Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ni/Co–Cu Sulphide Ores, Key Contributors to Sustainability: A Review of Applications and Processing Challenges

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Proceedings of the 61st Conference of Metallurgists, COM 2022 (COM 2022)

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1334 Accesses

Abstract.

Nickel and cobalt are among the strategic metals contributing to sustainability. Recent statistics have indicated that their domestic production gradually declined, although Canada still ranks among the top five countries in nickel production linked to the co-production of cobalt and precious metals. The sustainability of nickel and cobalt production requires efficient processing, whether this relates to recycling from secondary sources or primary resources. One of the main driving forces in the growing demand for nickel is related to the increasing importance of nickel and cobalt-bearing lithium-ion electric-car batteries to reduce dependence on fossil fuels as part of a sustainable future. In addition to their use for stainless steel production, alloys of these metals are essential for solar power facilities towards the same goals.

Nickel-copper sulphide ores in Canada are in the category of complex sulphides since they are available with large quantities of pyrrhotite which is undesirable from an environmental point of view. Thus, the rejection of pyrrhotite in the processing of Ni-Cu sulphide ores will continue to be important in the Canadian mining industry due to its dominance in the disseminated matrix of these ores. In addition, in some cases, these ores also have serpentines and talc problems. Challenges related to mineralogy are reviewed together with reagent functionality related to pyrrhotite rejection as well as non-sulphide gangue, specifically talc and serpentines with an overview of promising new reagents.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 349.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lide DR, editor. CRC handbook of chemistry and physics. 85th ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dehaine Q, Tijsseling LT, Glass HJ, Törmänen T, Butcher AR. Geometallurgy of cobalt ores: a review. Miner Eng. 2021;160:106656.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Xu C, Dai Q, Gaines L, Hu M, Tukker A, Steubing B. Future material demand for automotive lithium-based batteries. Commun Mater. 2020;1(1):1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Global Energy Metal Corporation. Cobalt demand. 2022. Retrieved March 8, from https://www.globalenergymetals.com/cobalt/cobalt-demand/.

  5. Fraser J, Anderson J, Lazuen J, Lu Y, Heathman O, Brewster N, Bedder J, Masson O. Study on future demand & supply security of Ni for electric vehicle batteries. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union (Rosskill report, JRC); 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  6. U.S. Geological Survey. Mineral commodity summaries 2022: U.S. Geological Survey. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3133/mcs2022.

  7. Dewulf J, Van der Vorst G, Denturck K, Van Langenhove H, Ghyoot W, Tytgat J, Vandeputte K. Recycling rechargeable lithium ion batteries: critical analysis of natural resource savings. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2010;54(4):229–34.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Alvial-Hein G, Mahandra H, Ghahreman A. Separation and recovery of cobalt and nickel from end of life products via solvent extraction technique: a review. J Clean Prod. 2021;297:126592.

    Google Scholar 

  9. CEC. Environmentally sound management of end-of-life batteries from electric-drive vehicles in North America (978–2–89700-110-0). Commission for Environmental Cooperation; 2015. http://www.cec.org/files/documents/publications/11637-environmentally-sound-management-end-life-batteries-from-electric-drive-vehicles-en.pdf

  10. Harper E, Kavlak G, Graedel T. Tracking the metal of the goblins: cobalt’s cycle of use. Environ Sci Technol. 2012;46(2):1079–86.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Petavratzi E, Gunn G, Kresse C. Commodity review: cobalt. British Geological Survey; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Graedel T, Allwood J, Birat J, Reck B, Sibley S, Sonnemann G, Buchert M, Hagelüken C. UNEP (2011) Recycling rates of metals-a status report, a report of the Working Group on the Global Metal Flows to the International Resource Panel, WGotGMF (Ed.). United Nations Environment Programme; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Roberts S, Gunn G. Cobalt. In: Gunn G, editor. Critical metals handbook. 1st ed. John Wiley & Sons; 2014. p. 122–49.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Alves Dias P, Blagoeva D, Pavel C, Arvanitidis N. Cobalt: demand-supply balances in the transition to electric mobility. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, EUR-Scientific and Technical Research Reports Publications Office of the European Union, 10, 97710. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Golmohammadzadeh R, Faraji F, Rashchi F. Recovery of lithium and cobalt from spent lithium ion batteries (LIBs) using organic acids as leaching reagents: a review. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2018;136:418–35.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Boldt JR, Queneau P. The winning of nickel; its geology, mining, and extractive metallurgy. Toronto: Longmans; 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hawley JE, Stanton RL. The Sudbury ores, their mineralogy and origin; part 2, the facts; the ores, their minerals, metals and distribution. Can Mineral. 1962;7(1):30–145.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kerr A. An overview of recent developments in flotation technology and plant practice for nickel ores. In: Mular AL, Halbe DN, Barratt DJ, editors. Mineral processing, plant design, practice and control proceedings, vol. 1. Littleton: Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration; 2002. p. 1142–58.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Naldrett AJ, Singh J, Krstic S, Li C. The mineralogy of the Voisey’s Bay Ni-Cu-Co deposit, Northern Labrador, Canada: influence of oxidation state on textures and mineral compositions. Econ Geol. 2000;95(4):889–900. https://doi.org/10.2113/gsecongeo.95.4.889.

