Using life cycle assessment to evaluate some environmental impacts of gold production

The environmental profile of gold production with regards to embodied energy, greenhouse gas emissions, embodied water and solid waste burden has been assessed using life cycle assessment methodology. Both refractory and non-refractory ores were considered, with cyanidation extraction followed by ca...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of cleaner production 2012-07, Vol.29-30, p.53-63
Hauptverfasser: Norgate, Terry, Haque, Nawshad
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 63
container_issue
container_start_page 53
container_title Journal of cleaner production
container_volume 29-30
creator Norgate, Terry
Haque, Nawshad
description The environmental profile of gold production with regards to embodied energy, greenhouse gas emissions, embodied water and solid waste burden has been assessed using life cycle assessment methodology. Both refractory and non-refractory ores were considered, with cyanidation extraction followed by carbon in pulp (CIP) recovery assumed for non-refractory ore processing. Flotation and pressure oxidation were included prior to cyanidation for processing refractory ores. For a base case ore grade of 3.5 g Au/t ore, the life cycle-based environmental footprint of gold production was estimated to be approximately 200,000 GJ/t Au, 18,000 t CO2e/t Au, 260,000 t water/t Au and 1,270,000 t waste solids/t Au for non-refractory ore. The embodied energy and greenhouse gas footprints were approximately 50% higher with refractory ore due to the additional material and energy inputs and gold and silver losses associated with the additional processing steps required with this ore. The solid waste burden was based on an assumed strip ratio of 3 t waste rock/t ore, but this ratio varies considerably between mines, significantly influencing the estimated value of this impact. The environmental footprint of gold production (per tonne of gold produced) was shown to be several orders of magnitude greater than that for a number of other metals, largely due to the low grades of ore used for the production of gold compared to other metals. The mining and comminution stages made the greatest contribution to the greenhouse gas footprint of gold production, with electricity being the major factor, and being responsible for just over half of the greenhouse gas footprint. This result emphasises the need to focus on these stages in any endeavours to reduce the embodied energy and greenhouse gas footprints of gold production. However, the significance of the contribution of the mining and comminution stages to the environmental footprint also means that falling gold ore grades will have a major impact on the environmental profile, and this issue is examined in the paper. Some technological developments in gold ore processing that have the potential to reduce the environmental footprint of gold production are also discussed. ► Life cycle assessment used to assess environmental footprint of gold production. ► Mining and mineral processing stages make greatest contribution to footprint. ► Declining ore grades will significantly increase environmental footprint. ► Efforts to reduce footprint s
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.042
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1671304665</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0959652612000947</els_id><sourcerecordid>1034822896</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-d224989a8391af45bba093c5c6b21892244452f96c4693416a16361d3c695fa73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkEtrwzAQhEVpoWnan1DQsRe7ets6lRL6gkAvzVko8jrIyFZq2YH8-yok9572MN_M7g5Cj5SUlFD13JWdC7AfY8kIZSWhJRHsCi1oXemCVrW6RguipS6UZOoW3aXUEUIrUokF2mySH3Y4-BawO-YYbFOClHoYJjxFDAcbZjsBTrEHDMPBj3E4iTZg3--tmxKOLd7F0OB8QTO7ycfhHt20NiR4uMwl2ry__aw-i_X3x9fqdV04XsmpaBgTuta25praVsjt1hLNnXRqy2itsyqEZK1WTijNBVWWKq5ow53SsrUVX6Knc25e_TtDmkzvk4MQ7ABxToaqinIilJL_o4SLmrFaq4zKM-rGmNIIrdmPvrfjMUPm1LjpzKVxc2rcEGpy49n3cvZBfvngYTTJeRgcNH4EN5km-n8S_gCWd4wI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1034822896</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Using life cycle assessment to evaluate some environmental impacts of gold production</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Norgate, Terry ; Haque, Nawshad</creator><creatorcontrib>Norgate, Terry ; Haque, Nawshad</creatorcontrib><description>The environmental profile of gold production with regards to embodied energy, greenhouse gas emissions, embodied water and solid waste burden has been assessed using life cycle assessment methodology. Both refractory and non-refractory ores were considered, with cyanidation extraction followed by carbon in pulp (CIP) recovery assumed for non-refractory ore processing. Flotation and pressure oxidation were included prior to cyanidation for processing refractory ores. For a base case ore grade of 3.5 g Au/t ore, the life cycle-based environmental footprint of gold production was estimated to be approximately 200,000 GJ/t Au, 18,000 t CO2e/t Au, 260,000 t water/t Au and 1,270,000 t waste solids/t Au for non-refractory ore. The embodied energy and greenhouse gas footprints were approximately 50% higher with refractory ore due to the additional material and energy inputs and gold and silver losses associated with the additional processing steps required with this ore. The solid waste burden was based on an assumed strip ratio of 3 t waste rock/t ore, but this ratio varies considerably between mines, significantly influencing the estimated value of this impact. The environmental footprint of gold production (per tonne of gold produced) was shown to be several orders of magnitude greater than that for a number of other metals, largely due to the low grades