Abstract
Reprocessing tailings to recover minerals of economic interest and environmental concern can add value to a project and decrease environmental risk, but dealing with heterogeneity within tailings facilities is a challenge. This study investigates the heterogeneity of the Cantung Mine tailings to assess the potential for reprocessing for both value recovery and remediation purposes. The Cantung Mine, Northwest Territories, was a world-class tungsten (W) deposit that was mined periodically from 1962 to 2015. Geochemical analysis of 196 tailings samples shows substantial heterogeneity in the elements of value (tungsten and copper (Cu)) and elements of environmental concern for acid rock drainage (iron (Fe) and sulfur (S)). Tungsten and copper concentrations range from 0.06 to 1.06 wt% W (average 0.32 wt% W) and 0.05 to 0.48 wt% Cu (average 0.23 wt% Cu). Iron and sulfur concentrations range from 8.25 to 34.08 wt% Fe (average 17.14 wt% Fe) and 2.20 to 19.70 wt% S (average 6.7 wt% S). Characterization of 29 samples by scanning electron microscope with automated mineralogy software shows that geochemical heterogeneity corresponds to mineralogical heterogeneity with variability in the concentrations of scheelite (CaWO4), chalcopyrite (CuFeS2) and pyrrhotite (Fe(1-x)S). Liberation analyses indicate that additional grinding would be necessary to recover scheelite, chalcopyrite or pyrrhotite. Pyrrhotite with monoclinic and hexagonal-orthorhombic forms were identified. Overall, the Cantung tailings display considerable heterogeneity, which could lead to difficulties in reprocessing for economic or environmental benefit, but characterizing the heterogeneity allows for systems to be optimized.
1 Introduction
Reprocessing tailings has the potential to add value to a project and mitigate environmental liabilities. As the demand for many commodities increases and geopolitical conflicts cause supply risks, reprocessing mine tailings has been proposed as a solution to recover valuable commodities, but few projects have been successfully implemented (; ; ). In Canada, the 1911 Gold True North Tailings Operations seems to be the only recently active tailings reprocessing project based on the authors’ research (1911 ). Mine tailings can be heterogeneous due to differences in ore and host rocks, processing methods, depositional history and chemical reactions that may or may not take place, which can make characterization and reprocessing difficult (; ; ; ). Reprocessing tailings that have environmental liabilities to extract critical raw materials and reconfigure the storage of the remaining tailings to a more geotechnically and geochemically stable facility could be advantageous for legacy sites, but uncertainty leads to risks (; ). The Cantung Mine, a former tungsten mine, provides a case study to assess heterogeneity within a tailings pond and the impacts heterogeneity can have on reprocessing and environmental outcomes.
Heterogeneity within tailings ponds has been documented and studies have shown that heterogeneity can affect vegetation growth for remediation, microbial activity, geotechnical performance, and resource estimation for reprocessing (; ; ; ; ). Resource estimation of tailings for reprocessing is currently a barrier to operations due to heterogeneity and a lack of best practices for characterization and economic analyses (). Heterogeneity also affects the long-term environmental performance of tailings, with the design of the storage facility playing a large role in the outcomes of these effects. A few of the variables that vary within tailings facilities include geochemistry, mineralogy, mineral liberation, grain size, and water content. These variables can also affect the acid rock drainage (ARD) potential of tailings, which is the dominant environmental concern for modern mining operations (; ; ). The tailings management strategy implemented at a site must consider these variables, but the strategy implemented can in turn impact variables such as mineralogy and mineral liberation in the long-term as well. Surface tailings disposal strategies can be classified based on water content; conventional slurry tailings have the highest water content at greater than 50% and filtered tailings have the lowest water content, typically ranging from 12% to 20% (; ; ; ). The tailings management strategy chosen is based on initial characterization, but many of the variables can change over time, due to processes such as sulfide oxidation or secondary mineral precipitation. Such changes can make reprocessing challenging (; ; ; ; ). Heterogeneity can also make sampling difficult as representative samples are needed to accurately characterize the material (). The degree of heterogeneity and assessment of what constitutes a representative sample can only be determined through sampling and analysis (). Automated mineralogy is a tool that can be used to comprehensively analyse multiple samples, providing abundant mineralogical data for characterization (). Modal mineralogy, deportment, and mineral liberation are a few of the variables that can be quantified and compared across multiple samples using automated mineralogy software to assess the extent of heterogeneity in a tailings facility, the reprocessing potential, and the environmental risks.
At the Cantung Mine, heterogeneity is expected at multiple scales, from the macro scale of a mine site to the micro scale of mineral structure. Pyrrhotite is the dominant acid-generating mineral and both monoclinic and hexagonal-orthorhombic types have been identified in the tailings (; ). The form of pyrrhotite substantially impacts mineral processing, and there is debate about the impact of pyrrhotite structure on the rate of oxidation for environmental considerations (; ; ; ). In this paper, geochemistry, mineralogy, mineral liberation and mineral structure were investigated for Cantung Mine tailings relating to the context of reprocessing potential and sulfide oxidation for tailings management using geochemical and automated mineralogy methods.
