SUSTAINABILITY IN MINING,MINERAL PROCESSING & MATERIAL PRODUCTION

Marrakech, Morocco

WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES TO SUSTAINABILITY ?

ROBERTO C. VILLAS-BAS

Marrakech, Morocco

2011

Workshop on Uranium Recovery from Phosphates and Phosphoric Acid

ROBERTO C. VILLAS BAS CETEM - Center for Mineral Technology CYTED Science & Technology for Development IMPC International Mineral Processing Council SD Committee IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency UDEPO & ThDEPO Group Rio de Janeiro, RJ - Brazil

Abstract
Materials play a fundamental role in developing a nation and in maintaining or increasing its share in the world economy. However, any material to be produced has in its transformation cycle, at least one extracting, processing, fabrication and manufacturing step in which releases of substances, gases, liquids, or solids, occur to the environment. Besides, social problems may arise when a mine or a plant is installed in a given region, be raising salaries,demanding local inexistent goods and services,bringing new work force and disrupting what was considered a normal way of life. This paper addresses some sustainability issues associated to the extracting and processing of some mineral commodities that are of major interest to the mineral processing practicioner in an attempt to design sustainable processes and products.

1. Introduction
The production and utilization of material in general, and as consequence those of ores and metals, obey, within a given framework of industrial development, the economic cycles that are in effect in a certain time period. These cycles have been well-discussed in the literature[1][2][3][4] and might reflect a world, a local or a geopolitical trend. As,normally, the selection of a given set of materials depends upon the predominant cycle in the industrialized countries, these determine, to a greater or lesser extend, the consumption pattern of a given commodity, inducing the market to adapt itself to such a new reality. In materials based industries two general strategies arise: there is a search for materials that suit an available technology, and the development of technology for an available material. The recycled materials, which magnitude of use varies from economy to economy, need, as a general rule, lower capital and energy expenditures and more manpower than that of the primary processing. Also, they require lower pollution control costs than the primary ores. Such a recycling,however, is more intense as the sophistication of the economy increases, since viable quantities of recycled materials must be available in order to reutilize them. However, as important as they are in the world's economy, materials to be produced promote changes in the environment and in society,since they require energy to be processed, land to be installed, disposal sites to receive tailings or disposals, give off gases and dusts, require water and earth moving, and promotes some social disruption. In fact, since early times such impacts have been recognized and some actions and concerns arouse, here and there, to minimize them or at least leaving them within a tolerable and acceptable limit.
* Parts of this manuscript have been available to readers from several sources.However this
present version integrates them for the sake of completeness.

Such acceptability, of course, changes from time to time, as social pressures increases, forcing legislative decisions that promote technological alternatives which, in turn, reflect on the economy. As regarding to the environment, two major questions are receiving worldwide attention: first,what are the effects linked to the production, disposal and use of materials, and ,second,what are their availability in a foreseen future?[5]. As for the social impacts,listings of some of the major ones are given as a challenge to planners and entrepreneurs.

2. The average metal recoveries and the production steps

For any material to be produced there are corresponding steps in which discards are also produced. These discards might be of two broad cathegories: losses and effluents. Losses are those discards readly identified to the main material produced, i.e., parts of that material that are left behind throughout the production steps. Effluents are the discards coming from these same steps and that are inherent to the applied technology within each production step, but not necessarily identified to the main material. 2.1. The average metal recoveries In order to systemize the analysis of the environmental impacts of the discards an attempt is going to be made in quantifying such average metal losses. No universal claims are made on the exposed reasonings, but they migh help to point-out the emergency of the facts and impacts. It is well recognized that ore recoveries, from mining to final metal product varies from country to country, from economy to economy, as a function of technology, skill, regulatory laws, finantial capability, etc...; so are the environmenal impacts caused by primary and secondary metals production. Therefore, recoveries and losses figures from metal to metal and even for the same metal from country to country, even when apparently similar technologies are used, do vary substantially due to the so called "particularities" of the mining world: the cut-off-grade and the compromise between grade versus recovery optimal combination, making each orebody unique in its physical and economic characteristics. Other things being equal, the lower the grade or the poorer the quality of the ore, the higher will be the cost of recovery of the valuable products. To the extent that there is a choice of the grade of the ore to be mined, there is also a choice of the total tonnage and of the total product recovered; the lower the permissible grade, the higher the tonnage. Therefore, the fixing of the cuttoff grade in deposits of irregular grade-distribution may require several computations of alternative tonnages and grades on the basis of different assumptions as to mineable limits. Equally important with grade is the workability of the ore which is measured by the cost of physical removal of the rock. Other factors, such as accessibility from mine openings, thickness and regularity of the ore zone, hardness and toughness of the ore, presence of interfering structures, such as faults, weak ground, et allia, all must be evaluated when the decision on which ore must be taken should be made. Variations in the grade in the workability of an ore body, may go side by side, or they may partly compensate each other. Ores of many different grades and many different costs, but sufficiently similar in other qualities to be amenable to the same treatment process may be mine or blended to profitable recovery of otherwise para marginal ore. Complete removal of all available ore from mine, or complete extraction of all available ore is never achieved. Cost per unit recovered rise almost continuosly and

