Download - Presentación Abet 1 Presentación Final

«NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING»«FACULTY OF GEOLOGICAL, MINING AND METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING”

«PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SCHOOL OF MINES»

HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

“ECONOMIC AND TECHNICAL CRITERIA IN THE SELECTION OF A TAILINGS DAM”

SUBJECT :

MINERAL ECONOMICS AND VALUATION OF MINES.

MEMBERS: GIANFRANCO LÓPEZ REQUELME HUGO DEUDOR BENAVENTE JEAN CRUZ RIVAS RENZO TEJADA HERRERA RONALD ROJAS GUERRERO VICTOR JUAREZ RACCHUMI

PROFESSOR :

ROBERTO MALDONADO ASTORGA



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

INDEX:

I. OBJECTIVESII. INTRODUCTIONIII. MATRIXIV. APPLICATIONV. DISPOSAL METHOD SELECTIONVI. CONCLUSIONSVII. BIBLIOGRAPHY



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

I. OBJECTIVESGENERAL:

To develop a methodology for selecting the best option of a tailings dam.

SPECIFICS:

Using a decision matrix in the selection of Tailing Pond with technical and economic criteria.

Show the most important scaling parameters to be taken into account in a tailings pond.

Allow tailings ponds are friendly to the environment.



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

II. INTRODUCTION

«TAILINGS POND»



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

III. DECISION MATRIX

Maximize the stability of the deposit - 22%

Minimize the volume of wall fillings - 18%

Optimizing the use of the

tributary basin – 15%

Minimize infiltration to

groundwater – 5%

To minimize transportation costs tailings

site - 18%

minimize the negative public

perception – 22%

DECISION MATRIX



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

MAXIMIZE THE STABILITY OF THE DEPOSIT - 22%

ANALYSIS OF STABILITY OF STRUCTURE

Stability against liquefaction

Stability against overflow

Stability against internal erosion



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

MINIMIZE THE VOLUME OF WALL FILLINGS - 18%

Important criteria to ensure the economic feasibility of the disposal system.



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

OPTIMIZING THE USE OF THE TRIBUTARY BASIN – 15%

Increase in capital Increase operating costs

Environmental management.

WE SHOULD



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

MINIMIZE INFILTRATION TO GROUNDWATER – 5%

EFFECTS

Ground water pollution.

Biodiversity damage.



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

TO MINIMIZE TRANSPORTATION COSTS TAILINGS SITE - 18%

KEY PARAMETERS

Tailings volume to transport

Process plant to tailings dam distance



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

MINIMIZE THE NEGATIVE PUBLIC PERCEPTION – 22%Main criteria due to the current sensitivity and the negative predisposition of the population to deposits Tailings.

Sinaycocha Tailings Ponds



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

IV. APPLICATION

• Name of the project : UNI 2016 • Surface mining operation producing copper• Daily production of tailings : 80000 tons.• Life of mine (LOM): 20 years• Production of tailings : 400 Mm3



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

SITES IDENTIFICATION

UNI 2016 MINE



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

PRELIMINARY SELECTION STAGE



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

PRE - SELECTED SITES

SITE VOLUME OF DAM (Mm3) DAM HEIGHT (m) LENGTH OF DAM (m)

2 440 15 2200

3 407 200 1670

4 445 220 1245

6 416 130 953

8 402 120 2225

9b 424 210 1174



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

EVALUATION SUMMARY FOR TAILINGS DISPOSAL SITES

QUALIFICATIONS AND RANKING – CONVENTIONAL DISPOSAL CAS

SITEIMPOUND

MENT STABILITY

(22%)

MINIMIZE NEGATIVE PERCEPTION (22%)

MINIMIZE CONVEYA

NC E COST (18%)

MINIMIZE DAM

VOLUME (18%

MINIMIZE WATER

MANAGE MENT

COSTS (15%)

MINIMIZE SEEPAGE

(5%) WEIGHTED SCORE RANKING

2 3 2 3 3 3 3 2.78 4°

3 3 2 4 3 3 3 2.96 2°

4 3 4 5 3 3 4 3.63 1°

6 2 4 3 1 4 3 2.79 3°

8 2 3 1 4 3 2 2.55 6°

9b 2 4 1 5 2 3 2.85 5°



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: LOCATION OF PLANT NON-RELEVANT FOR TAILINGS IMPOUNDMENT LOCATION QUALIFICATIONS AND RANKING – CONVENTIONAL DISPOSAL WITHOUT CONVEYANCE

