1 Sustainable Development HotDip Galvanizing AIAS Syracuse University

1

Sustainable Development & Hot-Dip Galvanizing -AIAS Syracuse University Chapter - Ocober 29, 1014 2

Frank Gerace Marketing New York Mills, NY 3

Hubbell Galvanizing Resources 1 -800 -244 -4258 Cell 315 -796 -2221 info@whyrust. com geracefp@whyrust. com www. whyrust. com 4

American Galvanizers Association Non-profit trade association dedicated to serving the after fabrication hot-dip galvanizing industry Provides technical support on innovative applications and technological developments in hot-dip galvanizing for corrosion protection 5

Purpose of the Seminar The purpose of this seminar is to educate architects, engineers, and other specifiers about the sustainability of hot-dip galvanized steel by examining both the life-cycle assessment (LCA) and life-cycle cost (LCC). 6

Learning Objectives Understand sustainability terms and methods Identify environmental costs (primary energy demand, global warming potential, etc. ) for hot-dip galvanized steel from production through end-of-life Decipher the environmental differences between painted steel and galvanized steel Incorporate life-cycle cost analysis into the evaluation of steel corrosion protection methods 7

What is Sustainable Development? Understanding Various Environmental Impact Methods 8

Defining Sustainable Development (SD) is the social, economic, and environmental commitment to growth and development that meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. 9

Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED®) LEED® is a third-party certification program and the nationally accepted benchmark for the design, construction, and operation of high-performance green buildings. Gives building owners and operators the tools they need to have an immediate and measurable impact on their buildings’ performance 10

Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED®) Promotes a whole-building approach to sustainability by recognizing performance in key areas of human health and environmental impacts: Reverse Contribution to Global Climate Change Enhance Individual Human Health and Well-Being Protect and Restore Water Resources Protect, Enhance and Restore Biodiversity Promote Sustainable and Regenerative Material Resources Cycles Build a Greener Economy Enhance Social Equity, Environmental Justice, and Community Quality of Life 11

Hot-Dip Galvanizing & LEED® v 4 Released in 2013 Materials & Resources revamped for objectivity and transparency Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) Based on Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) AGA is currently updating LCA data Sourcing of Materials Emphasis on supply chain from acquisition through end-of-life (zinc) Material Ingredients List Health Product Declarations (HPDs) What is in materials AGA has developed HPDs 12

LEED v 4 Credit Categories Sustainable Sites (SS) Water Efficiency (WE) Energy and Atmosphere (EA) Materials and Resources (MR) Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) Innovative Design (ID) Regional Priority (RP) 13

Material and Resource Credit MR Credit 1: Building Life Cycle Impact Reduction MR Credit 2: Building Product Disclosure and Optimization – Environmental Product Declarations MR Credit 3: Building Product Disclosure and Optimization – Sourcing of Raw Materials MR Credit 4: Building Product Disclosure and Optimization – Material Ingredients 14

Recycling of HDG Steel • HDG Recycling: • Post-Consumer Content • Pre-Consumer Content 56. 1% 31. 1% • HDG Reclamation: • Steel • Zinc 100. 0% 80. 0% 15

LCI and LCA Life-Cycle Inventory (LCI) is the study and measurement of the material flows, energy flows, and environmental releases for the production of a defined amount of a product. LCI does not consider energy consumed or environmental impact during use or end-oflife Three LCI’s are necessary for galvanizing LCI of steel making LCI of zinc refining LCI of hot-dip galvanizing process 16

LCI and LCA Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a standardized scientific method for the systematic analysis of all mass and energy flows as well as environmental impacts attributed to a product system, from raw material acquisition to end-oflife management. 17

LCI and LCA An LCA has 4 phases Goal and scope Setting the framework and objective of the assessment Life-cycle inventory Input/output analysis of mass and energy flows Life-cycle impact assessment Evaluation of environmental relevance of each flow Interpretation Where is there potential to optimize the system 18

Comparison of LCA Results 2014 vs. 2009 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Global Warming Potential (GWP) Acidification Eutrophication Photochemical Primary Energy Potential (AP) Potential (EP) Ozone Demand (PED) Creation Potential (POCP) 2014 Study 19 2009 Study 19

Where does Zinc Come from? 20

Zinc production, use, and resources zinc extracted throughout history (from ~12 th century to present) ~500 million tonnes 1 zinc currently in use 350 million tonnes 2 world zinc resources 1. 9 billion tonnes world zinc reserves 250 million tonnes 1 world zinc use in one year 16 million tonnes 1, 3 mined zinc in one year 12 million tonnes 3 zinc recycled in one year 4 million tonnes 1 1. International Lead Zinc Study Group (ILZSG) 2. In-Use Stocks of Metals. M. D. Gerst and T. E. Graedel. American Chemical Society. 2008. 3. U. S. Geological Survey, Mineral Commodities Summary, 2012 2121

