|
Headquartered
in Australia, BHP Billiton has just issued its Annual Report for 2007 in
which its plans for the Olympic Dam copper, gold silver and uranium mine
expansion as an open pit in South Australia are discussed. The company
is a global player in minerals, oil and gas extraction, but although it
has another big copper mine, Escondida in Chile, Olympic Dam is its only
uranium mine.
Currently operating as an underground mine, Olympic Dam was acquired
from WMC under the watch of the leaving CEO Chip Goodyear, now passing
the leadership to chemical engineer Marius Kloppers, who has appointed
Graeme Hunt as President for Uranium and Olympic Dam development,
perhaps to be his greatest misfortune.
The rise in the spot price of uranium, which might have added value
to the take-over investment in WMC has turned into a disadvantage. The
production in the current Olympic Dam underground mine has fallen (and
continues to fall) and in order to fill the deficit in supply and fulfil
forward selling contracts BHP Billiton is having to buy expensive
product on the open market, while earning only the previously negotiated
price.
Readers of "The big hole" [1] will know that the expansion project is subject to a pre-feasibility and
feasibility study, which is expected to take four years ending in 2009,
after which four years of overburden excavation will proceed the
extraction of the first uranium in 2014. Part of the pre-feasibility
study has been to find the extent of the deposits by drilling.

Total resource
The drilling results, now included in the 2007 Annual Report [2] indicate a total resource of 7,738 million tonnes of mixed ore
containing 67 million tonnes of copper (0.87% grade), 1.9 million tonnes
of uranium
(0.029% grade U3O8 *), 2,320 tonnes of gold (0.30 grams/tonne) and
12,460 tonnes of silver (1.61 grams/tonne). What must be understood is
that to obtain its metal contents this huge amount of ore has to be
extracted, milled and chemically processed and that it occurs below 350
metres of overlying rock. Around two to three times the quantity of the
ore body will have to be mined and set to one side of the open pit, so
that ore extraction can continue unhindered by excessive overburden.
But
the low grades of all the constituents of the combined ore must be
disappointing to the company, in particular those of the gold and the
uranium. The gold content in South African mines lies between 8 to 10
grams per tonne and costs US$ 12,000/kg to extract. Gold deposits of
0.30 grams/tonne (0.3 ppm) alone would in comparison require the mining
and milling of 27 times the amount of ore, while the extraction process
yield would drop. The costs of extracting gold from such a deposit could
well exceed the current price of gold of US$ 23,000/kg.
When considering further investment in processing equipment to
produce uranium from ore stocks and tailings as remnants of an
exhausting mine, as at the Ranger mine in the Northern Territory of
Australia, the economic cut-off grade was taken as 0.08% U3O8. In the
case of the Rössing mine, in production in Namibia since 1976, the ore
grade is now only around 0.035% U3O8. Production has continued ever
since, dropping only recently in 2006 to 3,077 tonnes U from 3,147
tonnes U in 2005 and plans to extend its production to 2021 are under
consideration. [3] This must be somewhat incongruous to the part-owners of Ranger and Rössing,
Rio Tinto, which is seemingly applying different economic cut-off
criteria when considering extensions to the two existing mines.
For comparison, there is no current project under review to open a new
mine based on a sole uranium deposit in the same order as the ore grade
(of 0.029% U3O8) in the case of the combined ore in the Olympic Dam
total resource. This is an important consideration when
contemplating the viability of other potential projects in Australia if
there are no co-products in a combined ore augmenting the low uranium
ore grades averaging 0.045%. [4]
In the case of the Olympic Dam expansion the components of the
combined ore are extracted by means of an extremely complex set of
chemical processes, needing vast quantities of chemicals, water and
energy. Moreover the product yield of such processes is never 100%, so
the contents of the ore body will not be fully recovered. It turns out
that the uranium, far from being an asset, contaminates the copper and
has to be removed from it before it can be sold. If exported there would
be nuclear proliferation issues as access to uranium could be achieved
by separating it from the copper.
No wonder the company has cautiously reminded investors that the
expansion is substantial and requires the completion of the feasibility
study and board approval.
Combined ore
The officially claimed ore grades anticipated in November 1983 for
the Olympic Dam underground mine project were 2.5% copper, 0.08%
uranium, 0.60 g/tonne gold and 6.0 g/t silver. Construction commenced in
1986 and the first combined ore was milled in June 1988, 11 years after
the first drilling in 1975.
Production of uranium began at 910 tonnes in 1988-89, rising to a
peak of 4,500 tonnes in 2000, dropping to 2,867 tonnes in 2002, but
reaching a second peak of 4,370 tonnes in 2004. It is now in rapid
decline with only 3,382 tonnes produced in 2006. [5] Production of the co-products of copper, gold and silver has declined in
parallel. The fall in production is linked to the halving of the ore
grades over the last few years of operation, so that when its
continuation as an open pit was proposed the anticipated ore grades were
1.0% copper, 0.04% U3O8, 0.45 g/t gold and 2.2 g/t silver.