COST

SiteImpound

ment Stability

(27%)

Minimize negative perception (27%)

Minimize conveyanc e cost (0 %)

Minimize dam

volume (22 %

Minimize water

manage ment costs (18%)

Minimize seepage

(6%) Weighted

Score Ranking

2 3 2 3 3 3 3 2.73 5°

3 3 2 4 3 3 3 2.73 5°

4 3 4 5 3 3 4 3.11 1°

6 2 4 3 1 4 3 2.96 3°

8 2 3 1 4 3 2 2.89 4°

9b 2 4 1 5 2 3 3.04 2°



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: INCREASING RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE PERMITS AND REGULATORY ASPECTS QUALIFICATION AND RANKING – CONVENTIONAL DISPOSAL WITH MORE IMPORTANCE

TO REGULATORY ASPECTS

SiteImpound

ment Stability

(22%)


Minimize conveyanc e cost (5 %)

Minimize dam

volume (5 %

Minimize water

manage ment

costs (23 %)

Minimize seepage (23%)

Weighted Score Ranking

2 3 2 3 3 3 3 2.78 4°

3 3 2 4 3 3 3 2.83 3°

4 3 4 5 3 3 4 3.50 1°

6 2 4 3 1 4 3 3.18 2°

8 2 3 1 4 3 2 2.50 6°

9b 2 4 1 5 2 3 2.72 5°



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: SENSITIVITY: INCREASING RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF COSTS

QUALIFICATIONS AND RANKING – CONVENTIONAL DISPOSAL WITH MORE IMPORTANCE TO COSTS

SiteImpound

ment Stability

(20%)


Minimize conveyanc e cost (25%)

Minimize dam

volume (25 %

Minimize water

manage ment

costs (5 %)

Minimize seepage

(5%) Weighted

Score Ranking

2 3 2 3 3 3 3 2.80 4°

3 3 2 4 3 3 3 3.05 2°

4 3 4 5 3 3 4 3.50 1°

6 2 4 3 1 4 3 2.80 3°

8 2 3 1 4 3 2 2.50 6°

9b 2 4 1 5 2 3 2.70 5°



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

V. DISPOSAL METHOD SELECTION: CONVENTIONAL OR THICKENED

Advantages of the thickened tailings method:• Greater water recovery in the thickeners, which in the

case for site 4,would be located relatively close to the concentrator.

• Lower tailings water seepage into the subsurface water tables.

• Lower closure costs of the tailings facility.



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

DISPOSAL METHOD SELECTION: CONVENTIONAL OR THICKENED

Disadvantages of the thickened tailings method:• The operational costs of a thickened tailings

impoundment are relatively high. • The technologies for tailings thickening and

conveyance for concentrations greater than 65% and with production rates of 80 ktpd are relatively new and have not been proven.



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

VI. CONCLUSIONS

• The main tool used for choosing the tailings dam was the decision matrix.

• Applying the decision matrix, you can know that the most suitable alternative to deposit tailings is the site 4.

• Choosing a tailings deposit must be done from a technical, economical and ecological aproach.



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Servicio Nacional de Geología y Minería. (2003). CONSTRUCCIÓN Y OPERACIÓN DE TRANQUES DE RELAVES. [online] Available at: http://www.sernageomin.cl/pdf/mineria/ambiente/construccion_operacion_tranques.pdf [Accessed 10 Jun. 2016].

• Cortés Cortés, J. and Dunstan Silva., J. (2008). MODELO DE AUDITORÍA AMBIENTAL PARA TRANQUES DE RELAVE. [online] Available at: http://www1.gorecoquimbo.gob.cl/tesis/descarga/2007/Modelo%20de%20auditoria.pdf [Accessed 10 Jun. 2016].



HEA

DIN

G F

OR

INTE

RNAT

ION

AL

ACCR

EDIT

ATIO

N A

BET

!!!

THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION !!!