  20. Kossatz E. Inco boosts productivity using bulk mining methods. Can Min J. 1983;104(12):23–5.

    Google Scholar 

  21. XPS. A mineralogical study of the Nickel Rim Ore. Sudbury, Glencore, XPS R&D Centre; 2010. https://www.xps.ca/services/process-mineralogy#publications, Last accessed 16 Sept 2014

  22. Cherevaty M, Lostritto P, Agar GE, Stewart K, Labonté G. Laboratory flotation of Voisey’s Bay ovoid zone massive sulphide. 30th annual meeting of CMP, Ottawa. 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Bouillon DF. Developments in emission control technologies/strategies: a case study, Chapter 21. In: Gunn JM, editor. Restoration and recovery of an industrial region: smelter damaged landcape near Sudbury, Canada. New York: Springer; 1995. p. 275–85.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rezaei S, Liu F, Marcuson S, Muinonen M, Lakshmanand VL, Sridhar R, Barati M. Canadian pyrrhotite treatment: the history, inventory and potential for tailings. Can Metall Q. 2017;56(4):410–7.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Vale. SO2 emissions reductions. 2018. http://www.vale.com/canada/EN/aboutvale/communities/sudbury/Clean-AER/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed 23 Feb 2022.

  26. Ransom C. Environmental management system & community engagement report 2019. Glencore. 2020. https://www.glencore.ca/.rest/api/v1/documents/2d864503e57e129842a459670ad6e272/2019%20Annual%20EMT%20Report.pdf.

  27. Inco. Annual sustainability report 2005. I. Ltd; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kelebek S, Fekete SO, Wells GW. Selective depression of pyrrhotite using sulphur dioxide–diethylenetriamine reagent combination. In: Proceedings of the XIX international mineral processing congress, San Francisco, CA, vol. 3. Littleton: SME; 1995. p. 181–7.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Marticorena M, Hill G, Kerr A, Liechti D, Pelland D. INCO develops new pyrrhotite depressant. Innov Miner Process. 1994;3:15–33.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kelebek S, Tukel C. The effect of sodium metabisulfite and triethylenetetramine system on pentlandite–pyrrhotite separation. Int J Miner Process. 1999;57:135–52.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kelebek S, Yoruk S, Smith GW. Wetting behaviour of molybdenite and talc in lignosulphonate/MIBC solutions and their separation by flotation. Sep Sci Technol. 2001;36(2):145–58.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Webmineral.com. Mineralogical databae. http://www.webmineral.com/data/Tosudite.shtml#.Ym24a-1E3DE. Accessed 15 Feb 2022.