Although the total resource is now considered to be much bigger than
before, leading to even greater media excitement, the ore grades are
even lower at, 0.87% copper, 0.029% U3O8, 0.30 g/t gold and 1.61 g/t
silver, calling into question the viability of the open pit method, not
least because the ore body occurs below 350 metres of rock.
Extraction efficiencies
The extraction of the co-products from the combined ore is an
extremely complex chemical operation. [6] Inevitably such processes do not have a 100% yield. The supplies include
process water, ammonia, diesel, frother, oxygen, cyanide, hydrogen
peroxide, nitric acid, caustic, ferrous sulphate, coke, zinc dust,
silica flux, nitre and as reagents, cobalt and guar gum. Sulphuric acid
is made on site from sulphur dioxide resulting from the copper sulphide
smelting, but may require augmentation.
The historical extraction efficiencies were:
- Copper ca. 90%
- Uranium ca. 65%
- Gold ca. 56.5%
- Silver ca. 54.4%
This means that around 10% of the copper and 35% of the uranium ends
up in the tailings pond. [7]
The extraction efficiency for the much reduced grades will be worse
and the company is reviewing the chemical processes needed, perhaps with
a view to restoring the yields by the introduction of more advanced
processes. However, applying the above extraction efficiencies to the
contents of the combined ore at the grades now anticipated, the mining
and milling of 40 million tonnes per annum (as was originally intended)
would produce around:-
- 320,000 tonnes of copper
- 6,440 tonnes of uranium (7,600 tonnes U3O¬8)
- 6,780 kg gold
- 35,000 kg silver
To restore the anticipated uranium production of 15,000 tonnes a year
(U) would mean that the combined ore mined and milled would have to be
increased to amount to 93 million tonnes a year instead of 40 Mt/y,
though the copper production would increase to 744,000 tonnes.
Because of the lower ore grades of the constituents in the combined
ore and other processing factors, it is possible that the uranium
extraction efficiency will decline to 40-50% a year, in which case
at 40 Mt/y the production would be 4,900 t/y U (5,800 t/y U3O¬8) and to
restore the anticipated production to 15,000 t/y U would require the
mining and milling of 122 million tonnes per year.
Implications
The reduction in ore grades requires a correspondingly inverse
increase in the amount of ore to be mined and milled for the same metal
production. It also means that the amount of overburden to be removed
increases by the same multiplier. Two decades ago the diesel needed for
the excavators and haultrucks would have been relatively cheap, but now
Australia is a net importer of diesel, now refined from crude oil priced
at US$ 80+. One of the advantages of nuclear power is claimed to be its
immunity to rising fuel costs and its role as an alternative to liquid
fuels for transport by the electrolysis of water for the production of
hydrogen. If however, its uranium based fuel is dependent on a doubling
or tripling of the amount of diesel needed to produce it, its immunity
will be lost. From 2009 to 2013, when the primary overburden will be
removed and displaced, the price of diesel can only be conjectured.
Based on the above analysis it is possible that the Olympic Dam
expansion may not go ahead, certainly not at the anticipated uranium
production rate of 15,000 tonnes per annum. Depending on the price of
copper futures in 2014 as set in 2010, it may go ahead on the basis of a
restricted copper production of 300,000 tonnes per annum, with a
moderate uranium production of 5,000 tonnes a year. Most likely the ore
from the open pit, if it goes ahead, will simply be transferred to the
existing processing plant, as by then the underground mine will be
approaching exhaustion. Whether this moderate continuation of its mining
activities would justify the initial investment in overburden removal is
somewhat doubtful.
It would be as well in the meantime to warn that the nuclear
"renaissance" - if relying on Australian uranium supplies -
may well stall. "The big hole" has got bigger, but its size is
nothing to that into which the politicians and bullish media will sink
when it fails to go ahead, particularly as its uranium product has been
"sold" already to the Chinese, the Indians and the Russians.
If new fleets of nuclear power stations are to be built on the huge and
pretentious projections claimed for the Olympic Dam expansion by
politicians and journalists and if the BHP Billiton board indeed turns
the project down (as it probably will) there will be much aggravation.
[1] The
big hole
[2] http://www.bhpbilliton.com/bbContentRepository/bhbpannualreport07.pdf
[3] http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/uprod.html
[4] http://pmc.gov.au/publications/umpner/docs/commissioned/ISA_report.pdf
[5] http://www.uic.com.au/emine.htm
[6] http://odx.bhpbilliton.com/docs/OreProcessingFlowDiagram.pdf
[7] Extraction efficiencies are derived from an analysis of quarterly and
annual reports of
WMC (1988 to 2005) and BHP Billiton (2005 to 2007) by Gavin Mudd,
Monash University, Melbourne.
* Uranium is shipped as triuranium octoxide (U3O8) or "yellow
cake" in drums. The uranium content is found by multiplying the
yellow cake weight by 0.848.
|