.11. Due to the already noted similarity between the paper used for joint tape and the gypsum facings, we will assume that the embodied manufacturing energy for both types of paper is the same. The only other energy input in the joint tape manufacturing is the power needed to lightly sand the paper and to slit the large paper rolls into the rolls of paper tape. In comparison with the other paper manufacturing energy inputs, this is negligible, and we will not consider it in our totals. The energy estimates expressed per mass of paper in Table 4.11 are converted to MJ/m of joint tape (52 mm wide) assuming paper weight of 0.2358 kg/m2, and taking into consideration typical usage of 0.98 m of tape per m2 of gypsum board, unit factors are also expressed per m2 of the board (Table 5.17).


5-9

TABLE 5.17 WEIGHTED AVERAGE ENERGY USE IN MANUFACTURING OF JOINT PAPER TAPE BY ENERGY FORM

GJ/tonne of paper MJ/m of tape MJ/m2 of gypsum board

5.3

natural gas

oil

electric

total paper

11.60470 0.14229 0.13945

0.61080 0.00749 0.00734

2.91480 0.03574 0.03503

15.13020 0.18552 0.18181

JOINT FINISHING PRODUCTS TRANSPORTATION

This subsection provides information regarding the distances and modes of the transportation of joint finishing products from their point of manufacture to the distribution centres across Canada. The ATHENATM computer model uses these data to calculate the energy consumption associated with the finished products transportation from the plant gate to the market. Here, in the study, we show some estimates just for illustration. Information regarding transportation distances and modes obtained from some of the individual producers was supplemented by other known geographical market distribution data. Based on our knowledge of the Canadian gypsum board and associated finishing products markets, we made some assumptions regarding the relative market share between the various national as well as regional producers. Based on the information received from the joint compounds producers, we concluded that: • • • • • •

Vancouver is served 70% by a local producer, 30% from Calgary, all by truck, Calgary is served 50% by a local producer, 40% from Edmonton, both by truck, and the remaining 10% from Ontario by rail, Winnipeg is supplied 40% from Calgary, 60% from Ontario, both by rail, with remaining local transport by truck, Toronto is served 70% by Ontario producers, with the remaining 30% coming from Montreal, all by truck, Montreal is served 100% by local producers, all by truck, Halifax is supplied 90% from plants in Montreal, shipped by rail and locally distributed by truck, with the remaining 10% served by a smaller regional supplier.

Further, it was assumed that only 20% backhaul is involved in the local truck transport, 50% backhaul in the long distance (inter-city) truck transport, and 100% backhaul in the rail transport of the finished goods. The weighted average transportation distances by mode were then developed using the distances of each production facilities from the designated cities, and are shown in Table 5.18. For joint paper tape we assumed the same transportation distances and modes of transport as for the joint compounds, as in most cases it is produced and shipped from the same production facility as the joint compounds.


5-10

TABLE 5.18 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES BY MODE FOR JOINT FINISHING PRODUCTS (KM) Average Distances & Transport Mode Truck

Rail


490.5 234 90 372 90 126

0 300 1740 0 0 1125


1.18

0.49

note:


The weighted average distances from table 5.18 were converted to the energy estimates by applying the appropriate energy per tonne-km consumption factors. The resulting estimates of the finished products transportation energy unit factors are shown in Tables 5.20 to 5.24. TABLE 5.20 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION ENERGY FOR FINISHED JOINT COMPOUNDS (MJ/KG OF COMPOUND)


Truck diesel-road

Rail diesel-rail

Total

0.57879 0.27612 0.10620 0.43896 0.10620 0.14868

0.00000 0.14700 0.85260 0.00000 0.00000 0.55125

0.57879 0.42312 0.95880 0.43896 0.10620 0.69993

TABLE 5.21 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION ENERGY FOR FINISHED READY MIX JOINT COMPOUNDS (MJ/M 2 OF BOARD)


Truck diesel-road

Rail diesel-rail

Total

0.39010 0.18610 0.07158 0.29586 0.07158 0.10021

0.00000 0.09908 0.57465 0.00000 0.00000 0.37154

0.39010 0.28518 0.64623 0.29586 0.07158 0.47175


5-11

TABLE 5.22 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION ENERGY FOR FINISHED SETTING JOINT COMPOUNDS (MJ/M 2 OF BOARD)


Truck diesel-road

Rail diesel-rail

Total

0.20373 0.09719 0.03738 0.15451 0.03738 0.05234

0.00000 0.05174 0.30012 0.00000 0.00000 0.19404

0.20373 0.14894 0.33750 0.15451 0.03738 0.24638

TABLE 5.23 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION ENERGY FOR FINISHED JOINT PAPER TAPE (MJ/M OF TAPE)


Truck diesel-road

Rail diesel-rail

Total

0.00710 0.00339 0.00130 0.00538 0.00130 0.00182

0.00000 0.00180 0.01045 0.00000 0.00000 0.00676

0.00710 0.00519 0.01176 0.00538 0.00130 0.00858

TABLE 5.24 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION ENERGY FOR FINISHED JOINT PAPER TAPE (MJ/M 2 OF BOARD)


5.4

Truck diesel-road

Rail diesel-rail

Total

0.00695 0.00332 0.00128 0.00527 0.00128 0.00179

0.00000 0.00177 0.01025 0.00000 0.00000 0.00662

0.00695 0.00508 0.01152 0.00527 0.00128 0.00841

JOINT FINISHING PRODUCTS - ENERGY SUMMARY

In this section we summarize all the preceding energy estimates associated with production of ready mix joint compounds, setting joint compounds, and joint paper tape by processing stage and by energy form. In the following tables (5.25 to 5.30), all these unit factors are expressed in both the customary units that the products are marketed in, i.e. in MJ per kg for joint compounds and in MJ


5-12

per lineal meter for tape, as well as per m2 of gypsum board, so that their usage (and associated energy) can be directly related to the gypsum board that it complements and finishes. The relative distribution of energy used in production of associated finishing products by process step is shown in Table 5.31 and Fig. 5.1. In a sharp contrast with gypsum board, where the manufacturing step represents the biggest share of the embodied energy, for joint compounds it is the raw materials transportation that contributes most to the total energy consumption. Combined raw materials and finished goods transportation represents almost 75% of the total energy use.

TABLE 5.31 AVERAGE DISTRIBUTION OF ENERGY USE IN JOINT FINISHING PRODUCTS PRODUCTION BY PROCESS STAGE [%] Extraction

ready mix joint compounds setting (dry) joint compounds joint paper tape

1.25 0.77 -

Raw Materials Manufacturing Transport

40.50 59.95 7.24

24.27 25.98 89.62

Finished Goods Transport 33.98 13.30 3.14

Extraction 100

RM Transport Manufacturing

% of total energy use

Finished Transport 80

60

40

20

0 Ready Mix

Setting Compound

Joint Tape

Fig. 5.1: Breakdown of Energy Use in Joint Finishing Products Production by Process Stage


5-13

TABLE 5.25 ENERGY USE IN READY MIX JOINT COMPOUNDS PRODUCTION BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION Extraction

Manufacturing

Raw Materials Transport

Total to Gate

Finished Products Transport

Total to Market

minerals processing

resin production

processing

total manufacturing

0.84773 0.84773 0.74805 0.74805 0.25816 0.25816

0.24917 0.24917 0.24917 0.24917 0.24917 0.24917

0.01855 0.01855 0.01855 0.01855 0.01855 0.01855

0.05400 0.05400 0.05400 0.05400 0.05400 0.05400

0.32172 0.32172 0.32172 0.32172 0.32172 0.32172

1.18603 1.18603 1.08635 1.08635 0.59646 0.59646

0.57879 0.42312 0.95880 0.43896 0.10620 0.69993

1.76482 1.60915 2.04515 1.52531 0.70266 1.29639

0.57137 0.57137 0.50418 0.50418 0.17400 0.17400

0.16794 0.16794 0.16794 0.16794 0.16794 0.16794

0.01250 0.01250 0.01250 0.01250 0.01250 0.01250

0.03640 0.03640 0.03640 0.03640 0.03640 0.03640

0.21684 0.21684 0.21684 0.21684 0.21684 0.21684

0.79938 0.79938 0.73220 0.73220 0.40201 0.40201

0.39010 0.28518 0.64623 0.29586 0.07158 0.47175

1.18949 1.08457 1.37843 1.02806 0.47359 0.87377

[MJ/kg of compound] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

0.01658 0.01658 0.01658 0.01658 0.01658 0.01658

[MJ/m 2 of board] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

0.01117 0.01117 0.01117 0.01117 0.01117 0.01117


5-14

TABLE 5.26A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN READY MIX JOINT COMPOUNDS PRODUCTION BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION diesel-road

diesel-rail

natural gas

oil

electric

TOTAL

0.95427 0.95427 0.85459 0.85459 0.36470 0.36470

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

0.12657 0.12657 0.12657 0.12657 0.12657 0.12657

0.00127 0.00127 0.00127 0.00127 0.00127 0.00127

0.10392 0.10392 0.10392 0.10392 0.10392 0.10392

1.18603 1.18603 1.08635 1.08635 0.59646 0.59646

0.64318 0.64318 0.57599 0.57599 0.24581 0.24581

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

0.08531 0.08531 0.08531 0.08531 0.08531 0.08531

0.00086 0.00086 0.00086 0.00086 0.00086 0.00086

0.07004 0.07004 0.07004 0.07004 0.07004 0.07004

0.79938 0.79938 0.73220 0.73220 0.40201 0.40201

[MJ/kg of compound] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [MJ/m 2 of board] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

TABLE 5.26B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN READY MIX JOINT COMPOUNDS PRODUCTION BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION diesel-road

diesel-rail

natural gas

oil

electric

TOTAL

1.53306 1.23039 0.96079 1.29355 0.47090 0.51338

0.00000 0.14700 0.85260 0.00000 0.00000 0.55125

0.12657 0.12657 0.12657 0.12657 0.12657 0.12657

0.00127 0.00127 0.00127 0.00127 0.00127 0.00127

0.10392 0.10392 0.10392 0.10392 0.10392 0.10392

1.76482 1.60915 2.04515 1.52531 0.70266 1.29639

1.03328 0.82928 0.64757 0.87185 0.31739 0.34602

0.00000 0.09908 0.57465 0.00000 0.00000 0.37154

0.08531 0.08531 0.08531 0.08531 0.08531 0.08531

0.00086 0.00086 0.00086 0.00086 0.00086 0.00086

0.07004 0.07004 0.07004 0.07004 0.07004 0.07004

1.18949 1.08457 1.37843 1.02806 0.47359 0.87377



5-15

TABLE 5.27 ENERGY USE IN SETTING JOINT COMPOUNDS PRODUCTION BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION Extraction

Raw Materials Transport

Manufacturing

minerals processing

processing

Total to Gate

Finished Products Transport

Total to Market

total manufacturing

[MJ/kg of compound] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

0.02968 0.02968 0.02968 0.02968 0.02968 0.02968

2.67120 2.67120 2.32218 2.32218 1.99514 1.99514

0.95589 0.95589 0.95589 0.95589 0.95589 0.95589

0.04320 0.04320 0.04320 0.04320 0.04320 0.04320

0.99909 0.99909 0.99909 0.99909 0.99909 0.99909

3.69997 3.69997 3.35095 3.35095 3.02391 3.02391

0.57879 0.42312 0.95880 0.43896 0.10620 0.69993

4.27876 4.12309 4.30975 3.78991 3.13011 3.72384

0.01045 0.01045 0.01045 0.01045 0.01045 0.01045

0.94026 0.94026 0.81741 0.81741 0.70229 0.70229

0.33647 0.33647 0.33647 0.33647 0.33647 0.33647

0.01521 0.01521 0.01521 0.01521 0.01521 0.01521

0.35168 0.35168 0.35168 0.35168 0.35168 0.35168

1.30239 1.30239 1.17953 1.17953 1.06442 1.06442

0.20373 0.14894 0.33750 0.15451 0.03738 0.24638

1.50612 1.45133 1.51703 1.33405 1.10180 1.31079

[MJ/m 2 of board] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax


TABLE 5.28A

5-16

CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN SETTING JOINT COMPOUNDS PRODUCTION BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION diesel-road

diesel-rail

natural gas

oil

electric

TOTAL

2.86195 2.86195 2.03763 2.03763 1.71059 1.71059

0.00000 0.00000 0.47530 0.47530 0.47530 0.47530

0.55368 0.55368 0.55368 0.55368 0.55368 0.55368

0.16477 0.16477 0.16477 0.16477 0.16477 0.16477

0.11956 0.11956 0.11956 0.11956 0.11956 0.11956

3.69997 3.69997 3.35095 3.35095 3.02391 3.02391

1.00741 1.00741 0.71725 0.71725 0.60213 0.60213

0.00000 0.00000 0.16731 0.16731 0.16731 0.16731

0.19490 0.19490 0.19490 0.19490 0.19490 0.19490

0.05800 0.05800 0.05800 0.05800 0.05800 0.05800

0.04209 0.04209 0.04209 0.04209 0.04209 0.04209

1.30239 1.30239 1.17953 1.17953 1.06442 1.06442


TABLE 5.28B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN SETTING JOINT COMPOUNDS PRODUCTION BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION diesel-road

diesel-rail

natural gas

oil

electric

TOTAL

3.44074 3.13807 2.14383 2.47659 1.81679 1.85927

0.00000 0.14700 1.32790 0.47530 0.47530 1.02655

0.55368 0.55368 0.55368 0.55368 0.55368 0.55368

0.16477 0.16477 0.16477 0.16477 0.16477 0.16477

0.11956 0.11956 0.11956 0.11956 0.11956 0.11956

4.27876 4.12309 4.30975 3.78991 3.13011 3.72384

1.21114 1.10460 0.75463 0.87176 0.63951 0.65446

0.00000 0.05174 0.46742 0.16731 0.16731 0.36135

0.19490 0.19490 0.19490 0.19490 0.19490 0.19490

0.05800 0.05800 0.05800 0.05800 0.05800 0.05800

0.04209 0.04209 0.04209 0.04209 0.04209 0.04209

1.50612 1.45133 1.51703 1.33405 1.10180 1.31079



5-17

TABLE 5.29 ENERGY USE IN JOINT PAPER TAPE PRODUCTION BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION Raw Materials Transport

Manufacturing

Total to Gate

Finished Joint Tape Transport

Total to Market

waste paper

finished paper

total RMs transport

0.38940 0.38940 0.38940 0.38940 0.38940 0.38940

0.96520 0.96520 0.67350 0.67350 0.85880 0.85880

1.35460 1.35460 1.06290 1.06290 1.24820 1.24820

15.13020 15.13020 15.13020 15.13020 15.13020 15.13020

16.48480 16.48480 16.19310 16.19310 16.37840 16.37840

0.57879 0.42312 0.95880 0.43896 0.10620 0.69993

17.06359 16.90792 17.15190 16.63206 16.48460 17.07833

0.00477 0.00477 0.00477 0.00477 0.00477 0.00477

0.01183 0.01183 0.00826 0.00826 0.01053 0.01053

0.01661 0.01661 0.01303 0.01303 0.01530 0.01530

0.18552 0.18552 0.18552 0.18552 0.18552 0.18552

0.20213 0.20213 0.19855 0.19855 0.20083 0.20083

0.00710 0.00519 0.01176 0.00538 0.00130 0.00858

0.20923 0.20732 0.21031 0.20394 0.20213 0.20941

0.00468 0.00468 0.00468 0.00468 0.00468 0.00468

0.01160 0.01160 0.00809 0.00809 0.01032 0.01032

0.01628 0.01628 0.01277 0.01277 0.01500 0.01500

0.18181 0.18181 0.18181 0.18181 0.18181 0.18181

0.19809 0.19809 0.19458 0.19458 0.19681 0.19681

0.00695 0.00508 0.01152 0.00527 0.00128 0.00841

0.20504 0.20317 0.20610 0.19986 0.19809 0.20522

[MJ/kg] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [MJ/m of tape] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [MJ/m 2 of board] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax


5-18

TABLE 5.30A CRADLE TO GATE ENERGY USE IN JOINT PAPER TAPE PRODUCTION BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION dieselroad

dieselrail

HFOmarine

natural gas

oil

electric

TOTAL

1.35460 1.35460 1.06290 1.06290 1.23950 1.23950

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00870 0.00870

11.60470 11.60470 11.60470 11.60470 11.60470 11.60470

0.61080 0.61080 0.61080 0.61080 0.61080 0.61080

2.91480 2.91480 2.91480 2.91480 2.91480 2.91480

16.48490 16.48490 16.19320 16.19320 16.37850 16.37850

0.01661 0.01661 0.01303 0.01303 0.01520 0.01520

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00011 0.00011

0.14229 0.14229 0.14229 0.14229 0.14229 0.14229

0.00749 0.00749 0.00749 0.00749 0.00749 0.00749

0.03574 0.03574 0.03574 0.03574 0.03574 0.03574

0.20213 0.20213 0.19855 0.19855 0.20083 0.20083

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00010 0.00010

0.13945 0.13945 0.13945 0.13945 0.13945 0.13945

0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734

0.03503 0.03503 0.03503 0.03503 0.03503 0.03503

0.19809 0.19809 0.19458 0.19458 0.19681 0.19681

[MJ/kg] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [MJ/m of tape] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

[MJ/m2 of board] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

0.01628 0.01628 0.01277 0.01277 0.01489 0.01489


5-19

TABLE 5.30B CRADLE TO MARKET ENERGY USE IN JOINT PAPER TAPE PRODUCTION BY ENERGY FORM AND REGION dieselroad

dieselrail

HFOmarine

natural gas

oil

electric

TOTAL

1.93339 1.63072 1.16910 1.50186 1.34570 1.38818

0.00000 0.14700 0.85260 0.00000 0.00000 0.55125

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00870 0.00870

11.60470 11.60470 11.60470 11.60470 11.60470 11.60470

0.61080 0.61080 0.61080 0.61080 0.61080 0.61080

2.91480 2.91480 2.91480 2.91480 2.91480 2.91480

17.06369 16.90802 17.15200 16.63216 16.48470 17.07843

0.02371 0.02000 0.01434 0.01842 0.01650 0.01702

0.00000 0.00180 0.01045 0.00000 0.00000 0.00676

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00011 0.00011

0.14229 0.14229 0.14229 0.14229 0.14229 0.14229

0.00749 0.00749 0.00749 0.00749 0.00749 0.00749

0.03574 0.03574 0.03574 0.03574 0.03574 0.03574

0.20923 0.20732 0.21031 0.20394 0.20213 0.20941

0.00000 0.00177 0.01025 0.00000 0.00000 0.00662

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00010 0.00010

0.13945 0.13945 0.13945 0.13945 0.13945 0.13945

0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734

0.03503 0.03503 0.03503 0.03503 0.03503 0.03503

0.20504 0.20317 0.20610 0.19986 0.19809 0.20522

[MJ/kg] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [MJ/m of tape] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

[MJ/m2 of board] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

0.02323 0.01960 0.01405 0.01805 0.01617 0.01668

REFERENCES 1. 2.

