Is the model of tying catalyst purchases to the recycling of waste catalysts feasible?
Thread Content
It is understood that a large foreign chemical company owns more than a dozen large sulfuric acid plants, each with a daily production capacity of over 3,000 tons. The main supplier of catalysts for these plants is MECS. In that country, the management of waste catalysts is also very strict; therefore, the current practice is that whenever a certain amount of new catalysts is purchased, MECS is required to dispose of an equal amount of waste catalysts as well. As for how the purchase price or disposal costs are calculated, that is not discussed here. Regardless, this tied-up arrangement seems to result in a fairly good partnership. It’s not just the one mentioned above; many sulfuric acid plants, including those in the United States, say that they hand over the waste catalysts to their suppliers for disposal. Whether the suppliers handle it themselves or use a third party for this task is something the sulfuric acid plants don’t need to worry about. In today’s world, where there are such strict regulations on the management of waste catalysts, it’s likely that sulfuric acid manufacturers are facing significant challenges in dealing with such waste. Although there are qualified recycling facilities available in various places to handle this waste, it is said that the costs associated with its treatment are increasing. So, if we adopt a similar approach by linking the purchase of catalysts to the handling of waste catalysts, could this put pressure on catalyst manufacturers and help reduce either the purchase costs or the treatment costs? Is this model feasible in China? The above are just some humble opinions from a beginner; I hope the more experienced among you will kindly offer their guidance.
The model of linking catalyst procurement with the recycling of waste catalysts is excellent; **appropriate policies should be introduced to provide support for it**
It is not feasible for now, as spent catalysts are classified as solid hazardous waste, and their recycling requires specific qualifications that the current catalyst manufacturers do not possess.
This suggestion has been discussed by manufacturers in the past; it is indeed possible to recover substances such as silicon and potassium. However, due to current market conditions and environmental regulations, the likelihood of achieving this is low. Without strong policy support, it is difficult to make this happen, as profits remain the limiting factor.
Currently, companies that recycle spent catalysts simply spend money to obtain the necessary qualifications; they can only carry out limited recycling and are not professional in this field.
Some acid producers that use smelting flue gas abroad add waste catalysts directly to the smelting furnace; the sulfuric acid catalyst is mainly diatomite (SiO2), which serves as a flux in the smelting process. The above method is likely not feasible in China, as the Environmental Protection Bureau may not approve it.
Now, environmental protection authorities classify used catalysts as solid hazardous waste, and they cannot be processed without the appropriate qualifications.
Domestic catalyst manufacturers are generally small in scale; therefore, if catalysts are to be recycled, the processing volume will not be sufficient to obtain approval from environmental protection agencies and other relevant departments, making this approach not very feasible. Of course, this approach can be used to adjust the structure of the domestic catalyst industry; eliminating smaller, less advanced enterprises is also an option. However, by then, due to a lack of competition, it might become difficult to obtain cheap catalysts.
As long as you have the qualifications, it’s fine. As far as I know, there are only three or four companies in the whole country that can handle recycling.
Now, there is chaos in the recycling of used catalysts; people spend money to obtain the necessary qualifications, and there are large differences in pricing. Things will go wrong if these practices are not regulated.
I’m sorry; perhaps I didn’t explain my idea clearly. What I mean is that from the perspective of the sulfuric acid plant, as for catalyst suppliers who lack the necessary qualifications, they can partner with third-party facilities that do have such qualifications. But for the acid plant, whether it’s new or used catalysts, it only needs to deal with the catalyst supplier alone, which might be more convenient for them