WO-2026096665-A1 - SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SILICATE MATERIAL PRODUCTION

Abstract

A system for producing a silicate material, the system comprising: a first reactor comprising a first spray nozzle and a first airlock; the first reactor configured to receive a superheated steam; the first reactor configured to receive a first process gas; a second reactor comprising a second spray nozzle and a second airlock; the second reactor configured to receive a steam; and the second reactor configured to receive a second process gas. A method for producing a silicate material, the method comprising: heating a feedstock; disposing the feedstock in a reactor; applying steam to the feedstock to yield a calcium silicate material; cooling the calcium silicate material; applying moisture to the calcium silicate material; and carbonating the calcium silicate material to yield a carbonated silicate material. A calcium silicate material composition comprising: synthetic calcium silicate.

Inventors

• BOYKO, Nikita
• JADIDIAN, BAHRAM
• KOPP, DANIEL
• DAVIDSON, Mario
• QUINN, SEAN

Assignees

• Queens Carbon, Inc.

Dates

Publication Date

20260507

Application Date

20251029

Priority Date

20241029

Claims (20)

1. CLAIMS
2. What is claimed is:
3. 1. A system for producing a silicate material, said system comprising:
4. a first reactor comprising a first spray nozzle and a first airlock;
5. said first reactor configured to receive a superheated steam;
6. said first reactor configured to receive a first process gas;
7. a second reactor comprising a second spray nozzle and a second airlock;
8. said second reactor configured to receive a steam; and
9. said second reactor configured to receive a second process gas.
10. 2. The system of claim 1 wherein said first reactor further is disposed at an angle.
11. 3. The system of claim 1 wherein said first reactor comprises a first end cap.
12. 4. The system of claim 1 wherein said first reactor is a hydrothermal vapor recrystallization process reactor.
13. 5. The system of claim 1 further comprising an inlet for introducing and disposing liquid water within said first reactor.
14. 6. The system of claim 1 wherein the first process gas comprises carbon dioxide.
15. 7. The system of claim 1 wherein said second reactor comprises a screw auger.
16. 8. The system of claim 1 wherein said second reactor comprises a second end cap.
17. 9. The system of claim 1 further comprising an inlet for introducing and disposing liquid water within said second reactor.
18. 10. A method for producing a silicate material, the method comprising:
19. heating a feedstock;
20. disposing the feedstock in a reactor;

Description

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SILICATE MATERIAL PRODUCTION CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS [0001] This application claims priority to and the benefit of the filing of U. S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63/713,215, entitled "SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REACTORS USED IN SYNTHESIS OF CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS", filed on October 29, 2024, and U. S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63/853,384, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SILICATE MATERIAL PRODUCTION, filed on July 29, 2025, and the specification and claims thereof are incorporated herein by reference. BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION Field of the Invention (Technical Field): [0002] The present invention relates to systems and method for silicate material production. The present invention also relates generally to the field of production and more specifically to a new and useful system and method for reactors used in synthesis of cementitious materials. Background: [0003] Traditional cement production relies heavily on rotary kiln reactors, a large cylindrical reactor used to process raw materials such as limestone and clay into clinker, the essential component of cement. The process involves heating these materials to extremely high temperatures, which can be 1350 °C to 1450°C in the burning zone. These temperatures facilitate chemical reactions that form calcium silicates and calcium aluminates, the basis of clinker. However, this process is energy-intensive, typically relying on carbon-heavy fuels such as coal, oil, or natural gas, leading to high energy costs and significant CO2 emissions. Additionally, the equipment itself is costly to install and maintain due to the need for robust refractory linings and precise temperature control, further increasing the overall operational expenses. The combination of high operational temperatures, reliance on non-renewable energy sources, and high capital expenditure make traditional cement production both expensive and environmentally damaging. [0004] The cement and concrete industries are responsible for approximately 8% of global CO2 emissions. These emissions predominantly arise from the thermal decomposition of limestone (CaCO3), a principal component of Portland cement, and from the high-temperature processing conditions (typically exceeding 1400 °) required to achieve partial melting of cement raw materials during clinker formation. The calcination of limestone releases CO2 as a byproduct, in addition to the CO2 generated through the combustion of fossil fuels used to maintain these temperatures in conventional kilns. [0005] Efforts have been made to develop low-carbon alternatives to mitigate the environmental impact of cement production. One approach involves formulating cement with reduced limestone content or alternative chemistries; however, these systems often face long timelines for commercialization due to extensive testing, regulatory approvals, and standardization requirements. [0006] A more immediately scalable approach to reducing cement-related CO2 emissions involves the use of supplementary cementitious material (“SCM") to partially replace conventional Portland cement in mortar and concrete formulations at replacement levels ranging from 1% to 50%, up to 90%. SCMs may contain both natural materials and industrial byproducts. Among the most widely used are blast furnace slag and coal fly ash, which possess pozzolanic or latent hydraulic properties that enhance long-term strength development. However, the supply of these industrial byproduct SCMs is increasingly constrained. As the steel and coal power sectors undergo decarbonization, the production of slag and fly ash has sharply declined. Additionally, many legacy stockpiles are not intended for use in cementitious systems and suffer from inconsistent quality due to inadequate historical storage and poor material traceability. [0007] The production of conventional Portland cement is an energy-intensive process and a major contributor to global anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. As part of ongoing efforts to mitigate the environmental impact of cement production, the development of low-carbon alternatives has received attention. Among these, low calcium cements and carbonation-enabled supplementary cementitious material (“SCM”) have emerged as promising pathways for reducing CO2 intensity. [0008] Outside of the cement and material production domain, supplementary cementitious materials such as fly ash, and ground granulated blast furnace slag (“GGBFS”) have been widely adopted to partially replace Portland cement in concrete formulations. These materials have long-term viability challenges as their source industry decarbonize or shut-down. For example, coal-fired power plants are the primary source for fly-ash - the emergence and adoption of inexpensive and cleaner energy solutions, such as nuclear, solar, natural gas, geothermal, challenge that industry and longer-term fly ash scarcity. Similarly for slag, as the steel industry decarboniz