See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268808361

Processing of Aluminum Dross: The Birth of a Closed Industrial Process

Article  in  JOM: the journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society · November 2014
DOI: 10.1007/s11837-014-1156-z

CITATIONS READS

6 1,543

2 authors:

Helgi T Ingason Thorsteinn Sigfusson

Reykjavik University Innovation Centre of Iceland
86 PUBLICATIONS   432 CITATIONS    56 PUBLICATIONS   512 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Thor Edward Jakobsson View project

New series of project management books View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Helgi T Ingason on 29 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

JOM, Vol. 66, No. 11, 2014
DOI: 10.1007/s11837-014-1156-z
Ó 2014 The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society

Processing of Aluminum Dross: The Birth of a Closed Industrial

Process

HELGI THOR INGASON1,3 and THORSTEINN I. SIGFUSSON2

1.—School of Science and Engineering, Reykjavik University, Menntavegi 1, 101 Reykjavik, Iceland.
2.—Innovation Center Iceland, Arleynir 2-8, 112 Reykjavik, Iceland. 3.—e-mail: helgithor@ru.is

This is the history of a modern aluminum dross recycling company, from its
beginnings in the last years of the twentieth century to the present day. The
vision of the founders was to build a local recycling plant and take full
responsibility for sensitive environmental issues by recycling aluminum dross
locally rather than shipping it abroad. The paper tells the history of the
company from the environmental perspective, and gives an overview of some
of the challenges and the decisions that followed from this vision, for instance
the selection of technology. The company developed a closed industrial process
for the recycling of aluminum dross, and the paper discusses some of their
laboratory experiments and industrial trials. An important milestone has now
been reached as the process in its present form is recognized by the environ-
mental authorities in the country. Furthermore, it seems realistic that in the
near future the final product from this process will be comparable to the
product delivered in the processing of salt cake in specialized chemical plants,
but at a fraction of the cost.

aluminum oxide or nitride.1 In order to stop the

INTRODUCTION AND THEORETICAL
BACKGROUND
Alur, alvinnsla hf (Alur) was founded in Reykja-
vik in 1998. Alur is a typical start-up company with
a business idea that sprang from a university
environment. The idea was to treat white dross from
primary aluminum smelters in Iceland locally, in-
stead of exporting it to Europe for recycling.
The history of Alur can be told from different
angles, but the most suitable one, one that best ex-
presses the company’s history and its challenges
from the beginning, is the environmental perspec-
tive: specifically the genesis, treatment and pro-
cessing of aluminum dross, generated in the
primary production of aluminum. It is a well-known
fact that the surface of molten aluminum oxidizes in
contact with the atmosphere and forms a layer of
aluminum oxide (Al2O3). This layer must be re-
moved before casting the aluminum. When this is
done, some metallic aluminum is always removed as
well. In this way, between 1% and 5% of the alu-
minum is lost and the corresponding material is
called aluminum dross.
Hot dross is subject to thermiting—the atmo-
spheric oxidation of the metal in the dross to form
oxide formation in the smelter, the dross must be
cooled as quickly as possible. More than one method
is available for this purpose. However, the method
used will have a great impact on the composition of
the cooled dross.1,2,33 Examples of well-known
methods are: floor cooling, dross stirring with rotary
dross coolers, inert gas dross coolers, and dross
presses. The last two methods are widely-used. In-
ert gas dross cooling typically consists of heavy steel
skim pans, where the atmosphere is replaced with
argon gas to prevent further oxidation of the dross.
Secondary recoveries are reported in the yield range
of 40–50%. The dross press is based on the principle
that a liquid placed under pressure will separate
from a solid and flow to the area of least pressure.
The system, consisting of a pressing head and a set
of skim pans, rapidly cools the dross and a consid-
erable amount of aluminum can be reclaimed in the
smelter. Overall dross recovery can range from 60%
to 70%, but the aluminum content of the dross
shipped to the recycling facility can be low.
Aluminum dross is defined as hazardous waste in
Iceland. It is listed in the ECHA database3 as alu-
minum dross: EC/List number 273-708-2 and CAS
number 69011-71-8. The hazard statement for

