1. ICE MELT APPLICATION FOR PROFIT MAXIMIZATION RUSS ALGER, MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY NILES HYSELL, MORTON SALT June 24, 2011

2. Ice Happens… And Sometimes Plowing Isnt Enough. 2

3. Why Use Ice Melt? Ice Melt helps snow professionals work faster and safer. Yet, the unknown behind what type of ice melt to use, when to use it, and how much to use can cause: Ineffective melting: Slow melt, no melt, refreeze, etc. Over application - runoff Client dissatisfaction Reduction in profits Identifying optimal application rates can help minimize negative impact of all these factors. 3

4. What Application Rate Is Optimal? Application recommendations exist from a myriad of highly reputable organizations: Handbook of Test Methods For Evaluating Chemical Deicers, 1992 Guide For Selecting Deicing Chemicals, 2001 Managing Snow And Ice, 2002 Minnesota Snow and Ice Handbook, Environmentally Sensitive Spreading Rates, 2005 Winter Parking Lot & Sidewalk Maintenance Manual (Fortin), 2006 Evaluation of Deicing Blends, 2009 Sidewalk and Parking Lot Application Study, 2011 Contractor Practices Survey, 2010 Application Recommendations Vary Significantly From Source To Source… 4

5. Wide Range of Recommendations Can Lead To Melter Abuse Recommended application ranges from 2lb - 65lb/1,000 ft 2 Using Too Little Ice Melt Can Lead To Safety Hazards While Using Too Much Leads To Environmental and Profitability Concerns. 5 Bulk HighwayPackage RetailCommercial

6. So Whos Right?…Everyone and No One. Many factors influence ice melt performance and effect optimal application rate. Air Temperature Surface Temperature Precipitation Radiation Snow/Ice Level Altitude Foot/Road Traffic Mortons Goal Was To Understand Impact of Key Variables To Identify Stronger Guidelines for Commercial Melter Application Rates. Melter Type Application Rate Air Movement Melter Particle Size 6

7. What Are We Going To Cover Today: PART 1: RESEARCH OVERVIEW Third Party Research Test Variable Selection (Melters, Temperatures, Conditions, etc.) PART 2: TEST SET UP Final Parameters Data Gathering Process & Analysis PART 3: RESULTS OVERVIEW Initial Findings At Selection Temperature Ranges Findings Detail By Temperature, Product & Application Rate PART 4: RECOMMENDATIONS & THE BIG PAYOFF Common Ice Melt Myths Recommended applications by product and temperature Potential Savings and Assistance Tools PART 5: QUESTIONS 7

8. RESEARCH OVERVIEW RUSS ALGER DIRECTOR OF SNOW RESEARCH MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY PART 1

9. Third Party Testing Helps Ensure Relevance of Results In developing research study format and structure, Morton teamed with Russ Alger of Michigan Techs Keweenaw Research Center. MTU experience and focus in Snow & Ice research helped develop optimal testing and data gathering plan for both controlled lab and external field testing. Location In Houghton, MI provided ideal testing environment. Keweenaw Research Center Laboratory testing validates safety and performance claims in a controlled setting. Field testing validates melting performance in real-world settings. 9

10. Key factors influence ice melt performance and vary the optimal application rate. Surface Temperature Melter Type Application Rate Key Testing Variables Were Identified: Air andSurface Temperatures, Melter Type, and Application Rate Were Identified as Prime Variables Which Contribute Most To Melter Performance. 10 Air Temperature

11. Average Monthly Temperatures: MINNEAPOLIS, MN WEATHER.COM Monthly Averages Surface Temperature Selection: Air temperature directly impacts surface temperature and so was used as a starting point for ST selection. Even in extreme climates like Minneapolis, MN, the average temperature does not drop below 0°F for extended periods of time. However, there are extreme temperature and wind chill drops that snow professionals must work through in any given season. Surface Temperature Ranges Were Selected To Identify Melting Performance In Extreme And Average Winter Temperatures. 11