2 Site description
The Cantung Mine is a former tungsten mine located in the Mackenzie Mountains in the western region of the Northwest Territories, Canada (Figure 1). The site is within the traditional territory of the Dehcho First Nation and the asserted territory of the Kaska Dene First Nation (). The Nahanni National Park, a UNESCO Heritage Park, is approximately 15 km from the Cantung Mine. The Flat River, which drains into the Nahanni River within the National Park, is adjacent to the Cantung Mine site. Cantung is remotely situated with the nearest community approximately 300 km downstream. The Cantung deposit was discovered in 1959 and operated intermittently from 1962 through 2015. Recovery of tungsten, now considered a critical element, was the primary focus, but copper was also recovered on a limited basis as a second commodity (; ; ). Initially, tailings were deposited directly onto the floodplain of the Flat River. In 1965, the first tailings pond (TP1) was constructed, and there are currently five tailings facilities on the site. Tailings Pond 3 (TP3) is the largest tailings facility, storing approximately 1,316,000 m3 of tailings in a conventional impoundment with the dam crest approximately 35 m above the ground (). Recent global tailings dam failures, such as the Mount Polley failure, have increased the demand for safer tailings management, which could include different approaches to tailings storage and handling (; ). The most recent dam safety review recommended all of the tailings facilities at the Cantung Mine be classified with a high dam consequence classification based on environmental and cultural risks, indicating the potential for significant loss or deterioration of habitats and disruption of regional heritage or cultural assets should failure occur (). The dam consequence classification is not a measure of risk but is used to determine minimum design standards for tailings facilities (). Reprocessing and remediating these tailings could be methods to decrease risk or potential impacts. The site is currently in care and maintenance and is owned by the Federal Government after the previous owner, North American Tungsten Corporation Limited (NATCL), defaulted in 2015.
FIGURE 1
The deposit was a tungsten skarn that was formed during and immediately after the Columbian Orogeny. It is associated with felsic intrusions of the Tungsten plutonic suite which were emplaced during the Cretaceous period (
3 Materials and methods
The methods used in this study include bulk geochemistry, quantitative mineralogy by scanning electron microscope (SEM) equipped with an automated mineralogy suite (Mineral Liberation Analysis; MLA), synchrotron-based micro X-ray diffraction and X-ray fluorescence (μXRD-XRF), and crystallography of pyrrhotite by X-ray diffraction (XRD) and electron microprobe (EMP) analyses. Samples used for these tests include tailings taken from the site and shipped to either CanmetMining, a division of Natural Resources Canada, or Queen’s University in 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022. Data from previous sampling campaigns in 2012 and 2018 were also included. The analyses were focused on samples from TP3 as it is the largest tailings facility on site.
3.1 Sample descriptions
In 2012, multiple core samples were collected by NATCL from TP3 for geochemical analysis to evaluate rare earth element potential. Subsamples of core were collected at depths ranging from 0 to 30 m for analysis by ACME Laboratories, now Bureau Veritas Minerals, and the data has been used in this study. Additional subsamples of the core were collected in 2017 and analysed by SEM-MLA by
TABLE 1
| Sample ID | Year collected | Sample type | Geochemical analysis | Mineralogical analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT-12 | 2012 | Core samples | NATCL at ACME/Bureau Veritas | |
| CT-18 | 2018 | Bulk–60 kg 2 Grab Samples | CanmetMINING | Sample preparation and initial mineralogy: |
| CT-19 | 2019 | Bulk–2000 kg | CanmetMINING Surrette - ALS | Surrette–Queen’s |
| CT-20 | 2020 | Bulk–120 kg | Surrette - ALS | Surrette–Queen’s |
| CT-21 | 2021 | Bulk–200 kg | Surrette - ALS | Surrette–Queen’s |
| CT-22 | 2022 | Bulk–5000 kg | CanmetMINING | Surrette–Queen’s |
Sample details for materials used in this project.
3.2 Bulk geochemistry
One hundred and fifty-two 2012 samples were analysed for whole-rock major and trace element content by inductively coupled plasma emission spectrometry (ICP-ES) after four-acid digestion and by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) after lithium borate fusion. Quality assurance and quality control (QAQC) measures included analysis of 24 duplicates, 7 standard reference materials (CDN-ME-14, CDN-ME-9), and 28 blanks in addition to the 152 samples. For the elements of interest (tungsten, copper, iron and sulfur) 94% of duplicates were within less than 5% of each other. All blanks measured less than 0.001% tungsten and copper, less than 0.02% iron and less than 0.05% sulfur. Measured values for the standard reference materials were within ±2 standard deviations of the recommended values. Seven samples from 2018, nine from 2019, and eight from 2022 were analysed by CanmetMINING using inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES) following four-acid digestion or lithium metaborate fusion for major or trace elements and ELTRA 2000 for sulfur and carbon. Certified reference materials (MP-2a, RTS-1) and duplicates were measured at regular intervals for the 2018 analyses. Duplicates for the elements of interest were within less than 6% of each other. The MP-2a certified reference material was within ±2 standard deviations of the recommended values for copper and iron but was more than 3 standard deviations less than the recommended value for tungsten. The RTS-3 certified reference material was within ±2 standard deviations of the recommended values for sulfur. Six samples from 2019, eight from 2020, and six from 2021 were analysed at ALS Geochemistry for their major element composition by ICP-AES following lithium borate fusion, trace elements by ICP-MS following four-acid digestion or lithium borate fusion, and total sulfur by induction furnace. The tungsten content of the 2019 and 2020 samples was also analyzed by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) for comparison. Certified reference materials (CDN-W-4, OREAS-101b, OREAS 920, OREAS-45h), duplicates and blanks were analysed to ensure the accuracy and reproducibility of the results. Quality control results for the 2019 and 2020 samples showed that duplicates for tungsten, copper and iron were within less than 2% of each other. Blanks were less than 1 ppm tungsten for fusion and four acid digestions, and less than 0.01% tungsten for XRF analyses. Blanks were less than 0.05% copper and 0.002% iron. For the elements of interest, 91% of the analyses on the certified reference materials were within ±2 standard deviations of the recommended values. The results presented in this work focus on the data from lithium borate fusion analyses for tungsten, four-acid digestion analyses for copper and iron, and either four-acid digestion or induction furnace analyses for sulfur. Induction furnace was used to measure sulfur for all 2018–2022 samples and four-acid followed by ICP-ES was used to measure sulfur for all 2012 samples. No systematic differences in the results were identified.