usually with increasing steeps as attempts are made to increase the percent extracted. In the short run, with the recovery plant given, the percent extraction of metal will depend, to some extent, on the grade of the ore itself; the mining method usually limits the recovery of the ore in the mine[6] [7]. As well as the utilized processing technology. For gold leaching, for example, the recovery figures are those shown in Table 1. Table 1 - Gold leaching recoveries[8] OPERATION PARTICLE SIZE Agitation Vat Heap < 0,1mm < 10mm > 10mm METTALURGICAL RECOVERY 90 - 95% > 20h 70 - 80% 3 to 4h 40 - 60% 3 to 4w h = hour w = week COSTS IN OP IN IN OP

IN = investment costs OP = operational costs

Lets have a look on some select mineral commodities, as regarding recoveries and grades, as shown in Table 2. It can be readly seen that the problem associated to earth moving and tailing disposal is quite a severe one, since from the grade of the ore up to the production of a salable concentrate, the mass of the produced concentrate, as related to that of the ore total (MC) and the mass recovery itself (MR) are, of course, far from the sustainable target of total utilization, for the aforementioned reasons. Table 2 - Selected mineral commodities recovery/grade ORE Nb2O5 (3,0%) piroclore TiO2 (1,5%) ilmenite Cr2O3 (17%) chromite WO3 (0,5%) scheelite Sn (1,3%) cassiterite Ta2O2 (0,16%) tantalite RECOVERY MC = 3,3% Ore MR = 66% MC = 2,2% Ore MR = 81% MC = 28% Ore MR = 65% MC = 0,49% Ore MR = 74% MC = 1,9% Ore MR = 69,1% MC = 0,22 Ore MR = 70% GRADE 60% Nb2O5 Conc. 55% TiO2 Conc. 37% - 46% Conc. 75% WO3 Conc. 48% Sn Conc. 49% Ta2O5 Conc. Cr2O3 COMPANY CBMM (9) RIB (9) FERBASA (9) TUNGSTNIO (9) RENISON (10) BERNIC (10)

As already pointed out MC stands for the mass of produced concentrate, as related to that of the ore total, in percent, and MR is the mass recovery, i.e., the

recovered amount of the valuable commodity as related to the original amount in the ore. A very illustrating example of recovery, grade, mass recovery, earth moving, generated by-products is the production of phosphate fertilizers, from volcanic rock, that besides the usual earth-moving and disposal problems associated to the production of the concentrate, it generates five times the mass of gypsum as that of the concentrate, P2O5 based, when such a concentrate reacts with sulphuric acid to produce the fertilizer. 2.2. The Production Steps Lets describe such production steps and their discards, for the purposes of this presentation, identifying four steps, namely extracting, processing, fabricating and manufacturing, as follows: - extracting step, i.e., the mining and beneficiation of the ore to a commercial concentrate. The losses are dependent upon the mining method (open pit, cutand-fill, room-and-pillar, etc...) and beneficiation techniques (gravity separation, flotation, etc...); the effluents generated are CO x NOx from machinery and equipment, process waters and contaminated freatic waters, particulate material, and earth moving disposals/rearrangements; - processing step, i.e., the extractive metallurgy or chemical operations to convert a concentrate into a metal; losses are depend upon the chosen technologies and skills involved (pyro, hydro and/or electro), and the effluents generated are gases (COx, NOx, SOx), liquids (heavy metals contamined waters) and solids (sediments, and heavy metals dusts); - fabrication step, i.e., those operations devoted to produce rods, bars, sheets, etc...; the losses are scrap materials resulting from those operations, denominated "home scrap"[11] endlessly recirculated, without any net loss of metal; the effluents are waste waters and industrial gases; - manufacturing step, i.e., the application of mechanical operations for the shaping of metals by machining, stamping and forging, other than those of the fabrication step; the losses are parts of metal resulting from such mechanical treatments that does not produce the aimed product, being denominated "new scrap" or "prompt scrap" [11][13][14][12], which recycling is well organized and efficient[12][13]; the effluents are water vapors and industrial gases. The utilized average metal recoveries figures from ore to metal, involving the extracting and processing steps are those of HASIALIS[15] and for the manufacturing step that of MAR[14]. It is acknowledged that this last figure is well obsolete for the U.S. where it was obtained in 1954(!); however in other parts of the world such figure might be still reasonably valid. As for those of HASIALIS they are average figures, and large departures from these figures, for a given particular case, do exist. The production steps, as indicated, are all illustrated in Figure 1. Such a flowchart, or Sankey diagram, helps to seek solutions related to the discards involved in each production step. A similar chart might be attempted in terms of overall mass flows (MC's), if defined for each production step, resulting in more impacting figures, since earthmovings, then, would be included. Tunneling into each of the aforementioned four production steps, a clear picture, hopefully, will then be achieved. Lets try that! For this, some explanations are needed to follow Figures 1 the remaining Figures of the text:

Figure 1 - The production steps

X = the metal content of the "in situ" ore LE = is the loss in metal resulting in the extracting step, and is equivalent to 0,3625 X. PE = is the product in metal originated from the extracting step, and is equivalent to 0,6375 X.

