Using NASA Life Support Technology to Reduce Cement Industry CO2 Emissions and Explore Improvements to Concrete Durability

PI: Dr. Morgan B. AbneyEnvironmental Control and Life Support SystemsNASA Marshall Space Flight Center

September 2016 ACI Strategic Development Council #40

September 8, 2016

1

Collaborators:

Dr. Tanya KomasConcrete Preservation Institute

Dr. Jim AllemanCivil, Construction, and

Environmental EngineeringIowa State University

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20160012078 2020-04-03T15:27:05+00:00Z

Agenda

• Introduction

• Background of NASA Technology

• Technology Transfer to Cement/Concrete Industry

• Progress To-Date

• Conclusions

• Future Work

2

Introduction

• Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS)

• Long Duration Missions

– Lunar or Mars Surface

– Mars Transit

• Atmosphere Revitalization Resource Recovery

– CO2 O2 + C(s)

– Oxygen Recycling

– Carbon repurposing

3

Goal = keep astronautshealthy & happy @ space

Background of NASA Technology

• Bosch Process

4

O2 CO2 Reactor 1

H2O

Reactor 2

Carbon

Separation

Series-Bosch SystemCrew Members

breathe in O2 and breathe out CO2

CO2 is combined with H2 and fed to the

Series-Bosch System

H2O produced in Reactor 1 can be used for drinking and washing or

electrolyzed to produce O2Carbon product from Reactor 2 might be used to make filters, to make carbon ropes, or as a

filler for radiation shielding materials.

Background of NASA Technology

• Chemistry

• Challenges for Space Application

– Power Consumption

– Catalyst Resupply

– Volume/Mass

5

RWGS

Carbon Formation

CO2 + H2 H2O + CO

2CO CO2 + C(s)

CO + H2 H2O + C(s)

CO2 + 2H2 2H2O + C(s)

1980’s Bosch System

Technology Transfer

• 2010 Iowa State University approached NASA about using Bosch technology to reduce CO2 emissions in the cement industry

6

O2 CO2 Reactor 1

H2O

Reactor 2

Carbon

Separation

Series-Bosch SystemCement factories

produce the 5th most CO2 of any industry in

the world

CO2 is heated using energy already

produced by the system

Metal content of clinker or cement product is reactive for the desired

reactions, steam is exhausted to the air Carbon product from Reactor 2 is intrinsic to the clinker material

Technology Transfer

7

SEM of Carbon fibers (platleted) from Space Bosch Testing

• Carbon is produced at the iron nuclei in the cement/clinker

• Carbon fibers produced

Progress To-Date

• Confirmed catalytic properties of clinker and cement produced both domestically and internationally (various suppliers)

• Carbon formed at Fe nuclei in the clinker/cement material– Not mixed in – inherently part of the starting material

8

Carbon formation on clinker in increasing time increments (t= 0hrs, 4 hrs, 8 hrs).

Progress To-Date

• Evaluated carbon produced– Nano- and Micro-fibers – Highly dispersed at the macro level– Pockets of carbon at the micro level– Grinding of carbon provided thorough dispersion

• No damage to the carbon fibers

9Unground Carbonaceous Cement (CC) Ground CC

Progress To-Date

• Concrete test bricks

–Cement (directly from manufacturer) used in the Bosch process (T>450°C) to form CC

–CC used to produce concrete test samples

• Water/Cement Ratio of 0.5

• Observation during preparation of test bricks

– Bricks tested for:• Compressive strength

• Tensile strength

• Modulus of elasticity

• SIMCO Stadium Analysis Porosity

• SIMCO Stadium Analysis Migration

10

Cement

CC

vs

Large difference in workability

Non-ideal conditions to compare two cements

Progress To-Date

11

Based on Yazdani et al. this is the expected result for w/c of 0.5. Lower ratios would be expected to provide improved compressive strength for CC over the untreated cement.

Progress To-Date

• SIMCO Stadium® Initial Results: After seven days of curing, mortar cylinders were removed from the moist room and sampled:– ASTM C642 – Standard Test Method for Density, Absorption, & Voids in

Hardened Concrete• 4 x Untreated Cement Porosity Measurements

• 2 x CC Porosity Measurements

– Migration Tests conducted in setup shown• 8 x Untreated Cement Migration

Tests

• 4 x CC Migration Tests

12

Migration test setup

Progress To-Date

• Slightly higher porosity value observed for CC is probably due to testing error (per SIMCO)

13

10.74%

11.33%

7 days of hydration

Mix.1 Mix.2

21.41%

22.78%

7 days of hydration

Mix.1 Mix.2

(SD 0.35%) (SD 0.22%)

Volume of permeable pore spaces (%) Absorption (%)

Cement CementCC CC

Progress To-Date

14

Cement (top)

Cement (bottom)Cement

CC

• CC mixture current values are slightly lower than untreated Cement, implying a better diffusivity property

Logistic and Economic Feasibility

• Logistic Feasibility– Approach uses existing technology (rotary kiln,

grinder, water condensers, etc.)

– Does not interfere with current cement production

– Simple integration into existing cement plants

• Economic Feasibility– Energy for system – minimized by using excess heat

from cement production

– H2 Supply – Cost currently prohibitive at $9/kg –break-even around $5/kg• Unless alternative energy can be used to electrolyze product

water

15

Conclusions

• Lower w/c ratios should show improved compressive strength for CC over untreated cement

• The presence of carbon in the cement results in decreased permeability of ions – possible increase in concrete durability

16

Future Work

• Optimization of carbon content in cement

• Optimization of w/c ratio for concrete product

• Evaluation of effect of w/c ratio on ion permeability

• Scaled production of CC– Benchtop

– Pilot Scale

• Negotiations/teaming with H2 suppliers or alternative energy companies

17

Questions?

18

Contact Information

Morgan B. Abney, Ph.D.National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationMarshall Space Flight CenterBldg 4755, Room 407MSFC, AL 35812

morgan.b.abney@nasa.govOffice Phone: +1 256 961 4758Mobile Phone: +1 256 541 8534Fax: +1 256 961 0737

19

Contact Information

Tanya W. Komas, Ph.D.Founding Director/CEO, Concrete Preservation InstituteAlcatraz Island, CA & Pearl Harbor, HI

Mailing address:1380 East Avenue, Suite 124-385Chico, CA 95926

tkomas@cpi-foundation.orgOffice Phone: +1 866 415 7691 x701Mobile Phone: +1 530 514 4341

20

Contact Information

James E. Alleman, Ph.D.Joel and Judy Cerwick Professor of Environmental EngineeringJefferson Science Fellow (US State Department)

Mailing address:Iowa State University – CCEE DepartmentRm. 420 – Town EngineeringAmes, Iowa 50011-3232

jea@iastate.eduOffice Phone: +1 515 294-3892Mobile Phone: +1 515 441 2411

21