3.3 Mineralogy
Modal mineralogy, mineral liberation, mineral associations and element deportment were analysed using a scanning electron microscope equipped with an automated mineralogy suite. Subsamples from the 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 bulk samples were selected and prepared into polished thin sections and epoxy grain mounts. The 2022 samples were classified using standard sieves into +300 μm, −300 to +150 μm, −150 to +75 μm, −75 to +38 μm, and −38 μm size fractions. One epoxy grain mount prepared by
Synchrotron-based μXRD-XRF was used to identify the mineral forms of iron-oxyhydroxides in the 2020 and 2021 samples. Analyses were conducted at beamline 13-IDE at the Advanced Photon Source (APS), National Argonne Laboratory, Chicago, IL, United States on thin sections that had been analysed by SEM. A monochromatic incident beam at 18 kV with a spot size of 2 μm and a dwell time of 50 ms per pixel was used to collect μXRF and μXRD maps of target grains. Spot μXRD analyses were performed on specific pixels with a measurement time of 10,000 ms per pixel. XRF data was used to investigate the trace chemistry of the target grains and data processing was conducted using Larch software (Version 0.9.46; Newville, 2019). XRD data was processed using Dioptas software (
3.4 Pyrrhotite crystallography
To determine the presence of monoclinic and hexagonal pyrrhotite in the Cantung tailings, powder XRD and EMP analyses were performed. Sixteen powder back-mounted samples were analysed by XRD using the Malvern Panalytical Empyrean Powder Diffractometer at Queen’s University. A cobalt source was used with a PIXcel3D detector. The data was processed using HighScore Plus (version 4.9) for phase identification and Rietveld refinement. Bulk and separated samples were analysed by XRD, including four bulk samples, four magnetically separated samples, four flotation concentrate samples, and four mineral density separated samples. Magnetic separation was conducted by passing a hand-held sliding magnetic separator over a thin layer of tailings. Flotation concentrate samples were collected from the products of sulfide flotation tests conducted for another study (
Forty-eight pyrrhotite grains from samples analysed by SEM-MLA were also analysed by EMP to determine the crystal structure of individual pyrrhotite grains based on iron and sulfur contents. Monoclinic pyrrhotites have greater iron deficiencies, with iron contents of 46.5%–46.8% Fe on a molar basis, and hexagonal to orthorhombic pyrrhotites have lesser iron deficiencies, with iron contents of 47.4%–48.3% Fe on a molar basis (
4 Results
4.1 Bulk geochemistry
Concentrations of elements of economic interest, tungsten and copper, and elements of environmental concern for sulfide oxidation, iron and sulfur, were assessed and are shown in Figure 2. Tungsten concentrations ranged from 0.06 to 1.06 wt% W, with an average of 0.32 wt% W. The 2019 sample showed the highest concentrations of tungsten, with values ranging from 0.97 to 1.06 wt% W. For all other samples, tungsten concentrations ranged from 0.06 to 0.60 wt% W. Copper concentrations ranged from 0.05 to 0.48 wt% Cu, with an average of 0.23 wt% Cu. Copper concentrations were not elevated in the 2019 sample as the tungsten concentrations were, ranging from 0.13 to 0.15 wt% Cu. The lowest and highest copper concentrations were from the 152 samples analysed from the 2012 sampling year; all other sampling years had minimum and maximum copper concentrations of 0.11 and 0.30 wt% Cu, respectively. Analyses for iron resulted in concentrations ranging from 8.25 to 34.08 wt% Fe with an average of 17.14 wt% Fe. The minimum and maximum values for iron concentrations were also from the 2012 samples, but all other sampling years had minimum values greater than or equal to the average iron concentration of the 2012 samples. The lowest minimum value for a sampling year aside from 2012 at 8.25 wt% Fe was 15.11 wt% Fe from 2022. The 2019 sample had high iron concentrations ranging from 25.30 to 26.00 wt% Fe, but the 2020 sample had the highest iron concentrations, ranging from 23.20 to 33.10 wt% Fe with an average of 29.10 wt% Fe. Sulfur concentrations ranged from 2.20 to 19.70 wt% S with an average of 6.70 wt% S. Sulfur concentrations were also highest in the 2020 sample, corresponding to iron concentrations, ranging from 13.15 to 19.70 wt% S with an average of 16.96 wt% S.
FIGURE 2

Compiled bulk geochemistry results for tungsten (W), copper (Cu), iron (Fe) and sulfur (S) for the Cantung tailings. Data includes samples from all available years, including 2012, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022.
