Search Documents

By L. H. Cole

FOR many years Industrial Minerals, or as they were formerly called, 'the Non-Metallic Minerals', compared with the metallics, were considered of only minor importance and as such were given scant attention in the technical press as well as in the public press. Those days are, however, happily passing, and thanks, to an appreciable extent, to the constant endeavour of the Industrial Minerals Section of this Institute, established in the fall of 1932 industrial minerals are now assuming the importance to which they are entitled. The term 'Industrial Minerals', when first adopted in this sense by the Institute, was thought to be original in its application, but it is interesting to note that it had been used many years previously by the Queensland Geological Survey in the following publication: SALT Article 1 in Industrial Minerals by B. DUNSTAN, Chief Government Geologist (Publication No. 268, in Part) Queensland Geological Survey, Department of Mines, Brisbane 1920 In Queensland, however, the term embraced some of the metals as well as the non-metallic minerals proper. The lead furnished by Canada in this matter bore rapid fruit, and already the term 'Industrial Minerals' is widely used, not only throughout Canada but in the United States as well.

Jan 1, 1939

By A. L. Hornbaker

Colorado has recorded more than 100 years of industrial mineral production. Much of the state's history, culture, and economy is based in mining, but the industrial minerals and construction materials comprising the nonmetallics sector of the industry very often are overlooked or overshadowed by mineral fuels and the metals. Indeed, many of these materials find use in seemingly unimportant industrial applications essential to our economy and life style and yet are not so recognized by the consumer. Unlike many other mineral resources, the numerous industrial minerals occur in many different and often exotic geologic environments, some of which are characteristic only of the western states. In Colorado only a few of these minerals have continued production through the years; many saw only "boom" periods or other critical times of need, such as the world wars. The changing needs and demands of our society in the 1980s will stimulate yet another era of intensive activity in our industrial minerals storehouse. Researchers are finding new uses and applications for these materials in dealing with the energy crisis and fuel shortages, the need to develop domestic mineral reserves of all kinds, and the goals of reuse and recycling. Some of Colorado's little-used and unused industrial minerals hold extraordinary promise in solving some of these problems on the regional and national levels. In this paper we will look at the history of development of Colorado's more prominent nonmetallics and especially at current research on and future potential of several other commodities among which Colorado contains the largest known reserves.

Jan 1, 1980

By Jasper L. Stuckey

GEOGRAPHICALLY, North Carolina consists of three divisions, the coastal plain on the east, the piedmont plateau in the center, and the Appalachian mountain region on the west. Geologically, the State may be divided into two main divisions, an eastern or coastal plain region, and a western or piedmont plateau and mountain region. The eastern region is underlain with unconsolidated sands, clays, marls, and shell limestones varying in age from Cretaceous to Recent. The western region is, in general, underlain with gneisses, schists, slates, sheared volcanics, and igneous intrusives of Pre-Cambrian age. In the mountain and upper piedmont portion of the western region are several areas of irregularly metamorphosed sediments of early Paleozoic age. Throughout the piedmont plateau and a part of the mountain portion of the western region, important areas are underlain with igneous intrusives of late Carboniferous age. Along the eastern edge of the piedmont plateau are two narrow belts, trending northeast-southwest, underlain with sediments of upper Triassic age. Although North Carolina contains a