Canadian Industry Program for Energy Conservation (CIPEC), Ministry of Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, 1989. Confidential information from the leading PVA resin manufacturer, January 1996.


6.0

6-1

ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS - GYPSUM BOARD

This section addresses atmospheric emissions associated with the production of gypsum board in all its processing stages, from the extraction and transportation of raw materials through manufacturing and final transportation to markets. Like any energy-burning production process, gypsum board production generates common air pollutants including carbon dioxide (CO2), sulfur oxides (SOx ) — primarily sulfur dioxide (SO2) — nitrogen oxides (NOx ), volatile organic compounds (VOC), methane (CH4), and carbon monoxide (CO) as well as total particulate matter (TPM). These energy-related emissions are termed “fuel emissions”. In a major contrast between gypsum-based products and those based on limestone, there is no additional CO2 released during the calcination of gypsum. In processing of limestone in the cement or lime industries, a substantial amount of CO2 (about 60% of the total) is released due to its dissociation (calcination) at high temperatures. Calcination of gypsum that occurs at much lower temperatures releases only some of the molecular water. The relatively low gypsum calcination temperatures (at about 120° to 160°C as opposed to about 1,450°C for cement clinker processing) has another “positive” effect as far as the atmospheric emissions are concerned: no “thermal” NOx is generated. Therefore in a marked contrast to some other inorganic building materials industries, apart from the particulate emissions, fuel emissions are the only emissions generated in the production of gypsum board. As in the energy section of the report, all results are presented in terms of weighted averages developed for the three geographical regions (West, Central and East), and adjusted to take into account transportation of the gypsum board to the six cities (Vancouver, Calgary, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal and Halifax), following the same assumptions regarding shipping distances and modes of transportation, as shown and discussed in Section 4.3. Essentially no data on measured atmospheric emissions is publicly available from the gypsum industry. In developing our atmospheric emission estimates, therefore, energy consumption unit factors developed in Section 4 were used as a base to calculate CO2, SO2, NOx, CO, CH4 and VOC releases. Contributions to atmospheric emissions by both the gypsum board production process stages and source of energy/fuel are tabulated and discussed in some detail, including the assumptions made and the reasoning for them. 6.1 APPROACH With the exception of those related to electricity, energy-related atmospheric emission estimates were developed using the energy estimates by process stage from Section 4 and energy emission factors as given in Tables 3 and 6 of the Research Guidelines, based on factors developed by Natural Resources Canada’s “Ad Hoc Committee on Emission Factors”.1 Applicable energy emission factors used throughout this work are summarized in Table 6.1.


6-2

Emissions related to the generation of electricity used by the gypsum board industry are not included in the tables that follow in this section. These emissions are being calculated separately within the Sustainable Materials Project calculation model for all of the products under consideration (i.e. concrete, steel, wood, gypsum board, and other materials under development). The estimates of electricity use in gypsum board production presented in this report will be translated into the mix of primary energy forms used to generate the electricity for the relevant regional electrical systems. Corresponding atmospheric emissions will then be added in the model to the other emissions estimated in this study. TABLE 6.1

ENERGY EMISSION FACTORS (KG/GJ)

Natural gas Diesel road Diesel rail H.F. oil marine H.F. oil industrial. Coal - Central

CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH 4

CO

49.700 70.700 70.700 74.000 74.000 87.600

0.0002 0.1020 0.1020 0.4500 0.8375 0.8360

0.0590 0.8070 1.4000 0.2000 0.1600 0.2500

0.00120 0.08690 0.07000 0.36000 0.00290 0.00150

0.00130 0.02170 0.00780 0.04000 0.00082 0.00054

0.01500 0.44300 0.05700 0.00740 0.01440 0.09300

6.2 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION ESTIMATES 6.2.1 Raw Materials Extraction Raw materials extraction (usually quarrying in open pit operations) involves drilling and blasting, with fractured rock handled and loaded onto trucks using front-end loaders, mechanical shovels and traxcavators. Most of this equipment uses diesel fuel, although some sites use electrical power only. Some heavy fuel oil and coal (for steam generation) are also used for on-site drying of both the natural and by-product gypsum. Atmospheric emissions were estimated using the weighted average energy estimates for raw materials extraction and on-site processing (Section 4.1) together with appropriate diesel-road, heavy fuel oil, and coal emission factors. Drilling, blasting and loading operations also create dust emissions. Environment Canada’s report entitled A Nationwide Inventory of Emissions of Air Contaminants 2 quotes particulate emission factors taken from a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) paper.3 For open-pit mining, a particulate emission factor of 0.51 kg/tonne is given, whereas for underground mining a factor of 0.05 kg/tonne is shown. As in some areas gypsum from both underground mines and quarries is used, weighted average particulate emission factors per tonne of rock were developed for the Canadian gypsum industry. We also have to take into account that natural rock represents a different percentage of the total gypsum supply in various regions of the country. Based on the limited amount of data from some gypsum quarries and mines, we assumed that on average 0.373 tonnes of solid waste is generated per tonne of extracted gypsum. Applying this multiplier (1.373), as well as another for conversion of gypsum to stucco (1.2048), as discussed in Section 3.1, we obtain the following TPM factors:


6-3

TABLE 6.2 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TPM EXTRACTION FACTORS APPLICABLE TO CANADIAN GYPSUM INDUSTRY

West Central East

Natural gypsum as % of total supply

TPM emissions (kg/tonne of rock)

TPM emissions (kg/tonne of stucco)

86.50 85.33 81.26

0.5100 0.0970 0.3662

0.7297 0.1369 0.4922

(As an example: weighted average TPM factor for the East region = 0.3662 (weighted average of 0.05 for underground mines and 0.51 for quarries, reflecting their relative contribution in the region) multiplied by 0.8126 (share of the natural gypsum in the total gypsum supply) times 1.373 (to account for mining solid waste) times 1.2048 (to convert to per tonnes of stucco units) = TPM East = 0.3662 x 0.8126 x 1.373 x 1.2048 = 0.4922.)

For estimates of extraction TPM of gypsum fiberboard, we considered the fact that only locally quarried natural gypsum is used in its production. The contribution of perlite quarrying to the total particulate emissions was also taken into account. These factors were used to estimate weighted averages for total particulate (TPM) emissions due to raw materials extraction. It should be noted that the EPA extraction emissions factors also include particulate emissions due to raw materials transportation. However, as the transportation particulate emissions are rather small in comparison to the extraction dust emissions, we felt that using the EPA numbers results in only a small error in the allocation of particulate emissions and, what is more important, both particulate emissions are still captured in the totals. Although blasting agents also generate some nitrogen oxides and some hydrocarbons, these emissions do not contribute significantly to the pollution burden, and are considered to be negligible.1 Total estimated atmospheric emissions due to gypsum board raw materials extraction, for a 1/2" thick regular gypsum board, are shown in Table 6.3. The emissions for the other types of gypsum boards are tabulated in the summary part of this section. TABLE 6.3 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO GYPSUM BOARD RAW MATERIALS EXTRACTION (G/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)


CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

13.42 4.78 16.12 10.13

0.0194 0.0267 0.0502 0.0326

0.1531 0.0336 0.1588 0.0976

0.0165 0.0029 0.0166 0.0100

0.0041 0.0007 0.0041 0.0025

0.0841 0.0172 0.0845 0.0521

4.6419 0.8709 3.1312 2.3275


6-4

6.2.2 Raw Materials Transportation Raw materials transportation energy unit factors based on information provided directly by most gypsum board manufacturing operations were shown in Section 4.1, Tables 4.4 and 4.6 for 1/2" regular gypsum board. These factors were multiplied by the appropriate emission factors from Table 6.1. The resulting raw materials transportation emissions estimates for such a board are presented in Table 6.4. As noted above, particulate emissions related to raw material transportation are included in Table 6.3. Again, the emissions for the other gypsum board products are shown in the summary part of this section. TABLE 6.4 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO GYPSUM BOARD RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION (G/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)


CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

753.17 153.92 453.40 371.37

2.0090 0.2221 1.0769 0.8615

7.6994 1.7569 4.3813 3.8322

1.6250 0.1892 0.8887 0.7059

0.2581 0.0472 0.1605 0.1256

2.9497 0.9644 2.2790 1.7605

6.2.3 Gypsum Board Manufacturing Atmospheric emissions are generated in all steps of the gypsum board manufacturing process described in Section 2 of this report, i.e. in gypsum calcination, in the paper making process, and in the gypsum board manufacturing itself. Use of energy to drive the crushers, screens, hammer mills, Raymond mills, the various conveyors, and especially fuel combustion in the calcination step, generates all the common air pollutants (i.e. CO2, SO2, NOx, VOCs, CH4 and CO) usually associated with energy consumption. Similarly the paper manufacturing process energy use in all the processing steps, from waste paper defiberization through paper formation, pressing, drying and calendering, generates atmospheric fuel emissions. Of the three board processing steps, the gypsum board manufacturing, due to the board drying in heated board kilns, uses about the same amount of energy as the other two steps combined (Table 4.35). Fossil fuels providing the kiln heat produce the common atmospheric emissions. Particulate matter is also generated as rock gypsum is dried and reduced to fine particles through crushing and milling, and as gypsum is conveyed and processed in the calcination kettles to stucco, and eventually into the board. A nationwide emissions inventory (1978)2 offers uncontrolled particulate emission factors (Table 6.5) based on the U.S. EPA 1977 data, and in calculation of the actual TPM emissions it assumes 90% control efficiency. Considering the advances in the particulate emissions controls and their implementation, these data appear to be somewhat obsolete now. Particulate emissions from paper board production are considered to be negligible.2


6-5

As any industry, the gypsum industry has been under some pressure to control its particulate emissions. High efficiency baghouses and some electrostatic precipitators are installed and used in all modern gypsum operations, and this is reflected in updated U.S. EPA 1983 controlled particulate emission factors.4 The EPA controlled emissions indicate 99.7% control efficiency. At the same time, however, the large spread in the factor estimates is an indication that there is relatively little actual measured data available, mainly due to the fact that the gypsum industry does not present any substantial particulates problem. This is best summarized in a response from one of the provincial authorities: “Based on site inspections, which demonstrated no visible particulate emissions, the Company was not required to do particulate stack testing.” Estimates of particulate emissions were obtained from provincial environmental ministries in Quebec, Ontario and from GVRD (Greater Vancouver Regional District). Ontario data cover all producers, and as such appear to be representative of the situation in the province. The reported weighted average TPM emissions of 0.2109 g/m2 are substantially better than even EPA assumed controlled emission. This is not surprising, considering that the Ontario plants are the flagship operations of the respective producers, and as such their emissions controls will be close to the state-of-the-art. As Ontario represents close to 90% of the Central region, we will use this factor for the entire region. For the East we received data concerning only one plant. At 0.7546 g/m2 of board, it is close to the EPA estimate, and we will assume that it is representative of the whole region. The GVRD data are permit data giving the maximum allowable annual emissions, but providing only scant measured data. From this limited actual emission monitoring, it would appear that the performance at 1.7494 g/m2 is substantially better than maximum potential assessment, although not as good as in the other regions. The above discussed gypsum board manufacturing TPM factors are summarized in Table 6.6. TABLE 6.5 ENVIRONMENT CANADA AND U.S. EPA PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR GYPSUM PROCESSING (KG/TONNE) Environment Canada 1978 Inventory 2 uncontrolled controlled emissions emissions* raw material drying primary grinding calcining conveying board sawing TOTAL

TOTAL g/m2 for 1/2" board; gypsum use 7.6637 kg/m2 of board notes:

U.S. EPA AP-42 1985 4 uncontrolled emissions

controlled emissions**

20.0 0.5 45.0 0.35 65.85

2.0 0.05 4.5 0.035 6.585

5 – 60 1.3 21 0.005 27.305 – 82.305

0.02 0.06 0.003 0.083

504.66

50.47

209.26 – 630.76

0.636

* assuming 90% control efficiencies, ** with baghouse / fabric filter


6-6

TABLE 6.6 ESTIMATES OF PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR GYPSUM PROCESSING BY REGION (G/M 2 OF 1/2" BOARD) Weighted TPM Emissions West Region Central Region East Region

1.7494 0.2109 0.7546

Processing (expansion) of perlite used in manufacturing of gypsum fiberboard also generates particulate emissions. According to U.S. EPA, uncontrolled emissions for perlite expansion are 10.5 kg/tonne.5 For our estimates, we will use the same particulate emissions as for gypsum (assuming that perlite expansion generates about the same TPM as gypsum calcination) in the East region adjusted for relative usage of gypsum and perlite in GFB. Weighted averages of estimates for atmospheric emissions due to all three manufacturing stages of gypsum board production, as well as the total, are summarized in Tables 6.7 to 6.10 for 1/2" regular gypsum board. The emissions for the other board products are shown in the summary part of this section.

TABLE 6.7

West Central East CANADA

ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO STUCCO CALCINATION (G/M 2 OF 1/2” REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD) CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

642.37 435.98 668.64 541.27

2.4903 1.1865 3.0635 1.9472

0.9770 1.4019 2.8025 1.6262

0.0188 0.1052 0.2280 0.1128

0.0135 0.0317 0.0622 0.0344

0.1703 0.5832 1.2052 0.6277

1.7494 0.2109 0.7546 0.7163

TABLE 6.8 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO GYPSUM PAPER PRODUCTION (G/M 2 OF 1/2” REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)


CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH 4

CO

293.27 293.27 293.27 293.27

0.2423 0.2423 0.2423 0.2423

0.3689 0.3689 0.3689 0.3689

0.0074 0.0074 0.0074 0.0074

0.0073 0.0073 0.0073 0.0073

0.0862 0.0862 0.0862 0.0862


6-7

TABLE 6.9 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO BOARD MANUFACTURING (G/M 2 OF 1/2” REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)


CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH 4

CO

1012.53 907.84 1090.85 976.50

3.2303 2.1708 6.2933 3.3985

1.4801 1.2645 1.8370 1.4518

0.0287 0.0248 0.0347 0.0281

0.0222 0.0209 0.0202 0.0210

0.2750 0.2535 0.2696 0.2625

TABLE 6.10 SUBTOTAL OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS FROM ALL THREE MANUFACTURING STEPS (G/M 2 OF 1/2” REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)


CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

1948.18 1637.09 2052.76 1811.04

5.9629 3.5996 9.5991 5.5880

2.8260 3.0353 5.0084 3.4469

0.0550 0.1374 0.2701 0.1483

0.0430 0.0599 0.0897 0.0628

0.5315 0.9228 1.5611 0.9765

1.7494 0.2109 0.7546 0.7163

Permissible levels of SO2, NOx and TPM emissions are regulated by the provinces. However, as gypsum board plants, in comparison with many other operations, generate relatively low emissions, there are no known monitoring data of such operations for either SO2 and NOx. According to industry sources, monitoring of air quality with respect to TPM near board plants indicates that the current emission limits are not exceeded.

6.2.4 Finished Gypsum Board Transportation The ATHENATM computer model calculates atmospheric emissions associated with the finished products transportation from the plant gate to the market, taking into consideration distances and transport modes, as tabulated in Table 4.15. To better recall this information, it is shown in this subsection again. To provide a picture of atmospheric emissions associated with finished products transportation in this study as well, the weighted average emissions related to finished 1/2" gypsum board transportation to market distribution centres were calculated by combining transportation energy emission factors from Table 6.1 with the estimates of transportation energy use by fuel type developed and presented in Table 4.17. The results are shown in Table 6.11, while the finished board transportation emissions for the other gypsum board products are tabulated in the summary part of this section.


6-8

TABLE 4.15 WEIGHTED AVERAGE TRANSPORTATION DISTANCES BY MODE FOR FINISHED GYPSUM BOARD (KM) Average Distances & Transport Mode Truck

Rail

Ship


90 225 90 153 288 279

0 300 400 0 0 847.5

0 0 0 0 0 110


1.18

0.49

0.12

note:


TABLE 6.11 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO TRANSPORTATION OF FINISHED GYPSUM BOARD (G/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)

West Central East


CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH 4

CO

60.54 235.15 172.28 102.92 193.73 432.29

0.0873 0.3393 0.2485 0.1485 0.2795 0.6602

0.6910 3.3870 2.9036 1.1748 2.2113 6.8514

0.0744 0.2690 0.1850 0.1265 0.2381 0.5034

0.0186 0.0557 0.0309 0.0316 0.0595 0.0880

0.3793 1.0159 0.4694 0.6449 1.2139 1.3676


6.3

6-9

ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS SUMMARY

Total atmospheric emissions due to the production of 1/2" regular gypsum board are shown in Table 6.12. Comprehensive tables of atmospheric emissions by process stage for all gypsum board products under consideration are shown as Tables 6.13 to 6.20.