of ore used for the production of gold compared to other metals. The mining and comminution stages made the greatest contribution to the greenhouse gas footprint of gold production, with electricity being the major factor, and being responsible for just over half of the greenhouse gas footprint. This result emphasises the need to focus on these stages in any endeavours to reduce the embodied energy and greenhouse gas footprints of gold production. However, the significance of the contribution of the mining and comminution stages to the environmental footprint also means that falling gold ore grades will have a major impact on the environmental profile, and this issue is examined in the paper. Some technological developments in gold ore processing that have the potential to reduce the environmental footprint of gold production are also discussed. ► Life cycle assessment used to assess environmental footprint of gold production. ► Mining and mineral processing stages make greatest contribution to footprint. ► Declining ore grades will significantly increase environmental footprint. ► Efforts to reduce footprint should focus on mining and milling stages. ► Technology developments offer opportunities to reduce environmental footprint.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0959-6526</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1786</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.042</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Air pollution ; Cyanidation ; Energy ; Environmental ; Footprints ; Gold ; Gold production ; Greenhouse ; Greenhouse effect ; Greenhouse gases ; Life cycle assessment ; Life cycle engineering ; Ore grade ; Water</subject><ispartof>Journal of cleaner production, 2012-07, Vol.29-30, p.53-63</ispartof><rights>2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-d224989a8391af45bba093c5c6b21892244452f96c4693416a16361d3c695fa73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-d224989a8391af45bba093c5c6b21892244452f96c4693416a16361d3c695fa73</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.042$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Norgate, Terry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haque, Nawshad</creatorcontrib><title>Using life cycle assessment to evaluate some environmental impacts of gold production</title><title>Journal of cleaner production</title><description>The environmental profile of gold production with regards to embodied energy, greenhouse gas emissions, embodied water and solid waste burden has been assessed using life cycle assessment methodology. Both refractory and non-refractory ores were considered, with cyanidation extraction followed by carbon in pulp (CIP) recovery assumed for non-refractory ore processing. Flotation and pressure oxidation were included prior to cyanidation for processing refractory ores. For a base case ore grade of 3.5 g Au/t ore, the life cycle-based environmental footprint of gold production was estimated to be approximately 200,000 GJ/t Au, 18,000 t CO2e/t Au, 260,000 t water/t Au and 1,270,000 t waste solids/t Au for non-refractory ore. The embodied energy and greenhouse gas footprints were approximately 50% higher with refractory ore due to the additional material and energy inputs and gold and silver losses associated with the additional processing steps required with this ore. The solid waste burden was based on an assumed strip ratio of 3 t waste rock/t ore, but this ratio varies considerably between mines, significantly influencing the estimated value of this impact. The environmental footprint of gold production (per tonne of gold produced) was shown to be several orders of magnitude greater than that for a number of other metals, largely due to the low grades of ore used for the production of gold compared to other metals. The mining and comminution stages made the greatest contribution to the greenhouse gas footprint of gold production, with electricity being the major factor, and being responsible for just over half of the greenhouse gas footprint. This result emphasises the need to focus on these stages in any endeavours to reduce the embodied energy and greenhouse gas footprints of gold production. However, the significance of the contribution of the mining and comminution stages to the environmental footprint also means that falling gold ore grades will have a major impact on the environmental profile, and this issue is examined in the paper. Some technological developments in gold ore processing that have the potential to reduce the environmental footprint of gold production are also discussed. ► Life cycle assessment used to assess environmental footprint of gold production. ► Mining and mineral processing stages make greatest contribution to footprint. ► Declining ore grades will significantly increase environmental footprint. ► Efforts to reduce footprint should focus on mining and milling stages. ► Technology developments offer opportunities to reduce environmental footprint.