Search Documents

By Brian Lewis

"IntroductionThe leaching method selected for the dissolving of uranium ore depends in part on the physical characteristics of the ore, as well as the uranium mineralization. There are two main methods of leaching employed in uranium circuits in North America, one being ""Carbonate Leaching"" on sandstone, and pitchblende type ores, and ""Acid Leaching"", on quartzite type ores.This chapter deals with the acid leaching of uranium ores found in the Elliot Lake area, using sulphuric acid, for the leaching reagent, and ""pachucas"" for the contactor.The basic leaching process involves the pregrinding of the ore and the mixing of the ore with hot sulphuric acid, the mixture is air agitated, the air being used to oxidize the ore as well as produce agitation. The chemical reaction is as follows: Uranium Oxide + Sulphuric Acid = Uranyl SulphateThe following equations show the actual dissolution of the ""Hexavalent Uranium"", which show that more than one ion or complex of uranium is possible.Uranium DissolutionsI. UO, + 2H-(UOJ + H,O2. (UO,) + SO, = -UO, SO, (Uranyl Sulphate)3. UO, + SO,-(UO, (SO,),)=4. (UO, (SO,),)= -(UO, (SO,),)'Test work carried out in the laboratory as well as in the plants has determined the most efficient methods of extracting the uranium from the ore. A very important factor that has to be determined during initial test work are the amount of acid consumers in the ore. Within the Elliot Lake orebodies are minerals such as chlorite schist, diabase, and basement material, all very high acid consumers, consuming up to 1000 lbs. of acid per ton of ore. Of these minerals only the chlorite schist contain any uranium at all.The following are the operating parameters that have to be controlled in the plant:I. sulphuric acid concentration2. temperature of the mixture3. agitation4. liquid solid ratio5. reaction time6. particle size of ground ore"

Jan 1, 1989

By J. N. Hartley

Uranium mill tailings, waste products of uranium extraction, contain hazardous constituents that if released into the atmosphere and groundwater could threaten our health and environment. To provide for safe disposal and control of these tailings, Congress enacted the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-604). Subsequently, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established standards for tailings disposal that limit radon emission into the air to 20 pCi m-2s-1 on an annual average basis (EPA 1983). The design life of the impoundment is to be 1000 years where practicable, but 200 years at least. To facilitate the design of containment systems that will meet the EPA standards, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Department of Energy (DOE) are sponsoring research at the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL)* to develop the necessary technology. Earthen and asphalt materials have been evaluated for use as radon barriers (Hartley 1983) and as liners to minimize leaching (Buelt 1983). Herbicide and rock barriers against biological intrusion have been evaluated (Cline 1982). Surface stabilization techniques have been investigated to maintain the long-term effectiveness of a containment system that must be protected from wind and water erosion, chemical and physical degradation, and biological disturbance.

Jan 1, 1984

By Robert G. Beverly

The presence of radioactivity in uranium mill wastes has resulted in somewhat unique waste disposal methods. In addition to the common problems of disposing of large quantities of solid wastes, neutralizing acids, minimizing dissolved heavy metals, and clarifying all liquid effluents, the uranium mill operator must sample and analyze liquid effluents for micro-micro quantities of radionuclides such as, radium-226, thorium-230 and lead-210. Special disposal methods or decontamination procedures are required to meet the stringent limitations established by the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission on the concentration of radionuclides in liquid effluents. Routine monitoring of the receiving stream is also normally required. In recent years there has been a growing concern about the radioactivity remaining in the uranium mill tailings, particularly at the sites of shut-down or dismantled mills. The State of Colorado, in cooperation with the industry, has adopted regulations for stabilization of inactive uranium mill tailings. The Mining and Metals Division of Union Carbide operates mills for the recovery of uranium and vanadium at Uravan and Rifle in Colorado and a mill in the Gas Hills of Wyoming for uranium production. The company also owns former mill sites on which mill tailings are located at Maybell, Rifle, and Slick Rock in Colorado and at Green River, Utah. The purpose of this paper is to describe the methods used by a few uranium mills, largely those operated by Union Carbide Corporation, to dispose of radioactive wastes, to discuss briefly the regulations under which the mills operate, and to present reference information on the subject.

