Search Documents

By G. F. Colborne, A. Thunaes

"When the Canadian uranium milling plants went into operation during the early 1950's, they utilized flowsheets developed at the Radioactivity Division of the Federal Mines Branch in Ottawa. Since then, numerous process improvements have been made by the Mines Branch, by the operating companies themselves and by other research organizations. This paper will consider uranium milling technology from the standpoint of a new mine operator charged with the responsibility for the design of an economic flowsheet, and will indicate the range of process elements available to him and the testwork required to enable an intelligent decision to be made."

Jan 1, 1968

By Peter Waggitt

Northern Australia has been home to uranium mining for over 70 years, more or less continuously. In the early days, post World War 2, there was little effort made to remediate workings at the end of operations. The three “campaigns” of uranium mining (1951-55; 1960-70; and 1979-present) are all now in various stages of remediation. This includes not only the large legacy site at Rum Jungle but also smaller fields like the South Alligator Valley, as well as contemporary works at Nabarlek and the ongoing closure at Ranger– Australia’s longest operating uranium mine. This paper briefly describes some of the past remediation activities before providing an update on the Ranger closure programme and future timetable.

Jan 1, 2020

By Miezitis Y

A weak airborne radiometric anomaly was examined in the field and the presence of uranium confirmed. Rotary-percussion drilling showed the presence of uranium but a subsequent programme of diamond and rotary percussion drilling indicated that the concentration of uranium was uneconomic. Within the tufts and volcanics of the prospect the uranium existed as uranyl phosphates within the oxidized zone. Geological mapping and the diamond drill core showed that the Stag Creek Volcanics are part of the Lower Proterozoic Masson Formation, probably with member status, rather than the expression of an Archaean basement ridge. This change in the interpretation of the fundamental structure of the Pine Creek Geosyncline has led to a reexamination of the stratigraphy and to suggestions which differ from the current concept.

Jan 1, 1977

By R. J. Munday

Although uranium deposits in northern Saskatchewan are clustered around the Athabasca basin, basement lithostructure determines their distribution. Basal Wollaston Group pelites are invariably graphitic and carry uraninite in felsic segregations and biotitic pegmatite. Where these intersect the Athabasca Formation, remobilized uranium concentrated as pitchblende. Uranium is also concentrated in silicified and hematized sandstone where the Athabasca Formation overlies post-orogenic faults. Presumably, pregnant solutions associated with the fault were stripped of their metals as they emerged into the contrasting physico-chemical environment of the sandstone basin. Both these types of mineralization correlate with a Grenvillian (-1,000 m.y.) heating event and associated diabase intrusions. However, the rich pitchblende veins at Uranium City appear to predate the Athabasca Formation, but display spatial correlation with the Martin Formation. They are tentatively associated with a syn- to post-D3 retrograde metamorphic event which thoroughly leached crystalline basement and generated uraniferous fluids which escaped, and precipitated metals, into fractures associated with faults that define the grabens in which the Martin Formation was deposited. Remobilization events allowed some of this uranium to move upward into fractures within Martin sediments.

Jan 1, 1979

By Paul F. Kerr

Uranium mineralization occurs in the footwall of the Sunshine vein from the 2900 to the 3700 level. Veinlets of uraninite associated with pyrite and jasper have been so extensively divided and recemented that units more than a few feet in length are seldom observed. The wall rock is St. Regis quartzite of the Belt series. The age of the uraninite, on the basis of isotopic analyses, is 750 t- 50, which agrees with geological data suggesting that phases of the Sunshine mineralization are pre-Cambrian.

