Heap Leach Pads

Authors:
- Amit Kumar (Norman B. Keevil Institute of Mining Engineering - University of British Columbia);
- Fergus Murphy (Robertson GeoConsultants)
Revised: July 2012
In This Review

Summary

Introduction

Design

Types of Heap Leach Pads

Components of a Leach Pad

Geosynthetics in Heap Leach

Ore Preparation

Operation

Cold Climate Heap Leaching Operations

Closure

Heap Leach Technology

Quality Control

Permitting

Consultants

Courses

Books

Software

Summary
This review looks at the basic concepts of heap leaching and describes the various types of
heap leach pads. It also explains the design considerations for heap leach pads.
Performance and stability of the pads are also discussed, and links to several software are
given.

INTRODUCTION
Heap leaching is the process to extract precious metals like gold, silver, copper and
uranium from their ore by placing them on a pad (a base) in a heap and sprinkling a
leaching solvent, such as cyanide or acids, over the heap. This process dissolves the metals
and they collect at the bottom of the pad. The metal is then further processed. This
methodology is mostly used for low-grade ores, and the basic processing steps involve
crushing and sometime grinding.
The stages for heap leaching can be described as:
1. Ground Preparation and pad construction: Here the soil on a slightly sloping ground is
compacted and covered by an impermeable pad (can be made of plastic).
2. Ore stacking: Then the crushed ore is stacked in the form of big heaps. Amount of fines
is decreases as low as possible to improve permeability.
3. Then the leaching agent such as cyanide or acid is sprayed over the heap.
4. As, the reagent passes through the heap; the valuable metals get dissolved in it.
5. The solution containing metal is drained from the heap and collected in a pond and the
solution is sent for subsequent process for metal recovery.
Here is an illustration of the process:

This diagram is from http://wiki.biomine.skelleftea.se/wiki/

DESIGN
Let us now take a look at what the general guidelines say about the construction of heap
leach facilities. "This Guideline provides the minimum Environmental Health and Safety
(EHS) requirements for the design, construction, operation, management and closure of
tailings, heap leach and water storage facilities. This Guideline does not replace any
regulatory or authoritative industry Guideline or Standard."
Conceptually there are a number of designs of heap leach pads to consider. The design will
be determined by the geography, amount of space available or climate. The principal types
available are:

Reusable Pad
Expanding Pad
Valley Method

For further detail on these I would recommend studying the Leach Pad & Facilities section
on the EduMine course on Heap Leach Pads. A very brief overview of these three pad
designs can be found on this Golder Associates Publication.

Source: Design and Operation of Heap Leach Pads - by John F. Lupo (Golder
Associates)
In terms of the current methodologies in today's Heap Leach designs, Richard Thiel's
publication on the current State of Practice, offers much insight into the thinking behind
their design.
"The critical aspects of heap leach design, from a geotechnical and containment
perspective, can be summarized as depth of the ore (or equipment loads for on/off pads),
presence of water and local terrain."
The main geotechnical concerns of the design include:
Slope Stability

Global and deep-seated failures due to extreme heights and base pressures

Sliding block stability along geomembrane interfaces

Effects of active leaching, with elevated degrees of saturation

Long-term chemical and biological degradation of ore

First-lift stability affected by lift thickness (5m to 50m) and stacking direction

Seismic Stability

Liquefaction

Earthquake-induced failures

Possible static liquefaction flowslides

Water Management

Tropical installations can have large surplus water balances

Designs include interim catch benches and temporary caps

Phreatic levels range from 1 to 60m over the base liner

Liner Durability & Leakage

Coarse rock "overliner" systems

Extreme pressures caused by weight of heap and equipment

Durability against chemical attack - especially for 96% H2SO4

Valley fill systems create very high solution levels

Slope Stability
When heaping ore for leaching, the stacking heights can in some cases reach 100m in
height, so an analysis of slope stability is of high importance. In general space is also
limited in mining operations so there is an economic incentive maximise the volume of the
ore that can be placed on a lined facility. Breitenback's paper on slope stability in heap
leach he analyses the factors in heap leach construction that slope stability is calculated
upon, and concludes that:
"analyses for construction of loosely placed ore heap fills is typically conservative for safe
operations and do not consider the increase in fill and liner strength with time during
operations"

