View
221
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
PAGE 2 13 August 2008
Overview• Background Information
• Recycling Processes for FRP
• Recycled Material Properties
• Possible Markets
• Business Model Options
• Conclusions
• Next Steps
PAGE 3 13 August 2008
Background Information• FRP (Fibre Reinforced Plastic) scrap produced in large
quantities across Canada• Estimated that 700 – 800 MT/yr in Manitoba
• FRP trim and scrapped parts from production
• FRP in MB is glass reinforced thermosetting resin• Cannot be melted and reformed as with thermoplastics
• Alternative recycling method is required
• Several unsuccessful attempts at developing recycling systems, based on two models:• Regional recycling networks
• In-house recycling
PAGE 4 13 August 2008
Background Information• Interest in finding solution for recycling from:
• Industry
• Government
• General public
• Potential economic and green benefits from recycling FRP• Smaller environmental footprint
• Lower landfill costs
• Lower transportation costs to Landfill
• Possible revenue opportunities
• Project started in August 2008 to study potential FRP recycling solutions for Manitoba and Southern Interior BC
PAGE 5 13 August 2008
Background Information• FRP Recycling Project – Milestones completed to date:
• Carried out research into FRP Recycling N.America/Worldwide
• Polled all FRP producers in regions, to obtain:
• Scrap Material Type and Quantity
• Cost of processing and landfilling scrap
• Obtained buy-in to the project from 9 of the 10 largest scrap producers in the regions
• Collected, sorted and ground their highest volumes of scrap
• Developed a business model and marketing database
• Analyzed all information and recommended further testing
• Currently: Organizing testing for next stage of project
PAGE 6 13 August 2008
Recycling Process• Recycling Methods Available
• Combustion
• Fluidised Bed Process
• Pyrolysis
• Sub-Critical Water Hydrolysis
• Chemical
• Mechanical
Energy Recovery Only
Resin Oil and Fibre Recovery
Energy and Fibre Recovery
Fibre Recovery
PAGE 7 13 August 2008
Recycling Process• Down-selected Mechanical Processing
• Most readily available process
• Most cost effective to start up and run
• Some proven use in FRP industry
• Can be considered more friendly to the environment
• No chemicals
• No high temperatures
• Low energy requirements
PAGE 9 13 August 2008
Recycling Process• 2 equipment suppliers selected
• Fibre Recovery Products, Winnipeg
• Seawolf Design, New Smyrna Beach, Florida
• 13 samples of the highest volume scrap collected
• 2 grades of fibres obtained from grinding• Coarse material using 1/4” screen
• Fine material using 1/16” screen
• Total of 52 recycled samples obtained for MB (and a further 44 from SIBC)
• All samples were logged, photographed and bagged
PAGE 10 13 August 2008
Fine Grind
1/4” Screen
Coarse Grind
1/16” Screen
Scrap Material
Recycled Material
Recycling Process• Mechanical grinding with screens
PAGE 11 13 August 2008
F-2
Discrete Fibres
No Fibre Content
Non-discrete Fibres / Low Quality Fibres
E-1 F-1
F-3
H-1
H-4
I-2
I-3
Recycled Material Properties• Sorted by Type
G-1
H-2
I-1
H-3
G-2
Scrap collected represents over 80% of FRP waste generated by MB companies
PAGE 12 13 August 2008
Markets
Thermoset FRP
Asphalt
Thermoplastics
LEED Building Products
Cement Products
PAGE 13 13 August 2008
Parking stall curbs
Construction barricades
Temporary traffic barriers
Vinyl siding additive
Tooling material additive
Insulation material
Flow medium
Aerating material
Patio stones
Garden ornaments
Countertops
Noise absorption material
Viscosity modification of polymer mixes
Hardwearing additive for road paint
Recyclate and natural fibre mat material
Blast medium for removing paint
Wall/floor coverings
Plastic wood products
Roofing shingles
Roofing asphalt additive
Markets• Other specific uses for recycled FRP
PAGE 14 13 August 2008
Markets• Cement Additive
Benefits:
• Proven plastic shrinkage reduction in Europe
• Large/very large volume market and varied products
• Encapsulates material so safer for future generations
• Can handle varied/imperfect materials and filler/resin/fibre mix
• Competes with value added products that charge a premium
Risks:
• Cement degradation due to alkaline attack on glass fibers possibility of leaving voids over time
• Supply too low for certain markets
• Need to certify material before any widespread use
PAGE 15 13 August 2008
Markets• Thermoplastic Additive
Benefits:
• Short fibres provide slight reinforcement
• Thermoplastic market is mostly unreinforced property gains
• Process improvements demonstrated in Europe
• Medium to large market and varied products
• Can use short fibers and filler at high % loadings (30%+)
