Minerals Engineering, Vol. 9, NO. 9, pp.

907-921, 1996
Pergamon Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd
Printed in Great Britain. All rights re,served
P l h S0892-6875(96)00083--0 0892-6875/96 $15.00+0.00

IMPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE THROUGH

INNOVATION: RECENT TRENDS IN THE MINING INDUSTRY

A. W A R H U R S T a n d G . B R I D G E

University of Bath, International Centre for the Environment,

School of Management, Bath BA2 7AY, UK
(Received 24 April 1996; accepted 1 June 1996)

ABSTRACT

Innovation in mineral processing technology can enable mining companies to combine

gains in productivity with improvements in environmental management. Although the
mining industry has a reputation for technological conservatism, this paper argues that
the development, acquisition and assimilation of new technologies may be an increasingly
important determinant of a company's competitive position in the context of growing
market and regulatory pressures. Specific examples of innovative process and remediation
technologies are reviewed, and their ability to improve competitiveness and sustain best-
practice environmental management is linked to the capacity of the company to manage
technological and organisational change. Copyright ©1996 Elsevier Science Ltd

Keywords
Environmental; mineral economics; mining; hydrometallurgy; pyrometallurgy

INTRODUCTION

The international lnining industry has a reputation for technological conservatism. The U.S. Office of
Technology Assessment, for example, describes this as a "tendency to repair, rebuild, and retrofit, rather
than replace...equipment" [1]. This reputation, however, is only partly justified. To the extent that it is
based on the radk',al (and therefore most visible) technological breakthroughs, the reputation is valid.
Radical technical change involving a significant departure from past practice is relatively rare in the
industry, reflecting high capital costs, long lead times of project development, and the high
risks involved in committing capital and expertise to unproven technology. Technology development is
inherently risky and corporate aversion to risk in the mining sector is particularly acute due to the already
considerable political risks associated with the development and operation of mines in overseas locations
and the commerci;d uncertainties stemming from the vagaries of market demand. The reputation for
conservatism is unjustified, however, if one considers the role of incremental technological and
organisational improvements in the development of the industry during the twentieth century. Improvements
in process control and optimisation, or the application of existing technologies at increasing scales of
operation to capture greater efficiences, have been fundamental to the competitiveness of major mineral
producers. By reducing costs per unit of output, such improvements have enabled companies to circumvent
the diminishing economic returns associated with developing an ore body of fixed geological properties and
spatial extent under conditions of a static technology.

907
908 A. Warhurst and G. Bridge

THE IMPERATIVE TO INNOVATE IN MINING

Innovation is central to sustaining the competitiveness of mining operations since by reducing production
costs, new process techniques enable the profitable extraction and processing of lower grade and more
complex ores. It is arguably the incremental innovations associated with the increase in capacity and scale
of mineral processing techniques, such as grinding, column flotation, and earth moving equipment (itself
dependent on advances in rubber technology for tyres and conveyor belts) that have enabled the continued
competitiveness of mining regions which have only relatively low-grade deposits remaining (e.g. copper
in the U.S.). The incremental nature of many of these innovations can be illustrated by reference to the
increasing scale of long-wall mining techniques [2]. The ability of long-wall miners to work a face
300-1000 metres long is dependent, in part, on small yet significant improvements to the strength of
carbide steels which have increased the durability of bucket wheel excavators and the ability of the long-
wall machine to penetrate harder rock.

RENEWED INCENTIVES TO INNOVATE

The competitive imperative for mining companies to develop, acquire, and assimilate new technology has
been re-invigorated by market and regulatory pressures over the last decade. Intensified competition in
minerals markets and the "environmental imperative" have increased the incentive for mining companies
to invest in the innovation and assimilation of new technologies in order to remain competitive. Innovation
is increasingly a key determinant of competitiveness for mining companies. The CEO of Kalgoolie
Consolidated Gold Mines, Australia recently described the situation as one of "innovate or perish". Without
innovation and technology development, Australia would not recover its position as a low-cost producer
in an increasingly competitive market [3].