LP = is the loss in metal resulting from processing, and is equivalent to 0,0637 5 X. PP = is the product in metal resulting from processing and is equivalent to 0,5737 5 X. LF = is the loss metal resulting from fabrication and is equivalent to O X (endless recirculated). PF = is the product in metal resulting from fabrication, and is equivalent to P P. PM = is the product in metal resulting from manufacturing. Ei = is the effluent, generated in each stage. LM = is the loss in metal resulting from manufacturing, and is equivalent to 0,1147 5 X.

2.3. Identifyable environmental impact and prospects in the extracting step

LE LOSSES Left Ore + Min. Proc. Tailing

0,3625X Bulk "in situ" ore X EXTRACTING (Mining + Min. Proc.) Concentrate 0,6375X PE

ENERGY* < 17,5MWh/ton *See footnote Table 3.

EE EFFLUENTS Gases from Machining H.M. Waste Waters Particulate/Dust Earth Movings

Figure 2 - Income/outcome of the extracting step.

From Figure 2: A. Energy: Taking up of energy. There are technical rooms for improvements. Figures in kWh (thermal), per tonne of primary metal, as reported in ref. 16; Al (10,175); Cu (17,420); Zn (1,240). B. Losses: B.1 Left ore, function of cut-off and mining method, there are technical rooms forimprovement. B.2 Mineral Processing tailings, rooms for gains pending on improvements in the next step (processing), since commercial grade concentrates are inputs to a given processing technology. C. Effluents: C.1 Mining, earth moving impacts associated to land reclamation; rooms for improvement based upon compromises between legislation (function of social pressures) and costs of reclayming. Physical disturbances are permanent; dust C.2 Mining: gases from machinery and equipment (as well as noises and vibrations), there are technical rooms for improvement. C.3 C.4 C.5 Mining: disruption of day mining methods. Mineral processing: improvement. water regimes. Little room for improvements in present process waters and dust, still technical rooms for

Mineral processing: tailing disposals, solids, and control of acid generation.

2.4. Identifiable environmental impacts and prospects in the processing step

LP LOSSES
Slags, Sludges, Dusts, Process Waters

0,06375X 0,6375X

PE

PROCESSING (Extractive Metallugy.)

OX

Metal 0,57375

PP

ENERGY* < 113 MWh/ton

*See footnote Table 3.

EP EFFLUENTS
Generated Gases Waste Waters Particulate Solid Wastes

Figure 3 - Income/outcome of the processing step.

From Figure 3: A. Energy: Taking up of energy. There are rooms for improvements. Figures in kWh per tonne (thermal) as reportes in ref. 16; Al (35,384); Cu (26,520); Zn (17,560); Mg (103,000). Other figures are reported for Al and Mg if hydro-based power is available (much lower figures). B. Losses: Left metal as function of the process technology utilized, skills and legislation. There are rooms for improvements, specially those devoted to recover metal from slags, sludges and dusts of existing technologies or new technologies based on decreasing the number of operations/equipment stages (i.e., continuous converting for Cu and the still pending solution to the red mud problem in Al.). C. Effluents: Generated process gases (COx, NOx, SOx); waste waters after eventual removal of metal(s) from process waters; particulates throughout the processing stages and solid wastes other than slags, sludges, etc... (for the Al industry, for instance, spent potlinings, drosses, electrodes, etc...),still rooms for technical improvements. 2.5. Identifiable environmental impacts and prospects in the fabricating step

LF LOSSES
Home Scrap

OX 0,57375X Metal Bards Rods

FABRICATING PP
OX

PF

0,57375X

ENERGY* < 6 MWh/ton

*See footnote table 3

EF EFFLUENTS
Industrial Gases Waste Waters

Figure 4 - Income/outcome of the fabrication step.

From Figure 4: A. Energy: Taking up of energy. There are rooms for some improvements. Figures in kWh/tonne (thermal), as reported in ref. 16; Al (4,937); Cu (5,970); Zn (1,492). B. Losses: Generation of home scrap, no net losses. However, rooms to reduce such generations as fabrication operations/equipments become more efficient. 2.6. Identifiable environmental impacts and prospects in the manufacturing step

LM LOSSES
New Scrap, Borings Trimmings Rejects

0,11475X 0,57375X Metallic Product PM

MANUFACTURING PF
OX

0,4590X

ENERGY*
<<6MWh *See footnote table 3

EM EFFLUENTS
Industrial Gases Water Vapors

Figure 5 - Income/outcome of the manufacturing step. From Figure 5: A. Energy: Quite variable depending on the particular metallic product through forging, stamping and machining. Much less than any other of the previous production stages. B. Losses: They are the so called new scrap that usually goes to secondary production. C. Effluents: Industrial gases and water vapors.

