Mining Industry Profile: Copper
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 206/Friday, October 24, 2014/Rules
63540 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 2014 / Rules and Regulations ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION deletion of these parcels does not were to contain and control sources of AGENCY preclude future actions under contamination. Surface water and Superfund. ground water quality were not 40 CFR Part 300 DATES: This action is effective October specifically addressed in the remedies [EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9918– 24, 2014. for these operable units. Site-wide water quality is specifically addressed in 37–Region 8] ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket OU12, which is an active operable unit. National Oil and Hazardous Identification No. EPA–HQ–SFUND– Under OU12, response action can be Substances Pollution Contingency 1983–0002. All documents in the docket conducted anywhere on the Site if Plan; National Priorities List: Partial are listed on the http:// needed to address releases that impact Deletion of the California Gulch www.regulations.gov Web site. Although or may impact water quality goals in the Superfund Site listed in the index, some information is Arkansas River. In OU4, OU5 and OU7, all responses actions have been AGENCY: Environmental Protection not publicly available, i.e., Confidential completed and institutional controls are Agency. Business Information or other in place. A responsiveness summary ACTION: Final rule. information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other was prepared and placed in both the SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection material, such as copyrighted material, docket, EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002, Agency (EPA) Region 8 announces the is not placed on the Internet and will be on www.regulations.gov, and in the deletion of the Operable Unit 4 (OU4), publicly available only in hard copy local repository listed above. -
Freeport-Mcmoran Annual Report 2020
Freeport-McMoRan Annual Report 2020 Form 10-K (NYSE:FCX) Published: February 14th, 2020 PDF generated by stocklight.com UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark one) ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 ☒ For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 OR TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 ☐ For the transition period from to Commission file number: 001-11307-01 Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 74-2480931 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) incorporation or organization) 333 North Central Avenue Phoenix Arizona 85004-2189 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) (602) 366-8100 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered Common Stock, par value $0.10 per share FCX The New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act ☑ Yes ☐ No Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. ☐ Yes ☑ No Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. -
Sierrita Mine from Mine to Me How Copper Ore Becomes Copper Wire
Sierrita Mine From Mine to Me How copper ore becomes copper wire Arizona Copper Mines 3 Copper Sulfide Ore 5 Copper Oxide Ore 8 Exploration 11 Open Pit Mining 22 Crushing and Milling 37 Flotation 46 Smelting 54 Leaching Oxide Ore 71 2012 Heap Leaching 76 by Jan C. Rasmussen, Ph.D. Solvent Extraction 82 Electrowinning 87 Fabricating - Rod Mill 96 Electrorefining 100 Reclamation 112 Uses of Copper 118 2 Arizona Copper Mines • Bagdad • Bisbee • Carlota • Hayden Smelter • Johnson Camp • Miami • Mineral Park • Mission • Morenci • Pinto Valley • Ray • Resolution • Rosemont X San Manuel • Safford • San Manuel • Sierrita X Bisbee • Silver Bell • Tohono 3 Copper sulfide ore and copper oxide ore are processed in different ways. Exploration Mining Concentrating Sulfide Ore Copper Products Smelting To Customer Rod, Cake, and Cathode Oxide Ore Leaching Solvent Extraction Electrowinning Refining Copper Anodes to Texas Copper Product to Customer (Ray and Silver Bell) 4 Cathode Sulfide ore: Chalcopyrite & Bornite Chalcopyrite Chalcopyrite can be called copper fool’s gold. It is made of copper, iron, and sulfur. It is a brassy yellow, metallic mineral and it is very heavy. Chalcopyrite is not as hard as pyrite, which is called fool’s gold. Chalcopyrite will not scratch glass, but will scratch a copper penny. Pyrite will scratch glass. Chalcopyrite is also a brighter yellow than pyrite. It often tarnishes to a blue-green, iridescent color on weathered surfaces. Chalcopyrite is the main copper sulfide ore. Chalcocite Bornite is also known as Peacock Copper because of the blue-green tarnish. On freshly broken surfaces, it is Chalcocite is a sooty black, bronze colored. -
Kennecott Utah Copper-Sustainable Over Time PHOTOS/VIDEO AUDIO
