1. Sorting Technologies for CCA Treated Wood

2. Objective To design and implement an automated system to effectively sort CCA treated wood from other wood types at facilities such as C&D facilities

3. Automated System Designed using x-ray fluorescence technology or Designed using laser induced breakdown spectroscopy technology

4. Motivation CCA treated wood => ~ 6 % of all wood waste at C&D facilities Amounts of CCA treated wood at C&D facilities increasing At 6 % level, cannot be used as mulch or burned to generate fuel

5. Sorting Studies Chemical stain method –laboratory results –field results from pilot studies X-ray fluorescence (XRF) –laboratory results Laser Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) –laboratory results

6. Automated System –X-ray fluorescence –Laser induced breakdown spectroscopy Training and monitoring –chemical stains

7. Chemical Stains Chrome Azurol S PAN Indicator Rubeanic Acid

8. Performance on whole wood 0.25 pcf 0.6 pcf 2.5 pcf

9. Laboratory Results Colors get darker with increasing retention levels Chrome Azurol and PAN indicator performed best: colors not usually found in C&D waste materials reacted fastest and easy to apply Rubeanic acid: green color could be mistaken for other material inconvenience of spraying with two different solutions

10. Field Studies Performed to determine if chemical stains could be used at C&D facilities to sort CCA treated wood from other wood types Three facilities studied

13. Findings from Field Studies PAN indicator and Chrome Azurol S performed best Time and labor intensive Assumed untreated wood waste piles contained 9 % to 30 % of CCA treated wood CCA treated wood found mostly in construction type debris Demolition debris contains increasing amounts of CCA treated wood

14. Current Practical Applications Sorting Small Quantities of Treated from Untreated Wood Screening Fuel Quality Training Tool

15. Design for Shelter

16. Detector Mounting Design

17. XRF Based on emission of x-rays Characteristic x-ray emitted by the element is read by the instrument

18. Model 400 No special training required User friendly Printout or output easy to read and understand Head Analyzer

19. XRF Instruments Low maintenance, few consumables, easy cleaning No repetitive calibration necessary (6 mo. to 2 yrs.) Life span of 10 years

20. XRF Instrument Cost range from $20,000 - $100,000 Detector replacement cost of $1,800 - $2,400 (life span of 5 years) Licensing may be required Sensor protected by a small beryllium window ($100 for replacement)

21. Results of XRF Studies Arsenic is the best indicator metal, although all three metals can be analyzed for Optimum count time of 2 seconds, would be even less for on-line analysis 1,800 ft/hr for detection of 1-ft board (2 s) 3,600 ft/hr for detection of 1-ft board (1 s) Detection of CCA for Model 400 is possible at 1 inch distance with a plastic shield

22. LIBS Based on creation of microplasma by the use of a high-power laser A signal from emitted light transmitted to a detector

23. LIBS Instruments Detectors –Continuum Minilite ($50,000) More sensitive Monitors one element at a time –Ocean Optics ($2,000) Not as sensitive Monitors more than one element at a time Laser

24. LIBS Instruments Flash lamp replacement cost of ~ $1,000 (replacement every 3 to 6 months) No licensing required

25. LIBS Results Elements with higher wavelength more sensitive to analysis –Chromium (425 nm): detected –Copper (327nm and 324 nm): detected, smaller signal –Arsenic (200 nm): not detected Chromium best indicator metal

26. LIBS Results Shortest analysis time 1/5 of a second (200 ms) 4,500 ft/hr for detection of 1-ft board Spacing detector and wood being analyzed could be 12 “

27. Air Conveyor Belt Air-Tight Box Laser Lens Mirror Puff of Air Laser Beam Up to 12” Detector To PC Glass Window Fiber-optic Cable

29. Questions?