v

I

I

li

:
FILE COPY

NBSIR 77-1244 DO NOT REMC

Survey of Uses of Waste

Materials in Construction in the

United States

James R. Clifton

Paul W. Brown

Geoffrey Frohndorff

Materials and Composites Section

Center for Building Technology

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

July 1977

Contribution to the RILEM Symposium by Correspondence on the

Use of Waste Materials in the Construction Industry

V iolS *

NBSIR 77-1244

SURVEY OF USES OF WASTE

MATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION IN THE

UNITED STATES

James R. Clifton

Paul W. Brown

Geoffrey Frohnsdorff

Materials and Composites Section

Center for Building Technology

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

July 1977

Contribution to the RILEM Symposium by Correspondence on the

Use of Waste Materials in the Construction Industry

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Juanita M. Kreps, Secretary

Dr. Sidney Harman, Under Secretary

Jordan J. Baruch, Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Acting Director

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pag

e

1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Solid Wastes in the United States 1 1.2 Developments in the Use of Wastes in Construction 1 1.3 Survey of Waste Materials 2

2. MINING WASTES 4 2.1 Inventory and Sources of Mining Wastes 4 2.2 Description, Disposal and Uses of Mining Wastes 9 2.2.1 Waste Rock 9 2.2.2 Mill Tailings 10

2.2.3 Coal Refuse 12 2.2.4 Dredge Spoil 12 2.3 Prospects for the Increased use of Mining Wastes 14

3. WASTES FROM THE PHOSPHATE, ALUMINUM AND CEMENT INDUSTRIES, AND SULFATE

WASTES 14

3.1 Phosphate Ore Processing Wastes 16

3.1.1 Production and Sources of Phosphate Ore 16

3.1.2 Characteristics and Disposal of Phosphate Processing Wastes 16

3.1.3 Prospective Uses of Phosphate Slimes 18 3.2 Sulfate Wastes 18

3.2.1 Phosphogypsum 18

3.2.2 Fluorogypsum 19 3.2.3 Gas Scrubber Waste 19

3.2.4 Prospective Uses of Sulfate Wastes 20

3.3 Muds from Processing Aluminum Ores 20

3.3.1 Properties of Muds 21

3.3.2 Prospective Uses of Muds 21

3.4 Cement Kiln Dust 21

4. BY-PRODUCTS FROM COAL COMBUSTION 23

4.1 Amounts and Disposal of Combustion Products 25

4.2 Uses of By-Products 25

4.2.1 Cement Manufacture and Concrete Products 25

4.2.2 Conventional and Lightweight Aggregates 29

4.2.3 Lime-Fly Ash-Aggregate Mixtures 29

4.2.4 Miscellaneous Uses 30

5. METALLURGICAL AND MINERAL SLAGS 30

5.1 Slag Production 30

5.2 Uses of Slags 30

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Page

6. MUNICIPAL WASTES 34

6.1 Incinerator Refuse 34

6. 2 Glass 36

6.3 Building and Highway Demolition Waste 37 6.3.1 Amounts of Demolition Waste 37

6.3.2 Uses and Disposal of Demolition Waste 39

6.4 Sewage Sludge 40

7. WASTE MATERIALS FROM EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 40

7.1 Oil Shale Residues 40

7.2 Slags and Ashes from Coal Gasification and Liquefaction Processes 41

7.3 Elemental Sulfur 41

8. OBSTACLES TO AND INCENTIVES FOR THE INCREASED USE OF WASTE MATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION 42

9. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 43

10. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 44

11. REFERENCES 45
LIST OF TABLES

Page

1. Amounts of Mining, Industrial and Municipal Wastes 3

2. Amounts and Possible Uses of Major Mining Wastes 5

3. Oxide Analysis of Some Taconite, Copper, Gold and Lead-Zinc Tailings 11

4. Oxide and Mineralogical Analyses of Coal Refuse 13

5. Amounts and Possible Uses of Some Major Industrial Wastes 15

6. Oxide and Mineralogical Compositions of Phosphate Slimes 17

7. Oxide and Mineralogical Analyses of Some Red Muds and a Brown Mud 22

8. Oxide Composition of a Cement Kiln Dust 24

9. Percentage Composition of U.S. Coal Ashes 26

10. Amounts and Uses of By-Products from Coal Combustion 27

11. Oxide Compositions of Some Slags 31

12. Annual Production of Slags 32

13. Uses of Slags 33

14. Amounts of Major Municipal Wastes Generated Annually 35 15. Estimated Amounts of Materials in New Construction and in Demolition

Waste 38

v
LIST OF FIGURES

Page

1. Locations of Large Accumulations of Waste Rock and Mill Tailings 7

2. Locations of Large Accumulations of Coal Refuse 8

3. Coal Consumption by State in 1972 28

vi
Survey of Uses of Waste Materials in Construction in the United States

James Roger Clifton, Paul Wencil Brown and Geoffrey Frohnsdorff

ABSTRACT

A survey has been made of the sources, amounts and methods of disposal of major mining,

industrial and municipal wastes available in the 48 conterminous states of the United

States. This includes the present and potential uses of these wastes as construction

materials

.

9 While over 3 x 10 tons of waste materials are generated annually in the United States,

only small amounts are being used by the construction industry. The low level of use does

not yet reflect the advances being made in converting wastes into viable construction

materials. In several cases, construction materials produced from wastes have been at least the technological equivalent of materials produced from virgin resources. Factors

which are impeding the increased utilization of wastes are discussed and emerging incentives

which could facilitate their increased use are covered.

vii
' H I
1 . INTRODUCTION

1 . 1 Solid Wastes in the United States

The United States is both a major consumer of natural resources and a major producer

of mining, industrial, agricultural and municipal waste materials. For example, it has

been predicted that, within the next 100 years, the United States will consume over 6.8 x

9 1/ 9 9 10 tons—'of iron ore, 1 x 10 tons of phosphate rock and 1.5 x 10 tons of aluminum ore, resulting in a massive generation of mining waste [1]. Present U.S. production of mining

9 waste and coal refuse exceeds 360,000 tons daily which is being added to some 23 x 10 tons already accumulated. The generation of large amounts of municipal refuse, building rubble,

sulfate wastes, fly ashes, industrial processing and other wastes are also contributing to massive disposal problems. Disposal of wastes is posing increasingly difficult problems

because of rapidly growing concern for the quality of the environment and enactment of

legislation to ensure its protection.

Many waste materials can be used directly as, or be converted into, viable construction

materials, thereby conserving natural resources and energy, and mitigating the harmful

effects of the wastes on the environment. Because of the large quantities of materials

used in construction, such applications could consume significant amounts of the wastes.

1.2 Developments in the Use of Wastes in Construction

With the exception of the program established some 60 years ago by the Bureau of Mines

[2], the United States government gave little emphasis to research and development on the use of waste materials in construction until the late 1960's. Consequently, only a small

fraction of the construction materials used in the United States is derived from waste

materials. During the past decade, however, significant programs which should facilitate

the increased use of waste materials in construction have been established by federal and

state governmental agencies. For example, the feasibility of using waste materials as sources of aggregate is being explored in projects sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration; the Federal Energy Administration and the Energy Research and Development Administration are supporting work relating to the conservation of energy by substituting waste

materials for more energy-intensive materials; the Environmental Protection Agency is

supporting demonstrations of uses of waste materials as an approach to improve the nation's

environment; and the Bureau of Mines is continuing its program on developing uses for

mineral wastes. In addition, the recently passed Resource Conservation Act of 1976 [3] is

intended to stimulate the increased use of waste materials.

If Amounts are given in metric tons throughout this report.

1
The business sector of the United States is also promoting the recycling of solid waste. For example, the National Center for Resource Recovery is a nonprofit organization

founded by leaders of major United States industry and labor organizations to advance the

technology of resource recovery from solid wastes. Its present emphasis is on resource recovery from municipal refuse.

Other important activities in the United States which are stimulating interest in the

2 / use of waste materials include the Mineral Waste Utilization Symposia,— the Ash Utilization

3 / Symposia,— and the work of Committee E-38 on Resource Recovery of the American Society for

Testing and Materials (ASTM) . Within the committee, subcommittee E3B.06 was specifically

established to cover "Materials of Construction from Other Recovered Materials."

1.3 Survey of Waste Materials

This survey covers the sources, amounts and disposal of major mining, industrial and

municipal wastes available in the 48 conterminous states of the United States along with

their present and potential uses as construction materials. Agricultural wastes are not included because only in a few cases has their use as viable construction materials been

seriously considered. One of the few examples is research with the conversion of certain

types of agricultural waste into construction materials. It has recently been shown [41

that hydraulic acid-resisting cements can be produced using the ash of rice hulls. Similar

cements probably could be produced using residues from the straw from wheat, barley, oats

and rye.) Furthermore, much of the agricultural waste rapidly re-enters the biological

cycle which facilitates its disposal.

In this report wastes from mining, industrial and municipal sources are treated

separately and in that order. This is the order of decreasing amount of usable wastes

available from each major classification (table 1). Wastes from mineral, metallic ore and

coal mining operations are covered in Section 2. Industrial wastes are treated in Sections

3 to 5, with Section 3 describing a variety of important wastes which have found few markets

by-products from coal combustion, which are examples of wastes for which there are growing

markets, are discussed in Section 4; and Section 5 covers slags, by-products which are already extensively used as aggregates in construction but for which there may be higher

value uses. Municipal wastes, including municipal refuse, incinerator residue, glass,

demolition waste and sewage sludge, are the subject of Section 6. Then Section 7 is

directed towards some potential wastes which may be generated in substantial amounts by

emerging technologies related to energy production and environmental protection. Obstacles

to and incentives for the increased use of waste materials in construction are discussed in

Section 8.

1/ Biannual Symposia held since 1968, co-sponsored by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the

Illinois Institute of Technology Research Institute (IITRI)

.

l_l Triannual Symposia held since 1967, sponsored jointly by the National Coal Association,

Edison Electric Institute, American Public Power Association, National Ash Association and

the U.S. Bureau of Mines.

2
Table 1. Amounts of Mining, Industrial and Municipal Wastes

Type of

Waste

Annual Amounts—

(10^ tons)

Section of

Survey

Mining 2,270 2

Industrial 180 3-5

Municipal 180^ 6

1/ Estimates based on amounts given in this survey.

2/ Includes some 135 x 10^ tons of municipal refuse of which about

36 x 1()6 tons might be suitable for use in construction.

3
2 . MINING WASTES

Mining wastes, considered collectively, form the greatest part of the solid waste

9 material generated in the United States with over 2.2 x 10 tons being generated annually.

A distinction is usually made between mineral mining wastes and coal refuse. Mineral

mining wastes are usually described as being either waste rock or mill tailings. Waste

rock is the coarse material that is excavated to expose the ore during mine development.

Mill tailings are the residues obtained from the separation of minerals from their ores. Wastes from the sizing and cleaning of coal, from either underground mining or from strip

mining operations, are defined as coal refuse. Coal refuse may contain mine rock, carbon- aceous shale, pyrites, and other debris from mining operations. Dredge spoils are also

covered in this section because their mineralogical compositions and physical states are like those of mining wastes.

This section is concerned with the sources, amounts, disposal, and present and potential

uses of wastes resulting from mining operations. Much of this information has been provided

by the members of ASTM Subcommittee E38.06.

2 . 1 Inventory and Sources of Mining Wastes

Estimates of the amounts of waste rock, mill tailings, and coal refuse produced

annually by major mining industries in the United States are listed in table 2. This table

includes estimates of the amounts of the mill tailings and phosphate processing wastes

which have accumulated over the years. The copper industry accounts for nearly one half of

the mining waste generated annually. Other operations which produce large amounts of waste

include the mining of iron ore and taconite, coal, uranium, phosphate, gold, gypsum, lead,

and zinc.

Areas of the United States in which large quantities of waste rock and mill tailings

are located are shown in figure 1. These include the large copper producing states (Arizona,

Utah, Montana, Michigan, and Tennessee) ; the Mesabi Range taconite mines (northeastern

Minnesota); the major iron ore mining areas (Minnesota, Michigan, Missouri, Pennsylvania,

California, and Wyoming); and several lead-zinc regions (Idaho, Tennessee, and Wisconsin).

There are also large accumulations of dredge tailings from past gold mining in the Mother

Lode district (northern California) and of chat (coarse tailings) from past mining of leadzinc ores in the Tri-State mining district (Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma) [5].