Jan 5, 1953

By I. Mazalov, G. Ospanova

Introduction Today, uranium is of great interest because of its application to nuclear power and nuclear weapons. Kazakhstan has been an important source of uranium for more than fifty years. All uranium products are exported. Results In Kazakhstan uranium exploration started in 1948 and developed in several parts of the country thru mining of hard rock deposits. There are known around 50 uranium deposits in six provinces: Shu-Sarysuyskaya (57%), North Kazakhstan (18%), Syrdaryinskaya (15%), Ilyiskaya (7%), Caspian (2%), Balkhash (1%). In the Northern Kazakhstan province, KazSabton took over Tselinny Mining & Chemical Co in 1999. In this province the stockwork is of Paleozoic and Paleozoic folded complexes origin. In the Balkash province some mining of volcanogenic deposits occurred during the Soviet era. This province’s stockwork is of Endogenous origin.In the Ili province uraniumis mainly found in uranium-coal deposits formed by oxidation of the lignite beds roofs. In the Caspian province the Prikaspisky Combine operated since the 1960s a major mining and processing complex on the Mangyshalk Peninsula. This led to the founding of Aktau. It was privatised as Kaskor in 1992 and operations ceased in 1994. The uranium occurrence is associated with the phosphorous from fossil fish bone detritus conglomeration. In the Chu-Sarysu province, which has more than half the country's known resources, both Stepnoye and Tsentralnoye have been operating since 1978 and 1982 respectively. Uranium mineralization occurred in the regional stratum oxidation zones. In the Syrdarya province slightly to the west of the province’s center the No.6 Mining group has been operating since 1985. Uranium mineralization occurred in the regional stratum oxidation zones.

Jan 1, 2007

By K. Wenrich

The uranium industry has made a dramatic turnaround in the past three years that even the most optimistic economist was not willing to predict during the uranium downswing of the 1990s. Uranium reached a 30-year low in February 2001 of $6.50/lb. By the end of February 2006 it had soared to $38.50/pound. This nearly 600% increase in the uranium spot price within 4 years dwarfed the increase in gold price that has barely mustered a 100% increase. The initial slow rise from $6.50 in February 2001 to $10.75 in April 2003 (fig. 1) was primarily driven by the decrease in the value of the dollar. Since then several factors have contributed to the soaring price: (1) The awakening of many to the simple fact that uranium supply has not met demand for several years and that the world’s stockpiles are being drawn down, (2) How sharply this fragile supply can be impacted by disasters at the world’s major uranium production facilities, such as a) the flooding of the McArthur River Mine in the spring of 2003, b) fires at Olympic Dam, c) the potential that Rossing, with an annual capacity of 4000 tonnes uranium might close by 2007, (3) the withdrawal of Tenex from the HEU (highly enriched uranium) feed agreement, and (4) the announcement by the Chinese of their intent to build 30 new nuclear reactors.

Jan 1, 2007

Australia had an active uranium mining industry in the 1950s with uranium oxide being supplied under contract to the atomic energy authorities of the U.K. and U.S.A. In the 1960s, when these con- tracts concluded, domestic production ceased, apart from Rum Jungle, whose production until 1971 was stockpiled. By the 1970s, the demand for uranium from the electrical utility industry had risen sharply and the effects on Australia were notable. The Mary Kath- leen mine re-opened in 1976 but, more significantly, exploration activity suddenly expanded with the re- sult that several world-standard deposits were locat- ed. Western world requirements for uranium based on increasing energy consumption and a changing energy mix, will warrant the development of Aust- ralia's resources. By 1985 our mines could be pro- ducing 9,500 tonnes of uranium oxide yearly and by 1995 the export value from uranium could reach that from wool. In terms of benefit to the community the economic rewards are considerable but, in terms of providing energy to the world, Australia's uranium is vital.

Jan 1, 1978

In 1975, the US produced 10 900 tons (12,000 st) of U3O8 from ores whose grade ranged from a low of 0.160% to a high of 0.196% U3O8. By the early 1980's if the current mining projects described here are allowed to go on stream, Australia will be able to produce at least 10 900 tons of U3O8 annually from ores whose grade ranges from a low of 0.150%to a high of 2.300%. As pointed out in the previous article, this initial rate of production could have been reached now-giving an immense boost to the depressed Australian economy. So, let's have a close look at current mining projects.

