Regarding the copper production at white dam, I wonder if they are having issues with the quality of the product or dewatering as there doesn't appear to be any copper sales to date. From previous presentations it looks like they are dewatering with some primary thickening (maybe flocculant??) and maybe geobags. Looking at some other SART plant flow diagrams on google, its looks pretty common to use mechanical dewatering units like a belt/filter press to dry the copper product, which also enables washing to remove contaminates. I understand this would require more capex/opex but it would be good to understand whether or not this would provide a cost benefit.
After reading some papers on previous testwork using SART: https://www.ausenco.com/download/10936,https://www.sgs.com/-/media/global/documents/technical-documents/sgs-technical-papers/sgs-min-tp2008-51-application-of-sart-to-heap-leaching-of-gold-copper.pdf, https://www.911metallurgist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/SART-for-copper-control-in-cyanide-heap.pdf; there were a couple of things highlighted particularly around dewatering. From one of the reports I read, it mentioned that the copper sulphide precipitant is very fine and the Recycle of ‘seed’ crystals does not appear to result in larger crystal growth. Just wondering how this may impact on thickening/retention time without mechanical aid and therefore allow any free cyanide to re-dissolve the copper?
Please note, this is pure speculation and I am most likely talking s&*t from my 30mins of research. The GBM team to date have been really impressive, using their skills/knowledge to make something from nothing . It would just be really interesting to see flowsheet for the SART plant to understand this bit more.