Jan 1, 1947

By L. Meier, M. Dennis, J. Schieffer, K. Murray

"INTRODUCTION Contrary to popular belief, Arizona State Trust land is not public land. All uses of the land must benefit the Trust, a fact that is considered with the review of each application received for sale, lease, or permit. This includes applications for activities ranging from commercial development to recreation. In 1863, the Territory of Arizona was established by an act of Congress. This act reserved sections 16 and 36 in each township to be held in trust for the benefit of the common schools. Later, the Enabling Act of 1910 allowed the Territory of Arizona to prepare for statehood. This act reserved the additional sections 2 and 32 of each township for the common schools and granted another 2,350,000 acres to be held in trust for other beneficiaries. In all, Congress granted the State of Arizona almost 11 million acres. The State was to manage those lands and maximize revenue for 13 separate beneficiaries. To meet this mandate, the State established the Arizona State Land Department (ASLD) in 1915. During fiscal year 2015, the ASLD contributed $136 million to the permanent fund, bringing the total value to over $5.1 billion, through the sale and leasing of the land and natural products which includes minerals. The current inventory of State Trust lands includes 9.2 million acres representing about 12.7% of the State.The ASLD Minerals Section manages the exploration, development, and leasing of mineral products on State Trust land. We are not a regulatory agency, but a department guided by our fiduciary responsibilities to the Trust. Our mineral programs include: Exploration Permits, Mineral Leases, Mineral Material Leases, Geothermal Leases, Oil & Gas Leases, and Special Land Use Permits. INDUSTRIAL MINERALS ON ARIZONA STATE TRUST LAND Industrial minerals fall under the category of either Mineral or Mineral Materials Leases. Common industrial minerals found on Arizona State Trust land include potash, limestone, gypsum, salt, specialty clays, zeolites, crushed stone, and sand and gravel."

Jan 1, 2016

By F. Woller

The territory of Czechoslovakia is well endowed in deposits of a variety of industrial minerals. At present, 29 different types of industrial minerals are mined from some 600 individual deposits in Bohemia and Moravia only. About half of those production centres involves structural materials like aggregate and common brick clays and loams. A significant proportion of industrial minerals produced in Czechoslovakia are exported. Destinations of main products are shown in Figure 1. Production of industrial minerals in Czechoslovakia has a long history. Glass has been produced since the 14th century, sulphuric acid since 1578, graphite since 1750, and chinaware since 1790, to name just a few; but most of the present production comes from deposits developed during the past forty years. For a variety of reasons, only about 30 per cent of registered and explored industrial minerals deposits in the country are in production (Table 1). Two of the reasons may be the complexity of processing or conflicting interests of parties involved, but lack of market research, investment funds, or processing capacity have also had an impact on the level of utilization of the resource base.

Jan 1, 1992

By Wallace W. Key

Problems of marketing industrial minerals to chemical manufacturers are manifold. In addition to the difficulty of establishing demarcation lines between "crude" and "processed" industrial (nonmetallic) minerals, and "industrial mineral compounds" further uncertainty exists because some chemical manufacturers do not talk the same language as the industrial mineral producer. For example, paint technologists use "rutile" and "anatase" to describe highly refined chemical compounds. The earth scientists use these terms to describe naturally occurring minerals. Further, marketing research problems are intensified because of the overlapping data of the Standard Industrial Classifications (SIC) groups, and the inexactness of "Chemical Industry," "Chemical and Allied Products Industries," and "Chemical Process Industries," which are widely variable in meaning but are often used interchangeably. Bureau of Mines information Circular 8244, "Minerals for Chemical Manufacturing," was the out¬growth of an attempt to unravel some of the problems caused by overlap of statistical data compared with actual industry practices. Using this study as a base, specific industrial mineral applications of some important sub-industry groups were analyzed for the; California chemical industry. Differences between local and national practices were compared. Practices usually differed, depending on cost and availability of alternate minerals, climate, idiosyncrasies, local regulations, and other conditions. Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8260, "Mineral Fillers for the California Pesticides Industry," is the first such analysis of, a sub-industry group. Other such studies are underway. Obtaining national data is easy, but to be able to compile meaningful information which can be revealed on a regional and State basis generally is difficult and often impossible. This paper will briefly emphasize some of the industrial mineral problems encountered, and bring out the needs and benefits being derived through the continued cooperation of authoritative officials concerned with supply and consumption of industrial minerals in government and industry.

Jan 1, 1965

By Oliver Bowles

GLASS razor blades, glass chairs, and marble window panes attest that creative genius was still active in 1935. Many less striking, though doubtless more important, developments are to be recorded for the nonmetallic mineral industries, and not the least of them is the establishment of an Industrial Minerals Division in the A.I.M.E. under the able leadership of Samuel H. Dolbear, Chairman. Thus the nonmetallics are rightly granted equal dignity with metals and fuels in the category of mineral industries. The brief review of progress that follows merely touches the fringe of important developments in this broad field.

