from each PM changeout and recovery can provide valua- ble insights into vendor performance and other key metrics. As previously mentioned, this data can also be helpful in evaluating reactor performance and tracking PM losses. Unfortunately, the absence of formal, documented expe- rience in PM recovery can leave companies lacking a thor- ough understanding of the technical complexities involved in PM recovery contracts, which often contain unique terms and conditions. Misunderstanding these details can lead to significant revenue losses. Essential control points It is essential to recognise that expenses related to trans- portation, PM refining services, and third-party representa - tion are small compared to the inherent value of the PM. Failing to address contract specifics can end up being more costly than the catalyst reclamation process itself. The fol- lowing are key contractual factors that can greatly influence metal value returns or increase costs: Splitting limit : This defines the maximum acceptable discrep - ancy between buyer and seller analytical results. If results fall within this limit, the average is calculated for transaction purposes. Exceeding the limit necessitates a control sample sent to a third-party lab for resolution, known as the ‘umpire.’ Standard industry practice dictates a splitting limit of 1% rel- ative, but less scrupulous refiners may attempt to raise this to 5% or even 10%, risking substantial financial compromise. A 1% limit mitigates risk and enhances analytical accuracy by demonstrating sample consistency and compelling labs to replicate each other’s findings. Lot size limitation : Implementing limits on the monetary value of individual assay lots supports control and risk management. Excessive monetary concentration in a single lot does not improve laboratory accuracy. It is advisable for PM refiners to create multiple smaller-value assay lots (for example, €500,000) rather than fewer larger-value lots to account for standard deviation and repeatability. Penalties and hidden charges : Some PM reclaimers include penalties in fine print based on powder levels, carbon con - tent, or minute quantities of other elements in spent cat- alyst shipments. These penalties can exceed €40,000 per instance if clients are unaware of these risks. To sum up these bespoke control points for safeguarding your profits: Contractual details : Understand the distinct terminology in PM reclaim contracts and meticulously review all provisions. Third-party oversight : Consider engaging witnesses for reclamation and possibly representation for catalyst manu- facturing processes and reactor loading/unloading. Third-party laboratory : Comprehend assay exchanges and maintain thorough records to evaluate third-party lab perfor- mance. Ideally, less than 10% of exchanges should require umpire involvement. If the umpire process is necessary more than 10% of the time, and you find your company is consist - ently on the losing end, you may need to find a new lab vendor. Shipping and hazardous classification : While outsourced handlers can aid, ensure experts internally and externally manage liabilities and transport expenses, especially for shipments classified as hazardous.
recover virtually all the Re from spent catalyst lots, maxim- ising the return value because the catalyst owners are paid based on total PM content. Wise customers will watch the PM refinery contract language very carefully: terms regarding the values being returned should be based on total PM contained and not on acid-soluble PM content. Settlement on acid-soluble values is almost always the equivalent of losing some PM assets. Accurately weighing catalyst shipments, performing pre- cise sampling, and following the highest industry stand- ards for PM analysis are essential. Choosing a PM refiner based solely on the lowest bid can jeopardise sampling and assaying processes, potentially leading to inaccurate assessments and financial losses. Achieving a precise evaluation of PM assets requires skilled personnel, properly calibrated equipment, and ade- quate time for thorough analysis – resources that demand training, maintenance, and other necessary investments (see Figure 2 ). Once a pre-qualification audit has been completed and the capabilities of the chosen refiner are confirmed, catalyst owners should strongly consider overseeing the weighing and sampling processes in person. Alternatively, reputable third-party representation companies specialising in this field can serve as on-site monitors, ensuring accurate data collection, verifying the PM refiner’s practices, and main - taining custody of samples throughout the analysis. This rigorous oversight ensures that all procedures are followed correctly and results are reliable. Documentation In recent years, the dynamics within the petroleum and chemical industries have resulted in frequent turnover of roles and responsibilities. With the typical lifespan of a PM catalyst ranging from two to five years, more purchasing agents, procurement managers, and process engineers are facing their first catalyst changeouts every year. This highlights the importance of establishing a formal, in-house programme to manage PM. Using spreadsheets and databases to store historical data Figure 2 Precision and accuracy; most microbalances in precious metals labs are calibrated to one ten-thousandth of a gram
50
Catalysis 2025
www.digitalrefining.com
Powered by FlippingBook