Is Sand Supply a Casting Concern?

The immediate future for the industrial sand market appears to have stabilized amid the fracking boom. Take a look at supply and demand issues that could impact your operation.

David Jablonski, Badger Mining Corp., Berlin, Wisconsin, and Nicholas Leider, Associate Editor

Click here for the digital edition.

The metalcasting industry uses an estimated 100 million tons of sand annually, including recycled and new material, to produce a majority of its castings. According to a 2014 Metal Casting Design & Purchasing survey of metalcasting facilities in the U.S., nearly 50% used a green sand casting process, (horizontally and/or vertically parted) while 35% reported nobake casting capabilities. (Note: Respondents may use both.)

Of the 100 million tons of sand in use annually, metalcasters only purchase somewhere between five and six million tons, meaning much of the supply is reused for an extended period of time through many production cycles. Still, considering the ubiquity of sand in metalcasting operations, both for producing cores and molds, issues related to supply and demand could significantly impact the industry’s ability to produce timely, cost-effective components.

The Recession & Fracking Boom

The recession of 2008-2009 resulted in a considerable decline in metalcasting production, leading to facilities consuming less sand. During this economic downturn, however, the oil and gas industry experienced a significant boom in fracking, thanks in part to technological advancements in horizontal drilling. Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is a drilling process that uses silica sand to fracture subterranean rock to release previously unavailable oil and gas reserves. Fuel suppliers pump a slurry, which includes silica sand, into wells at high pressure.

Fracking is forecast to consume approximately 60 million tons of sand a year by 2017. Prior to this recent surge in demand, the entire industrial sand market was roughly 30 million tons. The metalcasting industry is the third largest consumer of sand at roughly five million tons per year, slightly behind the consumption of glass producers.

With the fracking boom in full swing during the metalcasting industry’s recovery from the recession in 2010-2011, the sand market went through a turbulent period. When the glass and metalcasting industries exited the recession looking to increase consumption, the fracking industry already had purchased much of the available capacity. There was a real shortage for many metalcasters because major sand producers were running at or near capacity.

But metalcasters were able to procure the necessary sand as the production of fracking sands boomed. Suppliers who had long serviced the metalcasting industry were able to modestly increase the amount headed for metalcasters, while the total capacity of silica sand increased dramatically.

Considering the growth in both supply and demand of fracking sand, the average price for industrial silica sand as a whole has increased substantially since 2007. Sand destined for the metalcasting industry had remained relatively stable until the shortage in 2011. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average price then jumped nearly 20% (see Table 3). Since then, the price appears to have stabilized, with the 2011 price increase a part of a new normal.

Due to a number of issues including differing technical specification, the price of sand destined for metalcasting facilities is significantly lower than sand used in fracking. A relatively insignificant cost for oil and gas producers, sand is a material integral to the metalcasting industry’s ability to run smoothly. This difference in price has led some sand suppliers to focus primarily on fracking operations, but the metalcasting industry still has options in acquiring its necessary volume of sand. Also, sand destined for metalcasters is less profitable per ton, but the industry provides stability when compared to oil and gas producers.

Fracking sand is influenced strongly by the price of gas and oil, meaning suppliers can go from not being able to produce enough sand to a situation where they can’t stop production quickly enough. In contrast, the price of castings has been relatively stable. Consequently, the oil and gas market can go through two or three economic cycles for every one of other industries based on a variety of worldwide economic factors. Additionally, metalcasters tend to require a more standard amount of sand per month at fixed locations, while fracking demand can spike in disparate locations when particular wells require large amounts of sand.

Forecasting Sand’s Future

Barring significant economic unrest, the supply and pricing of metalcasting sand should remain fairly stable in the next few years. That being said, the possibility for a crisis in the industry’s sand supply is not zero, though many would argue it is remote. The biggest threat would be a massive surge in demand for fracking sands, which, considering the growth in overall capacity in recent years, remains unlikely.

Predictably, the further one looks ahead, the more uncertain the market appears. Many analysts expect natural gas and oil prices to increase sharply near the end of the decade, making sand for fracking a more valuable commodity. If the price difference between fracking sand and metalcasting sand becomes sizeable enough, suppliers may migrate toward the more lucrative market.

Since the advent of the fracking boom, the relationships between metalcasters and sand suppliers have grown a bit closer. Metalcasters can avoid problems in their sand supply by getting to know their suppliers. That way, they get a sense of the supplier’s dedication to the metalcasting market and whether it will be tempted by the fracking industry if prices reach a certain point.