TABLE 6.12 TOTAL ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO GYPSUM BOARD PRODUCTION - FROM CRADLE TO MARKET (G/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)

West Central East


CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

2775.30 2949.91 1968.06 1898.70 2716.01 2954.57

8.0786 8.3305 4.0969 3.9968 11.0056 11.3863

11.3696 14.0655 7.7294 6.0006 11.7598 16.3998

1.7708 1.9654 0.5146 0.4560 1.4135 1.6787

0.3238 0.3609 0.1388 0.1395 0.3138 0.3423

3.9446 4.5812 2.3739 2.5494 5.1384 5.2921

6.3913 6.3913 1.0818 1.0818 3.8858 3.8858


6-10

TABLE 6.13 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD (G/M 2 )

CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

0.1531 0.0336 0.1588 0.0976

0.0165 0.0029 0.0166 0.0100

0.0041 0.0007 0.0041 0.0025

0.0841 0.0172 0.0845 0.0521

4.6419 0.8709 3.1312 2.3275

Gypsum extraction & processing emissions West Central East CANADA

13.42 4.78 16.13 10.13

0.0194 0.0267 0.0502 0.0326

Total raw materials transportation emissions West Central East CANADA

753.17 153.92 453.40 371.37

2.0090 0.2221 1.0769 0.8615

7.6994 1.7569 4.3813 3.8322

1.6250 0.1892 0.8887 0.7059

0.2581 0.0472 0.1605 0.1256

2.9497 0.9644 2.2790 1.7605

5.9629 3.5996 9.5991 5.5880

2.8260 3.0353 5.0084 3.4469

0.0550 0.1374 0.2701 0.1483

0.0430 0.0599 0.0897 0.0628

0.5315 0.9228 1.5611 0.9765

1.7494 0.2109 0.7546 0.7163

7.9913 3.8483 10.7261 6.4821

10.6785 4.8258 9.5485 7.3767

1.6964 0.3295 1.1753 0.8643

0.3052 0.1079 0.2543 0.1909

3.5653 1.9045 3.9245 2.7891

6.3913 1.0818 3.8858 3.0438

0.0744 0.2690 0.1850 0.1265 0.2381 0.5034

0.0186 0.0557 0.0309 0.0316 0.0595 0.0880

0.3793 1.0159 0.4694 0.6449 1.2139 1.3676

1.7708 1.9654 0.5146 0.4560 1.4135 1.6787

0.3238 0.3609 0.1388 0.1395 0.3138 0.3423

3.9446 4.5812 2.3739 2.5494 5.1384 5.2921

Total manufacturing emissions West Central East CANADA

1948.18 1637.09 2052.76 1811.04

Cradle to gate emissions West Central East CANADA

2714.76 1795.78 2522.28 2192.53

Transportation emissions for the finished product West Central East


60.54 235.15 172.28 102.92 193.73 432.29

0.0873 0.3393 0.2485 0.1485 0.2795 0.6602

0.6910 3.3870 2.9036 1.1748 2.2113 6.8514

Total emissions associated with 1/2" regular board West Central East


2775.30 2949.91 1968.06 1898.70 2716.01 2954.57

8.0786 8.3305 4.0969 3.9968 11.0056 11.3863

11.3696 14.0655 7.7294 6.0006 11.7598 16.3998

6.3913 6.3913 1.0818 1.0818 3.8858 3.8858


6-11

TABLE 6.14 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF 1/2" TYPE X FIRE RESISTANT GYPSUM BOARD (G/M 2 )

CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

0.1564 0.0344 0.1622 0.0996

0.0168 0.0030 0.0169 0.0102

0.0042 0.0007 0.0042 0.0026

0.0858 0.0176 0.0863 0.0532

4.6214 0.8671 3.1173 2.3172


13.70 4.88 16.46 10.34

0.0198 0.0272 0.0512 0.0333


765.89 155.03 460.52 376.74

2.0469 0.2237 1.0960 0.8762

7.8256 1.7696 4.4458 3.8849

1.6554 0.1906 0.9044 0.7178

0.2625 0.0476 0.1631 0.1275

2.9918 0.9714 2.3118 1.7822

6.0050 3.6141 9.6534 5.6186

2.8304 3.0488 5.0515 3.4651

0.0550 0.1394 0.2746 0.1504

0.0430 0.0603 0.0907 0.0632

0.5314 0.9314 1.5828 0.9860

1.7417 0.2100 0.7513 0.7132

8.0717 3.8650 10.8006 6.5280

10.8124 4.8527 9.6596 7.4497

1.7273 0.3329 1.1959 0.8784

0.3097 0.1086 0.2580 0.1932

3.6090 1.9204 3.9809 2.8214

6.3631 1.0771 3.8686 3.0303

0.0755 0.2731 0.1878 0.1284 0.2417 0.5110

0.0189 0.0565 0.0314 0.0321 0.0604 0.0893

0.3851 1.0313 0.4765 0.6547 1.2323 1.3883

1.8028 2.0004 0.5207 0.4613 1.4376 1.7069

0.3286 0.3663 0.1400 0.1407 0.3184 0.3474

3.9941 4.6404 2.3970 2.5751 5.2132 5.3692


1948.86 1633.40 2054.01 1809.58


2728.45 1793.31 2530.99 2196.66



61.46 238.72 174.89 104.48 196.67 438.84

0.0887 0.3444 0.2523 0.1507 0.2837 0.6702

0.7015 3.4383 2.9476 1.1926 2.2449 6.9552

Total emissions associated with 1/2" type X board West Central East


2789.91 2967.17 1968.20 1897.79 2727.65 2969.83

8.1604 8.4161 4.1173 4.0157 11.0844 11.4708

11.5139 14.2507 7.8003 6.0453 11.9044 16.6147

6.3631 6.3631 1.0771 1.0771 3.8686 3.8686


6-12

TABLE 6.15 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF 1/2" MR MOISTURE RESISTANT GYPSUM BOARD (G/M 2 )

CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

0.1737 0.0382 0.1802 0.1107

0.0187 0.0033 0.0188 0.0113

0.0047 0.0008 0.0047 0.0028

0.0954 0.0196 0.0959 0.0591

5.0903 0.9551 3.4336 2.5523


15.22 5.42 18.29 11.49

0.0220 0.0302 0.0569 0.0370


849.24 171.13 510.36 417.28

2.2718 0.2469 1.2158 0.9716

8.6753 1.9534 4.9248 4.3015

1.8372 0.2103 1.0032 0.7959

0.2912 0.0525 0.1808 0.1412

3.3135 1.0723 2.5604 1.9719

6.3049 3.7661 10.0183 5.8569

2.9678 3.2343 5.3960 3.6762

0.0577 0.1518 0.3010 0.1637

0.0450 0.0644 0.0983 0.0676

0.5569 1.0038 1.7257 1.0634

1.9184 0.2313 0.8275 0.7855

8.5986 4.0433 11.2910 6.8655

11.8168 5.2259 10.5010 8.0884

1.9136 0.3655 1.3230 0.9710

0.3409 0.1178 0.2838 0.2117

3.9657 2.0956 4.3820 3.0945

7.0087 1.1863 4.2611 3.3378

0.0834 0.3016 0.2075 0.1418 0.2670 0.5644

0.0208 0.0625 0.0347 0.0354 0.0667 0.0986

0.4253 1.1391 0.5263 0.7231 1.3611 1.5334

1.9970 2.2152 0.5729 0.5073 1.5899 1.8874

0.3617 0.4033 0.1524 0.1532 0.3505 0.3825

4.3911 5.1048 2.6220 2.8187 5.7430 5.9154


2042.87 1704.00 2150.99 1892.12


2907.33 1880.55 2679.64 2320.89



67.88 263.66 193.16 115.40 217.22 484.69

0.0979 0.3804 0.2787 0.1665 0.3134 0.7402

0.7748 3.7976 3.2555 1.3172 2.4794 7.6818

Total emissions associated with 1/2" MR board West Central East


2975.21 3170.99 2073.71 1995.95 2896.85 3164.32

8.6966 8.9790 4.3220 4.2098 11.6044 12.0312

12.5916 15.6144 8.4814 6.5431 12.9803 18.1828

7.0088 7.0088 1.1863 1.1863 4.2611 4.2611


6-13

TABLE 6.16 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF 5/8" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD (G/M 2 )

CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

0.2001 0.0440 0.2075 0.1275

0.0215 0.0038 0.0217 0.0131

0.0054 0.0010 0.0054 0.0033

0.1098 0.0225 0.1104 0.0681

6.0610 1.1372 4.0884 3.0390


17.53 6.24 21.06 13.23

0.0253 0.0348 0.0655 0.0426


969.33 191.42 581.10 473.96

2.6035 0.2762 1.3903 1.1092

9.8918 2.1850 5.5963 4.8782

2.1049 0.2353 1.1468 0.9084

0.3326 0.0588 0.2062 0.1606

3.7618 1.1994 2.9075 2.2296

7.5366 4.5089 12.1142 7.0373

3.4999 3.7856 6.3310 4.3128

0.0680 0.1760 0.3487 0.1900

0.0528 0.0749 0.1139 0.0787

0.6536 1.1660 1.9989 1.2356

2.2842 0.2754 0.9853 0.9353

10.1655 4.8199 13.5700 8.1891

13.5918 6.0145 12.1348 9.3185

2.1945 0.4151 1.5172 1.1114

0.3908 0.1347 0.3255 0.2425

4.5252 2.3879 5.0167 3.5332

8.3453 1.4126 5.0737 3.9743

0.0949 0.3432 0.2361 0.1614 0.3038 0.6422

0.0237 0.0711 0.0394 0.0403 0.0759 0.1122

0.4840 1.2961 0.5989 0.8227 1.5487 1.7448

2.2894 2.5377 0.6512 0.5765 1.8210 2.1594

0.4145 0.4619 0.1741 0.1750 0.4014 0.4377

5.0092 5.8213 2.9868 3.2107 6.5653 6.7614


2401.78 2001.27 2534.00 2224.65


3388.64 2198.94 3136.16 2711.80



77.24 300.00 219.78 131.30 247.16 551.50

0.1114 0.4328 0.3171 0.1894 0.3566 0.8423

0.8816 4.3210 3.7043 1.4987 2.8211 8.7407

Total emissions associated with 5/8" regular board West Central East


3465.88 3688.64 2418.72 2330.24 3383.31 3687.65

10.2769 10.5983 5.1370 5.0094 13.9266 14.4123

14.4734 17.9128 9.7188 7.5132 14.9560 20.8755

8.3453 8.3453 1.4126 1.4126 5.0737 5.0737


6-14

TABLE 6.17 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF 5/8" TYPE X FIRE RESISTANT GYPSUM BOARD (G/M 2 )

CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

0.2029 0.0446 0.2105 0.1293

0.0219 0.0039 0.0220 0.0133

0.0055 0.0010 0.0055 0.0033

0.1114 0.0228 0.1119 0.0691

6.1473 1.1534 4.1466 3.0823


17.78 6.33 21.36 13.42

0.0256 0.0353 0.0665 0.0432


981.18 192.82 587.86 479.14

2.6379 0.2782 1.4079 1.1228

10.0103 2.2009 5.6587 4.9303

2.1326 0.2370 1.1613 0.9194

0.3368 0.0592 0.2086 0.1624

3.8030 1.2082 2.9394 2.2517

7.5768 4.5247 12.1652 7.0674

3.5085 3.8021 6.3737 4.3335

0.0682 0.1778 0.3528 0.1919

0.0529 0.0753 0.1149 0.0791

0.6545 1.1746 2.0191 1.2451

2.3167 0.2793 0.9993 0.9486

10.2404 4.8383 13.6395 8.2334

13.7216 6.0476 12.2429 9.3930

2.2226 0.4186 1.5361 1.1246

0.3951 0.1355 0.3290 0.2448

4.5688 2.4057 5.0705 3.5658

8.4640 1.4327 5.1459 4.0309

0.0970 0.3505 0.2411 0.1648 0.3103 0.6559

0.0242 0.0726 0.0403 0.0412 0.0775 0.1146

0.4943 1.3238 0.6117 0.8403 1.5818 1.7821

2.3196 2.5731 0.6597 0.5835 1.8464 2.1920

0.4193 0.4677 0.1758 0.1767 0.4065 0.4437

5.0631 5.8926 3.0173 3.2460 6.6522 6.8525


2406.06 2001.69 2538.77 2227.04


3405.02 2200.84 3147.99 2719.60



78.89 306.41 224.48 134.11 252.44 563.29

0.1138 0.4421 0.3239 0.1935 0.3642 0.8603

0.9005 4.4134 3.7835 1.5308 2.8814 8.9275

Total emissions associated with 5/8" type X board West Central East


3483.91 3711.43 2425.32 2334.95 3400.43 3711.27

10.3542 10.6824 5.1621 5.0317 14.0037 14.4998

14.6221 18.1350 9.8311 7.5784 15.1243 21.1704

8.4640 8.4640 1.4327 1.4327 5.1459 5.1459


6-15

TABLE 6.18 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF 5/8" MR MOISTURE RESISTANT GYPSUM BOARD (G/M 2 )

CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

0.2228 0.0489 0.2310 0.1419

0.0240 0.0042 0.0241 0.0145

0.0060 0.0011 0.0060 0.0036

0.1223 0.0251 0.1229 0.0758

6.5267 1.2246 4.4025 3.2725


19.52 6.95 23.45 14.73

0.0282 0.0388 0.0730 0.0474


1076.80 211.45 645.08 525.73

2.8954 0.3051 1.5452 1.2322

10.9853 2.4135 6.2091 5.4094

2.3407 0.2599 1.2745 1.0090

0.3696 0.0649 0.2289 0.1782

4.1727 1.3249 3.2252 2.4702

7.9213 4.7002 12.5839 7.3414

3.6680 4.0167 6.7699 4.5772

0.0713 0.1921 0.3830 0.2072

0.0553 0.0801 0.1236 0.0842

0.6842 1.2579 2.1831 1.3341

2.4597 0.2965 1.0610 1.0072

10.8448 5.0440 14.2020 8.6211

14.8761 6.4792 13.2101 10.1286

2.4360 0.4562 1.6817 1.2308

0.4309 0.1461 0.3586 0.2661

4.9792 2.6079 5.5311 3.8802

8.9864 1.5211 5.4635 4.2797

0.1060 0.3831 0.2635 0.1802 0.3391 0.7170

0.0265 0.0793 0.0440 0.0450 0.0847 0.1253

0.5403 1.4469 0.6686 0.9185 1.7289 1.9478

2.5420 2.8191 0.7198 0.6364 2.0208 2.3986

0.4573 0.5102 0.1901 0.1911 0.4433 0.4839

5.5195 6.4262 3.2765 3.5264 7.2600 7.4790


2515.52 2084.40 2651.63 2323.40


3611.83 2302.79 3320.17 2863.85



86.23 334.92 245.36 146.58 275.92 615.69

0.1244 0.4832 0.3540 0.2115 0.3981 0.9403

0.9842 4.8239 4.1354 1.6732 3.1495 9.7580

Total emissions associated with 5/8" MR board West Central East


3698.06 3946.75 2548.16 2449.38 3596.09 3935.85

10.9692 11.3280 5.3980 5.2555 14.6001 15.1423

15.8603 19.7001 10.6146 8.1524 16.3596 22.9681

8.9864 8.9864 1.5211 1.5211 5.4635 5.4635


6-16

TABLE 6.19 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF 5/16" MOBILE HOME GYPSUM BOARD (G/M 2 )

CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

0.1082 0.0238 0.1122 0.0689

0.0116 0.0021 0.0117 0.0071

0.0029 0.0005 0.0029 0.0018

0.0594 0.0122 0.0597 0.0368

3.2594 0.6115 2.1986 1.6343


9.48 3.37 11.39 7.15

0.0137 0.0188 0.0354 0.0230


548.45 119.56 332.89 274.96

1.4428 0.1725 0.7794 0.6269

5.6262 1.3647 3.2380 2.8509

1.1680 0.1470 0.6436 0.5143

0.1873 0.0367 0.1172 0.0926

2.1865 0.7492 1.6883 1.3225

4.0291 2.4460 6.3484 3.7506

1.9975 2.1629 3.5101 2.4384

0.0389 0.0975 0.1904 0.1049

0.0310 0.0431 0.0642 0.0451

0.3815 0.6597 1.1092 0.6969

1.2284 0.1481 0.5299 0.5030

5.4856 2.6373 7.1632 4.4005

7.7319 3.5514 6.8603 5.3583

1.2186 0.2465 0.8457 0.6263

0.2212 0.0803 0.1843 0.1394

2.6274 1.4210 2.8572 2.0562

4.4878 0.7596 2.7285 2.1373

0.0541 0.1956 0.1346 0.0920 0.1732 0.3661

0.0135 0.0405 0.0225 0.0230 0.0432 0.0640

0.2759 0.7389 0.3414 0.4690 0.8828 0.9946

0.2348 0.2618 0.1027 0.1032 0.2276 0.2483

2.9033 3.3663 1.7624 1.8901 3.7400 3.8518


1390.53 1179.30 1458.03 1296.59


1948.45 1302.24 1802.31 1578.69



44.03 171.02 125.29 74.85 140.90 314.39

0.0635 0.2467 0.1808 0.1080 0.2033 0.4801

0.5026 2.4633 2.1117 0.8544 1.6083 4.9828

Total emissions associated with 5/16" mobile home board West Central East


1992.48 2119.47 1427.53 1377.09 1943.21 2116.70

5.5491 5.7324 2.8181 2.7453 7.3665 7.6433

8.2345 10.1952 5.6631 4.4058 8.4685 11.8431

1.2727 1.4142 0.3811 0.3385 1.0189 1.2118

4.4878 4.4878 0.7596 0.7596 2.7285 2.7285


6-17

TABLE 6.20 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF 1" SHAFTLINER GYPSUM BOARD (G/M 2 )

CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

0.3757 0.0826 0.3897 0.2394

0.0405 0.0072 0.0407 0.0245

0.0101 0.0018 0.0102 0.0061

0.2063 0.0423 0.2073 0.1279

11.4330 2.1451 7.7120 5.7325


32.92 11.72 39.56 24.84

0.0475 0.0654 0.1231 0.0800


1777.39 331.09 1058.25 856.93

4.8274 0.4777 2.5620 2.0351

18.0857 3.7792 10.1349 8.7842

3.9002 0.4070 2.1122 1.6650

0.6115 0.1016 0.3769 0.2915

6.7951 2.0746 5.2547 3.9802

12.8218 7.5040 20.3542 11.8257

5.7395 6.3509 10.9323 7.2760

0.1113 0.3155 0.6365 0.3407

0.0851 0.1271 0.2006 0.1341

1.0572 2.0271 3.5857 2.1547

4.3088 0.5194 1.8586 1.7643

17.6967 8.0470 23.0393 13.9407

24.2009 10.2127 21.4569 16.2996

4.0520 0.7296 2.7893 2.0303

0.7067 0.2306 0.5877 0.4316

8.0586 4.1440 9.0476 6.2627

15.7417 2.6645 9.5706 7.4968

0.1759 0.6358 0.4374 0.2990 0.5628 1.1898

0.0439 0.1317 0.0731 0.0747 0.1405 0.2080

0.8966 2.4013 1.1096 1.5243 2.8692 3.2326

4.2279 4.6878 1.1670 1.0286 3.3522 3.9792

0.7506 0.8383 0.3036 0.3052 0.7283 0.7957

8.9552 10.4598 5.2535 5.6682 11.9169 12.2802


3905.11 3189.32 4126.19 3584.98


5715.41 3532.13 5223.99 4466.75



143.10 555.82 407.20 243.27 457.91 1021.78

0.2064 0.8019 0.5875 0.3510 0.6606 1.5605

1.6334 8.0057 6.8630 2.7767 5.2268 16.1941

Total emissions associated with 1" shaftliner board West Central East


5858.51 6271.23 3939.33 3775.40 5681.91 6245.77

17.9032 18.4986 8.6345 8.3980 23.6999 24.5998

25.8343 32.2066 17.0757 12.9894 26.6837 37.6510

15.7418 15.7418 2.6645 2.6645 9.5706 9.5706


6-18

TABLE 6.21 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF 1/2" GYPSUM FIBERBOARD (GFB) (G/M 2 )

CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

0.2045

0.0220

0.0055

0.1122

6.1276

Gypsum extraction & processing emissions 17.91

0.0258

Total raw materials transportation emissions 229.97

1.069

1.409

0.856

0.104

0.352

3.376

4.752

0.285

0.105

1.750

0.9697

4.4705

6.3650

1.1623

0.2145

2.2146

7.0973

44.833 37.448 27.161 13.941 9.796 3.836

2.242 1.872 1.358 0.697 0.490 0.413

0.250 0.209 0.151 0.078 0.055 0.103

1.825 1.525 1.106 0.568 0.399 2.106

51.1979 43.8128 33.5258 20.3062 16.1607 10.2013

3.4040 3.0347 2.5204 1.8594 1.6521 1.5754

0.4643 0.4231 0.3658 0.2922 0.2691 0.3177

4.0399 3.7393 3.3204 2.7822 2.6134 4.3205

Total manufacturing emissions 2141.39 Cradle to gate emissions 2389.28

Transportation emissions for the finished product Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

2264.06 1891.11 1371.62 704.03 494.68 336.10

3.266 2.728 1.979 1.016 0.714 0.485

Total emissions associated with 1/2" GFB West Central East


4653.34 4280.39 3760.90 3093.31 2883.96 2725.37

7.7369 7.1988 6.4493 5.4862 5.1842 4.9554

7.0973 7.0973 7.0973 7.0973 7.0973 7.0973


6-19

TABLE 6.22 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF 5/8" GYPSUM FIBERBOARD (GFB) (G/M 2 )

CO 2

SO 2

NO x

VOC

CH 4

CO

TPM

0.2537

0.0273

0.0068

0.1393

7.6031

Gypsum extraction & processing emissions 22.23

0.0321

Total raw materials transportation emissions 285.35

1.326

1.748

1.062

0.129

0.437

4.189

5.906

0.354

0.131

2.174

1.2031

5.5470

7.9072

1.4424

0.2664

2.7503

8.8062

55.992 46.769 33.921 17.411 12.234 4.791

2.800 2.338 1.696 0.871 0.612 0.516

0.312 0.261 0.189 0.097 0.068 0.129

2.280 1.904 1.381 0.709 0.498 2.630

63.8994 54.6760 41.8285 25.3184 20.1411 12.6984

4.2420 3.7809 3.1385 2.3130 2.0541 1.9583

0.5783 0.5269 0.4554 0.3634 0.3345 0.3952

5.0300 4.6544 4.1314 3.4592 3.2484 5.3804

Total manufacturing emissions 2665.02 Cradle to gate emissions 2972.60



2827.61 2361.83 1713.03 879.27 617.81 419.75

4.079 3.407 2.471 1.269 0.891 0.606

Total emissions associated with 5/8" GFB West Central East


5800.21 5334.43 4685.63 3851.87 3590.41 3392.35

9.6264 8.9545 8.0184 6.8155 6.4383 6.1526

8.8062 8.8062 8.8062 8.8062 8.8062 8.8062


6-20

REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

“Emission Factors for Greenhouse and Other Gases by Fuel Type: An Inventory”, Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, Ad Hoc Committee on Emissions Factors, December 1990. “A Nationwide Inventory of Emissions of Air Contaminants”, Environment Canada, Report EPS 3-EP-83-10, December 1983. “Metals Mining and Milling Process Profiles with Environmental Aspects, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/2-76-167, Washington, USA, 1976. “Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors”, Section 8.14 “Gypsum Manufacturing” (May 1983), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA AP-42, 4th edition, September 1985. “Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors”, Section 8.17 “Gypsum Manufacturing” (February 1972), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA AP-42, 4th edition, September 1985.


7.0

7-1

ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS - JOINT FINISHING PRODUCTS

In this section atmospheric emission estimates for joint finishing products are developed using the same approach employed in the development of estimates for emissions associated with gypsum board production, as was described in some detail in Section 6.0. To calculate CO2, SO2, NOx, CO, CH4 and VOC releases, energy consumption unit factors developed in Section 5 were used as a base, combined with the energy emission factors as given in Tables 3 and 6 of the Research Guidelines, based on factors developed by Natural Resources Canada’s “Ad Hoc Committee on Emission Factors”.1 Applicable energy emission factors used throughout this work were summarized in Section 6, Table 6.1. Contributions to atmospheric emissions, with the exception of those related to electricity, were developed for all three types of finishing products under consideration (ready mix joint compound, setting (dry) compound, and joint paper tape). They are tabulated and discussed in the individual subsections below. The emissions related to the generation of electricity are being calculated separately within the Sustainable Materials Project calculation model for all of the products under consideration (i.e. concrete, steel, wood, gypsum board, and other materials under development). The estimates of electricity use in gypsum board and associated finishing products production presented in this report will be translated into the mix of primary energy forms used to generate the electricity for the relevant regional electrical systems. Corresponding atmospheric emissions will then be added in the model to the other emissions estimated in this study.

7.1

ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION ESTIMATES

7.1.1 Raw Materials Extraction As noted in Section 5.1, while both types of joint compounds are comprised of a number of different raw materials, all of those with embodied extraction energy are industrial minerals quarried in open pits. Quarrying involves drilling and blasting, with fractured rock handled and loaded onto trucks using front-end loaders, mechanical shovels and traxcavators. In agreement with the Sustainable Materials Project Research Guidelines, we assumed that it takes 0.027 GJ/tonne2 for extraction of all of these materials, including gypsum, and that all this energy is in the form of diesel fuel - road. (As far as gypsum is concerned, this assumption is slightly different from those discussed for gypsum extraction for gypsum board production. However, as indicated in Section 5, gypsum used in production of setting compound is often calcined in a different manner, and it is always natural gypsum of as high a purity as possible.) Furthermore we assumed that the same amount of energy is required to extract the required quantities of raw materials in all geographical regions, and that consequently the same emissions are generated all across Canada. Atmospheric emissions were estimated using the average energy estimates for joint compounds raw materials extraction (Table 5.1) together with appropriate diesel-road emission factors from Table 6.1.


7-2

For the estimates of particulate emissions due to the drilling, blasting and loading in open-pit mining operations, a factor of 0.51 kg/tonne is used.3,4 For gypsum, we have assumed a high grade quality gypsum deposit, and considered the requirement of 1.2048 tonnes of gypsum for a tonne of stucco. Resulting estimates of atmospheric emissions due to the extraction of raw materials for the production of ready mix joint compound are presented in Table 7.1, and those for setting joint compounds in Table 7.2. As the joint paper tape is made entirely from recycled paper, we assume no raw materials extraction or emissions there.

7.1.2 Raw Materials Transportation In estimating raw materials transportation emissions factors, average raw materials energy transportation estimates (by energy form) developed in Section 5.1 (Tables 5.2 and 5.3 for ready mix compound, 5.4 and 5.5 for setting compound, and 5.6-5.8 for joint paper tape) were multiplied by appropriate emission energy factors from Table 6.1. The resulting atmospheric emissions estimates are shown in Tables 7.3 - 7.5. As already noted in Section 5, the specific grades of industrial minerals needed to produce joint compounds often have to be brought over from distant locations. Consequently the raw materials transportation contribution to the total energy, and therefore also to the atmospheric emissions total is rather high.

TABLE 7.1

ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND RAW MATERIALS EXTRACTION CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

1.17206 1.17206 1.17206 1.17206 1.17206 1.17206

0.00169 0.00169 0.00169 0.00169 0.00169 0.00169

0.01338 0.01338 0.01338 0.01338 0.01338 0.01338

0.00144 0.00144 0.00144 0.00144 0.00144 0.00144

0.00036 0.00036 0.00036 0.00036 0.00036 0.00036

0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734

0.31314 0.31314 0.31314 0.31314 0.31314 0.31314

0.78997 0.78997 0.78997 0.78997 0.78997 0.78997

0.00114 0.00114 0.00114 0.00114 0.00114 0.00114

0.00902 0.00902 0.00902 0.00902 0.00902 0.00902

0.00097 0.00097 0.00097 0.00097 0.00097 0.00097

0.00024 0.00024 0.00024 0.00024 0.00024 0.00024

0.00495 0.00495 0.00495 0.00495 0.00495 0.00495

0.21106 0.21106 0.21106 0.21106 0.21106 0.21106

g/kg of compound Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax g/m2 of board Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax


7-3

TABLE 7.2 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO SETTING JOINT COMPOUND RAW MATERIALS EXTRACTION CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

2.09851 2.09851 2.09851 2.09851 2.09851 2.09851

0.00303 0.00303 0.00303 0.00303 0.00303 0.00303

0.02395 0.02395 0.02395 0.02395 0.02395 0.02395

0.00258 0.00258 0.00258 0.00258 0.00258 0.00258

0.00064 0.00064 0.00064 0.00064 0.00064 0.00064

0.01315 0.01315 0.01315 0.01315 0.01315 0.01315

0.56066 0.56066 0.56066 0.56066 0.56066 0.56066

0.73867 0.73867 0.73867 0.73867 0.73867 0.73867

0.00107 0.00107 0.00107 0.00107 0.00107 0.00107

0.00843 0.00843 0.00843 0.00843 0.00843 0.00843

0.00091 0.00091 0.00091 0.00091 0.00091 0.00091

0.00023 0.00023 0.00023 0.00023 0.00023 0.00023

0.00463 0.00463 0.00463 0.00463 0.00463 0.00463

0.19735 0.19735 0.19735 0.19735 0.19735 0.19735


TABLE 7.3

ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

59.93437 59.93437 52.88699 52.88699 18.25191 18.25191

0.08647 0.08647 0.07630 0.07630 0.02633 0.02633

0.68412 0.68412 0.60367 0.60367 0.20834 0.20834

0.07367 0.07367 0.06501 0.06501 0.02243 0.02243

0.01840 0.01840 0.01623 0.01623 0.00560 0.00560

0.37554 0.37554 0.33139 0.33139 0.11436 0.11436

40.39577 40.39577 35.64583 35.64583 12.30179 12.30179

0.05828 0.05828 0.05143 0.05143 0.01775 0.01775

0.46109 0.46109 0.40688 0.40688 0.14042 0.14042

0.04965 0.04965 0.04381 0.04381 0.01512 0.01512

0.01240 0.01240 0.01094 0.01094 0.00378 0.00378

0.25312 0.25312 0.22335 0.22335 0.07708 0.07708



7-4

TABLE 7.4 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO SETTING JOINT COMPOUND RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

188.85384 188.85384 164.17813 164.17813 141.05640 141.05640

0.27246 0.27246 0.23686 0.23686 0.20350 0.20350

2.15566 2.15566 2.15585 2.15585 1.89193 1.89193

0.23213 0.23213 0.19376 0.19376 0.16535 0.16535

0.05797 0.05797 0.04378 0.04378 0.03669 0.03669

1.18334 1.18334 0.84526 0.84526 0.70038 0.70038

66.47655 66.47655 57.79070 57.79070 49.65185 49.65185

0.09591 0.09591 0.08338 0.08338 0.07163 0.07163

0.75879 0.75879 0.75886 0.75886 0.66596 0.66596

0.08171 0.08171 0.06821 0.06821 0.05820 0.05820

0.02040 0.02040 0.01541 0.01541 0.01291 0.01291

0.41654 0.41654 0.29753 0.29753 0.24653 0.24653


TABLE 7.5 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO JOINT PAPER TAPE RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

95.77022 95.77022 75.14703 75.14703 88.27645 88.27645

0.13817 0.13817 0.10842 0.10842 0.13034 0.13034

1.09316 1.09316 0.85776 0.85776 1.00202 1.00202

0.11771 0.11771 0.09237 0.09237 0.11084 0.11084

0.02939 0.02939 0.02306 0.02306 0.02725 0.02725

0.60009 0.60009 0.47086 0.47086 0.54916 0.54916

1.17430 1.17430 0.92142 0.92142 1.08241 1.08241

0.00169 0.00169 0.00133 0.00133 0.00160 0.00160

0.01340 0.01340 0.01052 0.01052 0.01229 0.01229

0.00144 0.00144 0.00113 0.00113 0.00136 0.00136

0.00036 0.00036 0.00028 0.00028 0.00033 0.00033

0.00736 0.00736 0.00577 0.00577 0.00673 0.00673

1.15081 1.15081 0.90299 0.90299 1.06076 1.06076

0.00166 0.00166 0.00130 0.00130 0.00157 0.00157

0.01314 0.01314 0.01031 0.01031 0.01204 0.01204

0.00141 0.00141 0.00111 0.00111 0.00133 0.00133

0.00035 0.00035 0.00028 0.00028 0.00033 0.00033

0.00721 0.00721 0.00566 0.00566 0.00660 0.00660

kg/tonne of paper Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax g/meter of tape Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax g/m2 of board Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax


7-5

7.1.3 Joint Finishing Products Manufacturing Atmospheric emissions are generated in all steps of the finishing products manufacturing process where energy is used. Industrial raw minerals have to be processed - dried and reduced to proper size through secondary grinding and milling. Furthermore, gypsum used in the setting compounds has to be calcined. The processing of joint compounds involves compounding and mixing of all the raw materials together, pumping and packaging of the finished materials. Use of energy in all these processing steps results in generation of common air pollutants, although as most of the processing is done at room temperatures, in comparison with many other processes, the energy used and the resulting emissions are relatively low. Particulate emissions are released in handling and processing of industrial minerals used in joint compound production. We assumed that drying and secondary processing (grinding, milling) of all industrial minerals will generate similar TPM emissions. Gypsum plaster processing, of course, includes the calcining caused TPM emission as well. Based on Environment Canada nationwide emission inventory (1978)3 data for gypsum processing (Table 5.5), we arrived at the following controlled emission factors: • •

limestone, mica, talc, clay gypsum plaster

2.085 kg/tonne 6.585 kg/tonne

In Section 6 while discussing gypsum paper processing, in agreement with the EC nationwide emission inventory (1978) we assumed that the particulate emissions associated with paper production are negligible. Despite all the similarities between the gypsum paper and paper used for joint tape production, however, we believe that in the case of joint tape some particulate emissions are generated due to the sanding, buffing and cutting operations, that have to be taken into consideration. Based on U.S. EPA AP-425, the following particulate emission factors for paper tape manufacturing was used: •

paper tape

0.3 kg/tonne.

The resulting estimates of atmospheric emissions associated with manufacturing of the three relevant joint finishing materials are shown in Tables 7.6, 7.7 and 7.8. As we assumed the same energy inputs (Section 5.2) into these products’ manufacture in all production facilities across Canada, atmospheric emissions assigned to the manufacturing are the same in all six cities under consideration.