1 UNIVERSITY OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF MINING ENGINEERING PRESENTATION to IMOA by Louie Cononelos “Kennecott Utah Copper-Sustainable Over Time PHOTOS/VIDEO AUDIO This is a story that had its beginning over 150 ago…and that story is still being written today. It began in Bingham Canyon, Utah located about 26 miles southwest of Salt Lake City, which was destined to become one of the greatest “mining camps” anywhere in the country. Mining in Utah, which was part of Spanish Mexico, can be traced back to Spanish miners in the mid-1700s. The start of mining in Utah, however, is credited to the United States Army in 1863. Troops under the command of Colonel Patrick Connor are credited with the discovery of Utah’s first mining claim and helping to form the first mining company and mining district in Bingham Canyon. The early mining at Bingham was underground with the exception of placer mining. 2 Bingham Canyon was a beehive of mining activity at the turn of the Century. Dozens of small companies dug tunnels and sank shafts in the mountains where they were mining lead, silver and gold ores…but not the low- grade copper ores that were in abundance and considered a nuisance. Then, along came Daniel C. Jackling, a 29-year-old metallurgical engineer, who with his partner, a mining engineer named Robert Gemmell, studied and assayed ore samples from the operations that dotted the canyon. They determined that there were vast tonnages of low- grade copper ore in the main mountain that divided the canyon…it was the kind of ore the mining companies tried to avoid because it interfered with the recovery of the metals they were mining. -
Transforming Lives and Advancing Economic Opportunity: EPA's
TRANSFORMING LIVES and ADVANCING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY: EPA’s Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training Program Preparing Unemployed and Underemployed Residents of Waste- Impacted Communities for Full-time Environmental Careers United States Environmental Protection Agency This page is intentionally left blank. B TRANSFORMING LIVES AND ADVANCING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY Contents Introduction ..................................................................................1 Superfund Site Cleanup ...............................................................5 • St. Louis Community College, Missouri ...........................................5 • Cypress Mandela Training Center, California ................................8 Solid Waste Management .........................................................13 • Zender Environmental Health and Research Group, Alaska ........13 • Northwest Regional Workforce Investment Board, Connecticut ...16 Wastewater Management ...........................................................20 • Rose State College, Oklahoma .....................................................20 • OAI, Inc. — Greencorps Chicago, Illinois .....................................22 Emergency Planning and Response ..........................................27 • Florida State College at Jacksonville, Florida ..............................27 • The Fortune Society, New York ....................................................30 Renewable Energy Installation ...................................................34 • City of Richmond, California -
Effects of Hydrothermal Alteration on the Geomechanics of Degradation at the Bagdad Mine, Arizona
Effects of Hydrothermal Alteration on the Geomechanics of Degradation at the Bagdad Mine, Arizona Item Type text; Electronic Thesis Authors Coutinho, Paulo Citation Coutinho, Paulo. (2020). Effects of Hydrothermal Alteration on the Geomechanics of Degradation at the Bagdad Mine, Arizona (Master's thesis, University of Arizona, Tucson, USA). Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction, presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 05/10/2021 14:56:11 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/648603 EFFECTS OF HYDROTHERMAL ALTERATION ON THE GEOMECHANICS OF DEGRADATION AT THE BAGDAD MINE, ARIZONA by Paulo Coutinho ______________________________________________________________________________ Copyright © Paulo Coutinho 2020 A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN MINING, GEOLOGICAL, AND GEOPHYSICAL ENGINEERING In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2020 2 3 Acknowledgements I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to my advisors, Dr. John Kemeny and Dr. Isabel Barton, for their crucial role in guiding me through my graduate studies. I would also like to thank my thesis committee members, Mr. Keith Taylor, for his valuable support and enlightening comments. Dr. Sergio Castro Reino for his resources and experience involving rock mass degradation. Furthermore, I would like to thank my coworkers at Freeport McMoRan Inc. for providing me geology and geological engineering knowledge pertaining to the Bagdad deposit, and Call & Nicholas for their constructive criticisms regarding my modeling techniques. -
The Primary Copper Industry of Arizona in 1983 Special Report No
