Chalcopyrite Heap Leaching

An Evaluation of its Current Status & Potential Future Viability

John Peacey, James Schaming & Gabor Csicsovszki Queens University, Canada

Overview of Presentation
Background Review literature on Chalcopyrite ore leaching Chalcopyrite heap leach/SX/EW model & conceptual design basis Conceptual economic comparison versus conventional milling & selling concentrate Conclusions

Motivation for Paper

Petersen, J (2009), too many researchers showing that bioleaching of chalcopyrite works in the laboratory without giving further consideration on how their process can be implemented in practice whereas the large copper mining companies tend to keep their developments on chalcopyrite heap leaching proprietary Lightfoot, C in a presentation on the BioCOP process (2007), New technology penetration into traditional technology space is extremely difficult

Concentrate Dominates World Copper Production

% Cu production from concentrate increasing in future % Cu production from heap leach/SX/EW will decline Unless chalcopyrite heap leaching can be developed

Declining Cu Concentrate Treatment Terms (TCRCs)

TCRC + PP, 1990-2010
TCRC + PP, US$/lb Cu
$0,30 $0,25 $0,20 $0,15 $0,10 $0,05 $0,00
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

TCRC +PP as % Cu Price

$0,35

40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

Differences between Chalcocite & Chalcopyrite Heap Leaching

Chalcocite
Supergene mineral readily contacted by leachant Readily leached by acidic ferric solutions at ambient temperature Cu extraction up to 80% in 300-500 days

Chalcopyrite
Hypergene mineral not as readily contacted by leachant Leaches very slowly even at higher temperatures (>50oC) Cu extraction ??% in ??? days at ?? T

Chalcopyrite Heap Leaching Current Status

Under development by all major Cu miners Data proprietary but no breakthroughs apparent Only available data from lab tests & patents Cu recovery will be lower & slower than chalcocite ores Added complexity of controlling extra Fe leached

Laboratory Column Leach Test Results

Reference Deposit Cu in ore Pyrite in ore Ore d80, mm Cu extraction Leach time, days Temperature, oC Schlitt 0.30% <0.1% 9.5 35% 300 60 Hollitt 0.72% 4.2% 10.0 70% 140-200 50 Van der Meer 0.25% <0.1% ? 65% 230 70 Haib, Namibia La Granja, Peru Aitik, Sweden

Heap Leach Model & Assumptions

Chalcopyrite ore: 0.5% Cu as chalcopyrite, 2% pyrite 50-60% Cu extraction in 1 yr in on-off leach pad #1 Pyrite oxidation rate 50% of chalcopyrite rate Leached ore moved to permanent pad for additional 10-20% Cu recovery

Mill vs Chalcopyrite Heap Leach Economic Comparison Basis

Existing 100,000 tpa Cu heap leach/SX/EW operation No more leachable ore but large 0.5% Cu hypergene reserves sufficient for additional 15 yrs life using heap leach base case assumptions Decision to build conventional mill or heap leach ore?
Base Case Parameters Cu recovery Mill 85% Heap Leach 70%

Cu price TCRCs
Cu concentrate freight By-product credits, $M/y Design production reached in

$2.25 $80/t + $0.08/lb Cu

$60/t $0 2nd year

$2.25 4th year

Base Case Comparison Parameters

Parameter Ore processed, Mtpa Payable Cu, Million lbs/y Estimated operating costs, $/t ore
Estimated costs, $/lb payable Cu Pre-tax cash flow at design, $M/y Cumulative discounted pre-tax cash flow (15 yr at 8% discount rate), $M Difference, $M

Mill 28.7 258.8 $11.0

$1.2 $270 $2,290 $540

Heap Leach 28.7 220.5 $8.7

$1.1 $250 $1,750 -

Heap Leach capital cost $540 less than the Mills for similar NPV

Sensitivity Analysis
Cu recovery difference between mill & heap leach Cu price Cu concentrate TCRCs Potential mill by-product credits

Comparison is not sensitive to % Cu in ore

Effect of Cu Recovery Difference

Effect of Cu Price

$240 M

Effect of TCRCs & Byproduct Credits

Conclusions
If a commercial chalcopyrite heap leach could achieve 70% Cu extraction, it would be potentially viable for a extending the life of existing heap leach/SX/EW assets for ores with low by-product credits Unlikely to be viable for greenfield projects & ores with significant by-product credits unless Cu recovery difference versus milling is reduced and/or TCRCs increase significantly Commercial development of chalcopyrite heap leaching will not make deposits that are uneconomic using conventional milling economic