Search Documents

Heap leaching accounts for around 20% of the global production of copper. In heap leaching coarsely crushed ore particles are contacted with an aqueous lixiviant percolating through large packed beds (heaps) of the ore particles, with the loaded solution collected at the foot of the heap for metal recovery, solution make-up and recycle. While dominant for copper oxide acid leaching, it finds application also in copper sulphide (bio) leaching. Despite their apparent simplicity, heaps are in fact complex chemical reactors in which a number of competing sub-processes determine the overall rate of metal extraction. Therefore, meaningful prediction of copper production rates from heaps, as well as operational optimisation and control, all hinge on a comprehensive and quantitative understanding of these complexities. The paper gives a comprehensive overview of the various sub-processes in copper heap leaching and their interactions, including those relating to mineral-particle-solution-gas phase interactions at the micro-scale bulk transport and distribution of solution in unsaturated dense beds at the macro-scale. On the basis of a more fundamental understanding and modelling, the potential for optimized operation offers new opportunities for the extraction of value from both low-grade and complex polymetallic ores. INTRODUCTION Heap leaching is one of the percolation leaching technologies, which includes in situ leaching, dump leaching, heap leaching and vat leaching (Bartlett, 1998). The common phenomenon in all these technologies is the transport of leach solution through a fixed bed of ore particles, which interacts with the solid as it migrates along its path. The target minerals are released into solution and with its flow are carried out of the bed. The targeted dissolved metal species are recovered from solution through various hydrometallurgical techniques, especially solvent extraction (SX), before the barren solution is returned to the leach process. Heap leaching is practised in three main types of applications: sulphuric acid leaching of copper oxide ores, cyanide leaching of gold ores as well as the oxidative acid leaching of secondary copper sulphide ores, usually with the assistance of certain microorganisms and, more recently, in the presence of chlorides (CaCl2, sea water). While gold heap leaching dates back to the 1960s, large scale copper heap leaching commenced in Chile from the 1980s, and sulphide heap leaching emerged essentially as a consequence of acid leaching from mixed oxide/sulphide ores from the 1990s (Watling, 2006).

Jan 1, 2019

By Roland W. Merwin

The Bureau of Mines has studied the possibility of using the heap leaching process for treating the gold ores in the sedimentary beds of northeastern Nevada. This paper summarizes all available information on the technical and economic feasibility of heap leaching oxidized ores from these beds, past industry application of vat leaching, results of recent Bureau of Mines and industry tests on heap leaching ores from this region, and requirements for planning the proper application of heap leaching. Preliminary tests on representative samples of ores from the region show that a satisfactory recovery of gold can be obtained by heap leaching the ores with cyanide at a relatively coarse size. Significant deposits of gold ore occur in sedimentary beds of various locations over an extended area 40 miles wide and 200 miles long in northeastern Nevada. The area is centered 40 miles west of and runs parallel to the leading edge of the Roberts Mountain thrust fault system, a prominent geologic feature in the area. The general locations of past and present gold mining operations are shown in figure 1. (slide 1)

Jan 1, 1969

By V. I. Lakshmanan, I. G. McColl

"Heap leaching of gold ores in permafrost conditions is feasible provided certain criteria are met. These criteria include relatively short heap leach residence time and the availability of waste heat.This paper describes the conceptual design of such a system for a mining operation in the North West Territories of Canada. The design includes the concept of continuous countercurrent leaching in enclosed ore heaps.Indicative capital and operating costs are given.INTRODUCTIONIn April 1984, Acres Davy McKee Engineering Inc. (ADM Eng.) in association with Ontario Research Foundation (ORF), was invited to carry out a preliminary design, cost estimate and financial analysis to assess the viability of gold heap leaching in a permafrost region in North West Territories, Canada.An orebody was being explored which could, by nature of its mineralogy, be upgraded substantially by crushing and screening in the size range of 1/4 in. to 3/4 in. It was proposed to process the screen undersize through an existing gold mill on site and to treat the oversize material in a heap leach facility to be constructed adjacent to the existing mill.Despite the formidable challenges imposed by isolation, permafrost and harsh winter conditions, the heap leach project was considered worthy of examination because of the relatively high grade of the heap leach material (> 0.1 oz/ton), very short leach times (in the range of 1 to 4 days) and the availability of substantial quantities of waste heat from the diesel generating station on site.Design challenges included the necessity to maintain the permafrost in frozen condition, to prevent freezing of ore and leach solution, to limit size of construction materials to that which could be carried in a Hercules freight plane and to contain water usage at an absolute minimum level."