(Published online September 27, 2014) 2235

2236
aluminum dross is H261: ‘‘In contact with water
releases flammable gases.’’ A total of 6 precaution-
ary statements are given, for example p. 232: ‘‘Pro-
tect from moisture’’ and p. 402 ‘‘Store in a dry
place.’’
The environmental authorities expect industry to
reduce the generation of hazardous waste as much
as possible, and aim for their reuse and recycling. In
1995, Iceland became a member of The Basel Con-
vention on the Control of Transboundary Move-
ments of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal.4
The goal of this agreement is to reduce the genera-
tion and transport of hazardous waste between
countries. This is to be achieved by disposing of
hazardous wastes as close as possible to the point
where they are created and by handling all haz-
ardous waste according to the standards of envi-
ronmental protection. Exports of aluminum dross
from aluminum smelters in Iceland fall under the
Basel Convention.
It is difficult to speak of a typical composition of
white aluminum dross, as the ratio of metallic alu-
minum that can be reclaimed may range from 30% to
90%. Although aluminum dross contains aluminum
oxide (Al2O3), this aluminum cannot be recycled.
Dross also contains aluminum nitride (AlN), which
is formed when the molten alloy comes into contact
with nitrogen at a temperature of over 1200°C.5 The
precise composition is dependent on the granular
size. Roth6 claims that coarse concentrate white
dross can contain more than 90% aluminum, fines
can contain 20–30% aluminum, and bag house dust
can contain less than 15% aluminum. Manfredi
et al.7 make a distinction between granular dross,
with 47–69% aluminum and a density of about 1 t/
m3, and compact dross with 71–93% aluminum and a
density of about 2.4 t/m3. Peterson8 points out that
dross can also contain some aluminum carbide and
cryolite, Na3AlF6, which is often associated with
molten metal coming from electrolysis cells.
The traditional method for processing aluminum
dross is the Rotary Salt Furnace (RSF) process. The
furnace is a rotating barrel with a burner at one
end. The burner flame heats up the furnace lining,
and this heat is transferred to the charge. Salt
flux—NaCl or KCl—is mixed with the dross to-
gether with some additional cryolite or CaF2. The
percentage of salt may range up to 50% depending
on the composition of the dross.1,5,9 The salt flux
protects the metal and prevents reactions with
oxygen and nitrogen. The salt is also believed to
help with the separation of the metal and the solid
material. However, there are several drawbacks to
this process. It is inefficient on three counts: finan-
cially, in terms of energy efficiency and, in particu-
lar, from environmental perspectives. Up to 1 ton of
residues or salt cake will be created for every ton of
aluminum dross.1,9,10 The amount of salt cake and
its chemical composition causes problems, and care
must be taken that it does not contaminate
groundwater. Typically it consists of aluminum,
Ingason and Sigfusson
aluminum oxide and magnesium oxide, a salt
(NaCl), potassium chloride (KCl), and other mate-
rials such as carbides, nitrides, and fluorides. Salt
cake is either disposed of or recycled in special
chemical processes.11,12 Landfill is permitted in the
U.S., but in many countries it is banned or the cost
of it is too high.9,14 Huang13 analyzed the mineral
phases, metal content and metal leachability of salt
cake samples from 10 different facilities in the USA.
The results showed that aluminum (Al), aluminum
oxide, aluminum nitride and its oxides, spinel and
elpasolite are the dominant mineral phases in salt
cake. The average Al content was 14%. Landfilling
means the problem of the disposal of salt cake is
merely postponed. As a consequence, the secondary
aluminum industries in Europe and the USA have
been forced to consider recycling technologies for
salt cake. Recovery of salt cake takes place in spe-
cialized chemical plants and the cost is high. The
overall goal of recycling salt cake is to reclaim the
salts and deliver solid residues or non-metallic
product (NMP) that consists of alumina and other
oxides, with some aluminum nitride and aluminum
carbide. The NMP can be landfilled or sold, e.g. to
cement producers, or used in the production of cal-
cium aluminate.1,14
In recent years, new recycling processes have been
developed in which there is no need for the addition of
salt flux. During the early days of Alur, these new
processes were examined and compared. One of these
processes, based on the use of plasma technology, was
developed by Alcan of Canada and has been in use in
the United States and Canada since the second half of
the last century. Plasma is created in burners that
emit flame at a very high temperature. The burner is
placed at the end of the rotatable furnace. The dross is
then put into the furnace, the door closed, and the
plasma flame ignited. The charge is heated to 700–
800°C while the furnace rotates.15,16 Compared with
the traditional RSF process, the flame temperature is
much higher for a plasma furnace and the volume of
waste gas much less. In addition, no salt flux is mixed
into the process. The drawback of plasma furnaces is,
however, that the investment is high, maintenance is
expensive because of the complicated equipment, and
electricity prices are high in many parts of the
world.1,10
A variation on the plasma furnace is the carbon
electrode furnace (Droscar), which was also devel-
oped in Canada by Hydro Quebec. This furnace is
not based on a plasma burner but on carbon elec-
trodes, between which burns a flame of ionized gas.
The investment is much smaller than for the plasma
furnace, the flame temperature is very high as in
the plasma furnace, and the process is based on the
same basic idea.17 The third process is the universal
rotary tilting furnace (URTF) process or Alurec
process. This process was developed in collaboration
between AGA in Sweden, Hooghovens in the Neth-
erlands and Hertwich in Austria. Here a closed