Jan 1, 1936

By J. C. Bradbury

The Illinois State Geological Survey's program in industrial minerals is twofold-the gathering of information on mineral raw materials and the generation of data on the use of these materials. The first function is carried out by the Industrial Minerals Section and the Clay Resources and Clay Mineral Technology Section of the Geological Group, and the second is the responsibility of the Chemical Engineering Section of the Chemical Group. Gathering in formation on raw materials includes both mapping of resources and fundamental geological research. Recent and current research projects include studies relating lithologies of limestones to their physical properties, investigation of sulfur dioxide reactivity of various types of limestone, lithostratigraphic studies of limestones of Mississippian age, investigations of heavy minerals in Cretaceous, Tertiary, and Pleistocene sands, studies of the environments of clay deposition, electron microscope studies of clays and limestones, and investigation of long-term expansion in ceramic products. A relatively recent development that relates more to dissemination of information than to research is environmental geology. This affects the Survey's industrial minerals program chiefly by stimulating the study of rock and mineral resources in metropolitan areas and reporting the results for the land- use planner as well as the engineer or mineral producer. The Survey's program of research on the use of industrial minerals was expanded and diversified in 1966. Incorporating a minerals beneficiation lab, the program is designed to develop new uses for existing mineral resources and to assist producers in implementing these ideas: Projects of the minerals engineering program have included the separation of a feldspar concentrate from certain glacial outwash and river sands, recovery of kaolinite from the waste from silica sand operations, development of the use of an Illinois clay as a binder for pellets, and investigations into the use of fly ash and fluorspar mine tailings.

Jan 1, 1970

By Andrew Scogings

The current edition of The Australasian Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) Code was published in 2012 and, after a transition period, the 2012 edition came into mandatory operation on Dec. 1, 2013. There is a significant change between JORC 2004 (Clause 44) and JORC 2012 (Clause 49) for the reporting of industrial mineral resources and reserves, which should be addressed by ASX-listed players in the industrial minerals space.

By R. L. Virta

Four companies mined ball call in four states in 2009, H.C. Spinks Clay Co. Inc. (owned by Lhoist Group), Kentucky-Tennessee Clay Co. (owned by Imerys Group), Old Hickory Clay Co. and Unimin Corp. Production, on the basis of preliminary data, was 820 kt (904,000 st) with an estimated value of $39.4 million. That was a 15-percent decrease in tonnage from 967 Mt (1.1 mil-lion st) with a value of $44.3 million that was produced in 2008. Tennessee was the top producing state with 59 percent of domestic production, followed by Texas, Mississippi and Kentucky. About 71 percent of production was airfloat, 18 perc

Jun 1, 2010

By R. L. Virta

Ball Clay -- Four companies - H.C. Spinks Clay Co. Inc. (owned by Lhoist Group), Imerys Group (formerly Kentucky-Tennessee Clay Co.), Old Hickory Clay Co. and Unimin Corp. - mined ball clay in four states during 2010. Production, based on preliminary data, was 910 kt (1.11 million st) with an estimated value of $42.9 million. That was a 10-percent increase in tonnage from 831 kt (916 million st) with a value of $37.7 million that was produced in 2009. Tennessee was the leading producer state with 61 percent of domestic production. It was followed by Texas, Mississippi and Kentucky. About 70 percent of production was airfloat, 20 percent was crude and 10 percent was water-slurried.

Jan 1, 2011

Editor?s note: Each year, the June issue of Mining Engineering features an industrial minerals review. Several people put in a fair amount of time in developing the material for this issue, all the while doing their own jobs. Thank you to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division technical committee chair and vice-chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles. Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor. Candace Trimble, member SME, of Oil-Dri Corporation of America, is chair of the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division?s Technical Committee.

