Phosphate resources and production - Atoms for Peace · PDF fileDi-Hydrate 22,000 70 ......

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency

Phosphate resources and production

Hari Tulsidas

IAEA

Phosphate reserves Country Reserves kt Production kt

USA 1 400 000 29 200

Algeria 2 200 000 1 500

Australia 490 000 2 600

Brazil 270 000 6 300

Canada 2 000 900

China 3 700 000 89 000

Egypt 100 000 3 000

India 6 100 1 260

Iraq 460 000 150

Israel 180 000 3 000

Jordan 1 500 000 6 500

Mexico 30 000 1 700

Morocco 50 000 000 28 000

Peru 820 000 2 560

Russia 1 300 000 11 300

Saudi Arabia 750 000 1 700

Senegal 180 000 980

South Africa 1 500 000 2 500

Syria 1 800 000 2 500

Togo 60 000 865

Tunisia 100 000 6 000

Others 390 000 6 000

World Total 67 000 000 210 000

67 billion tonnes

of reserves

300 billion tonnes

of resources*

*USGS 2012

IAEA

Capacity trends

IAEA

Phosphate utilization

• 72% - Phos acid

• 12% - SSP

• 2% - TSP

• 14% - Other uses

(Nyri, 2010)

- Mining

- Beneficiated phosphate rock

- Wet process

- Fertilizer production

Process

Production

Capacity

(`000t P2O5)

%

Di-Hydrate 22,000 70

Hemi-Hydrate 4,000 13

Other/Unknown 5,200 17

IAEA

Uranium resources tU (UDEPO, 2013)

1. Intrusive 700 000 – 740 000

2. Granite-related 450 000

3. Polymetallic breccia complex 2 200 000

4. Volcanic-related 520 000

5. Metasomatite 1 000 000

6. Metamorphite 500 000

7. Proterozoic unconformity 1 300 000

8. Collapse breccia pipe 16 000

9. Sandstone 3 700 000

10. Paleo-quartz pebble conglomerate 1 100 000

11. Surficial 400 000

12. Coal-lignite 7 400 000

13. Carbonate 70 000

14. Phosphate 13 000 000

15. Black shales 1 450 000

TOTAL 34 300 000 tU

43 Phosphate

U deposits

identified

IAEA

Phosphate U resources

Country Resources tU U ppm

Brazil 28 000 130

Chile 1325 80

Egypt 60 000 -

Finland 735 30

Greece 500 100

Iraq 58 000 130

Israel 33 000 140

Jordan 112 000 150

Kazakhstan 70 400 500

Mexico 56100 120

Morocco 6 526 000 150

Peru 16 000 60

Sweden 42 300 40

Syria 40 000 130

USA 5 565 000 90-500

Total 12 862 830

IAEA

Assessing U availability from phosphates

Quantities associated with known and potential phosphate resources

Contained in Phosphoric acid

Not Commercial for current extraction

Potential for Commercial extraction

Commercially Extracted quantities

Currently dissipated in

fertilizers

Not extracted; available in PG and process water

Available in raffinite and slags

Lost in tailings

and clays

IAEA

UxP lifecycle and UNFC-2009

Conceptual

Studies

Order of

Magnitude

Studies

Pre-feasibility

Studies

Feasibility

Studies

Project

Implementation

Mine closure,

Remediation and

Handover Conceptual

Studies Scoping Studies

Pre-feasibility Studies

Feasibility Studies Project

Implementation Decommissioning

Commercial Project Potentially

Commercial Project

Non-Commercial

Project

U Extraction Project

Additional Quantities in Place

U Extraction Project

Development Unclarified

Development Pending

Justified for Development

Approved For Development

On Production

Available in Clays and Residues

Development On Hold

Development Not Viable

IAEA

U concentration in phosphates

Country Deposit U (ppm) Algeria Djebel Onk 25

Djebel Kouif 100

Australia Duchess 80 - 92

China Undifferentiated 10 - 39

Egypt Abu Tartur 40-120

Israel Arad 150

Jordan Shidyia 46

Morocco Bucraa 70-80

Khourigba 80-120

Peru Sechura 47-80

Saudia Arabia Ma’aden 25-85

Senegal Taiba 64-70

Syria Khneifiss 75

Tanzania Minjingu 390

Togo 77 to 110 77-110

Tunisia 12-88

USA North Carolina 41-93

Central Florida 59-200

North Florida 50-143

Idaho 60-141

IAEA

Extraction of U – 3 Waves

• First wave: 1947 – 1963

• Driven by strategic reasons

• Second wave: 1978 – 1998

• Driven by energy boom

• 8 plants in USA during 70s

• Also in Spain, Canada, Belgium, Israel, Iran, Iraq, China (and also in Taiwan, China)

• Third wave: 2005 - ?

• Methods

• Precipitation

• Solvent extraction

• Ion Exchange

• Liquid membrane techniques • Supported Liquid Membranes

• Emulsion Liquid Membranes

IAEA

Solvents Vs Ion exchange

Technology SX (Liquid-Liquid) IX (Solid-liquid)

Process equipment Conventional, proven,

flexible, simple Performance, Kinetics, &

Relative Cost (?)

