3610 XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3
expedite and leverage revenue to reinvest in downstream
processing.
Of the three scenarios considered in the current paper,
Scenario 2 (stagewise implementation) and Scenario 3
(semi-stagewise implementation) allow for the expedition
of revenue. Full stagewise implementation also allows for
the staggering of expenditure over time to improve cash
flow, whilst semi-stagewise implementation is a modified
approach in which revenue is generated earlier, but upfront
lumpsum capital investment still occurs. Compared to com-
plete up-front capital investment (Scenario 1), a stagewise
approach to implementation provided the greatest overall
project returns (IRR). This highlights a variety of benefits
including, but not limited to, quicker access to market with
a saleable product, and reduced upfront capital require-
ments (with the potential for profits to offset downstream
capital requirements). Additionally, from a processing per-
spective, the development of a plant in stages improves the
ability to ensure that the design and operation of each stage
is complete and optimised before moving on to the next.
This streamlines the design process and minimises the risk
of having to repeat expensive processes such as drilling, tes-
twork and pilot campaigns, thus simplifying the commis-
sioning and ramp up periods.
Whilst many sites elect to generate a saleable concen-
trate, trading terms associated with saleable concentrate
often incur higher transport costs and penalties, and some
jurisdictions restrict the sale of intermediate products, leav-
ing operations with no choice but to generate final product.
This circumstance would typically call for whole-of-plant
implementation prior to production commencement. It is
however noted that some jurisdictions may allow a grace
period where an intermediate concentrate can be produced
for an agreed-upon, finite amount of time, prior to com-
missioning downstream processing plants. This opens up
the possibility of staged implementation where required.
Flexible and robust technologies are crucial for stage-
wise and semi-stagewise implementation, and GT provides
several industry-proven technologies and processes that are
simple, flexible, and complement each other. Both stage-
wise and whole-of-plant implementation approaches have
convincing arguments, with favourable IRR and NPV
respectively for each approach. The choice between the two
approaches should be based on the unique constraints and
goals of each client and operation.
REFERENCES
Anderson, G., &McDonald, N. (2016). IsaMills at
Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines—From the
M3000 to the M10 000 and Replacement of the
Roasters at Gidji Processing Plant. 13th AUSIMM Mill
Operators Conference. Perth: 29–38.
Aylmore, M., &Jaffer, A. (2012). Evaluating Process
Options for Treating Some Refractory Ores. ALTA
2012 International Gold Conference. Perth.
Dakkoune, A., Bourgeois, F., Po, A., &Joulian, C. (2023).
Hydrometallurgical Processing of Chalcopyrite by
Attrition-Aided Leaching. ACS Engineering Au, 3(3).
Ellis, S. (n.d.). Ultra Fine Grinding—A Practical Alternative
to Oxide Treatment of Refractory Gold Ores.
Gurnett, I., Swann, A., Martin, S., &Stieper, G. (2024).
How to Develop a Scalable Jameson Concentrator
from Class 5-Concept Level Testwork. 56th Annual
Meeting of the Canadian Mineral Processors. Ottawa.
Hu, H., &Chen, Q. (2004). Effect of grinding atmosphere
on the leaching of mechanically activated pyrite and
sphalerite. Hydrometallurgy, 71(1), 79–86.
Kumar, A., Sahu, R., &Tripathy, S. (2023). Energy-Efficient
Advanced Ultrafine Grinding of Particles Using Stirred
Mills—A Review. Energies, 16(14), 5277.
Lunt, D., &Weeks, T. (2016). Process Flowsheet Selection.
In M. Adams, Gold ore processing, project development
and operations (pp. 113–129). Great Britain: Elsevier
Science &Technology.
Lunt, D., &Weeks, T. (2016). Process Flowsheet Selection.
In M. Adams, Gold Ore Processing, Project Development
and Operations (pp. 113–129). Great Britain: Elsevier
Science &Technology.
McKinsey &Company. (2019). Arsenic: Will it take the
shine off the red metal? MineSpans, 1.
McNeice, J. (2021). Gold Extraction from Refractory
Sulfide Gold Concentrates: A Comparison of
Bioxidation and Neutral Atmospheric Pre-treatment
and Economic Implications. Journal of Sustainable
Metallurgy, 1354–1367.
Pease, J., Young, M., &Curry, D. (2005). Fine Grinding
as Enabling Technology—The IsaMill. Engineering,
Materials Science, Environmental Science.
Voigt, P., Walker, D., Kloiber-Deane, O., &Tsvetkov, A.
(2018). Ramp Up and Long Term Performance of the
Albion Process Plant at Geopromining Gold Armenia.
14th AusIMM Mill Operators’ Conference (pp. 339–
350). Melbourne: The Australasian Institute of Mining
and Metallurgy.
expedite and leverage revenue to reinvest in downstream
processing.