7-6

TABLE 7.6 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO MANUFACTURING OF READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND AND ITS CONSTITUENTS CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

12.74505 12.74505 12.74505 12.74505 12.74505 12.74505

0.01027 0.01027 0.01027 0.01027 0.01027 0.01027

0.08027 0.08027 0.08027 0.08027 0.08027 0.08027

0.00797 0.00797 0.00797 0.00797 0.00797 0.00797

0.00212 0.00212 0.00212 0.00212 0.00212 0.00212

0.04177 0.04177 0.04177 0.04177 0.04177 0.04177

1.28019 1.28019 1.28019 1.28019 1.28019 1.28019

8.59016 8.59016 8.59016 8.59016 8.59016 8.59016

0.00692 0.00692 0.00692 0.00692 0.00692 0.00692

0.05410 0.05410 0.05410 0.05410 0.05410 0.05410

0.00537 0.00537 0.00537 0.00537 0.00537 0.00537

0.00143 0.00143 0.00143 0.00143 0.00143 0.00143

0.02815 0.02815 0.02815 0.02815 0.02815 0.02815

0.86285 0.86285 0.86285 0.86285 0.86285 0.86285


TABLE 7.7 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO MANUFACTURING OF SETTING JOINT COMPOUND AND ITS CONSTITUENTS CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

51.09884 51.09884 51.09884 51.09884 51.09884 51.09884

0.15454 0.15454 0.15454 0.15454 0.15454 0.15454

0.18902 0.18902 0.18902 0.18902 0.18902 0.18902

0.01514 0.01514 0.01514 0.01514 0.01514 0.01514

0.00435 0.00435 0.00435 0.00435 0.00435 0.00435

0.08203 0.08203 0.08203 0.08203 0.08203 0.08203

4.92157 4.92157 4.92157 4.92157 4.92157 4.92157

17.98679 17.98679 17.98679 17.98679 17.98679 17.98679

0.05440 0.05440 0.05440 0.05440 0.05440 0.05440

0.06653 0.06653 0.06653 0.06653 0.06653 0.06653

0.00533 0.00533 0.00533 0.00533 0.00533 0.00533

0.00153 0.00153 0.00153 0.00153 0.00153 0.00153

0.02888 0.02888 0.02888 0.02888 0.02888 0.02888

1.73239 1.73239 1.73239 1.73239 1.73239 1.73239



7-7

TABLE 7.8 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO MANUFACTURING OF PAPER JOINT TAPE CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

621.95279 621.95279 621.95279 621.95279 621.95279 621.95279

0.51387 0.51387 0.51387 0.51387 0.51387 0.51387

0.78241 0.78241 0.78241 0.78241 0.78241 0.78241

0.01570 0.01570 0.01570 0.01570 0.01570 0.01570

0.01559 0.01559 0.01559 0.01559 0.01559 0.01559

0.18287 0.18287 0.18287 0.18287 0.18287 0.18287

0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000

7.62614 7.62614 7.62614 7.62614 7.62614 7.62614

0.00630 0.00630 0.00630 0.00630 0.00630 0.00630

0.00959 0.00959 0.00959 0.00959 0.00959 0.00959

0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019

0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019

0.00224 0.00224 0.00224 0.00224 0.00224 0.00224

0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368

7.47361 7.47361 7.47361 7.47361 7.47361 7.47361

0.00617 0.00617 0.00617 0.00617 0.00617 0.00617

0.00940 0.00940 0.00940 0.00940 0.00940 0.00940

0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019

0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019

0.00220 0.00220 0.00220 0.00220 0.00220 0.00220

0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360

[kg/tonne of paper] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [g/meter of tape] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [g/m2 of board] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

7.1.4 Finished Associated Products Transportation The ATHENATM computer model calculates the finished products transportation emissions from the distances and modes of transport, as shown in Table 5.18. For an illustration, some finished associated products transportation emissions are shown in this study as well. The average atmospheric emissions due to transportation of finished associated products to the markets were calculated by combining energy emission factors from Table 6.1 with the estimates of finished products transportation energy use by fuel type developed and shown in Tables 5.20 to 5.24. The results are shown in Tables 7.9 for ready mix compound, 7.10 for setting compound, and 7.11 for joint paper tape.


7-8

TABLE 7.9 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO TRANSPORTATION OF FINISHED READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

40.92045 29.91458 67.78716 31.03447 7.50834 49.48505

0.05904 0.04316 0.09780 0.04477 0.01083 0.07139

0.46708 0.42863 1.27934 0.35424 0.08570 0.89173

0.05030 0.03428 0.06891 0.03815 0.00923 0.05151

0.01256 0.00714 0.00895 0.00953 0.00230 0.00753

0.25640 0.13070 0.09564 0.19446 0.04705 0.09729

27.58039 20.16243 45.68855 20.91723 5.06062 33.35292

0.03979 0.02909 0.06592 0.03018 0.00730 0.04812

0.31481 0.28890 0.86228 0.23876 0.05776 0.60103

0.03390 0.02311 0.04645 0.02571 0.00622 0.03472

0.00847 0.00481 0.00604 0.00642 0.00155 0.00507

0.17282 0.08809 0.06446 0.13107 0.03171 0.06557


TABLE 7.10 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO TRANSPORTATION OF FINISHED SETTING JOINT COMPOUND CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

40.92045 29.91458 67.78716 31.03447 7.50834 49.48505

0.05904 0.04316 0.09780 0.04477 0.01083 0.07139

0.46708 0.42863 1.27934 0.35424 0.08570 0.89173

0.05030 0.03428 0.06891 0.03815 0.00923 0.05151

0.01256 0.00714 0.00895 0.00953 0.00230 0.00753

0.25640 0.13070 0.09564 0.19446 0.04705 0.09729

14.40400 10.52993 23.86108 10.92413 2.64294 17.41874

0.02078 0.01519 0.03442 0.01576 0.00381 0.02513

0.16441 0.15088 0.45033 0.12469 0.03017 0.31389

0.01770 0.01207 0.02426 0.01343 0.00325 0.01813

0.00442 0.00251 0.00315 0.00335 0.00081 0.00265

0.09025 0.04601 0.03367 0.06845 0.01656 0.03424



7-9

TABLE 7.11 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO TRANSPORTATION OF FINISHED PAPER JOINT TAPE CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

40.92045 29.91458 67.78716 31.03447 7.50834 49.48505

0.00000 0.02999 0.17393 0.00000 0.00000 0.11246

0.46708 0.54726 1.96739 0.35424 0.08570 1.33659

1.48283 1.47959 1.55018 1.44533 1.43251 1.52269

0.04195 0.03653 0.03202 0.03259 0.02920 0.03442

0.00000 0.07350 0.42630 0.00000 0.00000 0.27563

0.50175 0.36680 0.83118 0.38053 0.09206 0.60677

0.00072 0.00053 0.00120 0.00055 0.00013 0.00088

0.00573 0.00526 0.01569 0.00434 0.00105 0.01093

0.00062 0.00042 0.00084 0.00047 0.00011 0.00063

0.00015 0.00009 0.00011 0.00012 0.00003 0.00009

0.00314 0.00160 0.00117 0.00238 0.00058 0.00119

0.49172 0.35946 0.81456 0.37292 0.09022 0.59463

0.00071 0.00052 0.00118 0.00054 0.00013 0.00086

0.00561 0.00515 0.01537 0.00426 0.00103 0.01072

0.00060 0.00041 0.00083 0.00046 0.00011 0.00062

0.00015 0.00009 0.00011 0.00011 0.00003 0.00009

0.00308 0.00157 0.00115 0.00234 0.00057 0.00117

[kg/tonne of paper] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [g/meter of tape] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [g/m2 of board] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

7.2

JOINT FINISHING PRODUCTS ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS SUMMARY

Total atmospheric emissions due to the production of ready mix joint compounds, setting joint compounds, and joint paper tape, are summarized and shown in Tables 7.12, 7.13 and 7.14, respectively. The emission unit factors are expressed in both grams per unit of production and in grams per m2 of gypsum board. More detailed summary tables showing breakdown due to process stage and region are shown in Tables 7.15 to 7.21.


7-10

TABLE 7.12 TOTAL ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

114.77194 103.76607 134.59127 97.83858 39.67737 81.65408

0.15746 0.14158 0.18606 0.13303 0.04912 0.10968

1.24485 1.20639 1.97667 1.05156 0.38769 1.19372

0.13338 0.11737 0.14333 0.11256 0.04108 0.08336

0.03343 0.02801 0.02766 0.02824 0.01038 0.01561

0.68106 0.55536 0.47614 0.57496 0.21053 0.26077

1.59333 1.59333 1.59333 1.59333 1.59333 1.59333

77.35629 69.93833 90.71452 65.94320 26.74255 55.03485

0.10613 0.09543 0.12540 0.08966 0.03311 0.07393

0.83903 0.81311 1.33227 0.70875 0.26130 0.80457

0.08990 0.07910 0.09660 0.07587 0.02769 0.05618

0.02253 0.01888 0.01865 0.01903 0.00700 0.01052

0.45904 0.37431 0.32092 0.38752 0.14189 0.17576

1.07390 1.07390 1.07390 1.07390 1.07390 1.07390


TABLE 7.13 TOTAL ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF SETTING JOINT COMPOUND CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

282.97164 271.96577 285.16264 248.40995 201.76209 243.73880

0.48906 0.47318 0.49222 0.43920 0.37190 0.43246

2.83571 2.79726 3.64816 2.72306 2.19060 2.99663

0.30014 0.28413 0.28039 0.24963 0.19229 0.23457

0.07552 0.07010 0.05773 0.05830 0.04399 0.04921

1.53493 1.40922 1.03609 1.13490 0.84261 0.89285

5.48223 5.48223 5.48223 5.48223 5.48223 5.48223

99.60602 95.73195 100.37725 87.44030 71.02025 85.79606

0.17215 0.16656 0.17326 0.15460 0.13091 0.15223

0.99817 0.98463 1.28415 0.95852 0.77109 1.05482

0.10565 0.10001 0.09870 0.08787 0.06769 0.08257

0.02658 0.02467 0.02032 0.02052 0.01548 0.01732

0.54029 0.49605 0.36470 0.39949 0.29660 0.31428

1.92975 1.92975 1.92975 1.92975 1.92975 1.92975



7-11

TABLE 7.14 TOTAL ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF PAPER JOINT TAPE CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

758.64346 747.63759 764.88698 728.13429 717.73758 759.71429

0.71107 0.69519 0.72008 0.66706 0.65504 0.71560

2.34265 2.30420 2.91951 1.99441 1.87013 2.67616

0.18371 0.16770 0.17697 0.14621 0.13577 0.17805

0.05754 0.05212 0.04761 0.04818 0.04514 0.05036

1.03936 0.91365 0.74938 0.84819 0.77908 0.82932

0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000

9.30218 9.16723 9.37874 8.92809 8.80061 9.31531

0.00872 0.00852 0.00883 0.00818 0.00803 0.00877

0.02872 0.02825 0.03580 0.02445 0.02293 0.03281

0.00225 0.00206 0.00217 0.00179 0.00166 0.00218

0.00071 0.00064 0.00058 0.00059 0.00055 0.00062

0.01274 0.01120 0.00919 0.01040 0.00955 0.01017

0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368

9.11614 8.98389 9.19116 8.74953 8.62460 9.12901

0.00854 0.00835 0.00865 0.00802 0.00787 0.00860

0.02815 0.02769 0.03508 0.02397 0.02247 0.03216

0.00221 0.00202 0.00213 0.00176 0.00163 0.00214

0.00069 0.00063 0.00057 0.00058 0.00054 0.00061

0.01249 0.01098 0.00900 0.01019 0.00936 0.00997

0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360

[kg/tonne of paper] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [g/meter of tape] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax [MJ/m2 of board] Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax


7-12

TABLE 7.15 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION (G/KG OF COMPOUND) CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

1.17206 1.17206 1.17206 1.17206 1.17206 1.17206

0.00169 0.00169 0.00169 0.00169 0.00169 0.00169

0.01338 0.01338 0.01338 0.01338 0.01338 0.01338

0.00144 0.00144 0.00144 0.00144 0.00144 0.00144

0.00036 0.00036 0.00036 0.00036 0.00036 0.00036

0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734 0.00734

0.31314 0.31314 0.31314 0.31314 0.31314 0.31314

59.93437 59.93437 52.88699 52.88699 18.25191 18.25191

0.08647 0.08647 0.07630 0.07630 0.02633 0.02633

0.68412 0.68412 0.60367 0.60367 0.20834 0.20834

0.07367 0.07367 0.06501 0.06501 0.02243 0.02243

0.01840 0.01840 0.01623 0.01623 0.00560 0.00560

0.37554 0.37554 0.33139 0.33139 0.11436 0.11436

12.74505 12.74505 12.74505 12.74505 12.74505 12.74505

0.01027 0.01027 0.01027 0.01027 0.01027 0.01027

0.08027 0.08027 0.08027 0.08027 0.08027 0.08027

0.00797 0.00797 0.00797 0.00797 0.00797 0.00797

0.00212 0.00212 0.00212 0.00212 0.00212 0.00212

0.04177 0.04177 0.04177 0.04177 0.04177 0.04177

1.28019 1.28019 1.28019 1.28019 1.28019 1.28019

0.09843 0.09843 0.08826 0.08826 0.03829 0.03829

0.77777 0.77777 0.69732 0.69732 0.30198 0.30198

0.08308 0.08308 0.07442 0.07442 0.03185 0.03185

0.02087 0.02087 0.01871 0.01871 0.00808 0.00808

0.42466 0.42466 0.38050 0.38050 0.16348 0.16348

1.59333 1.59333 1.59333 1.59333 1.59333 1.59333

40.92045 29.91458 67.78716 31.03447 7.50834 49.48505

0.05904 0.04316 0.09780 0.04477 0.01083 0.07139

0.46708 0.42863 1.27934 0.35424 0.08570 0.89173

0.05030 0.03428 0.06891 0.03815 0.00923 0.05151

0.01256 0.00714 0.00895 0.00953 0.00230 0.00753

0.25640 0.13070 0.09564 0.19446 0.04705 0.09729

114.77194 103.76607 134.59127 97.83858 39.67737 81.65408

0.15746 0.14158 0.18606 0.13303 0.04912 0.10968

1.24485 1.20639 1.97667 1.05156 0.38769 1.19372

0.13338 0.11737 0.14333 0.11256 0.04108 0.08336

0.03343 0.02801 0.02766 0.02824 0.01038 0.01561

0.68106 0.55536 0.47614 0.57496 0.21053 0.26077

Extraction Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

Raw Materials Transport Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax Manufacturing Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

Cradle to Gate Emissions Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

73.85148 73.85148 66.80411 66.80411 32.16903 32.16903

Finished Products Transport Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax TOTAL Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

1.59333 1.59333 1.59333 1.59333 1.59333 1.59333


7-13

TABLE 7.16 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF READY MIX JOINT COMPOUND BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION (G/M 2 OF BOARD) CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

0.78997 0.78997 0.78997 0.78997 0.78997 0.78997

0.00114 0.00114 0.00114 0.00114 0.00114 0.00114

0.00902 0.00902 0.00902 0.00902 0.00902 0.00902

0.00097 0.00097 0.00097 0.00097 0.00097 0.00097

0.00024 0.00024 0.00024 0.00024 0.00024 0.00024

0.00495 0.00495 0.00495 0.00495 0.00495 0.00495

0.21106 0.21106 0.21106 0.21106 0.21106 0.21106

40.39577 40.39577 35.64583 35.64583 12.30179 12.30179

0.05828 0.05828 0.05143 0.05143 0.01775 0.01775

0.46109 0.46109 0.40688 0.40688 0.14042 0.14042

0.04965 0.04965 0.04381 0.04381 0.01512 0.01512

0.01240 0.01240 0.01094 0.01094 0.00378 0.00378

0.25312 0.25312 0.22335 0.22335 0.07708 0.07708

8.59016 8.59016 8.59016 8.59016 8.59016 8.59016

0.00692 0.00692 0.00692 0.00692 0.00692 0.00692

0.05410 0.05410 0.05410 0.05410 0.05410 0.05410

0.00537 0.00537 0.00537 0.00537 0.00537 0.00537

0.00143 0.00143 0.00143 0.00143 0.00143 0.00143

0.02815 0.02815 0.02815 0.02815 0.02815 0.02815

0.86285 0.86285 0.86285 0.86285 0.86285 0.86285

0.06634 0.06634 0.05949 0.05949 0.02581 0.02581

0.52421 0.52421 0.47000 0.47000 0.20354 0.20354

0.05600 0.05600 0.05016 0.05016 0.02147 0.02147

0.01407 0.01407 0.01261 0.01261 0.00545 0.00545

0.28622 0.28622 0.25646 0.25646 0.11018 0.11018

1.07390 1.07390 1.07390 1.07390 1.07390 1.07390

27.58039 20.16243 45.68855 20.91723 5.06062 33.35292

0.03979 0.02909 0.06592 0.03018 0.00730 0.04812

0.31481 0.28890 0.86228 0.23876 0.05776 0.60103

0.03390 0.02311 0.04645 0.02571 0.00622 0.03472

0.00847 0.00481 0.00604 0.00642 0.00155 0.00507

0.17282 0.08809 0.06446 0.13107 0.03171 0.06557

77.35629 69.93833 90.71452 65.94320 26.74255 55.03485

0.10613 0.09543 0.12540 0.08966 0.03311 0.07393

0.83903 0.81311 1.33227 0.70875 0.26130 0.80457

0.08990 0.07910 0.09660 0.07587 0.02769 0.05618

0.02253 0.01888 0.01865 0.01903 0.00700 0.01052

0.45904 0.37431 0.32092 0.38752 0.14189 0.17576




49.77590 49.77590 45.02597 45.02597 21.68192 21.68192


1.07390 1.07390 1.07390 1.07390 1.07390 1.07390


7-14

TABLE 7.17 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF SETTING JOINT COMPOUND BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION (G/KG OF COMPOUND) CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

