A Planet in Crisis

1. A Planet in Crisis TecEco are in the BIGGEST Business on the Planet – Economic Solutions to Global Warming and Waste The Problem - A Planet in Crisis

2. ? ? A Demographic Explosion Undeveloped Countries Developed Countries Global population, consumption per capita and our footprint on the planet is exploding.

3. Ecological Footprint Exceeds Capacity Source: WWF State of the Planet Our footprint is exceeding the capacity of the planet to support it. We are not longer sustainable as a species and must change our ways

4. One Planet, Many People, Many Problems

5. Global Temperature Anomaly

6. Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide

7. The Carbon Cycle and Emissions Emissions from fossil fuels and cement production are the cause of the global warming problem Units: GtC GtC/yr Source: David Schimel and Lisa Dilling, National Centre for Atmospheric Research 2003

8. Techno-Processes & Earth Systems Underlying the techno-process that describes and controls the flow of matter and energy are molecular stocks and flows. If out of tune with nature these moleconomic flows have detrimental affects on earth systems. Bio-sphere Geo-sphere Earth Systems Atmospheric composition, climate, land cover, marine ecosystems, pollution, coastal zones, freshwater and salinity. Detrimental affects on earth systems Waste Take Move 500-600 billion tonnesUse some 50 billion tonnes Manipulate, Make and Use Techno-sphere To reduce the impact on earth systems new technical paradigms need to be invented that result in underlying molecular flows that mimic or at least do not interfere with natural flows.

9. Techno-Processes Affect Underlying Molecular Flows Take → Manipulate → Make→ Use → Waste [ ←Materials→ ] [ ← Underlying molecular flow → ] If the underlying molecular flows are “out of tune” with nature there is damage to the environmente.g. heavy metals, cfc’s, c=halogen compounds and CO2 MoleconomicsIs the study of the form of atoms in molecules, their flow, interactions, balances, stocks and positions. What we take from the environment around us, how we manipulate and make materials out of what we take and what we waste result in underlying molecular flows that affect earth systems. These flows should mimic or minimally interfere with natural flows.

10. Moleconomics– The Economics of Molecules • Moleconomics is the study of the form of atoms in molecules, their flow, interactions, balances, stocks and position on scales ranging from local to universal. • The word ‘moleconomics’ is a new word for a new and still evolving discipline involving the study of the form of atoms in molecules, their flow, interactions, balances, stocks and positionson scales ranging from local to universal (1) • Unnatural moleconomic imbalances have resulted in stocks of some molecules such as carbon dioxide, CFC’s, and heavy metals in undesirable positions such as the global commons. • Anthropoid technical paradigms, driven by fossil fuels and used by techno-processes in the techno-sphere result in an underlying flows of molecules. Flows are to positions and result in stocks, some of which are unnaturally high or low. The study of this process is the science of moleconomics • By changing the technical paradigms we can redefine the moleconomics of the planet. • John Harrison invented the word because there were difficulties with words like molecular ecology and molecular economics which were used with a different meaning to that considered logical given their roots.

11. Changing Techno-process Take => manipulate => make => use => wasteDriven by fossil fuel energy with detrimental effects on earth systems. ReduceRe-useRecycle Eco-innovate Do so based on physical properties such as weight and strength If you can’t recycle based on chemical property Materials

12. Changing Technical Paradigms • “By enabling us to make productive use of particular raw materials, technology determines what constitutes a physical resource1” • Pilzer, Paul Zane, Unlimited Wealth, The Theory and Practice of Economic Alchemy, Crown Publishers Inc. New York.1990 By inventing new technical paradigms and re-engineering materials that are economic to produce we can change the underlying molecular flows that are damaging this planet. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world. Albert Einstein We must make materials that have underlying molecular flows that mimic or at least do not disrupt natural flows, that require less energy to make, last much longer and contribute properties that reduce lifetime energies.