</description><subject>Air pollution</subject><subject>Cyanidation</subject><subject>Energy</subject><subject>Environmental</subject><subject>Footprints</subject><subject>Gold</subject><subject>Gold production</subject><subject>Greenhouse</subject><subject>Greenhouse effect</subject><subject>Greenhouse gases</subject><subject>Life cycle assessment</subject><subject>Life cycle engineering</subject><subject>Ore grade</subject><subject>Water</subject><issn>0959-6526</issn><issn>1879-1786</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkEtrwzAQhEVpoWnan1DQsRe7ets6lRL6gkAvzVko8jrIyFZq2YH8-yok9572MN_M7g5Cj5SUlFD13JWdC7AfY8kIZSWhJRHsCi1oXemCVrW6RguipS6UZOoW3aXUEUIrUokF2mySH3Y4-BawO-YYbFOClHoYJjxFDAcbZjsBTrEHDMPBj3E4iTZg3--tmxKOLd7F0OB8QTO7ycfhHt20NiR4uMwl2ry__aw-i_X3x9fqdV04XsmpaBgTuta25praVsjt1hLNnXRqy2itsyqEZK1WTijNBVWWKq5ow53SsrUVX6Knc25e_TtDmkzvk4MQ7ABxToaqinIilJL_o4SLmrFaq4zKM-rGmNIIrdmPvrfjMUPm1LjpzKVxc2rcEGpy49n3cvZBfvngYTTJeRgcNH4EN5km-n8S_gCWd4wI</recordid><startdate>201207</startdate><enddate>201207</enddate><creator>Norgate, Terry</creator><creator>Haque, Nawshad</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SU</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>JG9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201207</creationdate><title>Using life cycle assessment to evaluate some environmental impacts of gold production</title><author>Norgate, Terry ; Haque, Nawshad</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-d224989a8391af45bba093c5c6b21892244452f96c4693416a16361d3c695fa73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Air pollution</topic><topic>Cyanidation</topic><topic>Energy</topic><topic>Environmental</topic><topic>Footprints</topic><topic>Gold</topic><topic>Gold production</topic><topic>Greenhouse</topic><topic>Greenhouse effect</topic><topic>Greenhouse gases</topic><topic>Life cycle assessment</topic><topic>Life cycle engineering</topic><topic>Ore grade</topic><topic>Water</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Norgate, Terry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haque, Nawshad</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><jtitle>Journal of cleaner production</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Norgate, Terry</au><au>Haque, Nawshad</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Using life cycle assessment to evaluate some environmental impacts of gold production</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cleaner production</jtitle><date>2012-07</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>29-30</volume><spage>53</spage><epage>63</epage><pages>53-63</pages><issn>0959-6526</issn><eissn>1879-1786</eissn><abstract>The environmental profile of gold production with regards to embodied energy, greenhouse gas emissions, embodied water and solid waste burden has been assessed using life cycle assessment methodology. Both refractory and non-refractory ores were considered, with cyanidation extraction followed by carbon in pulp (CIP) recovery assumed for non-refractory ore processing. Flotation and pressure oxidation were included prior to cyanidation for processing refractory ores. For a base case ore grade of 3.5 g Au/t ore, the life cycle-based environmental footprint of gold production was estimated to be approximately 200,000 GJ/t Au, 18,000 t CO2e/t Au, 260,000 t water/t Au and 1,270,000 t waste solids/t Au for non-refractory ore. The embodied energy and greenhouse gas footprints were approximately 50% higher with refractory ore due to the additional material and energy inputs and gold and silver losses associated with the additional processing steps required with this ore. The solid waste burden was based on an assumed strip ratio of 3 t waste rock/t ore, but this ratio varies considerably between mines, significantly influencing the estimated value of this impact. The environmental footprint of gold production (per tonne of gold produced) was shown to be several orders of magnitude greater than that for a number of other metals, largely due to the low grades of ore used for the production of gold compared to other metals. The mining and comminution stages made the greatest contribution to the greenhouse gas footprint of gold production, with electricity being the major factor, and being responsible for just over half of the greenhouse gas footprint. This result emphasises the need to focus on these stages in any endeavours to reduce the embodied energy and greenhouse gas footprints of gold production. However, the significance of the contribution of the mining and comminution stages to the environmental footprint also means that falling gold ore grades will have a major impact on the environmental profile, and this issue is examined in the paper. Some technological developments in gold ore processing that have the potential to reduce the environmental footprint of gold production are also discussed. ► Life cycle assessment used to assess environmental footprint of gold production. ► Mining and mineral processing stages make greatest contribution to footprint. ► Declining ore grades will significantly increase environmental footprint. ► Efforts to reduce footprint should focus on mining and milling stages. ► Technology developments offer opportunities to reduce environmental footprint.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.042</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0959-6526
ispartof Journal of cleaner production, 2012-07, Vol.29-30, p.53-63
issn 0959-6526
1879-1786
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1671304665
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Air pollution
Cyanidation
Energy
Environmental
Footprints
Gold
Gold production
Greenhouse
Greenhouse effect
Greenhouse gases
Life cycle assessment
Life cycle engineering
Ore grade
Water
title Using life cycle assessment to evaluate some environmental impacts of gold production
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T13%3A17%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Using%20life%20cycle%20assessment%20to%20evaluate%20some%20environmental%20impacts%20of%20gold%20production&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cleaner%20production&rft.au=Norgate,%20Terry&rft.date=2012-07&rft.volume=29-30&rft.spage=53&rft.epage=63&rft.pages=53-63&rft.issn=0959-6526&rft.eissn=1879-1786&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.042&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1034822896%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1034822896&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0959652612000947&rfr_iscdi=true