Hazards Solvent & Diluent Waste Disposal (?)

Capital Cost Relatively High Reported to be low

Operating cost Governed by Solvent Cost &

Loss Reported to be low

Industrial Deployment Proven Yet to be demonstrated

Life cycle performance Adequate data Available Yet to be demonstrated

Disposal Simple, Technology available Bulk active solid effluent (?)

IAEA

Solvent extraction steps

IAEA

Acid cleaning - Pre-treatment

• Most important stage

• Involve 30 – 40 % of plant cost

• Unit operations involve :

• Cooling

• Clarification ( flocculation &

organic removal )

• Valency adjustment

IAEA

New solvents – One example

• D2EHPA-TBP

• Extracts uranium from WPA

• D = 2.5-2.8 for 1.5M D2EHPA – 0.2M TBP

• Cycle-I stripping with MGA under reducing condition, cycle-II stripping with ammonium

carbonate solution [US patent no. 7192563 (2007)]

• Co-extraction of rare earths is better and that of iron is lower as compared with D2EHPA-

TOPO

• Due to higher viscosity of solvent, slower phase separation; needs larger settlers implying

higher solvent hold-up

• Since D lower than D2EHPA-TOPO system, number of stages required is higher; higher

solvent inventory.

• Useful when TOPO is unavailable or it is desired to co-extract rare earths with

uranium.

IAEA

Industrial equipment in Pre-treatment

• Clariflocculator for removal of

suspended solids & organics

• Belt Filter for separation of

solids from clear phosphoric

Acid

• Mixer-settler for organic wash

• Activated Carbon column for organic removal

• Mixing Tanks or

Electrolytic Oxidator /

Reducer for valency

adjustment

Clariflocculator

Electrolytic Oxidator/reducer

IAEA

Industrial Equipment in Extraction

• Mixer-Settler, a conventional

liquid-liquid contacting device

• Centrifugal Extractor, a

more efficient liquid-liquid

contacting device having

advantage of low inventory

• Rotating Disc Contactor, a

preferred liquid-liquid

contacting device for industrial

application due to low foot-

print & ease of automation

Mixer-Settler

IAEA , Safeguard, march 2013

IAEA

Economics

Plant 1o SX On-

Stream Recovery

Capital

Intensity

($/lb/a)

Opex

($/lb)

Years

Operation

W/house DHEPA/TOPO 98% 92% 160 40-50 3

IMC DHEPA/TOPO 92% 96% 280 40-50 3 – 12

URC OPAP 60% 80% 260 140-160 4

Freeport DHEPA/TOPO 92% 95% 190 40-50 17 – 21

Gardinier OPPA ? 90% 170 60-70 3

Note: Operating costs exclude royalties, all cost in 2009US$

IAEA

Urtek study - 2012

• Consistently high uranium recovery (> 90%)

• No crud formation

• Reagent consumptions within expected range

• Purification and concentration of uranium

achieved without significant uranium losses

• Phosphoric acid chemistry unchanged except

for the removal of uranium and other impurities

• 1M short ton of P2O5 phosphate facility

• 880,000 lbs of uranium per annum

• Cash operating costs: $18/lb of U3O8

• Consumables: $6.70/lb of U3O8

• Labor: $1.10/lb of U3O8

• Maintenance: $3.20/lb of U3O8

• Misc. $4.90/lb of U3O8

• Contingency $1.50/lb of U3O8

• Capital cost: $156 million

IAEA

Uranium Production Potential

Annual Capacity : Q PA (T P2O5 / yr)

U-Content : CU (Gm / M3)

P2O5 Concentration : CP2O5 (%)

Acid Density : DPA (T / M3 )

Recovery Efficiency : ή

On-stream Factor : OS (%)

Annual Capacity : QU (T / yr)

QU = ( QPA) * (1/CP2O5) * (1/DPA) * (CU) * (ή/100) * (OS/100) * (10 -6)

100 000 t/yr; 100 mg/lit; 28% P2O5; 90% Recovery & O.S. QU = 25 T U3O8 / Yr

PA Plant

S-X Plant

IAEA , Safeguard, march 2013

IAEA

Conceptual study – (1)

• Fertiliser plant

• Capacities, by product

• Phosphoric acid production flow sheet(s)

• Feed materials (phosphate rock, P2O5)

• Rock phosphate / P2O5 source(s)

• Blends (if known)

• Location

• Utilities

• Water, electricity requirements and supplies

• Extraction efficiency

• P2O5

• known/ likely % of U in P2O5 and PG

• Process technology

• Solvent extraction - eg di-hydrate, hemi-hydrate,

hemi-di-hydrate

• Ion exchange

• other

• Land availability – is there enough room on

site (needs ~ 2ha)

• Likely requirements/ options if off-site

• Ore – Phosphate rock characteristics

• P2O5 grade and homogeneity

• Detailed chemical characterization of the

phosphate ore/ rocks – P2O5, CaO, H2SO4,

Fe2O3, SiO2, Al2O3, MgO, Na2O, F, U3O8,

organic matter, REE, Cr, Fe, U, Si, V, SO2,

CaO etc

• Likely or known U content in phosphate rock -

ppm

• Mineralogy

• Physical characteristics or rock

• Particle size distribution

• Beneficiation required?