Of the three scenarios considered in the current paper,
Scenario 2 (stagewise implementation) and Scenario 3
(semi-stagewise implementation) allow for the expedition
of revenue. Full stagewise implementation also allows for
the staggering of expenditure over time to improve cash
flow, whilst semi-stagewise implementation is a modified
approach in which revenue is generated earlier, but upfront
lumpsum capital investment still occurs. Compared to com-
plete up-front capital investment (Scenario 1), a stagewise
approach to implementation provided the greatest overall
project returns (IRR). This highlights a variety of benefits
including, but not limited to, quicker access to market with
a saleable product, and reduced upfront capital require-
ments (with the potential for profits to offset downstream
capital requirements). Additionally, from a processing per-
spective, the development of a plant in stages improves the
ability to ensure that the design and operation of each stage
is complete and optimised before moving on to the next.
This streamlines the design process and minimises the risk
of having to repeat expensive processes such as drilling, tes-
twork and pilot campaigns, thus simplifying the commis-
sioning and ramp up periods.
Whilst many sites elect to generate a saleable concen-
trate, trading terms associated with saleable concentrate
often incur higher transport costs and penalties, and some
jurisdictions restrict the sale of intermediate products, leav-
ing operations with no choice but to generate final product.
This circumstance would typically call for whole-of-plant
implementation prior to production commencement. It is
however noted that some jurisdictions may allow a grace
period where an intermediate concentrate can be produced
for an agreed-upon, finite amount of time, prior to com-
missioning downstream processing plants. This opens up
the possibility of staged implementation where required.
Flexible and robust technologies are crucial for stage-
wise and semi-stagewise implementation, and GT provides
several industry-proven technologies and processes that are
simple, flexible, and complement each other. Both stage-
wise and whole-of-plant implementation approaches have
convincing arguments, with favourable IRR and NPV
respectively for each approach. The choice between the two
approaches should be based on the unique constraints and
goals of each client and operation.
REFERENCES
Anderson, G., &McDonald, N. (2016). IsaMills at
Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines—From the
M3000 to the M10 000 and Replacement of the
Roasters at Gidji Processing Plant. 13th AUSIMM Mill
Operators Conference. Perth: 29–38.
Aylmore, M., &Jaffer, A. (2012). Evaluating Process
Options for Treating Some Refractory Ores. ALTA
2012 International Gold Conference. Perth.
Dakkoune, A., Bourgeois, F., Po, A., &Joulian, C. (2023).
Hydrometallurgical Processing of Chalcopyrite by
Attrition-Aided Leaching. ACS Engineering Au, 3(3).
Ellis, S. (n.d.). Ultra Fine Grinding—A Practical Alternative
to Oxide Treatment of Refractory Gold Ores.
Gurnett, I., Swann, A., Martin, S., &Stieper, G. (2024).
How to Develop a Scalable Jameson Concentrator
from Class 5-Concept Level Testwork. 56th Annual
Meeting of the Canadian Mineral Processors. Ottawa.
Hu, H., &Chen, Q. (2004). Effect of grinding atmosphere
on the leaching of mechanically activated pyrite and
sphalerite. Hydrometallurgy, 71(1), 79–86.
Kumar, A., Sahu, R., &Tripathy, S. (2023). Energy-Efficient
Advanced Ultrafine Grinding of Particles Using Stirred
Mills—A Review. Energies, 16(14), 5277.
Lunt, D., &Weeks, T. (2016). Process Flowsheet Selection.
In M. Adams, Gold ore processing, project development
and operations (pp. 113–129). Great Britain: Elsevier
Science &Technology.
Lunt, D., &Weeks, T. (2016). Process Flowsheet Selection.
In M. Adams, Gold Ore Processing, Project Development
and Operations (pp. 113–129). Great Britain: Elsevier
Science &Technology.
McKinsey &Company. (2019). Arsenic: Will it take the
shine off the red metal? MineSpans, 1.
McNeice, J. (2021). Gold Extraction from Refractory
Sulfide Gold Concentrates: A Comparison of
Bioxidation and Neutral Atmospheric Pre-treatment
and Economic Implications. Journal of Sustainable
Metallurgy, 1354–1367.
Pease, J., Young, M., &Curry, D. (2005). Fine Grinding
as Enabling Technology—The IsaMill. Engineering,
Materials Science, Environmental Science.
Voigt, P., Walker, D., Kloiber-Deane, O., &Tsvetkov, A.
(2018). Ramp Up and Long Term Performance of the
Albion Process Plant at Geopromining Gold Armenia.
14th AusIMM Mill Operators’ Conference (pp. 339–
350). Melbourne: The Australasian Institute of Mining
and Metallurgy.