furnace rotates while heat is transferred to the
Processing of Aluminum Dross: The Birth of a Closed Industrial Process
charge by the flame of an oxyfuel burner. The flame
temperature is very high and there is no need for
the addition of salt.18 The main advantages of the
Alurec process, compared to the RSF process, is that
the amount of solid waste will be much less and
energy consumption in kWh per ton is only 30–50%
of the energy consumption in the RSF process.5
Examples of processes for processing hot dross are
the Ecocent and Drosrite processes.10 Such recycling
has to be part of, or work in very close conjunction,
with the aluminum smelter. The advantage, how-
ever, is that less heat will be lost as there is no need
to cool the dross and heat it up again.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The business idea behind Alur emerged in 1995
and its essence was to build up operations in Iceland
to recycle aluminum dross. Prior to that, Dross had
been shipped to Europe for recycling from the Rio
Tinto Alcan smelter in Straumsvik, the only plant in
Iceland at the time. In 1995, it was known that a
new aluminum smelter would be built at Grundar-
tangi, and this meant that the business idea would
become feasible. The vision of Alur’s founders was to
build a recycling plant in Iceland and take full
responsibility for the sensitive environmental issues
of the aluminum industry in Iceland by recycling
aluminum dross in this country instead of shipping
it abroad. The ambition was to select the best
available technology while trying to minimize, as far
as possible, the negative environmental impacts of
such an operation, and always aiming to close the
environmental circle so that all products related to
aluminum production in Iceland would become
valuable products in one form or another.
During 3 years in the operating history of Alur,
all aluminum dross derived from aluminum pro-
duction in Iceland was recycled by Alur. On aver-
age, aluminum dross was 1.5% of the total
aluminum for these years. Aluminum production in
Iceland and the estimated creation of aluminum
dross in the years 1995–2012 is shown in Fig. 1.
The selection of the technology was one of the first
and most important decisions made by Alur’s foun-
ders in the years 1995–1997. The choice was be-
tween the three processes that treat cold dross: the
plasma process, Droscar and Alurec. The RSF pro-
cess was not considered, due to the drawbacks of
that process, as described above.
The possibility of using electrical energy was
quite appealing, but the decision was nevertheless
the Alurec process. The reasons were several, but
mainly that Alurec was a proven technology; in
addition, a similar furnace had been in successful
use in Germany for several years, investment costs
seemed acceptable, and the process met all the
environmental standards. Last but not least, the
capacity of the process was of the same magnitude
as was needed for recycling all aluminum dross
produced in Iceland (Table I).
2237
PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION
START-UP
A decision was made to locate the plant at the port
of Helguvik, the main oil supply and distribution
harbor of the Reykjanes peninsula. It was further-
more decided to enter into close cooperation with a
fishmeal plant in Helguvik, and install the alumi-
num recycling facility within the building of the
fishmeal plant, which operated for only a few weeks
every year. The recycling of aluminum dross
therefore takes place in the same building as the
production of fishmeal. This sharing of housing,
infrastructure and human resources for the melting
of fish and aluminum was considered newsworthy
internationally, and was presented in a scientific
paper in the JOM in 2010.19 The manufacturing
process is a batch process and the main components
are described in Fig. 2.
The URTF manufactured by Hertwich consists of a
vessel that is open at one end. It can be tilted and
turned with hydraulic equipment. The furnace rota-
tion is controlled and the rotation speed varies from
the beginning to the end of each batch. The power of
the burner is 3 MW and the fuel is marine oil, burned
in pure oxygen. The power consumption in the pro-
duction process itself is 200–300 kWh per tonne of
aluminum dross, but 75 kW of electrical power is
required to rotate the furnace. The furnace capacity
is 5 m3 of dross. A simplified representation of the
material balance of the process is shown in Fig. 3.
The material balance is based on a recent example
from the operation of Alur with an input of 1000 kg
aluminum dross. In this example, the aluminum
dross has been pressed in the smelter, prior to
sending it to Alur’s facilities. 39 l of marine oil and
124 kg oxygen are used. The aluminum reclaimed in
this example is 455 kg, the quantity of solid residues
(NMP) is 528 kg, and there are 16 kg of filter dust.
The emissions are: carbon dioxide 111 kg, sulphur
dioxide 0.14 kg and dust 0.12 kg. It should be poin-
ted out that the consumption of energy for heating is
higher in this example than indicated by the sup-
pliers of the equipment. This is explained by the fact
that, in this example, the plant was run at only a
fraction of its capacity. The furnace was run on a
day-shift for 5 days per week and considerable
quantities of oil and oxygen were thus used for
heating the furnace. As a consequence, the calcu-
lated consumption of fuel was higher than expected.
The preliminary environmental assessment for
Alur20 discussed several options for handling the
NMP. The basic solution was to cool the NMP and
deliver it in big bags to Sorpa, the waste management
and solid waste disposal company of Reykjavik and
its adjoining municipalities. The environmental
assessment concluded that the NMP could be used for
landfilling and reference was made to the landfilling
of spent pot lining (SPL) and fine aluminum dross,
which has been practised for many years in Stra-
umsvik. Reference was made to a report from the
2238 Ingason and Sigfusson