In order to analyse the slope stability of the heap leach pad, a slope stability modelling
software such as SLOPE/W could be used. Industry standard methods and/or computer
programs may be used to evaluate the factor of safety of the slopes of Heap Leach Pads.
Key to the use of any of these programs is the geometry of the Heap Leach Pad, the
strength of the ore as placed in the pad, and the angle of friction between the liner beneath
the pad and the materials placed directly above the liner.
Seismic Stability
Thiel remarks that while standard circular and block type failure analysis is important and
can be used, but attention should also be paid to liquefaction due to areas in the pile which
have become locally saturated due to leach solution irrigation. The response of a Heap
Leach Pad to an earthquake depends on the magnitude of the event, the properties of the
materials in the pad, and the liner interface strength. The paper "Simplified Liquefaction
Analysis for Leach Heaps and Dumps" gives a basic overview of the factors that affect
liquefaction and how to militate against this. The seismic stability of the cover is something
that would also have to be considered after heap leaching has concluded. Methods used in
the landfill industry to evaluate the seismic response of landfills are also to quantify the
potential for liner sliding and mass deformation. This is documented by Kavazanjian &
Matasovic in their publication on hazardous wastes.
Erosion
Control of erosion during operation of the HLP is generally best affected by appropriate
surface contouring as part of the placement of the ore on the HLP, by limiting runon, and by
directing runoff to sediment control dams and basins. See the TechnoMine review on this
topic.

TYPES OF HEAP LEACH PADS

Different researchers have classified leach pads into different categories.
Dirk Van Zyl (2012) has classified heap leach pads into three categories: Reusable/On-Off
pads, Valley fills and expanding pads.
John F. Lupo divided leach pads into four categories: Dedicated (single use pads),
Reusable/On-Off pads, Valley fills and Hybrid pads.
Richard Thiel and Mark E. Smith divided them into four categories: Conventional or flat
pads, dump leach pads, valley fills and on/off pads.
Richard Thiel and Mark E. Smith also explained the key geotechnical concerns of leach
pads as:

Source: State of the Practice Review of Heap Leach Pad Design Issues. Richard Thiel and
Mark E. Smith. 2003.

COMPONENTS OF A LEACH PAD

Pad Liner system: Liner system selection depends mostly on the type of material and the
thickness of the layer.

Dirk Van Zyl described the liner for a heap leach pad system as:

For more information on liner systems, please click here.

Pond Liner system:

Leach Solution collection system: It's a combination of pipes and filter material which is
installed directly on top of the liner.
Ore stacking system: It can be dozer and dumpers, conveyor and radial arm stackers or
combination of these units.

GEOSYNTHETICS IN HEAP LEACH

Liner
The Liner system employed is one of the most crucial aspects associated with the
construction of a heap leach facility. As noted in the above section, there are many factors
that are considered before laying down any synthetic material at the base of the heap leach
pad. According to Lupo, the geomembrane which is tasked with containing the lixiviant is
only one part of the general liner configuration, which depends on the type of leach facility
(single use, on-off, or valley pad). Components include:
i. Foundation
ii. Underliner
iii. Geomembrane
iv. Overliner materials
Each of these components are discussed in detail in Lupo's paper.
Foundation: The ideal foundation is one that consists of homogeneous, firm materials. A
firm foundation is desirable to minimize settlements under loads which would translate to
strain on the geomembrane liner and the piping networks in the overliner. However, ideal
foundation conditions are seldom encountered in mine sites that may be located anywhere
from the high Andean mountains of South America to the marshlands in central Asia.
Underliner: An integral component of any liner system is the underliner material. The
purpose of the underliner is to provide a low-permeability layer beneath the geomembrane
liner to minimize leakage of leach solutions from the facility. Ideally, the underliner should
consist of fine-grained soils with the following characteristics:
Maximum particle size - 38 mm
Non-gap graded particle size distribution -- moderate to high fines (minus 200 mesh)
content
Moderate plasticity
Saturated hydraulic conductivity of 1x10-6cm/sec or less
Since the underliner is in direct contact with the geomembrane, the internal and interface
shear strength of the underliner are very important. The design of the underliner material is
a balance between permeability and shear strength.
Geomembrane Liner: The geomembrane liner is the primary component in a liner system.
Common geomembrane liner materials used in the design of heap leach facilities include
Linear Low Density Polyethylene (LLDPE), High Density Polyethylene (HDPE), and
Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC), with the majority of facilities being constructed using LLDPE
and HDPE. When selecting a geomembrane type, it is important to consider all of the

properties of the liner with respect to the anticipated loading conditions, local climatic
conditions, experience of installation crew, and local construction conditions. In addition,
the thickness and type of geomembrane liner should consider the following factors:
o Foundation settlement and maximum strain;
o Anticipated ore loads;
o Underliner material characteristics (maximum particle size, internal, and interface
friction);
o Overliner material characteristics (maximum particle size, internal, and interface friction);
and
o Slope stability requirements for the facility.
Overliner: Depending on the type of ore and leaching process, the overliner layer may
consist of the following configurations:
o Single, permeable drainage layer with or without solution collection piping;
o Compacted, low permeability protection layer overlain by permeable drainage layer with
Solution collection piping; and
o Single, permeable drainage layer with solution collection piping, overlain by a permeable
protection layer with or without air injection piping.
Testing: Prior to the placement of any geosynthetic barrier in a heap leach pad, extensive
testing must be carried out to determine what the effect of normal operation will be on the
liner system. The Use of Geosynthetics in Mining Works includes a detailed study of
geosynthetic components and their selection. They acknowledge that because of the harsh
conditions in the area of heap leach pads, the correct choice of the synthetic liner is crucial.
The specified geomembrane has to survive:

High chemical attack

Point loads from mineral drainage layer on top of the geomembrane (requirement of
a geotextile)

Heap loading conditions

Site specific topography

Site specific climate conditions

Site specific construction conditions (quality control during liner installation and
installation of initial mineral layers)

The thickness and the type of geomembrane (e. g. raw material, surface structure) have to
be determined. Geomembrane thicknesses between 1 mm and 3 mm have been used (5 mm
in tanks) (Defilippis M.O.). In the area of heap leach pads typically 1.5 mm thick
geomembranes are common.

The selection of the geomembrane thickness can be derived using the "Liner-Load Test"
used by Giroud (1995), reference in paper. For liner-load tests, rock particles are manually
placed on the underliner surface and directly on the geomembrane to simulate field
conditions. The paper gives an important key to choose the geomembrane thickness.
Nevertheless it is a laboratory approach which cannot cover all possible risks. Long term
creep of the geomembrane at point loads and stress cracking cannot be proven with this
laboratory approach.
Many of the leaks that develop in heap leach facilities are related to rock particles left on
the underliner surface or that have collected at the bottom of the mineral drainage layer. As
the leach pad is loaded with ore, point loads (from the rock particles) develop on the
geomembrane surface, resulting in puncture. Details of the experiment types carried out are
also included in this paper.
Interestingly the manufacture's point of view can also be understood from SL Limitada's
publication on the use of geosynthetics in heap leach. Testing is carried out with respect to
density, thickness, stress crack resistance, oxidative induction time (OIT) and delamination
to get a better idea of the durability of a geosynthetic system.
Leak Detection: Often a leak detection layer can be employed in the design of a heap leach
pad. Their use in double liner systems is used to control the head on the lower liner system.
According to Lupo the performance of this leak detection layer is measured through its
ability to achieve these goals:
o Prevent puncture of the upper and lower geomembranes. This can be evaluated by
conducting a series of liner-load tests;
o Provide sufficient permeability under load to allow collection of leakage solution, if it
occurs;
o Sufficient internal shear strength to maintain heap stability under anticipated loads; and
o Sufficient interface shear strength to maintain heap stability under anticipated loads.
Thiel, Beck & Smith have run a cost-benefit analysis on the installation of leak detection
system on both copper and gold mining operations. They conclude that the probability of
the system's installation being economical is 96 & 97% respectively.
Drainage Collection: It is also important to remember that the collection system you use at
the base of your heap leach system will also be subject to the load of the ore placed on top
of the rest of the pad. Thiel & Smith bring forth the idea of soil compressibility in terms of
stress distribution on the pipe. They remark "The more compacted the soil, the less
deformation and stress the pipe will receive. Terzaghi's famous arching equation relates the
stress on the pipe to the friction angle of the adjacent soil, presuming a granular soil. Most
overliner material indeed is granular, and internal shear strengths of well over 35 degrees
would be expected for the crushed stone usually employed at mine sites". Details of testing
can be found in this paper and also in Lupo's paper.

ORE PREPARATION

Agglomeration
"The formation of a lump by the coalescence of smaller globules; refers to briquetting,
nodulizing, sintering, etc".
A persistent cause of failure of heap leach operations is the presence of excess fines in the
materials placed on the pad. Excess fines results in a low permeability material and thus the
seepage rate of the lixiviant is too slow for economic pad operations.
A similar situation occurs if you intend to leach tailings. Generally tailings are primarily
clay and siltthe seepage rate of most lixiviants through these fine-grained, low
permeability materials is generally too slow for cost-effective heap leaching.
It may be possible to agglomerate the fines in the ore or the tailings to be leached. This
normally involves adding a binder to the fines so that the resulting material consists of
individual particles that are larger than the original material and hence of higher
permeability.
Additives for effective agglomeration vary greatly and depend on the ore type and
gradation, the chemistry of the ore and the lixiviant, and the physical characteristics of the
heap leach pad, including the height and the stresses imposed on the agglomerated fine
grained materials.
Typical agglomerating materials include Portland cement, lime, or ash for gold ores.
Polymers have been used for coppers ores. In some cases, after crushing, sulfide ores may
be treated by roasting, autoclaving, bio-oxidations, or chlorination prior to heap leaching.
The web notes these recent patent applications for agglomeration additives:
No 6428597: Methods and compositions for increasing the recovery of precious metals
from ore during heap leaching operations are disclosed. The methods add polypropylene
glycol and alkylphenol ethoxylate in a paraffin oil solvent with the cyanide lixiviant to the
ore heap.
No 5186915: Agglomerating agent and method for use in heap leaching of mineral bearing
ores. A moderate to high molecular weight anionic polymer in combination with lime
provides a highly effective agglomerating agent. The anionic polymer is preferably a
copolymer of acrylamide and acrylic acid. The polymer preferably has a molecular weight
of about 1 to 8 million or higher.
Crushing & Preconditioning

In addition to agglomeration, increasing the leachability of the ore may be carried out
through further crushing, and preconditioning. The economic return associated with these
increased process costs should be considered, through column testing etc., before
implementation on the heap leach pad. This paper analyses the increased return of gold ores
with crushing with regards to heap leaching.
In some cases the economics can be quite favorable. This link for a low grade gold ore
body suggests that "leach operation requiring only a minor crush or perhaps even no
crushing at all are feasible".