  33. Gaudin AM. Flotation. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wellham E, Elber L, Yan D. The role of carboxy methyl cellulose in the flotation of a nickel sulphide transition ore. Miner Eng. 1992;5(3–5):381–95.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Mani H, Xu M, Quinn P, Stratton-Crawley R. Proceedings of the UBC-McGill Bi-annual international symposium on fundamentals of mineral processing, Sudbury, 17–19 Aug 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Holmes JA, Langlois P. Process development at the Raglan concentrate. 33rd annual meeting of the Canadian Mineral Processors (CMP), Ottawa. 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Gibson C, Kelebek S. Sensitivity of pentlandite flotation in complex sulfide ores towards pH control by lime versus soda ash: effect on ore type. Int J Miner Process. 2014;127:44–51.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Edwards C, Kipkie W, Agar G. The effect of slime coatings of the serpentine minerals, chrysotile and lizardite, on pentlandite flotation. Int J Miner Process. 1980;7(1):33–42.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Arnold RG. Range in composition and structure of 82 natural terrestrial pyrrhotites. Can Mineral. 1967;9:31–50.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Becker M, Bradshaw D, De Villiers J. The mineralogy of pyrrhotite from Sudbury CCN and Phoenix nickel ores and its effect on flotation performance. Can Metall Q. 2011;50(1):10–9.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Multani RS, Waters KE. A review of the physicochemical properties and flotation of pyrrhotite superstructures (4C-Fe7S8/5C-Fe9S10) in Ni-Cu sulphide mineral processing. Can J Chem Eng. 2018;96:1185–206.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wercholaz CR. Non-magnetic pyrrhotite and its effect on ore processing. BSc thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON. 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Lawson V, Hill G, Kormos L, Marrs G. The separation of pentlandite from chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite and gangue in nickel projects throughout the world. 12th AusIMM Mill Operators’ Conference, Townsville, 1–3 Sept 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Zhao CH, Wu BZ, Chen JH. Electronic structure and flotation behavior of monoclinic and hexagonal pyrrhotite. J Cent South Univ. 2015a;22(2):466–71.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Zhao K, Gu G, Wang C, Rao X, Wang X, Xiong X. The effect of a new polysaccharide on the depression of talc and the flotation of a nickel–copper sulfide ore. Miner Eng. 2015b;77:99–106.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Kelebek S, Tukel C. Separation of nickeliferous hexagonal pyrrhotite from pentlandite in Ni-Cu sulphide ores: recovery by size performance. Miner Eng. 2018;125:223–30.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Multani RS, Waters KE. Pyrrhotite depression studies with DETA and SMBS on a Ni-Cu sulphide ore. Can J Chem Eng. 2019;97(7):2121–30.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Tukel C, Kelebek S, Yalcin E. Eh-pH stability diagrams for analysis of polyamine interaction with chalcopyrite and deactivation of Cu-activated pyrrhotite. Can Metall Q. 2010;49(4):411–8.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Qi C, Liu J, Malainey J, Kormos LJ, Coffin J, Deredin C, Liu Q, Fragomeni D. The role of Cu ion activation and surface oxidation for polymorphic pyrrhotite flotation performance in Strathcona Mill. Miner Eng. 2019;134:87–9.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Kelebek S, Wells PF, Heinrich G. Metal ion characterization of monoclinic pyrrhotite from nickel-copper ores using EDTA extraction. In: Kemal M, et al., editors. Changing scopes in mineral processing: proceedings of the 6th International Mineral Processing Symposium. Rotterdam: A.A. Balkema; 1996a. p. 295–300.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kelebek S, Wells PF, Fekete OS. Differential flotation of chalcopyrite, pentlandite and pyrrhotite in Ni-Cu sulphide ores. Can Metall Q. 1996b;35(4):329–36.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Xu ZH, Rao SR, Finch JA, Kelebek S, Wells P. Role of diethylene triamine (DETA) in pentlandite-pyrrhotite separation. 1. Complexation of metals with DETA. Trans Inst Min Metall C. 1997;106:C15–20.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Yoon RH, Basilio CI, Marticorena MA, Kerr AN, Stratton-Crawley R. A study of the pyrrhotite depression mechanism by diethylenetriamine. Miner Eng. 1995;8(7):807–16.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Cao J, Qi L, Tian X-D, Jia J-J, Hu X-Q, Luo Y-C, Xu PF. Investigation on the promoted flotation behavior of pentlandite by ammoniacal copper(II) solution. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp. 2018;546:67–73.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Tian X, Furnell E, Bobicki ER. Predicting the fate of diethylenetriamine in pyrrhotite tailings management. Miner Eng. 2022;76:107335.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Yalcin E, Cushing AML, Kelebek S. Solution equilibria and adsorption tendencies of complexed Cu ions in mining environment. Paper presented at 7th conference on sustainable development of energy, water and environment systems, July 1–7, Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia. 2012. p. 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Cushing A, Kelebek S, Yue S, Ramsay JA. Biodegradation of CuTETA, an effluent by-product in mineral processing. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2018;25:17393–401.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Furnell E, Tian X, Bobicki ER. Diethylenetriamine as a selective pyrrhotite depressant: properties, application, and mitigation strategies. Can J Chem Eng. 2021;99(6):1316–33.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Pugh R. Macromolecular organic depressants in sulphide flotation—a review, 1. Principles, types and applications. Int J Miner Process. 1989;25(1–2):101–30.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Liu G, Feng Q, Ou L, Lu Y, Zhang G. Adsorption of polysaccharide onto talc. Miner Eng. 2006;19(2):147–53.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Mierczynska-Vasilev A, Beattie DA. Adsorption of tailored carboxymethyl cellulose polymers on talc and chalcopyrite: correlation between coverage, wettability, and flotation. Miner Eng. 2010;23(11–13):985–93.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Feng B, Lu Y, Feng Q, Zhang M, Gu Y. Talc–serpentine interactions and implications for talc depression. Miner Eng. 2012a;32:68–73.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Rath RK, Subramanian S, Laskowski J. Adsorption of dextrin and guar gum onto talc. A comparative study. Langmuir. 1997;13(23):6260–6.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Beattie D, Huynh L, Mierczynska-Vasilev A, Myllynen M, Flatt J. Effect of modified dextrins on the depression of talc and their selectivity in sulphide mineral flotation: adsorption isotherms, AFM imaging and flotation studies. Can Metall Q. 2007;46(3):349–58.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Ma X, Pawlik M. The effect of lignosulfonates on the floatability of talc. Int J Miner Process. 2007;83(1–2):19–27.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Feng B, Peng J, Guo W, Zhu X, Huang W. The stimulus response of chitosan and its depression effect on talc flotation. Miner Process Extr Metall. 2018;127(1):56–61.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Wei G, Bo F, Jinxiu P, Wenpu Z, Xianwen Z. Depressant behavior of tragacanth gum and its role in the flotation separation of chalcopyrite from talc. J Mater Res Technol. 2019;8(1):697–702.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Peng Y, Seaman D. The flotation of slime–fine fractions of Mt. Keith pentlandite ore in de-ionised and saline water. Miner Eng. 2011;24(5):479–81.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Bremmell KE, Fornasiero D, Ralston J. Pentlandite–lizardite interactions and implications for their separation by flotation. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp. 2005;252(2–3):207–12.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Peng Y, Bradshaw D. Mechanisms for the improved flotation of ultrafine pentlandite and its separation from lizardite in saline water. Miner Eng. 2012;36:284–90.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Feng B, Wang P, Lu Y, Feng Q. Role of sodium hexametaphosphate in flotation of a nickel ore. Physicochem Probl Miner Process. 2016;52(1):170–81. https://doi.org/10.5277/ppmp160115.