The largest accumulations of coal refuse are located (figure 2) in the eastern states

of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Tennessee, and Kentucky. Other significant accumulations

9 are in Illinois, Ohio, and Wyoming. There are more than 3 x 10 tons of coal refuse in

Pennsylvania and Kentucky alone. The amount of coal refuse produced annually will certainly

increase because of the greater emphasis being placed in the United States on coal

4
00

CM

in in m cn

•h 3

3 o H *H

QJ CO 10 3

3> O

4-* X

3 -h

Q) B

a 3 3 o

rO 3

e *h

•* 00

0) 3

MJ -H 3 *3

Ml cd >%H

QJ 00 Cd *H M 0) ^ CM O M ,C (0 C oo oo 3

O 00 -H -H CJ cd ps a

> *H

•H CM M lM M

»> pn cd cd a

^ X U -H o B M

a co

cd 3 u o

CM is

QJ *H m e

3

* Ml

QJ *H

•H rO

•H

Ml 3 M3 M3 QJpX EQ)

U QJ tH QJ M QJM M O CdrH

•H c 3 3 cm 3 CM 00 *H M rH M O Cd -H QJ -H QJ 00 3 QJ *H

P3 2 M S M SMC CQ U cm

3 00 /-s B 3 co 3 -H 3

<*1

M i—I

' e s

CO -M 00 -H 3 4J ^ •H 3 CO

<

13 3

•H 3 O 3 O' MJ H «HvO

i—13 0 •—I 3 t—

I

•H 3 ' C

o 3 co 3 3 3

3 O

QJ O' mi

CO I VO 3 3 0

12 3 rl 3C

00 MJ 3 CO •H 3 3 T3

•H 3 S H

Cu O

5
lounts

and

Possible

Uses

of

Major

Mining

Wastes

(cont. 3 3

CO 3O 3 60 /-V B C M 3 *H C

CJ 1-4

O

O *rt 4-J C 3

HvD

'O

O

B

X3 co 3 3 3 O

cr 4-i

t-HvO 3 O 3 r-i 3 ^4

r^i *H O 4-J O C CO OS 3 3 3 O

CD O' 4-» U

CO rH v£> cD (fl O ^ 3 «-H 3 w<

W) 4-J 3 m

•H 3 e

•H 3 a h

CD CD m e 3

4-1 60 a 3 3 nH

*4-4 *3 3 tH C *H

cD 3 S ^

>% e co a- 3 P*

CO

*• a- w) 3^0 h bo^:

CD

O Cu ^ 3 CD

co

a o

10 ,3 » O ft ^ rC O 3- *4-1 o o • 5-4 *3

CO 3 CO 3 3 3 3

CD 3 o 3 vH CO 4-J o e oB *»o 3 CO *H O g 3 rH rH o d m

co 3 X

rH 3 3 a 4J VD

*H 3 3 CO

*H ,3 i—

5-J *H -3 4-1 3 -3 CL 3 p 3 ^ S 3 . 4-J 4-> 3 0 3 O 3 ,3 3 3

co *4-1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 M 3 3 3 3 3 i—1 rH i—I rH 0 3 0 3 3 0 3 3 M CJ M M

-I | CN | CO | -<f |
NORTH

DAKOTA

CJ) • d CO o 60

•H

d

4-» •H

cd i—

!—1 •H d cd £ H do i—

o i— < •Hs

oj60 TJd

cd cd

4-4 o O o

pci COd CD o 4-J •H CO 4J Cd cd ^ oO 4-1O (1) V-J d

60

•H 7
8

Figure

2.

Locations

of

Large

Accumulations

of

Coal

Refuse.
g utilization. It is estimated that while 560 x 10 tons of coal will be produced in 1975,

C. approximately 900 x 10 tons will be produced in the year 2000 [6]. Much of the increased

coal production will be in western states. Most of this western coal will probably be

burned in the uncleaned state directly from the mine resulting in a smaller ratio of coal

refuse to coal production than is currently obtained [6]. Nevertheless, there is no doubt

that stockpiles of coal refuse will continue to grow for many years.

Dredge spoil is available along the major navigable waterways in the United States,

such as the Mississippi and Columbia rivers and from coastal sites.

2 . 2 Description, Disposal, and Uses of Mining Wastes

2.2.1 Waste Rock

9 Over 1.1 x 10 tons (table 2) of waste rock are removed each year during mineral

mining operations. Most of this waste rock comes from open-pit mines. The composition of

waste rock can vary from one mining operation to another. Depending on the geological

formation from which the ore is removed, the waste rock may be igneous, metamorphic, or sedimentary. Generally, igneous and metamorphic rocks are harder than sedimentary rocks

and are more suitable for uses requiring hard rock, such as aggregate for concrete.

However, some well consolidated sedimentary rocks, such as some limestones, are also good

aggregate materials [5] . The particle size of waste rock can vary because of variations in

geological formations and differences in mining methods. While individual pieces might be

larger than 1 m in diameter, waste rock is usually less than 0.3 m. Waste rock from any source can generally be reduced to a desired size range by normal crushing and sizing

methods

Waste rock along with overburden is often disposed of in large dumps. For example,

over 5580 hectares in Minnesota are covered with a waste rock overburden from the mining of

iron ore [7], Waste rock is sometimes used as backfill in open pit mining operations and

in highway construction. The total use of waste rock in construction appears, however, to be only a small fraction of the amount generated each year. The largest use of waste rock

has been in highway construction using rock from iron ore mines [5]. Traprock from an underground mine in Pennsylvania was used to resurface a section of the Pennsylvania Turnpike and in Missouri a similar waste rock is being crushed and marketed as a skid-resistant

aggregate. Waste rock from ore mining in Michigan, New York, Wisconsin, and Wyoming has

also been used successfully in highway construction as aggregates, subbase material, and

for embankments. Waste rock from copper mining has occasionally been crushed and used as a base or subbase material in Arizona and Michigan. Waste rock from gold mining has been

used as an aggregate in Colorado and as a highway resurfacing material in South Dakota.

Waste rock from lead-zinc mines has been used as an aggregate for bituminous paving in

Washington, Wisconsin, and Missouri.

9
2.2.2 Mill Tailings

The physical and chemical characteristics of mill tailings depend on their source and

the method of ore processing. For example, the tailings from lead-zinc mining are often

dolomitic [8], while those from taconite, gold, and copper ore mines have high silica

contents [9, 10] (table 3),

In operations where the tailings are not a residue produced by size separation, they are usually finely divided having particle sizes in the silt-clay particle size range. The

processing of copper, taconite, gold, uranium, lead, and zinc ores all require about the same degree of crushing and fine grinding. Between fifty and ninety percent of the particles

from these tailings are smaller than 75 ym. Where size separation is practiced, the coarse fraction of the tailings approximate a well-graded sand, predominantly in the fine to medium sand range. Iron ore tailings are often separated into a fine fraction which is in

the silt to coarse particle size range and a coarse fraction which is graded from a fine

sand to a gravel [5].

Tailings are usually separated from ore minerals by wet processing and are transported

as a slurry by pipelines for disposal in tailing ponds. Coarse tailings and waste rock are used for construction of the containment dikes. Much of the slurry water is recirculated

or allowed to evaporate resulting in the formation of slimes in the case of lead-zinc

tailings [9] and sometimes in the case of iron [7] and copper tailings [9]. Tailings are also disposed of through use as mine backfill materials [11] . Coarse tailings are often

stockpiled [7 , 8]

As with waste rock, the amount of mill tailings used annually in construction appears

to be only a small fraction of the amount produced. However, there are many examples of

the use of mill tailings in highway construction [5]. Coarse taconite tailings have been

used successfully as skid-resistant aggregate for bituminous overlays of highways in

Minnesota. Chat, the coarse by-product from the milling of lead-zinc ores, has been an approved highway construction material for many years in Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma.

In Utah, millions of tons of copper tailings have been used in highway embankments and as mineral filler in bituminous mixtures. Gold dredge tailings are routinely used as sand and

gravel in northern California and have been used for similar purposes in Colorado. These

and other mill tailings have performed well in many highway applications. Other possible

uses of mill tailings include the manufacture of ceramic products such as brick [10, 12-17]

lightweight building block [9, 14, 18], and mineral wool [19]. Many mill tailings have

excellent engineering properties [11, 20] and are suitable for the construction of small

earth dams and as backfill materials [11].

10
Table 3. Oxide Analyses of Some Taconite, Copper, Gold and

Lead-Zinc Tailings

Constituent

Taconite

Tailings [9]

Percent

Copper Ore

Tailings [9]

Percent

Gold

Tailings [5]

Percent

Lead-Zinc

Tailings [9]

Percent

sio

2 59 71.1 93 9.8

Fe2°3 21 4.9 1.9 1.1

a12°3 2.7 13.2 3.5 0.3

MgO 3.7 2.1 0.41 17.8

CaO 2.7 1.1 1 29.4

Na

2 0 — 0.3 0.07 —

k

2 o — 3.3 0.33 —

Loss on Ignition7.4 2.6 0.22 42

11
2.2.3 Coal Refuse

Coal refuse from anthracite and bituminous coal mine operations consists of a variety

of minerals (table 4) and is usually rich in SiC^, A^O^, and ^22^3 t^l, 22], Anthracite

refuse has a high proportion of coarse particles with over 65 percent being 13 mm or larger

in size [21]. The refuse from bituminous coal mines in Kentucky is usually separated into coarse and fine fractions through separation by sedimentation [22].

In the past, coal refuse has been placed in refuse piles or banks. Coal refuse often

contains carbon which can be ignited by spontaneous, accidental, or intentional ignition.

If it is ignited, and if sufficient oxygen is available, a bank becomes a self-sustaining

source of air pollution. State and federal programs have been established to extinguish

existing burning banks of coal refuse. Furthermore, atmospheric or other ozidation of

pyrite creates a sulfuric acid effluent which may pollute water resources. Presently, most

states require that coal refuse be placed in cleaned sites free of underground or surface

drainage and laid down in layers followed by compaction, contouring, and vegetation. The

effectiveness of the legislation and of these disposal methods is still a controversial

subject [23-25]. Coal refuse has also been disposed of by being flushed into underground

8 3 mines. Over 1.8 x 10 m of coal refuse had been flushed into mines by 1968 [21].

A small amount of coal refuse has been used in the past for construction purposes,

primarily for highway applications such as base and subbase material [6], and aggregates

for pavement [26, 27], including anti-skid material [28]. Anthracite coal refuse has been

used, on a relatively small scale, to make concrete block, lightweight aggregate, and brick

[21], Other small scale uses of coal refuse have been in the manufacture of mineral wool

and cement [21]. These applications represent only a small tonnage and seem to have only a small potential for growth. Another possible use of coal refuse is as landfill material

[6]. Coal refuse has been used successfully in England as landfill for a variety of con- struction purposes [29-30]. In general, coal refuse appears to have many of the engineering

properties, handling characteristics, and availability desired for a landfill material [21].

2.2.4 Dredge Spoil

Dredge spoil, the waste from dredging operations, is usually divided into three types

of materials for engineering purposes: coarse grained, fine grained, and organic. Fine

grained materials are defined as those smaller than 75 pm. It is the fine grained and

organic spoils that normally cause dredging problems 15]. Over two thirds of dredge spoil

is disposed of in open water and the remainder is disposed of in landfill.

12
Table

4.

Oxide

and

Mineralogical

Analyses

of

Coal

Refuse e

<do

CD

p-. o

I-*.

0)

u

u-1

C

CD 0)

cD CD •Hc

cD ~ >

rH ^

CJ

CO

p

C -u G C

CD CD O c

CD *H u a x p

13
2 . 3 Prospects for the Increased Use of Mining Wastes

Enormous amounts of mining wastes are produced annually in the United States and it is

anticipated that most types of mining wastes will be generated even more rapidly in the

next several decades. Only a small fraction of these wastes is currently being used in any

application. Probably their largest use is for self-containment purposes. The most

promising prospective use of mining wastes appears to be in large engineering projects such

as the construction of highways and earth dams, and in land and minefills. Their application

as highway materials, especially as aggregates, continues to receive significant attention

[5, 31-33].

Waste rock, coal refuse, and gold and taconite tailings have often performed better as aggregates and fillers than conventionally used materials. Furthermore, a significant

portion of these waste materials, is located in regions of the United States which have

shortages of high quality aggregates [34-37]. There appear to be no significant institutional obstacles to the use of these mining wastes as aggregates and current ASTM specifications for aggregates do not preclude the use of mining wastes, with benef iciation if required,

provided they meet essential physical requirements. The main factor which determines the use of specific waste materials as aggregates is the economics [36]. As shortages of high

quality natural aggregates from traditional sources develop regionally and transportation

costs increase, the use of locally available waste materials may become economically

attractive [35]. Therefore, it is expected that waste rock and coal refuse generated near

large construction activities will find increasingly wide use as aggregates in many types

of construction.

The prospects for large scale use of mill tailings (with the exception of gold and

taconite tailings and coarse tailings) as aggregates and highway construction materials are not encouraging based on present technology and economics [31]. A more promising application

is their use in the production of ceramic building materials such as brick and lightweight

building blocks, and in autoclaved calcium silicate insulation materials. However, even these applications would consume only a small portion of the available mill tailings.

3. WASTES FROM THE PHOSPHATE, ALUMINUM AND CEMENT INDUSTRIES, AND SULFATE WASTES

Major processing waste materials generated in the phosphate fertilizer, aluminum

extraction, and cement manufacturing industries, and those which can be classified as waste

sulfates are considered in this section. The amounts of these waste materials generated

annually in the United States are given in table 5. Presently, only small quantities of

these waste materials are used for construction or any other purpose. However, as discussed

in this section, many of these materials could be used to produce construction materials.

14
p*vO

iH O

cd i

l P w

C

c<

cda

T3 C

cd

*> X

CO *rH cd B

^ 4-1 B

cd .C

C B C

O X)

•H C U Cd

cdu <d O B

CL -H U rH O

a m

xj u

*H O

co cd

Cl) Vj PS 4JX

X) w

3S

CD Cd n B

cd CD

P P P<

• 4J *H o

(D P U rO CD

I 1 O 1 1 Cd rP h co co p y

cd c

> *H

cd cd •H CD -Hcd oo y y o y!