Jan 1, 1987

By Robert G. Woolery, S. Ramachandran, James A. Weber, Donald J. Hansen

Union Carbide began looking seriously at heap leaching in 1971. At that time some 1.6 million tons of mineral averaging 0.40 kg U308 /t) (0.80 lb U308) were stockpiled at various sites around the Gas Hills, Wyoming, uranium facility. Several alternatives for economically exploiting these reserves were considered and heap leaching seemed the most attractive. At the time, Western Nuclear Inc. was operating a heap leaching project nearby in which the low-grade ore was leached with sulfuric acid, the product liquor treated in an on site solvent extraction circuit, and the stripped product liquor re-acidified and recycled. The operators were most generous in allowing us to visit their site and in answering our questions. They were also helpful in discussing the problems associated with heap leaching. Their experience confirmed our belief that it was possible to operate a heap leach profitably on material too low grade for conventional milling.

Jan 3, 1978

By Robert G. Woolery, S. Ramachandran, James A. Weber, Donald J. Hansen

Union Carbide began looking seriously at heap leaching in 1971. At that time some 1.6 million tons of mineral averaging 0.40 kg U3O8 /t) (0.80 lb U3O8) were stockpiled at various sites around the Gas Hills, Wyoming, uranium facility. Several alternatives for economically exploiting these reserves were considered and heap leaching seemed the most attractive. At the time, Western Nuclear Inc. was operating a heap leaching project nearby in which the low-grade ore was leached with sulfuric acid, the product liquor treated in an on site solvent extraction circuit, and the stripped product liquor re-acidified and recycled. The operators were most generous in allowing us to visit their site and in answering our questions. They were also helpful in discussing the problems associated with heap leaching. Their experience confirmed our belief that it was possible to operate a heap leach profitably on material too low grade for conventional milling. Based largely on what we had learned from Western Nuclear's experience, we undertook a program involving a laboratory study to determine the characteristics of the mineral stockpiles, as related to heap leaching, and to conduct a pilot heap leach adjoining our Gas Hill mill. Basically the pilot heap construction and leach procedure were similar to those described in the literature l, 2 with certain modifications to permit detailed monitoring of the operation. In May 1972, the decision was made to construct a test heap. The UCC plant at Gas Hills, Wyoming was selected as the most appropriate site for the following reasons: (1) The necessary equipment for heap construction was readily available. (2) Stockpiles of mineral from the various mining sites were on hand: (3) Construction of the heap could be made on an abandoned tailings pile minimizing problems associated with environmental approval. (4) Proximity of the mill would allow product streams to be absorbed into existing circuits. (5) Necessary utilities were available. (6) Tailings water from the existing circuit could be used for leaching. A program for the pilot heap leach was developed with the following primary objectives. (1) To confirm the data obtained in bench-scale tests particularly on uranium recovery, acid usage, and ore permeability. (2) To evaluate plastic liners used for base preparation. (3) To investigate heap configuration variables. (4) To determine heap leach amenability of the different mineral sources. (5) To establish the economics of heap leaching low-grade ores.