1000 14

Estimated total creation of aluminium

dross in Iceland in 1000 tons. 12

Al production, ton (x 1000) / year

800

10
Rey arfjordur

600
8
Grundartangi
6
400

200
Straumsvik 2

0 0
1995

Year

Fig. 1. Development of aluminum production in Iceland (y-axis on left) and the corresponding creation of aluminum dross (y-axis on right) in the
years 2003–2012. Based on official production data from the Icelandic smelters, Fjardaal in Reydarfjordur, Rio Tinto Alcan in Straumsvik and
Nordural in Grundartangi, as well as production data from Alur, alvinnsla.

Table I. Comparison of several industrial processes for recycling aluminum dross

Investment Technical Prooven Flue gas Flame Solid

Process cost complexity Energy technology Flue gas volume temperature residue
RSF Low Little Oil Yes CO2, CO, NOx Large Low Salt cake
Plasma Large Large Electricity Yes N2, air Little Very high NMP
Graphite Moderate Some Electricity No N2, air Little Very high NMP
electrodes-
DROSCAR
Alurec Moderate Some Oil Yes CO2 Some High NMP
The ‘‘proven technology’’ variable reflects whether this is an experimental process or whether the process has been in operation as an
industrial process for some time

Fig. 3. A simplified representation of the mass balance in Alur’s

production process.

removing the aluminum. This was to be an extra

process step, during which excess oxygen is blown
Fig. 2. Overview of the recycling plant. into the furnace after all the molten aluminum has
been removed. The chemical reactions following this
injection would lead to the burning of the remaining
University of Iceland,21 where it was stated that such aluminum and aluminum nitride, and aluminum
landfill had shown very little impact on the environ- oxide would be formed in exothermic reactions. This
ment around the dumping pits in Straumsvik. aluminum oxide would have a market value. To the
The preferred solution by Alur was to perform a best of Alur’s knowledge, this process step would be
so-called ‘‘afterburning’’ in the furnace, after possible with the equipment supplied.
Processing of Aluminum Dross: The Birth of a Closed Industrial Process 2239