2.09851 2.09851 2.09851 2.09851 2.09851 2.09851

0.00303 0.00303 0.00303 0.00303 0.00303 0.00303

0.02395 0.02395 0.02395 0.02395 0.02395 0.02395

0.00258 0.00258 0.00258 0.00258 0.00258 0.00258

0.00064 0.00064 0.00064 0.00064 0.00064 0.00064

0.01315 0.01315 0.01315 0.01315 0.01315 0.01315

0.56066 0.56066 0.56066 0.56066 0.56066 0.56066

188.85384 188.85384 164.17813 164.17813 141.05640 141.05640

0.27246 0.27246 0.23686 0.23686 0.20350 0.20350

2.15566 2.15566 2.15585 2.15585 1.89193 1.89193

0.23213 0.23213 0.19376 0.19376 0.16535 0.16535

0.05797 0.05797 0.04378 0.04378 0.03669 0.03669

1.18334 1.18334 0.84526 0.84526 0.70038 0.70038

51.09884 51.09884 51.09884 51.09884 51.09884 51.09884

0.15454 0.15454 0.15454 0.15454 0.15454 0.15454

0.18902 0.18902 0.18902 0.18902 0.18902 0.18902

0.01514 0.01514 0.01514 0.01514 0.01514 0.01514

0.00435 0.00435 0.00435 0.00435 0.00435 0.00435

0.08203 0.08203 0.08203 0.08203 0.08203 0.08203

4.92157 4.92157 4.92157 4.92157 4.92157 4.92157

0.43003 0.43003 0.39443 0.39443 0.36107 0.36107

2.36863 2.36863 2.36882 2.36882 2.10490 2.10490

0.24985 0.24985 0.21148 0.21148 0.18306 0.18306

0.06296 0.06296 0.04878 0.04878 0.04168 0.04168

1.27852 1.27852 0.94044 0.94044 0.79556 0.79556

5.48223 5.48223 5.48223 5.48223 5.48223 5.48223

40.92045 29.91458 67.78716 31.03447 7.50834 49.48505

0.05904 0.04316 0.09780 0.04477 0.01083 0.07139

0.46708 0.42863 1.27934 0.35424 0.08570 0.89173

0.05030 0.03428 0.06891 0.03815 0.00923 0.05151

0.01256 0.00714 0.00895 0.00953 0.00230 0.00753

0.25640 0.13070 0.09564 0.19446 0.04705 0.09729

282.97164 271.96577 285.16264 248.40995 201.76209 243.73880

0.48906 0.47318 0.49222 0.43920 0.37190 0.43246

2.83571 2.79726 3.64816 2.72306 2.19060 2.99663

0.30014 0.28413 0.28039 0.24963 0.19229 0.23457

0.07552 0.07010 0.05773 0.05830 0.04399 0.04921

1.53493 1.40922 1.03609 1.13490 0.84261 0.89285




242.05119 242.05119 217.37548 217.37548 194.25375 194.25375


5.48223 5.48223 5.48223 5.48223 5.48223 5.48223


7-15

TABLE 7.18 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF SETTING JOINT COMPOUND BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION (G/M 2 OF BOARD) CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

0.73867 0.73867 0.73867 0.73867 0.73867 0.73867

0.00107 0.00107 0.00107 0.00107 0.00107 0.00107

0.00843 0.00843 0.00843 0.00843 0.00843 0.00843

0.00091 0.00091 0.00091 0.00091 0.00091 0.00091

0.00023 0.00023 0.00023 0.00023 0.00023 0.00023

0.00463 0.00463 0.00463 0.00463 0.00463 0.00463

0.19735 0.19735 0.19735 0.19735 0.19735 0.19735

66.47655 66.47655 57.79070 57.79070 49.65185 49.65185

0.09591 0.09591 0.08338 0.08338 0.07163 0.07163

0.75879 0.75879 0.75886 0.75886 0.66596 0.66596

0.08171 0.08171 0.06821 0.06821 0.05820 0.05820

0.02040 0.02040 0.01541 0.01541 0.01291 0.01291

0.41654 0.41654 0.29753 0.29753 0.24653 0.24653

17.98679 17.98679 17.98679 17.98679 17.98679 17.98679

0.05440 0.05440 0.05440 0.05440 0.05440 0.05440

0.06653 0.06653 0.06653 0.06653 0.06653 0.06653

0.00533 0.00533 0.00533 0.00533 0.00533 0.00533

0.00153 0.00153 0.00153 0.00153 0.00153 0.00153

0.02888 0.02888 0.02888 0.02888 0.02888 0.02888

1.73239 1.73239 1.73239 1.73239 1.73239 1.73239

0.15137 0.15137 0.13884 0.13884 0.12710 0.12710

0.83376 0.83376 0.83382 0.83382 0.74092 0.74092

0.08795 0.08795 0.07444 0.07444 0.06444 0.06444

0.02216 0.02216 0.01717 0.01717 0.01467 0.01467

0.45004 0.45004 0.33104 0.33104 0.28004 0.28004

1.92975 1.92975 1.92975 1.92975 1.92975 1.92975

14.40400 10.52993 23.86108 10.92413 2.64294 17.41874

0.02078 0.01519 0.03442 0.01576 0.00381 0.02513

0.16441 0.15088 0.45033 0.12469 0.03017 0.31389

0.01770 0.01207 0.02426 0.01343 0.00325 0.01813

0.00442 0.00251 0.00315 0.00335 0.00081 0.00265

0.09025 0.04601 0.03367 0.06845 0.01656 0.03424

99.60602 95.73195 100.37725 87.44030 71.02025 85.79606

0.17215 0.16656 0.17326 0.15460 0.13091 0.15223

0.99817 0.98463 1.28415 0.95852 0.77109 1.05482

0.10565 0.10001 0.09870 0.08787 0.06769 0.08257

0.02658 0.02467 0.02032 0.02052 0.01548 0.01732

0.54029 0.49605 0.36470 0.39949 0.29660 0.31428




85.20202 85.20202 76.51617 76.51617 68.37732 68.37732


1.92975 1.92975 1.92975 1.92975 1.92975 1.92975


7-16

TABLE 7.19 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF JOINT PAPER TAPE BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION (KG/TONNE OF PAPER) CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

95.77022 95.77022 75.14703 75.14703 88.27645 88.27645

0.13817 0.13817 0.10842 0.10842 0.13034 0.13034

1.09316 1.09316 0.85776 0.85776 1.00202 1.00202

0.11771 0.11771 0.09237 0.09237 0.11084 0.11084

0.02939 0.02939 0.02306 0.02306 0.02725 0.02725

0.60009 0.60009 0.47086 0.47086 0.54916 0.54916

621.95279 621.95279 621.95279 621.95279 621.95279 621.95279

0.51387 0.51387 0.51387 0.51387 0.51387 0.51387

0.78241 0.78241 0.78241 0.78241 0.78241 0.78241

0.01570 0.01570 0.01570 0.01570 0.01570 0.01570

0.01559 0.01559 0.01559 0.01559 0.01559 0.01559

0.18287 0.18287 0.18287 0.18287 0.18287 0.18287

0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000

0.65204 0.65204 0.62228 0.62228 0.64421 0.64421

1.87557 1.87557 1.64017 1.64017 1.78442 1.78442

0.13341 0.13341 0.10806 0.10806 0.12654 0.12654

0.04498 0.04498 0.03865 0.03865 0.04283 0.04283

0.78295 0.78295 0.65373 0.65373 0.73203 0.73203

0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000

40.92045 29.91458 67.78716 31.03447 7.50834 49.48505

0.05904 0.04316 0.09780 0.04477 0.01083 0.07139

0.46708 0.42863 1.27934 0.35424 0.08570 0.89173

0.05030 0.03428 0.06891 0.03815 0.00923 0.05151

0.01256 0.00714 0.00895 0.00953 0.00230 0.00753

0.25640 0.13070 0.09564 0.19446 0.04705 0.09729

758.64346 747.63759 764.88698 728.13429 717.73758 759.71429

0.71107 0.69519 0.72008 0.66706 0.65504 0.71560

2.34265 2.30420 2.91951 1.99441 1.87013 2.67616

0.18371 0.16770 0.17697 0.14621 0.13577 0.17805

0.05754 0.05212 0.04761 0.04818 0.04514 0.05036

1.03936 0.91365 0.74938 0.84819 0.77908 0.82932



717.72301 717.72301 697.09982 697.09982 710.22924 710.22924

Finished Materials Transport Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

TOTAL Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000 0.30000


7-17

TABLE 7.20 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF JOINT PAPER TAPE BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION (G/METER OF TAPE) CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

1.17430 1.17430 0.92142 0.92142 1.08241 1.08241

0.00169 0.00169 0.00133 0.00133 0.00160 0.00160

0.01340 0.01340 0.01052 0.01052 0.01229 0.01229

0.00144 0.00144 0.00113 0.00113 0.00136 0.00136

0.00036 0.00036 0.00028 0.00028 0.00033 0.00033

0.00736 0.00736 0.00577 0.00577 0.00673 0.00673

7.62614 7.62614 7.62614 7.62614 7.62614 7.62614

0.00630 0.00630 0.00630 0.00630 0.00630 0.00630

0.00959 0.00959 0.00959 0.00959 0.00959 0.00959

0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019

0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019

0.00224 0.00224 0.00224 0.00224 0.00224 0.00224

0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368

0.00799 0.00799 0.00763 0.00763 0.00790 0.00790

0.02300 0.02300 0.02011 0.02011 0.02188 0.02188

0.00164 0.00164 0.00133 0.00133 0.00155 0.00155

0.00055 0.00055 0.00047 0.00047 0.00053 0.00053

0.00960 0.00960 0.00802 0.00802 0.00898 0.00898

0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368

0.50175 0.36680 0.83118 0.38053 0.09206 0.60677

0.00072 0.00053 0.00120 0.00055 0.00013 0.00088

0.00573 0.00526 0.01569 0.00434 0.00105 0.01093

0.00062 0.00042 0.00084 0.00047 0.00011 0.00063

0.00015 0.00009 0.00011 0.00012 0.00003 0.00009

0.00314 0.00160 0.00117 0.00238 0.00058 0.00119

9.30218 9.16723 9.37874 8.92809 8.80061 9.31531

0.00872 0.00852 0.00883 0.00818 0.00803 0.00877

0.02872 0.02825 0.03580 0.02445 0.02293 0.03281

0.00225 0.00206 0.00217 0.00179 0.00166 0.00218

0.00071 0.00064 0.00058 0.00059 0.00055 0.00062

0.01274 0.01120 0.00919 0.01040 0.00955 0.01017



8.80043 8.80043 8.54756 8.54756 8.70855 8.70855

Finished Materials Transport Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax TOTAL Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368 0.00368


7-18

TABLE 7.21 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS DUE TO PRODUCTION OF JOINT PAPER TAPE BY PROCESS STAGE AND REGION (G/M 2 OF BOARD) CO2

SO2

NOx

VOC

CH4

CO

TPM

1.15081 1.15081 0.90299 0.90299 1.06076 1.06076

0.00166 0.00166 0.00130 0.00130 0.00157 0.00157

0.01314 0.01314 0.01031 0.01031 0.01204 0.01204

0.00141 0.00141 0.00111 0.00111 0.00133 0.00133

0.00035 0.00035 0.00028 0.00028 0.00033 0.00033

0.00721 0.00721 0.00566 0.00566 0.00660 0.00660

7.47361 7.47361 7.47361 7.47361 7.47361 7.47361

0.00617 0.00617 0.00617 0.00617 0.00617 0.00617

0.00940 0.00940 0.00940 0.00940 0.00940 0.00940

0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019

0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019 0.00019

0.00220 0.00220 0.00220 0.00220 0.00220 0.00220

0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360

0.00784 0.00784 0.00748 0.00748 0.00774 0.00774

0.02254 0.02254 0.01971 0.01971 0.02144 0.02144

0.00160 0.00160 0.00130 0.00130 0.00152 0.00152

0.00054 0.00054 0.00046 0.00046 0.00051 0.00051

0.00941 0.00941 0.00786 0.00786 0.00880 0.00880

0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360

0.49172 0.35946 0.81456 0.37292 0.09022 0.59463

0.00071 0.00052 0.00118 0.00054 0.00013 0.00086

0.00561 0.00515 0.01537 0.00426 0.00103 0.01072

0.00060 0.00041 0.00083 0.00046 0.00011 0.00062

0.00015 0.00009 0.00011 0.00011 0.00003 0.00009

0.00308 0.00157 0.00115 0.00234 0.00057 0.00117

9.11614 8.98389 9.19116 8.74953 8.62460 9.12901

0.00854 0.00835 0.00865 0.00802 0.00787 0.00860

0.02815 0.02769 0.03508 0.02397 0.02247 0.03216

0.00221 0.00202 0.00213 0.00176 0.00163 0.00214

0.00069 0.00063 0.00057 0.00058 0.00054 0.00061

0.01249 0.01098 0.00900 0.01019 0.00936 0.00997



8.62442 8.62442 8.37661 8.37661 8.53438 8.53438

Finished Materials Transport Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax TOTAL Vancouver Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Montreal Halifax

0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360 0.00360


7-19

REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

“Emission Factors for Greenhouse and Other Gases by Fuel Type: An Inventory”, Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, Ad Hoc Committee on Emissions Factors, December 1990. Canadian Industry Program for Energy Conservation (CIPEC), Ministry of Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, 1989. “A Nationwide Inventory of Emissions of Air Contaminants”, Environment Canada, Report EPS 3-EP-83-10, December 1983. “Metals Mining and Milling Process Profiles with Environmental Aspects, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/2-76-167, Washington, USA, 1976. “Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors”, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA AP-42, 4th edition, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1985.


8.0

8-1

LIQUID EFFLUENTS

This section addresses liquid effluents associated with gypsum board production, namely in its raw materials extraction and manufacturing stages. The gypsum board manufacturing process itself generates hardly any process effluent. While a large amount of water is mixed with gypsum stucco to prepare slurry, in the case of 1/2" regular gypsum board, for example, representing about 44% of the total raw materials weight, this water is partially chemically bonded in the re-hydration of calcium sulfate hemihydrate back to calcium sulfate dihydrate, with the rest of the “water of convenience” driven off during the drying process. However, gypsum board plants do use some water to clean equipment and yards. In addition, rainwater washes away gypsum dust into containment areas and this “gypsum board plant” effluent is regularly discharged. As a result, some plant liquid effluents are associated with the gypsum board production and associated operations despite the absence of process effluents. While perhaps negligible in comparison to the atmospheric emissions, these effluents should not be ignored. Furthermore, gypsum board raw materials extraction and preparation is associated with effluent discharges. Mining or quarrying of gypsum rock generates regular and often fairly substantial volumes of “minewater” or “quarry effluent”. Sudden storms can also create “stormwater effluent” at quarries. Preparation of a commercial grade by-product gypsum often requires additional washing of the “gypsum cake” that would not be necessary if the by-product were stacked or landfilled. The paper manufacturing process is well known to use large volumes of water, although modern near “zero discharge” paper-making operations have reduced the amount of effluent drastically. We were not able to find any information or references in the literature regarding liquid effluents associated with gypsum operations. However, we were able to obtain some detailed monitoring data from the Water Resources Branch of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Energy from their MISA program1, as well as some additional limited information of similar numbers from the Nova Scotia Department of the Environment.2 Further valuable data were supplied by the Greater Vancouver Regional Authority3 and Ontario Hydro.4 8.1

LIQUID EFFLUENT ESTIMATES - GYPSUM BOARD

8.1.1 Raw Materials Extraction The detailed MOEE information on “minewater” effluent characteristics both in grams per liter of discharge, as well as annual loading in kilograms per year, are summarized in Table 8.1. These numbers represent weighted averages of four mining operations. Cursory comparison with limited data from Nova Scotia quarries indicate that “quarry effluent” is fairly similar to the “minewater”, and therefore in the absence of more detailed information from various quarries across the country, we will use the Ontario data as representative of gypsum mines and quarries for all regions. Also shown in table 6.1 are the monitoring data representing FGD blowdown wastewater treated effluent from sand filters at the Ontario Hydro’s Lambton Generating Station before discharging into the equalization ponds. We are assuming that effluent from other by-product gypsum washing would have similar characteristics.


TABLE 8.1

8-2

GYPSUM EXTRACTION LIQUID EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS 1,2,4 Natural gypsum

FGD gypsum

minewater weighted average Flow [m3/day] Hydrogen ion [pH] Specific conductance [microS/cm]

Total suspended solids Aluminum Zinc Phenolics Sulfide Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite Dissolved Organic Compounds (DOC) Chlorides Sulfates

weighted avg. annual loading

treated effluent from sand filters before discharge to equalization pond average average annual loading

199 - 4010 7.78 - 7.94 1600 - 3100

300

[mg/L]

[kg/yr]

28.378 0.672 0.008 0.002 0.017 1.034 0.358 2.686 3.615 42.282 1044.831

31207.94 891.33 10.70 0.41 6.29 1085.62 315.16 2622.88 2781.66 34497.04 1157168.98

[mg/L]

[kg/yr]

0.050 0.015 0.001 0.002

5.48 1.64 0.11 0.22

4.280

468.66

Taking then into consideration the relative use of natural, by-product, and recycled gypsum (see Table 3.3 in Section 3) in the respective region of the country, Table 8.2 shows, as an example, weighted average effluent loading due to the gypsum extraction by region in g/m2 of 1/2" regular gypsum board. (Data for other types of gypsum board are shown in the summary of this section.) TABLE 8.2 WEIGHTED AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO GYPSUM EXTRACTION BY REGION (G/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)


West Region

Central Region

East Region

(Vancouver, Calgary)

Winnipeg, Toronto)

(Montreal, Halifax)

0.25371 0.00725 0.00009 0.00000 0.00005 0.00883 0.00256 0.02132 0.02261 0.28045 9.40744

0.25028 0.00749 0.00019 0.00001 0.00006 0.00871 0.03182 0.02103 0.02231 0.27666 9.28019

0.23834 0.00726 0.00022 0.00001 0.00007 0.00829 0.04120 0.02003 0.02124 0.26346 8.83755


8-3

8.1.2 Gypsum Board Manufacturing In developing estimates for effluents associated with gypsum board manufacturing, two parts of the process have to be factored in: • •

gypsum paper production, and manufacturing of gypsum board itself.

