Andrew Watson - 3

Andrew H.
Watson General Manager, MWH Peru

Selection of the Best Alternative
September 14, 2011
Define Alternative Tailing Disposal (ATD)
Understand why we consider Alternative Tailing Disposal (ATD).
Understand how to decide on an disposal method.
Discuss the challenges and unanswered questions.
Conclusions and a call to action

Presentation Outline
Tailings Disposal
Conclusions and a call to action.
Conventional Tailing Disposal

Thickened Tailing Disposal

Paste Tailing Disposal
Filtered Dry Stack Tailing Disposal
The Benefits of ATD
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Conventional
Tailings
Thickened Tailings Paste Filtered Tailings
W
a
t
e
r

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)

Water Recovery by Tailings Type
Why we consider ATD: Water Savings
Tailing
Facility
Stewardship
Why we consider ATD: Risk Reduction
Why we consider ATD: Risk Reduction*
All of the ATD methods save
space over conventional
disposal, however
Filtered Tailing Disposal saves
the most.
Why we consider ATD: Space Limitation
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Convential
Tailings
Thickened
Tailings
Paste Filtered
Tailings
Y
i
e
l
d

S
t
r
e
s
s

(
P
a
)

Yield Stress by Tailings Type
The higher yield stress prevents
the need for a tailings dam.
Why we consider ATD:
Reduced Embankment Volume
Many miners, regulators, and
NGOs are asking that filtered
tailing disposal be considered
for any major expansion or green
field site.
Evaluations require considerable
effort!
A simple screening methodology
has been used to assess fatal
flaws and initial feasibility.
Its All About Water and Risk Reduction

Fatal Flaw Analysis
Multiple Accounts Analysis
Qualitative Evaluation Ranking
Detailed Quantitative Ranking
Cost Analysis
Screening Options for Tailing Disposal
Site Characteristics
Topography
Seismicity
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Tailing Characteristics
Gradation and Plasticity
Geochemistry
Regulatory Setting/Landuse/Social
Implications of Failure
Permitting
Landuse
Closure

Key Criteria for
Assessment
of Fatal Flaws and
Qualitative Evaluation
Requirements for Tailing Disposal
Fatal Flaw Screening
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Large footprint Small(er) footprint
High & low fines/plasticity High fines/high plasticity
Time needed Quick/easy
Plentiful Limited
Dry or wet Dry or wet
High degree of care Medium degree of care
Steep or valley Steep or flat
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Gradation & Plasticity
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Range of Global Sites to be Considered
Eastern Europe