The environmental assessment was dated May Iceland. The size distribution of the samples is
2000 and the operations were started in Helguvik in shown in Table II.
October 2003. During the commissioning of the fur- The AlN content of the samples was determined
nace, it was discovered that the refractory lining with the Kjeldahl method. For the sample from
supplied would, in fact, not withstand the high tem- smelter 1, the AlN content was 17.2%; for the
peratures of the extra ‘‘afterburning’’ process step. sample from smelter 2, the AlN content was 11.7%.
This solution was therefore not possible. As a result, In earlier stages of the research project, the
the company was already faced with a huge problem material was treated and tested without prior
at the beginning of their operations: how should the crushing. The ground samples were treated by
NMP be processed? These were difficult times in submerging them in a laboratory reactor—in water
Alur’s life. During the first weeks and months, there that was heated in an oil bath—for a period of up to
was complete uncertainty about how to respond 6 h. The water temperature and ammonia coming
properly to this problem. To begin with, the NMP was from the reactor were logged, and the ammonia in
stockpiled after it had cooled. However, it soon be- the water in the reactor was determined after the
came clear that this could not continue because rain experiment was finished. For comparison, regular
water and atmospheric moisture reacted with alu- stirring was carried out in some of the samples,
minum nitride in the NMP and formed ammonia. It while no stirring was performed in other samples.
was clear that knowledge and experience had to be Some of the results from these trials showed that
developed through theory and trials in order to the material is crushed during the regular stirring
identify the best possible solutions to this problem. and, as a consequence, 50% more AlN in the original
sample will react with the water when stirring is
LABORATORY TRIALS done. The test showed that the process—with stir-
ring—reduced the AlN content in the sample from
A number of research papers have reported on
smelter 1 to 4%. In later stages of the research
laboratory and pilot-scale trials where aluminum
project, 1000-g samples of material from both
dross is leached.22–24 Kevorkijan 25 discusses the
smelters were ground to <0.5 mm particle size in a
hydrolysis of AlN in samples of filter dust from an
disk mill. The samples were then treated in the
aluminum smelter in Slovenia. The average grain
reactor as described above, using the same quantity
size was 67 lm. The material was submerged in
of water, and stirring at 500 rpm. After treatment,
boiling water and Kevorkijan used the chemical
the material was divided into fine-grained and
reaction
coarse fractions, and dried. The weighed average
2AlN þ 3H2 O ! Al2 O3 þ 2NH3 (1) content of AlN in the treated sample from smelter 1
was 2.1%, but 2.3% in the sample from smelter 2.
to explain that the wt.% of aluminum oxide in- Crystalline phases were identified with x-ray dif-
creased from 78% to 95% while the wt.% of AlN fraction (XRD), before and after the treatment. The
decreased from 7% to 0%. Fukumoto26 made a de- results are shown in Table III.
tailed assessment of the hydrolysis behavior of
aluminum nitride in various solutions. He found out INDUSTRIAL OPERATION
that a higher temperature and a larger surface area
of AlN produced a more efficient acceleration of the To begin with, this neutralizing of NMP was
hydrolysis. Below a temperature of 351 K, crystal- performed in a primitive way using open containers
line bayerite and NH3 were produced in the hydro- outdoors. However, that method was not acceptable
lysis. A process for converting dross residues to from a safety and environmental point of view. A
useful products is described in a patent from 1991.27 more permanent solution was therefore developed,
In this process, residues from plasma dross pro-
cessing—with aluminum nitride content of at least
5%—are treated with a solution of at least pH 7. Table II. Size distribution of dross samples
Very soon, Alur leaned towards the solution to
treat the NMP by submerging it in seawater under From (lm) To (lm) Smelter 1 (%) Smelter 2 (%)
controlled conditions. In that way, they could en- 90 4.34 3.82
sure that ammonia would be formed in the exo- 90 125 4.63 3.07
thermic reaction between aluminum nitride and 125 250 14.68 12.84
water, and that this ammonia would be contained in 250 355 7.10 8.76
the water. Extensive trials in a laboratory were 355 500 7.27 9.39
carried out in collaboration with the Technological 500 800 7.38 9.47
Institute of Iceland.28 The main objective was to 800 1600 14.00 15.55
investigate whether water treatment of NMP could 1600 2500 11.84 12.81
be used for the destruction of aluminum nitride in 2500 4000 11.43 10.42
4000 8000 17.30 13.72
the NMP, and for the removal of soluble metal salts. 8000 0.00 0.12
Samples of NMP were obtained from the processing Sum 99.97 99.97
of aluminum dross from two primary smelters in
2240 Ingason and Sigfusson