13. Drivers for Change The challenge is to harness human behaviours which underlay economic supply and demand phenomena by changing technical paradigm in favour of greater sustainability.

14. Economically Driven Change New, more profitable technical paradigms used in the techno-processthat result in more sustainable and usually more efficient moleconomic flows that mimic or at least do not disrupt natural flows are required. $ - ECONOMICS - $

15. Incandescent Fluorescent Led Light <20 watts1700 lumens 25 watts1700 lumens 100 watts1700 lumens Examples of Economic Changes in Technical Paradigms that result in Greater Sustainability Light Globes - A Recent Paradigm Shift in Technology Reducing Energy Consumption Light Globes in the last 10 years have evolved from consuming around 100 watts per 1700 lumens to less that 20 watts per 1700 lumens. As light globes account for around 30% of household energy this is as considerable saving. Robotics - A Paradigm Shift in Technology that will fundamentally affect Building and Construction Construction in the future will be largely done by robots because it will be more economic to do so. Like a color printer different materials will be required for different parts of structures, and wastes such as plastics will provide many of the properties required for the cementitious composites of the future used. A non-reactive binder such as TecEco tec-cements can supply the right rheology, and like a printer, very little will be wasted.

16. Sustainability Driven by Economics • Our goal should be: • To develop technical paradigms that more economically deliver reduced moleconomic impacts and thus greater sustainability. • To do this we need to: • Through education to induce cultural change to increase the demand for sustainability. • Innovate to change the technical paradigms • Improvements in technical paradigms will bring about changes in demand affecting resource usage and thus underlying moleconomic flows reducing detrimental linkages with the planet. • TecEco Tec, Eco and Enviro cements are innovative sustainability enabling technologies.

17. Sustainability = Culture + Technology Increase in demand/price ratio for sustainability due to educationally induced cultural drift. $ Supply Greater Value/for impact (Sustainability) and economic growth Equilibrium shift ECONOMICS New Technical Paradigms are required that deliver sustainability. Demand Increase in supply/price ratio for more sustainable products due to innovative paradigm shifts in technology. # Sustainability could be considered as where culture and technology meet.

18. CO2 CO2 CO2 CO2 The TecEco CarbonSafe Geo-Photosynthethic Process The CarbonSafe Geo-Photosynthetic Process is TecEco’s evolving techno-process that delivers profitable outcomes whilst reversing underlying undesirable moleconomic flows from other less sustainable processes. Inputs: Atmospheric or smokestack CO2, brines,waste acid, other wastes Outputs: Potable water, gypsum, sodium bicarbonate, salts, building materials, bottled concentrated CO2 for geo-sequestration and other uses. Solar or solar derived energy TecEcoKiln TecEco MgCO2 Cycle MgO MgCO3 Greensols Process MgO 1.29 gm/l Mg Coal Fossil fuels Carbon or carbon compoundsMagnesium oxide CO2 Oil

19. TecEco CarbonSafe Geo-Photosynthetic Process Vectors

20. The CarbonSafe Geo-Photosynthetic Process 1.354 x 109 km3 Seawater containing 1.728 1017 tonne Mg or suitable brines from other sources Seawater Carbonation Process Waste Acid Gypsum + carbon waste (e.g. sewerage) = fertilizers Bicarbonate of Soda (NaHCO3) CO2 from power generation or industry Other salts Na+,K+, Ca2+,Cl- Gypsum (CaSO4) Sewerage compost CO2 as a biological or industrial input or if no other use geological sequestration Magnesite (MgCO3) Solar Process to Produce Magnesium Metal Magnesium Thermodynamic Cycle Simplified TecEco ReactionsTec-Kiln MgCO3 → MgO + CO2 - 118 kJ/moleReactor Process MgO + CO2 → MgCO3 + 118 kJ/mole (usually more complex hydrates) CO2 from power generation, industry or out of the air Magnesite (MgCO3) Magnesia (MgO) Hydroxide ReactorProcess Sequestration Table – Mg from Seawater Eco-CementTec-Cement Other Wastes