  72. Zhao K, Yan W, Wang X, Wang Z, Gao Z, Wang C, He W. Effect of a novel phosphate on the flotation of serpentine-containing copper-nickel sulfide ore. Miner Eng. 2020;150:106276.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Feng B, Feng Q, Lu Y. A novel method to limit the detrimental effect of serpentine on the flotation of pentlandite. Int J Miner Process. 2012b;114:11–3.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Lu J, Yuan Z, Liu J, Li L, Zhu S. Effects of magnetite on magnetic coating behavior in pentlandite and serpentine system. Miner Eng. 2015;72:115–20.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful for continued support and funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and for the sponsorship of S. Arslangil by the general directorate of mineral research and exploration of Turkey.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Robert M. Buchan Department of Mining, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada

    S. Kelebek, S. Arslangil & C. E. Gibson

Authors
  1. S. Kelebek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Arslangil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C. E. Gibson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Arslangil .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    Copyright information

    © 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

    About this paper

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this paper

    Kelebek, S., Arslangil, S., Gibson, C.E. (2023). Ni/Co–Cu Sulphide Ores, Key Contributors to Sustainability: A Review of Applications and Processing Challenges. In: Proceedings of the 61st Conference of Metallurgists, COM 2022. COM 2022. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17425-4_105

    Download citation

    Publish with us

    Policies and ethics

    Search

    Navigation