Jan 1, 1968

By Bruce C. Fielder

"The concentration of uranium in orebodies discovered in the Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan over the last 20 years has increased by a factor of 100. These high grade uranium orebodies are associated with high concentrations of radionuclides, complex mineralogy and an elemental makeup that includes base metals, arsenic, and molybdenum. Exploiting these high grade ores has required metallurgical advances in milling, tailings disposal and effluent treatment as well as changes in the design of uranium mills.This paper describes the most significant advances, including advances in dealing with the environmental issues which have become more prevalent in recent years. The milling processes of the Cluff Lake Mill, Key Lake Mill, Rabbit Lake Mill, and McClean Lake Mill are compared to illustrate both similarities and differences necessary for milling different orebodies.BackgroundUranium mining in Saskatchewan started in 1953 when the Beaverlodge Mine, owned by Eldorado Nuclear Limited (Eldorado), came into operation at Uranium City. Development in the Athabasca basin started in 1975 when the Rabbit Lake mine came into operation. This was followed by the start-up of the Cluff Lake mine in 1980 and the Key Lake mine in 1983. The McClean Lake mine is forecast to start up in the near future. The McArthur River mine recently received construction approval and the Cigar Lake Project and the Midwest Project are currently in the environmental approval process.The Beaverlodge operation ceased production in June 1982 after nearly 30 years of operation. The Rabbit Lake mill processed Rabbit Lake ore from 1975 until 1985, Collins Bay R-Zone ore from 1985 until 1993, and is currently processing ore from the Eagle Point mine (Bharadwaj, Jarvi and Lam, 1996). The Cluff Lake mill processed ore from the D- Orebody from 1980 until 1984. Since then the Claude orebody has been processed and the OP and DS orebodies are presently being milled (SRK. Senes and Melis, 1987; and Cogema Resources Inc. 1994 ). The Key Lake mill processed ore from the Gaertner ore body from 1983 until 1989 and Deilmann ore has been processed since (Cameco Corporation, 1992b and I 994a). Processing of McArthur River ore in the Key Lake mill is scheduled for 1999. The McClean Lake mill will be processing ore from the JLR, Sue and McClcan orebodies associated with the McClean Lake mine. In future ore from the Cigar Lake and Midwest projects will be processed in the McClean Lake mill. (Minatco Limited. 1991a)."

Jan 1, 1998

By Chuck Edwards

"Milling operations in northern Saskatchewan’s Athabasca Basin have produced uranium continuously since 1975. Over that period, the Athabasca Basin has been one of the world’s premier uranium camps, yielding more than 660 million lb of U3O8. In this paper, the author describes former and current milling operations and discusses why and how the milling process has changed and developed over the past 35 years. The author’s considerations for the future of uranium extraction in the Athabasca Basin close out the paper.INTRODUCTIONThe roughly oval Athabasca Basin in northern Saskatchewan occupies nearly one third of the surface area of the Saskatchewan Shield. Its sandstone-like deposits lie unconformably on the older basement. The basin hosts many high-grade unconformity-type uranium deposits(Saskatchewan Energy and Resources, 2010) for which the Athabasca Basin is world famous. Uranium production in the Athabasca Basin has come from four mills. In the order of startup these are Rabbit Lake, Cluff Lake, Key Lake and McClean Lake. General data (AREVA, 2010; Cameco, 2010; Denison 2010) for each mill are shown in Table 1."

Jan 1, 2011

By C. Edwards

ABSTRACT: Milling operations in northern Saskatchewan’s Athabasca Basin have produced uranium continuously since 1975. During that period, the Athabasca Basin has been one of the world’s premier uranium camps, yielding more than 660 million lb (299,370,964 kg) of U3O8. In this paper, the author describes former and current milling operations and discusses why and how the milling process has changed and developed over the past 35 years. The author’s considerations for the future of uranium extraction in the Athabasca Basin conclude the paper.

Jan 1, 2012

By G. F. Colborne, A. Thunaes

"When the Canadian uranium milling plants went into operation during the early 1950's, they utilized flowsheets developed at the Radioactivity Division of the Federal Mines Branch in Ottawa. Since then, numerous process improvements have been made by the Mines Branch, by the operating companies themselves and by other research organizations. This paper will consider uranium milling technology from the standpoint of a new mine operator charged with the responsibility for the design of an economic flowsheet, and will indicate the range of process elements available to him and the testwork required to enable an intelligent decision to be made."

Jan 1, 1968

By Peter Waggitt

Northern Australia has been home to uranium mining for over 70 years, more or less continuously. In the early days, post World War 2, there was little effort made to remediate workings at the end of operations. The three “campaigns” of uranium mining (1951-55; 1960-70; and 1979-present) are all now in various stages of remediation. This includes not only the large legacy site at Rum Jungle but also smaller fields like the South Alligator Valley, as well as contemporary works at Nabarlek and the ongoing closure at Ranger– Australia’s longest operating uranium mine. This paper briefly describes some of the past remediation activities before providing an update on the Ranger closure programme and future timetable.