21. CO2 The MgCO2 Process (Magnesium Thermodynamic Cycle) The magnesium thermodynamiccycle is very important for sequestration and is used for the formation of valuable building product MgCO3 MgO + CO2 ΔH = 118.28 kJ.mol-1 ΔG = 65.92 kJ.mol-1 Calcination CO2 CaptureNon fossil fuel energy Magnesite Calcination Dehydration Eco-Cements TOTAL CALCINING ENERGY (Relative to MgCO3) Theoretical = 1480 kJ.Kg-1 With inefficiencies = 1948 kJ.Kg-1 Representative of other hydrated mineral carbonates including an amorphous phase and lansfordite Magnesia Nesquehonite Carbonation Hydration MgO + H2O  Mg(OH)2.nH2O ΔH = -81.24 kJ.mol-1 ΔG = -35.74 kJ.mol-1 Carbonation Mg(OH)2.nH2O + CO2 + 2H2O MgCO3.3 H2O ΔH = -175.59 kJ.mol-1 ΔG = -38.73 kJ.mol-1 Brucite Tec and Enviro-Cements

22. Why Magnesium Carbonates for Sequestration? • Because of the low molecular weight of magnesium, magnesium oxide which hydrates to magnesium hydroxide and then carbonates, is ideal for scrubbing CO2 out of the air and sequestering the gas into the built environment: • More CO2 is captured than in calcium systems as the calculations below show. • An area 10km by 10m by 150m deep of magnesium carbonate will sequester all the excess CO2 we release to the atmosphere in a year. • At 2.09% of the crust magnesium is the 8th most abundant element • Magnesium minerals are potential low cost. New kiln technology from TecEco will enable easy low cost simple non fossil fuel calcination of magnesium carbonate with CO2 capture for geological sequestration.

23. Reduction Global CO2 from CarbonSafe Process

24. Carbonate Sequestration in Built Environment

25. TecEco Kiln Technology • Can run at low temperatures. • Can be powered by various non fossil fuels. • Runs 25% to 30% more efficiently. • Theoretically capable of producing much more reactive MgO • Even with ores of high Fe content. • Captures CO2 for bottling and sale to the oil industry (geological sequestration). • Grinds and calcines at the same time. • Part of a major process to solve global CO2 problems. • Will result in new markets for ultra reactive low lattice energy MgO (e.g. cement, paper and environment industries) • TecEco need your backing to develop the kiln

26. A Post – Carbon & Waste Age? New techno-process are required that mimic nature and do not change global system flows

27. Mimicking Natural Processes - Biomimicry Since we now dominate this planet we need to evolve technical paradigms that result in techno-processes that mimic nature. • The term biomimicry was popularised by the book of the same name written by Janine Benyus • Biomimicry is a method of solving problems that uses natural processes and systems as a source of knowledge and inspiration. • It involves nature as model, measure and mentor. The theory behind biomimicry is that natural processes and systems have evolved over several billion years through a process of research and development commonly referred to as evolution. A reoccurring theme in natural systems is the cyclical flow of matter in such a way that there is no waste of matter or energy.

28. Utilizing Carbon and Wastes (Biomimicry) • During earth's geological history large tonnages of carbon were put away as limestone and other carbonates and as coal and petroleum by the activity of plants and animals. • Sequestering carbon in magnesium binders and aggregates in the built environment mimics nature in that carbon is used in the homes or skeletal structures of most plants and animals. In eco-cement blocks and mortars the binder is carbonate and the aggregates are preferably wastes We all use carbon and wastes to make our homes! “Biomimicry”

29. Re - Engineering Techno-Processes and Materials • To solve environmental problems we need to understand more about the underlying moleconomic flows involved in the techno process including: • the way their precursors are derived and their degradation products re assimilated • how we can reduce the impact of these • what energies drive the evolution, devolution and flow or materials in the techno process and • how we can reduce these energies • how materials impact on lifetime energies • With the knowledge gained re-design materials to not only be more sustainable but more sustainable in use Environmental problems are the result of an inherently flawed techno-process involving materials, materials flows and their underlying moleconomic and energy systems.

