|
Pollution Prevention and Control Technologies for Plating
Operations
Section 3 - Chemical Recovery
3.5 ELECTROWINNING
3.5.7 Operational and Maintenance Experience
The following summarizes the respondents O&M experiences and
provides operating labor information.
- The average number of annual operating hours per electrowinning
unit were: 140 hrs/yr. The labor categories commonly used for
operating this technology are wastewater treatment plant operator
and trained technician. The following is a breakdown of the responses
for skill requirements (based on data from 39 respondents):
Environmental Engineer:................4
Process/Chemical Engineer:.............5
Chemist:..............................12
Consultant:............................2
Plumber/Pipe Fitter:..................13
Electrician:..........................11
Vendor:................................3
Senior-Level Plater:..................10
Junior Level Plater:..................14
Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator:..20
Trained Technician:...................17
Common Labor:.........................10
- The average percentage of downtime for this technology experienced
by the respondents was 20 percent.
- The most frequent and significant operational and maintenance
problems identified with electrowinning include: labor intensive
to clean (e.g., anode cleaning, electrode contact cleaning) (PS
025, PS 053,); high level of fuming or gassing (PS 036, PS 053,
PS 128); sluffing off of deposit from cathode (PS 043); temperature
build-up (PS 036); salting of the electrolyte (PS 036); anodes
polarize at high current density and deteriorate or are attacked
by chemicals (PS 213); anodes passivate (PS 239); and deterioration
of fiber cathodes (PS 086).
- Approximately 40% of the total number of electrowinning units
reported in the survey forms are no longer in use.
- Some shops reported that poor support from the manufacturer
was partially the cause of their system failure. PS 008 indicated
that their zinc recovery unit was removed after 4 to 5 months
of operation because they could not get help with system problems
("everything went wrong...like pulling teeth to get help").
- Two of the shops that purchased equipment from HSA Reactors
Ltd. indicated that the fact the company went out of business
led to the failure of their systems (PS 012, PS 276). The carbon
cathodes and other equipment components used in their products
were too unique to find elsewhere. Also, users cited numerous
mechanical problems (e.g., pump failures-PS 086) with these units
and they complained about the fragile nature, short life and high
cost of electrodes (PS 039, PS 086). The labor costs for HSA systems
appear to be higher than the average electrowinning system, which
points to the complexity of the systems. Further, the operation
of the equipment required a moderate level of expertise. As one
shop (PS 276) indicated, it was "too technical for our people."
Generally, it is observed that this technology was probably sound
from a theoretical standpoint, but lacked good engineering design
and components. A similar conclusion is presented in a report
sponsored by the Canadian Branch of the AESF (ref. 351). That
report concluded that such a system could be operated in a manual
mode, but that more developmental work was needed before an adequate
automated system could be marketed.
- Some facilities have added sodium chloride to the electrolyte
to increase the efficiency of cyanide destruction (PS 036). One
shop reported unsatisfactory results, because the solution temperature
increased and gassing occurred and the residual cyanide level
was too high for sewering (PS 036).
- Shops that reported difficulty with the electrowinning process
cited two possible technical causes, including: (1) contamination
in electrolyte (PS 036, PS 090) and (2) build-up of carbonates
(PS 036).
- Shops using the small precious metals recovery units (both
commercial and in-house) reported none or very few operational
and maintenance problems.
Next Section|Main Table of Contents|Section 3
|