Jan 1, 2020

By Miezitis Y

A weak airborne radiometric anomaly was examined in the field and the presence of uranium confirmed. Rotary-percussion drilling showed the presence of uranium but a subsequent programme of diamond and rotary percussion drilling indicated that the concentration of uranium was uneconomic. Within the tufts and volcanics of the prospect the uranium existed as uranyl phosphates within the oxidized zone. Geological mapping and the diamond drill core showed that the Stag Creek Volcanics are part of the Lower Proterozoic Masson Formation, probably with member status, rather than the expression of an Archaean basement ridge. This change in the interpretation of the fundamental structure of the Pine Creek Geosyncline has led to a reexamination of the stratigraphy and to suggestions which differ from the current concept.

Jan 1, 1977

By R. J. Munday

Although uranium deposits in northern Saskatchewan are clustered around the Athabasca basin, basement lithostructure determines their distribution. Basal Wollaston Group pelites are invariably graphitic and carry uraninite in felsic segregations and biotitic pegmatite. Where these intersect the Athabasca Formation, remobilized uranium concentrated as pitchblende. Uranium is also concentrated in silicified and hematized sandstone where the Athabasca Formation overlies post-orogenic faults. Presumably, pregnant solutions associated with the fault were stripped of their metals as they emerged into the contrasting physico-chemical environment of the sandstone basin. Both these types of mineralization correlate with a Grenvillian (-1,000 m.y.) heating event and associated diabase intrusions. However, the rich pitchblende veins at Uranium City appear to predate the Athabasca Formation, but display spatial correlation with the Martin Formation. They are tentatively associated with a syn- to post-D3 retrograde metamorphic event which thoroughly leached crystalline basement and generated uraniferous fluids which escaped, and precipitated metals, into fractures associated with faults that define the grabens in which the Martin Formation was deposited. Remobilization events allowed some of this uranium to move upward into fractures within Martin sediments.

Jan 1, 1979

By Paul F. Kerr

Uranium mineralization occurs in the footwall of the Sunshine vein from the 2900 to the 3700 level. Veinlets of uraninite associated with pyrite and jasper have been so extensively divided and recemented that units more than a few feet in length are seldom observed. The wall rock is St. Regis quartzite of the Belt series. The age of the uraninite, on the basis of isotopic analyses, is 750 t- 50, which agrees with geological data suggesting that phases of the Sunshine mineralization are pre-Cambrian.

Jan 5, 1953

By I. Mazalov, G. Ospanova

Introduction Today, uranium is of great interest because of its application to nuclear power and nuclear weapons. Kazakhstan has been an important source of uranium for more than fifty years. All uranium products are exported. Results In Kazakhstan uranium exploration started in 1948 and developed in several parts of the country thru mining of hard rock deposits. There are known around 50 uranium deposits in six provinces: Shu-Sarysuyskaya (57%), North Kazakhstan (18%), Syrdaryinskaya (15%), Ilyiskaya (7%), Caspian (2%), Balkhash (1%). In the Northern Kazakhstan province, KazSabton took over Tselinny Mining & Chemical Co in 1999. In this province the stockwork is of Paleozoic and Paleozoic folded complexes origin. In the Balkash province some mining of volcanogenic deposits occurred during the Soviet era. This province’s stockwork is of Endogenous origin.In the Ili province uraniumis mainly found in uranium-coal deposits formed by oxidation of the lignite beds roofs. In the Caspian province the Prikaspisky Combine operated since the 1960s a major mining and processing complex on the Mangyshalk Peninsula. This led to the founding of Aktau. It was privatised as Kaskor in 1992 and operations ceased in 1994. The uranium occurrence is associated with the phosphorous from fossil fish bone detritus conglomeration. In the Chu-Sarysu province, which has more than half the country's known resources, both Stepnoye and Tsentralnoye have been operating since 1978 and 1982 respectively. Uranium mineralization occurred in the regional stratum oxidation zones. In the Syrdarya province slightly to the west of the province’s center the No.6 Mining group has been operating since 1985. Uranium mineralization occurred in the regional stratum oxidation zones.