Metalcasting will be around for a long time—as long as there is a need for manufacturing. Many sand suppliers understand it is a stable market that represents a decent volume of material. The number of customers for the material is healthy, so a supplier can diversify its customer base by dealing with the metalcasting industry.   

W

ith gridlock in the 113th Congress and continued to resistance to the administration’s legislative agenda, President Obama is utilizing federal agencies to achieve his policy agenda. Dozens of federal regulations, directives and policies are being pushed through via government agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Labor Relations Board, U.S. Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The wave of regulations is reflected by the fact that over the last five years, 157 new major regulations have been released, many of which have direct impact on U.S. manufacturing and the metalcasting industry.
A major regulation is defined as a rule with $100 million or more in expected economic impact. Since President Obama was elected, a record 3,659 final rules and 2,594 proposed rules have been issued. Those that are not deemed significant are not required to include a cost-benefit analysis, even as their layered implementation has a cumulative economic impact on businesses. More regulations are on the docket for 2014, 2015 and 2016 addressing issues like health care, crystalline silica, power plant emissions and ozone protection.
EPA Regulations
Among the several EPA regulations recently introduced, the power plant rule, ozone legislation and the proposed waters of the U.S. rule may have the most impact on metalcasters.
Power Plant Regulation
EPA’s Clean Power Plan Rule, released June 2, proposes emission guidelines for states to follow in developing plans to address greenhouse gas emissions from existing fossil fuel-fired electric generating units. Specifically, EPA is proposing state-specific rate-based goals for carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector, as well as guidelines for states to follow in developing plans to achieve the state-specific goals.  
Manufacturers will be hit twice by greenhouse gas regulations, both as users of the energy being regulated and as industries considered next in line to receive similar regulations from EPA.
The current proposed power plant rule would substantially increase electricity and natural gas costs and create reliability problems, all for a relatively small global climate impact. For example, EPA says the proposed rule would eliminate 730 million metric tons of carbon by 2030. From 2010 to 2011, China’s carbon dioxide emissions rose by 705 million tons. The rule would substantially reduce use of coal-fired generation. Coal-fired power is a low cost and reliable source of electricity. Importantly, coal competes with natural gas on a Btu basis and helps keep electricity prices from rising. Many in the business community believe the EPA power plant rule would increase dependency on natural gas for power generation.
A lawsuit against EPA challenging the agency’s failure to assess the job-loss impact of its power plant rules has been allowed into federal court (Murray Energy Corporation v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 14-1112). A three-judge panel was expected to hear the case this month.
In September, EPA extended the comment period for its “Clean Power Plan Rule” 45 days, until December 1. The American Foundry Society (AFS) is in the process of receiving input from its members and drafting comments.  Based on comments from EPA staff, the agency still intends to finalize the rule by June 2015.
Ozone Regulation
This summer EPA’s Advisory Panel and staff recommended to the EPA Administrator that the national air standards for ozone be lowered to 60-70 parts per billion (ppb) from the current 75-ppb standard, which was set in 2008. The agency cites scientific data and exposure information that “provide strong support” for revising the health-based national ambient air quality standard for ozone of 75 ppb.
The EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, which prepared the assessment, said a revised standard set within that range “could reasonably be judged to provide an appropriate degree of public health protection, including for at-risk populations and life stages.”  
The regulation could become the most costly in U.S. history if the new standard is implemented. In 2010, EPA estimated the annual compliance costs for a 60-ppb standard would be $90 billion in 2020. The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) released a report in July that estimated a revised ozone standard of 60 ppb could cost the U.S. economy up to $270 billion per year and result in the closure of one-third of the nation’s coal-fired power plants. The lower standard will require large reductions in NOx and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from power plants, manufacturing facilities and mobile sources such as cars, trucks and off-road vehicles. Requiring a reduction to 60 ppb would leave nearly all of the U.S. in a so-called “nonattainment zone.” Metalcasting facilities of all sizes in nonattainment areas would not be able to make investments and expand operations without other businesses reducing their emissions or, worse yet, shuttering their operations. EPA has until December 1 to decide whether to keep or change current national air quality standards for ozone. President Obama delayed EPA’s previous attempt to promulgate a lower ozone air quality standard in 2011. A final rule is expected to be made by October 2015.
Waters of the U.S. Rule