4.2 Mineralogy
4.2.1 Modal mineralogy
Modal mineralogy was assessed on 19 samples from the 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 sampling years, shown in Figure 3, and compared to analyses previously done by
FIGURE 3

Modal mineralogy for the Cantung tailings from sampling years 2012 (from
4.2.2 Element deportment
Element distributions were analysed to further assess the relationship between geochemistry and mineralogy. Tungsten and copper were hosted solely by scheelite and chalcopyrite, respectively. Pyrrhotite was the dominant host of sulfur for all samples except two, as shown in Figure 4. The 2018 and 2020 samples had the highest distribution of sulfur associated with pyrrhotite, with an average of 94% of sulfur associated with pyrrhotite, compared to averages of 69%, 80%, 81% and 82% of sulfur associated with pyrrhotite for the 2012, 2019, 2021, and 2022 samples. The two samples that did not show pyrrhotite as the dominant sulfur host (CT-12 samples 2 and 4) had low pyrrhotite concentrations (1.7 and 1.8 wt%) and high gypsum concentrations (9.3 and 9.7 wt%) compared to other samples.
FIGURE 4

MLA-based distribution of sulfur across sulfur-bearing minerals in the Cantung tailings.
4.2.3 Mineralogical acid-base accounting
With the concentrations of acid-producing and acid-neutralizing minerals known, mineralogically based acid-base accounting was performed. The acid potentials (AP) of chalcopyrite, pyrite, and pyrrhotite were calculated to determine the total AP (Eq. 1, (
Where m is the number of iron sulfide minerals that contribute to acid production, X is the concentration of mineral s in the sample (wt%), and F is the calculation factor applied depending on the mineral s. A calculation factor of 31.25 was used to determine the AP of pyrrhotite and pyrite and a factor of 15.62 (31.25/2) was used for the chalcopyrite AP based on the assumption that one mole of calcite neutralizes two moles of acid produced from the oxidation of one mole of sulfur because the system is open and the tailings are exposed to the atmosphere (Eq. 2, (
Overall pyrrhotite and pyrite oxidation equations show that the oxidation of one mole of sulfur produces two moles of acid, while the oxidation of one mole of sulfur produces one mole of acid in the overall chalcopyrite oxidation equation (Eqs 3–5), (
The neutralization potentials (NP) of calcite, dolomite, and ankerite were calculated, including a correction for the iron contribution from ankerite, to determine the total NP (Eq. 6, (
Where k is the number of minerals that contribute to neutralization potential, X is the concentration of mineral i in the sample (wt%), and w is molar mass. The results in Figure 5, below, demonstrate that the 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 samples were classified as potentially acid generating (PAG). Two 2012 samples were classified as non-potentially acid generating (NPAG) and five samples from 2012 to 2018 were classified as uncertain based on a neutralization potential ratio of 2. The 2020 samples were determined to have the highest acid potential.
FIGURE 5

Mineralogical acid-base accounting for the Cantung tailings.
4.2.4 Mineral liberation
Mineral liberation was investigated for scheelite, chalcopyrite and pyrrhotite in the Cantung tailings by SEM-MLA. Liberation of scheelite and chalcopyrite was used to assess recoverability at the current tailings grain size. Figure 6 and Figure 7 show the proportion of scheelite and chalcopyrite, respectively, in liberation classes from 0% to 100% liberation. Liberation of scheelite was heterogenous with values ranging from 5% to 40% of scheelite more than 80% liberated and 11%–92% of scheelite less than 20% liberated (Figure 6). Of the samples analysed, the highest average liberation value for scheelite was approximately 30% of scheelite more than 80% liberated in the 2020, 2021, and middle grain size fractions (from −300 to +38 μm) of the 2022 samples. Scheelite was largely associated with silicates in the 2012, 2018, 2020, 2021 and 2022 samples, and iron oxyhydroxides in the 2019 samples. Liberation of chalcopyrite showed similar heterogeneity with 1%–60% of chalcopyrite more than 80% liberated and 5%–85% of chalcopyrite less than 20% liberated (Figure 7). The highest average liberation value for chalcopyrite for the samples analysed was approximately 40% of chalcopyrite more than 80% liberated in the 2012 and 2018 samples. Chalcopyrite was most associated with silicates in the 2012, 2018, 2021, and 2022 samples and iron oxyhydroxides in the 2019 and 2020 samples. To assess the availability of pyrrhotite for oxidation or recovery by flotation, the liberation of pyrrhotite was examined. Figure 8 shows the proportion of pyrrhotite in various liberation classes, from 0% to 100% liberation. The distribution of more than 80% liberated pyrrhotite varied from 1% to 70% of pyrrhotite in the sample. The 2012, 2018, 2021 and middle grain size fractions (from −300 to +38 μm) of the 2022 samples had the highest degree of pyrrhotite liberation, with an average of approximately 40% of pyrrhotite more than 80% liberated. The 2019 samples had the lowest degree of pyrrhotite liberation, with an average of 1% of pyrrhotite more than 80% liberated and an average of 95% of pyrrhotite less than 60% liberated. Pyrrhotite grains were most associated with iron oxyhydroxide grains for the 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 samples and silicates for the 2012 and 2018 samples. Liberation of scheelite, chalcopyrite and pyrrhotite varied substantially among the 2012 samples, but showed more consistency in other sampling years.
FIGURE 6

Distribution of scheelite across liberation classes ranging from 0% liberated to 100% liberated.