12. Resulting Surface Temperature Ranges: Team identified surface temperature groups to capture a range of potential conditions a snow professional may encounter… > 21°F 11°F – 20°F 0°F – 10°F <0°F Extreme Cold: <0°F Below Average: 0°F to 10°F Average: 11°F to 20°F Just Freezing: >21°F 12

13. Melter Selection: Melting materials were selected to provide a range of pricing options (expensive/inexpensive) and to align with most commonly used melters in the field: Sodium Chloride (Rock Salt), Calcium Chloride, Calcium Chloride/Rock Salt Blend, and Magnesium Chloride were selected for trials. GIE Snow Magazine, 2010 State of the Industry Report, Icing Salt Prices, Kyle Brown, May 2010 13

14. Test Melters: DeicerComposition SaltSodium Chloride (NaCl) Salt/Calcium Chloride BlendNaCl and CaCl 2 H 2 0 Calcium ChlorideCaCl 2 (Anhydrous) Magnesium ChlorideMgCl 2 6H 2 0 Deicer Selection and Application Rate Criteria Widely used Availability Economical Temperature melting range Commercial/Highway application variability 14

15. Application Rate Selection: Initial High/Medium/Low application rates were selected as a starting point based on common recommendations from various reputable organizations. Adjustments to these application rates could be made during the course of the study in the case of observed over/under- melting. 15

16. TEST SET-UP & DATA GATHERING PART 2

17. Laboratory Testing A controlled laboratory test was performed on each material at each temperature range as a control and comparison point. The SHRP recommended application rate * of 21lb/1,000 ft 2 was used for all melters. * SHRP H-205.1 17

18. Test Plot Layout 18

19. Data Gathering Methodology 19

20. Test Methodology 20

21. Example: Calcium Chloride @ 3°F-10°F Calcium at 60 minutes 60lb/1,000ft 2 30lb/1,000ft 2 15lb/1,000ft 2 21

22. Image Analysis with ImageJ Software * * Rasband, W.S., ImageJ, U. S. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/,1997-2011 Test Area Image Test Area Image With Bare Pavement Defined by ImageJ Sample output: 28-Jan-11 30 MinutesPicture ## Pixels - ROI# Pixels - Bare PavementArea Fraction A2IMG_5874.JPG85258623936085% 22

23. RESULTS OVERVIEW PART 3

24. FIRST THE LAB RESULTS

25. Controlled Laboratory Test Results: -5°F Note: MgCl 2 results were overstated as a result of water present in the hexa-hydrate formula. At -5°F, 21lb/1000ft 2 is not sufficient to melt significant amounts of ice – however, CaCl 2 and MgCl 2 melt some ice at this temperature & amount. -5°F * SHRP H-205.1, 21lb/1,000ft 2 Ice Melted (Measured Brine mL/g) 25

26. At +5°F, 21lb/1000ft 2 – CaCl 2 still melts faster, however the salt/calcium blend and salt catch up over time. Controlled Laboratory Test Results: +5°F +5°F * SHRP H-205.1, 21lb/1,000ft 2 Ice Melted (Measured Brine mL/g) 26

27. * SHRP H-205.1, 21lb/1,000ft 2 Controlled Laboratory Test Results: +15°F +15°F At +15°F, salt and salt blends generate the most melting over time. (MgCl 2 demonstrates the least melting capacity despite hydrate levels.) Ice Melted (Measured Brine mL/g) 27

28. Controlled Laboratory Test Results: +25°F +25°F At +25°F, all melters (Except MgCl 2 ) perform fairly consistently. * SHRP H-205.1, 21lb/1,000ft 2 Ice Melted (Measured Brine mL/g) 28