End-of-Life Recycling Rates for Zinc (2010) 2222

IZA Sustainability Charter on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)* Balance social desire for economic prosperity, environmental protection, and social progress. Create opportunities to raise standard of living and improve quality of life. Conduct business ethically and respect human rights. Commitment to address climate change. Avoid unacceptable risks to people or the environment. Obey all applicable laws and regulations. Support research and continual monitoring of sound scientific practice. Support recycling and minimization of waste. Promote transparency and openness *CSR also coordinated and audited through partnership with International Counsil on Mining & Metals (ICCMM) 23

The Study: LCI and LCA of Hot-Dip Galvanized Steel 29

Study Core Group As a part of the Zinc for Life program, the International Zinc Association (IZA) sponsored a study of the LCI and LCA of hot-dip galvanized steel Five Winds International & PE International Galvanizing data collected from: American Galvanizers Association (AGA) European General Galvanizing Association (EGGA) Galvanizers Association of Australia Hot Dip Galvanizers Association of South Africa 30

LCI Scope and Goal To provide an LCI for 1 kg of hot-dip galvanizing up to the point at which the galvanized product leaves the galvanizer’s facility Gate-to-Gate Impact Energy, emissions, etc. of the galvanizing process exclusively Cradle-to-Gate Impact Energy, emissions, etc. of the galvanizing process and raw materials (zinc and steel) 31

Defining the Criteria Primary Energy Demand (PED) measured in Mega Joules (MJ), is the sum of the total primary energy consumed in the manufacture and supply of products. Global Warming Potential (GWP) measured in kilograms CO 2 equivalent (100 years), is the potential to gradually increase over time the average temperature of Earth’s atmosphere and oceans that induce changes to the Earth’s climate. 32

Defining the Criteria Acidification Potential (AP) measured in kilograms SO 2 equivalent, is the amount of hydrogen ions created when a substance is converted into an acid, known as acid rain. Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP) measured in kilograms ethyne (C 2 H 2) equivalent, is the creation of summer smog, or increased levels of ozone at ground level. 33

LCA Scope and Goal To understand the full environmental impact of zinc products from production, use, and end-of-life Galvanized steel structural beam (LCA study) Cradle-to-Grave (Cradle-to-Cradle) Impact Energy, emissions, etc. throughout the life of the product, including a credit for recycling 34

Hot-Dip Galvanizing LCA 35

LCA Production Phase 36

Steel Production 37

Steel LCI STEEL ONLY (Cradle-to-Gate) 1 kg of HDG PED 21. 64 MJ GWP CO 2 equiv. 1. 55 kg AP SO 2 equiv. POCP C 2 H 2 equiv. 0. 00459 kg 0. 000763 kg 38

Steel vs Gasoline PED 1 kg Steel GWP CO 2 equiv. AP SO 2 equiv. POCP C 2 H 2 equiv. 22. 30 MJ 1. 600 kg 0. 00459 kg 0. 000763 kg 1 gal of Gasoline 121. 00 MJ 8. 788 kg ~1 kg 0. 037878 kg 1 kg of Gasoline 42. 68 MJ 3. 100 kg ~0. 35 kg 0. 013361 kg 39

Zinc Production 40

Zinc LCI ZINC ONLY (Cradle-to-Gate) PED 1 kg of HDG 2. 46 MJ GWP CO 2 equiv. 0. 160 kg AP SO 2 equiv. POCP C 2 H 2 equiv. 0. 00115 kg 0. 0000614 kg 41

HDG Process 42

Galvanizing Production 43

Hot-Dip Galvanizing LCI Process ONLY (Gate-to-Gate) 1 kg of HDG PED 1. 80 MJ GWP CO 2 equiv. AP SO 2 equiv. 0. 0991 kg 0. 000407 kg POCP C 2 H 2 equiv. 0. 0000265 kg 44

LCA Production Phase for HDG Production Phase (Cradle-to-Gate) PED 1 kg of HDG 25. 9 MJ GWP CO 2 equiv. 1. 80 kg AP SO 2 equiv. POCP C 2 H 2 equiv. 0. 00615 kg 0. 000824 kg 45

LCA Use Phase 46

Metallurgical Bond 47

Long Lasting Protection Barrier between steel and atmosphere Zinc sacrifices itself to protect steel (cathodic) Development of the passive, impervious zinc patina 48

Time to First Maintenance 49

HDG vs. Paint Use Phase 50

LCA Use Phase for HDG and Paint Use Phase PED GWP CO 2 equiv. AP SO 2 equiv. POCP C 2 H 2 equiv. 1 kg of HDG 0 MJ 0 kg Painted steel P 1 MJ P 2 kg P 3 kg P 4 kg 51