4-1 p p 4-1 Cj o o o i-i cd z u u c p

H | eg | ro | ><J- 1 4-1

15
3 .

1

Phosphate Ore Processing Wastes

3.1.1 Production and Sources of Phosphate Ore

The primary ore for phosphorus fertilizers is phosphate rock, in which the phosphate

occurs as apatite, i.e. calcium f luophosphate, Ca^FCPO^)^. Phosphate ore is generally

composed of roughly equal quantities of sand, clay, and phosphate [37].

Phosphate mining operations consist of stripping off the overburden and transferring

the phosphate ore to large sumps or wells where it is converted into a slurry by high

pressure jets of water. The slurry is then pumped to the ore processing plants. In the

processing operation, the clay particles are removed from the sand and phosphate and pumped

to large settling ponds. The sand tailings, which are mostly silica, are used for building

dikes around the waste settling ponds and for filling mined areas being reclaimed. The

phosphate concentrate is dried and shipped to chemical manufacturing plants.

Phosphate rock is mined in Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee, Idaho, and Montana.

Florida produces about 70 percent (about 23 x 10^ tons annually) of all the phosphate rock

produced in the United States, with most of it coming from a 32 x 48 kilometer area in the

Bone Valley District of central Florida [37].

3.1.2 Characteristics and Disposal of Phosphate Processing Wastes

The major waste materials from the processing of phosphate ores are silica sand and

phosphate slimes. Few problems are encountered in the disposal or use of the sand as it can be used without further treatment in concrete and landfill operations, and for the

construction of dikes. The most significant problem of the phosphate mining industry is

the handling, disposal and reclamation of the slimes. Phosphate slimes constitute over one

6 6 half of the plant wastes. Between 9 x 10 and 13 x 10 tons of phosphate slimes are produced

each year and their production is increasing at about 4 percent per year.

Phosphate slimes consist of colloidal clay particles with 75 percent of the particles

being under 3 microns and 50 percent under 0.3 microns. The slimes are rich in Si 02 » AI

2 O

3

, CaO, and P

2 O

5 (table 6 ).

Phosphate slimes are pumped to large ponds where the clay gradually settles. As much

of the supernatant water is reused as possible. Many of the slime ponds are enormous, being up to 3 kilometers long and 3 kilometers wide, and surrounded by walls and dikes up

9 to 13 m in height. It has been estimated that nearly 2 x 10 tons of phosphate slime,

9 containing about 1.4 x 10 tons of water, are stored in these ponds. The colloidal clay

particles settle very slowly and after about 25 years the slimes have a solids content of

between 20 and 30 percent and the consistency of grease [38]

.

16
Table 6. Oxide and Mineralogical Compositions

of Phosphate Slimes [37]

Oxide Composition Mineralogical Composition

Oxide Percent Mineral Percent

P 2°5 9-17 Calcium f luophosphate 20-25

sio

2 31-46 Quartz 30-35

Fe 2°3 3-7 Mon tmoril Ionite 20-25

A12°3 6-18 Attapulgite 5-10

CaO 14-23 Wavellite 4-6

MgO 1-2 Feldspar 2-3

Loss on ignition 9-16 Heavy minerals 2-3

Dolomite 1-2

17
3.1.3 Prospective Uses of Phosphate Slimes

Major problems encountered in the use of phosphate slimes are their slow settling

rates, their low percentages of solids, and the extreme fineness of the mineral constituents.

Slimes have been stabilized and used as landfill materials by being mixed with sand

tailings from phosphate rock processing plants. The sand tailings capture the slimes and a paste with about 90 percent solids content is produced when the mixture is passed through a narrow channel at high velocity. This paste is then allowed to settle in long, narrow, mined-out channels which are subsequently backfilled in land reclamation projects [39].

This method can consume only about 35 percent of the slimes generated at a processing plant

because of the resultant ratio of slime to tailing in the landfill material [37].

Other uses of phosphate slimes depend on thermally drying the slimes to high solid

levels. Cross-flow fluid dryers have been found to be efficient in drying slimes to a 95-

99 percent solids content [40].

The most promising application of dried slimes to date has been in the production of

lightweight aggregates. Dried phosphate slime is pelletized and heated to between 1050 to 1100°C in a rotary kiln, producing an aggregate with a bulk density between 320 and 480

3 kg/m . These aggregates meet the requirements of ASTM Specification C330, Lightweight

Aggregates for Structural Concrete [41]. Furthermore, they appear to have better loadbearing characteristics than some conventional lightweight aggregates such as perlite and

vermiculite [40].

Brick and sewer pipe have been manufactured from phosphate slime but neither product was of high quality [40].

3.2 Sulfate Wastes

Calcium sulfate is generated as a by-product or waste material in a variety of processes,

the major one being the manufacture of phosphoric acid. In the near future, scrubbing of

combustion gases from coal burning power plants is also expected to produce large quantities.

3.2.1 Phosphogypsum

During the conversion of phosphate rock to chemical fertilizers and other products,

the rock is treated with sulfuric acid to form phosphoric acid and gypsum:

Ca,F(P0.) 543o + 5 H„S0 24. + 10 H„0 = 3 H.PO. + 5 CaS0,.2 H„0 + HF.

2 34 42

18
The phosphoric acid is then often used to produce fertilizers such as triple superphosphates

and mono- and diammonium phosphates [37]. The by-product gypsum is pumped into diked areas where it settles out and the supernatant water is reused. The dike walls are often constructed

with dewatered gypsum. Because the gypsum contains a significant amount of phosphoric acid

it is called phosphogypsum. Phosphogypsum is also disposed of by being placed in exhausted

phosphate mined areas. Approximately 5 x 10^ tons of phosphogypsum are produced annually

in the United States [5], primarily in areas where phosphate ore is mined. Accumulated

amounts have been estimated to be 136 x 10^ tons [5].

At present, gypsum recovered from phosphogypsum has little commercial value because of

its impurity [42] and also because adequate alternative sources of gypsum are generally

available [43]. Nevertheless, the feasibility of producing plasterboard and filler materials

for floor and roof systems from the recovered gypsum is being investigated [15, 42]. The

recovered gypsum could possibly be used as a set-regulating admixture for portland cement.

3.2.2 Fluorogypsum

3 Approximately 90 x 10 tons of anhydrite (CaSO^) are produced annually in the production

of hydrofluoric acid from fluorspar and sulfuric acid. The anhydrite by-product is a dry

material containing 4 to 6 percent calcium fluoride and smaller amounts of various other

salts. The anhydrite by-products are disposed of by dumping on dry land or use as landfill

material. They have little commercial value at present. A possible use is production of an impure plasterboard.

3.2.3 Gas Scrubber Waste

Gas scrubber waste is the material obtained using the lime or limestone slurry process

for removing sulfur dioxide from the stack gases of coal burning power plants. The sulfur

dioxide is converted to calcium sulfite and calcium sulfate in the processes used in the

United States. The resulting gas scrubber waste is a sludge having solid contents in the

range of 19 to 50 percent [44, 45].

£ At present about 5 x 10 tons per year of gas scrubber waste are generated in the

United States [45]. Because of the increasing use of high sulfur coals, the amounts of

waste generated will increase rapidly; it has been estimated that 64 x 10^ tons of solid

scrubber waste will be generated in 1980 [45]

.

Approximately 17 power plants which incorporate

scrubber systems are either being planned or are in operation [44, 46].

19
Proposed methods for disposing of most of the scrubber wastes include placing it in

ponds and using it in landfill operations [45].

3.2.4 Prospective Uses of Sulfate Wastes

Recent studies have indicated that sulfate wastes from a variety of sources can be

mixed with lime and fly ash to form structurally stable construction materials [44, 47],

Potential applications of the waste sulfate-lime-fly ash material include use as a structural

landfill material [47], and as highway construction material for embankments, subbases and

bases for pavements [44, 48]. These materials appear to have acceptable mechanical properties

but their durability, especially to freezing and thawing appear to be marginal in the

present state of their development [44], The proximity of fly ash and waste sulfate sources

to each other and to large metropolitan areas [44] could result in sulfate-lime-fly ash

material becoming an economically viable construction material if additional development

work indicates it has acceptable long-term performance.

3 . 3 Muds from the Processing of Aluminum Ores

The feedstock for the reduction of alumina to aluminum metal is obtained from the

processing of bauxite. Bauxite ores are mined in Arkansas or imported from Caribbean area deposits and are processed in domestic plants located in the southern states of Arkansas,

Alabama, Louisiana, and Texas.

The major waste materials from the processing of bauxite are "red muds' 1 and, to a lesser amount, "brown muds." Over 5 x 10 ^ tons of solid waste are produced annually from

the processing of bauxite and approximately 90 x 10 tons have been accumulated in settling

ponds [49]. Red muds comprise about 90 percent of this tonnage. During the processing of

bauxite from Arkansas, a "black sand," comprising 8 to 18 percent by weight of the total

waste, is separated from the mud [49]

The red muds are pumped from alumina extracting plants as slurries containing about 20

percent solids. The slurries are stored in ponds where the solids settle and the supernatant

water is reused. The solid contents of slurries gradually approach 50 percent after years

of settling [49].

20
3.3.1 Properties of Muds

The properties of a red mud depend on the source of the bauxite. The oxide and

mineralogical compositions of typical red muds are given in table 7. The chemical compositions of muds derived from the same source of bauxite may vary by 10 percent. Their

mineralogical compositions depend on the ore as well as processing conditions, and they

have been described as being clay-like materials similar to noselite in composition [49].

The oxide analysis of a typical brown mud shown in table 7 suggests that it is composed

largely of dicalcium silicate. The particle size distribution of dried muds also depends

on the source of the ore and processing conditions. Red muds consist of fine particles

with almost 90 percent being smaller than 45 ym [50].

3.3.2 Prospective Uses of Muds

Considerable effort has been devoted to finding uses for muds from the processing of

bauxite including the recovery of valuable minerals and by-products. Possible direct uses include use as an additive to concrete, as a thermal insulation material and as a highway

road bed stabilizer; other possible uses are incorporation in building materials such as Portland cement, binders (e.g. for taconite pellets), and bricks [42, 49]. Some of these uses have reached the commercial stage but no consistent use has been maintained on a sufficient scale to even consume current output.

The Bureau of Mines has sponsored work to develop new uses for red muds [42, 51].

Recently, it has been demonstrated that lightweight structural building materials can be

3 produced from red muds [50]. These materials have densities ranging from 480 to 1120 kg/m

with excellent thermal and acoustical insulation properties [49-50] . Another prospective

use for red muds is the manufacture of synthetic aggregates. Red mud has been molded into

balls and heated in a muffle furnace at 1260 to 1316°C to produce a dense synthetic aggregate

[52]. However, the performance of these aggregates either in concrete or in asphalt has

3 not yet been investigated. Granular lightweight aggregates of bulk density 704 kg/m have

been prepared in West Germany by firing a 1:1 mixture of red mud and fly ash [53].

3.4 Cement Kiln Dust

In the manufacture of portland cement clinker in rotary kilns, between 10 to 20 percent

of the weight of the raw material leaves the kiln as dust. Approximately 17 x 10 tons of

kiln dust were collected in 1972, of which about 12 x 10 tons were fed back into the

process and the remaining 5 x 10 tons were discarded [54]. The most common method of

discarding the collected dust is to dump it on surface piles or in abandoned quarries.

21
”3

Mc o o o s CU 00 rH 1—

m

CJ 1 i 1 l X) H LO LO LO co 3 0)

<D Ph (—

4-) o CM •H

LT)

O

X3

#> C/D cd O' X PQ

C/D i—i >>

C

X cd

X cd CJ c •H s C cdS p rH cd 3 cd X) o CJ h •H e

PQ 60 o O j-i CU CU cu cd i—

CM rH

MM (U 4-J cd cd •H •H M •H

XuH

M

X •H e S (U <U cd 4-J a X Cd c e e CU rH cu •H •H cu o cd o

C/D s o CJ PQ XX

CU

CU rj & 3 X 1—1 co rH

O

m CO o O 3 • • • 1 CO H 2 vD vO co vO co 1 o

PQ CM <fr

4-1O

CO

CU o

CO CM

m

rH

M cu cd c CU O o <t oo o m 00 a i—

c cu CJ • • M • • cd • <d a CO o CO X <fr o u CO u CU 3 <M <fr m H 1—1 rH cU U O

cd PH

O co o o v—/

•H

X

60 CO cu o •H 4-» rH CO u

cd po

O i—

u »

1 a

CU cd e cu CO CO CO <r o o c C M a • • • • 1 • •H < H O' co o m vO \D rH 1 1—

s 3 X CO X

cu o x X CO c •H

cd

Xo

cua

X) •H

•H 4-J cu

m i

i oo CO oo

X CO

u • • • 1 • o CU o vO o CM 00 i—

CO 1 CM CM £ CsJ X CM i

i X o • Q rcu

a 1—

fiO

X o x

cd cu CO CO 4-J H X o O CM o CM m C/D X

•H CM CM o o CM

O o CO C/D

C

X

X CU •H cd cd •H CM

OO 60 o < Pm CO CJ 12 H Ph CO X X

22 I
Cement kiln dust consists primarily of fine particles with more than 90 percent being

smaller than 12 pm [55], The chemical analysis of a kiln dust is given in table 8, which

indicates that it has a high content of alkali, particularly potassium. Dust fractions

which have low alkali contents, usually the coarser fractions, are usually returned to the

kiln. However, dusts with high alkali contents often cannot be returned to the kiln because

of limitations on the alkali contents of the clinker. For example, according to ASTM C150

[56], cements with 0.6 percent or less total alkali expressed as Na

2 0 are classified as low-alkali cements. Low-alkali cements may be necessary when certain alkali-reactive

aggregates are incorporated in the concrete. Low-alkali cements are often specified even where higher alkali cements would be adequate. This results in the producers disposing of more kiln dust than would be necessary if the cement users did not overspecify. Problems

associated with disposal of high-alkali kiln dust also could be reduced by only using raw materials, especially clays, which have small amounts of alkalis. However, low-alkali

materials are usually more expensive than those commonly used.