29. THE REAL WORLD RESULTS

30. Field Test: Surface Temp < 0°F 60lb/1,000ft 2 No measurable melt. 15lb/1,000ft 2 30lb/1,000ft 2 No measurable melt. In extreme winter temperatures, only calcium chloride melts. A minimum of 60lb/1,000ft 2 of calcium chloride is necessary to create partial bare pavement. Other Conditions: February 10, 2011; 0.25 – 0.5 inches packed snow; Air temp +3 – +6°F; Light flurries. 30 Percent Bare Pavement Time (Minutes )

31. Field Test: Surface Temp 0°F to 10°F 15lb/1,000ft 2 Percent Bare Pavement 30lb/1,000ft 2 Percent Bare Pavement 60lb/1,000ft 2 In low winter temperatures, a blend of salt and calcium chloride performs better than pure calcium chloride. A minimum of 60lb/1,000 ft 2 is necessary to melt to bare pavement. Other Conditions: January 25, 2011; 0.25 inches packed snow, 0.25 inches loose snow, air temp 20°F, light snow Time (Minutes) 31 Percent Bare Pavement

32. Field Test: Surface Temp 11°F to 20°F 15lb/1,000ft 2 Percent Bare Pavement 30lb/1,000ft 2 Percent Bare Pavement 60lb/1,000ft 2 In moderately low temperatures, a blend of salt and calcium chloride performs generally as well as calcium chloride. A minimum of 60lb/1,000ft 2 at 30 minutes is necessary to melt to bare pavement. Other Conditions: January 28, 2011; 0.25 inches packed snow, air temperature 12°F, no snow 32 Time (Minutes)

33. Field Test: Surface Temp > 20°F 15lb/1,000ft 2 Percent Bare Pavement In the highest temperature range tested, the blend containing calcium melted comparably to straight calcium chloride and magnesium chloride albeit a bit slower. Salt achieved similar results but only at the highest application rate. Percent Bare Pavement 30lb/1,000ft 2 60lb/1,000ft 2 Other Conditions: March 4, 2011; 0.25 inches packed snow; Air temp 25 – 29°F; Freezing drizzle 33 Time (Minutes) Percent Bare Pavement

34. APPLICATION GUIDELINE RECOMMENDATIONS PART 4

35. Disclaimer The information presented herein is based upon our own research and general experience and is believed to be accurate and reliable. However, you should conduct your own test to evaluate the effectiveness of deicing products under your own test conditions prior to use. As you can appreciate, since the conditions of handling, use and testing are beyond our control, we make no guarantee of results and assume no liability for direct or consequential damages incurred by following these suggestions. Nothing contained herein is to be construed as a recommendation for use in violation of any patents or of applicable laws and regulations. 35

36. Key Findings Summary: Only anhydrous calcium chloride produces measurable melting. A deicer must be complimented with mechanical removal (i.e. plowing) to produce bare pavement. 36 High application rates of any deicer are needed to produce bare pavement. At heaviest application rate the salt/calcium chloride blend is most cost- effective deicer. Performance of the salt/calcium blend becomes equivalent to calcium and magnesium chlorides. The salt/calcium chloride blend is the most cost effective deicer in this temperature range. Performance of the salt/calcium and calcium chloride are roughly equivalent. Salt becomes the the most cost- effective deicer in this temperature range.

37. Application Recommendation Summary Melter Type Rock Salt Blend Rock Salt & 10% CaCl 2 Calcium Chloride Magnesium Chloride Surface Temp. Range < 0°F Not Recommended >60 Not Recommended 0°F - 10°F Not Recommended 60 Not Recommended 11°F - 20°F > 7050-6030-60 Not Recommended >20°F 45-6040-6030-60 Application (lb/1,000ft 2 ) = recommended melter 37

38. Morton Helps Optimize Ice Melt Use With New Smartphone App Store and track site information Recommend optimal Morton ice melter based on external conditions Calculate and track total ice melt quantities needed for each specific snow event 38 Morton Snow Pro App available in early August 2011!

39. QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION Next steps