LCA End-of-Life Phase 52

HDG End-of-Life Recycling 53

LCA End-of-Life Phase for HDG End-of-Life 1 kg of HDG PED -8. 61 MJ Steel primary contributor for credit Zinc coating of HDG also recycled Paint coating enters permanent waste stream 54

Complete LCA 55

Complete LCA for HDG Complete LCA 1 kg of HDG PED† 17. 3 MJ GWP CO 2 equiv. 1. 80 kg AP SO 2 equiv. POCP C 2 H 2 equiv. 0. 00615 kg 0. 000824 kg † PED (primary energy demand) reflects production, use, and end-of-life credit. 56

Other Building Materials Concrete Aluminum Stainless Steel Wood 57

Steel vs Concrete* LCA Energy Consumptio n CO 2 Emissions Steel (EAF) 102. 1 MJ/SF 12. 4 kg/SF Concrete 102. 5 MJ/SF 16. 4 kg/SF *Comparison of environmental impacts of steel and concrete as building materials using the Life Cycle Assessment method By Timothy Johnson 58

Steel vs Concrete* LCA *Based on equivalent utilization in a building’s design 1 ton of steel 8 tons of concrete 1. 0 ton CO 2/ton 1. 6 tons of CO 2/8 tons 70 gallons of water/ton 150 to 500 gallons of water/8 tons 1, 860 pounds of recycled material/ton 160 to 800 pounds of recycled material/8 tons * Equivalent utilization nets out the actual steel and concrete in a typical structure and then compares the remaining tonnage of structural steel in a steel framed building with the remaining concrete in a concrete framed building. Generally the ratio falls between 1: : 6 and 1: 15. Note: embodied CO 2 is the estimate for the material (steel/cement), fabrication/ready mix process, transportation and erection/placement. 59

Steel vs Concrete* LCA Based on equivalent utilization* in a building’s design 1, 860 pounds of recycled material/ton 160 to 800 pounds of recycled material/8 tons AT END OF BUILDING LIFE 1, 960 pounds multicycled 3, 200 pounds down-cycled/8 tons 40 pounds landfilled/ton 12, 800 pounds landfilled/8 tons Equivalent utilization nets out the actual steel and concrete in a typical structure and then compares the remaining tonnage of structural steel in a steel framed building with the remaining concrete in a concrete framed building. Generally the ratio falls between 1: : 6 and 1: 15. 60

HDG Steel vs Aluminum * LCA HDG Steel (Assumes 100% recycling) Aluminum (Extruded Products) (Assumes PED GWP CO 2 equiv. AP SO 2 equiv. POCP C 2 H 2 equiv. 17. 3 MJ/kg 1. 80 kg/kg 0. 00615 kg/kg 0. 000824 kg/kg 28. 58 GJ/ton 1. 8 ton/ton 6 kg/ton 83 kg O 3/ton 31. 5 MJ/kg 1. 8 kg/kg 0. 00661 kg/kg N/A 95% recycling) Aluminum (Extruded Products) Equiv Units (Assumes 95% *The Environmental Footprint of Semi-Finished recycling) Products in North America, A Life Cycle Aluminum Assessment Report, The Aluminum Association, December 2013 61

Steel vs Stainless Steel * LCA 1 kg PED GWP CO 2 equiv. AP SO 2 equiv. POCP C 2 H 2 equiv. Steel 17. 3 MJ 1. 600 kg 0. 0046 kg 0. 0007 kg Stainless Steel (304 2 B) 16. 4 MJ 1. 200 kg 0. 0032 kg 0. 0006 kg Methodology report Life cycle inventory study for steel products © World Steel Association 2011 62

Steel vs Wood * LCI 1 kg Steel Douglas Fir Red Oak PED GWP CO 2 equiv. PED 1 kg Equivalent GWP 1 kg Equivalent 22. 30 MJ 1. 600 kg 7. 72 MJ N/A 131. 24 MJ N/A 14. 38 MJ 1. 380 kg 186. 94 MJ 17. 940 kg *ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF PRODUCING HARDWOOD LUMBER USING LIFE-CYCLE INVENTORY Richard D. Bergman*†, Scott A. Bowe† Department of Forest and Wildlife Ecology University of Wisconsin— Madison January 2008 Corresponding author: rbergman@wisc. edu † SWST Member 63

Comparison of Environmental Impact of a Representative Deck per year of use Impact Indicator Units ACQ-treated Lumber WPC use as decking GHG Emissions lb-CO 2 -eq/yr 26 114 163 330 Fossil Fuel Use MMBTU/yr 0. 17 0. 24 3. 2 3. 4 Hþ moles-eq 17 24 90 105 gal/yr 12 12 34 34 Smog Potential ge. NOx-eq/m/yr 0. 091 0. 11 0. 25 0. 28 Eutrophication lb-N-eq/yr 0. 013 0. 014 0. 015 Ecological Impact lb-2, 4 -D-eq 0. 18 0. 25 0. 28 0. 43 Acid Rain Potential Water Use in land fill Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of ACQ- Treated Lumber Decking with Comparisons to Wood Plastic Composite Decking Christopher A. Bolin , Stephen Smith ISO 14044 Compliant Prepared by: Aqu. Ae. Ter, Inc. © Treated Wood Council (March 2012) 64