Competitive Market Pressures

Most minerals are traded as homogeneous, fungible commodities. Mineral commodities provide little scope
for product differentiation between individual producers and, assuming a standardised product quality,
competition is based predominantly on cost. The commodity market therefore provides a considerable
incentive to produce at the lowest cost, particularly since marginal high-cost producers will be pushed out
during cyclical downturns in demand. Over the last two decades, competition in many minerals markets
has increased, rendering cost-reduction through technological and organisational change increasingly
important to corporate strategy. In the 1950s and 1960s strong growth in many regional markets and an
oligopolistic industry structure for key minerals provided relatively buoyant market conditions with limited
pressure on price. In the U.S. copper industry, for example, oligopolistic control over market supply and
a relatively strong demand in the domestic market reduced competitive pressures in the industry, postponing
the need to cut production costs and diminishing the incentive for technological change. Since the late
1970s, however, many mineral markets have undergone a transition towards increased competition due to
a number of factors. These include: an increase in new market entrants as a consequence of nationalisation
and expropriation in the early 1970s and economic growth outside core economies during the 1980s; a
world-wide recession leading to a protracted period of exce~ supply for many metals and industrial
minerals; the decline of self-contained regional markets and the emergence of global market for minerals
associated with industrial growth outside of traditional market areas of OECD; and competition in end-use
markets following the development of alternative materials able to perform similar functions, for example
the increasing importance of plastic rather than copper in the domestic piping market [4].

A 'measure' of the increased competition in many mineral markets is the shift from regional markets
dominated by producer pricing to a global market based on LME/COMEX exchange prices. Producer
pricing in copper in the U.S, for example, collapsed after Kennecott and Anaconda moved to exchange
prices after 1978, and nickel, aluminium, and other base metal trading were introduced to the LME during
the late 1980s. In the U.S. copper market, for example, competition increased when the nationalisation of
mining assets in Latin America in the early 1970s eroded the U.S. copper oligopoly by undermining the
ability of U.S. producers to control the flow of copper onto U.S. markets. The loss of control over the
 Improving environmentalperformancethrough innovation 909

supply of copper to the market produced a structural, rather than purely cyclical surplus, driving down and
maintaining prices at low levels for much of the 1980s, and exposing the position of the U.S. as a high cost
producer. High costs and consistently low prices forced U.S. producers to find ways to reduce production
costs. Significantly these included innovation and acquisition of new production technologies, including
investment in economies of scale, micro-electronics and process control technology, and process
improvements enabling the effective coupling of solvent extraction and electrowinning to produce copper
from low grade oxide and sulphide ores.

New Market Opportunities

Although the "environmental imperative" is most often regarded as an external pressure to which
companies must re,act, there is emerging evidence (particularly in the manufacturing sector) that some
companies regard l~e environment as a new strategic arena and are taking a proactive stance towards the
environment to capture a competitive advantage. There is little evidence as yet (with the possible exception
of aluminium) that non-ferrous metal producers are seeking competitive advantage through the marketing
of "green" metal products, but some mineral markets are nonetheless very sensitive to the quality and
reliable delivery of products. To the extent that attributes of quality, reliability, and environmental
management are all dependent on the technological, organisational and managerial capacity of companies,
there is a correlation between competitiveness in the market and environmental performance [5]. There is,
in addition, a growing market for environmental technologies,i services and expertise. The development of
technologies and managerial capacity in the area of environmental performance can represent a potential
new profit centre fi~r some companies. Mt. Isa Mines, for example, has developed a successful technology
marketing group which has licensed a number of products including ISASMELT, the Jameson Cell and the
ISA PROCESS, a copper refining technology. Since its introduction to commerical operations in 1990 over
120 Jameson Cells have been deployed in a variety of applications (see below), and by 1994 the ISA
PROCESS had been licensed to 34 operators representing 20 % of global production [38]. The development
of flash converting by Kennecott and Outokumpu (see below) has sparked interest in possible licensing
arrangements. Technology marketing provides an opportunity to recoup R&D costs, although it is unlikely
that technology licensing will become a new profit centre for Kennecott. Alcan has seized on the
environment as a ,~ource of competitive advantage and is involved in developing innovative technologies
for industry which would improve the market for recycling aiuminium. These include proprietary structures
for car bodies and an innovative bonding system for their attachment, contributing to the environmental
efficiency of the motor car through being both lightweight :(thus reducing fuel consumption) and fully
recyclable [6].