30. Materials in the Built Environment • The built environment is made of materials and is our footprint on earth. • It comprises buildings and infrastructure. • Building materials comprise • 70% of materials flows (buildings, infrastructure etc.) • 40-50% of waste that goes to landfill (15 % of new materials going to site are wasted.) • At 1.5% of world GDP Annual Australian production of building materials likely to be in the order 300 million tonnes or over 15 tonnes per person. • Over 20 billion tonnes of building materials are used annually on a world wide basis. • Mostly using virgin natural resources • Combined in such a manner they cannot easily be separated. • Include many toxic elements.

31. C C Waste C C Waste C Huge Potential for More Sustainable Materials in Construction • Reducing the impact of the take and waste phases of the techno-process. • including carbon in materialsthey are potentially carbon sinks. • including wastes forphysical properties aswell as chemical compositionthey become resources. • re – engineeringmaterials toreduce the lifetimeenergy of buildings Many wastes can contribute to physical properties reducing lifetime energies

32. CO2 The TecEco Dream – A More Sustainable Built Environment CO2 OTHERWASTES CO2 FOR GEOLOGICAL SEQUESTRATION PERMANENT SEQUESTRATION & WASTE UTILISATION (Man made carbonate rock incorporating wastes as a building material) MINING MgO TECECO KILN MAGNESITE + OTHER INPUTS TECECO CONCRETES RECYCLED BUILDING MATERIALS We need materials that require less energy to make them, that last much longer and that contribute properties that reduce lifetime energies “There is a way to make our city streets as green as the Amazon rainforest”. Fred Pearce, New Scientist Magazine SUSTAINABLE CITIES

33. Impact of the Largest Material Flow - Cement and Concrete • Concrete made with cement is the most widely used material on Earth accounting for some 30% of all materials flows on the planet and 70% of all materials flows in the built environment. • Global Portland cement production is currently in the order of 2 billion tonnes per annum. • Globally over 14 billion tonnes of concrete are poured per year. • Over 2 tonnes per person per annum • Much more concrete is used than any other building material. TecEco Pty. Ltd. have benchmark technologies for improvement in sustainability and properties

34. Embodied Energy of Building Materials Concrete is relatively environmentally friendly and has a relatively low embodied energy Downloaded from www.dbce.csiro.au/ind-serv/brochures/embodied/embodied.htm (last accessed 07 March 2000)

35. Average Embodied Energy in Buildings Most of the embodied energy in the built environment is in concrete. Because so much concrete is used there is a huge opportunity for sustainability by reducing the embodied energy, reducing the carbon debt (net emissions) and improving properties that reduce lifetime energies. Downloaded from www.dbce.csiro.au/ind-serv/brochures/embodied/embodied.htm (last accessed 07 March 2000)

36. Emissions from Cement Production • Chemical Release • The process of calcination involves driving off chemically bound CO2 with heat. CaCO3 →CaO + ↑CO2 • Process Energy • Most energy is derived from fossil fuels. • Fuel oil, coal and natural gas are directly or indirectly burned to produce the energy required releasing CO2. • The production of cement for concretes accounts for around 10% of global anthropogenic CO2. • Pearce, F., "The Concrete Jungle Overheats", New Scientist, 19 July, No 2097, 1997 (page 14). CO2 CO2 Arguments that we should reduce cement production relative to other building materials are nonsense because concrete is the most sustainable building material there is. The challenge is to make it more sustainable.

37. Cement Production ~= Carbon Dioxide Emissions Between tec, eco and enviro-cements TecEco can provide a viable much more sustainable alternative.