Jan 1, 1979

By M. Vaillé, B. Bossé, N. Durupt, A. Michaut

Imouraren is a sedimentary uranium deposit (> 150,000 tU @ 800 ppm), located approximately 100 km North-Northwest of Agadez (Niger); its depth reaches 110 to 170 meters. For low-grades ores, heap leaching is commonly considered as the appropriate technology for metal recovery. More precisely, the ore is crushed (≤ 300 mm) and agglomerated before being stacked. In this case, sulfuric acid can be added during agglomeration and/or irrigation (for three months to a year) to improve uranium recovery. It is known that mineralogical, chemical and physical properties of the uranium ore impact recovery, yet many challenges remain to increase recovery using this process. For example, ore heterogeneity and spatial variability (e.g., variation in uranium, carbonate and/or clay contents) can affect heap leaching performances (i.e., metal recovery, acid consumption or neutralization, percolation rate). However, laboratory column tests using composite ore sample that do not consider ore heterogeneity are widely used to anticipate recovery. Consequently, a new approach that consists in using Imouraren drill core ore samples was recently investigated. This latter also enabled a better assessment of the main parameters that influence uranium recovery and proposed a new predictive model to optimize mining operations.

Jan 1, 2020

By T. J. De Mull

The Alligator Ridge Mine is located 70 miles northwest of Ely in White Pine County, Nevada. Development of the mine began in the late 1970's as a joint venture between Amselco Minerals, Inc. and Occidental Minerals Corporation, with Amselco as the operating partner. Early in 1983 Nerco Minerals Company acquired Occidental's share of the property. The mine and ore processing facility have operated at capacity since 1981 producing 680,000 tonnes of ore and 1,900 kg of gold per year. The gold ore deposits at Alligator Ridge consist of disseminated micron-size gold particles in a silicified siltstone matrix. The deposit comprises three separate but adjacent areas of mineralization that are designated as Vantage 1, Vantage 2, and Vantage 3 after the name of the basin in which the deposits lie.

Jan 1, 1983

By J. D. McBeth, G. M. Potter, Ramon Pizarro

Heap leaching is used by the Carlin Gold Mining Co., Carlin, Nev., to supplement conventional processing of gold ore by agitation-leaching and countercurrent decantation. Selected open-pit ore containing about 0.072 oz Au per ton is crushed to 3/4 inch, dumped by truck on an asphalt pad, and leached by sprinkling with dilute cyanide solution for 7 days. The heap is then drained and removed by front-end loader to tailings disposal. About 70 percent of the gold is dissolved. Leach solution from the heap joins the pregnant solution from countercurrent decantation for gold recovery by zinc precipitation. Four leach pads, each with a capacity of 1,400 tons of ore, are in use. About 10,000 tons of ore are heap leached monthly from about April through October. Heap leaching is recessed during freezing weather. Labor, equipment, and reagent requirements for heap leaching are presented.

Jan 1, 1974

By L. R. Todd

Gold Fields' Mesquite mine, located in southeastern California, heap leaches low grade gold ore at an annual rate of 2.7 Mt (3 million st). Ore is crushed in a two stage open circuit and belt agglomerated prior to loading on the leach pads. Since initial heap construction in October of 1985, a number of operating practices have been modified and several agglomeration techniques have been tested in an effort to improve percolation and reduce leaching time. Findings to date are discussed.

Jan 1, 1987

By Robin J. Hickson

The Ortiz Mine is operated by Gold Fields Mining Corporation, a subsidiary of Consolidated Gold Fields Ltd., one of the world's major gold producers. The Ortiz Mine is Gold Fields only heap leaching facility as well as being their first operating mine in the U.S.A. The hydrometallurgical processes utilized for recovery of gold and silver at Ortiz are discussed along with the several practical changes in operation adopted since start-up. Included are heap leaching by cyanidation, concentration of values on activated carbon, desorption, and the final electrowinning steps prior to shipment. Construction costs and pertinent technical data are shown.

