Energy Savings and Carbon Footprint Reduction - Jameson vs Conventional Copper Concentrator
CAnderson 1, G Csicsovszki 2, S Crane 3, and G Ballantyne 4
- Glencore Technology, Senior Metallurgist, 180 Ann St, Brisbane Qld 4000,
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. - Glencore Technology, Principal Metallurgist, 180 Ann St, Brisbane Qld 4000,
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. - Ausenco, Process Engineer, 189 Grey Street, South Brisbane QLD 4101,
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. - Ausenco, Director Technical Solutions, 189 Grey Street, South Brisbane QLD 4101,
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
*This paper was presented at MetPlant 2023 held 6-8 November 2023 in Adelaide, Australia. To view the full paper select download file below.
ABSTRACT
Traditional concentrator design involves the use of large mechanical cells of up to 630 m3 to provide sufficient residence time for flotation of ever lower grade ore bodies. Increasingly, companies are required to release Environmental Social Governance (ESG) disclosures for projects and demonstrate savings in both Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions. However, very few benchmarks of emissions in flotation and regrind circuits are available in publications.
An alternative approach using the Jameson Concentrator has previously been demonstrated at New Britannia, Philex and Ozernoye which combines both IsaMill and Jameson Cell technology into a full-concentrator flow sheets to drastically reduce footprint, power, operating cost (OPEX) and capital cost (CAPEX) requirements. However, the benefits in terms of Scope 2 and 3 emissions have yet to be determined.
This paper presents a comparative case study between the Jameson Concentrator and a conventional copper concentrator. Each design is compared on a consistent basis in terms of plant footprint, power consumption, height, and Scope 2 and 3 carbon emissions.
The results demonstrate that the Jameson Concentrator approach results in savings in power consumption and footprint. In addition, both Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions are reduced both during construction and during operation. It was found that the carbon savings during operation of the plant outweighed the emissions savings during construction by several orders of magnitude.