The substitution of kiln dust for lime and limestone in a variety of applications has

been investigated. Possible applications include agricultural uses [57], reclamation of

acidic bays and lakes [58], and the treatment of municipal or process waters [59]. Kiln

dust has been used as a soil stabilizer and as a subbase for secondary roads and parking

lots. Bituminous paving materials and asphalt roofing materials have been filled with

cement kiln dust in a few applications. However, kiln dust has found little use in construction. Current research may result in its increased use. For example, the feasibilities of

incorporating kiln dust in blended cements and of using it in the manufacture of lightweight

aggregates are being investigated [54].

4. BY-PRODUCTS FROM COAL COMBUSTION

By-products from coal combustion for steam generation are classified as fly ash and,

depending on the design of the boiler, as bottom ash or boiler slag. Fly ashes are the

small particles carried in combustion gases up the stacks of coal burning units. Their

emergence from stacks is largely prevented by electrostatic precipitators or by other

collection methods. In open-grate boilers, the ashes with the largest sizes fall through

the grates and are collected in water-filled ash hoppers. This material is called bottom

ash. In slag-tap boilers, molten ash is allowed to run down into a water-filled hopper.

This material is called boiler slag [60].

Fly ash, bottom ash, and boiler slag from bituminous coals have a wide range of

compositions, but in general they consist primarily of Si0

2

, A^O^, and Fe^^, with smaller

amounts of CaO, MgO, unburned carbon, and alkali sulfate. Ashes and slags from lignite or subbituminous coal also tend to consist largely of SK^, A^O^, and Fe^^; however, CaO and

23
Table 8. Oxide Composition of a Cement Kiln Dust [54]

Oxide Percent

Si0

2 11.1

A1 2°3 5.5

Fe 2°3 2.9

CaO 44.0

MgO 2.5

Na

20 0.9

k

2 o 6.0

so

2 5.6

Loss on ignition 21.5

24
MgO are present in greater amounts than in the corresponding products from bituminous coal.

These higher CaO contents generally will result in higher free lime contents. Table 9 lists

typical ranges of fly ash composition along with a few actual compositions.

Fly ash occurs as small spherical particles whose diameters range from a few micrometers

to about 100 micrometers. Bottom ash particles range in size from about 0.08 to about 20 mm, have angular shapes, and are very porous. Boiler slags have particle size distributions

similar to bottom ashes. They also have angular shapes but are glassy and the larger

particles often have porous surfaces [64].

4 . 1 Amounts and Disposal of Combustion Products

The accumulated amounts of fly ash, bottom ash, and boiler slag and the amounts

collected in 1975 by the U.S. electric power generating industry are listed in table 10

along with the amounts utilized.. Over a two-fold increase in the amount of fly ash collected

occurred between 1965 and 1975 and an even greater rate of growth is anticipated in the

next decade because of the increased dependence on coal as an energy source. The largest

amounts of coal are, of course, burned in high population density areas and this concentration has caused serious disposal problems. However, this also means that ash is available

in areas where the largest amount of construction occurs. Figure 3 shows, by state, the

approximate coal consumption in millions of tons in the U.S. in 1972.

The weights of ash produced vary between 12 and 20 percent of the weight of coal

burned. Approximately 50 percent of unused ash is sluiced to disposal ponds. The remaining

50 percent is trucked to disposal areas, mixed with about 20 percent water, compacted, and

used as fill. However, between 65 and 80 percent of the power plants have facilities for

dry collection and loading of ash which could be used if markets were available [65].

4 .

2

Use of By-Products

In 1975, less than 10 percent of the coal by-products were used in construction

(table 10) . However, it appears that promising markets are being developed in the construction

industry as discussed in the following.

4.2.1 Cement Manufacture and Concrete Products

While only a relatively small amount of ash and boiler slag have been used in cement

manufacture and in concrete products, much larger amounts could potentially be used. Ash

can be introduced into the cement manufacturing process either as a raw material for portland

cement clinker manufacture or as a pozzolanic ingredient of a blended cement [66]. Bottom

ash and boiler slag have also been used as raw materials for cement manufacture. Many fly

ashes are also used as mineral admixtures in concrete. When used in blended cements or as an admixture in concretes, fly ash is usually required to comply with ASTM Specifications

25
Table

9.

Percentage

Compositions

of

U.S.

Coal

Ashes

70

<D£U£

'C£ £a££h i—1 m

m CM co co CO

a; vO bO bO bO bO bO bO

4-4££o

rQ CM CM • • • i—1 m t—1

<3 <3 <3 £ 1 • • 1 • • • CJ r—1

<r CM rH £ £ oCM £ CM 00 bO rH bO o o T—1 O o O O r"- CO£

V-/

CM CM CO CM <3 i i"- CM Ob

m o 1 • • • • CM

co

O

O £ o rH CM i—i

CO1 1—1 o LO rH O 1—1

00

mm

00 • • 1 • • • £ o i—1

rH CM

mm bO

MO

CM CO Ob

O i—1

CM Ob 1 • • • £ 1 • • rH <r CM • CJ rH m o rH CM CM CM 4-» ££B£

CO O

m Ob

CM CM CO rH ON CM £ l m • 1 • • O

M

Ph bO •—i

bO CM CO *vf • rH Ob £ • CU £

rH

H HP CO i—1 £ O CO bO m Ob m 2 r—1

CM 1 • CM • • p *H i—1

CO CMO 1 rH CO £

<3 1-1

CM CO 00 CM rH rH < >£

4-1O £

CM CM 4H CM m bO m Ob £ £ o I • l • • • O rd

•H

O com bO o •H

CO CO

m in rH co 00 CM

uct no

73 CO rH rH O £ £ £ £ "'v £ U 4J 00 00 £ £ £ a O £ £ 4-1 4H 4H £

rH I »H

J £ £ £ O CJ /—\ £ £

CO <0 CO ps3 & <3 <3 £ •H 73 £ £ £ £ S—' vy /-b 'w/ cd 4J D. o O /"V o /T-V £ Q O 73 • >b £ /-“N £ rH £ rH £ £ £ £ £ CO £ < H •H £ •H £ •H £ 4-1 4-> £ H HP 4J £ CO • B CxO B £ B £ •H •H 4-1 •H 4-> •H £ £ £ i—1 £ £ £ 4-J £ 4-1 £ £ £ £ U £ £ £ 4J £ 4-1 O H a 00 00 O 00 O 00 •H O •H •H <3 •H <3 •H •H £ •h jz; •H s rH | O PQ PQ PQ v— CM 

•J hJ ^

26 I
Table

10.

Amounts

and

Uses

of

By-Products

from

Coal

Combustion

[65] 1

60G

rH CO

C/0

G o <r r** rH CNJ co o nO CO o 1 I o 1 LO • U 4J • 1 • 1 j • 1 • • rH

cu LO o o o o rH

rH nO

•HO

O f-H PQ n-/

C\]

rC ^CO CO < a o o rH o <! CO CNJ NO S h • rH o 1 o LO 1 <r o rH o CO 1 • | • • 1 • • •

4-J NO rH o o o o o rH 00

4-»

O

O fH

pq

W

LO

CO rC C

CO o o < 4J CO o CO LO ON LO NO • co CNJ ON o rH 1 00 >sO CNJ 1 • • • • • 1 • • rH O o o o o o o rH

pH rH o 'w' CH $

cdH • cu

CO

u

cd • G

a) • 4->

u

u o CO

a o G 4-1 4-4 cd

4-1 o 4-4 •

4-1

O a)

GG <u c cd h G CO

(U 4-4

G

O cd cd £ G 4J U B rO • CU g X a. rO 60 a cd •H <u G c e 6 <D 4-4 CO •H

PH "d 4-» cd 44 M 4-4 cd cu 60 G • o • • c H CU o 4-> o • • ••

0) cu

T 1 a

U •H i—u

LO /*“V cx e cd

G 60 4-»

G

<U LO <U

u o 60 cd rG T3 on 4-4 H a <u o G N a, G

rH

G ONC •H COG

V / rH rH

G •H

u 4-1 rH

G

G v-^ Eh •H e o rG •H 4-4 & CO 60 rO G •H • • CU G T3 <J rH cd (U •H G •H U T)

4-4

a cu cd 4-» (U 4-4 60 • • CU

a o N c •H CO (U £ CO

U T3 CO

0) < •H •HH cdH 4-4 cu 4-1 CU PQ rH rH CU o rG rH rH CO CO rH CO •H a) 4-4 cu G 60 •H rH G £> 4-> O 4J 4-1 CO cd CO O •H O •H rH G

CJG G> 6 P=>

a CO Pm PQ i—

CU 3 G CJ

X o r£ 4-4

U

CO e CO • • • • • • o CU < <3 < rH CNJ co <1- LO NO H PH

27
28

I

Figure

3.

Coal

Consumption

by

State

i

1972

(1C)6

tons)

.
C595 [67] or C618 [68], Blended cements produced by intergrinding fly ash with pnrtland

cement clinker to comply with the ASTM requirements for Type IP cement [67] must contain

between 15 and 40 percent fly ash by weight. The anticipated increased use of fly ashes by

intergrinding will result in several benefits to the cement industry including decreased

energy cons imption in cement manufacture and increased capacity for a relatively low capital

expenditure. At present, incentives for the use of fly ash in cement are low because of

the reduced demand for cement coupled with lack of experience in manufacture and the use of

blended cement [69]. The limitations on the minimum amount of fly ash permitted in a blended cement under ASTM C595 may also hinder experimentation with different levels of fly

ash addition.

The use of fly ash as a mineral admixture by the ready mixed concrete industry, which

uses over 60 percent of the cement manufactured in the U.S., is rapidly increasing. Fly

ash is also finding commercial use in the manufacture of steam-cured concrete products.

4.2.2 Conventional and Lightweight Aggregates

FI v ash may be used in the manufacture of lightweight aggregates. The U.S. lightweight

aggregate production in 1970 was 13.3 x 10^ tons, of which about 10 x 10^ tons were manufactured [70] and the remainder was natural lightweight aggregates. Lightweight aggregates

include expanded clay, shale and slate, along with some slag and sintered fly ash. Sintered

fly ash aggregates have good strength to weight ratios and they facilitate the mixing of

concretes [70]. The extent to which sintered fly ash will supplant expanded clay, slate,

and shale is uncertain. The use of bottom ash as a lightweight aggregate may be preferred

because it is available in larger sizes than sintered fly ash and it does not require

sintering. The use of bottom ash and boiler slag as conventional aggregate should also

increase significantly in view of the aggregate shortages developing in some of the larger

metropolitan areas. These products have been used as aggregate base course as well as base course with portland cement for highway construction [71].

4.2.3 Lime-Fly Ash-Aggregate Mixtures

Lime-fly ash-aggregate (LFA) mixtures and lime-fly ash-portland cement-aggregate

mixtures have been used successfully in the construction of highway bases and subbases. In 1971, for example, 2 x 10 tons of LFA were placed in the U.S. [72]. The compressive

2 strengths of LFA range from about 5.2 to 14 MN/m after about 1 year, depending on the mix

design, and these materials exhibit adequate durability [73] and good dimensional stability

[72], As mentioned in Section 3.2.4, lime and fly ash are also being mixed with sulfate

wastes to form construction materials.

29
4.2.4 Miscellaneous Uses

Fly ash has been used in small quantities in a variety of other materials of construction

including asphalt, roofing shingles and brick. However, one midwestern utility has sold

£ over 1.2 x 10 tons of fly ash for use as an asphalt filler since 1939 [74]. Fly ash is

also used in granules for roofing shingles. Several studies [75-77] have indicated that

bricks meeting or exceeding the current ASTM requirements [78] for strength, saturation

coefficient, and water absorption can be successfully produced from fly ash. In addition,

bricks from fly ash can in some cases be produced more rapidly while requiring less energy

than conventional bricks. Although bricks manufactured from fly ash have not been marketed

commercially in the U.S., brick manufacture could become a large tonnage market for fly ash

[13].

5. METALLURGICAL AND MINERAL SLAGS

The term slag is generally used to describe the nonmetallic melt which forms during

the thermal reduction of metallic ores. This term is also applied to similar materials

produced in other processes such as coal combustion or phosphorus production. Slags are usually composed of the same major constituents although their relative proportions vary

widely. Generally, slags contain oxides of calcium, silicon, aluminum, iron, and smaller

amounts of magnesium. The compositions of slags from a variety of processes are listed in

table 11 and the annual amounts produced are listed in table 12.