Table III. Phases identified in NMP with XRD before and after water treatment

Sample a-Al2O3 Cryolite AlN CaF2 NaCl Al Al(OH)3 Diaoyudoite

NMP from Smelter 1
Before XX x XX x XX o o x
After Coarse XX x x x o o XX x
After Fine XX x o x o o XX x
NMP from Smelter 2
Before XXX o X x o o o X
After Coarse XXX o x x o o X X
After Fine XXX o x x o o X X
o—the phase was not found, x—the phase was identified. X, XX and XXX indicate stronger presence of the phase

pletely submerged in seawater. The flushing pit is

Flushed NMP is divided into three chambers. The NMP is kept in
each chamber for 2–3 days which is stirred every
removed from
III (2-3 days)

day, using a powerful hydraulic excavator, to ensure

NMP is moved between the chambers

the lushing pit that the seawater will come into contact with all of
of the lushing pit – regular stirring

to a temporary the NMP. After a period of 2–3 days, the NMP is

stockpile moved to the next chamber in the pit and the same
routine is repeated. After 2–3 days in the third
chamber, the NMP is removed from the flushing pit
and piled up for 1 day, while the seawater drips
II (2-3 days)

from the material. At the next stage, the NMP is

transferred to a more permanent stockpile, where it
Sea is stored until it is used. The material has been used
as a base material in road and harbor construction
in the Helguvik area.
To assess the efficiency of the flushing process,
samples of NMP, before and after flushing, were
I (2-3 days)