Technological development and managerial capacity in the areas of quality and environmental performance
add value to the company either directly (through patenting and trade) or indirectly as part of a company's
research reputatioi~ and international profile. Although intangible, this reputation can be a significant factor
in determining a company's stock market value and in obtaining access and credit in emerging markets.
Providers of credit and insurance arc increasingly aware that poor environmental performance can delay
a project significantly and increase exposure to liabilities. Insurance companies offering political risk
insurance to Australian mining companies, for example, have started to insist on annual reviews of
environmental standards in the companies' international operations [39]. A recent illustration of the
heightened sensitivity among financial institutiom was provided by the decision of the Overseas Private
Investment Corpo:ration to withdraw $100 million worth of risk insurance from the Grasberg mine in Irian
Jaya, ostensibly on the grounds of ecological damage to forests and river systems [7]. Not only is a good
environmental re~ord increasingly important in securing financial backing, it may also be a factor in gaining
access to newly-liberalised investment regimes. Increased scrutiny of mining projects from investment,
credit, and insurance companies, the trend towards harmonisation of national environmental standards, and
the emergence of voluntary standards and codes of conduct at the global level (e.g. ISO 14000, Berlin
Guidelines) are combining to make clean process and best-practice standards the sine qua non of market
access and project approval. Demonstration of technological and managerial strategies for environmental
best-practice is inrreasingly required by banks and financial institutions which finance investment projects
in the developing world, such as the International Finance Corporation of the World Bank and the Japanese
Overseas Economic Co-operation fund. While these agencies may provide only a small proportion of total
910 A. Warhurstand G. Bridge

project funding, their approval can be key to leveraging further funds.

Regulatory Pressures and the 'Voice of Society'

The rapid increase in environmental legislation over the last 25 years has provided an additional incentive
to innovate in order to stay in business. In response to a raft of regulatory initiatives and elevated levels
of public and commercial concern about the impacts and risk associated with poor environmental
performance in both industrialised and developing countries, dynamic companies have sought ways to
reduce pollution while at the same time remaining competitive. Unlike manufacturing or the electricity
generating industries, the option of changing raw material feed stocks as a means of reducing pollution is
not so readily available to mining companies (although planning mine development to avoid high sulphide
or other problematic ores has been suggested as a way of reducing the potential for pollution during
processing: for example, the sourcing of "clean" low-iron zinc sulphide deposits from the Century Mine
in northern Queensland as feed for Pasminco's Budel zinc smelter in the Netherlands will enable it to meet
future Dutch regulations on jarosite disposal). The limited scope for changing feed stocks, however means
that innovation in beneficiation and processing is the primary means by which the environmental impacts
of production can be reduced [8].

For some companies, regulation has provided the incentive to invest in new processes which are able to
lower production costs overall. Faced with increasing controls and penalties on account of the toxic dust
content of its processing plants, a Brazilian gold company designed and introduced specialised dust
precipitators. As a consequence, not only were dust levels reduced but the extra gold values collected in
the dust more than paid for the cost of buying and installing the new equipment. The rising costs of land
disposal (as a result of increasingly stringent land use controls) for moulding sand at a foundry in
Pennsylvania, U.S. led the company to invest in a sand reclamation programme as part of a comprehensive
waste minimisation scheme which netted the company $2.4 million per year in savings [9]. In response to
a condition of permitting, the Coeur d'Alene mining company developed a cyanide recovery technology
(Cyanisorb) to recover cyanide from the tailings stream of its gold operations rather than from decant water
in the tailings pond. As a proprietary technique, Cyanisorb has become a marketable product for the
company. The threat of a substantial fine in anticipation of acid mine drainage from low-grade waste-dumps
at Exxon's Los Bronces mine in Chile, led the company to seek alternative solutions. The fine provided
an economic justification for the development of a bioleaching project which was able to extract copper
profitably from the waste dumps while preventing water quality degradation. A further example is provided
by INCO which developed its smelting technologies in response to new legislation from the Ontario
Environment Ministry. The company has embarked on an aggressive technology licensing initiative to
commercialise its new technologies in other copper and nickel-producing countries, with six agreements
signed by 1994.