OPERATION

Application of Lixiviant
The materials in a heap leach pad constitute a heterogeneous, anisotropic mass. Material
hydraulic conductivities vary greatly from point to point. This random variation from point
to point of hydraulic conductivity is the result of the inherent in-situ variability in the ore
being mined, variations in the comminution of the ore as a result of blasting, loading, and
dumping, and segregation and blinding that occur during placement
While it is tempting to think of seepage of leach solution and lixiviants as a uniform
vertically downward flow regime, this is not the case. The paths that the solution will take
as it flows down through the mass of heap leach material will depend on these, and
probably many other factors:

The heterogeneity of the mass, and hence the presence and pattern of channels or
paths of greater permeability.

The moisture content of the ore which depend on the moisture content as mines, as
placed, and as resulting from ambient conditions including antecedent rainfall
percolation

The rate and pattern of application of the solution and lixiviant.

O'Kane Consultants have carried out much research into the area and they note:
Layers of coarse and fine textured ore inevitably develop within heap and dump leach piles
as natural processes segregate coarse and fine material during material placement.
Segregation of heap leach material will occur regardless of whether the material is
agglomerated or non-agglomerated... Under such conditions leaching solution flows
preferentially in the more conductive layer, potentially leaving areas within the heap
unleached. The preferred flow path is not dependent entirely on the physical properties of

each layer, but also on the stress state and resulting degree of saturation, and therefore the
solution application rate. For this reason either the coarse or the finer material can be the
preferred flow path.
Thus it is not quite as simple as multiplying the area of the pad by the saturated hydraulic
conductivity if you want to establish the maximum possible application rate.

If you do succeed in applying enough solution to the top of the pad to create fully saturated
flow through the heap leach materials, you will certainly be getting lots of solution through
the materials, but you may not be getting the metal recovery you seek or could achieve by
less aggressive solution application.
To quote O'Kane again:
Column testing revealed that solution application rates greater than the saturated hydraulic
conductivity of the finer material resulted in preferential flow in the coarser layer. The
preferred flow path became the finer textured material when application rates were less
than the saturated hydraulic conductivity of the fine material.
In other words, to get the metal out of the finer materials and into the solution, you need to
get the solution to seep through these finer materials. And that happens best when the
material is partially saturated, and the seepage retreats, as it were, into the finer channels.
This leads to the counterintuitive conclusion: to increase recovery, it may be better to
reduce solution application rates, rather than increase them.
Keep in mind also if you increase application rates too much you may create a saturated
zone near the base of the pad, and that could induce slope failure.

Here is a random result from the web that supports the greater recovery from finer material
concept:
Samples were subjected to leach ranging from 6", 4", 2" and 1" top crush size. The samples
were subjected to various amounts and rates of acid addition to the column leaches. The
following results have been reported by Plenge Labs for some selected samples. 1" top size
intrusive mineralization containing 0.33% total copper of which 53.5% was cyanide soluble
copper was subjected to an acid cure and leached in a ferric sulfate environment for 295
days. The intrusive sample leached well and 72.9% of the total copper was leached. The
sample consumed 25.7 kg/t sulfuric acid. Non-cyanide soluble appeared to leach well and
the mineralization was still producing copper at the time the leach was terminated. 4" top
size intrusive mineralization containing 0.33% total copper, of which 53.5% was cyanide
soluble copper, was subjected to a leach using an application rate of leach solution of 15
L/hr-m2 of 5 gpL H2SO4. The rock was leached for 247 days and yielded 53.5% total
copper recovery. An identical sample crushed to 6" top size is still running and the total
copper recovery has exceeded 60%. The copper is still leaching in the 6" column. Total acid
consumption of the 4" material was 21.9 kg/t.
Maybe it is time to get a consultant to help. Here is the description of services from one:
WMC developed its proprietary Heap Leach Dynamic Technology (HLDT) to assist mines
in designing, operating and closing heap leach facilities. HLDT uses a combination of
geophysical, laboratory, field and modeling techniques to fully characterize and optimize
the heap leaching process. With its wide understanding and experience in water flow and
solute transport, WMC is able to assist mine metallurgists in optimizing key design and
operational conditions that affect the hydrodynamics of the leaching process. This gives the
operator control of solution-to-rock interaction, thereby greatly increasing the potential for
higher yields during the leaching operation. WMC has successfully improved leaching
efficiency, increased recovery and lowered costs through application of this technology at
mines worldwide. Results include operational costs reduced by up to 30%, expansion of
economically leachable reserves, ability to leach ores with very high fine contents and
significantly increase recoveries have been demonstrated. Services offered for HLDT
include:

Electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) surveys of heap leach facilities

Laboratory testing of unsaturated flow parameters affecting heap leaching in our

Tucson laboratory facility

Field testing and instrumentation of heap leach facilities to monitor flow and leach
efficiency

Integration of hydrodynamics with standard column tests

Numerical modeling of heap leach hydrodynamics

Evaluation of existing heap facilities for overall efficiency

Determination of optimum leaching application rates and dripper spacing

Design of agglomerates to improve hydrodynamics and recovery

Development of material handling and placement criteria to improve recovery

Studies of optimum leach cycles including variable application rates

Heap leach closure

Bio heap leaching

Microbes are also used to extract metals from ores in heap leach pads. This is known as
bioleaching and can be used to enhance leaching efficiency. The microbes, as set out
in this paper, change the redox state of the metal being harvested, or change the redox state
of other metal cations which also render the desired metal more soluble and easier to
harvest. Bio heap leaching is cost effective (U.S. $ 0.34-$0.60 per pound of cathode copper,
depending on ore grade) and used to recover other metals such as zinc, nickel, uranium,
gold and silver ores. This article by Pradhan gives us a review of the current bio-leaching
techniques that are currently being employed in the copper industry.

COLD CLIMATE HEAP LEACHING OPERATIONS

The operation of a Heap leach facility in a cold climate offers a number of challenges that
milder regions don't encounter, and so consideration must be given to:

Heap, recovery plant, ponds and fluid handling facilities must be carefully
engineered to minimise heat loss.

Construction on permafrost should be avoided, but this may not be possible.

Thawing of this would result in significant settlement and could destroy the liner.

Cold sensitive liners should be avoided.

Mining ore in winter months could contribute to the depression of the heap
temperature and should be considered in planning.

Heap leaching above the continuous permafrost line may not be practical.

Insulation of pipes etc. will be necessary.

Low evaporative rates will cause a net increase of moisture in the system and toxic
chemicals destruction will have to be considered in the design process.

Due to the heat sink that develops in the heap, the valley method will probably
prove to be the best design option.

Careful management of the fluids in irrigation should prevent freezing for most of
the heap so consideration should be giving to the stability issues that may arise from
this.

Kenneth E. Smith's Publication on cold weather gold heap leaching is worth a read and
sheds some light on the operational methods used.

CLOSURE

Principles of Closure
For a full overview on closure there are few more comprehensive resources available than
the workshop on Closure, Remediation & Management of Precious Metals Heap Leach
Facilities 99, which if you have enough time, you should definitely have a look at.
If are you are unable to commit yourself wholly to the concept of closure, then I would
suggest you have a look at these 10 questions on the decommissioning stage of heap leach
facilities. They are from the Yukon Environmental Assessment Act, under Additional
Information Requirements proposed. It recommended that the proponent prepare the
supporting documentation on the proposed conceptual heap decommissioning plan. This
work should include, but not be limited to, the following considerations. Here are a number
of questions that the Act laid out.
"10 good questions"
1. Discussion of the methods of testing done on the spent ore;
2. Presentation of all data generated from the tests;
3. Interpretation of test results, geochemical modelling, and discussion of the feasibility of
detoxification of the spent ore, time estimates for how long it will take to detoxify the heap
and implications of precipitate formation;
4. Details of leach rinsing and detoxification procedures including volumes, scheduling,
duration, and factors that indicate when rinsing and detoxification will cease;

5. Design criteria and preliminary design for the closure treatment system;
6. Discharge effluent quality that protects the aquatic resources in the surrounding
environment, and sludge disposal;
7. A discussion of the risks and uncertainties associated with the conceptual plan;
8. A evaluation of possible failure modes, contingencies in place, and an evaluation of any
risks or uncertainties;
9. Description of ongoing or planned studies, objectives, and scheduling; and how study
results will be incorporated into the heap decommissioning plan; and
10. Activities to be implemented in the case of a temporary closure including criteria to
define when temporary closure constitutes permanent closure and final reclamation
measures are to be
This paper on closure plans reports on practices gathered by one company for a number of
their heap leach facilities and how they were implemented. It includes their approaches to
closure and some of the tools they use in good closure practice. It is short, non-technical,
but gives a good deal of useful information on the challenges a planner would have to
overcome to facilitate a successful closure program.
A specific closure case study that I will also be include is on the Tonopah Mine which was
closed in 2003 and became the world's first closed and reclaimed heap leach facility.
Covers
In this review we try to keep strictly to the technology associated with heap leach systems.
However, there are some supporting areas that while they are not specific to heap leach,
they do play an important role in the life cycle of the technology. It is for this reason I
include this piece on the role of covers in Heap Leach systems.
When one considers using a cover over a heap leach pad, a permanent end of operational
life cover comes to mind. However the use of temporary covers also known as Raincoat
Liners (RCLs) are now used in areas where a significant amount of rainfall can occur in a
relatively short amount of time or extended throughout the month-to-month wet season.
There are a number of advantages to using these systems, namely, the avoidance of a
surplus water balance which requires recycled storage within the ore heap, treatment and
discharge to the environment, or both. Details of this can be found in this article. Thiel &
Smith also include their temporary cover in their "State of Practice" paper on heap
leaching.
The other type of cover is permanent and placed after the mine has ceased producing. The
style of cover mentioned in this piece is designed to limit the infiltration of water into the
heap leach pile where it could pick up cyanide solution. The original concern was that this