taken in the spring of 2013. XRD analysis of the

samples was carried out by ISOR—Iceland Geo-
Cold NMP is survey. Figure 5 shows the XRD spectra for the
poured into NMP. The curve in Fig. 5a shows the NMP without
the lushing pit any treatment and the curve in Fig. 5b shows the
NMP after treatment in the flushing pit, as de-
scribed above.
It has been shown that the process is quite effec-
Fig. 4. The flushing process for NMP. tive in removing the AlN from the NMP. With ref-
erence to Alur’s laboratory experiments, published
research on the leaching of aluminum dross and the
based on the concept of landfill and dumping pits XRD spectra above, it is assumed that if the alu-
that had been applied for decades in Straumsvik minum dross received by Alur contains 15% AlN,
and at Grundartangi. In the case of Alur, a dumping 80% of this AlN will react with water in the flushing
pit was used for processing the material but not as a process and form NH3 according to reaction (1). This
permanent storage, hence its name—flushing pit. A would mean that for the year 2013, a total of 92 tons
new flushing pit was designed and constructed at of ammonia were created in the Alur flushing pro-
the Alur processing area in Helguvik. The flushing cess and dissolved and removed by the seawater.32
pit was located close to the coast. It was deep en- This release of ammonia to seawater can be com-
ough to ensure that it would never run empty, that pared to an average fish farm in Iceland and does
the surface would be controlled by the tides, and not cause noticeable environmental damage. After
that the sea water in the flushing pit would be flushing, the NMP is relatively inert so that rain-
continuously replenished. The flushing process has water and atmospheric moisture have no influence
evolved over many years of operation and is shown on it. In other words, the original problem associ-
in a simple way in Fig. 4. ated with the NMP is solved with this method.
The flushing process starts on day 0 when cold However, another problem associated with the
NMP is put into one end of the flushing pit, com- NMP was discovered along the way: higher than
Processing of Aluminum Dross: The Birth of a Closed Industrial Process
Fig. 5. XRD spectra for NMP. (a) A sample of NMP without treatment, (b) a sample taken after treatment in the flushing pit. Arrows indicate the
frequency peaks AlN and show that AlN is significantly reduced with treatment in the flushing pit.
anticipated contents of fluoride in the NMP. A
standard compliance test for leaching of granular
waste materials (EN 12457-2:2002) revealed that
the concentration of fluoride was above the limits
set out in the regulations for landfilling. It is to be
expected that the NMP contains a certain amount of
fluoride.8 This has to do with the fact that some bath
material may be mixed with the dross. The bath
material is high in cryolite, which is used in the
electrolysis of alumina, and cryolite contains fluo-
ride. It serves the interests of the aluminum smelter
to keep this material in circulation within the plant.
However some of the cryolite escapes the cycle, ends
up with the dross, and is subsequently sent to the
dross recycling facility. In order to look at the fluo-
ride content in NMP and how this could be dealt
with, a collaboration project was launched with a
large engineering consultancy, Mannvit. The effect
of seawater on fluoride concentration in the NMP
was examined, and the survey29 pointed out that
the salinity of the seawater is largely due to sodium
chloride content. However, seawater also includes
other ions in large quantities such as magnesium
and calcium, though the fluorine concentration in
seawater is small. Fluoride salts, such as calcium
fluoride, are harmless because of their insolubility.
Fluoride reacts with calcium and magnesium in
seawater and precipitates as the insoluble salt CaF2
at pH 8.30 The pH of the sea around Iceland is about
8.
Ca þ F2 ! CaF2 (2)
To examine whether these effects can be seen in
practice, a comparative test was carried out in the
spring of 2013. Figure 6 shows XRD spectra of NMP
samples, before and after the flushing process. The
analysis was performed by ISOR—Iceland Geosur-
vey.
Two important observations can be made from the
comparison of the XRD spectra in Fig. 5 and 6.
Figure 5 shows that the percentage of AlN de-
creases significantly with treatment in the flushing
pit. Figure 6 shows that the fluoride reacts with
2241
calcium and forms the insoluble CaF2 in the flush-
ing process. The mechanisms behind these trans-
formations are shown in Eqs. (1) and (2).
Although not all the aluminum nitride and fluo-
ride is transformed in the flushing process, it can be
concluded that this would in fact happen over time
when the NMP is submerged in seawater. For this
reason, it is concluded that using flushed NMP as a
filling material in harbor construction work is
harmless to the environment.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The laboratory- and industrial-scale experiments
have helped to underpin Alur’s strategy to process
the NMP in flushing pits. The results from laboratory
experiments and industrial operations of the flushing
process are in line with reported research from
leaching of aluminum dross.22–26 The process has
been recognized by the environmental authorities in
Iceland, as can be seen in the official operating permit
for Alur dated September 2011.31 Flushing of NMP is
authorized, and it is confirmed that the flushed NMP
is not considered hazardous waste. Flushed NMP is
used as a construction material, for example in har-
bor construction or in road building. This is, however,
only one important milestone for Alur. Utilization of
flushed NMP must be part of a particular imple-
mentation project, and this method of utilizing the
NMP is therefore subject to some uncertainty. Fur-
thermore, using the NMP as a construction material