THE LIMITATIONS OF CURRENT REGULATORY APPROACHES

Although successful in focusing attention on environmental performance, regulatory approaches have tended
to discourage innovative responses to the environmental imperative. Rather than seeking innovative ways
to reduce environmental damage costs, regulations instead have assumed the technology and organisation
of production (and therefore the environmental damage costs) to be static, and have focused on the
distribution of these fixed environmental damage costs among stakeholders. Hence the concept of the
environmental trade-off: either society suffers from pollution or industry internalises the environmental
damage costs associated with pollution. Approaches to regulation which promote pollution control through
Best Available Technology (BAT), for example, are based on the assumption that emissions and waste
materials are an inevitable part of production and that the environmental impacts of these emissions can
be most effectively controlled through pricing to internalise environmental damage costs and make the
polluter pay. BAT controls have proved very effective at reducing pollution after their initial application,
but they create a situation of technology lock-in where a company has little incentive to find alternative,
innovative ways to comply with environmental performance standards. There is also no guanmtee that once
items of BAT are in place environmental performance will be sustained and improved over time. Although
 Improving environmental performance through innovation 911

add-on controls car[ have relatively low capital costs, retrofitting tends to increase production costs by
reducing process efficiency and offering little flexibility for further improvement. As regulatory standards
change, so new deviices (and further capital costs) are required to achieve the permitted levels of discharge.

There is growing recognition that technological innovation can be stimulated by an environmental

regulatory framework in which compliance costs are offset by productivity gains [10, 11]. The objective
of such regulation is not simply to control pollution and distribute the costs, but to reduce pollution at
source. The chemic,als sector has led this revolution in approaches to waste management through several
innovative programmes, notably Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing' s (3M)' "3P" programme--Pollution
Prevention Pays. Re-regulation to reduce total environmental damage costs by encouraging pollution
prevention through investment in new production technologies and organisational practices has emerged
as a policy objective in several countries (e.g.U.S. Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, U.S. Bureau o f
Mines Guidelines fi3r Pollution Prevention in Mining and Mineral Processing). Several regulatory regimes
have begun to incorporate strategies for source reduction and pollution prevention into their environmental
statutes. Typical provisions include requirements to improve unit efficieneies, modify or eliminate
production steps, and change, substitute, or modify production input materials [9]. Few policies, however,
have established systematic incentives for industry to innovate and develop new environmental technology,
and in practice pollution prevention legislation has continued to focus on internalising fixed environmental
damage costs rather than reducing them through innovation in the production process.

Regulatory policy has some way to go in furthering the aims of pollution prevention, but there is evidence
to suggest that some of the more dynamic companies in the international mining industry are developing
and investing in cleaner technologies in a shift away from end.of-pipe pollution control techniques such as
flue-gas scrubbers, dust precipitators, or waste water treatment plants, towards a re-engineering of the
production process itself to reduce or even eliminate waste. Efforts to reduce SO2 emissions from two
different Falconbr~idge smelters illustrate the site-specific nature of the innovation efforts required to
respond to enviromalental regulation and are an indication that "Best Practice" rather than "Best Available
Technology" standards are more appropriate regulatory instruments. Falconbridge Ltd has reduced its total
SO2 emissions from an estimated 122,000 tones in 1980 to some 63,500 tons in 1988 through a
combination of processes. At the Falconbridge smelter, where for technical reasons recovery of SO2 is
particularly difficult, the approach has been through incremental improvements to existing technology. In
contrast, Falconbridge's new Kidd Creek electrolytic zinc plant was designed and operated from the outset
to meet current an6 foreseeable environmental constraints. The zinc concentrate is "fluid-bed" roasted but,
unlike the partial roasting of nickel-copper sulphides at Falconbridge, the Kidd Creek concentrate is "dead"
roasted to oxidise a substantial proportion of the sulphur to SO2 for acid production. SO2 emissions to the
atmosphere are therefore nominal. The by-product acid is used to leach oxide calcine to produce a neutral,
purified zinc sulphate solution for electrolysis to zinc cathodes [12].

The high front-end costs and long-term nature of investment in pollution prevention is demonstrated by
Alean InternationaL's recent programme of pollution abatement and modernisation. Expected to cost more
than C$3 billion by the year 2015, the investment replaces horizontal Stud Sodeberg smelters in Quebec
with more environmentally sophisticated facilities, and modernises old pre-bake cells at its Arvida Works.
One third of the investment is committed to the construction of a new 200,000 t/y Laterriere smelter in
Chicoutimi, which will gradually come on stream as older, more pollutant, capacity is shut down. This will
enable the company to eliminate virtually all its emissions of toxic aromatic hydrocarbons.