Jan 1, 1981

By G. D. Van Arsdale

THE paper of Mr. Posnjak presents a laboratory confirmation of the well known facts that air ox-idation of pure solutions of ferrous sulfate is slow and difficult and that, like many other similar reactions, the speed, may be greatly accelerated by the presence of other substances, often in very small amounts, the effect of the presence of copper being determined ex-perimentally in this case. However, it should not be. overlooked that copper is always present in heap leach-ing solutions in amounts equal to or greater than those in the experiments described; therefore the paper may be considered as an explanation of present results rather than a possible improve-ment to be added to present practice. It is not practicable and it does not pay to precipitate copper by ce-mentation below a point about 5 lb. per 1000 gal., equivalent to about 0.0005 mol. Cu. per liter, compar-ing with the approxi-mately 0.0009 mol. per liter of curve 2 in the diagrams given of course, also, in the heaps local concentrations are usually very much higher than this, which is also true of the effluent li-quors, so that I feel that it is safe to say that copper is already present in amount sufficient to realize, as large an accelerating effect as is practicable. Too much im-provement or refinement cannot be expected in a method of this kind, due to commercial limitations. It should be remembered that chemically and physically there is no sharp dividing line between leaching in place, heap leaching, and the usual tank leaching practice, practi-cally the same reagents being used in all three. From the viewpoint of extractions, etc., it is not common sense to apply leaching in place to an orebody carrying enough copper to pay for mining; and the same is true of heap leaching, for an ore carrying enough to pay for the crushing, handling, etc., of ordinary leaching. That is to say, leaching in place should properly be consid-ered only for an ore too low-grade to pay for mining, and heap leaching for the next higher grade, still how-ever too low-grade to pay for crushing and other re-finements. There is no advantage in leaching without mining or in heap leaching except lower cost of in-stallation and handling; on the other hand there are very distinct disadvantages which are inherent and which should prohibit their use except where necessity requires. The object of metallurgy is to make money out of the handling of ore, and it is purely a question of money as to how far we can go in "improving" or

Jan 7, 1927

By Paul H. Johnson

Heap leaching is a simple means of recovering copper from oxide and oxide-sulfide ores. Although this method requires relatively low capital investment, it suffers from low copper recoveries and relatively high acid consumption. The objectives of this study were (1) to determine what factors influence these shortcomings, and (2) to establish a basis of correlation. between laboratory and field testing. The principal methods of leaching copper ores at the present time are heap, dump, in-place, and vat. A number of references are presented in the bibliography on the theoretical and practical aspects of these methods. In the heap-leaching method, crushed or uncrushed oxidized copper ore is placed on a prepared drainage pad. Acid leach solutions are dis¬tributed over the top of the heap, caused to percolate downward through the ore bed by gravity, and are drained from its base. The leach duration is generally a matter of a few months. Dump leaching is used to recover copper from very low-grade oxide-sulfide pit-waste materials. Here again, leach solutions are, percolated downward through a heap. However, in this method, little or no acid is added to the leach liquors, prepared drainage pads are not used and the leaching cycle is generally measured in terms of several years. Leaching agents are usually autogenously generated by the breakdown of sulfide minerals within the dump.

Jan 1, 1970

By R. E. Ford, P. Tarassoff, P. H. Jennings

Copper oxide ore may be leached at all sizes from run-of-mine down to pulp, and consideration must be given to all available methods in determining the most economical one. Heap leaching was evaluated in a pilot plant at Gaspe Copper Mines, Ltd. which was designed to simultaneously leach two 1200-ton dumps of ore. The plant was operated for two years, in part under severe winter conditions. Two modes of leaching were investigated: acid leaching in which sulfuric acid was added externally to the leach solution, and pyritic leaching in which pyrite concentrate was added to the dump and acid was generated in situ by bacterial action. The pilot plant operation is described, and the results are compared with laboratory data obtained in 6-in.-diam columns. It is concluded that pyritic leaching offers certain operating advantages over acid leaching when copper is recovered by cementation in that iron buildup in the solution is prevented.