Jan 1, 2007

By K. Wenrich

The uranium industry has made a dramatic turnaround in the past three years that even the most optimistic economist was not willing to predict during the uranium downswing of the 1990s. Uranium reached a 30-year low in February 2001 of $6.50/lb. By the end of February 2006 it had soared to $38.50/pound. This nearly 600% increase in the uranium spot price within 4 years dwarfed the increase in gold price that has barely mustered a 100% increase. The initial slow rise from $6.50 in February 2001 to $10.75 in April 2003 (fig. 1) was primarily driven by the decrease in the value of the dollar. Since then several factors have contributed to the soaring price: (1) The awakening of many to the simple fact that uranium supply has not met demand for several years and that the world’s stockpiles are being drawn down, (2) How sharply this fragile supply can be impacted by disasters at the world’s major uranium production facilities, such as a) the flooding of the McArthur River Mine in the spring of 2003, b) fires at Olympic Dam, c) the potential that Rossing, with an annual capacity of 4000 tonnes uranium might close by 2007, (3) the withdrawal of Tenex from the HEU (highly enriched uranium) feed agreement, and (4) the announcement by the Chinese of their intent to build 30 new nuclear reactors.

Jan 1, 2007

Australia had an active uranium mining industry in the 1950s with uranium oxide being supplied under contract to the atomic energy authorities of the U.K. and U.S.A. In the 1960s, when these con- tracts concluded, domestic production ceased, apart from Rum Jungle, whose production until 1971 was stockpiled. By the 1970s, the demand for uranium from the electrical utility industry had risen sharply and the effects on Australia were notable. The Mary Kath- leen mine re-opened in 1976 but, more significantly, exploration activity suddenly expanded with the re- sult that several world-standard deposits were locat- ed. Western world requirements for uranium based on increasing energy consumption and a changing energy mix, will warrant the development of Aust- ralia's resources. By 1985 our mines could be pro- ducing 9,500 tonnes of uranium oxide yearly and by 1995 the export value from uranium could reach that from wool. In terms of benefit to the community the economic rewards are considerable but, in terms of providing energy to the world, Australia's uranium is vital.

Jan 1, 1978

In 1975, the US produced 10 900 tons (12,000 st) of U3O8 from ores whose grade ranged from a low of 0.160% to a high of 0.196% U3O8. By the early 1980's if the current mining projects described here are allowed to go on stream, Australia will be able to produce at least 10 900 tons of U3O8 annually from ores whose grade ranges from a low of 0.150%to a high of 2.300%. As pointed out in the previous article, this initial rate of production could have been reached now-giving an immense boost to the depressed Australian economy. So, let's have a close look at current mining projects.

Jan 1, 1977

By Ta M. Li, John D. Wiebmer

Record high prices, burgeoning exploration programs, mine-mill openings, and plant expansions have all characterized a dramatic: resurgence of the US uranium industry in recent years. But while the bull is leading the way on the production side of the nuclear fuel cycle, there is reason for caution from the end-users' viewpoint. How fast will electrical demand grow in the years to come, and what portion of that will nuclear generators supply? How do utilities play their cards when the government holds two of the largest jokers in the deck-a policy on spent fuel reprocessing and a timetable for the fast breeder reactor? Is there a shortfall in domestic uranium supplies on the horizon?

Jan 10, 1978

By Savory P. J

Uranium mining operations commenced at Ranger mine site, Jabiru NT Australia in May 1980. The Ranger orebodies, totalling approximately 110 000 tonnes contained U305 had been indicated by airborne radiometric survey in 1969 and confirmed by drilling the following year. Both diamond and percussion drilling methods were used to define the mineralisation and samples were analysed using a combination of radiometric and neutron activation techniques. Ore reserve estimates were calculated from conventional and geostatistical methods, and following the mining of 15 million tonnes of ore, reconciliations with before mining estimates are well within acceptable industry standards. In-pit grade control employs radiometric techniques including a radiometric truck discriminator built in Australia to mine specification to meet production requirements and improve productivity. Environmental requirements associated with uranium mining are a daily consideration.