Jan 1, 2012

Editor?s note: Each year, Mining Engineering features an industrial minerals review. Several people put in a fair amount of time in developing the material for this issue, all the while doing their own jobs. Thank you to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division technical committee chair and vice-chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles. Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor. Rajesh Raitani, member SME, of Cytec Industries Inc., is chair of the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division?s Technical Committee. The technical Committee vice chairs include: ? Vishal Gupta, member SME, of FlSmidth, Agricultural Materials. ? Candace Trimble, member SME, of Oil- Dri Corporation of America, and Bradley Van Gosen, of the U.S. Geological Survey, ceramics and refractory materials. ? Stanley Krukowski, member SME, of the Oklahoma Geological Survey, chemical raw materials. ? Russell Winn, member SME, of R.E. James Gravel Co., chemical raw materials. ? Justin Zdunczyk, member SME, of Plum Creek, construction materials. ? Jerry Gauntt, member SME, of Golder Associates, fillers and pigments. ? Michael Cheshire, member SME, of Los Alamos National Laboratory, sorbents, filters and process aids. ? Rajesh Raitani, member SME, of Cytec, Industries Inc., specialty minerals. Their help makes possible this June industrial minerals issue. On behalf of ME readers, the editors thank them.

Jul 1, 2013

By R. L. Virta

Four companies ? H.C. Spinks Clay Co., Inc., Imerys, Old Hickory Clay Co., and Unimin Corp. ? mined ball clay in four states in 2013. On the basis of preliminary data, production was 1 Mt (1.1 million st) with an estimated value of $47 million. Production increased by 3 percent in tonnage from 973 kt (1.1 million st) with a value of $45.1 million in 2012. Tennessee was the leading producer accounting for 64 percent of domestic production, followed by Texas, Mississippi and Kentucky. About 67 percent of total ball clay production was airfloat, 22 percent was crude or shredded and 11 percent was water-slurried.

"Editor’s note: Each year, Mining Engineering features an industrial minerals review. Several people put in a fair amount of time in developing the material for this issue, all the while doing their own jobs. Thank you to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division technical committee chair and vice chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles.Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor.Vishal Gupta, member SME, of EP Minerals LLC, is chair of the Industrial Minerals &Aggregates Division’s Technical Committee.The technical committee vice chairs include:• Vishal Gupta, member SME, of EP Minerals LLC, Agricultural Materials.• Joe Garska, member SME, of Imerys, ceramics and refractory materials.• Stanley Krukowski, member SME, of the Oklahoma Geological Survey, chemical raw materials.• Russell Winn, member SME, of R.E. Janes Gravel Co., chemical raw materials.• Justin Zdunczyk, member SME, of Pike Industries, construction aggregates.• Jerry Gauntt, member SME, of Golder Associates, fillers and pigments.• Ebrhaim K. Tarshizi, member SME, of the Michigan Tech, sorbents, filters and process aids.• Daniel T. Eyde, member SME, of St. Cloud Mining, specialty minerals.Their help makes possible this July industrial minerals issue. On behalf of ME readers, the editors thank them.Virta, R.L. U.S. Geological Survey, National Minerals Information CenterFour companies - H.C. Spinks Clay Co., Inc., Imerys, Old Hickory Clay Co., and Unimin Corp. - mined ball clay in four states in 2013. On the basis of preliminary data, production was 1 Mt (1.1 million st) with an estimated value of $47 million. Production increased by 3 percent in tonnage from 973 kt (1.1 million st) with a value of $45.1 million in 2012. Tennessee was the leading producer state accounting for 64 percent of domestic production, followed by Texas, Mississippi and Kentucky. About 67 percent of total ball clay production was airfloat, 22 percent was crude or shredded and 11 percent was water-slurried.ConsumptionIn 2013, domestic ball clay producers sold clays to the following markets: ceramic floor and wall tile (44 percent); exports (21 percent); sanitaryware (18 percent); miscellaneous ceramics (9 percent); fillers, extenders, and binders, and unspecified uses (4 percent each), based on 2012 end use patterns and current markets. Other markets accounted for less than 1 percent of the remaining ball clay sales or use. Sales reported for the manufacture of fiberglass or most filler, extender, and binder applications were likely to have been mainly kaolin mined or purchased by the ball clay producers.PricesThe average value of domestically produced ball clay was approximately $47/t ($43/st) in 2013 compared with $46/t ($42/st) in 2012, on the basis of a preliminary survey of domestic ball clay producers. The unit values of exported and imported ball clay were $126/t ($114/ st) and $373/t ($338/st), respectively, in 2013, compared with $62/t ($56/st) and $314/t ($285/st), respectively, in 2012. Unit values for most large export shipments increased in 2013, and a larger number of low-tonnage, high-value export shipments were shipped in 2013 than in 2012, resulting in a doubling of the average export value. Two low-tonnage, high-value shipments in 2013 accounted for the increased value of imports."