FIGURE 7

Distribution of chalcopyrite across liberation classes ranging from 0% liberated to 100% liberated.
FIGURE 8

Distribution of pyrrhotite across liberation classes ranging from 0% liberated to 100% liberated.
4.3 Pyrrhotite crystallography
The crystal structure of pyrrhotite was analysed to determine the presence of monoclinic, or magnetic pyrrhotite, and hexagonal, or non-magnetic pyrrhotite. Powder XRD was performed on bulk samples and on samples that were separated by hand-magnet, by sulfide flotation and by mineral density. Based on the methods proposed by
Electron microprobe (EMP) analysis was then used to identify the compositions of pyrrhotite to assess the crystal structure of pyrrhotites showing different degrees of oxidation. XRD analyses determined that both monoclinic and hexagonal pyrrhotite were present in all samples, so pyrrhotite grains at various degrees of oxidation from the 2019, 2020 and 2021 samples were chosen for further investigation. One hundred and thirty-nine spot analyses on 48 pyrrhotite grains from 5 thin sections were analysed by EMPA. Iron content in the pyrrhotites ranged from 46.57% to 49.79% on a molar basis. Only two grains were identified to have an iron deficient, monoclinic (Fe7S8) structure, with atomic compositions of 46.7% iron and 53.3% sulfur. All other grains analysed had average atomic compositions of 47.7% iron and 52.3% sulfur, corresponding to a hexagonal or orthorhombic structure that could range from Fe9S10 to Fe11S12. The two monoclinic pyrrhotite grains were from a 2019 sample and a 2020 sample, although it is expected that monoclinic and hexagonal pyrrhotite are both present in all samples, with hexagonal being the dominant structure. Both intact and oxidized pyrrhotite grains were analysed, which showed that the degree of oxidation of a pyrrhotite grain was not indicative of its structure for these samples. The two monoclinic grains identified were strongly oxidized, but compositions that align with hexagonal pyrrhotites were determined in both intact and strongly oxidized grains. Target grains with hexagonal and monoclinic structure are shown in Figure 9.
FIGURE 9

Backscatter electron (BSE) images of target pyrrhotites for EMP analyses to determine crystal structure based on iron concentrations. (A) An intact pyrrhotite with hexagonal structure (Fe11S12). (B) An oxidized pyrrhotite with hexagonal structure (Fe11S12). (C) and (D) Oxidized pyrrhotites with monoclinic structure (Fe7S8).
5 Discussion
The Cantung tailings displayed heterogeneity in geochemistry and mineralogy. This heterogeneity could be caused by many factors including heterogeneity of the ore body, changes in the processing circuit, the tailings management strategy, and reactions that took place within the tailings facility. Focusing on reprocessing potential, there is one pocket of the tailings facility where tungsten grades are above the average ore grade of the mine (2019 sample–average 1.01 wt% W, n = 15, compared to an average ore grade of 0.64 wt% W (
The reprocessing potential and heterogeneity associated with copper differs from that of tungsten. The average grade of copper in the tailings facilities is 0.23 wt% Cu, while copper grades of operating mines averaged 0.62–0.65 wt% Cu globally in 2015 (
Creating a reprocessing flow sheet that could recover scheelite and chalcopyrite in an economically feasible manner will be challenging due to the heterogeneity within this tailings pond. While the highest concentrations of scheelite and chalcopyrite are in the largest grain size fraction analysed, additional grinding would be necessary to improve liberation for recovery due to liberation. There is also no systematic method to interpolate the grade of tungsten and copper in the tailings facility as details about tailings deposition, such as specific periods when copper was not recovered and corresponding spigot points, are not available and there are substantial variations in close proximity. However, characterization of the potential extremes allows for a moderated plan to be developed, which may miss recovery of the outliers, but could capture most of the value.
From an environmental perspective, tailings can be managed at different points throughout the mining cycle; the amount of tailings can be reduced from the beginning depending on the extraction method chosen, the composition of tailings can be altered by removing minerals of interest or adding reagents during processing, and the behaviour of tailings can be affected by the tailings storage method. The strategies chosen at each of these points strongly affects environmental outcomes and the effect of the storage method is demonstrated by the different results seen from the Flat River tailings and the impounded tailings at the Cantung Mine. The Flat River tailings were deposited on the floodplain of the Flat River as a slurry with no manufactured containment in 1962. In 1963, the first tailings facility, tailings pond 1 (TP1), was constructed using the upstream dam method. From 1965 to 2015, tailings were deposited as a slurry into 5 dam style tailings facilities (
6 Conclusion
Characterization of mine tailings is important for assessing heterogeneity, reprocessing potential and remediation strategies. Heterogeneity was confirmed across multiple scales and variables, including bulk geochemistry, modal mineralogy, mineral liberation and mineral structure for the Cantung Mine tailings. Geochemical analyses showed that the Cantung tailings host tungsten and copper concentrations ranging from 0.06 to 1.06 wt% W and 0.05 to 0.48 wt% Cu, respectively, throughout the tailings facility, indicating potential spatial heterogeneity issues for reprocessing. However, an average grade of approximately 0.30 wt% W and an average grade of 0.23 wt% Cu were reported. Both tungsten and copper are considered critical or strategic minerals by Canada and the EU, and tungsten is also considered a critical mineral by the United States (
Statements
Data availability statement
The data presented in the study are available at https://hdl.handle.net/1974/33107.