INNOVATION FOR POLLUTION PREVENTION IN SMELTING

The non-ferrous raetals industry produces a range of metals from their sulphide ores, notably nickel,
copper, zinc and lead. The pyrometallurgical treatment of sulphide ores involves a controlled oxidation of
the sulphides to produce sulphur dioxide gas. In the treatment of chalcopyrite, for example, two tonnes of
sulphur dioxide gas are produced for every tonne of copper. Sulphur dioxide from smelting and other
sources is a contributor to acid precipitation, and has been implicated in several ecological and health
problems including crop damage, forest die-back, the erosion of masonry, and respiratory complications
912 A. Warhurst and G. Bridge

in humans. Together with a steep rise in energy prices during the 1970s, the demonstration of the linkage
between sulphur dioxide emissions and acid precipitation has challenged the smelting industry to find ways
of reducing sulphur dioxide emissions while continuing to be viable in a very competitive world market.

The development of smelting technology exemplifies the shift away from retrofitting pollution controls
towards the redesign of the production process for cost-effective pollution prevention. Unable to meet
increasingly stringent air quality standards during the 1970s and 1980s, operators of reverberatory furnaces
had the choice of closing the operation altogether, retrofitting the reverberatory furnace with acid plant
equipment and an oxy-fuel reaction shaft, or investment in oxygen-flash smelting technology. Re-
engineering the production process through investment in flash smelting has enabled improvements in
efficiency and productivity to be combined with a reduction of emissions and environmental compliance
costs over the long term. The Hlsmelt process for iron ores'illustrates the economic efficiencies of investing
in pollution prevention. Initiated as a research project between CRA and Kloeckner Stahlwerke in 1981,
the process is able to smelt iron ores directly in a single stage and consists of closed molten bath reactor,
eliminating the need for blast furnace, coke ovens, and sinter plants. A large scale research plant is
currently operated by CRA and Midrex Corporation and has the potential to substantially improve the
economics of steel making and result in significant environmental improvements.

Considerable progress towards pollution prevention in the smelting industry has been made over the last
few years through the redesign of the production process for sulphide ores to facilitate sulphur dioxide
capture and its efficient conversion. In seeking to meet the challenge posed by competitive market pressures
and regulatory and societal demands for better environmental performance, new technologies have
improved process efficiency and cut emissions by reducing the number of stages in the smelting process,
increasing the concentration of sulphur in the off-gas, and enclosing the process so as to make the capture
of off-gases as efficient as possible. Additional methods for reducing the atmospheric impacts of sulphur
dioxide include improvements in the efficiency of conversion to sulphuric acid (the most popular option,
but constrained by the need for proximate markets), improving ore feed quality by rejecting iron sulphides
of low metal value, and the production of elemental sulphur either directly through the metal extraction
process (e.g. the ferric chloride leach process for the treatment of concentrates from complex
lead-zinc-copper-silver sulphide ores) or indirectly through SO2 conversion. Noranda Minerals Inc, for
example, has reduced SO2 emissions at its seven metallurgical facilities from 800,000 tonnes per year in
1970 to 270,000 tonnes per year in 1990 by adopting smelter technologies that reduce SO2 production, and
by increasing the conversion to sulphuric acid which is sold as a by-product [13]. Inco Ltd has also been
working for a number of years to reduce SO2 emissions at its Sudbury operations. Progress has been made
by rejecting more pyrrhotite in the milling operations and the introduction of new flash smelter technologies
to facilitate sulphuric acid production. The latest phase of their Sulphur Dioxide Abatement Project is
expected to reduce SO2 emissions further through the commissioning of a flash converter for high copper
matte and a modified gas cleaning system [14].

INCO Flash Smelting Technology

INCO's development of oxygen flash smelting technology is an example of radical technical change
necessitated by the exhaustion of possibilities for further efficiency improvements in conventional
technologies. Until recently one of the world's highest cost nickel producers, INCO was the greatest single
source of environmental pollution in North America as a result of an aged and inefficient revcrberatory
furnace smelter at Sudbury, Ontario which emitted excessive volumes of SO2. Having reached the limits
of efficiency improvements in this obsolete technology, and unable to meet increasingly stringent
regulations as part of an intensive acid rain abatement programme by the Ontario Environment Ministry,
INCO invested over C$3,000 million in research and development. The INCO oxygen flash smelter
produces a concentrated SO2 off-gas stream which can be efficiently captured and fixed as sulphnric acid.
In addition the flash smelting process utilises the exothermic properties of sulphide ores and requires very
little additional fuel. The process efficiencies stemming from the application of the technology have not
only reduced SO2 emissions at Sudbury by over 100,000 t/pa, but have helped transform the company into
one of the world's lowest cost producers [lO].
 Improvingenvironmentalperformancethrough innovation 913