5 . 1 Slag Production

The bulk of the slag generated in the U.S. comes from the production of iron and steel

and, therefore, largely consists of blast furnace, converter, and foundry slags. Annual

4/ 6 productions of blast furance and converter—' slags are about about 27.5 x 10 tons and

9.7 x 10 ^ tons, respectively [83]. Foundry slag is produced in smaller amounts. Other

types of slag are also produced in small amounts, however, because their production tends

to be concentrated within small geographic areas, their use might be attractive in such

areas. For example, about 2 x 10 tons of slag from phosphorus production are produced

annually at two sites in Idaho [80]

.

5 .

2

Uses of Slags

While slags are used in a variety of construction materials (table 13) , their primary

use is as aggregate. In 1973, 21 of the 27.5 x 10^ tons of blast furnace slag produced

£ were used as some form of aggregate. Similarly, 7.8 of the 9.7 x 10 tons of converter

slag produced were used as aggregate [83]. If unsoundness is anticipated because of a high

free CaO content, converter slag is stockpiled to allow CaO to hydrate prior to utilization

4V Converter slag is the molten residue of the conversion of pig iron into steel.

30
CU

CJd

<UU

<U 44

CU Pi

as as

cd r- u cm

(DO

00

O - CM CO

cd cu 5z "d

•H

vO

vO

00

cd

VO

vO

CM

00

4-4 CO •H 44 co CO d U So cu rH

0) 0) > nd cd • * r* r o ^d cd *H i rH o o

U 4-1 1 1 cu x t—1 •I d d 1 CO CU O 1 1 & o cd »H I s S 1 00 PX

cd rH 4-» co JO

00 vO

CU •H O 1 o 00 co • oo B <u oo 1 • rH • • o • • o S £ 1—

1

rH o rH rH <r CO

CO

4-r d

o o r** •H rH co

CO 4-1 O ON •

l • • • d •H cd VO • m H m m o o

o CO CJ 1—

1

<r CM <r

•H o U cx

•H 6 m

CO o • o CJ o •<r <r 00

cu 0) vO rH CM •

i vO • • 6 cu pH <fr CM rH »H CO *H Ov o • i—

i

o •H rH X

CU o

T3

•H CO m

X O CM rH oo CM o CM 00 vO LO •

1 • • • rH CO rH vO rH vO co 00 < rH rH

rH

f—

1

00

cu CM oo CO vO CO

I—

1

o vO n* CO •1 • • • JO •H CO co CM <r in rH co

cd CO CO CM CM CO

CO00

co 44 cd d cd CU o i—

i

44 cu c

SO 00 a co O j^ 54 u cd cd • £ d o rH d 00 vO • 44

4J CO > 00 T3

cd d \ cd 44 > CU d

u §

44 r—1 1 s-x O cd o (U

(U 00 00 'w' d 00

rd d cd 4-1 cd JO T3 So u cu <—

i

CO rH 4-1 00 00 o X

0) "d CO cd CO u > cd u o

> rO rH cd /-“S cd rH PX

cu So <u rO H (U CO CO o u rH 00 4-1 (U J0 00 /—s 00 •H o cd cd rH 4-1 cd So CO cd CO u B rH rd cd J4 c rH cm| 54 00 rH cd cu o CO px a CU (U CO W x> cd CO PQ 04 u CO •H 00 > PX O 0J rH

px u d o 04 Cd d o CO PQ d CO o cu •H rC So rH o o o pH H PH H co CJ pH ’-•1 <M

d

•HT3

CU

4-1 H

CU>

d

o

CJ

d

o

•H

00

•H • PX 0)

31
Table 12. Annual Production of Slags

Type of Slag^

Annual Production

(10^ tons) Year Reference

Blast furnace slag 27.5 1973 83

Converter slag 9.7 1973 83

Phosphate slag 4.0 1976 5

Copper smelting slag 5.2 1965 84

2/ Foundry wastes— 20.0 1976 5

1 / Data not available for all types of slags listed in table 11. 2/ Includes both dust and slag of which approximately 2 x 10^ tons are slag.

32
Amount

Used

or

Produced

Type

of

Slag

Uses

in

Construction

(10^

tons)

Per

Year

Reference CO CO CO co co CO co o UO m

00 oo 00 00 00 00 00 00

CO O'* co vO CM o <r 1/

CO CO CO UO o • • • uo ON CM CM < C <

o <r 2; 23 CM CM

t—io

o • £ 4-J CO

T—I cd • cd r—

i

• co U i—1 CU 4-J 0) cd 1—

1

P

p rO •H cu •H 4-J g

6 • • no 00

0) <u cd a *H

#> 3-4 u o •H CL

/-s /—

s

4-> 3 p 3-i g

T3 no CO 4J 4-1 i—l cd • r. <U CU cd a CJ •H 3-i cu cu O O i—i • cd cd cd (U 4-» 4-J P i—i 00 44 44 3-i a cd P

nd no cd cd 2 P 00 00 O o • rQ i—i p p #< * <u cu 34 CU CO cd cd CU CU 34 34 cl a u no g 6 4-J 4J 00 00

c

d

cd 00 cd cd 00 00

i—i i—i 00 o p 4-1 4-J 00 00 cd cd * cd cd a) 34 •rH a a cu cu <u

4-J 4J n r—

1

44 cu (D 3-1 3-1 CU cu 1—1 o o 00 •H O £ g 00 oo p P rO

4-J 4-1 00 cd O <u a> 00 00 •H *H cd N—

/

s»x pp; 3-4 CJ CJ <d <1 pH Ph T—

1

*H

cd>

cd

4-J /*“N o

\ /^N no no P

CO CO cu cu

cu a) t—i 4J no cd cl a. o cd cu 4-J fn o r—i no cd

4-) 4-J a 2 a nd a cd

r-H i—

I

34 cd cl co i—

1

rH •H 34 X 00 cu

cd cd cd 00 <u cd 4-J v-/ V V-/ rH cd 00 CO a

0) <U a> <u cu cd CU •H a o u o a i—i 3-i 4-J nd

cd cd cd cd cd CO CU CO P P P P P P 4-» cd M u 34 j-i 3-i 3-4 3-4 cu 1—1 IB P <U 3 P P CU 4-J CU • 4-1 U 4-1 4-1 44 44 4-J cd g c U 3-i JZ CO 34

4-J <U 4-J 4J 4-J 4J CU CL nd 23

CO > CO CO CO CO > CO a P

Cd p cd cd cd cd P o a P

r—

1

o i—i t—i rH i

i o rC •H o

PQ cj PQ PQ PQ PQ CJ PH M pH i—1

33
of the slag as aggregate. Other uses for slags produced by the Iron and steel industry include

railroad ballast, mineral wool production, use in roofing, and raw materials for manufacture of

Portland and blended cements.

Unlike many other industrial by-products, the quantity of slags produced by the iron and

steel industry is relatively constant. In addition, virtually all of these materials,

with the exception of foundry slags, are used. However, the extensive use of slags as aggregate may not represent their highest value use. Because most slags, if properly

quenched, exhibit hydraulic properties, slags could be extensively used as cementitious

materials as is currently done in many other industrialized countries. Use in this way

should offer advantages in terms of energy conservation, raw materials conservation, cost savings, and possibly in the durability of the concrete produced [85]. In addition, aircooled slags which are low in MgO may be suitable as raw materials for the manufacture of cement. It has been recently demonstrated that portland cements can be produced by the

pyroprocessing of blast furnace and converter slags along with limestone and a small amount

of sand [86]

6. MUNICIPAL WASTES

A wide variety of municipal wastes, which include domestic wastes, are being generated

in the United States. Collectively, they amount to more than 172 x 10 tons annually. The

types, amounts, and possible uses of these wastes are given in table 14. Refuse constitutes

the most abundant municipal waste and its rate of generation is increasing at an annual

rate of 4.5 percent [87]. However, at present, little refuse is used in construction other

than as a landfill material. The National Center for Resource Recovery is investigating

other prospective uses of refuse. Incineration of the refuse produces a residue which can be converted into aggregate. Extraction of the glass fraction from the refuse yields

another material which has a potential market either as aggregate or as a raw material for

the manufacture of building materials. Demolition wastes and sewage sludge also are being

considered for use in construction.

6.1 Incinerator Refuse

Incineration is becoming an increasingly important method for disposing of municipal

refuse in the United States. It facilitates disposal of the refuse because the volume of

the residue is usually between 3 to 20 percent of the initial refuse volume. Furthermore,

power plants are being developed which can utilize the combustible portion of the municipal

waste as a supplementary fuel source [87].

34
Estimated

Annual

Production

I

I

4-J X • CO • 4J •H 4-J rH 3 rH 3 3 £ 3 O X 4-J X •H a X a 4-J co CO w

O 3 •rH 3

3 rH

J-4 nd nd

4-J 3 +> 3

CO 3 r

X

3

3 o

r—

i

o 3 •H 3 • O 4-J U 4-J to CO 3 X 3 4J 3 M U c

*H 3 u a <u LO 3 •rH 3 a

i 1 CO O e o

(D CJ 3 o c

CO ct) rH 3) U 3 u .O

rH O O o s

3 0) 4-1 4-J <u 3 > r • 3 •H • 3 4-> 3 3 #» • 3 4J r—

1

4-J rH 4-J 4J I—

1

rH C a i—

1

3 3 3 3 r-H rH

CD •H CO -3 CO CO •H *H x) (X 4-1 3 3h 3 3 4H 4H

CD CO T> U 3 U U T3 nd

4J o 3 CO 3 CO CO 3 3

3 u 3 CO t—

1

CO CO 3 3

J-4 PM J <3 O 3 < hH hJ 3

33o

co

4-J 3

3O

a)

i—

i

rO3H

3

3

T3

•H

CO

CD 3 3 3 3 4-J

4-J 3 3

3 4-4 o 3 3

3 3 4J £ CO 3

3 T3 3

3 3 J-J rH rH 3 O rH •H 3 3 3 3 •H 3 4J o. a, •H 3 4-J •H •H CJ 3 •rH 3

O o 3 rH rH CO 3

•H •H M o O 3 rQ 3 3 B s

3 3 3 3 3 S s P CO

35
During 1975, there were 141 incinerators and 1 pyrolysis plant operating in the United

6 6 States, treating an estimated 15 x 10 tons of refuse and producing approximately 5 x 10 tons of residue [87]. Most of these plants are located in metropolitan areas of the northwestern states. Little information about the future availability of incinerator residue

has been published; however, current programs should result in its increased availability.

Landfill is currently the major disposal method for incinerator residues.

With the exception of unburned combustibles, the compositions of incinerator residues

from different sources throughout the United States are relatively uniform regardless of

the size of plant and method of incineration. Based on a moisture and combustible free

basis, incinerator residues consist of approximately 43 to 55 percent glass; 23 to 37 percent

ferrous metals; 13 to 16 percent ash; 1 to 3 percent ceramics and stone; and 1 to 4 percent

nonferrous metals [87],

A promising application of incinerator residue is as aggregate for both Portland

cement concrete and asphaltic concrete [88]. Pilot plant tests carried out at the Franklin

Institute Research Laboratories (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) indicated that aggregate could

be produced at a cost of $4 to $5 per ton (including capital cost) based on the production

of 109 tons of aggregate per day [89]

.

Aggregate from this pilot plant is being incorporated

in a bituminous wearing surface of a test highway pavement [90]

.

The residual aluminum in

this type of aggregate may preclude its use in portland cement concrete [89]

.

The feasibility

of using incinerator residue as aggregate in asphaltic concrete is also being investigated

in Houston, Texas [91] and Baltimore, Maryland [89]. The feasibility of using aggregate

from incinerator residue in the manufacture of concrete block has recently been demonstrated

[ 88 ].

6.2 Glass

Glass comprises some 6 to 11 percent by weight of municipal and commercial refuse or

£ at least 11 x 10 tons annually [92], At present, only a small amount of the waste glass

in municipal refuse is used as cullet in the manufacture of new glass. Cullet for glass

manufacture must be essentially free of nonglass constituents and be color sorted. This

requires an advanced separation technology which is being developed [93, 94]. Normally,

waste glass is not extracted from municipal refuse and the refuse is disposed of in dumps

and landfills.

36
One approach being developed to utilize waste glass is its incorporation as an aggregate

in asphaltic mixtures for pavements [92, 95-96], The composite material is commonly

referred to as "glasphalt." Glasphalt appears to give adequate performance in numerous

test strips laid in the United States and Canada [93], However, the substitution of glass

for conventional aggregates may produce a slightly more abrasive asphaltic pavement surface

[92], The prospective use of waste glass as aggregate in portland cement concrete is not

encouraging because of the potential for the occurrence of expansive reactions between the

cement matrix and the glass [97], Possibly, replacing part of the portland cement with

reactive fly ash could mitigate the expansive effects of these reactions [98], Other uses

for waste glass for construction purposes include the manufacture of mineral wool [99-100];

a raw material in the manufacture of ceramic brick [101]; and a raw material for the

production of lightweight aggregate [102-103],

A wide range of potential markets exist for waste glass. However, waste glass is

relatively thinly distributed throughout the United States and is abundant only in large

metropolitan areas. These are areas of high levels of construction, and in such areas construction materials produced from waste glass could possibly become economically and

technologically competitive with materials produced from virgin resources. Advances are being made in the technology of collection and separation of municipal waste which could

facilitate the increased use of waste glass in the production of construction materials.