Jan 1, 1977

By Ta M. Li, John D. Wiebmer

Record high prices, burgeoning exploration programs, mine-mill openings, and plant expansions have all characterized a dramatic: resurgence of the US uranium industry in recent years. But while the bull is leading the way on the production side of the nuclear fuel cycle, there is reason for caution from the end-users' viewpoint. How fast will electrical demand grow in the years to come, and what portion of that will nuclear generators supply? How do utilities play their cards when the government holds two of the largest jokers in the deck-a policy on spent fuel reprocessing and a timetable for the fast breeder reactor? Is there a shortfall in domestic uranium supplies on the horizon?

Jan 10, 1978

By Savory P. J

Uranium mining operations commenced at Ranger mine site, Jabiru NT Australia in May 1980. The Ranger orebodies, totalling approximately 110 000 tonnes contained U305 had been indicated by airborne radiometric survey in 1969 and confirmed by drilling the following year. Both diamond and percussion drilling methods were used to define the mineralisation and samples were analysed using a combination of radiometric and neutron activation techniques. Ore reserve estimates were calculated from conventional and geostatistical methods, and following the mining of 15 million tonnes of ore, reconciliations with before mining estimates are well within acceptable industry standards. In-pit grade control employs radiometric techniques including a radiometric truck discriminator built in Australia to mine specification to meet production requirements and improve productivity. Environmental requirements associated with uranium mining are a daily consideration.

Jan 1, 1993

By J. Randel Hill

The 64th Texas Legislature passed the "Texas Surface Mining and Reclamation Act," Chapter 131, Texas Natural Resources Code (subsequently referred to as "the Act"), at a point in time when little surface mining had taken place within the state. Thus, enactment of regulatory control governing mining operations in our state has, for the most part, preceded widespread, intensive mining activity. I should point out that the statute applies only to the extraction of coal, lignite, uranium and uranium ore. A recent opinion rendered by the Attorney General's office has stated that extraction of the named elements, when it occurs incidental to the extraction of other materials, e.g., clay, is not not an activity subject to the Act. An important theme of the Act, frequently overlooked in other environmentally oriented legislation, is recognition of the Act's affect on the mining industry. The Act states that "the extraction of minerals by surface mining operations is a basic and essential activity making an important contribution to the economic well-being of the state and nation" and, in reference to reclamation being accomplished contemporaneously with mining, provides a recognition that "the extraction of minerals by responsible mining operations is an essential and beneficial economic activity." This legislative recognition is, of course balanced against the need for proper mined land reclamation, the rights of surface owners, the need to guard against unreasonable degradation to land and water resources and numerous other actions or events that the Legislature wanted protected. Another rather pervasive general theme that is established in the Act is the concept that the agency is entitled to obtain whatever information, or take whatever action, that appears reasonably necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Act. This concept, coupled with the detailed requirements placed on mining operations in the portions of the Act dealing with Permit Applications, Reclamation Plan and Reclamation Standards, easily insures that surface mining activities can and will be regulated to the extent necessary. Section 131.102(b)(2) is probably the most relevant provision in the Act which deals with the preclusion of mined lands becoming waste lands. This portion of the Act states that the surface mining operator shall: ". . . restore the land affected to the same or a substantially beneficial condition. ." In this language the Legislature had made it abundantly clear that the abandoned or orphaned lands found in some of the Eastern states, will not be tolerated in this State, and provided the Commission with a degree of latitude to determine what condition would be appropriate in each individual mining situation. I bring this area of the Act to your attention because it is the area which has received the most inquiries and concern by operators, i.e. what does "substantially beneficial" constitute? The Commission's staff has spent a considerable amount of time wrestling with the statutory language "substantially beneficial" to determine the legislative intent and provide operators with guidance of what they can expect. In this regard, the most definitive criteria in our opinion lies in the Act's legislative hsitory. The Legislature had before it basically three reclamation standards namely: House Bill 656, considered to provide the most stringent reclamation standard and identical to Senate Bill 66; House Bill 1717 which was supported by industry spokesmen and was considered to contain the least stringent reclamation standard; and Senate Bill 55 which was adopted by the Legislature. During the Bill's initial hearing before the House Environmental Affairs Committee, the House sponsor of the Senate Bill 55, which was the Bill eventually adopted, made the following statement: (I am quoting verbatim from the Committee's transcript although substituting the speaker's reference to the authors names with the Bill's numbers.) "An example of the differing approaches of the four bills can be seen in the area of reclamation standards and this is critical. House Bill 656, talking about restoring the surface of the land, House Bill 656 has this statement: 'At least fully capable of supporting the use to which it was capable of supporting prior to any mining or any higher or better use.' In other words you have to restore it to the level it was prior to the mining. Senate Bill 55: 'Restore the land to the same or substantially beneficial use.' Substantially beneficial use. (Emphasis his) House Bill 1717 says: 'Restore insofar as practical to appropriate beneficial post-mining use.' So that House Bill 1717 said to, 'restore insofar as practical to appropriate beneficial use. I think that's too weak, whereas I think the House Bill 656 that would call you to restore it to at least the use it had prior to the mining may also be too tight the other way. I think the Senate Bill 55 approach is down the middle of the road which says that you do restore it to the 'same or substantially beneficial use,' is a proper way to go there." Therefore, the conclusion that we have drawn from the legislative history of the bill is that the extent of reclamation required by "substantially beneficial" may be something other than the use it was prior to