Kennecott/Outokmnpu Oy Flash Smelter, Garfield, Utah

The development of a new generation of flash smelting/flash converting by Kennecott and Outokumpu Oy
at Garfield, Utah h,Ls been heralded as the "cleanest smelter in the world" and as such, one of the most
significant innovations in mineral processing in recent times. The new smelter and converter complex
replaces an existing facility which was able to handle only 60% of the concentrates produced at the
Bingham Canyon mine. To meet increasingly tough air quality, regulations, the company was faced with
a choice of investing $150 million in pollution control technology and being constrained by the existing
smelter capacity, or investing $880 million on a new process. The new process increased the capacity of
the smelter to handi[e 100% of the concentrates, thereby eliminating transportation and processing costs
associated with the shipment of concentrates to Pacific Rim smelters, and enabling the plant to meet or
exceed all existing and anticipated air quality regulations. It is anticipated that the new plant will reduce
operating costs by 53% [15]. The principal features of the new complex are the replacement of traditional
Pierce-Smith converters with a patented flash converter, the total enclosure of the converter, and the
replacement of open-air ladle transfer of molten matte with a solid-state transfer. Molten matte is cooled
with water into a granulated form prior to transfer to the converters, significantly reducing the release of
sulphur dioxide and other gases in the transfer process. Although the cooling of the matte involves a loss
of heat energy, "waste" heat is captured as steam and fed to a co-generation unit. The selection of flash
converting enables a continuous high throughput of material and a much increased concentration of sulphur
in the off-gas, greatly improving the efficiency of sulphur capture. In combination with the world's largest
double contact acid plant, annual average emissions of sulphur dioxide will be reduced from 3,600 pounds
per hour to 200 per hour [ 16, 17].

At the time that Keunecott was evaluating options to increase smelting capacity, the State of Utah adopted
significantly more :restrictive regulations for the control of SO2 and PMlo particulates I as part of the
Environmental Protection Agency's mandated State Implementation Plan (SIP) for compliance with the
Federal Clean Air Act. The new regulations required that SO2 be limited to 16,850 t/y and PMIo to 1,216
t/y. The smelter's existing SO2 emissions had averaged 20,050 t/y, with PMto emissions of about 800 t/y.
Compliance with the new regulations would have required a decrease in the old smelter's operating capacity
and replacement of the single-contact acid plants. Furthermore, modifications to that smelter were likely
to be inadequate to meet more restrictive regulations expected after the mid-1990s. The strategy developed
for the new smelter was to install the best available emission control equipment and minimise the need for
progressive modifications to the facility in the future. With the new smelter able to capture 99.9% of input
sulphur, Kennecott was able to propose to the Utah Department of Air Quality an emission limit of 982
t/y (112 kg/h) for SO2, a 50% reduction in PM10 limits, and acid mist emissions reduced by approximately
one-third. Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) were also reduced significantly by using ultra-low NO x
burners in all applications. Exceeding compliance requirements and establishing emissions standards below
those of the Department of Air Quality facilitated the permit approval process which was expedited to only
five months [ 18].

"LEAN AND CLEAN" PRODUCTION THROUGH

INNOVATION IN PROCESS CONTROL

The policy of Pollution Prevention Pays recognises that successful pollution prevention can improve a
company's competiLtive position as well as its environmental performance. The principal mechanism by
which preventing pollution is judged to improve competitiveness is through improvements to resource
productivity (although other, less tangible benefits such as improved access to credit and expedited
permitting may also be important--see above). The resource productivity argument holds that emissions
and waste materials are, in essence, wasted resources and as such pollution is an indicator of inefficiency

'PMIO refers to particles of less than 10 microns in size which are judged to be a more serious health risk than larger panicles.
914 A. Warhurstand G. Bridge

[10, 11, 19]. Improving efficiency reduces costs and waste per unit of output and improves environmental
performance so that an efficient "lean" company is not only competitive but also "clean".