affected water would find its way to Badger Creek where and affect the Red Band Trout.
This was remedied by placing a geosynthetics liner over the pad, followed by waste rock
and topsoil which was then reseeded. While it is common practice to line heap leach pads
with geosynthetics, capping is usually done with soil mixtures only. Wood Gulch was the
first case of a heap leach pad being capped using a geosynthetic liner as part of the cover
solution.
I also include in this closure section, a PowerPoint on covers by Maritz Rykaart,
worthwhile, as it takes a numerical modelling approach to determine the success of a
number of cover designs.

HEAP LEACH TECHNOLOGY

Modelling Software:
Heap leach pads are complex problems to analyse. As we have already seen in this review,
issues with application rate, collection, and partially saturated flow all serve to complicate
this issue further. Computer codes to simulate and model the performance of leach pads
aboundany code that calculates a factor of safety against instability will work on a heap
leach pad problem, and the same is true for most aspects of heap leach pad performance.
Some are more specialist than others. This paper by Jensen & Taylor takes a detailed look
at the various heap leach models available, their roles and their limitations.
GoldSim is a simulation software that is used in engineering that uses Monte Carlo
methods to simulate complex dynamic systems. One major application is the its use in
water balance, and hence in heap leach systems. This software is used in heap leach for
probabilistic simulation of rainfall inputs, and controlling parameters, processes and events
that are uncertain or stochastic. SRKs website briefly discusses this topic of GoldSim in
heap leach.
SoilVision Systems sells us SVFlux, which is a powerful tool that can be used in the design
of a heap leach pad to analysis unsaturated flow. This can also be combined with add-ons
like CHEMFLUX and SVAirFlow to further augment the analysis. The following link uses
SVAirFlow to simulate leaching with air injection. . This link also gives a good run through
of the different disciplines SoilVision packages that are covered in the area of heap leach
simulation.
METSIM has a heap leach model that is part of their comprehensive suite of computer
codes to address complex chemical, metallurgical, and environmental processes. The heap
leach module performs mass balances around the heap leach process including chemical
reactions, precipitation and evaporation, solids and water inventories, heap drainage and
control logic. The model is non-steady state and generates time dependent plots.

Leach, Inc. has a software package to scale up and simulate a heap leaching operation
based on engineering and kinetic fundamentals of the leaching process. Using results from
a column leach test or a commercial heap operation LEACH will allow you to quickly
predict heap performance under different operating conditions such as particle size
distributions, heap heights, solution flow rates and solution chemistry.
Performance Monitoring
HeritageGeophysics.com describes installation of an electronic leak detection system under
a heap leach pad to monitor the liner performance. See a similar program byTerraplus.

QUALITY CONTROL

Risk Management
Risk management enables you to identify risks and take action to avoid them before you get
hurt. At least that is the theory. In practice, it may scare you so much that you decide
instead to do nothing.
The problem lies in the definition of risk. Try making a list of the things that could go
wrong as you put your pants on each morning - enough to make you Scottish and a kilt
devotee!
Heap leach pad operation can be equally as hazardous if you list the risks. At the link is a
list of risks associated with operating a heap leach pad. The list includes suggestions as to
how you might go about avoiding them, or at least mitigating their consequences.
This site gives you all you need to know about a risk based probabilistic assessment of a
long-term cover systems for waste isolation. Generally this is relevant to reclamation of a
heap leach pad but the technique can also be applied to many other processes.