This has led to the establishment of a section in ASTM Committee E-38 on Resource Recovery

for the purpose of developing standard test methods and specifications covering the use of

waste glass in the manufacture of brick.

6 . 3 Building and Highway Demolition Waste

The demolition of buildings and highways results in the generation of large amounts of

potentially usable materials. Only recently have significant studies been carried out to determine the types, amounts, and potential uses of demolition materials being produced in

the United States. In many cases only crude estimates of the amounts being generated are available and little is known about the extent of their reuse.

6.3.1 Amounts of Demolition Waste

The annual amount of waste material resulting from the demolition of buildings and

highways has been estimated to be of the order of 27 x 10^ tons [104], This figure is a gross estimate extrapolated from demolition rate data and the combination of population and

building densities. Estimated amounts of the major demolition materials generated annually

and their levels of reuse are given in table 15. The amount and type of demolition material

available depends on the age of demolished structures. For example, the mean age of demolished

buildings in Boston, Massachusetts, is approximately 65 years; in Atlanta, Georgia, 35

years; and in Los Angeles, California, and 45 years. These ages are reflected by the

37
Table

15.

Estimated

Amounts

of

Materials

in

New

Construction

C

D

4-> COGp

G

o

O

e

<1) P

X

G

G

<4-1 O

B

CD P

(—1 /—s G G G p 4-1 rH rH rH o G rO P P rH G •H •H •H

i 1 O CO • CO CO • H •h m O < •H •H co O < CD G rH m »—1 i—1 rH p 4-1 P CO a* CO CO a G V-X G G G

G $5 £ £

P

COGP

G co O G

*H O

4-1 4J rHvO GOOE 1 CD w G

G

G P

<C

4-1O

G

•H

co G

G 4J <—

I

G m

CO C '

1 G

O O

•H pH 4-1 4-J CJ 05 \D G «—I O

H iH D

CO *H GOO

G

GO

CO

«—

I

G G

rH G **

P G • OJ | •H rH G i—

i

CO r-* <r CO o o • r>-

• • C • •H • • c X o rH rH • rH rH O o • G rH £ CO £ CJ i 1 G G £ X CO O I"- u 05 p rH G CO

m

!—

i

CO

CN

CM

col co co

G m G X rH 4J CM O G

G G CJ G •H G

4-1 G G 4-1 G 4-1 G

CJ H X CJ O G

G G O G B 4-1 X U XI X u G

1—1 G o X P o G e G o G

G 4-1 H G u CJ G 4-» G 4-1 O

•H G P G e p •H C U rH G G g H U G 4-1 •H G G P IH G O X G G >5 G g P P 4-1 G o O P G G G P P

G O o H >5 «H rH i—

1

O G \

£ CJ p H o CJ PH < U < CM CO

G

•HH

GX

C

O

4-1 0) O P G G Po G iH G

O -H £

4-> G P

> CO

sO G *H O P rH 4Jo G

X G *H

38
compositions and relative amounts of the various types of demolition wastes available in

these cities [104].

6.3.2 Uses and Disposal of Demolition Waste

The level of use of recovered material depends on the specific material and the

geographic region. Metals are recycled to a significant extent and, as deposits of rich

ore are consumed, metal scrap will become more valuable. The market for used bricks varies

substantially across the country, with most of the recovered brick in the New England

region being reused, whereas used brick has little value in the midwest region [106]. At present, only an insignificant portion of the available concrete, wood, gypsum, asphalt,

and plastics from demolished buildings and highways are recycled. Large quantities of

these materials are disposed of in landfills.

Concrete clearly constitutes the major fraction of demolition material currently

generated in the United States and, based on current levels of use (table 15) [105], it

will be the predominant demolition material for at least the next 100 years. This fact,

coupled with prospects of future regional aggregate shortages, has stimulated investigations

of the feasibility of using crushed concrete rubble as aggregate for new concrete. Buck

[108] has concluded that concrete of adequate quality for many applications can be produced

using crushed concrete rubble as both the fine and coarse aggregate. This is consistent

with the experience gained in Europe after World War II when concrete rubble was used as aggregate in the reconstruction of devastated cities [109]. Recently, the American Concrete

Paving Association reported [110] the first full scale use, in the United States, of crushed

old concrete as the aggregate in new concrete.

As with the recycling of concrete, the technological and economic feasibility of

recycling of asphalt pavements has been demonstrated [107, 111]. Over 2.3 x 10 tons of

asphalt are used in highway construction annually in the United States [107] and the

materials from old asphalt pavements are being recycled in demonstration Droiects. It is

estimated that about 500,000 tons of asphalt pavement will be recycled during 1977.

The low level of recycling of demolition materials is attributable to several factors

[104-106] including higher processing cost of the demolition materials compared to virgin

materials; low cost of dumping demolition materials; and institutional restrictions. The

technology of separating the materials present in rubble needs to be improved. For example,

large amounts of sulfate from gypsum plaster and board could contaminate concrete rubble.

If such concrete were used as aggregate for new concrete, the concentration of sulfate ions

could be sufficient to produce disruptive reactions with the cement matrix. Another factor

which appears to be limiting the recycling of demolition materials is lack of data on amounts and availability of specific types of demolition materials.

39
6 . 4 Sewage Sludge

Between 7 and 11 x 10 tons [5] of sewage sludge are generated annually by the chemical

treatment of municipal sewage. The sludge is usually deposited in settling basins and

allowed to thicken. This thickened sludge is usually either dumped into waterways or incinerated. The incinerator residue is an ash somewhat similar to fly ash. The ash is

disposed of in the dry form or as a slurry by being mixed with plant effluent [5],

Sewage sludge ash can be compacted to a high strength mass which gradually gains

additional strength [112]; therefore, it could be used in landfills. Sewage sludge, itself,

has been combined with a mixture of soil, lime, fly ash, and waste calcium sulfate to produce a material which could be used in highway embankments [113]. However, its freezethaw resistance was found to be marginal.

7. WASTE MATERIALS FROM EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

Increasing demands for energy, coupled with depletion of petroleum reserves are stimulating

the development of new technologies for energy production and for protection of the environment. The commercialization of these technologies will probably result in the generation

of substantial amounts of processing and mineral wastes. The types and prospective uses of some of these potential waste materials are discussed in this section.

7 . 1 Oil Shale Residues

Massive deposits of oil-rich sedimentary marlstone are located in Colorado, Utah and

9 3 9 Wyoming, which may contain over 288 x 10 m (1800 x 10 barrels) of extractable oil [114].

3 The average yield per ton of processed shale is 0.13 m (0.74 barrels) of oil [114]; there9 fore, over 2180 x 10 tons of oil shale residue could be produced if the deposits were

fully developed. Although progress has been slow in developing these resources, generation

of significant amounts of oil and of residue may commence within the next 20 years. The

amount of residue requiring disposal will depend on the oil extraction method; if the rock

is processed above ground, then essentially all the residue will require disposal; on the

other hand, if the oil is extracted in situ only a small amount of residue will require

disposal [115-116].

Raw oil shale generally consists of dolomite, quartz, clay, calcite, and a number of

minor inorganic constituents, and the organic substance kerogen [117]. Kerogen is readily

vaporized and converted to shale oil when the shale is heated to about 450°C which results

in the generation of an expanded porous residue. This residue when mixed with limestone

and calcined produces a hydraulic cement, which may merit further investigation [118].

Other potential uses of the residue are as lightweight aggregate, fines in asphaltic

concrete, and as a surface course layer for secondary roads [117].

40
7 . 2 Slags and Ashes from Coal Gasification and Liquefaction Processes

Substantial amounts of fly ash and coal slag having pozzolanic value may become

available in the next two decades if coal gasification proves economically feasible. By

1985 as much as 180 x 10^ tons of coal may be converted into gas annually [119] resulting

£ in an annual production of approximately 18 x 10 tons of ash and slag.

Coal gasification fly ashes should have compositions similar to the fly ashes currently

generated by burning coal from the same source, except that the former should be virtually

free of sulfates and unburned carbon. Coal gasification slags should also be similar in

composition to the fly ashes except that limestone may be added to the coal to improve the

rheological properties of the slags, thereby producing slags which may have intrinsic

hydraulic properties [66]

.

The coal liquefaction process will probably produce slags having pozzolanic or hydraulic

properties similar to the slags produced by coal gasification. Although coal liquefaction

technology is lagging behind that for coal gasification, it may result in the annual pro-

/CO £ duction of as much as 14 x 10 m (90 x 10 barrels) of oil by 1985 [119]. This could

require the processing of approximately 30 x 10 tons of coal per year with the generation

of about 3 x 10 tons of slag.

The slags and fly ashes with pozzolanic properties from the coal conversion processes

could be used in the manufacture of cement and concrete products in the same way as fly ash

is currently being utilized (Section 4.3). The slags may have sufficient cementitious

value to be used as hydraulic cements by themselves or with suitable activators.

7.3 Elemental Sulfur

The slight oversupply of sulfur which currently exists in the United States is anticipated

to grow rapidly because of the necessity for the removal of sulfur from solid, liquid, and

gaseous effluents, and wastes for the protection of the environment. The recovery of

sulfur from coal gasification and liquefaction processes could greatly aggravate the oversupply problem [120]. The amount of recovered sulfur is already rapidly increasing, e.g.,

it has increased by over 50 percent between 1969 and 1973, with approximately 2.1 x 10^ tons being recovered in 1973 [43].

Elemental sulfur has many potential applications for construction purposes, including

sulfur-impregnated concrete [121-122], sulfur concrete [123-124], and sulfur-asphaltic

mixes for pavements [125] . Recently, experimental houses have been constructed using

sulfur-concrete blocks [126] and also by surface bonding cinder blocks with a sulfurfiberglass formulation [127].

41
8. OBSTACLES TO AND INCENTIVES FOR THE INCREASED USE OF WASTE MATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION

The direct use, processing or conversion of waste materials into construction materials

9 has the potential of consuming significant amounts of the over 3 x 10 tons of wastes

9 generated annually in the United States. This is because over 1.5 x 10 tons of nonmetallic

g materials (sand, gravel, crushed stone, gypsum, slag, and cement) and over 140 x 10 tons

of steel are consumed annually in construction [33], No reliable estimates of the total

amount of wastes used in construction are available, but it appears that only a small amount

of the total wastes are used.

Several major barriers must be overcome before any material is widely accepted for use

in construction. These include those posed by economic, institutional and technical con- siderations. An example of an economic barrier to the use of waste materials is the higher

costs sometimes charged for their transportation as compared to virgin materials. Apparently,

few obvious institutional restrictions have been placed on the use of waste materials; only

in the case of recycling demolition wastes have such restrictions been mentioned [104-106].

Technical requirements for construction materials are usually defined by standards and

specifications. The lack of such technical requirements, as well as overly restrictive

requirements, can discourage experimentation with the use of waste materials in construction.

Building materials standards which are based on performance tests and criteria do not

appear to pose any severe restrictions on the use of waste materials. However, specifications

based on compositional requirements can be more restrictive. For example, the ASTM specification for blended cements, C595, [67] appears to place unnecessarily narrow restrictions

on the amounts of fly ashes and slag materials which can be added to portland cement to form Types IP and IS blended cements, respectively. Recent developments suggest that this

specification may be broadened.

Many technical programs have been carried out in the past to develop viable construction

materials from wastes. While some of these endeavors have been technical successes, few

have resulted in products reaching the commercial stage. Often the building materials from

wastes have not been economically competitive with those from virgin materials, or the

necessary markets have not existed near the wastes disposal areas.

Forces are emerging in the United States because of changing patterns of supply and

demand of materials and energy, economic factors, and heightened concern for the quality of

the environment, which are providing new incentives for the increased use of waste materials.

Overall the United States has abundant resources, except for petroleum, but material

shortages may exist in some areas. For example, Witczak [34] has identified areas in the

United States which lack good quality aggregates. Many of these areas have large amounts

of waste rock and coarse mill tailings which could be used directly as aggregates. Increasing

energy costs coupled with energy conservation policies should increase the recycling of

energy-intensive materials such as steel, aluminum, asphalt, and ceramic building materials.
These pressures will also facilitate the substitution of waste materials for energy-intensive

materials as, for example, in the addition of fly ashes to portland cement to form Type IP blended cements [81, 85]. Regulations established to protect the environment will provide

incentives for using wastes in construction because both the complexities and costs of

disposing of wastes will be increased. Land reclamation policies coupled with environmental

concerns will provide incentives for using accumulated wastes, especially the wastes stored near highly populated areas or on land containing important minerals.

The various pressures for direct use of wastes as, or for converting them into construction

materials will be effective only if the wastes are technically and economically competitive

with conventional materials. As indicated throughout this survey, some of the construction

materials produced from waste are at least the technical equivalent of materials produced

from virgin resources, and the technology of converting other wastes into usable materials

is rapidly advancing. Growth in the use of waste materials in construction, therefore,

appears to depend on the development of economic incentives, either formed in the market

place or created by governmental policies.

9. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

9 Over 3 x 10 tons of mining, industrial, agricultural, and municipal wastes are generated

annually in the United States. More than 70 percent of this amount comes from mining

operations in the form of waste rock, mill tailings, and coal refuse, which are being added

9 to some 23 x 10 tons of mining waste already accumulated. Production of many of the

wastes is expected to grow steadily, while production of others may grow at alarming rates. For example, because of the new emphasis on coal utilization, the stockpiles of coal refuse,

fly ashes and sulfate sludges could grow rapidly. The commercialization of developing

technologies for energy production and for protection of the environment could also result

in the generation of substantial amounts of processing and mineral wastes.