3. Role of the mineral processor practicioner and engineer

The points to be raised in this section are those of a general nature that may guide the practicioner towards a better understanding of the overall effect a given process has upon the environment, thus hopefully enhancing chances of designing environmentally sound processes which in turn produce sustainable products. Let's raise some major points in each of the income/outcome of the production steps, namely energy, losses and effluents. 3.1. Energy Table 3 lists the energy taken up in each production step. Table 3 - Energy utilized in each production step PRODUCTION STEPS Extracting Processing Fabrication Manufacturing ENERGY (MWh) [thermal]/ton* < 17.5

< 113.0 < 6.0

<< 6.0

* Figures as mentioned, not averages but maximum, for a selected class of metals (Al, Cu, Zn, Mg, Ti)

The role of the mp practicioner is to seek for processes that minimizes energy consumption; his/her tasks are, thus, primarely devoted to the processing step, following the extracting step and, then, fabrication and manufacturing. Indeed, the efficiences of processing operations have been compared by CHAPMAN & ROBERTS[13], appearing in other papers dealing with the subject of environment, metals production and energy such as YOSHIKI-GRAVELSINS, et al.[16], and FORREST & SZEKELY[22]. The overall energy efficiences in the processing step, i.e. the energy take up by the whole step and not just the direct one, as compared to the thermodinamical Gibbs Free Energy, G, for that same processing step, are of interest, since they give a strong indication to where to search for process improvements, energywise. Table 4 lists some selected metals and their overall efficiencies[13][16]. Table 4 - The processing step overall energy efficiences for selected metals. PRIMARY METALS Al Cu Zn Mg Ti OVERALL ENERGY EFFICIENCIES* (%) 13 1.4 5.5 6.1 4.1

* Energy take up by the whole step, as related to the Gibbs Free Energy.

Of great concern is the power source of energy, i.e., hydro or coal based, due to the greenhouse effect. Such a concern was extensively dwelled by FORREST & SZEKELY[22]. 3.2. Losses Table 5 list the average metal losses to the environment, per production step. Table 5 - Metal losses to the environment per production step PRODUCTION STEP Extracting Processing Fabrication Manufacturing AVERAGE METAL LOSSES* 0,3625 0 0,11475 X X 0,06375 X

* Average metal loses as referred in the text.

Here, the mp practiconer has to focus his/her attention to the extracting step, first, and to a lesser degree to the manufacturing step. It is worthy point out, however, that those average figures may be misleading. For each particular metal/substance that the hydrometallurgist is studing he/she has to refer to the actual values that are particular to the mining method, metal, process, skill, country, etc..., as previously discussed. Nevertheless, mining and minerals processing techniques are, in general, responsible for the greatest losses. In-situ mining techniques, that usually refer to the injection of a leach solution through boreholes into the ore are to be taken into account whereas possible[17]. The losses of the manufacturing step usually goes to secondary recovery and besides the strategic/economic aspect to the enterprise itself, as discussed by CHAPMANN and ROBERTS[13] through the GER (gross energy requirement) concept, no major role of the hydrometallurgist is to be foreseen, since such efficiencies are rather linked to the mechanical/electronics/physical metallurgical aspects of the issue. In the processing step, several improvements have been and are still made through process optimization and process improvements[16][17][18]. 3.3. Effluents Regarding the effluents, the discards to the environment are several assuming the liquid, the gaseous and the solid states, giving to the hydrometallugist an extraordinary opportunity and offering several challenges. Table 6 gives a list of problems that seek solutions at each of the production steps, compairing in relative terms the land, water and air impacts; the relationship is made referring to acceptable environmental standards in OECD's countries and they may vary considerable from country to country and from metal to metal.

Table 6 - Comparison between the impacts of the effluents in each production step PRODUCTION STEP Extracting Processing Fabrication Manufacturing L M S low impact moderate impact severe impact LAND S MS L L IMPACT WATER S MS L L AIR M S S L

For the identification of the specific problems that face the particular metal industry, the reader is referred, for instance, to references[23] and [24]. Thus the role of the mp practicioner in developing sustainable processes has to be focused on the extracting step (i.e., land disturbance, soil erosion, mine run-off water, water regimes, dust tailing disposal, revegetation, etc...) and the processing step (i.e., acid generation, heavy metals effluents, disposal of solids, gas generation), primarely. For the specific techniques (biosorption, liquid-liquid exchange, electrowinning of dilute solutions, membranes, etc... see references[17][18] and [19]). Table 7, lists some environmental impacts associated to selected mineral industries. Table 7 - Major environmental impacts for selected mineral industries METAL Al Cu Zn Mg Ti Ni P2O5 IMPACT Red mud slurry; HF; CO2; tar pitch volatiles; spent pot linings; cyanide SO2; metal fumes; heavy metal effluents Iron oxide; SO2; Cd; heavy metal effluents CHCs; dioxin FeCl3; volatile chlorides; CO2 Metal carbonyl; heavy metal leachate;severe dusts and particulate emissions Gipsum, water consumption (whenever present) and disposal; radiation