is a low use form of a material with a lot of potential,
because of its high alumina content.
Alur’s vision is still the same as the vision of the
entrepreneurs who established the company in
1998. Great experience has been accumulated in the
11 years that have passed since the beginning of
operations in late 2003. The subject of this article
has been the environmental aspects of the opera-
tion; the processing of NMP has always been by far
the biggest challenge facing the company and the
associated costs for labor, experts, trials and dif-
ferent kinds of chemical analysis from the beginning
are enormous. But the company has never given up
in its efforts to develop a lasting and acceptable
2242
Fig. 6. XRD spectra for NMP. (a) A sample of NMP without treatment, (b) a sample taken after treatment in the flushing pit. Arrows indicate the
frequency peaks for calciumfluoride (CaF2), and show that its concentration increases with treatment.
solution for the handling of NMP and to create a
closed industrial process that takes care of alumi-
num dross from its source in the aluminum smelters
and meets all the requirements of Icelandic envi-
ronmental authorities, as well as the requirements
of the foreign companies that run primary alumi-
num smelters in Iceland, and last, but not least, a
process that results in no waste or landfill but
delivers products that can be used and have a
market value. Such development is ongoing at the
time of writing this paper, in collaboration with
international and local companies.
In fact, it seems realistic in the near future that
the final product—from the NMP flushing process
by Alur—will be comparable to the product deliv-
ered in the processing of salt cake in specialized
chemical plants, but at a fraction of the cost.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Dr. Gudmundur
Gunnarsson from the Innovation Center in Iceland
and Thor Tomasson from Mannvit Engineering for
their contribution to this work. Century Aluminium
is also acknowledged for good cooperation through
the years and a positive attitude towards research
and development.
REFERENCES
1. M. Schlesinger, Aluminium Recycling (Boca Raton, FL:
Taylor & Francis Group, 2007).
2. A. Peel, J. Herbert, D. Roth, and M.J. Collins, Mater. Sci.
Forum 630, 53–60 (2010).
3. ECHA database, www.echa.europe.eu, Accessed 7 Apr 2014.
4. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Move-
ments of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, 28 I.L.M.
657 (1989), Mar. 22, 1989, 1673 U.N.T.S. 125.
5. L. Zhang, Light Metals 2006, ed. T.J. Galloway (Warrendale,
PA: TMS, 2006), pp. 931–936.
6. D.J. Roth, Mater. Sci. Forum 693, 24–32 (2011).
7. O. Manfredi, W. Wuth, and I. Bohlinger, JOM 49, 48–51 (1997).
8. R.D. Peterson, Mater. Sci. Forum 693, 13–23 (2011).
9. P.E. Tsakiridis, Hazard. Mater. 217, 1–10 (2012).
10. N. Ünlü and M.G. Drouet, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 36, 61–72 (2002).
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Compliance
Sector Notebook Project—Profile of the Nonferrous Metals
Industry, Washington DC, 1995.
View publication stats
Ingason and Sigfusson
12. L. Falardeau, Dross in the Aluminium Industry (Thane:
Alcan International Ltd., 1994).
13. X.L. Huang, A.E. Badawy, M. Arambewela, R. Ford, M. Barlaz,
and T. Tolaymat, J. Hazard. Mater. 273, 192–199 (2014).
14. H. Shen and E. Forssberg, Waste Manag. 23, 933–949 (2003).
15. S. Lavoie, C. Dube, and G. Dube, Light Metals 1991, ed. E.L.
Rooy (Warrendale, PA: TMS-AIME, 1991), pp. 981–985.
16. J. Heberlein and A.B. Murphy, J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 41,
053001 (2008).
17. M.G. Drouet, J. Meunier, and C.B. Laflamme, JOM 46 (5),
26–27 (1994).
18. H. Gripenberg, M. Muellerthann, N. Jueger, Light Metals
1997, ed. Reidar Huglen (Warrendale, PA: TMS, 1997), pp.
1171–1178.
19. H.Th. Ingason and Th.I. Sigfusson, JOM 62 (8), 39–43
(2010).
20. Alur, alvinnsla ehf (2000) Environmental impact assess-
ment for a dross recycling facility (in Icelandic).
21. G.M. Gislason, ‘‘The Environmental Impact of Dumping Pits
for Potlinings and Filterdust from Isal Aluminium Smelter
at Straumsvik. A Review of Research Carried Out on the
Biotic Diversity and Accumulation of Heavy Metals and
PAH in Organisms,’’ Report no. 42 (Reykjavı́k, Iceland:
Institute of Biology, University of Iceland, 1998).
22. P.E. Tsakiridis, P. Oustadakis, and S. Agatzini-Leonardou,
J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 1, 23–32 (2013).
23. P. Li, ‘‘Innovative Process Solutions Towards Recycling of
Salt Cake from Secondary Aluminium Smelting’’ (Ph.D.
thesis) (Stockholm, Norway, KTH Royal Institute of Tech-
nology, 2012), www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=
diva2:547241. Accessed 6 Aug 2014.
24. E. David and J. Kopac, J. Hazard. Mater. 209, 501–509 (2012).
25. V.M. Kevorkijan, Mater. Manuf. Processes 14, 509–524 (1999).
26. S. Fukumoto, T. Hookabe, and H. Tsubakino, J. Mater. Sci.
35, 2743–2748 (2000).
27. G. Chauvette, F. Kimmerle, R. Roussel, WO/1991/009978,
World Intellectual Property Organization (1991).
28. G. Gunnarsson, ‘‘Water Treatment of NMP’’ (in Icelandic), a
closed report for Alur, alvinnsla hf, IceTec, Report no.
ITI0503/EUT02/T (2005).
29. T. Tomasson, ‘‘Leaching of Fluorides in Seawater (in Ice-
landic), a closed memorandum for Alur Alvinnsla hf (Kop-
avogur, Iceland: Mannvit Engineering Consultants, 2009).
30. H. Bilinski, Environ. Prot. Eng. 35, 249–257 (2009).
31. Environmental Agency (September 2011). Operating permit
for Alur, alvinnsla hf in Helguvik - Reykjanesbæ (in Ice-
landic). www.ust.is. Accessed 30 Dec 2013.
32. Alur, alvinnsla hf, ‘‘Material Balance for the Operation
during 2013’’ (in Icelandic). Official environmental report
(Reykjavı́k, Iceland: Alur, alvinnsla, 2014).
33. C. Schmitz, Handbook of Aluminium Recycling (Essen:
Vulkan Verlag, 2006).