PERMITTING

It is in the interest of mining to keep the environmental impact of heap leaching as low as
reasonably possible. It is in many cases the only economically viable method available, so
maintaining a good relationship with those who live around the mine is crucial. There have
however been some disastrous public relations affairs that have blackened its name and
even caused moratoria to be placed on the use of certain lixiviants, which can render viable

ore bodies uneconomical. The lixiviant that is most controversial in heap leaching is
cyanide.
Montana
One example where the misuse of cyanide has resulted in serious environmental damage is
in that of the state of Montana. In this state, the practices of two mines in particular lead to
phase out open pit and cyanide leach mining. This was set out in state law in the 1998
citizens initiativeI-137.
This citizens initiative has since halted any development of other gold projects in the
state. The Seven-Up Pete Joint Venture is one such project that has been rendered not
economically viable. Metallurgical testing has been carried using alternative lixiviants for
extraction, but have all been proven that cyanide heap leaching is the only real option. For
more on this, sign in or register for OneMine and read the article by Richard H. De Voto on
banning cyanide at McDonald mine.
Romania
Cyanide also has a bad name outside of North America, in Europe this is due largely to the
environmental incident that occurred on 30th January 2000. Baia Mare is a small town in
northwestern Romania with a history of mining especially in gold and silver. Waste from
seven mining sites was stored in over 200 different ponds and improvised tailings facilities
in the area. The mine planned to reprocess these waste sites and extract the remaining gold
and dispose of the tailings in a location which didnt hinder the citys development and
was safe.
The process used high concentrations of cyanide, much of which was contained in a dam
encircling a tailings facility in Baia Mare. The cause of the spill was deemed to be a
combination of design defects, unexpected conditions and bad weather, which resulted in
the spilling of 10,000m3 of liquid from the facility much of which made its way into the
local river.
The result of this spill was what became known as the largest environmental disaster in
Europe since Chernobyl. For more information on this please see this spill please see this
report (note: Click on it first and then open a duplicate tab to view the publication).
Other Cyanide Restrictions
A similar bill was also introduced in Wisconsin after the spill in Romania and I-137 was
introduced in Montana. To be added to that list, cyanide has also been banned in Czech
Republic and Hungry. The importance of proper management of cyanide can be seen from
these case studies as once a precedent has been set, countries and states will follow, and it
will be to the determent of the industry as a whole.

"Because of the dangers of cyanide, and the disasters seen across the world, I have
introduced a bill in the legislature to ban the use of cyanide in mining operations in
Wisconsin. My bill would prevent a disaster such as the recent disaster in Romania and
others that have been seen across the country"
-Representative Spencer Black
Failure
One of the most prominent heap leach failures in recent years was the Bellavista heap leach
pad in October 2007, located in Costa Rica. The failure of this heap leach pad however can
be traced long before any heavy rains encouraged any moved of the pile. From all the
information that is available, this tropical region was clearly unsuitable for a heap leach pad
placed on a slope. Here are the opinions of Anna Cederstav included from a newspaper
article:
"Putting an open-pit gold mine in a mountainous, tropical region prone to landslides and
torrential rainfall is a disaster waiting to happen"
Her concerns were documented in a 21 page review that was conducted before the mines
opening. The consequences named in the report included:
"Potential landslides", "erosion and sedimentation of rivers," and "the creation of a boomand-bust economy"
Even though these risks were highlighted in her report, it was not the report that mattered as
the consultants who carried out the reviews of the mine were ultimately answering to the
mining company and not the government and where hence reluctant to offer their true
analysis of the situation which would have led to difficulties in procuring future work.

CONSULTANTS

I suspect that any reasonable consulting group servicing the mining industry will tell you
they have and can design a heap leach pad. All that is needed is the ability to prepare a
grading plan, select a liner, specify drains, and establish the slope stability of a heap, write a
plausible closure plan, and leave it to the metallurgists and chemist to work out the right
solutions to apply when. Maybe, but as always past success is the best indicator of future
performance. So here are a few consultants whose heap leach experience is documented on
their websites. If I omit your company, be assured this is my oversight, not conscious
decision-for I have sought to include all companies I am aware of.

Golder Associates provides a comprehensive suite of services related to heap leach pad
design, construction, operation, and closure.
HydroGeoSense, Inc. HGS has developed characterization techniques that provide direct
measurement of key physical, hydraulic and chemical parameters along the profile of a
heap. Our techniques are efficient and non-invasive and can be implemented without the
need of traffic of heavy-equipment on the heap surface. See their website for of their
current tools.
Kappes, Cassiday & Associates in Reno, Nevada provides consulting, testing, and design
services for metal heap leaching.
Knight Piesold has undertaken extensive research, testing and analysis on the deformation
and collapse capacities of drain pipes, liner systems and their compatibilities with
foundation and overliner materials as well as with hydraulic and geotechnical stability of
ore piles.
Leach, Inc. will design and supervise laboratory and field test programs to evaluate the
heap leaching of copper and gold ores. They have an extensive library of publications that
are available on request.
O'Kane Consultants have done the work and have written about it. I much admire their
innovative approaches.
W. Joseph Schlitt is a consulting metallurgist-hydrometallurgist. He writes the best papers I
have read. Here is a quote from CV:
"Over 40 years of experience in engineering, process assessment, research and
development, and plant-oriented studies for the nonferrous industry worldwide. Primary
emphasis has been on chemical processing and hydrometallurgy, particularly for copper.
Technology has included heap, dump, vat, agitation, bio-, and in-situ leaching, plus metal
value recovery."
SRK has the specialists, and they have worked in the most amazing places which they have
written about - see the book Copper Leaching, Solvent Extraction, and Electrowinning
Technology edited by Gerald Jergensen.
With over 100 major mining projects in more than 34 countries, Ausenco has extensive
knowledge and experience in leach pad engineering. They can provide the expert
knowledge required to guide you through complex environmental and social challenges,
while meeting increasingly stringent permitting processes.