4. Social issues
Social issues in mineral processing and extraction operations may vary from place to place, from ore to ore ,from plant to plant and from commodity to commodity. However,in general terms they are related to land ocuupation, local employment, local health, royalty distribution and application, taxes, lack of transparency and last but not least the hole left in the ground and negative externalities.

5. Sustainable Mineral Industry

A SUSTAINABLE mineral industry has to observe some requirements : MINIMIZING : 1.- masses involved in mining and processing(earth moving,rocks and water); 2.- process energy : the free energy ! 3.- effluents : solids,liquids and gases ; MAXIMIZING : 4.- social satisfaction ; Such requirements were already discussed by us,at length,in several opportunities and as well quantified(http://w3.cetem.gov.br/cyted-xiii), as,for instance, in the book Technological Challenges Posed by Sustainable Development to the Mineral Extraction Industry , available for free download at the aforementioned site. These can, and must, be measured ,via the proposition of INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY FOR THE MINERALS EXTRACTION INDUSTRIES( http://www.dundee.ac.uk/cepmlp/journal/html/Vol16/article16_12.php) and such measurement project is in development throughout the world ; see,for instance,our book A Review on Indicators of Sustainability for the Minerals Extraction Industries freely available at http://w3.cetem.gov.br/cyted-xiii . Investigations on past to present data on mining in Australia (http://civil.eng.monash.edu.au/about/staff/gmudd/) ,concluded that the sustainability in that country still hangs in ballance, see (http://civil.eng.monash.edu.au/about/staff/muddpersonal/rr5/.

The MINING industry committments to sustainable mining practices and operations might be found explicited on several webpages,as ,for instance : ICMM - International :http://www.icmm.com/icmm_principles.php?lang=pt MAC Canada: http://www.mining.ca/www/Towards_Sustaining_Mining/index.php IBRAM Brasil: http://www.ibram.org.br/ OLAMI Argentina : http://www.olami.org.ar
According to these committments, the purposes and actions preconized by sustainable development are already widelly accepted by the responsable and competitive mining industry ! Also,such committments might be seen at the website of major MINING COMPANIES , as SOCIAL CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY,for instance. In this way,issues as minimizing of EFFLUENTS,even beyond the limits imposed by legislation,is looked upon as fundamental for VOLUNTARY actions which target their overcomings,on their lower limits, the company thus becoming a TRUSTER of its GLOBAL RESPONSABILITY and taking as garanteed committment, at the restricted levels of contamination, for its GLOBAL OPERATION,whatever and whenever ! Others,as minimizing of ENERGY, are too obvious to stress the companys interests in thus proceeding, due to,amongst others, the associeted costs of said procedures.

As for the issue of MASSES involved in mining and mineral processing, and even chemical processing,it is a quite more subtle issue, since as a PRINCIPLE of modern mining, huges masses are to be extracted ,normally of low grade associated,thus maximizing the ore body and the mine. In this regard,ingeniousity in handling and discarding of such masses is the priority,and still today is an open subject,however with many local competent solutions ... And that of te SOCIAL SATISFACTION, how the enterprizes have faced it ? Quite reluctant,at the beginning,the companies realized that one of their strongest issues might be that of local community alliances . There is no other branch of industry that provides more resources towards these goals in achieving strong community alliances than mining,developing several quite interesting social and environmental projects together with its stakeholders, thus preparing for a decent mine closure operation. Ofcourse,not all this is a rosen garden,neither linear,due to the actual existence,in several cases, of severe social and environmental damages,not necessarly provoqued by the same industry that now operates in these areas, but by past mining activities leaving unsolved,costly, problems. As well,anti-mining concerns and ,even some,professional movements, are been detected and coordinated in several parts of the Globe. Mine closure is,certainly,the widening concept of the fourth mining unit operation,aforementioned,since enlarges and extrapolates it,transcending the mere reclayming operation ; see,for instance, Mine Closure in Iberoamerica in http://w3.cetem.gov.br/cyted-xiii .