• Chemistry of the ore concentrate

• REE content? Could it be a potential by-

product? (Some rock contains 1% or more

REE)

• Th content - ppm

IAEA


• P2O5 characteristics

• P2O5 concentration (%)

• P2O5 content - kg P2O5 / m3

• U content of P2O5 - kg U/m3

• Detailed chemical characterisation of acid –

CaO, H2SO4, Fe2O3, Fe2+, SiO2, Al2O3, MgO,

Na2O, HF, organics/humic matter, solids,

traces, total H+, EMF

• Physical characteristics – temp, density,

viscosity, coloration

• Uranium species – U VI – phosphate -

extractable species vs inextricable?

• Uranium recovery

• Technologies comparison and choice of

process

• High level flow sheet

• Throughput of P2O5 in litres/hour

• Acid pre-treatment – conditioning

required

• Solvents to be used

• Contacting equipment used

• First cycle extraction – stripping

• Second cycle purification of uranium and

precipitation of concentrates

• Acid post treatment

• Organic solvent contamination

• Space requirements for operating plant

• Water requirements

• Dependencies and constraints

• R&D required

• Training

• Cultural issues

IAEA


• Plant Design

• Design basis inputs • Plant battery limits

• Design basis for plant operation

• Production

• Raw materials

• Chemicals and additives

• Utilities

• Design requirements inputs

• Outputs

• Process description • Acid pre-treatment

• Cycle I extraction

• Cycle II extraction

• Precipitation and drying

• Heat and mass balance

• Storage of raw materials and chemicals

• Strategy for regular supply of chemicals

• Engineering design

• Plant organization

• Operation management • Labour source and training

• Do job descriptions exist?

• Staffing and working time

• Salaries

• Are Standard Operating Procedures available?

• Does any current or recent past employee

have operational experience of UxP?

• If not, is a suitable consultant engaged for

advice?

• Are suitably qualified personnel available for

deployment

• Managerial

• Regulatory/ HSE

• Supervisory

• Operator

• Maintenance

• Familiarity with UxP in national/ regional

government or academic laboratories?

IAEA


• Supply Chain

• Are there national requirements/

restrictions on

• Contractor selection eg engineering

company

• Sourcing labour and materials

• Local sourcing or equivalent in

contractual off-set

• Availability, supply and transportation of

solvents, reagents etc

• Socio – Economics

• Are clear and defined national policies

and plans approved for:

• Energy requirements

• Food – fertilizer requirements

• National nuclear programme

• Uranium fuel requirements

• Financing / investment

• Sources and availability

• Return on investment/ return on capital

requirements

• Positive project evaluation.

IAEA


• Regulatory aspects

• Is there an existing regulatory or legal

framework?

• Are there laws in place determining in

advance who owns the uranium once

extracted?

• Are any (experienced) regulators in

place?

• Licensing – is an independent licensing

authority/ agency in place?

• If not, what I the licensing process/

requirement?

• Are stakeholders consulted

• What are the pertaining policies and

procedures for

• Environmental protection

• Waste management

• Radiological protection.

• Health, Safety and Environment

• Site characterisation

• Geology

• Climate

• Groundwater

• Proximity to sensitive areas

• Liquid / solid wastes from uranium plant

• Residue/ waste (eg phosphogypsum)

and its characterisation

• Stakeholder attitudes.

IAEA


• Investment costs • EPC investment costs

• Non-EPC investment costs

• Financial analysis • Energy industry trends, Nuclear fuel demand, Uranium

price forecast

• Economic analysis

• Operating costs

• Annual U production capacity – (from U

content in P2O5, P2O5 throughput, and

assuming 90% (?) recovery – 300 working

days in a year calculate the annual U

production)

• Capital costs?

• Operational costs?

• Direct (chemicals, utilities)

• Fixed (labour, consumables, overheads)

• Financial costs

• Process water / steam, electricity

requirements?

• Economical evaluation

IAEA


• Project implementation

• Project schedule • Go/No Go decision

• EIA

• Basic engineering

• EPC

• Pre-commissioning and commissioning

• Project management

• Project timing

• Decommissioning • Conceptual decommissioning plan

• Financial guarantee

• Timeline

• Chemical analysis - 1 month

• Laboratory tests – 2 months

• Pre-treatment tests – 6 months

• Pilot plant tests – 6 months

• Build 2-3 years

• Operations […]

• Decommissioning [1-2 years?]

Phosphate resources and production - Atoms for Peace · PDF fileDi-Hydrate 22,000 70 ......

Documents

Transcript of Phosphate resources and production - Atoms for Peace · PDF fileDi-Hydrate 22,000 70 ......