Jan 1, 1974

By R. Bruce Thorndycraft

This paper will describe several modifications to design of con­ventional oxide gold heap leaching. They are targeted at reduc­ing costs and simplifying heap operations. These modifications were conceptualized during consulting work on over 90 differ­ent heap leaches. In 1995, a unique opportunity arose to imme­diately apply all of these design concepts to the permitting and construction of a new facility at the American Girl Mine in southeastern California. American Girl Mine has operated since 1987. In April 1995, the mine faced a situation with grave consequences for cash flow. Approval for mining of a new ore zone, Oro Cruz, had just been granted, after lengthy delays by California regula­tors. All existing pad space would be filled by October. Only 6 months were available, and new pad siting and design were still undecided. Permitting of a new pad had not begun. Options were quickly reviewed. A strong criteria for pad site selection and design was ease of permitting. There was also a strong desire to install a system that would achieve better met­allurgical recovery and reduced operating costs, compared to previous heaps at this mine. One site offered the best chance for rapid permitting. It was the site of the original 1987-90 heap leach. This already dis­turbed ground contained 1.6 million tons of heaped ore. The old heap had just completed detoxification and was about to be signed off as a Group C waste, ready for reclamation. Instead of recontouring and revegetating the old heap, which the reclamation plan anticipated, we offered BLM and the County something even better. We proposed to off-load much of the detoxed old heap, and reuse the space. The off-loaded material would be back-filled into the original open pit, imme­diately adjacent. While the footprint of the proposed new pad was much larger, the reuse of disturbed ground, and backfilling of the open pit, had very strong appeal to the regulators. Our permitting strategy included the technical design of the proposed new facility. Many of the new design details also appealed to the regulators, particularly the "zero active ponds" concept.

Jan 1, 1996

By R. C. Beard

"Heap leaching, currently being applied in the treatment of low-grade ores in the south western United States, is shown to have potential for use in north western Ontario. The history and operation of the process are described, and cost comparisons are given.IntroductionHeap leaching is a simple, low-cost method of recovering gold from low-grade ore. Although it is not currently being used in Canada on a production scale, it is being used extensively, and successfully, in the southwestern United States as well as elsewhere in the world. Especially suited for large deposits of very low -grade ore, it also appears to be practical for use on small, high-grade deposits because it avoids the high capital costs of mills. Eveleth (1980) and others suggest that the capital and operating costs required for heap leaching are approximately 20% and 40% respectively of conventional milling methods.Northwestern Ontario is noted for its large number of undeveloped, small, high-grade gold deposits. Although there are a number o f larger and higher-grade deposits in the area as well, it is the relatively small undeveloped deposits which would benefit most from heap leaching, if it could be demonstrated to be a viable extraction method.To assess the significance of these small deposits, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources recently commissioned a consultants' study of the gold reserves in certain parts of northwestern Ontario. This report, titled ""Feasibility of Small-Scale Gold Mining in Northwestern Ontario"", by J.N. Neilson and R.C.E. Bray (1981, OGS Open File Report 5332), documents 106 known gold deposits having sufficient information to calculate gold reserves. A total of over 7.8 million tons having a weighted average grade of 0.19 oz of gold per ton were compiled in the proven, probable and possible categories, with an additional 8.2 million tons in the speculative category. Many of these deposits could be mined by open-pit methods."

Jan 1, 1983

By Thomas J. DeMull

Heap leaching was introduced to the precious metals mining industry approximately two decades ago as a simple, low cost method for recovering gold and silver from ores. Since that time, operational experience has contributed to knowledge and understanding of the process, making it a reliable alternative to conventional milling processes for low grade ores. At time of this writing, dozens of heap leach operations are active producing hundreds of thousands of ounces of gold and millions of ounces of silver annually. These successes have caused the popular press to acclaim heap leaching "high-tech" gold mining, but, despite the hype, the process remains a simple one. An example of simplicity in heap leaching is the operation established in 1986 at Amax Gold's Sleeper Mine. Starting with a simple goal, namely to produce gold from sub-mill grade ore at low cost, heap leaching was rapidly implemented at Sleeper; only five months after testwork started, leaching commenced on the first commercial scale, 50,000 ton heap of low grade ore. Sized at 600,000 tons per year to produce 10,500 oz gold per year, the low grade heap operation has performed beyond expectations. During the first year of production, 881,800 tons have been leached producing 15,665 oz of gold and 35,528 oz of silver. Operating ·costs for the first year have averaged $112 per oz gold produced ( or $95 per oz if silver credit is included). Successful implementation of heap leaching at Sleeper has had a dramatic impact on ore reserves and future operations.