Author contributions
AS: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing. AD: Investigation, Writing–review and editing. GL: Resources, Writing–review and editing. HF: Resources, Writing–review and editing. HJ: Conceptualization, Project administration, Supervision, Writing–review and editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This project was supported by the Northwest Territories Geological Survey Contribution Agreement 63040/60123, NSERC Northern Research Award 305500 awarded to HJ, NSERC Discovery Grant 03736 awarded to HJ, and the Ontario Graduate Scholarship awarded to AS.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge North American Tungsten Corporation Limited for their assistance with sample collection, and Dr. M. Leybourne, Queen’s University, for his guidance with the bulk geochemistry work. Shannon Shaw, pHase Geochemistry, provided valuable advice during the development of the project, the synchrotron μXRD-XRF analyses could not have been performed without the assistance and guidance of Dr. M. Newville and Dr. A. Lanzirotti at beamline 13-IDE, Advanced Photon Source (APS), Argonne National Laboratory, and the use of the Jasper table for mineral separation was possible thanks to the guidance of Dr. C. Spencer, Queen’s University. The authors would also like to thank Dr. R. Peterson, Emeritus Professor, Queen’s University, and B. Joy, Queen’s Facility for Isotope Research, for assistance with pyrrhotite XRD and EMP analyses, respectively.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
AdiansyahJ. S.RosanoM.VinkS.KeirG. (2015). A framework for a sustainable approach to mine tailings management: disposal strategies. J. Clean. Prod.108, 1050–1062. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.139
2
ArnoldR. G. (1966). Mixtures of hexagonal and monoclinic pyrrhotite and the measurement of the metal content of pyrrhotite by X-ray diffraction. Am. Mineralogist51 (7), 1221–1227.
3
BadiozamaniM. M.BeierN. (2022). Estimating the potential differential settlement of a tailings deposit based on consolidation properties heterogeneity. Appl. Sci.12 (12), 6206. 10.3390/app12126206
4
BeckerM.VilliersJ. d.BradshawD. (2010). The flotation of magnetic and non-magnetic pyrrhotite from selected nickel ore deposits. Miner. Eng.23 (11-13), 1045–1052. 10.1016/j.mineng.2010.07.002
5
BelzileN.ChenY.-W.CaiM.-F.LiY. (2004). A review on pyrrhotite oxidation. J. Geochem. Explor.84 (2), 65–76. 10.1016/j.gexplo.2004.03.003
6
BlanninR.FrenzelM.Tolosana-DelgadoR.GutzmerJ. (2022). Towards a sampling protocol for the resource assessment of critical raw materials in tailings storage facilities. J. Geochem. Explor.236, 106974. 10.1016/j.gexplo.2022.106974
7
BlowesD. W.PtacekC. J.JamborJ. L.WeisenerC. G.PaktuncD.GouldW. D.et al (2014). “The geochemistry of acid mine drainage,” in Treatise on geochemistry. Editors Holland,D.TurekianK. K. (USA: ISBN), 131–190.
8
BussièreB. (2007). Colloquium 2004: hydrogeotechnical properties of hard rock tailings from metal mines and emerging geoenvironmental disposal approaches. Can. Geotechnical J.44 (9), 1019–1052. 10.1139/t07-040
9
Cacciuttolo VargasC.Pérez CampomanesG. (2022). Practical experience of filtered tailings technology in Chile and Peru: an environmentally friendly solution. Minerals12 (7), 889. 10.3390/min12070889
10
CalvoG.MuddG.ValeroA.ValeroA. (2016). Decreasing ore grades in global metallic mining: a theoretical issue or a global reality?Resources5 (4), 36. 10.3390/resources5040036
11
Canadian Dam Association (2013). Dam safety guidelines 2007. 2013 Edition.
12
CollinsA. (2023). Reprocessing of the Cantung mine tailings. MASc: Queen's University.
13
ConstantinescuP.NeagoeA.NicoaraA.GrawunderA.IonS.OneteM.et al (2019). Implications of spatial heterogeneity of tailing material and time scale of vegetation growth processes for the design of phytostabilisation. Sci. Total Environ.692, 1057–1069. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.07.299
14
CrystalC.HoreC.EzamaI. (2018). “Filter-pressed dry stacking: design considerations based on practical experience,” in Tailings and mine waste 2018 (Colorado, USA: Keystone).
15
DegenT.SadkiM.BronE.KönigU.NénertG. (2014). The HighScore suite. Powder Diffr.29 (S2), S13–S18. 10.1017/s0885715614000840
16
DelaneyB.BakkerF. J. (2014). Technical report on the Cantung mine, Northwest Territories, Canada. Canada: North American Tungsten LTD.
17
DickL. A.HodgsonC. J. (1982). The MacTung W-Cu(Zn) contact metasomatic and related deposits of the northeastern Canadian cordillera. Econ. Geol.77 (4), 845–867. 10.2113/gsecongeo.77.4.845
18
DinisM. d. L.FiuzaA.FuturoA.LeiteA.MartinsD.FigueiredoJ.et al (2020). Characterization of a mine legacy site: an approach for environmental management and metals recovery. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.27 (9), 10103–10114. 10.1007/s11356-019-06987-x
19
DoldB. (2014). Evolution of acid mine drainage formation in sulphidic mine tailings. Minerals4 (3), 621–641. 10.3390/min4030621
20
DoldB. (2017). Acid rock drainage prediction: a critical review. J. Geochem. Explor.172, 120–132. 10.1016/j.gexplo.2016.09.014
21
EdrakiM.BaumgartlT.ManlapigE.BradshawD.FranksD. M.MoranC. J. (2014). Designing mine tailings for better environmental, social and economic outcomes: a review of alternative approaches. J. Clean. Prod.84, 411–420. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.079
22
European Commission Directorate-General for Internal MarketGroholM.VeehC. (2023). Study on the critical raw materials for the EU 2023 – final report. USA: Publications Office of the European Union.