Jan 1, 2014

By Daniel M. Flanagan

"Editor’s note: Each year, Mining Engineering features an industrial minerals review. Several people put in a fair amount of time in developing the material for this issue, all the while doing their own jobs. Thank you to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals & Aggregates Division technical committee chair and vice chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles. Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor.Joe Garska, member SME, of Imerys, is chair of the Industrial Minerals &Aggregates Division’s Technical Committee.The technical committee vice chairs include:• Hyunjung Kim, member SME, of Chonbuk National University, agricultural materials.• Xihui Lin, member SME, of Kemira, ceramics and refractory materials.• Nikhil Gupta, member SME, of Virginia Tech, chemical raw materials.• Adam Rodriquez, member SME, of Penn State, construction aggregates.• LeDeana Roberts, member SME, of Imerys, fillers and pigments.• Harsha Kolla, member SME, of ChemEOR, sorbents, filters and process aids.• Edgar Blanco, member SME, of FLSmidth, specialty minerals.Their help makes possible this July industrial minerals issue. On behalf of ME readers, the editors thank them.During the past 25 years, U.S. ball clay production (the quantity sold or used by domestic producers) increased from 788 kt (869,000 st) in 1990 to an alltime high of 1.31 Mt (1.44 million st) in 2003 (Fig. 1). Housing construction within the United States, a leading market for ball clay-based ceramics and sanitaryware, began to decline in 2005, which resulted in a considerable decrease in sales of ball clay that continued through the 2008-2009 economic recession. After bottoming out at 831 kt (916,000 st) in 2009, ball clay production steadily increased through 2015 (Fig. 1). Estimated sales in 2015 were 36 percent higher than those in 1990 and 18 percent lower than those in 2003.Four companies (H.C. Spinks Clay Co., Imerys S.A., Old Hickory Clay Co., and Unimin Corp.), mined ball clay in five states during 2015. An estimated 1.7 Mt (1.18 million st) of ball clay valued at an estimated $47.5 million was sold or used by U.S. producers, a 4-percent increase from 1.03 Mt (1.14 million st) valued at $45.2 million in 2014. Approximately 65 percent of total ball clay production was air-float, 25 percent was crude or shredded and 10 percent was water-slurried"