6. Case Studies : 6.1.- GEOLOGICAL PROSPECTING

SOCIAL SATISFACTION :once,years back, I was participating at one AIST workshops in Japan,Tsukuba City,where the discussion was how to start a prospecting operation in a given locality without causing too much disturbance on local habits and normal life of the community, there living, and,besides,do not create big expectations or frustations from the prospecting results on the said community ! That was an international seminar, the official language was English. Then, I asked to speak and started delivering a speech in ... Portuguese ! Everyone there present was a bit astonished and, quite politelly, asked me,pardon,would you,kindly, speak in the official workshop language, understandable to all ? Then , I said, now in English, I am speaking the language of the locals, the language of natives. If we like to have success in whatever endeavour we are having in prospecting or else, the first concern is to be understood and be able to communicate ! Someone of our team has to speak the local language since it is the FIRST ,and probable the MOST IMPORTANT contact with the locals ! In fact,nowadays, all major prospecting companies do have in their prospecting team experienced anthropologists who could speak,detect signs, and avoid too much expectations out of the prospecting results... but not all !

And some conflicts might start, right here !

ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGES : geological prospecting utilizes machinaries, who utilizes energy, who creates perforations and takes samples ,i.e.,does interact with the environment and cases of acidic water production,deforestation,exposition of bedrocks,etc.,have been reported and should be avoided .F or GEOLOGICAL
PROSPECTING care should be exercized in : - minimization of MASSES : .- SAMPLES taken; .- WATER utilized; .- DISCARDS produced ; - minimization of ENERGY: here those necessary to make the machinery to work; - minimization of EFFLUENTS : .- CAUSED BY SAMPLING; .- CAUSED BY SOURCE OF ENERGY; .- ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS during drilling ; .- maximization of SOCIAL SATISFACTION: .- PUBLIC PERCEPTION ; .- minimizing EXPECTATIONS

6.2.- URANIUM ORE INDUSTRY

For the URANIUM ORE industry,although a comprehensive toxicological profile for uranium (http://www.cvmbs.colostate.edu/erhs/Health%20Physics/ATSDR_Uranium.pdf), issued by the USDHHS in 1999 persists, some still pending problems are- just for the sake of examples,not exhaustible - : .- minimization of MASSES involved : .- OVERBURDEN, TAILLINGS AND SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTS : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj6Zd-hrly8 .- URANIUM MILL TAILINGS ACTIVITY : http://www.wise-uranium.org/img/actumt.gif .- URANIUM WASTE MANAGEMENT : http://www.wise-uranium.org/rup.html#UMT and http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_1244_prn.pdf .- URANIUM MINE WATER MANAGEMENT : http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_1463_web.pdf and http://www.waterinfo.org/uranium-mining .- LONG TERM STABILIZATION OF URANIUM MILL TAILLINGS : http://wwwpub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_1403_web.pdf .- ISR AND WATER MANAGEMENT : http://seekingalpha.com/article/31832-the-water-factor-in-isr-uranium-mining .- minimization of process ENERGY : .- PROCESS : http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/mining/pdfs/cover.pdf .- VENTILATION : http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/pubs_catalogue/uploads/44019-G221E.pdf

.- minimization of effluents : .- TENORM : http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/tenorm/uranium.html .- AQUATIC ECOTOXICITY ASSESSMENT FROM URANIUM MINING : http://www.environment.gov.au/ssd/uranium-mining/ecotoxicology.html .- DECOMMISSIONING OF URANIUM MINES AND PLANTS : http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&uid=4682428&cmd=showdeta ilview&indexed=google .- RADIOCLIDES IN URANIUM MINES AND TAILLINGS: http://www.wise-uranium.org/rup.html#RN and http://www.radon.com/radon/radon_EPA.html and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&uid=4682428&cmd=showdeta ilview&indexed=google and http://www.kiae.ru/radleg/ch1e.htm .- PARTICULTES (DUST) IN URANIUM MINING : http://www.uraniumsa.org/ .- ISL ISSUES IN URANIUM MINING : http://www.sea-us.org.au/pdfs/isl/no2isl.pdf .-GROUNDWATER : http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2007AM/finalprogram/session_19871.htm and http://hs.environmentalexpert.com/resulteachpublication.aspx?cid=6063&codi=3888&level=6&idproducttype =5

- maximization of social satisfaction

.- PUBLIC PERCEPTION ON URANIUM MINING : http://www.dailypress.com/news/opinion/dp-ed_satltrs_02090feb09,0,3198753.story .- ABORIGINAL LANDS AND URANIUM MINING : http://www.sric.org/uranium/index.html and http://www.abqtrib.com/news/2007/oct/24/navajos-spurn-uranium-mining/ and http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2007/10/18/uranium-inuit.html and http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Action/press555.htm .- SOCIAL CONCERNS IN URANIUM MINING : http://hamptonroads.com/2008/01/lawmakers-find-uranium-mining-still-hot-issue and http://no-uranium.blogspot.com/ and http://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/bills/pdf/57_of_2006.pdf and http://www.praguemonitor.com/en/260/czech_business/17750/ and http://www.monash.edu.au/news/newsline/story/1147 .- MEDICAL CONCERNS ON URANIUM MINING : http://www.ccnr.org/bcma.html and http://www.wsib.ca/wsib/wopm.nsf/Public/230203 .- SAFETY IN URANIUM MINING : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021303253.html .-ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS FROM URANIUM MINING INCIDENTS : http://www.environment.gov.au/ssd/uranium-mining/supervision/ecol-assessincidents.html .- ABANDONNED AND UNRECLAIMED URANIUM MINES : http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/tenorm/pubs.html#uraniumdatabase and http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/docs/tenorm/volume-ii/402-r-05-007-ch5.pdf and http://uraniummine.spaces.live.com/ and