Table 6.3 provides average characteristics of gypsum paper producing mill effluent. Major effluent categories are expressed in both milligrams per liter as well as in kg per day, taking average effluent flow at the time of monitoring sampling into account. To be able to provide, later, effluent loading per area of gypsum board, Table 8.3 also shows effluent estimates expressed in grams per tonne of finished paper. In our calculations, it was assumed that a paper mill operates six days a week, 52 weeks a year, for a total of 312 days per year. Liquid effluent generated in gypsum board manufacturing operations and its characteristics are shown in Table 8.4. These estimates represent weighted averages of a number of Ontario operations, and due to the general similarities of gypsum board plants across the industry, it will be assumed that it is representative of all Canadian gypsum board plants. TABLE 8.3

GYPSUM PAPER PLANT LIQUID EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS 3,1 Gypsum Paper Production (averages)

Flow [m3/day] Hydrogen ion [pH] Specific conductance [microS/cm]

Total suspended solids Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) Aluminum Zinc Iron Copper Boron Cyanides Oil & grease Manganese Lead Molybdenum Nickel Silver Cobalt Cadmium Chromium

203.00 4.9 - 8.4 362.60 [mg/L]

[kg/day]

[g/tonne of paper]

243.40 270.70 1.38 0.36 2.14 1.07 1.72 0.10 13.50 0.12 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01

46.30 55.00 0.27 0.07 0.45 0.24 0.34 0.00 2.80 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

270.44089 321.25807 1.57709 0.40887 2.62848 1.40185 1.98596 0.00000 16.35496 0.11682 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000


TABLE 8.4

8-4

GYPSUM BOARD PLANT LIQUID EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS 1 Gypsum Board Plant (weighted averages) annual loading

Flow [m3/day] Hydrogen ion [pH] Specific conductance [microS/cm]


4330 - 5500 7.89 - 7.96 2050 - 2500 [mg/L]

[kg/yr]

35.85 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.76 0.40 1.70 2.62 41.39 1219.60

75063.91 923.51 0.00 0.00 134.92 1376.26 397.22 1780.66 6976.95 84293.61 1156065.79

From the manufacturing effluent monitoring data shown in Tables 8.3 and 8.4, unit factors for effluent loading expressed in grams per square meter of gypsum board can be estimated. In the development of these estimates, paper content in various types of gypsum boards was taken into consideration (see Table 3.1 in Section 3). As an example, weighted average effluent loading due to gypsum board manufacturing steps for 1/2" regular gypsum board is shown in Table 8.5. The manufacturing effluent estimates can be combined with those for the raw materials extraction effluent to yield total effluent loading per m2 of 1/2" regular gypsum board, as shown in Table 8.6 below. Similar effluent estimates for other types of gypsum board are shown in the summary of this section.


8-5

TABLE 8.5 WEIGHTED AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO GYPSUM BOARD MANUFACTURING (G/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)

Total suspended solids Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) Aluminum Zinc Iron Copper Boron Phenolics Sulfide Cyanides Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite Dissolved Organic Compounds (DOC) Chlorides Sulfates

Paper manufacturing

Gypsum board manufacturing

Total manufacturing

0.12752 0.15148 0.00074 0.00019 0.00124 0.00066 0.00094

0.70549

0.83301 0.15148 0.00942 0.00019 0.00124 0.00066 0.00094 0.00000 0.00127 0.00000 0.02065 0.00373 0.01674 0.06557 0.79223 10.86528

0.00868 0.00000

0.00000 0.00127 0.00000 0.00771

0.01293 0.00373 0.01674 0.06557 0.79223 10.86528

TABLE 8.6 TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO GYPSUM BOARD PRODUCTION (G/M 2 OF 1/2" REGULAR GYPSUM BOARD)

Total suspended solids Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) Aluminum Zinc Iron Copper Boron Phenolics Sulfide Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite Dissolved Organic Compounds (DOC) Chlorides Sulfates

West Region

Central Region

East Region

(Vancouver, Calgary)

Winnipeg, Toronto)

(Montreal, Halifax)

1.08672 0.15148 0.01667 0.00028 0.00124 0.00066 0.00094 0.00000 0.00132 0.02947 0.00630 0.03806 0.08819 1.07268 20.27272

1.08329 0.15148 0.01691 0.00038 0.00124 0.00066 0.00094 0.00001 0.00133 0.02935 0.03555 0.03777 0.08788 1.06889 20.14547

1.07135 0.15148 0.01668 0.00041 0.00124 0.00066 0.00094 0.00001 0.00133 0.02894 0.04493 0.03677 0.08682 1.05569 19.70283


8.2

8-6

LIQUID EFFLUENT - GYPSUM BOARD SUMMARY

Effluent estimates associated with the extraction and manufacturing stages, as well as total effluent unit factors for all ten different types of gypsum boards considered in this study, are summarized in Tables 8.7 to 8.11.

8.3

LIQUID EFFLUENT ESTIMATES - FINISHING PRODUCTS

8.3.1 Joint Compounds According to joint compounds manufacturers, there is no liquid effluent associated with the production of either ready mix or setting (dry) joint compounds. Although water is used as a major component of the ready mix compounds, as the manufacturing process operates as a closed loop system, no liquid waste is generated. Consequently, the only liquid effluent associated with the joint compounds is generated in the extraction (open pit mining) of industrial minerals used as raw materials in their production. Mine/quarry water characteristics for natural gypsum were shown in Table 8.1 above, and we will assume the same effluent characteristics also for gypsum used for production of gypsum plaster for setting compounds. For the effluent parameters of other industrial minerals used in joint compounds, mainly calcium carbonate (limestone), we used the numbers provided by the “Water Resources Branch of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Energy”,5 and used in the “Cement and Structural Concrete Products” part of the ATHENATM Sustainable Development Project.6 We will assume that mica, talc and clay have the same effluent loading as limestone. Table 8.11 shows the relevant effluent characteristics for gypsum and limestone quarry water, expressed both in g/mL and in g/tonne of a mineral. Gypsum and limestone quarry effluent loadings from Table 8.11 were combined with joint compounds formulations as shown in Tables 3.6 for ready mix compound and 3.7 for the setting compound to provide the unit factor estimates for effluent loadings associated with these two types of joint finishing compounds. The results are shown in Table 8.12, expressed in both grams per kg of compound and grams per m2 of board. 8.3.2 Joint Paper Tape As noted earlier, joint paper tape is produced from the same recycled paper stock as paper for gypsum board facings. Liquid effluent generated in the manufacturing of gypsum paper was discussed in detail above, in Section 8.1.2 (Table 8.3). In this subsection, we will use the same paper effluent data as derived there, but in addition to mg/L and kg/tonne of paper units we will express the liquid effluent also in grams per lineal meter of tape and grams per m2 of gypsum board (Table 8.13).


8-7

TABLE 8.7 WEIGHTED AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO GYPSUM BOARD PRODUCTION BY PROCESS STAGE (G/M 2 ) - 1/2" REGULAR & TYPE X 1/2" Regular Gypsum Board

1/2" Type X Gypsum Board

West

Central

East

West

Central

East

0.25371 0.00725 0.00009 0.00000 0.00005 0.00883 0.00256 0.02132 0.02261 0.28045 9.40744

0.25028 0.00749 0.00019 0.00001 0.00006 0.00871 0.03182 0.02103 0.02231 0.27666 9.28019

0.23834 0.00726 0.00022 0.00001 0.00007 0.00829 0.04120 0.02003 0.02124 0.26346 8.83755

0.25259 0.00721 0.00009 0.00000 0.00005 0.00879 0.00255 0.02123 0.02251 0.27921 9.36588

0.24917 0.00746 0.00019 0.00001 0.00006 0.00867 0.03168 0.02094 0.02221 0.27544 9.23920

0.23729 0.00723 0.00022 0.00001 0.00007 0.00825 0.04102 0.01994 0.02115 0.26230 8.79851

Gypsum Extraction Total suspended solids Aluminum Zinc Phenolics Sulfide Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite DOC Chlorides Sulfates

Paper and Gypsum Board Production Total suspended solids BOD Aluminum Zinc Iron Copper Boron Phenolics Sulfide Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite DOC Chlorides Sulfates

0.83301 0.15148 0.00942 0.00019 0.00124 0.00066 0.00094 0.00000 0.00127 0.02065 0.00373 0.01674 0.06557 0.79223 10.86528

0.82427 0.14480 0.00935 0.00018 0.00118 0.00063 0.00090 0.00000 0.00126 0.02025 0.00372 0.01666 0.06528 0.78873 10.81728

TOTAL EFFLUENT Total suspended solids BOD Aluminum Zinc Iron Copper Boron Phenolics Sulfide Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite DOC Chlorides Sulfates

1.08672 0.15148 0.01667 0.00028 0.00124 0.00066 0.00094 0.00000 0.00132 0.02947 0.00630 0.03806 0.08819 1.07268 20.27272

1.08329 0.15148 0.01691 0.00038 0.00124 0.00066 0.00094 0.00001 0.00133 0.02935 0.03555 0.03777 0.08788 1.06889 20.14547

1.07135 0.15148 0.01668 0.00041 0.00124 0.00066 0.00094 0.00001 0.00133 0.02894 0.04493 0.03677 0.08682 1.05569 19.70283

1.07686 0.14480 0.01657 0.00027 0.00118 0.00063 0.00090 0.00000 0.00131 0.02904 0.00627 0.03789 0.08780 1.06795 20.18316

1.07344 0.14480 0.01681 0.00037 0.00118 0.00063 0.00090 0.00001 0.00133 0.02892 0.03539 0.03760 0.08749 1.06417 20.05648

1.06156 0.14480 0.01658 0.00040 0.00118 0.00063 0.00090 0.00001 0.00133 0.02850 0.04474 0.03660 0.08643 1.05103 19.61579


8-8

TABLE 8.8 WEIGHTED AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO GYPSUM BOARD PRODUCTION BY PROCESS STAGE (G/M 2 ) - 1/2" MR & 5/8" REGULAR 1/2" Moisture Resistant Board

5/8" Regular Gypsum Board

West

Central

East

West

Central

East

0.27822 0.00795 0.00010 0.00000 0.00006 0.00968 0.00281 0.02338 0.02480 0.30754 10.31623

0.27446 0.00821 0.00021 0.00001 0.00007 0.00955 0.03489 0.02307 0.02446 0.30338 10.17670

0.26137 0.00796 0.00024 0.00001 0.00007 0.00909 0.04518 0.02197 0.02330 0.28891 9.69130

0.33128 0.00946 0.00011 0.00000 0.00007 0.01152 0.00335 0.02784 0.02953 0.36619 12.28350

0.32680 0.00978 0.00025 0.00001 0.00008 0.01137 0.04155 0.02747 0.02913 0.36124 12.11735

0.31121 0.00948 0.00028 0.00002 0.00009 0.01083 0.05380 0.02616 0.02774 0.34401 11.53939



0.90474 0.15573 0.01028 0.00020 0.00127 0.00068 0.00096 0.00000 0.00139 0.02211 0.00409 0.01835 0.07191 0.86877 11.91491

1.05026 0.15335 0.01209 0.00020 0.00125 0.00067 0.00095 0.00000 0.00166 0.02470 0.00487 0.02185 0.08562 1.03444 14.18704


1.18296 0.15573 0.01823 0.00029 0.00127 0.00068 0.00096 0.00000 0.00145 0.03179 0.00690 0.04174 0.09671 1.17631 22.23115

1.17919 0.15573 0.01850 0.00040 0.00127 0.00068 0.00096 0.00001 0.00146 0.03166 0.03899 0.04142 0.09637 1.17215 22.09161

1.16610 0.15573 0.01824 0.00044 0.00127 0.00068 0.00096 0.00001 0.00146 0.03120 0.04928 0.04032 0.09520 1.15768 21.60621

1.38154 0.15335 0.02155 0.00031 0.00125 0.00067 0.00095 0.00000 0.00172 0.03622 0.00822 0.04969 0.11515 1.40063 26.47054

1.37706 0.15335 0.02187 0.00044 0.00125 0.00067 0.00095 0.00001 0.00174 0.03606 0.04642 0.04932 0.11475 1.39567 26.30439

1.36147 0.15335 0.02157 0.00048 0.00125 0.00067 0.00095 0.00002 0.00174 0.03552 0.05867 0.04801 0.11336 1.37844 25.72643


8-9

TABLE 8.9 WEIGHTED AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO GYPSUM BOARD PRODUCTION BY PROCESS STAGE (G/M 2 ) - 5/8" TYPE X AND MR 5/8" Type X Gypsum Board

5/8" Moisture Resistant Board

West

Central

East

West

Central

East

0.33599 0.00960 0.00012 0.00000 0.00007 0.01169 0.00339 0.02824 0.02995 0.37140 12.45831

0.33145 0.00992 0.00025 0.00001 0.00008 0.01153 0.04214 0.02786 0.02954 0.36638 12.28980

0.31564 0.00962 0.00029 0.00002 0.00009 0.01098 0.05456 0.02653 0.02813 0.34890 11.70361

0.35673 0.01019 0.00012 0.00000 0.00007 0.01241 0.00360 0.02998 0.03180 0.39432 13.22720

0.35190 0.01053 0.00026 0.00001 0.00009 0.01224 0.04474 0.02958 0.03137 0.38899 13.04829

0.33512 0.01021 0.00031 0.00002 0.00009 0.01166 0.05793 0.02817 0.02987 0.37044 12.42592



1.06001 0.14935 0.01223 0.00019 0.00122 0.00065 0.00092 0.00000 0.00168 0.02473 0.00494 0.02216 0.08684 1.04916 14.38894

1.12906 0.16288 0.01300 0.00021 0.00133 0.00071 0.00101 0.00000 0.00178 0.02648 0.00525 0.02353 0.09220 1.11391 15.27698


1.39600 0.14935 0.02182 0.00031 0.00122 0.00065 0.00092 0.00000 0.00175 0.03642 0.00834 0.05040 0.11679 1.42056 26.84725

1.39145 0.14935 0.02215 0.00044 0.00122 0.00065 0.00092 0.00001 0.00176 0.03626 0.04708 0.05002 0.11638 1.41554 26.67873

1.37564 0.14935 0.02184 0.00048 0.00122 0.00065 0.00092 0.00002 0.00177 0.03571 0.05951 0.04869 0.11497 1.39806 26.09255

1.48579 0.16288 0.02319 0.00033 0.00133 0.00071 0.00101 0.00000 0.00185 0.03889 0.00885 0.05351 0.12399 1.50823 28.50418

1.48096 0.16288 0.02354 0.00047 0.00133 0.00071 0.00101 0.00001 0.00187 0.03872 0.04999 0.05311 0.12356 1.50290 28.32527

1.46418 0.16288 0.02321 0.00051 0.00133 0.00071 0.00101 0.00002 0.00188 0.03814 0.06318 0.05170 0.12207 1.48435 27.70291


8-10

TABLE 8.10 WEIGHTED AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO GYPSUM BOARD PRODUCTION BY PROCESS STAGE (G/M 2 ) - 5/16" MH AND 1" SL 5/16" Mobile Home Board

1" Shaftliner

West

Central

East

West

Central

East

0.17815 0.00509 0.00006 0.00000 0.00004 0.00620 0.00180 0.01497 0.01588 0.19692 6.60561

0.17574 0.00526 0.00013 0.00001 0.00005 0.00611 0.02234 0.01477 0.01566 0.19426 6.51627

0.16736 0.00510 0.00015 0.00001 0.00005 0.00582 0.02893 0.01407 0.01492 0.18499 6.20546

0.62489 0.01785 0.00021 0.00001 0.00013 0.02174 0.00631 0.05252 0.05570 0.69075 23.17045

0.61644 0.01845 0.00046 0.00002 0.00016 0.02144 0.07837 0.05181 0.05494 0.68140 22.85705

0.58703 0.01788 0.00054 0.00003 0.00016 0.02042 0.10148 0.04934 0.05232 0.64890 21.76683



0.62753 0.15699 0.00687 0.00020 0.00128 0.00069 0.00097 0.00000 0.00089 0.01707 0.00262 0.01175 0.04604 0.55628 7.62927

1.86977 0.15699 0.02215 0.00020 0.00128 0.00069 0.00097 0.00000 0.00312 0.03985 0.00920 0.04122 0.16151 1.95126 26.76111


0.80568 0.15699 0.01195 0.00026 0.00128 0.00069 0.00097 0.00000 0.00093 0.02327 0.00442 0.02672 0.06192 0.75321 14.23488

0.80327 0.15699 0.01212 0.00033 0.00128 0.00069 0.00097 0.00001 0.00094 0.02319 0.02496 0.02652 0.06171 0.75054 14.14553

0.79489 0.15699 0.01196 0.00035 0.00128 0.00069 0.00097 0.00001 0.00094 0.02290 0.03155 0.02582 0.06096 0.74128 13.83473

2.49466 0.15699 0.04000 0.00041 0.00128 0.00069 0.00097 0.00001 0.00325 0.06159 0.01551 0.09374 0.21720 2.64201 49.93156