Western Europe

Latin America

Central America

Wet site (rainfall exceeds evaporation)
Steep topography
High seismicity
Limited to no space for expansion
Mine life controlled by tailing storage
Production rate 6 Mtpa
High clay content in tailing
Filter tailing considered as combined
disposal for expansion of capacity
Currently thickening to 55% .
Evaluated:
paste
filtered
Latin America
Neutral
Disadvantage
Major Disadvantage or
Fatal Flaw
Favorable
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Suitable for dry
stack if fill
across valley
Topography
Topography
Very steep valley,
efficient for wet
disposal
Topography Steep, rugged, valley
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Seismicity
Rockfill dam can
be designed and
constructed to
meet seismic
design criteria
Filtering operation
can be designed
to produce
seismically stable
material after
placement and
compaction
Seismicity - High
Neutral
Disadvantage
Fatal Flaw
Favorable
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Wet disposal can
accommodate
wet conditions
with pond
management
Placement during
wet season may
require special
measures or
specific wet
material
placement areas
Climate
Climate Defined wet and dry season,
rain fall exceeds evaporation
Neutral
Disadvantage
Fatal Flaw
Favorable
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Large facility with
low density tailing
Small footprint,
high density,
efficient use of
space
Space
Space Very tight property boundary
Neutral
Disadvantage
Fatal Flaw
Favorable
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Large portion of
excess water is
stored in tailing
void space
Filtered water
has to be stored
at site or treated
and released
Water Balance
Water Balance Positive water balance, process water,
seepage water, and contact water must be treated to be released
Neutral
Disadvantage
Fatal Flaw
Favorable
Steep topography
Moderate seismicity
Storage space is constrained
Production planned at 13.1 Mtpa
Tailing seepage and runoff from tailing
are expected to have CN above
discharge standards
Therefore, water treatment for CN
required prior to discharge
Currently thickening to 55%.
Evaluated:
paste
filtered
Central Europe
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Large portion of
excess water is
stored in tailing
void space. Large
pond areas for
storage of 2 PMFs
Filtered water
has to be stored
at site or treated
and released.
Would required
separate
treatment plant
for CN.
Discharge
standards are
very restrictive
Water Balance
Water Balance Positive water balance, process water,
seepage water, and contact water must be treated to be released
Neutral
Disadvantage
Fatal Flaw
Favorable
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Low density, slow
beach
development, low
strength beach
Difficult to filter
due to high clay
content, requires
cyclone pre-
treatment and wet
storage for over-
flow
Gradation & Plasticity Fine grind
ore contains high clay content
Neutral
Disadvantage
Fatal Flaw
Favorable
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
High impact
associated with
tailing release
Still requires wet
disposal of
cyclone overflow
which requires
D/S construction
Implications of Failure High, local
residences, directly downstream of facility
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Initial permits
were approved for
wet storage
concept
Could be easier to
permit due to
lower volume of
wet storage
Permitting
Permitting Based on recent experience,
both could be permitted
Neutral
Disadvantage
Fatal Flaw
Favorable
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Acceptable based
on initial
submission
Could be
considered to be
more favorable
Adjacent Land Use
Adjacent Land Use Grazing of cattle
and some home construction
Neutral
Disadvantage
Fatal Flaw
Favorable
Moderate to steep topography
High seismicity
Storage space is constrained
Production is ~1.5 Mtpa
Existing facility at capacity
Additional capacity required
Filtered facility the primary alternative

Central America
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Not possible to
permit
Possible to permit
Permitting
Permitting
Wet site
Flat topography
Moderate seismicity
Storage space is very constrained
High land value
Existing facility at capacity
Considered filtering for new production
as well as reprocessing of exiting
tailing
Range of Sites to be Considered:
Western Europe
Less More
Difficult Easier
Higher Lower
Plentiful Limited
Seismicity
Topography
Climate
Space
Water Balance
Closure
Geochemistry
Permitting
Adjacent Land Use
Cost
F
I
L
T
E
R
E
D

C
O
N
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L

Topography
Large facility with
low density tailing
Small footprint,
high density,
efficient use of
space
Space
Space No expansion space, high value
property
Neutral
Disadvantage
Fatal Flaw
Favorable
The mining industry needs a broader set of project
evaluations and better benchmarking data.
For each methodology, we need to understand:
What slopes can we achieve?
What seepage will result?
How will the paste, thickened or filtered tailing material behave during an
earthquake?
MWH, in cooperation with Paterson & Cooke, have an initiative to
answer these questions. We need your help!

As an industry, we need to know more.
Water management is key to controlling risks for tailing facilities.
A tailing stewardship program is required for all tailing facilities (large
and small).
Alternative tailing disposal methods (thickened, paste and filtered) is
one way to reduce the water content of tailing and reduce the risks of
failure during and after operations.
Site and project characteristics have to be amenable to the
implementation of ATD methods.
Wet storage with appropriate dam design may still be the most cost
effective storage method.
A high level screening process can be used to identify fatal flaws and
advantages and dis-advantages to determine if further evaluation is
required.

Conclusions
High cost.
Equipment performance has not kept up with the increase in
production rates.
There are still many questions to be answered.
So why isnt everyone doing it?
We do not have depth or breadth of project experience that helps
refine/improve the ATD evaluation process.
We call on mining companies to share their learnings
and data to contribute to benchmarking for the
industry.
Call to Action

Andrew Watson - 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Andrew Watson - 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Andrew H.

Watson General Manager, MWH Peru

You might also like