Jul 1, 2016

By Jack Bedder

"Editor’s note: We would like to thank those who make this annual issue possible. A special thank you goes out to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals & Aggregates Division Technical Committee chair and vice chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles.Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor.Ebrahim K. Tarshizi, member SME, of Michigan Tech, is chair of the Industrial Minerals &Aggregates Division’s Technical Committee.The technical committee vice chairs include: • Hyunjung Kim, member SME, of Chonbuk National University, agricultural materials.• Xihui Yin, member SME, of Kemira, ceramics and refractory materials.• Nikhil Gupta, member SME, of Virginia Tech, chemical raw materials.• Jasson Giddens and Swadhin Saurabh, members SME, of Oil Dri Corp of America and Mill Creek Engineering, respectively, chemical raw materials.• Snehamoy Chatterjee, member SME, of the Michigan Tech.• LeDeana Roberts and Shubham Verma, members SME, of Imerys and U.S. Oil Sands, respectively, fillers and pigments.• Thomas Hilderbrand and Kaiwu Huang, members SME, of Thiele Kaolin Co. and Virginia Tech, respectively, sorbents, filters and process aids.• Rhaghav Dubey and Edgar Blanco, members SME, of Outotec and FL Smidth, respectively, specialty mineralsAntimony generally occurs along with gold, lead, copper and silver. There are more than 100 antimony minerals, although the sulfide mineral stibnite is the main one.Antimony enters the supply chain either as a result of mining (primary production) or recycling (secondary production). China has by far the largest antimony resources and is, as a result, the world’s center for antimony mine production. In 2016, it accounted for more than three quarters of the global mine supply out of a world production figure of 130 kt (143,000 st), according to the U.S. Geological Survey. The biggest, and most high-grade deposits are found in southern China, with the largest mines located in Hunan, Guangxi and Yunnan provinces. Tajikistan, Russia, Australia and Bolivia are the largest mine producers outside China. A new antimony project in Oman made progress in 2016, producing first metal in April 2016 in test facilities, and then ordered three furnaces for a 26 kt/a (28,600 stpy) antimony metal and oxide smelter that is due on stream in late 2017.Antimony ingot production is not as widespread as is antimony mine production, owing to the high levels of pollution that are associated with antimony smelting. It is for this reason that smelting has been largely confined to China and other Asian countries, where environmental legislation is less stringent.Antimony oxide production is undertaken on four continents with China being the biggest producer. There is also a considerable amount of oxide production in Europe — which relies on imported feedstock, mostly from China. Antimony also enters the supply chain through recycling. Lead containing antimony is produced in a number of countries, mainly in secondary lead smelters. Typically, a blast furnace charge containing used or discarded battery plates, type metal or bearing metal is reduced to lead bullion, which is refined in reverberatory furnaces and melting pots. In the main, the antimony recovered is consumed in metallurgical applications. China was the biggest secondary antimony producer in 2016, and accounted for 25 retardants and lead-acid batteries. Flame retardants accounted for roughly 50 percent of consumption in 2016 with batteries representing about 25 percent. Other end uses include plastics and heat stabilizers, ceramics and glass and a variety of metallurgical applications. Demand has been sluggish since the global financial crisis, mostly because key markets failed to recover strongly from the downturn, particularly in Europe."

Jan 7, 2017

By Jack Bedder, Nils Backeberg

"Native antimony metal is rare and antimony generally occurs together with gold, lead, copper and silver. There are more than 100 antimony minerals, although the sulfide mineral stibnite is the main economic mineral.Antimony enters the supply chain either as a result of mining (primary production) or recycling (secondary production). China has by far the largest antimony resources and is, as a result, the world’s center for antimony mine production. While China remains the leading primary producer, accounting for 69 percent (80.5 kt or 88,700 st) of the global 117.5 kt (129,000 st) in 2017, market consolidation and regulatory inspections across China leading to closures of facilities have caused a significant decrease in Chinese output from 115.8 kt (127,600 st) in 2015 (81 percent of global production).Tajikistan and Russia are the next largest producers of antimony after China, both ramping up production in recent years. Russia could significantly increase its supply of antimony if Polyus moves ahead with supplying 10-12 kt/a (11,000–13,200 stpy) of contained antimony from gold tailings. Australia and Bolivia are also significant mine producers outside China. The value of the different ores varies based on the metal content of the concentrates, with the most valuable gold-bearing ores sourced from Australia’s Costerfield Mine and the least valuable mercury-bearing ores sourced from the Anzob Mine in Tajikistan. On average, Bolivian and Russian ores trade at an intermediate value between those from Costerfield and Anzob. Nearly all of the rest-of-world production is exported to China, where the ores and concentrates are processed into antimony ingots and oxides.Antimony ingot production is not as widespread as is the case with antimony mine production, owing to the high levels of pollution that are associated with antimony smelting. It is for this reason that smelting has been largely confined to China and other Asian countries ,such as Vietnam and Myanmar, where environmental legislation has historically been less stringent. Tajikistan has become a growing producer of antimony ingot since 2014, coming from the commissioned metallurgical plant at the Anzob Mine.Antimony oxide production is undertaken on four continents with China being the biggest producer. There is also a considerable amount of oxide production in Europe (mainly Belgium and France), which relies on imported antimony metal feedstock, mostly from China.A new antimony project under construction by Strategic and Precious Metals Processing (SPMP) in Oman made progress in 2016 and 2017, and after producing first metal in April 2016 in test facilities, was set to be commissioned in the first quarter of 2018. Commissioning had been moved back to June 2018, with a potential ramp-up to 2-3 kt/a (2,200 to 3,300 stpy) of antimony metal by the end of 2018. SPMP is also reviewing producing antimony oxide as part of its flow sheet."