• Low risk of adverse chemical reactions with recycled material
Risks:
• Surface quality of thermoplastic is reduced limits market
• Lower value use of material than cement
PAGE 16 13 August 2008
F-2
Cement
Thermoplastics
E-1 F-1
F-3
H-1
H-4
I-2
I-3
Markets• Preferred Applications
G-1
H-2
I-1
H-3
G-2
Flow Medium
PAGE 17 13 August 2008
Markets• Scrap Quantities by Market (Metric Tonnes/Year)
Note: Quantities assume 50% of recyclate is pure fibre remaining is resin/filler
224
104
306
143
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Sc
rap
Qu
an
titi
es
by
Ma
rke
t (M
T/y
r)
Minimum Maximum
Min/Max Production Rates
Scrap Quantities (MT/yr) by Market for Minimum and Maximum Production Rates - Manitoba
Thermoplastic Additive
Cement Additive
PAGE 18 13 August 2008
Business Model Options
• Assumptions for setting up FRP Recycling Mechanism
• Manufacturing companies are willing to pay the recycling company equivalent external costs per MT (transportation and tipping fees)
• Material price (conservative) and volumes (min/max) used are per table below
• Loan servicing and financing have not been taken into account
• Amortization, interest and taxes have not been analyzed
PAGE 19 13 August 2008
Business Model Options• Standalone Recycling Facility
FRP Company
Shredder / Grinding
Equipment
Holding Bin
Cement Company
Short Fibre/Filler
Thermoplastic Company
$
Long Fibre/Filler
$
$
$$$
Transportation and Tipping Fees Direct Labour Direct Utilities Packaging costs Cost of Goods Sold
Cost of Goods Sold
Insurance (quotation required) Property taxes (high? required?)Dangerous Goods, WHIMS, StorageRepairs/MaintenanceLease General - Factory Overhead Marketing Research and DevelopmentBank ChargesOffice Supplies Legal Audit General - Office and AdminTelecommunicationsManagement & Admin
Expenses:
StandaloneRecycling Facility
PAGE 20 13 August 2008
Business Model Options• Standalone Recycling Facility
CM = Contribution Margin
CMR = Contribution Margin Ratio
PAGE 21 13 August 2008
Business Model Options• Standalone Recycling Facility
Breakeven MT = > 450 MT / year Breakeven Revenue = $ 550,000
Cost Volume Profit (New Company Recycling - MB)
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
$450,000
$500,000
$550,000
$600,000
328 352 376 401 425 449
MT Processed and Sold (one year)
Rev
enu
e
Revenue
Total Costs andExpenses
PAGE 22 13 August 2008
Business Model Options• Shared Recycling Facility
Cement Company
Short Fibre/Filler
Thermoplastic Company
$
Long Fibre/Filler
$
$
$$
Transportation and Tipping Fees Direct Labour Direct Utilities Packaging costs Cost of Goods Sold
Cost of Goods Sold
SharedRecycling Facility
Insurance (quotation required) Dangerous Goods, WHIMS, StorageRepairs/MaintenanceGeneral - Factory Overhead Bank ChargesOffice Supplies General - Office and AdminManagement & Admin
Expenses:
FRP Company
Shredder / Grinding
Equipment
Holding Bin
PAGE 23 13 August 2008
Business Model Options• Shared FRP Recycling Facility
CM = Contribution Margin
CMR = Contribution Margin Ratio
PAGE 24 13 August 2008
Business Model Options• Shared FRP Recycling Facility
Breakeven MT = 345 MT / year Breakeven Revenue = $ 281,484
Cost Volume Profit (In-house Recycling - MB)
$250,000
$270,000
$290,000
$310,000
$330,000
$350,000
$370,000
$390,000
$410,000
328 352 376 401 425 449
MT Processed and Sold (one year)
Rev
enu
e
Revenue
Total Costs andExpenses
PAGE 25 13 August 2008
Business Model Options
• Preferred Option: Shared recycling facility
• Offset low volumes/downtime with another business that has facility space
• Existing recycling company
• Manufacturer
• Low set-up costs for someone to start FRP recycling
• Possible government grants/subsidies
• Potential for high revenue if material can be sold as a value added product
• Reinforcement material
• Green material
PAGE 26 13 August 2008
Conclusion
• FRP Recycling is technically feasible
• Proven uses in Europe
• However, technical risks testing required to verify
• FRP Recycling has a market
• Cement and thermoplastics are preferred
• However, more markets are possible in the future
• FRP Recycling has a feasible business model
• Facility likely needs to be shared with another business
• However, good revenue stream could be possible
PAGE 27 13 August 2008
Next Steps
• Testing
• Initial testing with cement and thermoplastics – Jun/July 2009
• Increase awareness of FRP Recycling
• Obtain support from industry/government/academia
• Develop relationships inside and outside Manitoba
• Investigate post consumer scrap (boats, canoes, tanks, etc)
• Develop business model and marketing data further
• Carry out a technology demonstration – Sep/Oct 2009
• Develop Commercialization Plan for recycling – Dec 2009
Recommended