Jan 1, 1979

The major greenhouse gas emissions from coal combustion are leading certain people to argue for uranium mining and nuclear power to meet these challenges. Although there is considerable rhetoric around promoting nuclear power as 'green' due to its relatively lower greenhouse intensity, a careful study of the data is required to properly underst and the sustainability of uranium mining and nuclear power and whether it can or should have a role in future energy supply scenarios. This paper presents detailed research and analysis on uranium mining, focusing on known economic resources, production, solid waste and water management, pollution issues as well as energy and greenhouse aspects. A particular focus will be on Australia and its operating and prospective uranium mines. Overall, the paper raises fundamental issues concerning the long-term sustainability of uranium mining and nuclear power and documents the greenhouse intensity of uranium production and the nuclear fuel chain.

Jun 1, 2010

By Thomas N. Walthier

ROSPECTING for uranium in the East is hampered by the lack of bedrock exposure due to extensive overburden and residual soil. But, despite the problems of this physiographic province, it has not been ignored in the search for radioactive materials. Since 1951 both the U.S. Geological Survey and the Atomic Energy Commission have had field parties in the eastern U.S. Tempo of private prospecting is increasing, and many discoveries have resulted. AEC work so far has been concentrated in the areas of most numerous discoveries-Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York. Accounts of uranium mineralization in the eastern U.S. are found in the old literature and one site in the Mauch Chunk area of Pennsylvania has been known since 1874. In 1949 McKeown examined the original occurrence there and found another southeast of the town. The deposit appeared to have commercial possibilities and a short period of production began in July 1954