Most of the wastes are disposed of by being stockpiled or by being placed in settling

ponds and containment dikes, or by being used as landfill materials. Only small amounts of

most wastes are being used for construction purposes. An exception is slags, which are being used extensively as aggregate. In several other cases, construction materials which

are at least the technical equivalent of materials produced from virgin resources have been

produced from wastes.

Several factors have impeded the large scale use of wastes in construction including

the abundant supply of natural resources; abundant supply of and low cost of energy for

processing natural resources; low cost of disposing of wastes; lack of adequate technical

information on the performance of materials produced from wastes; and lack of appropriate

standards and specifications for materials produced from wastes. However, during the past

decade significant programs which should facilitate the increased use of waste materials in

43
construction have been established in the United States. Regional material and energy

shortages, and heightened concern for the quality of the environments are also providing

growing incentives for the increased use of waste materials. Ultimately, the amount of

waste materials used in construction will depend on the development of economic incentives,

either formed in the market place or created by governmental policies.

10. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of the members of ASTM Subcommittee

E38.06 on Materials of Construction from Other Recovered Materials who provided information

pertinent to this report. We particularly wish to thank Mr. Ronald Collings, Chairman of

Task Group 7 on Mining Waste, who was the source for much of the information presented in

Section 2 on mining waste.

44
11 . REFERENCES

1. J. B. Hansen, Providing a Solution, Proceedings of the Third Mineral Waste Utilization

Symposium, pp. 4-6 (Chicago, 1972).

2. C. B. Kenahan, R. S. Kaplan, J. T. Dunham, and D. G. Linnehan, Bureau of Mines Research

Programs on Recycling and Disposal of Mineral-, Metal-, and Energy-Based Wastes, U.S.

Bureau of Mines Information Circular No. 8595 (Washington, D.C. 20240, 1973).

3. Resource Conservation Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-580), Congressional Record - House,

H11174, September 27, 1976.

4. P. K. Mehta and N. Pitt, Energy and Industrial Materials from Crop Residues, Resource

Recovery and Conservation 1_ (No. 1), pp. 23-38 (1976).

5. R. H. Miller and R. J. Collins, Waste Materials as Potential Replacements for Highway

Aggregates, National Cooperative Highway Resource Program Report No. 166 (1976);

available from the National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. 20418.

6. D. R. Maneval, Utilization of Coal Refuse for Highway Base or Subbase Material,

Proceedings of the Fourth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp . 222-228 (Chicago, 1974).

7. M. M. Fine, Iron Ore Waste Occurrence, Benef iciation and Utilization, Proceedings of

the First Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 67-72 (Chicago, 1968).

8. R. W. Heinz and G. H. Gaynor, Potential Utilization of Mine Waste Tailings in the

Upper Mississippi Valley Lead-Zinc Mining District, Proceedings of the Second Mineral

Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 181-193 (Chicago, 1970).

9. H. H. Nakamura, E. Aleshin, and M. A. Schwartz, Utilization of Copper, Lead, Zinc and

Iron Ore Tailings, Proceedings of the Second Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 139-148 (Chicago, 1970).

10. S. Mindess, Production of High Pressure Steam-Cured Calcium Silicate Building Materials

from Mining Industry Waste Products, Proceedings of the First Mineral Waste Utilization

Symposium, pp. 153-154 (Chicago, 1968)

11. H. C. Pettibone, Engineering Properties and Utilization Examples of Mine Tailings,

Proceedings of the Third Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 161-169 (Chicago, 1972).

45
12. S. Mindess and C. W. Richards, Criteria for Selection of Mineral Wastes for Use in the

Manufacture of Calcium Silicate Building Materials, Proceedings of the Second Mineral

Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 155-165 (Chicago, ±970).

IP. Building Bricks from the Waste Pile, Environmental Science and Technology 6^ (6), 502-

503 (1972).

14. R. F. Stoops and I. h. Reaeker, North Carolina Feldspar Tailings Utilization, Proceedings

of the Second Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 177-180 (Chicago, 1970).

15. I. B. Cutler and P. S. Nicholson, Ceramic Product^ from Mineral Wastes, Proceedings of

the Second Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 149-154 (Chicago, 1970)

.

16. P. J. LaRosa, K. A. Ricciardella , and R. J. McGarvey, Carbonate Bonding of Taconite

Tailings, Environmental Protection Technology Series Report No. EPA-670/2-74-001

,

(Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,

D.C. 20460, January 1974).

17. R. H. Heinz and G. H. Geiger, Utilization of Mine Waste Tailings in Southwestern

Wisconsin, Grant No. SWD-13, 1974; available from U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington,

D.C. 20240.

18. Utilization of Mining and Milling Wastes, Illinois Institute of Technology Research

Institute Contract No. H0190397, 1971; available from U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington,

D.C. 20240.

19. R. K. Collings, A. A. Winer, D. G. Feasby, and N. G. Zoldners, Mineral Waste Utilization

Studies, Proceedings of the Fourth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 2-12

(Chicago, 1974)

.

20. H. C. Pettibone and C. D. Kealy, Engineering Properties of Mine Tailings, Journal of

the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division (ASCE) , 9_7 (SM9), pp. 1207-1225 (1971).

21. T. S. Spicer and P. T. Luckie, Operation Anthracite Refuse, Proceedings of the Second

Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 194-204 (Chicago, 1970).

22. J. G. Rose, T. L. Robl, and A. E. Bland, Composition and Properties of Refuse from

Kentucky Coal Preparation Plants, Proceedings of the Fifth Mineral Waste Utilization

Symposium, pp. 122-131 (Chicago, 1976).

23. Digging into Mine Waste, Environmental Science and Technology 8 (2), pp . 110-111

(1974)

.

*6
24. A. Haas, Switching to Coal is Buying Trouble, Business and Society Review, pp. 52-57

(Winter 1974-75).

25. W. W. Parker and R. E. Gray, Indicators of Coal Refuse Embankment Stability, Proceedings

of the Fifth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 86-91 (Chicago, 1976).

26. P. T. Luckie, J. W. Peters, and T. S. Spicer, Evaluation of Anthracite Refuse As a Highway Construction Material, Pennsylvania State University Experiment Station Report

SR- 5 7 (1966).

27. D. L. Bryenton and J. G. Rose, Utilization of Coal Refuse as a Concrete Aggregate

(Coal-Crete) , Proceedings of the Fifth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 108-

113 (Chicago, 1976).

28. H. B. Charmbury and D. R. Maneval, The Utilization of Incinerated Anchracite Mine

Refuse as Anti-Skid Highway Material, Proceedings of the Third Mineral Waste Utilization

Symposium, pp. 123-128 (Chicago, 1972).

29. D. Tanfield, Construction Use for Colliery Spoil, Contract Journal (1971).

30. H. G. Glover, Coal Mine Refuse Disposal in Great Britain, Special Report SR-81, Coal

Research Station, The Pennsylvania State University (1971)

.

31. R. H. Miller and R. J. Collins, Waste Materials as Potential Replacements for Highway

Aggregates, Proceedings of the Fourth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 50-61

(Chicago, 1974)

.

32. J. J. Emery and C. S. Kim, Trends in the Utilization of Waste for Highway Construction,

Proceedings of the Fourth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 22-32 (Chicago,

1974)

.

33. Optimizing the Use of Materials and Energy in Transportation Construction, Transportation

Research Board Special Report No. 166 (National Research Council, Washington, D.C.,

1976).

34. M. W. Witczak, C. W. Lovell, and E. J. Yoder, A Generalized Investigation of the

Potential Availability of Aggregate by Regional Geomorphic Units within the Conterminous

Forty-Eight States, Highway Research Board No. 343, pp. 31-42 (1971).

47
35. R. J. Collings, Waste Products as a Potential Replacement for Aggregates. Proceedings

of the Fourth International Ash Utilization Symposium, pp. 93-113 (St. Louis, 1976).

36. F. F. Fondriest and M. J. Snyder, Synthetic Aggregates for Highway Construction,

National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report No. 8 (National Research Council,

Washington, D.C., 1964).

37. J. L. Cox, Phosphate Wastes, Proceedings of the First Mineral Waste Utilization

Symposium, pp. 50-61 (Chicago, 1968).

38. S. Vasan, Utilization of Florida Phosphate Slimes, Proceedings of the Third Mineral

Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 171-177 (Chicago, 1972).

39. R. C. Timberlake, Disposal of Mining Wastes in the Central Florida Phosphate Field,

Proceedings of the Second Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 237-240 (Chicago,

1970)

.

40. Utilization of Phosphate Slimes, Water Pollution Control Research Series, United

States Environmental Protection Agency Report No. 14050 EPU 09/71 (1971)

.

41. Standard Specification for Lightweight Aggregates for Structural Concrete, ASTM

Designation C330-69 (American Society for Testing Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19103)

.

42. K. C. Dean, Utilization of Mine, Mill and Smelter Wastes, Proceedings of the First

Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 138-141 (Chicago, 1968)

.

43. Commodity Data Summaries 1974, Appendix 1 to Mining and Minerals Policy, U.S. Bureau

of Mines (Washington, D.C., 1974).

44. L. M. Smith and H. G. Larew, User's Manual for Sulfate Waste in Road Construction,

Federal Highway Administration Report No. FHWA-RD-76-11 (Washington, D.C., 1975).

45. R. J. Evans, Potential Solid Waste Generation and Disposal from Lime and Limestone

Desulfurization Processes, U.S. Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8633 (Washington,

D.C., 1974).

46. M. R. Beychok, Coping with SC^, Chemical Engineering - Deskbook Issue, pp. 79-85

(October 21, 1974).

48
47. L. J. Minnick, Progress in the Conversion of Sulfur Oxide Scrubber Sludges into

Environmentally Acceptable Products, Proceedings of the Fifth Mineral Waste Utilization

Symposium, pp. 285-290 (Chicago, 1976).

48. L. M. Smith and H. G. Larew, Technology for Using Waste Sulfates in Road Construction,

Proceedings of the Fourth Fly Ash Utilization Symposium, pp. 114-128 (St. Louis,

(.1976) .

49. A. G. Pincus, Wastes from Processing of Aluminum Ores, Proceedings of the First Mineral

Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 40-49 (Chicago, 1968).

50. Utilization of Red Mud Wastes for Lightweight Structural Building Products, IITRI Project No. G6015 - Final Report (1968); available from U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington,

D.C. 20240.

51. 0. C. Fursman, J. E, Mauser, M. 0. Butler, and W. A. Stickney, Utilization of Red Mud

Residues from Alumina Production, U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigation 7454

(Washington, D.C., 1970).

52. H. R. Blank, Red Mud from Alumina Plants as a Possible Source of Synthetic Aggregate,

Journal of Testing and Evaluation 4_ (5), pp. 355-358 (1976).

53. G. Wargalla, Einsatz von Ratschlamm bei Zement-und Blahtonherstellung , Erzmetall 26_ Cl), PP- 18-20 (1973).

54. T. A. Davis and D. B. Hooks, Utilization of Waste Kiln Dust from the Cement Industry,

Proceedings of the Fourth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 354-363 (Chicago,

1974)

.

55. N. R. Greening, R. J, Hinchey, and H, Hagao, Elimination of Water Pollution by Recycling

Cement Plant Dust, Portland Cement Association (Skokie, Illinois, 1973).

56. Standard Specification for Portland Cement, ASTM Designation C150-74 (American Society

for Testing Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103).

57. D. M. Carroll, C. J. Erickson, and C. W. Whittakers, Cement Kiln Flue Dust for Soil

Liming, Agronomy Journal _5(3, pp. 373-376 (1974).

49
58 . F. J. Trembley, J. A. Mihursky, and E. W. Hertz, Use of Cement Plant Stack Dust as a Neutralizing Agent in Acid Water Lakes, Transactions of Northwest Wildlife Conference,

1, pp. 55-60 (1958).

59. W. Farnham, Process of Clarifying Turbid Water using Cottrell Flour and Acidifying

Coagulant, U.S. Patent 2,964,466 (1960).

60. L. K. Moulton, Bottom Ash and Boiler Slag, pp. 148-169, U.S. Bureau of Mines Information

Circular 8640 (Washington, D.C., 1974).

61. W. R. Barton, Raw Materials for Manufacture of Cement, pp. 46-51, Fly Ash Utilization,

U.S. Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8348 (Washington, D.C., 1967).

62. R. F. Abernathy, J. J. Peterson, and F. N. Gibson, Major Ash Constituents in U.S.

Coals, U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigation 7240 (Washington, D.C., 1969).

63. 0. E. Manz, Lignite Production and Utilization, Fourth International Ash Utilization

Symposium, pp. 39-57 (St. Louis, 1976).

64. R. K. Seals, L. K. Moulton, and B. E. Ruth, Bottom Ash: An Engineering Material,

Journal of the Soil Mechanics Division, (ASCE) 9£5, pp. 311-25 (1972).

65. Ash At Work _8 (2), p. 6 (1976).

66. P. W. Brown and J. R. Clifton, Energy Conservation Through the Utilization of Mineral

Waste Products in Cement Manufacture, Proceedings of the CANMET Seminar on Energy and

Resource Conservation in the Cement and Concrete Industry (Ottawa, 1976), in press.