38. Portland Cement & Global Warming • Concrete is the third largest contributor to CO2 emissions after the energy and transportation sectors. • The cement industry is growing at around 5% a year globally. Mainly China, Thialand and India. • On current trends world production of Portland cement will reach 3.5 billion tonnes by 2020 - a three fold increase on 1990 levels. • To achieve Kyoto targets the industry will have to emit less than 1/3 of current emissions per tonne of concrete. • Carbon taxes and other legislative changes will provide legislative incentive to change. • There is already strong evidence of market incentive to change

39. Concrete Industry Objectives • PCA (USA) • Improved energy efficiency of fuels and raw materials • Formulation improvements that: • Reduce the energy of production and minimize the use of natural resources. • Use of crushed limestone and industrial by-products such as fly ash and blast furnace slag. • WBCSD • Fuels and raw materials efficiencies • Emissions reduction during manufacture

40. TecEco Technologies Take Concrete into the Future • More rapid strength gain even with added pozzolans • More supplementary materials can be used reducing costs and take and waste impacts. • Higher strength/binder ratio • Less cement can be used reducing costs and take and waste impacts • More durable concretes • Reducing costs and take and waste impacts. • Use of wastes • Utilizing carbon dioxide • Magnesia component can be made using non fossil fuel energy and CO2 captured during production. Tec -Cements Tec & Eco-Cements Eco-Cements

41. Greening Concrete • Scale down Production. • Untenable nonsense, especially to developing nations • Use waste for fuels • Not my area of expertise but questioned by many. • Reduce net emissions from manufacture • Increase manufacturing efficiency • Increase fuel efficiency • Waste stream sequestration using MgO and CaO • E.g. Carbonating the Portlandite in waste concrete • Given the current price of carbon in Europe this could be viable • TecEco have a mineral sequestration process that is non fossil fuel driven using MgO and the TecEco kiln This is not going to happen Not discussed

42. Greening Concrete • Increase the proportion of waste materials that are pozzolanic • Using waste pozzolanic materials such as fly ash and slags has the advantage of not only extending cement reducing the embodied energy and net emissions but also of utilizing waste. • We could run out of fly ash as coal is phasing out. (e.g. Canada) • TecEco technology will allow the use of marginal pozzolans • Slow rate of strength development can be increased using TecEco tec-cement technology. • Potential long term (50 year plus) durability issues overcome using tec-cement technology. • Replace Portland cement with viable alternatives • There are a number of products with similar properties to Portland cement • Carbonating Binders • Non-carbonating binders • The research and development of these binders needs to be accelerated

43. Greening Concrete • Use aggregates that extend cement • E.g. use air as an aggregate making cement go further • Aluminium use questionable • Foamed Concretes work well with TecEco eco-cement • Use for slabs to improve insulation • Use aggregates with lower embodied energy and that result in less emissions or are themselves carbon sinks • Other materials that be used to make concrete have lower embodied energies. • Local aggregates with lower transport embodied energies • Recycled aggregates from building rubble • Glass cullet • Materials that non fossil carbon are carbon sinks in concrete • Plastics, wood etc. • Improve the performance of concrete by including aggregates that improve or introduce new properties reducing lifetime energies • Wood fibre reduces weight and conductance.

44. Increasing the Proportion of Waste Materials that are Pozzolanic • Advantages • Lower costs • More durable greener concrete • Disadvantages • Rate of strength development retarded • Potential long term durability issue due to leaching of Ca from CSH. • Glasser and others have observed leaching of Ca from CSH and this will eventually cause long term unpredictable behavior of CSH. • Resolved by presence of brucite in tec-cements • Higher water demand due to fineness. • Finishing is not as easy • Supported by WBCSD and virtually all industry associations • Driven by legislation and sentiment