23
FitzpatrickK.BakkerF. J. (2011). Technical report on the Cantung mine, Northwest Territories, Canada. Canada: North American Tungsten LTD.
24
FloresG. A.RisopatronC.PeaseJ. (2020). Processing of complex materials in the copper industry: challenges and opportunities ahead. JOM72 (10), 3447–3461. 10.1007/s11837-020-04255-9
25
FrostadS. R.PriceW. A.BentH. (2003). “Operational NP determination - accounting for iron manganese carbonates and developing a site-specific fizz rating,” in Sudbury '95, mining and the environment III (China: Sudbury, Ontario).
26
Gold (2020). True North complex - tailings operation. Available at: https://1911gold.com/assets/true-north-complex/(Accessed September 26, 2023).
27
GrahamA. R. (1969). Quantitative determination of hexagonal and monoclinic pyrrhotites by X-ray diffraction. Can. Mineralogist10 (1), 4–24.
28
HanZ.GolevA.EdrakiM. (2021). A review of tungsten resources and potential extraction from mine waste. Minerals11 (7), 701. 10.3390/min11070701
29
HayesS. M.McCulloughE. A. (2018). Critical minerals: a review of elemental trends in comprehensive criticality studies. Resour. Policy59, 192–199. 10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.06.015
30
Hudson-EdwardsK. A.JamiesonH. E.LottermoserB. G. (2011). Mine wastes: past, present, future. Elements7 (6), 375–380. 10.2113/gselements.7.6.375
31
JamiesonH. E.DoboszA. (2019). Characterization of the Cantung tailings by mineral liberation analysis 2019: report to NTGS.
32
JamiesonH. E.KazamelB.LeybourneM.DoboszA.FalckH. (2019). “Increasing value and decreasing environmental risk by reprocessing and stabilizing tungsten tailings at Cantung mine, NT, Canada,” in 15th society for geology applied to mineral deposits biennial meeting 2019 (UK: SGA).
33
JamiesonH. E.WalkerS. R.ParsonsM. B. (2015). Mineralogical characterization of mine waste. Appl. Geochem.57, 85–105. 10.1016/j.apgeochem.2014.12.014
34
JanzenM. P.NicholsonR. V.ScharerJ. M. (2000). Pyrrhotite reaction kinetics: reaction rates for oxidation by oxygen, ferric iron, and for nonoxidative dissolution. Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta64 (9), 1511–1522. 10.1016/S0016-7037(99)00421-4
35
KarlssonT.RaisanenM. L.LehtonenM.AlakangasL. (2018). Comparison of static and mineralogical ARD prediction methods in the Nordic environment. Environ. Monit. Assess.190 (12), 719–729. 10.1007/s10661-018-7096-2
36
KazamelB. (2020). Factors controlling tungsten mobility in W-Cu skarn tailings from the Cantung mine Northwest Territories. Canada. MSc: Queen's University.
37
KazamelB. G.JamiesonH. E.LeybourneM. I.FalckH. (2023). Factors controlling tungsten mobility in W-Cu skarn tailings. Chem. Geol.630, 121487. 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2023.121487
38
KinnunenP. H. M.KaksonenA. H. (2019). Towards circular economy in mining: opportunities and bottlenecks for tailings valorization. J. Clean. Prod.228, 153–160. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.171
39
Klohn Crippen Berger (2017). Study of tailings management technologies. Mine Environ. Neutral Drain.2.50.1.
40
KuhnK.MeimaJ. A.RammlmairD.OhlendorfC. (2016). Chemical mapping of mine waste drill cores with laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) and energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF) for mineral resource exploration. J. Geochem. Explor.161, 72–84. 10.1016/j.gexplo.2015.11.005
41
LapakkoK. A. (1994). Evaluation of neutralization potential determinations for metal mine waste and a proposed alternative. J. Am. Soc. Min. Reclam.1994 (1), 129–137. 10.21000/jasmr94010129
42
LiuJ.HuaZ. S.ChenL. X.KuangJ. L.LiS. J.ShuW. S.et al (2014). Correlating microbial diversity patterns with geochemistry in an extreme and heterogeneous environment of mine tailings. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.80 (12), 3677–3686. 10.1128/AEM.00294-14
43
LyuZ.ChaiJ.XuZ.QinY.CaoJ. (2019). A comprehensive review on reasons for tailings dam failures based on case history. Adv. Civ. Eng.2019, 1–18. 10.1155/2019/4159306
44
MachielsL.FrenzelM.GoldmannD.IllikainenM.PfisterS. (2021). Preface to the thematic section: mine tailings: problem or opportunity? Towards a combined remediation and resource recovery approach. J. Sustain. Metallurgy7 (4), 1440–1443. 10.1007/s40831-021-00468-7
45
MaestA. (2023). Remining for renewable energy metals: a review of characterization needs, resource estimates, and potential environmental effects. Minerals13 (11), 1454. 10.3390/min13111454
46
MESH Environmental Inc (2008). Geochemical characterization of the Cantung mine tailings. USA: NWT.