Jan 7, 2018

By E. Lee Bray

"Editor’s note: The editors thank those who make this annual issue possible. A special thank you goes out to the Industrial Minerals Annual Review editor, to the Industrial Minerals & Aggregates Division Technical Committee chair and vice chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles.Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech Geo, is the industrial minerals annual review editor. Edgar Blanco, member SME, of Freeport- McMoRan, is chair of the Industrial Minerals &Aggregates Division’s Technical Committee.The technical committee vice chairs include:• NickTushar Gupta and Sallie Gaillard, of the USGS, members SME, agricultural materials.• Abhishek Choudhuryand Xihui Yin, members SME, of Montana Tech and Kemira, repectively, ceramic and refractory materials.• Bobbi Strange and Riddhika Jain, members SME, of Outotec, Martin Marietta and Outotec, respectively, chemical raw materials.• Snehamoy Chatterjee, Alyssa Kendir and Alind Chandra, members SME, of BMT, Universityof Kentucky and Michigan Tech, respectively,construction aggregates.• Subham Verma, Gauran Soni and Freddy Sime, members SME, fillers and pigments.• Kaiwu Huang, Thomas Hilderbrand and Ricardo Santander members SME, of Virginia Tech, Thiele Kaolin and Carbo Ceramics, respectively, sorbents, filters and process aids.• Rhaghay Dubey and William Rapier, members SME, of Outotec and a consultant, respectively, specialty minerals.On behalf of ME readers, the editors thankTwo U.S. alumina refineries produced an estimated 1.5 Mt (1.65 million st) of alumina from imported bauxite in the United States in 2018. The 500-kt/a (550,000-stpy) refinery in Burnside, LA, owned by Almatis Inc. produced specialty alumina used in the abrasives, ceramics, chemical and refractory industries. The 1.2-Mt/a (1.32 million-stpy) refinery in Gramercy, LA, owned by Noranda Alumina LLC produced alumina mostly for use in aluminum smelters but also produced specialty alumina. An upgrade project at the Gramercy refinery to convert 200 kt/a (220,000 stpy) of capacity to produce more profitable specialty alumina was completed in the first half of 2018, and another project to increase capacity was started but a completion schedule was not available. The amount of new capacity was not disclosed, but it would be used to produce nonmetallurgical grade alumina. The 2.3-Mt/a (2.5 million-stpy) refinery in Point Comfort, TX, which was temporarily shut down in March 2016, remained closed throughout the year."

Jul 1, 2019

By Raymond Wilson

Grinding costs are an important item in cement manufacture, and the cost of power is one of the large items in grinding costs. Even where power is of secondary importance, cost items dependent on mill capacity are influenced by the efficiency with which the mill uses power. Tube mills typify the grinding mills most generally used in cement plants, though other types are in use. Tube mills have been widely criticized as being extremely inefficient, and this feeling regarding them has led to many attempts to design more efficient grinding equipment. Other types may be an improvement over tube mills, but the improvement has certainly not been revolutionatry, at least as applied to clinker grinding. The very fact that there is doubt regarding the relative efficacy of various types of mills is an indication that an adequate basis for an analysis of performance is lacking. The development of methods of analyzing mill performance has been hampered by the lack of a suitable method for measuring the work actually done in pulverizing. There has been no acceptable standard to which mill performance might be compared. As a consequence, it was not known whether the margin of possible improvement in pulverizing operations was large or small. Even direct comparison of different types of mills was seldom possible because most plants had only one type of mill for each type of service. Comparisons between plants were difficult because of differences in the grinding characteristics of various clinkers. Some recent developments complete a chain of circumstances that place the cement industry in a particularly fortunate position for the study of its clinker-pulverizing operations. Modern investigators of grinding phenomena have generally agreed that the best measure of mill performance is the production of new surface. For most materials this measure of performance is largely theoretical and has a rather remote connection with the practical aims of the grinding operation. In clinker grinding, on the other hand, surface area is intimately connected with the properties conferred on the cement by grinding. Morcover, the determination of surface area is rapidly coming into routine use as a tost

Jan 1, 1938