SR·8 THE PRIMARY COPPER INDUSTRY OF ARIZONA IN 1983 SPECIAL REPORT NO. 8 14 KINGMAN 10 BAGDAD 20 22 AJO 6 TUiSON I 11 25• 2-3 51 ~ BISBEE 23. DOUGLAS• BY CLIFFORD J. HICKS FIELD ENGINEER ARIZONA ·DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND MINERAL RESOURCES BOARD OF GOVERNORS Edna Vinck-Globe_ Brian Donnelly-Phoenix Chairman Vice Chairman Richard C. Cole·Pinetop Donald Hart-Phoenix Secretary Member John H. Jett Director ABOUT THE COVER The producing copper mines and operations listed below correspond to the location and numbers on the cover. COMPANY #. Mi·ne ANAMAX MINING COMPANY RANCHERS EXPLORATION &DEVELOPMENT CORP. 1.. -Twi n Buttes 26. Bl uebi rd 2. Eisenhower 27. Old Reliable ASARCO INCORPORATED 2. Eisenhower 3. Mission 4. Sacaton 5. San Xavier 6. Silver Bell CITIES SERVICE COMPANY/PINTO VALLEY COPPER CORP. 7. Copper Cities Operations 8. Miami Mine 9. Pinto Valley CYPRUS MINES CORP. 10. Bagdad 11. Johnson 12. Pima DUVAL CORP. 13. Esperanza 14. Mineral Park 15. Sierrita INSPIRATION CONSOLIDATED COPPER CO. 16. Christmas 17. Inspiration 18. Oxhide Mine KENNECOTT CORPORATION 19. Ray MAGMA COPPER CO. 20. San Manuel 21. Superior NORANDA LAKESHORE MINES, INC. 22. Lakeshore PHELPS DODGE CORP. 23. Copper Queen Branch 24. Morenci Branch Metca 1f t,1i ne Morenci Mine 25. New Cornelia ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The author wishes to express appreciation to individual Arizona copper mining companies and Lorraine Burgin of the U.S. Bureau of Mines for providing production and other data. Additionally, thanks are extended to Nyal Niemuth, Mineral Resources Specialist, Arizona Department of Mines and Mineral Resources for his valuable advice and assis tance in the compilation of some of the contained tables. -
The Primary Copper Industry of Arizona 1985 By
SR-10 THE PRIMARY COPPER INDUSTRY " ~ ! OF ARIZONA ~ ~ ... IN 1985 SPECIAL REPORT NO. 10 .. l$i,"'. - ~ ! 20 22 AJO • 6 TU~SON I 11 25 2-3 51 ~ BISBEE 23. DOUGLAS• '" BY ~ RICHARD R. BEARD MINING ENGINEER ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND MINERAL RESOURCES ERRATA - THE PRIMARY COPPER INDUSTRY OF ARIZONA IN 1985 Page 1 Last sentence of second paragraph should read: By-products of the copper mines (gold, silver and molybdenum) contributed approximately 7.5% more which ma~es the contribution of the copper mines more than 81% of the total. Table XXIII --ACfCf: Company - Freeport McMorRan Deposit - Santa Cruz Major Mineral Type - Oxide Millions of Tons - 800 Average Copper Content - .43 Remarks - 50% joint venture with ASARCO 11/86 ------ABOUT THE COVER The producing copper mines and operations listed below correspond to the locations and numbers on the cover. COMPANY #. Mine ANAMAX MINING COMPANY PHELPS DODGE CORP. 1. Twin Buttes 23. Copper Queen Branch 2. Eisenhower 24. Morenci Branch Metcalf Mine ASARCO INCORPORATED Morenci ~1i ne 2. Ei senhower 25. New Cornelia 3. Mission Complex 4. Sacaton PINTO VALLEY COPPER CORP. 6. Silver Bell ~opper Cities 8. Mi ami Mi ne CYPRUS MINES CORP. 9. Pinto Valley 10. Bagcraa--- II. Johnson DUVAL ~speranza 14. Mineral Park 15. Sierrita INSPIRATION CONSOLIDATED COPPER CO. 16. Christmas 17. Inspiration Mines KENNECOTT CORPORATION 19. Ray MAGMA COPPER CO. 20. San Manue-l-- 21. Superior NORANDA LAKESHORE MINES, INC. 22. Lakeshore THE PRIMARY COPPER INDUSTRY OF ARIZONA IN 1985 Special Report Number 10 By Richard R. Beard, Mining Engineer October 1986 ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND MINERAL RESOURCES JOHN H. -
Failure to Capture and Treat Wastewater
U.S. OPERATING COPPER MINES: FAILURE TO CAPTURE & TREAT WASTEWATER BY BONNIE GESTRING, MAY 2019 In 2012, Earthworks released a report documenting the failure to capture and treat mine wastewater at U.S. operating copper mines accounting for 89% of U.S. copper production.1 The report found that 92% failed to capture and control mine wastewater, resulting in significant water quality impacts. This is an update to that effort. We reviewed government and industry documents for fifteen operating open-pit copper mines, representing 99% of U.S. copper production in 2015 – the most recent data on copper production available from the U.S. Geological Survey (see Table 1). Our research found similar results: 14 out of 15 (93%) failed to capture and control wastewater, resulting in significant water quality impacts (see TaBle 2). These unauthorized wastewater releases occurred from a number of different sources including uncontrolled seepage from tailings impoundments, waste rock piles, open pits, or other mine facilities, or failure of water treatment facilities, pipeline failures or other accidental releases. TABLE 1: Copper production from top 15 (as of 2015) U.S. open-pit copper mines (most recent data availaBle from USGS).2 MINE PRODUCTION (metric tons) Morenci 481,000 Chino 142,000 Safford 91,600 Bagdad 95,300 Bingham Canyon 92,000 Sierrita 85,700 Ray 75,100 Pinto Valley 60,400 Mission CompleX 68,300 Robinson 56,800 Tyrone 38,100 Continental pit 31,000 PhoeniX 21,100 Miami 19,500 Silver Bell 19,300 Total (99% of U.S. production) 1,377,000 U.S. -
Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment for the Upper Arkansas Ri Ve R Watershed Dated January 7, 2010
Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment for the April 14, 2010 Upper Arkansas River Watershed PREPARED FOR PREPARED BY U.S. Department of the Interior State of Colorado Stratus Consulting Inc. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department of Natural Resources PO Box 4059 U.S. Bureau of Land Management Department of Public Health and Environment Boulder, CO 80306-4059 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Department of Law 303-381-8000 Contact: Diana R. Lane, PhD or Allison Ebbets, MS List of Authorities and Responsible Agency Point of Contact Natural Resource Trustees: • U.S. Department of the Interior - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - U.S. Bureau of Land Management - U.S. Bureau of Reclamation • State of Colorado - Department of Natural Resources - Department of Public Health and Environment - Department of Law Legal Authority: • Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (as amended), 42 U.S.C. § 9601, et. seq. • Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) (as amended), 33 U.S.C. § 1251, et. seq. • Natural Resource Damage Assessment Regulation, 43 C.F.R. Part 11 Lead Federal Agency for Restoration Plan: • U.S. Department of the Interior (Region 6, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) Lead Federal Agency for Environmental Assessment: • U.S. Department of the Interior (Region 6, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) Participating State Agencies: • Colorado Department of Natural Resources - Division of Wildlife, Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety • Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment • Colorado Department of Law Point of Contact: Laura Archuleta U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Saguache Field Offi ce 46525 Highway 114 Saguache, CO 81149 719-655-6121 SC11902 Upper Arkansas River Watershed Restoration Plan and Environmental Contents Assessment Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... -
U.S.Copper Porphyry Mines and Water Quality
U.S. Copper Porphyry Mines Report THE TRACK RECORD OF WATER QUALITY IMPACTS RESULTING FROM PIPELINE SPILLS, TAILINGS FAILURES AND WATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT FAILURES. JULY 2012 (REVISED 11/2012) TM EARTHWORKS U.S. COPPER PORPHYRY MINES: The track record of water quality impacts resulting from pipeline spills, tailings failures and water collection and treatment failures. EARTHWORKS, July 2012 (Revised 11/2012) By Bonnie Gestring Reviewed by Dave Chambers Ph. D., Center for Science in Public Participation (CSP2) TM EARTHWORKS Photos, top to bottom: TM Yankee Doodle tailings pond by Ecofight EARTHWORKS Chino Mine by Gila Resource Information Project (GRIP) Sierrita Mine by Ecofight Bird fatality at Tyrone Mine by Jim Kuipers TM EARTHWORKS TM EARTHWORKS Table of Contents ! Introduction, Methods, & Results ..................................................................................................... 4 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………………………………5 ! Table 1: Copper production amounts for mines reviewed in the report ................................... 6 Table 2. Synopsis of pipeline spills, tailings spills and impoundment failures, and water capture and treatment failures for 14 copper porphyry mines (1986-2012). ............... 7 Case Studies of Active U.S. Copper Porphyry Mines ! Morenci Mine, AZ…………………………………………………………………………………. 8 Bingham Canyon, UT .......................................................................................................... 10 Ray Mine, AZ ....................................................................................................................... -
Economic Conditions Cause Re-Evaluation of El Paso Plant Investment/Goals
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For media information contact: Teresa Montoya 915-204-4401 [email protected] ECONOMIC CONDITIONS CAUSE RE-EVALUATION OF EL PASO PLANT INVESTMENT/GOALS El Paso, February 3, 2009 – Today ASARCO LLC informed the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) that it does not intend to reopen its El Paso, Texas Copper Plant. The decision is based on the dramatic downturn of the world economy in the last six months. Thomas L. Aldrich, Vice President of Environmental Affairs commented, “We’ve always believed that an operating copper smelter is the best use of our property in El Paso and we have worked hard toward the goal of reopening the smelter. Unfortunately, due to the extreme economic conditions world wide that have occurred during the last six months, we can no longer financially afford to continue pursuing that goal.” ASARCO is working with the state of Texas to fund a custodial trust for the demolition of the plant and remediation of the site. Any custodial trust must be approved by the bankruptcy court that is overseeing ASARCO’s reorganization effort. Today’s decision will not affect ASARCO’s operating copper refinery in Amarillo, Texas. Aldrich added, “We’re deeply saddened by this decision and we’d like to thank all of our many supporters in El Paso and Texas. We also want to assure the community that we’re working to ensure that our property is left in a condition that will be an asset to a great community that we have enjoyed working and living in for more than 110 years.” Asarco has been a proud part of El Paso since 1887.