67. Standard Specification for Blended Hydraulic Cements, ASTM Designation C595-75 (American

Society for Testing Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103).

68. Standard Specification for Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolans for Use in

Portland Cement Concrete, ASTM Designation C618-72 (American Society for Testing

Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103).

69. P. W. Brown, J. R. Clifton, R. L. Berger, and G. Frohnsdorff, Limitations to Fly Ash

Use in Blended Cement, Proceedings of the Fourth International Ash Utilization Symposium,

pp. 518-529 (St. Louis, 1976).

50
70. G. R. Morris, Lightweight Aggregates in the U.S,, pp. 201-204, U.S. Bureau of Mines

Information Circular 8488 (Washington, D.C., 1972).

71. W. V. Blocker, R. E. Morrison, W. E. Morton, and A. W. Babcock, Marketing Power Plant

Aggregates as Road Base Material, pp. 208-233, reference 60.

72. E. J. Barenberg, Utilization of Ash in Stabilized Base Construction, pp. 180-196,

reference 60.

73. E. J. Barenberg, The Behavior and Performance of International Asphalt Pavements with

Lime-Fly Ash-Aggregate Bases, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements, pp. 619-33 (Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1967).

74. F. U. Ziminer, Fly Ash as Bituminous Filler, pp. 49-76, reference 70.

75. P. L. Sieffert, Test Firing of Fly Ash Brick on a Short Time Cycle, pp. 327-330,

reference 70.

76. H. E. Shafer, C. F. Cockrell, K, K. Humphreys, and J. W. Leonard, Status Report on Bricks from Fly Ash, pp. 195-203, reference 61.

77. J. F. Slonaker, Production of Forty Percent Core Area Flyash Bricks Using Selected

Flyashes, Proceedings of the Fourth International Fly Ash Utilization Symposium, pp. 231-237 (St. Louis, 1976).

78. Standard Specification for Building Brick (Solid Masonry Units made from Clay or Shale) ASTM Designation C62-66 (American Society for Testing Materials, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 19103)

,

79. J. M. Gomes, K. Uchida, and M. M, Wong, Recovery of Metal Values from Industrial Slags

By the Use of a 2-Phase Molten Electrolyte System, Proceedings of the Third Mineral

Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 55-61 (Chicago, 1972).

80. E. G. Valdez, K. C. Dean, and L. L. Warner, Utilization of Phosphorus Furnace Slag in

Ceramic Wall and Floor Tile, U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigation 7829 (Washington,

D.C., 1974).

51
81. P. W. Brown, J. R. Clifton, and G. Frohnsdorff, Energy Conservation Through the

Facilitation of Increased Blended Cement Use, National Bureau of Standards Report

NBSIR 76-1008 (1975)

.

82. W. Gutt, Manufacture of Cement from Industrial By-Products, Chemistry and Industry,

pp. 189-97, February 13, 1971.

83. Minerals Yearbook 1973, Volume I, pp. 1139-42, U.S. Bureau of Mines (Washington, D.C.,

1973)

.

84. W. A. Vogely, The Economic Factors of Mineral Waste Utilization, Proceedings of the

First Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 7-19 (Chicago, 1968).

85. P. W. Brown, J. R. Clifton,, and G. Frohnsdorff, The Utilization of Industrial ByProducts in Blended Cement, Proceedings of the Fifth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium,

pp. 278-84 (Chicago, 1976).

86. R. Kondo, M. Daimon, S. Goto, A. Nakamura, and T. Kobayashi, Furnace Converter Slags,

Proceedings of the Fifth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 329-40 (Chicago,

1976)

.

87. D. Pindzola and R. J. Collins, Technology for Use of Incinerator Residue as Highway

Material: Identification of Incinerator Practices and Residue Sources, Federal Highway

Administration Report No. FHWA-RD-75-81, 1975; available from National Technical

Information Service (NTIS) , Springfield, Virginia 22161.

88. K. R. Lauer and R. M. Leliaert, Profitable Utilization of Incinerator Residue from

Municipal Refuse, Proceedings of the Fifth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 215-218 (Chicago, 1976)

.

89. D. Pindzola and R. C. Chou, Synthetic Aggregate from Incinerator Residue by a Continuous

Fusion Process, Federal Highway Administration Report FHWA-RD-74-23 (Washington, D.C.,

1974)

.

90. D. Pindzola, Large Scale Continuous Production of Fused Aggregate from Incinerator

Residue, Federal Highway Administration Report No. FHWA-RD-7 6-115 (Washington, D.C.,

1976)

.

91. J. Haynes and W. B. Ledbetter, Incinerator Residue in Bituminous Base Construction,

Federal Highway Administration Report No. FHWA-RD-76-12 (Washington, D.C., 1975).

1

52
92. W. R. Malisch, D. E. Day, and B. G. Wixson, Use of Domestic Waste Glass for Urban

Paving, Environmental Protection Agency Report No. EPA-670/2-73-038, 1973; available

from NTIS (Springfield, Virginia 22161, No. PB 222-052.

93. J. H. Abrahams, Recycling Container Glass - An Overview, Proceedings of the Third

Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 35-44 (Chicago, 1972).

94. F. J. Palumbo, Concentrating Glass Cullet Recovered from Unburned Urban Refuse and

Incinerator Residues, Proceedings of the Third Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium,

pp. 323-390 (Chicago, 1972).

95. W. P. Malisch, D. E. Day, and B. G. Wilson, Use of Domestic Waste Glass as Aggregate

in Bituminous Concrete, Highway Research Record No. 307, pp. 1-10 (1970).

96. W. R. Malisch, D. E. Day, and R. G. Wixson, Use of Waste Glass for Urban Paving,

Proceedings of the Second Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 369-373 (Chicago,

1970)

.

97. C. D. Johnston, Waste Glass as Coarse Aggregate for Concrete, Journal of Testing and

Evaluation 2^ (5), pp. 344-350 (1974).

98. J. C. Phillips, D. S. Cahn and G. W. Keller, Refuse Glass Aggregate in Portland Cement

Concrete, Proceedings of the Third Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 385-390

(Chicago, 1972)

.

99. H. P. Cahoon and I. B. Cutler, Feasibility of Making Insulation Material by Foaming

Waste Glass, Proceedings of the Third Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 353-357

(Chicago, 1972).

100. A. H. Goode, M. E. Tyrrell, and I. L. Feld, Mineral Wool from High-Glass Fractions of

Municipal Incinerator Residues, Proceedings of the Third Mineral Waste Utilization

Symposium, pp. 391-396 (Chicago, 1972).

101. M. E. Tyrrell and I. L. Feld, Structural Products Made from High Silica Fractions of

Municipal Incinerator Residues, Proceedings of the Second Mineral Waste Utilization

Symposium, pp. 355-362 (Chicago, 1970).

102. R. 0. Shotts, Waste Glass as an Ingredient of Lightweight Aggregate, Proceedings of

the Third Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 411-422 (Chicago, 1972).

103. K. J. Liles and M. E. Tyrrel, Waste Glass as a Raw Material for Lightweight Aggregate,

U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigation 8104 (1976); available from NTIS (Springfield,

Virginia 22161), No. PB 250-692.

53
104. D. G. Wilson, P. Foley, and R. Wiesman, Demolition Debris: Qualities, Composition and

Possibilities for Recycling, Proceedings of the Fifth Mineral Waste Utilization

Symposium, pp. 8-15 (Chicago, 1976).

105. G. V. Jones and M. J. Holley, Improved Utilization of Construction Materials, Department

of Civil Engineering Research Report R73-34, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

1973; available from NTIS (Springfield, Virginia 22161), No. PB 224-244.

106. D. G. Wilson, The Resource Potential of Demolition Debris in the United States, Resource

Recovery and Conservation JL, pp. 129-140 (1975).

107. D. Saylak, B. M. Gallaway, and J. A. Epps, Recycling Old Asphalt Concrete Pavements,

Proceedings of the Fifth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp . 16-25 (Chicago,

1976).

108. A. D. Buck, Recycled Concrete as a Source of Aggregate, Miscellaneous Paper C-76-2,

Concrete Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experimental Station, Vicksburg,

Mississippi (1976)

.

109. 0. Graf, Uber Ziegelsplittbeton, Sandsteinbeton , and Trummerschuttbeton, Die Bauwirtschaf

t

Nos. 2 to 4 (1948): English translation available from U.S. Army Engineer Waterways

Experimental Station (Vicksburg, Mississippi) as Translation No. 73-1.

110. Newsletter, American Concrete Paving Association 11 (No. 10), October 1975.

111. H. Proudy, J. Hodge, and G. Gregory, Recycled Asphalt Concrete, Federal Highway

Administration Implementation Package 75-5 (U.S. Department of Transportation, 1975).

112. D. H. Gray, Properties of Compacted Sewage Ash, Journal of the Soil Mechanics and

Foundation Division (ASCE) 9j5 (SM2) , pp. 439-451 (1970).

113. A. Kawam, L. M. Smith, J. Ross, H. G. Larew, and L. Rude, Feasibility of Using Sewage

Sludge in Highway Embankment Construction, Federal Highway Administration Report FHWARD-75-38; available from NTIS (Springfield, Virginia 22161), No. PB 242-260.

114. Modern Energy Technology, Volume 2, Chapter 57 (Research and Education Association,

New York, 1975)

.

115. E. Teller, How Technology Can Solve the Problems, Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Journal, August 1974 (Worcester, Massachusetts).

54

I
116. N. Conkle, V. Ellzey, and It. Murthy, Environmental Considerations for Oil Shale

Development, Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA-650/2-74-099 (1974); available

from NTIS (Springfield, Virginia 22161), No. PB 241-942.

117. G. I. Gromko, A Preliminary Investigation of the Feasibility of Spent Oil Shale as Road Construction Material, Transportation Research Record No. 549, pp. 47-54 (1975).

118. T. D. Nevens, W. J. Culbertson, and R. Hollingshead , Disposal and Uses of Oil Shale

Ash, Bureau of Mines Open File Report 32-74 (1970); available from NTIS (Springfield,

Virginia 22161), No. PB 234-208.

119. Materials Technology in the Near-Term Energy Program, National Academy of Sciences

(Washington, D.C., 1974).

120. First Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior Under the Mining and Mineral

Policy Act of 1970, PL 91-631 (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,

1972)

121. N. Thaulow, Sulfur Impregnated Concrete, SIC, Cement and Concrete Research (2), pp. 269-277 (1974).

122. J. Platou, Sulphur- Impregnated Concrete, Sulphur Institute Journal 1JL (1), pp. 2-4

(1975).

123. L. J. Crow and R. C. Bates, Strengths of Sulfur-Basalt Concretes, U.S. Bureau of Mines

Report of Investigation No. 7349 (Washington, D.C., 1970).

124. BuMines Develops Improved Sulphur Concretes, Sulphur Institute Journal U2 (1), pp. 6-8

(1976).

125. W. C. McBee and T. A. Sullivan, Utilization of Secondary Sulfur in Construction

Materials, Proceedings of the Fifth Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium, pp. 39-51

(Chicago, 1976).

126. W. Rybczynski, A Sulphur House at Saddle Lake, Sulphur Institute Journal 10 (1), pp. 2-5 (1974).

127. BuMines Builds a Sulphur House, Sulphur Institute Journal 9 (4), pp. 2-7 (1973).

55
I
rJBS-1 14A (REV. 7-73)

O.S. DEPT. OF COMM.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

1. PUBLICATION OR REPORT NO.

NBSIR 77-1244

2. Gov’t Accession

No.

3. Recipient’s Accession No.

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Survey of Uses of Waste Materials in Construction in the

United States

5. Publication Date July 1977

6. Performing Organization Code

7. AUTHOR(S)

James R. Clifton, Paul W. Brown and Geoffrey Frohnsdorff

8. Performing Organ. Report No.

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20234

10. Pro ject/Task/Work Unit No.

11. Contract/Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Complete Address (Street, City, State, ZIP)

Same as 9 above.

13. Type of Report & Period

Covered

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

! Will become the U.S. contribution to the RILEM Symposium by Correspondence on the

I Use of Waste Materials in the Construction Industry.

16. ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.)

A survey has been made of the sources, amounts and methods of disposal of major

mining, industrial and municipal wastes available in the 48 counterminous states of

the United States. This includes the present and potential uses of these wastes as construction materials.

9 While over 3 x 10 tons of waste materials are generated annually in the United States,

only small amounts are being used by the construction industry. The low level of use

does not yet reflect the advances being made in converting wastes into viable construction materials. In several cases, construction materials produced from wastes have

been at least the technological equivalent of materials produced from virgin resources. Factors which are impeding the increased utilization of wastes are discussed and

emerging incentives which could facilitate their increased use are covered.

17. KEY WORDS (six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only the first letter of the first key word unless a proper name; separated by semicolons

)

Coal by-products; construction materials; industrial wastes; mining wastes; municipal

waste; slags; waste materials.

18. AVAILABILITY Unlimited

c For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

I

I Order From Sup. of Doc., U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402, SD Cat. No. C13

E 0rder From National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

Springfield, Virginia 22151

19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

UNCLASSIFIED

20. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS PAGE)

UNCLASSIFIED

21. NO. OF PAGES

62

22. Price

$4.50

U S COMM- D C 29042-P74