Jun 1, 1955

By James K. Hallenburg

INTRODUCTION The delayed fission neutron, or DFN technique for uranium ore body analysis uses the first down-hole method for detecting uranium in place quantitatively. This technique detects the presence of and measures the amount of uranium in the formation. DFN TECHNIQUE DESCRIPTION The DFN technique depends upon inducing a fission reaction in the formation uranium with neutrons, resulting in an anomalous and quantitative return of neutrons from the uranium. Since there are no free, natural neutrons in formation, a good, low noise assessment may be made. There are several methods available for determining uranium quantity in situ. The method used by Century uses an electrical source of neutrons. This is a linear accelerator which bombards a tritium target with high velocity deuterium ions. The resulting reaction emits high energy neutrons which diffuse into the surrounding formation. They lose most of their energy until they come to thermal equilibrium with the formation. Upon encountering a fissile material, such as uranium, these thermal neutrons will react with the material. These reactions produce additional neutrons, the number of which is a function of the number of original neutrons and the amount of fissile material exposed. The particular source used, the linear accelerator, has several distinct advantages over other types of sources: 1. It can be turned off. Thus, it does not constitute a radioactive hazard when it is not in use. 2. It can be gated on in short bursts (6 to 8 microseconds). This results in measurements free of a high background of primary neutrons. 3. The output can be controlled. Thus, the neutron output can be made the same in a number of tools, easily and automatically. There are several interesting reactions which take place during the lifetime of the neutrons around the source. During the slowing down or moderating process the neutron can react with several elements. One of these is oxygen 17. This results in a background level of neutrons in any of the measurements which must be accounted for in any interpretation technique. These elements are usually uninteresting economically. The high energy neutrons will also react with uranium 238. However, the proportions of uranium 235 and 238 are nearly constant. Therefore, this reaction aids detection of uranium mineral and need not be seperated out. Upon reaching thermal energy the neutrons will react with any fissile material, uranium 235, uranium 234, and thorium 232. At present, we do not have good techniques for seperating out the reaction products of uranium 234 and thorium 232. However, uranium 234 is a small (.0055%) percentage of the uranium mineral and thorium 232 is usually not present in sedimentary deposits. When the uranium 235 reacts with thermal neutrons it breaks into two or more fragments and some neutrons. This occurs within a few microseconds after the primary neutrons have moderated and is the prompt reaction. One system uses this; the PFN or prompt fission neutron technique. We don't use this method because the neutron population is low and, therefore, the signal is small and difficult to work with, accurately. Within a few microseconds to several seconds the fission fragments also decay with the emmission of additional neutrons. Now, with a long time period available and a large neutron population we gate off the generator and measure the delayed fission neutrons after a waiting period. These neutrons can be a measure of the amount of uranium present around the probe. Thermal neutrons are detected with the DFN technique instead of capture gamma rays to avoid some of the returns from other elements than uranium. LOGGING TECHNIQUE The exact logging technique will depend, to some extent, upon the purpose of the measurement. However, the general technique is to first run the standard logs. These will include: 1. The gamma ray log for initial evaluation of the mineral body and for determining the position of the borehole within the mineral body, 2. The resistance or resistivity log for determining the formation quality, lithology, and porosity. 3. The S. P. curve for estimating the redox state and shale content, and measuring formation water salinity, 4. The hole deviation for locating the position, depth, and thickness of the mineral (and other formations), and 5. The neutron porosity curve. The neutron porosity curve is most important to the interpretation of the DFN readings. The neutrons from this tool are affected in the same way by bore hole and formation fluids as the DFN neutrons are. Therefore, we can use this curve to determine effect of the oxygen 17 in the water. Of course, this curve can be used to determine formation porosity. It can also be used to calculate formation density.

Jan 1, 1979

By J. F. Crouch

INTRODUCTION Roll front uranium has unique geologic characteristics (L,) which require specialized mining procedures. Roll front uranium occurs in arkosic sandstones with the ore zone typically less than 100 feet in thickness with up to 400 feet of overburden. The areal extent of ore is often a few thousand acres. Within the ore zone, ore grade material occurs in C and S shaped rolls, which are a few feet in width and height but may run laterally for several hundred feet. Since the total mine plan may include mining all ore, a roll front uranium mine may cover a few thousand acres. For both economic and environmental reasons, a roll front deposit is mined as a series of phases or sub-pits (3, 4) as illustrated in Figure 1. A typical sub-pit is 400 to 500 feet across. Sub-pit 1 is stripped initially and the overburden is spoiled on the surface. Depending on haul distance and overburden characteristics, stripping is done with trucks and shovels (or front-end loaders) or scrapers. When ore is encountered in sub-pit 1, mining begins, and the stripping equipment is moved to sub-pit 2, with sub-pit 2 overburden also being spoiled on the surface. When ore is encountered in sub- pit 2, sub-pit 1 mining should ideally be complete so the mining equipment can move to sub-pit 2 and sub-pit 3 overburden can be spoiled in the mined out sub-pit 1 area. Ore is mined selectively in a series of 12 to 24 inch cuts by a 2-1/2 yard backhoe on the basis of radiometric probing. For effective drainage, ditches must be maintained on the boundary of sub-pits, and mining lifts are kept as level as possible, with the orebody slightly elevated as part of general good mining practice. Waste removal in the ore zone is done by self- loading scrapers near the orebodies and by push-pull or push loaded scrapers away from the orebodies. Each self-loading scraper cut is

