Pollution Prevention and Control Technologies for Plating
Operations
Section 3 - Chemical Recovery
3.5 ELECTROWINNING
3.5.5 Costs
3.5.5.1 Capital Costs
The capacity requirement for conventional electrowinning depends
most heavily on the amount of metal to be recovered and the rate
of metal deposition. Factors that influence the rate of metal
deposition are (ref. 39 and 128):
- Electrode type and area
- Agitation rate (or in general, mass transfer)
- Solution chemistry
- Electrical variables
- Temperature
The cathode surface area depends on the size and number of the
cathodes employed in the unit. The agitation rate, average metal
concentration in the rinse solution, solution conductivity and
temperature all influence the current density that can be maintained
and still result in an even, homogeneous metal deposit on the
cathode. The higher the current density allowed, the higher the
rate of metal deposition per unit area of cathode (ref. 39). Exhibits 3-42
and 3-43 present useful data for cathode sizing exercises.
Exhibit 3-43. Maximum Current Density for Copper Electrowinning
A nearly linear relationship between cost and capacity is displayed
in Exhibit 3-44. Capital costs, therefore,
can be estimated once capacity requirements are determined. Most
vendors refer to capacity in terms of amperage; more precisely,
the maximum amperage setting on a unit's rectifier. Less commonly,
capacity is expressed in terms of total cathode area. The rectifier
and electrodes comprise the majority of the cost for most units;
other contributing components are the fluid containment tank,
pumps, filters and optional metering devices.
The strategy for determining the appropriate capacity of an electrowinning
unit for a specific application is straightforward in theory:
match the expected plate-out rate of the unit with the application's
waste metal generation rate. For drag-out tank applications, such
as those diagrammed in Exhibit 3-32,
the rate at which metal is introduced into the tank is determined
either by direct analysis, or by a method such as that proposed
in Section 2.5.3.1. The plating rate of the metallic species in
question is obtained from the Faraday Table presented in Exhibit 3-42.
Capacity requirement in amperes, therefore, is the introduction
rate in g/hr divided by the plating rate in g/amp-hr. This quotient
requires an adjustment for expected current efficiency (that portion
of current available to the cell that actually is employed reducing
the target metal on the cathode) before serving as a reliable
guide for required capacity. Current efficiency for electrolytes
with high metallic concentrations will approach theoretical levels,
but it may range down below < 10% of the theoretical rate for
electrolytes concentrations of metal below 100 mg/l.
Other application configurations lend themselves to similar analysis.
For units employed to electrowin metal from ion-exchange regenerant,
the volume and concentration of the regenerant is required for
capacity sizing. These quantities will be known from the analyses
required for ion exchange sizing. The time available for electrowinning
is limited by the time between regenerations. Spent regenerant
may be contaminated by several species of metallic ions; this
will make the calculation of appropriate cell amperage less accurate.
For batch dumps, concentration of metal in the spent bath and
the dump period are usually available data. The following formula
applies to regenerant or process batches alike.
amps = [g/batch]/[g/amp-hr]/[hours/batch or cycle]
Cell amperage is not likely to approach the maximum rectifier
output. It is limited by the maximum practical cathode current
density for the metallic species being electrowinned which, in
turn, is a function of metallic concentration. Thus, in practice,
it is the total cathode area and the concentration of metal in
the electrolyte that best determines the practical amperage capacity
of a unit. Exhibit 3-43 demonstrates the considerable effect of
concentration (and temperature) on maximum current density for
copper electrowinning; similar curves are to be expected for other
metals.
Low concentration electrolytes present significant sizing implications.
Plating proceeds at a fraction of high concentration current densities
and efficiency is lost as current is wasted reducing hydrogen
at the cathodes. Units lacking design features aimed at reducing
the thickness of the polarization depletion layer and not equipped
with high surface area cathodes will be least efficient in these
environments. At concentrations of <100 mg/l, a reasonable
current efficiency estimate may be 10% or less. These factors
must be offset with larger capacity units. Success at low concentrations
will also depend on the metallic species being electrowinned,
the presence of multi-valent cations in the electrolyte (such
as tin and iron, which further lower efficiency by oxidizing to
higher valence at the anode and reducing to lower valence at the
cathode, thereby wasting current and yet staying in solution)
and the time available for electrowinning (eventually, units so
designed can reduce concentrations of certain metals to below
compliance levels).
Anode and cathode construction will significantly impact the cost
of an electrowinning unit. A list of cathode and anode materials
is displayed in Exhibit 3-36. Materials
options for a specific application are limited by the peculiarities
of the electrolyte being electrowinned and by the manufacturer
of the unit. Cost differences can be significant; e.g., ELTECH
Systems Corporation offers itís units with either graphite
or DSAÆ (proprietary rare earth coating) anodes. The graphite
anodes were quoted in 1993 at $80, while the DSA were $335. For
a Retec 25 (26 anodes) this represents a cost difference of $6,630.
3.5.5.2 Operating Costs
Typical operating costs for this technology are shown in Exhibit 3-45.
Respondents employing this technology reported their annual operating
costs to be only $4,100/yr on average, roughly split between the
labor and non-labor categories. This technology is not labor-intensive
nor expensive to run. Operating costs components are labor, electrode
replacement, maintenance and energy.
Labor costs are largely installation- and application-specific.
Units used in batch configurations may require considerable solution
transport, pre-adjustment of the electrolyte, cleaning of salt
deposits and adjustment of batch releases from the unit. On the
other hand, dedicated drag-out rinse units treating fluids with
lower total dissolved solids may require only occasional cleaning
and rare maintenance of any kind. In all, little scheduled maintenance
beyond cleaning and replacement of corroded connectors is to be
expected.
Energy costs will comprise only a small percentage of total operating
costs for most applications. For large units, however, energy
costs may more significant in relation to total operating costs
as other expenses benefit from economies of scale. Predicting
energy costs for a given application is complicated by the fact
that several variables affecting total power consumption are difficult
or impossible to know prior to actually running the unit. Conductivity,
required voltage, rectifier efficiency, and current efficiency
are either unknown or will vary with time or batch to batch. Once
the unit is operating, energy costs will become easy to assess.
In the example given in Exhibit 3-46,
electrical costs were $0.4198/lb of Cu; these costs reflect metal
removal to <5 mg/l and should be typical of similar applications.
Electrode replacement costs depend on their construction and life
expectancy. Stainless steel cathodes are usually peeled or scraped
free of plating deposits and reused. Reticulated cathodes must
be replaced after they accumulate sufficient metal to lower their
effectiveness, roughly 5-10 pounds/sq. ft. of cathode area. Anodes
may, as in the case of DSAÆ and other proprietary materials,
be semi-permanent and last in excess of 5 years. Graphite anodes
are well-known to ìmeltî or gradually exfoliate carbon
particles into the electrolyte; this obviously shortens their
operating life.
The example offered in Exhibit 3-46 has total operating costs
at $6.81/lb of Cu. Unlike a drag-out rinse application, considerable
labor was involved transporting and adjusting spent process baths
prior to electrowinning. Labor, at $3.64/lb, was by far the largest
operating cost component.
Next Section|Main Table of Contents|Section 3