EAF offers one of the most flexible routes to manufacture steel castings of different grades. Charge selection is simpler as one can add all sizes and varieties of scarp including machine shop turnings and borings. As refinement is possible, incidences of high carbon,sulphur and phosphorous is not a problem. Addition of alloys is simpler and winning some of the alloys from the slag is possible. The increasing cost of clean and dense scrap and its shortage,might outweigh all other factors in favor of EAF.
The negatives would be the need of high power transformers, refractory costs and cost of graphite electrode. Also there is a need to have highly skilled operators which is a major problem. Emissions from the EAF need to be controlled with suitable dust and fume extractors, which will increase the capital costs. Maintenance crew required will be large per shift.
Induction furnaces offer a clean and simple method to melt steel. The capital costs are lower due to low investment on electrical and pollution control equipments. There is virtually no smoke emission from induction melting. Low level of skilled operators are needed and maintenance crew rarely needed.
However it is not versatile in changing over from a high carbon heat to low carbon or from high chrome iron heat to carbon steel heat.Also the charge selection and preparation needs to be carefully done. (The cost of scrap and alloys charged significantly affect the melt cost). There is no refinement possible.
I am not able to offer any comment on peak demand charges as this depends on the local electricity supplier. I always watch for the peak demand recorded as we have two cost components power demand charges and energy units consumed. During a melt campaign if there is a surge in power demand due to bad scrap distribution in arc furnace,the charges are billed for the complete month,but in Induction Furnace the possibilty does not exist.
Chocolates,men,coffee: are somethings liked better rich!!
(noticed in a coffee shop)