Cement, Energy and Environment July-Sep 2002

PLUGGING IN TO DIGITAL DETONATION Russell A. Carter It 's hard to argue with the old blaster's axiom that "explosives are the mo st powe rful tool in th e quarry." Producers who properly app ly explosives, generally reap subsequent benefits at many points downs tream in the production process . Misappl y them, and problems can emerge faste r than fl yrock from a faulty shot. But, like comedian Rodney Dange rf ield , mining 's mo st powerful tool often gets no respect. Or so attendee s at the recent International Society of Explosives Engineers' 28'h Annual Conference on Exp los ives and Blast in g Techniques were told. Despite the potential payo ff, rising economic, regulatory and environmental press ures have some quarry managers v iewing blasting as a costly but necessary evil. The four-d ay confe ren ce offered a potent cha rge of in fo rmati on about emerg ing technologies and methods, ranging from th e advan tages of di gita l electronic blasting systems to the th orn y problem of handling and so lv ing qua rry- ne ighbou r compl aints about bl ast noise and vibration. The conference also hit safety issues involving unexpected detonation of shock-tube fuses and emulsion-pump explosions. Precision from Electronics Combining e lectroni c blast sequencing and initiation systems, 3 - D laser profi ling of highwall faces, and GPS- ba sed drill pos itioning and mon itoring capabilities provide blasters with an unprecedented degree of precision in blast planning and execution. The evo lution of electroni c blasting means that blast designs no longer are constrained by fi xed delay times, explains Andrew G. Stirling, Orica USA hie. "Electronic detonators can be programmed with unique delay times th at are best suited to site-specific conditions and to the desired blast results," he says. "The ability to change blast designs on the fly gives flexibility should a hole or deck be lost during loading operations, or if the shot di rection needs to be changed." Courtesy · Rock Products May 2002, Pp 28-29. Fax : 312 1 726-25741726--1/07 Weh: ll'li'IV. ruckproducts. com THE EFFECTS OF C0 2 EMISSIONS TRADING ON ENERGY-INTENSIVE SECTORS OF INDUSTRY V. Hoenig, M. Schneider, Dusseldorjl Germany The 1997 Kyoto Protocol fi rst established reduction commitments binding in international law for the signatory states. In addition to project-related fl exible mechanisms such as Joint Implementation (Jl) and Clean Deve lopment Mechani sms (COM), there was prov ision for a part of these reduc tion commitments to be satisfied by trading of emi ssions certificates. The Bonn conference of the Pa1ties in spring 200 I decided to perm it em iss ion s trading at corporate level too. The European Commi ss ion subm itted a dr aft Directive for an emissions trading scheme in October 200 I for implementation in Europe; in which selected energy-i ntensive industries are to participate from 2005. The introducti on of suc h a tradi ng scheme wo uld have far-reach ing effects on the industries concerned. Thi s app li es in particular to manufacturing industries with high C0 2 intensity and low value added. This includes the cement industry. Yol~ntary agreement a t industry leve l such as ex ist in Germany are advan tageou s to energy-intensive industries, because they provide great fle xibility in selecting measures to reduce C0 2 • It is not feasible for such industry– wide agreements to be compatiable with emissions trading that operates only at corporate level. For many energy-intens ive indu strie s, the European Commiss ion 's es timated average price leve l of 20 to 30 EUR per tonne of C0 2 relate s to a contribution margin of comparab le va lue. The introducti on of pan– European trading in C0 2 emi ssions ri ghts as proposed by the EU Commi ss ion wou ld th e refo re seriously affect energy-i ntensive indu stri es. Buy ing emi ss ions certificates will s ignifi ca ntl y increase production costs in some parts of these industries. If the cement industry has to buy a ll its em iss ions certificates, production costs will roughl y double. This wi ll distort competition to the extent of closing down production in Europe. The reason for this is principally the hi gh prices anticipa ted for C0 2 emissions rights. Producing cement in Germany in vo lves emiss ion s of approximately 0.7 t C0 2 per tonne. and th e va lue added rough ly corresponds to the proceeds from se lling the associated emi ssions shares. Even if the emi ss ions