COURSES

It is also worth keeping in mind the large number of courses available on EduMine (a
division of InfoMine) that deal with heap leaching. These courses are diverse and deal with
them main principles of heap leaching from cyanide management to closure and everything
in between.
"Heap Leach Pads": This Course is includes design, mechanics of prepared ore,
construction, operation, physics of liberation of ore, and ultimately closure of the heap
leach pad.
"Hydrometallurgy 1 - Introduction to Leaching": Covers the theoretical basis of solution
chemistry, leaching mechanisms & processes amongst other things.
"Hydrometallurgy 2 - Leaching Processes" : Takes us through the leaching processes used
for hydrometallurgical treatment of mineral ores, concentrates and metals.
"Hydrometallurgy 3 - Concentration and Purification of Leach Solutions" : Takes us
through the leaching processes used for hydrometallurgical treatment of mineral ores,
concentrates and metals
"Hydrometallurgy 4 - Precipitation from Leach Solutions": The final instalment of this
series covers the recovery from the leached solutions.
"Cyanide Management in Mining - 3: Geochemical Properties and Environmental Fate of
Cyanide": This course attempts to provide the user with the necessary background for
development of a cyanide management plan that meets the unique requirements of each
operating mine.
"Mine Water and Chemical Balance Analysis" : This courses could prove to be valuable in
the context of a heap leach pad.
"Groundwater in Mining" : This course includes a section on heap leach pads and how they
relate to groundwater
"Geotechnical Engineering for Mine GeoWaste Facilities": As is in the description of this
course, it is intended for anybody involved in mining that has to manage, review, pay for,
design, construct, operate, or close a geotechnical structure at a mine.
"Mine Closure: The Basics of Success" : Is the final course I include and could also be
looked at last final stage in a heap leach life cycle so it is still of the utmost importance.

BOOKS

The most important book for understanding the basic of the heap leaching is The
Chemistry of Gold Extraction by John Marsden and Iain House. Other important books
are:
Improvements in heap leaching to recover silver and gold from low-grade resources by G E
McClelland
Enhancing percolation rates in heap leaching of gold-silver ores by H J Heinen
Gold and Silver Leaching, Recovery and Economics by W J Schlitt

SOFTWARE
For heap leach pad design and analyzing the performance there are some softwares
available in the market that are listed as:

SVFlux

METSIM

Leach, Inc.

Jensen and Taylor compare some codes. Here are others:

SOILVISION SYSTEMS sells SVFlux to analyze unsaturated flow in a pad-when coupled
with ChemFlux you can study the effect of the input chemistry on the output chemistry.
METSIM has a heap leach model that is part of their comprehensive suite of computer
codes to address complex chemical, metallurgical, and environmental processes. The heap
leach module performs mass balances around the heap leach process including chemical
reactions, precipitation and evaporation, solids and water inventories, heap drainage and
control logic. The model is non-steady state and generates time dependent plots.
Leach, Inc. has a software package to scale up and simulate a heap leaching operation
based on engineering and kinetic fundamentals of the leaching process. Using results from
a column leach test or a commercial heap operation LEACH will allow you to quickly
predict heap performance under different operating conditions such as particle size
distributions, heap heights, solution flow rates and solution chemistry.
Stability - Static
Industry standard methods and/or computer programs may be used to evaluate the factor of
safety of the slopes of Heap Leach Pads. Key to the use of any of these programs is the

geometry of the Heap Leach Pad, the strength of the ore as placed in the pad, and the angle
of friction between the liner beneath the pad and the materials placed directly above the
liner.
Stability - Seismic
The response of a Heap Leach Pad to an earthquake depends on the magnitude of the event,
the properties of the materials in the pad, and the liner interface strength. Potential
responses include:

Material liquefaction.

Sliding of the ore over the liners.

Mass deformation of the slopes of the pad.

Methods used in the landfill industry to evaluate the seismic response of landfills may be
used to quantify the potential for liner sliding and mass deformation - see Kavazanjian and
Matasovic.
Erosion
Control of erosion during operation of the HLP is generally best effected by appropriate
surface contouring as part of the placement of the ore on the HLP, by limiting runon, and by
directing runoff to sediment control dams and basins. See the TechnoMine review on this
topic.
Performance Monitoring
HeritageGeophysics.com describes installation of an electronic leak detection system under
a heap leach pad to monitor the liner performance. See a similar program by Terraplus.