http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/geochem/envir/uranium_e.php and http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Meetings/Announcements.asp?ConfID=1035 .- NATIONAL HERITAGE AND URANIUM MINING : http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/umtra/monument_valley_title1.html .- POLITICAL AND GUERRILLAS ACTIONS AND URANIUM MINING - GUERRILLAs : http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/26797.html And http://m-n-j.blogspot.com/ and http://www.geotimes.org/july04/WebExtra073004.html .- POLITICAL PARTIES : http://www.keralanext.com/India/read.asp?id=1176079 and http://www.mining-technology.com/features/feature1210/ PUBLIC PARTICIPATION : http://www.gov.sk.ca/news?newsId=579c4e43-a94e-4f89-acf6-7b6a83f842cd and http://www.icrindia.org/?p=145

6.3.- PHOSPHATE ORE INDUSTRY

As for the ORE PHOSPHATE industry some still pending problems are- just for the sake of examples, not exhaustible - : - minimization of MASSES involved: . - OVERBURDEN: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/alisteri/part-c.html . - PHOSPHOGYPSUM: http://www.ecampus.com/book/0873352254 . - WASTE MANAGEMENT: http://www.fertilizer.org/ifa/publicat/pdf/2001_mining_guide.pdf and http://www.springerlink.com/content/h586m88215253u72/ . - WATER MANAGEMENT: http://elmaa.brgm.fr/Documents/Description/TheElMaaproject.pdf . - minimization of process ENERGY: . - PROCESS: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/mining/pdfs/cover.pdf . - LIFE CYCLE: http://www.fertilizer.org/ifa/publicat/pdf/2001_mining_guide.pdf . - minimization of effluents: . - RADIONUCLIDES: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch11/final/c11s21.pdf;and http://docs.ksu.edu.sa/PDF/Articles34/Article340653.pdf . - PARTICULATE MATTER: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/08aug20051500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/c fr_2005/julqtr/pdf/40cfr60.402.pdf . - INPUT/OUTPUT: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/mining/pdfs/phosphate.pdf . - FLUORIDE: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/jiec.2007.1075?cookieSet=1&journ alCode=jiec . - SELENIUM: http://www.allbusiness.com/government/3620515-1.html and

http://www.savethis.clickability.com/st/saveThisApp?clickMap=link&webPadID=K203 702321 - maximization of social satisfaction . - JOB CREATION: http://www.census2010.gov/epcd/susb/2004/us/US212392.HTM . - VALUE ADDED: http://www.ecampus.com/book/0873352254 . - SOCIAL DEMAND: http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reportinfo.asp?report_id=498250&t=t&cat_id= and http://www.mindbranch.com/Outlook-Phosphate-Rock-R307-22377/ . - EDUCATION & TRAINNING: http://www.fipr.state.fl.us/Education2004/what_is_fipr.pdf .- OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE : http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VB2-4BKN19P1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_ version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=824f6ac3be8817d7bde137ff1198abf0 . - FOREIGN EARNINGS: http://www.uoguelph.ca/~geology/rocks_for_crops/53togo.PDF and http://www.morocco.com/business/ . - PERMITS: http://www.law.fsu.edu/current_students/organizations/ELS/images/256 7.4.8. - UNPROVEN FACTS: http://www.stats.org/stories/2004/tampa_trib_unscientific_jun22_04.htm Also some interesting facts and concerns: . - BUNGE SUSTAINABILITY REPORT: http://www.bunge.com.br/sustentabilidade/Bunge_Rel_Sustentabilidade_2007.pdf . - PHOSPHATES IN CHINA: http://www.wengfu.com/eng/pages/JCK.asp . - PHOSPHATE RECYCLING: http://www.thermphos.com/Documentation/~/media/Pdf/documents/PhosphorusRecy cling%20pdf.ashx and http://www.phosphorus-recovery.tudarmstadt.de/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=40&Itemid=50 8.4.- ISO 14001: http://www.puriphos.com/AboutUs.htm 8.5. - ECO-RESTRUCTURING: http://www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu24ee/uu24ee00.htm#Contents

In Conclusion
a.- It is hoped that the presentation of the production steps always present in the production of materials, namely, extracting, processing, fabrication, and manufacturing that incorporates the incomes/outcomes for each of these steps, namely, the input/output of materials, energy, losses and effluents, and their discussions, have helped the mineral processor and mining practicioner to better manage and solve the relevant daylife problems and for the researcher engineer to choose the relevant areas of research interests for the sake of designing environmentally and socially sound processes thus promoting sustainability.

b.- An overall account of the challenges faced by the mining and metallurgical industry to meet sustainable development is given in (26) and the reader is addressed to the issues and solutions therein proposed. As for mine closure, see reference (27). c.- Last but not least, to have present all still unsolved social issues that as a practicioner, scientist,engineer or citizen he/she will be faced in a given development project.