Jan 1, 1993

By J. Randel Hill

The 64th Texas Legislature passed the "Texas Surface Mining and Reclamation Act," Chapter 131, Texas Natural Resources Code (subsequently referred to as "the Act"), at a point in time when little surface mining had taken place within the state. Thus, enactment of regulatory control governing mining operations in our state has, for the most part, preceded widespread, intensive mining activity. I should point out that the statute applies only to the extraction of coal, lignite, uranium and uranium ore. A recent opinion rendered by the Attorney General's office has stated that extraction of the named elements, when it occurs incidental to the extraction of other materials, e.g., clay, is not not an activity subject to the Act. An important theme of the Act, frequently overlooked in other environmentally oriented legislation, is recognition of the Act's affect on the mining industry. The Act states that "the extraction of minerals by surface mining operations is a basic and essential activity making an important contribution to the economic well-being of the state and nation" and, in reference to reclamation being accomplished contemporaneously with mining, provides a recognition that "the extraction of minerals by responsible mining operations is an essential and beneficial economic activity." This legislative recognition is, of course balanced against the need for proper mined land reclamation, the rights of surface owners, the need to guard against unreasonable degradation to land and water resources and numerous other actions or events that the Legislature wanted protected. Another rather pervasive general theme that is established in the Act is the concept that the agency is entitled to obtain whatever information, or take whatever action, that appears reasonably necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Act. This concept, coupled with the detailed requirements placed on mining operations in the portions of the Act dealing with Permit Applications, Reclamation Plan and Reclamation Standards, easily insures that surface mining activities can and will be regulated to the extent necessary. Section 131.102(b)(2) is probably the most relevant provision in the Act which deals with the preclusion of mined lands becoming waste lands. This portion of the Act states that the surface mining operator shall: ". . . restore the land affected to the same or a substantially beneficial condition. ." In this language the Legislature had made it abundantly clear that the abandoned or orphaned lands found in some of the Eastern states, will not be tolerated in this State, and provided the Commission with a degree of latitude to determine what condition would be appropriate in each individual mining situation. I bring this area of the Act to your attention because it is the area which has received the most inquiries and concern by operators, i.e. what does "substantially beneficial" constitute? The Commission's staff has spent a considerable amount of time wrestling with the statutory language "substantially beneficial" to determine the legislative intent and provide operators with guidance of what they can expect. In this regard, the most definitive criteria in our opinion lies in the Act's legislative hsitory. The Legislature had before it basically three reclamation standards namely: House Bill 656, considered to provide the most stringent reclamation standard and identical to Senate Bill 66; House Bill 1717 which was supported by industry spokesmen and was considered to contain the least stringent reclamation standard; and Senate Bill 55 which was adopted by the Legislature. During the Bill's initial hearing before the House Environmental Affairs Committee, the House sponsor of the Senate Bill 55, which was the Bill eventually adopted, made the following statement: (I am quoting verbatim from the Committee's transcript although substituting the speaker's reference to the authors names with the Bill's numbers.) "An example of the differing approaches of the four bills can be seen in the area of reclamation standards and this is critical. House Bill 656, talking about restoring the surface of the land, House Bill 656 has this statement: 'At least fully capable of supporting the use to which it was capable of supporting prior to any mining or any higher or better use.' In other words you have to restore it to the level it was prior to the mining. Senate Bill 55: 'Restore the land to the same or substantially beneficial use.' Substantially beneficial use. (Emphasis his) House Bill 1717 says: 'Restore insofar as practical to appropriate beneficial post-mining use.' So that House Bill 1717 said to, 'restore insofar as practical to appropriate beneficial use. I think that's too weak, whereas I think the House Bill 656 that would call you to restore it to at least the use it had prior to the mining may also be too tight the other way. I think the Senate Bill 55 approach is down the middle of the road which says that you do restore it to the 'same or substantially beneficial use,' is a proper way to go there." Therefore, the conclusion that we have drawn from the legislative history of the bill is that the extent of reclamation required by "substantially beneficial" may be something other than the use it was prior to

Jan 1, 1979

The major greenhouse gas emissions from coal combustion are leading certain people to argue for uranium mining and nuclear power to meet these challenges. Although there is considerable rhetoric around promoting nuclear power as 'green' due to its relatively lower greenhouse intensity, a careful study of the data is required to properly underst and the sustainability of uranium mining and nuclear power and whether it can or should have a role in future energy supply scenarios. This paper presents detailed research and analysis on uranium mining, focusing on known economic resources, production, solid waste and water management, pollution issues as well as energy and greenhouse aspects. A particular focus will be on Australia and its operating and prospective uranium mines. Overall, the paper raises fundamental issues concerning the long-term sustainability of uranium mining and nuclear power and documents the greenhouse intensity of uranium production and the nuclear fuel chain.

Jun 1, 2010

By Thomas N. Walthier

ROSPECTING for uranium in the East is hampered by the lack of bedrock exposure due to extensive overburden and residual soil. But, despite the problems of this physiographic province, it has not been ignored in the search for radioactive materials. Since 1951 both the U.S. Geological Survey and the Atomic Energy Commission have had field parties in the eastern U.S. Tempo of private prospecting is increasing, and many discoveries have resulted. AEC work so far has been concentrated in the areas of most numerous discoveries-Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York. Accounts of uranium mineralization in the eastern U.S. are found in the old literature and one site in the Mauch Chunk area of Pennsylvania has been known since 1874. In 1949 McKeown examined the original occurrence there and found another southeast of the town. The deposit appeared to have commercial possibilities and a short period of production began in July 1954

Jun 1, 1955