Conclusions and Summary Report on an Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of ACQ- Treated Lumber Decking with Comparisons to Wood Plastic Composite Decking ISO 14044 Compliant Prepared by: Aqu. Ae. Ter, Inc. © Treated Wood Council (March 2012) 65

Galvanizing vs. Paint in LCA Steel the primary component for both LCA’s Steel’s high recyclability and low environmental impact have large impact on LCA numbers Galvanized coating provides more advantages No additional direct or indirect environmental costs during use - zero maintenance Zinc coating recycled during end-of-life phase leaving no permanent waste 66

Galvanizing vs. Paint in Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) Case Studies 67

Balcony Structure LCA study conducted by VTT Technical Research in Finland 60 -year service life 1, 715 lbs (778 kg) galvanized steel No maintenance for galvanizing 420 ft 2 (39 m 2) painted steel Zinc-rich epoxy primer, epoxy intermediate, polyurethane top coat (240 µm) Maintenance every 15 years for paint (3 cycles) 68

Balcony Structure Life-Cycle Energy: Galvanized Life-Cycle Energy: Painted 69

Parking Garage LCA study conducted by Technical University of Berlin 60 -year service life No maintenance for galvanizing 1 m 2 steel part (20 m 2/metric ton) 3 -coat paint system (240 µm) Maintenance every 20 years for paint (2 cycles) 71

Parking Garage 72

Hot-Dip Galvanizing Costs Less Lasts Longer 73

Sustainable Development Revisited Sustainable Development is the social, economic, and environmental commitment to growth and development that meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. 74

The Cost of Corrosion Protection Initial cost will always factor into decision Life-cycle cost analysis is more complete Includes all future maintenance costs Provides total cost of the project over its life Life-cycle cost calculation automated online at www. galvanizingcost. com 75

Initial Cost Parameters Paint Material (one- or two - pack product, number of coats, etc) Shop cleaning labor Shop/field application Field labor Galvanizing Process is inclusive of all cleaning, material, and labor 76

Initial Cost Coating System $/ft 2 Total Hot-Dip Galvanizing $1. 76 $1, 320, 000 Inorganic Zinc/Epoxy/ Polyurethane $2. 30 $1, 725, 000 77

Life-Cycle Cost Maintenance costs calculated on a practical maintenance cycle (vs. ideal) Unique to each paint system Manufacturer recommended cycles provided in the KTA Tator paper NACE model for NFV and NPV calculations 2% inflation; 4% interest 60 -year life Maintenance repaint at 5% rust 78

Life-Cycle Cost ($/ft 2) 60 -Year Life Coating System Hot-Dip Galvanizing Inorganic Zinc/Epoxy/ Polyurethane $/ft 2 $1. 76 $7. 27 79

Total Cost of 60 -Year Garage Coating System Hot-Dip Galvanizing Inorganic Zinc/Epoxy/ Polyurethane $/ft 2 $ 1, 320, 000 $ 5, 451, 272 80

Why is HDG Sustainable? Based on LCI/LCA, provides a low environmental cost Based on LCC, provides a low economic cost. 81

Bridge the Gap: Merge LCA and LCC to Measure Sustainability 82

Sustainable Development is… Measured in a number of ways including LEED, LCI, and LCA A social, economic, and environmental issue Pertinent for future generations and their quality of life 83

LCA + LCC = Sustainable Development IF…HDG’s life-cycle assessment (LCA) proves low environmental impact AND…HDG’s life-cycle cost (LCC) indicates low economic impact AND…HDG’s aesthetically pleasing, durable coating provides positive social impact THEN… Hot-dip galvanizing is sustainable 84

Hubbell Galvanizing Resources 1 -800 -244 -4258 Cell 315 -796 -2221 info@whyrust. com geracefp@whyrust. com www. whyrust. com 85

AGA Resources www. galvanizeit. org aga@galvanizeit. org 1 -800 -HOT-SPEC (1 -800 -468 -7732) Technical Library Galvanizing Insights Quarterly e-newsletter 86

Galvanize the Future Scholarship opportunity open to full- or part-time students in North America enrolled at an accredited 4 -year college or university 3 scholarships awarded annually 1 st - $2500; 2 nd - $1500; 3 rd - $1000 www. galvanizeit. org/scholarship for official rules, details, and application 87

Locate a Galvanizer www. galvanizeit. org/galvanizers 88

Questions & Comments 89

90