Talk:Aluminium dross recycling

many of the citations and external links in this article appear to be bias toward a particular company.

There doesn't appear to be any information on chemical recycling methods, simply claims that mechanical methods are superior.

Taha bankrupcy/Aluminium dross as hazardous waste

Taha Fertilizer Industries went bankrupt several years ago. There are serious allegations that their aim of recycling Aluminium dross into fertilizer is not actually a viable process, and that the material is in fact just hazardous waste.

I will note that 5 of the 13 current sources on this page relate to Taha Fertilizer Industries supposed environmentally friendly methods. While in reality it seems Taha never managed to process any of the waste, and instead illegally dumped it in various locations, causing hazardous environmental contamination. Several individuals were hospitalized due to exposure to the dumped dross.

It seems highly questionable whether Aluminium Dross Recycling is in fact a viable process. Omcnoe (talk) 05:15, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

I remain highly concerned that this article presents a misleading industry-pushed viewpoint that fails to be supported by reliable sources. The very name of the article implies that aluminium dross recycling is a real and viable industrial process, but the article's own sources do not support that viewpoint, a majority are either connected to the now disgraced Taha Asia Pacific operation, or are internal Wikipedia references. Environmental reports from the NZ Tiwai smelter indicate they have been searching for a processing option for this hazardous dross for nearly 20 years now. It looks more and more likely that the material is not safely recyclable. Omcnoe (talk) 04:19, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Aluminum dross recycling is different

Is this a necessary article? 2600:1007:B12E:47FE:D58D:8411:ED2D:2ADF (talk) 20:43, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I do agree that this is a very poor article. However, it does exists as a process with aluminium metal being recovered from the dirty oxide and flux mixtures. The resulting waste is a very dangerous and polluting material which generates copious amounts of hydrogen and ammonia in the presence of atmospheric moisture and bursts into flame when well wetted. However , this is personal knowledge as a regulator of such plants but the industries involved tend to be very shy about promoting their business in reliable sources. I think that right approach would be to substantially improve the article by tracking down RSs which must exist somewhere. I would also agree that the fertilizer issue is a total blind. Nothing to see here folks.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:27, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps somebody could extract relevant meaning from this regulatory document to improve the article.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

As it currently stands the article promotes an Aluminium industry viewpoint that dross recycling is a viable process, of which I'm not convinced. At the very least all the content relating to Taha Asia Pacific should be removed, given the scandalous outcome from that case, and a mention added explaining the outcome there.

But after doing so is there enough content left? The majority of references are either related to Taha/ NZ Aluminium Smelter, or they are just internal wikipedia links.

I'm not convinced that good sources exist on this topic, removing the article may be the best outcome. Omcnoe (talk) 04:31, 10 July 2022 (UTC)