References
1. 2. 3. 4. Malenbaum, W. (1978) World Demand for Raw Materials in 1985 and 2000; in University of Phyladelphia Publication Series, U.S.A. Tilton, J.E.(1986) Atrophy in Metal Demand; Materials and Society, vol.10, no 3. Waddell, L.M. and Labys, W.C. (1988) Transmaterialization: Technology and Materials Demand Cycles; Materials and Society, vol. 12, n o 1 . Villas Bas, R.C. (1987) Strategic Ores: Worldwide and Brazilian Prospectives; Second Southern Hemisphere Meeting on Minerals Technology, Proceedings, Rio de Janeiro. Anon, (1993) Materials and Environment, where do we Stand, Minerals Today, our Materials World: A Special Edition, U.S.B.M., April, 1993 Villas Bas, R.C. (1976) Aluminium: Why Search for New Production Roules? Proceedings of the IV National Meeting a Minerals Processing, So Jos dos Campos, Brasil. Corry, A. V.& Kiessling, O.E. (1938) Grade of Ore, Works Progress Administration, National Research Project, Mineral Technology and output per Man Studies, USBM, Report E-6, August, p. 114. Bahr, A. and Priesemann, Th.(1988) The Concentration of Gold Ores, Workshop Rare and Precious Metals, Castelo Ivano,Universit di Trento, Italy. Benvindo da Luz, A. et all (1990); Manual de publicao avulsa, CETEM, Rio de Janeiro. Usinas de Beneficiamento,

5. 6.

7.

8. 9. 10.

Ottley, D.J. (1979) Technical Economic and other Factors in the Gravity Concentration of Tin, Tungsten, Blondion and Tantalum Ores, Minerals Sci. Engng., vol. 11, no 2, pp. 99-121. Beever, M.B. (1982) Materials, Technology Change and Productivity, Materials & Society vol. 6, no 4. Beever, M.B. (1976) The Recycling of Metals: I - Ferrous Metals; II - NonFerrous Metals, Conservation & Recycling, vol. 1. Chapman, P.F. and Roberts, F. (1983) Metal Resources and Energy, Boston, MA: Butterworth. Mar, J.W. (1981) Testimony at Hearings of the Subcommitee on Science, Technology and Space of the Comittee on Commerce, Science and Transportation of the Senate, Washington. D.C., U.S.G.P.O. Hasialis, M.D. (1975) Improvements in Minerals Recovery, National Materials Policy. Proceedings, National Academy of Science, Washington, D.C. Yoshiki-Gravelsins, K.S. et al.(1993) Metals Production, Energy and the Environment, Past I: Energy Consumption, JOM, pp. 15-20, May. Conard, B.R. (1992) The Role of Hydrometallurgy in Achieving Sustainable Devolpment, Hydrometallurgy, 30, pp. 1-28, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

11. 12. 13. 14.

15. 16. 17.

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

Doyle, F.M. & Duyvesteyn, S. (1993). Aqueous Processing of Minerals, Metals, and Materials, 1993 Review of Extraction Processing, JOM, pp. 46-54, April. Nicol, M.J. (1993) Progress in Electrometallurgy Research and Applications, 1983 Review of Extractive & Processing, JOM, pp. 55-58, April. Hancock, G.F. (1984) Energy Requirements for Manufacture of some NonFerrous Metals. Metal Technology, vol. 11, vol. 11, July, pp. 290-299. Whitter, W. and Hoskins, C. (1984) Energy Required to Process Ingots semis, and finished products, Metals Technology, vol. 11, July, pp. 307-307. Forrest, D. & Szekely, J. (1991) Global Warming an the Primary Metals Industry, JOM, pp. 23-30, December . UNIDO. (1987) Pollution Problems and Solutions in the Non-Ferrous Metals Industry, First Consultation on the Non-Ferrous Metals Industry, ID/WG. 470/3, Budapest-Hungary. UNEP. (1993) Environmental Management of Nickel Production: A Technical Guide. Paris, (Technical Report, 15). Harries-Rees, K. (1993) Minerals in Waste and Effluents Treatment, Industrial Minerals, pp. 29-39, May.

24. 25.

26. Villas-Bas, R.C. and Fellows Filho , L . Technological Challenges Posed by Sustainable Development : The Mineral extraction Industries , p.408 , IMAAC/UNIDO and CYTED , Rio de Janeiro , 1999 . 27. Villas-Bas , R.C. and Barreto , L. Mine Closure in Iberoamerica , p. 581 , IMAAC/UNIDO and CYTED , Rio de Janeiro , 2000. 28. All listed http in the text up to 2010.