47
MorimotoN.NakazawaH.NishigucmiK.TokonamiM. (1970). Pyrrhotites: stoichiometric compounds with composition fen-1Sn (n≥8). Science168, 964–966. 10.1126/science.168.3934.964
48
MulenshiJ.GilbrichtS.ChelganiS. C.RosenkranzJ. (2021). Systematic characterization of historical tailings for possible remediation and recovery of critical metals and minerals – the Yxsjöberg case. J. Geochem. Explor.226, 106777. 10.1016/j.gexplo.2021.106777
49
MultaniR. S.WatersK. E. (2018). A review of the physicochemical properties and flotation of pyrrhotite superstructures (4C - Fe7S8/5C - Fe9S10) in Ni-Cu sulphide mineral processing. Can. J. Chem. Eng.96 (5), 1185–1206. 10.1002/cjce.23099
50
Nahanni National Park Reserve (2010). Naha dehe - Nahanni national Park Reserve of Canada. Available at: https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/nt/nahanni/visit/∼/media/EC085A2C67574FFF912A6AFBE39D3488.ashx (Accessed December 10, 2023).
51
Natural Resources Canada (2001). Canada. Available at: https://ftp.maps.canada.ca/pub/nrcan_rncan/raster/atlas_6_ed/reference/bilingual/canada01.pdf (Accessed December 10, 2023).
52
Natural Resources Canada (2022). The Canadian critical minerals strategy.
53
NicholsonR. V.TibbleP. A.WilliamsG. (1997). A Survey of in situ oxygen consumption rates on sulphide tailings: investigations on exposed and covered tailings. MEND.
54
NikonowW.RammlmairD.FurcheM. (2019). A multidisciplinary approach considering geochemical reorganization and internal structure of tailings impoundments for metal exploration. Appl. Geochem.104, 51–59. 10.1016/j.apgeochem.2019.03.014
55
North American Tungsten Corporation LTD (2020). Engagement plan V2.
56
PaktuncA. D. (1999). Mineralogical constraints on the determination of neutralization potential and prediction of acid mine drainage. Environ. Geol.39 (2), 103–112. 10.1007/s002540050440
57
PrescherC.PrakapenkaV. B. (2015). DIOPTAS: a program for reduction of two-dimensional X-ray diffraction data and data exploration. High Press. Res.35 (3), 223–230. 10.1080/08957959.2015.1059835
58
RasmussenK. L.LentzD. R.FalckH.PattisonD. R. M. (2011). Felsic magmatic phases and the role of late-stage aplitic dykes in the formation of the world-class Cantung Tungsten skarn deposit, Northwest Territories, Canada. Ore Geol. Rev.41 (1), 75–111. 10.1016/j.oregeorev.2011.06.011
59
SarkerS. K.HaqueN.BhuiyanM.BruckardW.PramanikB. K. (2022). Recovery of strategically important critical minerals from mine tailings. J. Environ. Chem. Eng.10 (3), 107622. 10.1016/j.jece.2022.107622
60
SRK Consulting Inc (2023). Cantung mine tailings storage facilities 2022 dam safety review. Vancouver, BC: FINAL REPORT.
61
TangX.ChenY. (2022). A review of flotation and selective separation of pyrrhotite: a perspective from crystal structures. Int. J. Min. Sci. Technol.32 (4), 847–863. 10.1016/j.ijmst.2022.06.001
62
Tetra Tech (2022). Annual geotehcnical inspection - tailings containment area, Cantung mine, tungsten, NT.
63
UlrichB. (2019). “Practical thoughts regarding filtered tailings,” in Paste 2019. Editors PatersonA. J. C.FourieA. B.ReidD. (Cape Town, South Africa: Australian Centre for Geomechanics).
64
URS (2000). “URS Norecol Dames and Moore, SRK consulting Inc, SENES consultants ltd, and BC research Inc,” in MEND manual volume 3 - prediction. Editors ManualMENDTremblayG. A.HoganC. M.5.4.2c ed (New York: INC).
65
U.S. Geological Survey (2022). 2022 final list of critical minerals. U.S. Geol. Surv. Dep. Interior.
66
ZinckJ.TischB.ChengT.CameronR. (2019). “Mining value from waste initiative: towards a low carbon and circular economy,” in Rewas 2019 (Germany: Springer International Publishing).
Summary
Keywords
heterogeneity, tailings reprocessing, automated mineralogy, tungsten, scheelite, Cantung Mine, acid rock drainage
Citation
Surrette A, Dobosz A, Lambiv Dzemua G, Falck H and Jamieson HE (2024) Geochemical and mineralogical heterogeneity of the Cantung mine tailings: implications for remediation and reprocessing. Front. Geochem. 2:1392021. doi: 10.3389/fgeoc.2024.1392021
Received
26 February 2024
Accepted
16 April 2024
Published
10 June 2024
Volume
2 - 2024
Edited by
Michael Ojovan, Imperial College London, United Kingdom
Reviewed by
Juan M Menéndez-Aguado, University of Oviedo, Spain
Nuno Durães, University of Aveiro, Portugal
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2024 Surrette, Dobosz, Lambiv Dzemua, Falck and Jamieson.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: A. Surrette, a.surrette@queensu.ca
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.