In March, EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers proposed a new rule to redefine the term “waters of the United States” and the agencies’ jurisdiction over waters they can regulate under the Clean Water Act. The rule extends federal jurisdiction well beyond traditional navigable waters to tributaries, adjacent waters (such as ponds) and vaguely defined “other waters.” EPA’s proposal exposes new facilities and expansion projects to additional federal permitting, triggering new upfront costs, project delays and threats of litigation. Permitting requirements could cost metalcasters nearly $200,000 in some cases.
On September 10, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act (H.R. 5078), which requires EPA and the Corps to revisit the proposed rule with direct consultation with state and local officials to determine which bodies of water should be covered under the Clean Water Act. The White House has issued a veto threat against this legislation, and the Senate is unlikely to take up the Overreach Protection Act this year.
EPA has received more than 500,000 comments to date on the proposal, and the comment period was extended to Nov. 14. The AFS Environmental Health and Safety 10-F Committee assembled comments from the industry on how the new permitting requirements will impact metalcasters. Information about the proposed rule can be found at www.epa.gov/uswaters.
OSHA Initiatives
OSHA’s top priorities in President Obama’s second term have included increased injury reporting requirements, crystalline silica, combustible dust and increased enforcement. 2014 has shown a continued focus on high hazard industries such as metalcasting through the use of national and local emphasis programs, such as the silica and primary metals national emphasis programs.
Crystalline Silica Standard
Of perhaps largest concern to the metalcasting industry is the proposed standard on occupational exposure to respirable crystalline silica. OSHA formally unveiled the comprehensive regulation to control crystalline silica in September 2013. It is one of the safety agency’s most far-reaching regulatory initiatives ever proposed for the metalcasting industry and a number of other key sectors. In addition to the 50% reduction in the permissible exposure limit (PEL), OSHA is proposing requirements including, but not limited to, medical surveillance, record keeping and prohibitions on certain work practices, including compressed air and dry sweeping.
AFS believes the current PEL is adequate to protect the health of exposed workers from silica-related disease when it is fully complied with and enforced. OSHA estimates the rule will result in approximately $44 million in annual costs to the industry. This stands in sharp contrast to the industry analyses whereby AFS estimates a conservative cost to the industry of $2.2 billion per year, or 276% of profits. OSHA expects to issue a final rule by 2016.
For the past year, AFS has been working on gathering and submitting detailed comments and background materials for OSHA, including: prehearing comments submitted Feb. 11; testimony at a March 28 public hearing in Washington, D.C.; post-hearing comments responsive to OSHA’s request for additional information June 3; and the post-hearing brief filed on August 18.
With the docket closed, metalcasters can continue to educate their lawmakers about the impact that rule will have on their metalcasting facility and our industry. The metalcasting association in its meetings with lawmakers is focusing on the regulatory overreach, feasibility and cost of the proposed standard.
Temporary Workers
Metalcasters also should be aware of an initiative launched last year to better train and protect the safety of temporary workers. The OSHA Temporary Worker Initiative includes outreach, training and enforcement.
At least 14 temp workers died during their first day at a new worksite in 2013 across all industries. In recent months, OSHA has investigated reports of temporary workers suffering serious or fatal injuries and cited a number of businesses. The agency and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has released recommended practices for staffing agencies and host employers to protect temporary workers from hazards on the job. The new publication highlights the joint responsibility of the staffing agency and host employer to ensure temporary workers are provided a safe work environment.
The new guidance recommends that staff agency/host employer contracts clearly define the temporary worker’s tasks and the safety and health responsibilities of each employer.  The new Recommended Practices publication is available at: www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3735.pdf.
Injury and Illness Reporting
Two proposals on injury and illness reporting were reclassified as long-term action in May, including the Injury and Illness Prevention Program (I2P2), which would require employers to establish formal written plans to find and fix real and potential workplace hazards, and the MSD Column to OSHA’s Form 300 Injury and Illness Log, which would be used to enforce ergonomics.
Combustible Dust Standard
The Chemical Safety Board documented hundreds of fatalities and serious injuries resulting from combustible dust explosions in a 2006 study. As a result, OSHA began working on a potential rule in 2009 that would require industries, including metalcasting, to better control combustible dust hazards. A number of OSHA standards address aspects of this hazard, but the agency does not have a comprehensive standard. According to the agency’s current regulatory agenda, OSHA intends to initiate a review panel on the proposed rule in December, as required under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA).  If OSHA does commence a review panel, AFS plans to have a member company be part of the discussions. While a proposed standard is not expected soon, OSHA is gathering information and currently regulating combustible dust through a national emphasis program.