Jan 1, 1983

By Munro DL

The Mary Kathleen uranium deposit is in north-west Queensland, approximately halfway between the townships of Mount Isa and Cloncurry, at long. 1400 009 E and lat. 200 44' S. The deposit Iwas discovered by prospectors of the Walton McConachy Syndicate early in July, 1954, and climaxed a very intensive ground search by hundreds of part-time prospectors. during the uranium boom from March to July 1954ò Numerous small deposits, mostly in the vicinity of Mount Isa, were discovered in various rock environments, but Mary Kathleen is the only large deposit and, apart from a few tons of hand sorted material from the Milo lease, is the only deposit that has been worked. Exploration of the surrounding area, and proving of the economic worth of the deposit, were conducted from the time of discovery until February 1956 by a geological team camped near the deposit. Proving was carried out by drilling a pattern of vertical and inclined diamond drillholes at fifty-foot centres over the outcrop. An adit was driven eastwards through the deposit. Metallurgical research and design work in the South Australian Department of Mines Adelaide Laboratories were based on core samples and bulk samples from the deposit. The signing of a contract in March 1956 with the British Atomic Energy Authority to supply 4500 short tons of uranium oxide allowed mining to commence, and enabled the planned construction of water supply, township and treatment plant to proceed. The open out mine and plant are now serviced by a modern township, four miles away, which is connected to Cloncurry and Mount Isa by road. Although little field work has been done since the exploration phase, this paper differs in interpretation from a previous paper (Matheson and Searl, 1956) in that it is based on a revised structural inter- pretation (Compana, 1958), detailed mapping of progressive exposures in the open out, and a re-examination of diamond drill cores.\

Jan 1, 1968

By C. L. Belyk

There are fifteen accepted types of uranium ore deposits and at least forty subtypes readily identified around the world. Each deposit type has a unique geological model which may also have unique processing implications. Primary uranium production in the past decade has come from a handful of these deposit types: unconformity, sandstone, calcrete, intrusive, breccia complex and volcanic. Processing implications for each of the fifteen deposit types can vary widely between and within different geological models. Some key characteristics of uranium deposits that may have processing implications include: ore grade, uranium and gangue mineralogy ? including clay and carbonate species and content, hardness, porosity, uranium mineral morphology, and carbon content. Processing roadblocks may occur as a result of one or more of these characteristics for any of the fifteen deposit types. Future technological advances and innovative thinking around uranium ore processing could provide avenues for roadblock removal setting the stage for additional and economically-viable uranium production from traditional and non-traditional uranium ore deposits.

Aug 1, 2010

By L. A. Clark

Although vein-, syenite-, and pegmatite-type deposits are known in Saskatchewan, recent intense exploration stems from discovery of several exceptionally high grade uranium and uranium-nickel deposits locallized near the basal unconformity of the 1.3-1.4 b.y. Athabasca Sandstone Formation. Graphitic basement rocks and post-Athabasca faulting or brecciation coincident with the unconformity are important in locallizing uranium deposits which form as tabular, shoe lace-like bodies with grades averaging over two percent and containing up to 50,000 tonnes U308. Some deposits have similar nickel contents. A few published sandstone analyses average 0.8 ppm uranium while basement granitoid and meta-sedimentary rocks vary from 0.5 to 20 ppm. In the proposed genetic model, traces of uranium are leached from these rocks by oxidized formation waters sweeping through the sandstone and along faults. Solutions are reduced and uranium is precipitated as basement graphitic meta-pelites are encountered along brecciated fault zones.

Jan 1, 1979

Cameco Corporation is in the process of revitalizing the Key Lake mill. As part of this process, the company is considering installing the Rabbit Lake style strong acid stripping in solvent extraction. This would lead to using hydrogen peroxide for uranium precipitation. The process currently employs ammonia stripping and ammonia precipitation. As part of the process evaluation, an indirect fired drier pilot plant test was conducted. This paper will discuss the results of that test work, including the relationships between the following: ? Drying temperature and product grade ? Drying temperature and product colour ? Drying temperature and product reactivity with water ? Drying temperature and energy input requirements ? Drying temperature and shipping costs

Aug 1, 2010