45. More Pozzolan can be Used with Tec-Cement Technology • The practical limit to adding pozzolan to conventional concretes is the rate of strength development. • TecEco tec-cements have an increased rate of strength development particularly in the first 3-4 days. • Internal consumption of water by MgO as it hydrates reducing impact of fineness demand. • More pozzolanic and hydrolysis reactions. • Mg Al hydrates or Mg ettringite? • Improved durability as brucite is much less soluble or reactive • Potential long term durability issue due to leaching of Ca from CSH resolved. • Improved finishing as Mg++ contributes a strong shear thinning property overcoming the tendency to ‘stickyness’ In TecEco tec-cements Portlandite is consumed by the pozzolanic reaction and replaced with brucite

46. Tec-Cement Concrete Strength Gain Curve We have observed this kind of curve with over 300 cubic meters of concrete The possibility of high early strength gain with added pozzolans is of great economic and environmental importance.

47. Volumetric Consequences of Replacement of PC by Carbonating Binders • Lime • The most used material next to Portland cement in binders. • Generally used on a 1:3 paste basis since Roman times • Non-hydraulic limes set by carbonation and are therefore close to carbon neutral once set. Ca(OH)2 + CO2 => CaCO3 33.22 + gas ↔ 36.93 molar volumes • Very slight expansion, but shrinkage from loss of water.

48. Volumetric Consequences of Replacement of PC by Carbonating Binders • Eco-Cement (TecEco) • Have high proportions of reactive magnesium oxide which first hydrates and then carbonates like lime. • Generally used in a 1:8 paste:aggregate basis because much more carbonate “binder” is produced than with lime. • Consider the reactions MgO + H2O <=> Mg(OH)2.1H2O* 11.20 + 18 <=> 24.29 - 45* • As yet uncharacterised expansion Mg(OH)2 + CO2 + H2O <=> MgCO3.3H2O 58.31 + 44.01 <=> 138.32 molar mass (at least!) 24.29 + gas + 18 <=> 74.77 molar volumes (at least!) • 307 % expansion (less water volume reduction) producing much more binder per mole of MgO than lime (around 8 times) Mostly CO2 and water

49. Eco-Cements • Eco-cement is based on blending reactive magnesium oxide with other hydraulic cements and then allowing the Brucite and Portlandite components to carbonate in porous materials such as concretes blocks and mortars. • The use of eco-cements for block manufacture, particularly in conjunction with the kiln also invented by TecEco (The Tec-Kiln) would result in sequestration on a massive scale. • As Fred Pearce reported in New Scientist Magazine (Pearce, F., 2002), “There is a way to make our city streets as green as the Amazon rainforest”. Ancient and modern carbonating lime mortars are based on this principle

50. CO2 Abatement in Eco-Cements For 85 wt% Aggregates 15 wt% Cement Capture CO211.25% mass% reactive magnesia, 3.75 mass% Portland cement, 85 mass% aggregate. Emissions.25 tonnes to the tonne. After carbonation. approximately .140 tonne to the tonne. Portland Cements15 mass% Portland cement, 85 mass% aggregate Emissions.32 tonnes to the tonne. After carbonation. Approximately .299 tonne to the tonne. No Capture11.25% mass% reactive magnesia, 3.75 mass% Portland cement, 85 mass% aggregate. Emissions.37 tonnes to the tonne. After carbonation. approximately .241 tonne to the tonne. Capture CO2. Fly and Bottom Ash11.25% mass% reactive magnesia, 3.75 mass% Portland cement, 85 mass% aggregate. Emissions.126 tonnes to the tonne. After carbonation. Approximately .113 tonne to the tonne. Eco-cements in porous products absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Brucite carbonates forming lansfordite, nesquehonite and an amorphous phase, completing the thermodynamic cycle. Greater Sustainability .299 > .241 >.140 >.113Bricks, blocks, pavers, mortars and pavement made using eco-cement, fly and bottom ash (with capture of CO2 during manufacture of reactive magnesia) have 2.65 times less emissions than if they were made with Portland cement.