Jan 1, 1998

By Paul Chamberlin

Although performing a heap leach test is inherently simple, a lot of information beyond extraction, leach time, and reagent consumption can be obtained from a well designed test program. The following is a list of information to look for and acquire when performing column tests and field heap leach tests.

Jan 1, 1998

By Allan Neal, Jess W. Smith

FirstMiss Gold Inc., formerly FRM Minerals, Inc., is heap leaching gold from difficult, low grade ores at the Getchell Gold Mine in Humboldt County, Nevada. A two-thousand ton per day facility is leaching material from waste dumps from old operations and from small, satellite deposits around the main orebody. A three-thousand ton per day pressure oxidation mill is under construction to treat sulphide gold ores in the main deposit. The Getchell gold deposit occurs in a wide fault zone in carbonaceous, calcareous sediments and intrusive rocks. Intense clay alteration is typical within the mineralized zones. Silicification is a less dominant alteration phase within the ore. Gold in the upper oxide portion of the deposit occurs both in a free state which is leachable and complexed in fine disseminated pyrite which is not leachable. Gold in the lower sulphide portion of the deposit is almost entirely complexed in pyrite. Abundant arsenic sulphides and variable amounts of remobilized carbon are associated with the gold mineralization throughout the deposit. The waste dump material being heap leached was derived from the upper portions of the gold deposit. The dumps contain high quantitites of fines, clays and sulphides of iron, arsenic and other trace elements. No stockpiling of low grade materials was attempted during the old mining operations, therefore, the dump material is highly variable and unpredictable. A sample of representative material from one dump contained the following:

Jan 1, 1998

By E. A. Devuyst, G. H. Robbins

The Inco process can be retrofitted into a typical heap operation with minimum capital. Capital cost for a mid to large size heap would be less than 1 cent/ton. Operating costs are typically in the order of 8 cents/ton. Ammonium bisulphite is the preferred reagent. The process provides the equivalent of fresh water r?1s­ing and thus minimizes the time of the _nnse program. A typical heap (the Snow Caps Mine, California) was rinsed completely

Jan 1, 1996

By Robert G. Woolery

Union Carbide_ began looking seriously at heap leaching in 1971. At that time some 1.6 million tons of mineral averaging 0.040% U308 were stockpiled at various sites around the Gas Hills, Wyoming, uranium facility. Several alternatives for economically exploiting these reserves were considered and heap leaching seemed the most attractive. At the time, Western Nuclear Inc. was operating a heap leach project nearby in which the low-grade ore was leached with sulfuric acid, the product liquor treated in an on-site solvent extraction circuit, and the stripped product liquor re-acidified and recycled. They were most generous in allowing us to visit their site, answering our questions, and were helpful in discussing the problems associated with heap leaching. They confirmed our belief that, it was possible to operate a heap leach profitably on material too low grade for. conventional milling. Based largely on what we had learned from Western Nuclear's experience, a program was set up involving a laboratory study to determine the characteristics of the mineral stockpiles as related to heap leaching and to conduct a pilot heap leach adjoining our Gas Hills mill. Basically, the pilot heap construction and leach procedure were similar to those described in the literature(1,2) with certain modifications to permit detailed monitoring of the operation. In May, '1972, the decision was made to construct a test heap. The UCC plant at Gas Hills, Wyoming was selected as the most appropriate site for the follow¬ing reasons:

Jan 1, 1977