2.48621 0.15699 0.04060 0.00066 0.00128 0.00069 0.00097 0.00002 0.00328 0.06129 0.08756 0.09303 0.21645 2.63267 49.61816

2.45681 0.15699 0.04003 0.00074 0.00128 0.00069 0.00097 0.00003 0.00329 0.06027 0.11067 0.09056 0.21383 2.60017 48.52794


8-11

TABLE 8.11 WEIGHTED AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO GYPSUM BOARD PRODUCTION BY PROCESS STAGE (G/M 2 ) - 1/2" AND 5/8" GFB 1/2" Gypsum Fiberboard

5/8" Gypsum Fiberboard

East

East

0.32602 0.00931 0.00011 0.00000 0.00007 0.01134 0.00329 0.02740 0.02906 0.36038 12.08843

0.40452 0.01155 0.00014 0.00001 0.00008 0.01407 0.00409 0.03400 0.03606 0.44716 14.99940

0.90654 0.00000 0.01115 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00163 0.01662 0.00480 0.02150 0.08426 1.01801 13.96174

1.12484 0.00000 0.01384 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00202 0.02062 0.00595 0.02668 0.10455 1.26315 17.32381

1.23256 0.00000 0.02046 0.00011 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00170 0.02796 0.00809 0.04890 0.11332 1.37838 26.05017

1.52937 0.00000 0.02539 0.00014 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00001 0.00210 0.03470 0.01004 0.06068 0.14061 1.71031 32.32321

Gypsum Extraction Total suspended solids Aluminum Zinc Phenolics Sulfide Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite DOC Chlorides Sulfates GFB Production Total suspended solids BOD Aluminum Zinc Iron Copper Boron Phenolics Sulfide Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite DOC Chlorides Sulfates TOTAL EFFLUENT Total suspended solids BOD Aluminum Zinc Iron Copper Boron Phenolics Sulfide Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite DOC Chlorides Sulfates


8-12

TABLE 8.12 WEIGHTED AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO GYPSUM AND LIMESTONE EXTRACTION Gypsum mine/quarry water [mg/L of effluent] Total suspended solids [TSS] Aluminum Zinc Phenolics Sulfide Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite Dissolved organic compounds [DOC] Chlorides Sulfates

24.22 0.57 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.88 0.31 2.29 3.08 36.08 891.55

Limestone quarry water

g/tonne of gypsum

[mg/L of effluent]

g/tonne of CaCO3

29.04387 0.82952 0.00996 0.00038 0.00585 1.01034 0.29330 2.44100 2.58877 32.10489 1076.92658

103.70 0.76 0.00 0.01 0.04 1.77 1.41 2.90 2.49 1290.03 217.71

80.17464 0.26055 0.02077 0.00713 0.04669 2.19849 0.73995 3.38014 3.73075 449.11891 261.46478

TABLE 8.13 AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO JOINT COMPOUNDS PRODUCTION Ready Mix Compounds

Total suspended solids [TSS] Aluminum Zinc Phenolics Sulfide Oil & grease Ammonia & ammonium Nitrate & nitrite Dissolved organic compounds [DOC] Chlorides Sulfates

Setting Compounds

[g/kg of compound]

[g/m 2 of board]

[g/kg of compound]

[g/m 2 of board]

0.049227 0.000160 0.000013 0.000004 0.000029 0.001350 0.000454 0.002075 0.002291 0.275759 0.160539

0.033179 0.000108 0.000009 0.000003 0.000019 0.000910 0.000306 0.001399 0.001544 0.185862 0.108204

0.058261 0.000619 0.000017 0.000004 0.000027 0.001723 0.000552 0.003167 0.003434 0.250056 0.763933

0.020508 0.000218 0.000006 0.000001 0.000010 0.000606 0.000194 0.001115 0.001209 0.088020 0.268904


8-13

TABLE 8.14 AVERAGE EFFLUENT LOADING DUE TO PAPER JOINT TAPE PRODUCTION Flow [m3/day] Hydrogen ion [pH] Conductance [microS/cm]

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) Total suspended solids [TSS] Oil&grease Aluminum Boron Copper Iron Manganese Zinc

203.00 4.9 - 8.4 362.60 [mg/L]

[kg/day]

[g/tonne of paper]

[g/meter of tape]

[g/m2 of board]

270.70 243.40 13.50 1.38 1.72 1.07 2.14 0.12 0.36

55.00 46.30 2.80 0.27 0.34 0.24 0.45 0.02 0.07

321.25807 270.44089 16.35496 1.57709 1.98596 1.40185 2.62848 0.11682 0.40887

0.003939 0.003316 0.000201 0.000019 0.000024 0.000017 0.000032 0.000001 0.000005

0.003860 0.003250 0.000197 0.000019 0.000024 0.000017 0.000032 0.000001 0.000005

REFERENCES 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Communication from S. Wong / K. Donyina, Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy (MOEE), re. MISA water effluent discharge data for gypsum plants in Ontario, February 7, 1996. Communication from B. Matlock, Nova Scotia Department of the Environment, February 22, 1996. Communication from M. de Spot, Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD), March 4, 1996. Communication from R.S. Daly, Ontario Hydro, February 27, 1996. Communication from G. Rees, Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy (MOEE), re. MISA water effluent discharge data for cement plants in Ontario, April 19, 1993. “Building Materials in the Context of Sustainable Development - Raw Material Balances, Energy Profiles and Cement and Structural Concrete Products”, CANMET and Radian Canada Inc. for Forintek Canada Corp., February 1994, pp. 36-37.


9.0

9-1

SOLID WASTES

In this section we discuss solid wastes associated with gypsum board and related materials. The gypsum board industry generates remarkably little solid waste. The only production stage where the gypsum board industry generates some measurable solid wastes, as any other industry that mines and quarries its raw materials, is from the raw materials extraction. Essentially, all the waste generated in the manufacturing stage is internally recycled back as raw materials or used as sleutters to support gypsum board pallets. To balance the picture, the growing trend in using by-product gypsum as a replacement for mined/quarried gypsum, as well as the beneficial role of the board industry in recycling and reuse of collected construction gypsum board waste are discussed. 9.1 SOLID WASTES ESTIMATES - GYPSUM BOARD 9.1.1 Raw Materials Extraction Overburden, top soil, and subsoil have to be removed before a new quarry can commence operation. The soil used to be resold, but in modern operations it is stockpiled for eventual quarry reclamation and is not considered waste. In general, quarrying and mining operations can create large amounts of mine spoil — rock material that is not used, but is moved to get to the desired mineral resource. Mine spoils are usually deposited in old surface-mine pits or in mounds. These materials can be physically stabilized and protected from runoff or leaching to varying degrees, but have nevertheless been frequent sources of environmental problems. In contrast to most mining operations, however, gypsum rock is fairly widely available and mining/quarrying it generates relatively little waste. In comparison with metals mining, for example, there is little or no separating (depending on the amount and nature of impurities), no refining or smelting of the desired materials from the rock. In the gypsum industry, it is the rock itself that is quite often used in its entirety. In mines or quarries where gypsum rock is contaminated with larger volumes of limestone or dolomite, and it is separated from them, limestone or dolomite is resold and used in road bases or in similar applications. In general, the extraction of gypsum, like other structural materials extracted from mines, pits and quarries, results in little environmental contamination although the degree of land disturbance can be substantial.1 Based on information obtained from six different gypsum mines or quarries located in all three regions of Canada, weighted average solid waste, including mine/quarry soil/subsoil overlay, overburden, minespoil and separated impurities (limestone, dolomite, salt, shale), was estimated to be 336.5 kg/tonne of gypsum rock. (Excluding stripped overlay and overburden, solid waste impurities on their own were estimated to be 142.8 kg/tonne of gypsum. This is in good agreement with U.S. EPA numbers.2) Taking into consideration the fact that 1.2048 tonnes of gypsum are needed to produce one tonne of stucco (Section 3.1), and the difference in regional usage of natural gypsum versus the other sources (Table 3.3, Section 3), solid waste unit factors expressed per tonne of stucco were developed for all three regions, and are shown in Table 9.1.


TABLE 9.1

9-2

GYPSUM EXTRACTION SOLID WASTE BY REGION natural gypsum as percentage of total gypsum supply [%]

solid waste

Solid waste [kg/tonne of natural gypsum]

336.51

Solid waste [kg/tonne of stucco] *

405.43

West Region (Vancouver, Calgary) [kg/tonne of stucco] Central region (Winnipeg, Toronto) [kg/tonne of stucco] East region (Montreal, Halifax) [kg/tonne of stucco] Note:

86.50 85.33 81.26

350.68 345.94 329.44

* if stucco produced from natural gypsum only

As more by-product gypsum will enter the gypsum board production stream replacing some of the natural gypsum, these solid waste unit factors will undoubtedly diminish in the years to come. 9.1.2 Gypsum Board Manufacturing During the gypsum board manufacturing stage about 2 to 5% of the production is culled due to some operation problems or material being off specifications. However, in contrast to many other manufacturing processes, the rejected gypsum board is not wasted; virtually all of it is reused. Most of the off-spec board is broken down, shredded and recycled back as a part of the raw materials stream into the production. As shown in Table 3.3 in Section 3, such internal gypsum board waste recycling accounts for about 6%, 4% and 7% of the gypsum sources in the West, Central and East regions respectively. Some of the waste gypsum board is also cut into strips and used as sleutters to support gypsum board pallets during storage and transportation, thus eliminating the need to use 4"x4" wood support for the same purpose. Any off-spec paper or damaged paper is also recycled, as is the paper that is on some occasions stripped from the waste gypsum board before it is broken, shredded and fed back into the calciner. Consequently, there is no solid waste that is associated with the gypsum board manufacturing stage. The only solid waste generated by the gypsum board production is that already identified and estimated above for gypsum mining / quarrying. 9.1.3 Total Solid Waste Due to Gypsum Board Production The unit factors from Table 7.1, now considered the total solid waste factor estimates, can then be combined with typical average mass of stucco used in formulations of different gypsum board products (Table 3.1, Section 3) to develop estimates for solid waste associated with gypsum board production expressed per m2 of board. (For gypsum fiberboard, it was assumed that use of perlite generates about the same amount of solid waste as gypsum.) These estimates are presented in Table 9.2.


9-3

TABLE 9.2 TOTAL SOLID WASTE ASSOCIATED WITH GYPSUM BOARD PRODUCTION BY REGION [KG/M 2 OF BOARD] [kg of solid waste/m 2 ]

[kg of stucco/m 2 ]

1/2" regular gypsum board 1/2" Type X gypsum board 1/2" MR gypsum board 5/8" regular gypsum board 5/8" type X gypsum board 5/8" MR gypsum board 5/16" mobile home board 1" shaftliner 1/2" gypsum fiberboard (GFB)* 5/8" gypsum fiberboard (GFB)*

notes:

9.2

6.3610 6.3329 6.9755 8.3057 8.4239 8.9438 4.4665 15.6671 8.1738** 10.1421**

West

Central

East

2.2307 2.2208 2.4462 2.9126 2.9541 3.1364 1.5663 5.4941 -

2.2005 2.1908 2.4131 2.8733 2.9141 3.0940 1.5451 5.4198 -

2.0955 2.0863 2.2980 2.7362 2.7751 2.9464 1.4714 5.1613 2.6928 3.3412

* includes perlite ** GFB is produced only in the East region

THE USE OF WASTES IN GYPSUM BOARD PROCESSING

It has been already noted (Section 2.6.5) that the gypsum board industry is in a rather unique position in that it can use industrial by-products, construction waste and products made from postconsumers waste paper as a part of its raw materials stream. This recycling and reuse of byproducts and wastes is one of the major strengths of the gypsum industry. Westroc’s Mississauga plant became the first Canadian gypsum board plant operating entirely on FGD by-product/waste gypsum, with a number of other operations supplementing their gypsum rock supply with byproduct gypsum, or construction waste gypsum. This trend to increased utilization of by-product gypsum appears to be especially strong in East region plants. It is entirely feasible that both CGC’s and Westroc’s Montreal gypsum board plants will be operating on 100% by-product / recycled gypsum before the end of 1996. The availability of free, or very inexpensive by-product gypsum, is changing the gypsum industry. In years to come, it is expected that where it will make economic and geographic sense, more and more FGD gypsum will be used.3 In 1992 in the U.S.A. over 25.5 GWe of coal-fired power generating plants were already operating, under construction, or planned to be equipped with wet lime/limestone scrubbers generating FGD gypsum. It is expected that by the end of the decade some 7.3-million tonnes of FGD gypsum could be available.6,7 To put that number in perspective, it represents about one-third of the total U.S. annual consumption and almost one-half of its gypsum mining output. Other sources forecast an eventual U.S. production of synthetic gypsum as high as 32-million tonnes annually.8


9-4

Increased generation and use of FGF gypsum is a worldwide phenomenon. In Great Britain, FGD gypsum output of just one power station, of the National Power’s Drax station, when fully operational in late 1996, will have the capability to supply up to 1,000,000 tonnes of gypsum annually, representing more than one third of the total UK gypsum industry needs. In Canada 1.5 GWe power generating capacity already is or will soon be similarly equipped with flue gas desulfurization scrubbers capable of generating commercial grade gypsum.5 Canadian FGD gypsum production capability, estimated on the basis of Canadian vs. U.S. wet lime/limestone scrubbing capacity, appears to be in the 500,000 tonnes/year area. This figure seems to correspond well with the FGD gypsum generating forecasts expected from Ontario Hydro’s Lambton and New Brunswick’s Belledune power stations. In at least two Canadian metropolitan areas, Vancouver and Toronto, construction gypsum board waste has been banned from landfill sites since the early 1990s. In these areas, the gypsum board producers entered into partnership arrangements with recycling companies such as New West Gypsum. Gypsum construction waste is being collected and processed by recyclers, and supplied back to the gypsum board manufacturing plants. An alternate use for construction waste, according to the Gypsum Association, includes agricultural applications and animal bedding material.4 Beneficial re-use of either by-product or waste construction gypsum eliminates some of the pressure on scarce landfill sites. One leading gypsum board producer certifies that over 20% (by weight) of all gypsum board manufactured consisted of recycled material, and that 100% of gypsum waste generated at that particular manufacturing facility is recycled.9 The same operation was recognized for its environmental leadership by the Recycling Council of Ontario when it was awarded the 1991 Ontario Waste Minimization Award for Outstanding Industrial 3-R’s Initiative. Table 9.3 summarizes the current distribution of gypsum sources used by Canadian gypsum board manufacturers. TABLE 9.3


DISTRIBUTION OF GYPSUM SOURCES BY GEOGRAPHICAL REGION (%) Natural Gypsum

Synthetic Gypsum

Recycled / external

Recycled / internal

86 85 81 85

0 7 10 6

8 4 2 4

6 4 7 5

Furthermore, as already noted in Section 2.2.3, paper used as facings of gypsum board is made entirely f rom waste paper (old newspaper, magazines and corrugated cardboard). Therefore,


9-5

gypsum board from at least some of the operations is, or can be, 100% recycled or by-productsderived building material. 9.3 SOLID WASTES ESTIMATES - FINISHING PRODUCTS According to industry sources, there is no solid waste generated in the manufacturing steps of joint compounds production, other than bagged raw materials packaging. Paper bags packaging, however, is collected, compacted and sent back to the paper producers for recycling, and is not therefore considered to be a waste. Consequently, the only solid waste assignable to the joint compounds production, is the portion of the solid waste generated in extraction of industrial minerals used as their constituents. In Table 9.1, solid waste of 336.51 kg/tonne of gypsum and 405.43 kg/tonne of stucco (plaster) were shown. As a rough approximation, we will use the “gypsum” solid waste number for limestone, mica, talc and clay as well. Combining the content of industrial minerals in the joint compound formulations (Tables 3.6 and 3.7) with these factors, we can provide some indication of the solid waste associated with joint compounds production (Table 9.4).

TABLE 9.4

SOLID WASTE ASSOCIATED WITH JOINT COMPOUNDS PRODUCTION

Ready Mix Joint Compound

Setting Joint Compound

[g/kg of compound]

[g/m2 of board]

[g/kg of compound]

[g/m2 of board]

206.62

139.26

369.94

130.22

REFERENCES 1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6.

“The State of Canada’s Environment”, Environment Canada, Ottawa 1991, p. 11-20. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Industrial Process Profiles for Environmental Use: Chapter 17, The Gypsum and Board Industry, 1977. G.J. Venta, R.T. Hemmings, “FGD Gypsum Utilization: A Strategic Approach to Reuse”, Proceedings, Paper 95-WA80.03, Air & Waste Management Association 88th Annual Meeting & Exhibition, San Antonio, TX, June 18-23, 1995. “Gypsum Board Systems: Technical Report”, Topic I-9250, AIA Environmental Resource Guide, July 1993. H.N. Soud, M. Takeshita, “FGD Handbook”, Chapter 4 - FGD Installations on Coal-Fired Plants, IEACR/65 Report, IEA Coal Research, London, January 1994. G.J. Venta, R.T. Hemmings, “FGD Gypsum Utilization: Bridging the “Two Solitudes”, Proceedings of 11th International Symposium on Use and Management of Coal Combustion By-Products (CCBs), American Coal Ash Association, Orlando, FL, January 15-19, 1995.


7. 8.

9.

9-6

W. Ellison, R.A. Kuntze, “Expanding of Markets for Gypsum Byproducts”, Proceedings of Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, Inc., 1993 Annual Meeting, Reno, NE. J.A. Walker, “Gypsum - The Miracle Mineral: Brief History and Prospects”, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Inorganic-Bonded Wood and Fiber Composite Materials, Spokane, WA, September 26-28, 1994, pp.39-40. “Certificate of Recycling”, Westroc Industries Limited, June 1993.

Gypsum Wallboard

Recommend Documents