1. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 1 TecEco Technology and Geopolymers I will have to race over some slides but the presentation is always downloadable from the TecEco web site if you missed something. John Harrison B.Sc. B.Ec. FCPA. It is time to deploy new technology materials like geopolymers and TecEco cement binders that offer waste utilisation, emissions reduction, capture and sequestration. Auguste Rodin “The Thinker” Sustainability will be the biggest business on the planet if we want to survive the future. Can we create more polymeric non hydration species using Ca-Mg cements?

2. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 2 TecEco Binder Systems and Geopolymer  Geopolymers and TecEco binders have much in common.  Both are sustainable materials with common deployment issues e.g. –Response to the reality of carbon taxes. –Lobby groups and competition product associations e.g. Portland cement industry putting out information to diffuse and confuse regarding geopolymer and TecEco technology. –Lobby groups having a disproportionate say on government committees etc. –Research development and deployment issues. –Energy issues. –Government policy issues. –Development of standards and codes of practice?  Can we learn from each other? Can we help each other?  There are also features of tec-cement chemistry that invoke hydrolysis and more polymeric reactions. There are definitely benefits to co-operation between the two emerging technologies e.g. EU research funding.

3. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 3 The Problem – A Planet in Crisis TecEco are in the BIGGEST Business on the Planet - Solving Sustainability Problems Economically A Planet in Crisis?

4. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 4 A Demographic Explosion ? Developed Countries Undeveloped Countries Global population, consumption per capita and our footprint on the planet is exploding.

5. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 5 Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide

6. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 6 Global Temperature Anomaly

7. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 7 The Techno-Process Our linkages to the bio-geo- sphere are defined by the techno process describing and controlling the flow of matter and energy. It is these flows that have detrimental linkages to earth systems. Detrimental affects on earth systems Earth Systems Atmospheric composition, climate, land cover, marine ecosystems, pollution, coastal zones, freshwater systems, salinity and global biological diversity have all been substantially affected. Move 500-600 billion tonnes Use some 50 billion tonnes

8. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 8 Ecological Footprint Our footprint is exceeding the capacity of the planet to support it. We are not longer sustainable as a species and must change our ways

9. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 9 Impact of the Largest Material Flow - Cement and Concrete  Concrete made with cement is the most widely used material on earth accounting for some 30% of all materials flows on the planet and 70% of all materials flows in the built environment. –Global Portland cement production is in the order of 2 billion tonnes per annum. –Globally over 14 billion tonnes of concrete are poured per year. –Over 2.1 tonnes per person per annum TecEco Pty. Ltd. And the geopolymer industry both have important technologies for improvement in sustainability and properties

10. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 10 Embodied Energy of Building Materials Downloaded from www.dbce.csiro.au/ind- serv/brochures/embodied/embodied.htm (last accessed 07 March 2000) Concrete is relatively environmentally friendly and has a relatively low embodied energy

11. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 11 Average Embodied Energy in Buildings Downloaded from www.dbce.csiro.au/ind- serv/brochures/embodied/embodied.htm (last accessed 07 March 2000) But because so much is used there is a huge opportunity for sustainability by reducing the embodied energy, reducing the carbon debt (net emissions) and improving properties. Most of the embodied energy in the built environment is in concrete.

12. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 12 Emissions from Cement Production  Chemical Release –The process of calcination involves driving off chemically bound CO 2 with heat. CaCO 3 → CaO + ↑ CO 2  Process Energy –Most energy is derived from fossil fuels. –Fuel oil, coal and natural gas are directly or indirectly burned to produce the energy required releasing CO 2.  The production of cement for concretes accounts for around 10% of global anthropogenic CO 2. –Pearce, F., "The Concrete Jungle Overheats", New Scientist, 19 July, No 2097, 1997 (page 14). The article by Fred Pearce was based on a 1994 article by Joseph Davidovits of the Geopolymer Institute titled “Global Warming Impacts on the Cement and Aggregates Industries.” World Resources Review, pages 263-278, volume 6, number 2. CO 2 CO 2

13. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 13 Cement Production = Carbon Dioxide Emissions Between geopolymers, tec, eco and enviro-cements we can provide a viable much more sustainable alternative.

14. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 14 Sustainability  Sustainability is a direction not a destination.  Our approach should be holistically balanced and involve –Everybody, every process, every day. Geopolymers + TecEco Cements = Low Emissions Production Mineral Sequestration + Waste utilization Geological Seques- tration Emissions reduction through efficiency and conversion to non fossil fuels + + Common Contributions?

15. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 15 Materials Affect Underlying Molecular Flows Take only renewables → Manipulate → Make → Use → Waste only what is biodegradable or can be re- assimilated Reuse Re-make Recycle [ ← Materials → ] [← Underlying molecular flows →] Materials control: How much and what we have to take to manufacture the materials we use. How long materials remain of utility, whether they are easily recycled and how and what form they are in when we eventually throw them “away”. What we take from the environment around us, how we manipulate and make materials out of what we take and what we waste result in underlying molecular flows that affect earth systems. Problems in the global commons today include heavy metals, halogen carbon double bond compounds, CFC’s too much CO2 etc. e.g. heavy metals, cfc’s, c=halogen compounds and CO 2

16. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 16 Innovative New Materials - the Key to Sustainability There is no such place as “away”, only a global commons The choice of materials in construction controls emissions, lifetime and embodied energies, user comfort, use of recycled wastes, durability, recyclability and the properties of wastes returned to the bio-geo-sphere.

17. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 17 Sustainability = Culture + Technology Increase in demand/price ratio for sustainability due to educationally induced cultural drift. # $ Demand Supply Increase in supply/price ratio for more sustainable products due to innovative paradigm shifts in technology. Equilibrium shift ECONOMICS Greater Value/for impact (Sustainability) and economic growth Sustainability is where Culture and Technology meet. DemandSupply New Technical Paradigms are required that deliver sustainability. (TecEco and geopolymers.)

18. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 18 Huge Potential for Sustainable Materials in the Built Environment  The built environment is made of materials and is our footprint on earth. –It comprises buildings and infrastructure.  Construction materials comprise –70% of materials flows (buildings, infrastructure etc.) –40-45% of waste that goes to landfill (15 % of new materials going to site are wasted.)  Reducing the impact of the take and waste phases of the techno-process. –Reducing emissions and other impacts during manufacture. –Including carbon in materials so they become carbon sinks (eco- cements). –including wastes for their physical properties as well as chemical composition so they become resources. C C C C C Waste

19. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 19 TecEco Technologies  Silicate → Carbonate Mineral Sequestration –Using either peridotite, forsterite or serpentine as inputs to a silicate reactor process CO 2 is sequestered and magnesite produced. –Proven by others (NETL,MIT,TNO, Finnish govt. etc.)  Tec-Kiln Technology –Combined calcining and grinding in a closed system allowing the capture of CO2. Powered by waste heat, solar or solar derived energy. –To be proved but simple and should work!  Direct Scrubbing of CO 2 using MgO –Being proven by others (NETL,MIT,TNO, Finnish govt. etc.)  Tec and Eco-Cement Concretes in the Built Environment. –TecEco eco-cements set by absorbing CO2 and are as good as proven. TecEco Economic under Kyoto? TecEco

20. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 20 TecEco Kiln Technology  Tec-Kiln technology will be the first non fossil fuel industrial process. –variable energy input. –Made from geopolymers. –Suitable for the manufacture of MgO, CaO and metakaolin. Eventually Portland cement.  Grinds and calcines at the same time.  Runs 25% to 30% more efficiency.  Theoretically capable of producing much more reactive MgO as well as metakaolin and other input materials for geopolymers.

21. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 21 TecEco Kiln Technology  Captures CO 2 for bottling and sale. –To the oil industry (geological sequestration). –Coca Cola?  Can be run cyclicly as part of a major process to solve global CO2 problems.  Will result in new markets for ultra reactive low lattice energy MgO (e.g. paper and environment industries). TecEco plan to use geopolymer materials for the kiln capable of withstanding high temperatures.

22. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 22 Drivers for TecEco & Geopolymer Technology Producer Push The opportunity cost of compliant waste disposal Profitability and cost recovery Technical merit Resource issues Robotics Research objectives Consumer Pull Environmental sentiment Fear of climate change Cost Technical advantages Competition Government Influence Carbon Taxes Provision of Research Funds Environmental education Huge Existing Markets Cement >2 billion tonnes. New markets e.g. Bingham mixtures for robots, kilns, fireproof materials etc. The way forward is through solving problems in niche markets and delivering sustainability.

23. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 23 TecEco Cement Concretes More information at www.tececo.com

24. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 24 TecEco Cements SUSTAINABILITY DURABILITYSTRENGTH TECECO CEMENTS Hydration of the various components of a hydraulic cement such as Portland cement for strength. Note that geopolymers are esp. included Reaction of alkali with pozzolans (e.g. lime with fly ash.) for sustainability, durability and strength. Hydration of magnesia => brucite for strength, workability, dimensional stability and durability. In Eco-cements carbonation of brucite => nesquehonite, lansfordite and an amorphous phase for sustainability. HYDRAULIC CEMENT + or - POZZOLAN MAGNESIA

25. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 25 The Magnesium Thermodynamic Cycle

26. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 26 TecEco Formulations  Tec-cements (Low MgO) –contain more Portland cement than reactive magnesia. Reactive magnesia hydrates in the same rate order as Portland cement forming Brucite which uses up water reducing the voids:paste ratio, increasing density and possibly raising the short term pH. –Reactions with pozzolans are more affective. After all the Portlandite has been consumed Brucite controls the long term pH which is lower and due to it’s low solubility, mobility and reactivity results in greater durability. –Other benefits include improvements in density, strength and rheology, reduced permeability and shrinkage and the use of a wider range of aggregates many of which are potentially wastes without reaction problems.  Eco-cements (High MgO) –contain more reactive magnesia than in tec-cements. Brucite in porous materials carbonates forming stronger fibrous mineral carbonates and therefore presenting huge opportunities for waste utilisation and sequestration.  Enviro-cements (High MgO) –contain similar ratios of MgO and OPC to eco-cements but in non porous concretes brucite does not carbonate readily. –Higher proportions of magnesia are most suited to toxic and hazardous waste immobilisation and when durability is required. Strength is not developed quickly nor to the same extent.

27. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 27 TecEco Cement Technology  Portlandite (Ca(OH) 2 ) is too soluble, mobile and reactive. –It carbonates, reacts with Cl - and SO 4 - and being soluble can act as an electrolyte.  TecEco generally (but not always) remove Portlandite using the pozzolanic reaction and  TecEco add reactive magnesia –which hydrates, consuming water and concentrating alkalis forming brucite which is another alkali, but much less soluble, mobile or reactive than Portlandite.  In Eco-cements brucite carbonates The consequences of need to be considered.

28. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 28 Strength with Blend & Porosity STRENGTH ON ARBITARY SCALE 1-100 High PC Tec-cement concretes Eco-cement concretes Enviro-cement concretes High Porosity High Magnesia Tec – cement concretes have more polymeric species because they are much more alkaline during the early plastic phase.

29. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 29 Why Add Reactive Magnesia?  To maintain the long term stability of CSH. –Maintains alkalinity preventing the reduction in Ca/Si ratio.  To remove water. –Reactive magnesia consumes water as it hydrates to possibly hydrated forms of brucite.  To raise the early Ph. –Increasing non hydraulic strength giving reactions  To reduce shrinkage. –The consequences of putting brucite through the matrix of a concrete in the first place need to be considered.  To make concretes more durable  Because significant quantities of carbonates are produced in porous substrates which are affective binders. Reactive MgO is a new tool to be understood with profound affects on most properties

30. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 30 In the presence of water magnesium does not appear to be an important network former in silicate structures including geopolymers at room temperature and this is probably because of it’s high affinity for water which it seems to retain even when it carbonates. There are however other intriguing ramifications of adding reactive MgO. Tec-Cements & Geopolymers More information at www.tececo.com

31. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 31 The Form of MgO - Overcoming Dogma  In 1917 the US National Bureau of Standards (now the National Bureau of standards and Technology) and the American Society for Testing Materials established a standard formula for Portland cement which excluded MgO in any form.  We now know that it is lattice energy that causes the difference between amorphous magnesia and periclase  TecEco have proved that amorphous magnesia, having no lattice energy to overcome, is safe to use in water based binder systems.

32. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 32 The Form of MgO - Lattice Energy Destroys a Myth  Magnesia, provided it is reactive rather than “dead burned” (or high density, crystalline periclase type), can be beneficially added to cements in excess of the amount of 5 mass% generally considered as the maximum allowable by standards prevalent in concrete dogma. –Reactive magnesia is essentially amorphous magnesia with low lattice energy. –It is produced at low temperatures and finely ground, and –will completely hydrate in the same time order as the minerals contained in most hydraulic cements.  Dead burned magnesia and lime have high lattice energies –Crystalline magnesium oxide or periclase has a calculated lattice energy of 3795 Kj mol-1 which must be overcome for it to go into solution or for reaction to occur. –Dead burned magnesia is much less expansive than dead burned lime in a hydraulic binder (Ramachandran V. S., Concrete Science, Heydon & Son Ltd. 1981, p 358-360 )

33. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 33 Tec-Cement Concrete Strength Gain Curve strength gain with less cement and added pozzolans is of great economic and environmental importance.  The use of tec-cement results in –20-30% greater strength or less binder for the same strength. –more rapid early strength development even with added pozzolans. –Straight line strength development for a long time We have observed this sort of curve in over 300 cubic meters of concrete now

34. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 34 Tec-Cement Reactions MgO + H 2 O => Mg(OH) 2.nH 2 O - water consumption resulting in greater density and higher alkalinity. Higher alkalinity => more reactions involving silica & alumina. Mg(OH) 2.nH 2 O => Mg(OH) 2 + H 2 O – slow release water for more complete hydration of PC MgO + Al + H 2 O => 3MgO.Al.6H 2 O ??? – equivalent to flash set?? MgO + SO 4 -- => various Mg oxy sulfates ?? – yes but more likely ettringite reaction consumes SO 4 -- first. MgO + SiO 2 => MSH ?? Yes but high alkalinity required. Strength?? We think the reactions are relatively independent of PC reactions

35. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 35 Non hydration Reactions in Tec-Cement Concretes?  MgO + H 2 O => Mg(OH) 2.nH 2 O - water consumption –Increases density. –Raises the alkalinity during the early plastic stage.  Better pozzolanic reactions, surface hydrolysis and re- bonding as well as the formation of more polymeric not necessarily hydraulic species. –Resulting mineralization more similar to Roman cement concretes that contained more Mg and more polymeric species.

36. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 36 Tec-Cement pH Curves

37. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 37 Conjecture  Why does Mg keep turning up in discussion of ancient mineral systems (Egyptians, Mesopotamians and Romans)??  Maybe sepiolite (polygorskite with Al?) are carrier minerals that break down as the alkalinity rises delivering soluble and mobile SiO 2 and Al 2 O 3 for reactions forming more polymeric minerals. This idea emerged over too many drinks with Herbert Baier of PCI (part of Degussa) on the 29 th June in Saint Quentin, France. It’s conjecture, interesting and not completely daft.

38. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 38 Role of Mg ++ in Geopolymerism??! Mg 4 Si 6 O 15 (OH) 2.6H 2 O (sepiolite)+ clay + sodium or potassium salt => Geopolymer (Si-O-Al-O-Si ??) + brucite + more sepiolite?? or Sepiolite + clay + H 2 O + CO 2 + OH -  Geopolymer + sepiolite + salt?? Sepiolite precipitates from salty alkaline waters in arid environments and was available to the Egyptians. Does explain role of Mg in Egyptian cements.

39. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 39 Strength Development in Tec-Cements.  Reactive magnesia requires considerable water to hydrate resulting in: –A significantly lower voids/paste ratio i.e. denser, less permeable concrete. –Higher early pH initiating more effective silicification reactions? The Ca(OH) 2 normally lost in bleed water is used internally for reaction with pozzolans. Super saturation of alkalis caused by the removal of water? Could the role of added reactive magnesia be to consume water like the ettringite reaction in PC concretes. This property could be useful with geopolymers to overcome the viscosity problem.

40. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 40 Water Reduction During the Plastic Phase? Water is required to plasticise concrete for placement, however once placed, the less water over the amount required for hydration the better. Magnesia consumes water as it hydrates producing solid material. Less water results in increased density and concentration of alkalis - less shrinkage and cracking and improved strength and durability. Ph Water Reduction.

41. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 41  For more effective reactions in hydraulic concretes like PC and in “geopolymer concretes” high alkalinity is required. –To achieve high alkalinity it is necessary to not add too much water – this results in higher viscosity. –To place concretes low viscosity is required.  Tec-cement concretes achieve high alkalinity by internal water removal. –The dichotomy between viscosity and ease of placement defines much of the current research on geopolymers and for that matter in relation to additives for PC.  Depending on the level of alkalinity reached, many of the particles of fly ash or dehydrated clay (Kandoxi) polymerise, react at the surface only (hydrolyse and re-bond) or remain as micro-aggregates. High Alkalinity Common to Both Hydraulic and Geopolymer Systems => Better Reactions.

42. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 42 Adding Reactive MgO  Portland cements stoichiometrically require around 23 -25% water for hydration yet we add approximately 45 to 50% at cement batching plants to fluidise the mix sufficiently for placement.  If it were not for the enormous consumption of water by tri calcium aluminate as it hydrates forming ettringite in the presence of gypsum, concrete would remain as a weak mush and probably never set. –26 moles of water are consumed per mole of tri calcium aluminate to from a mole of solid ettringite. When the ettringite later reacts with remaining tri calcium aluminate to form monosulfoaluminate hydrate a further 4 moles of water are consumed.  The addition of reactive MgO achieves water removal in a similar way. –Can reactive MgO be used to get over the viscosity issue in geopolymers? –Would this be cheaper than using super plasticisers?

43. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 43 Adding Reactive MgO to Geopolymers  It is not possible to add water to geopolymers. If water were add the alkalis would be diluted, the pH would fall and the mix would not set as unlike the setting of Portland cement concretes there is no reaction that consumes water. On the contrary – water is expelled.  Reactive magnesia is a water removal tool and may be useful as an adjunct to assist with the viscosity problem.  Most people researching geopolymers seem to be trying various super, duper, hyper, blah blah plasticiser molecules to see if they can be used to fluidise the mix sufficiently.  The water removal mechanism of magnesia and its plasticising properties may be useful as a totally different approach to get over the viscosity issue. There is obviously more work to do pending funding but could it be that the best features of geopolymeric and hydraulic cements can be combined? –There are more polymeric species in Roman cements.

44. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 44 Non Newtonian Rheology The strongly positively charged small Mg++ atoms attract water (which is polar) in deep layers affecting the rheological properties and making concretes less “sticky” with added pozzolan It is not known how deep these layers get Etc. Ca++ = 114, Mg++ = 86 picometres

45. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 45 MgO Changes Surface Charge as the Ph Rises + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Mutual Repulsion => + + + + + + + + + + + + + + - - - - - - - Mutual Attraction This could be the reason for the greater tensile strength displayed during the early plastic phase of tec-cement concretes. Ph 12 ? Cement MgOSand MgO

46. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 46 Tec-Cement Tensile Strength Graphs by Oxford Uni Student Tensile strength is thought to be caused by change in surface charge on MgO particles from +ve to –ve at Ph 12 and electrostatic attractive forces

47. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 47 Rheology  TecEco concretes and mortars are: –Very homogenous and do not segregate easily. They exhibit good adhesion and have a shear thinning property. –Exhibit Bingham plastic qualities and react well to energy input. –Have good workability.  TecEco concretes with the same water/binder ratio have a lower slump but greater plasticity and workability.  A range of pumpable composites with Bingham plastic properties will be required in the future as buildings will be “printed.” (Robotics)

48. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 48 Technical Comparisons Geopolymers and Tec-Cement Concretes Tec-Cement ConcretesGeopolymers Can use a high proportion of pozzolanic materials Use a high proportion of pozzolanic materials Low temperature heat curing only. Often but not always require heat curing Low shrinkage More durable than PC concretes but not as acid resistant than Geopolymers Durable acid and alkali resistant.

49. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 49 Technical Comparisons Geopolymers and Tec-Cement Concretes (2) Tec-Cement ConcretesGeopolymers Fire retardants (Water or CO 2 releases. MgO is a smoke absorbent. Heat resistant Higher tensile strength than PC concretes Lower heat of hydration than pure PC concretes. Very low heat of hydration Not attacked by sulfate and chloride.

50. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 50 Other Comparisons = Common Problems Tec-Cement ConcretesGeopolymers Are a system. i.e. no single formulation ideal More sustainable with reduced net emissions. (Eco-cements can be net carbon sinks) More sustainable with reduced net emissions. Disruption by the PC industry - Diffuse and confuse the science. - Lack of understanding => “put downs” Disruption mentioned by Grant Lukey, Robert Temple, Davidovits and others. Not fragmented (yet).Fragmented – too many patents Standards ban MgO regardless of form. Standards suit PC not geopolymers.

51. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 51 TecEco and Geopolymer Groups  Mutual response to government –Changing standards to performance based. –Policy issues Procurement policies designed to foster new more sustainable materials technologies. Funding for sustainable new materials.  Mutual promotion of sustainability.  Educational – the buying public  Counter subversive tactics by the PC lobby There are definitely benefits to co-operation between the two emerging technologies e.g. EU research funding.

52. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 52 TecEco and the PC Cement Industry  The PC industry should: –Spend a little more money on research to move cementitous composites into better market space. –Spend a little less on litigation, remediation and arbitration because of the imperfect material they have. Worth thinking about in context of carbon taxes?

53. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 53 TecEco Cement Implementation Summary

54. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 54 High Performance-Lower Construction Costs  Less binders (OPC + magnesia) for the same strength.  Faster strength gain even with added pozzolans.  Elimination of shrinkage reducing associated costs.  Tolerance and consumption of water.  Reduction in bleed water enables finishing of lower floors whilst upper floors still being poured and increases pumpability.  Cheaper binders as less energy required  Increased durability will result in lower costs/energies/emissions due to less frequent replacement.  Because reactive magnesia is also an excellent plasticiser, other costly additives are not required for this purpose.  A wider range of aggregates can be utilised without problems reducing transport and other costs/energies/emissions. Foolproof Concrete?

55. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 55 TecEco Concretes - Lower Construction Costs (2)  Homogenous, do not segregate with pumping or work.  Easier placement and better finishing.  Reduced or eliminated carbon taxes.  Eco-cements can to a certain extent be recycled.  TecEco cements utilise wastes many of which improve properties.  Improvements in insulating capacity and other properties will result in greater utility.  Products utilising TecEco cements such as masonry and precast products can in most cases utilise conventional equipment and have superior properties.  A high proportion of brucite compared to Portlandite is water and of Lansfordite and nesquehonite compared to calcite is CO 2. –Every mass unit of TecEco cements therefore produces a greater volume of built environment than Portland and other calcium based cements. Less need therefore be used reducing costs/energy/emissions.

56. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 56 Summary  Simple, smart and sustainable? –TecEco cement technology has resulted in potential solutions to a number of problems with Portland and other cements including shrinkage, durability and corrosion and the immobilisation of many problem wastes and will provides a range of more sustainable building materials.  The right technology at the right time? –TecEco cement technology addresses important triple bottom line issues solving major global problems with positive economic and social outcomes. Climate Change Pollution Durability Corrosion Strength Delayed Reactions Placement, Finishing Rheology Shrinkage Carbon Taxes

57. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 57 TecEco Doing Things

58. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 58 The Use of Eco-Cements for Building Earthship Brighton By Taus Larsen, (Architect, Low Carbon Network Ltd.) The Low Carbon Network (www.lowcarbon.co.uk) was established to raise awareness of the links between buildings, the working and living patterns they create, and global warming and aims to initiate change through the application of innovative ideas and approaches to construction. England’s first Earthship is currently under construction in southern England outside Brighton at Stanmer Park and TecEco technologies have been used for the floors and some walling. Earthships are exemplars of low-carbon design, construction and living and were invented and developed in the USA by Mike Reynolds over 20 years of practical building exploration. They are autonomous earth-sheltered buildings independent from mains electricity, water and waste systems and have little or no utility costs. For information about the Earthship Brighton and other projects please go to the TecEco web site.

59. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 59 Repair of Concrete Blocks. Clifton Surf Club The Clifton Surf Life Saving Club was built by first pouring footings, On the footings block walls were erected and then at a later date concrete was laid in between. As the ground underneath the footings was sandy, wet most of the time and full of salts it was a recipe for disaster. Predictably the salty water rose up through the footings and then through the blocks and where the water evaporated there was strong efflorescence, pitting, loss of material and damage. The TecEco solution was to make up a formulation of eco-cement mortar which we doctored with some special chemicals to prevent the rise of any more moisture and salt. The solution worked well and appears to have stopped the problem.

60. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 60 Mike Burdon’s Murdunna Works Mike Burdon, Builder and Plumber. I work for a council interested in sutainability and have been involved with TecEco since around 2001 in a private capacity helping with large scale testing of TecEco tec-cements at our shack. I am interested in the potentially superior strength development and sustainability aspects. To date we have poured two slabs, footings, part of a launching ramp and some tilt up panels using formulations and materials supplied by John Harrison of TecEco. I believe that research into the new TecEco cements essential as overall I have found: 1.The rheological performance even without plasticizer was excellent. As testimony to this the contractors on the site commented on how easy the concrete was to place and finish. 2.We tested the TecEco formulations with a hired concrete pump and found it extremely easy to pump and place. Once in position it appeared to “gel up” quickly allowing stepping for a foundation to a brick wall. 3.Strength gain was more rapid than with Portland cement controls from the same premix plant and continued for longer. 4.The surfaces of the concrete appeared to be particularly hard and I put this down to the fact that much less bleeding was observed than would be expected with a Portland cement only formulation

61. Presentation downloadable from www.tececo.com 61 Tec-Cement Slab Whittlesea, Vic. Australia  On 17th March 2005 TecEco poured the first commercial slab in the world using tec-cement concrete with the assistance of one of the larger cement and pre-mix companies. –The formulation strategy was to adjust a standard 20 MPa high fly ash (36%) mix from the company as a basis of comparison. –Strength development, and in particular early strength development was good. Interestingly some 70 days later the slab is still gaining strength at the rate of about 5 MPa a month. –Also noticeable was the fact that the concrete was not as "sticky" as it normally is with a fly ash mix and that it did not bleed quite as much. –Shrinkage was low. 7 days - 133 micro strains, 14 days - 240 micro strains, 28 days - 316 micros strains and at 56 days - 470 microstrains.