A prerequisite to improving efficiency and environmental performance is a high level of process control.
Process control is the technological and managerial capacity to continuously adjusted process conditions
so as to optimise overall performance. Achieving process control relies on the monitoring and processing
of reliable, real-time information on operations and the capacity to adjust and maintain desired levels of
performance. The microelectronics revolution has enabled greater degrees of process control than were
formerly possible through an increased capacity for monitoring (e.g. the development of instream sensors
and particle size monitors), rapid data analysis, modelling, and computer automation [20]. Flotation
technologies, for example, have been used since the 1920s, but it was not until the early 1980s that
automated control systems became available which enabled a fine-tuning of the flotation process to optimise
its performance. The introduction of an expert system to control reagent use in flotation at ASARCO
Sweetwater and Doe Run in Missouri has enabled a reduction of reagent use and, as a result of improving
the quality of concentrate passing to the smelter, decreased smelter emissions per unit of output [21]. As
part of a programme for evaluating the options for smelter modernisation, CANMET has been working
with the non-ferrous smelting industry, Environment Canada, and Industry, Science and Technology
Canada to develop a ceramic-based sensor for concentrations of SO2 and SO3 gases in an effort to optimise
process control. Sensors have already been developed for the continuous measurement of oxygen in copper
casters and lead blast furnaces with the aim of modernising smelters and optimising their operation to
reduce substantially SO2 emissions and metal losses [14].

Jameson Cdl Technology--Mt. Isa Mines (MIM)

The Jameson Cell exemplifies how innovation to improve resource productivity and achieve greater levels
of process control can also improve the environmental performance of a mineral processing plant. The
Jameson cell (exclusive marketing rights to which are held by MIM holdings) has a wide range of mineral
processing applications. As an alternative separation process to column flotation, the cell achieves a higher
concentration of froth via a simple "downcomer" device in which air and liquid mineral feed are introduced
together at the top of the flotation cell rather than air at the bottom as in conventional flotation. The effect
is to increase froth generation and, as a consequence, to improve the rate of metal recovery. The
technology has been widely used in Australia for such diverse applications as improving recoveries in the
lead/zinc concentrator at Mt. Isa Mines, for the recovery of coal fines which previously had been sent as
waste to tailings at Newlands coal mine, and for concentrate cleaning at the Peko Mines copper
concentrator. The technology also has been favourably applied at copper processing facilities in the U.S.,
Canada, and Italy where it is able to improve hydrocarbon and reagent recovery at solvent
extraction-electrowinning (SX-EW) plants. Reagent non-recovery can represent a substantial component
of operating costs at SX-EW plants, and the placement of the cell between the SX and EW stages enables
the recovery of reagents from the aqueous raffinate. In addition to improving the economics of reagent use,
the Jameson cell removes reagents which would otherwise be carried forward into the electrowin plant,
thereby facilitating the improvement of final product quality. Other promising applications of the Jameson
Cell include antimony cleaning, copper oxide and gold flotation, and the recovery of zinc from tailings
[38].

New Control Technologies for Refractory Gold Pre-Treatment

Refractory gold ores--those that do not respond well to simple cyanidation without pretreatment and are
typically pyritic, arsenopyritic or carbonaceous--have received increasing attention in the United States with
the discovery that many near-surface oxidised deposits are underlain by large gold-bearing sulphide
(refractory) deposits. Common pretreatment methods for refractory ores are masting, pressure oxidation,
and biooxidat'on. Chlorination pretreatment is also utilised to treat refractory gold ores containing
carbonaceous materials at some mines, although its applicability is limited due to the requirement for low
sulphur in the ore in order to minimise chlorine consumption. The principal environmental issues associated
with pretreatment are the capture of sulphur, arsenic, mercury and particulates, with other potential
pollutants (such as antimony) of possible importance depending on the specific ore mineralogy. The
 Improvingenvironmentalperformancethrough innovation 915

selection of a pretreatment technique depends upon mineralogy, the economics of mineral recovery,
possible environmen'tal impacts, and the industry's acceptance of the technology as proven. In recent years
the environmental aspect of mineral processing has become of increasing importance in the selection of
treatment routes.

A recent study by the U.S. Bureau of Mines compared the environmental control technology requirements
associated with roasting, pressure oxidation, and biooxidation [22]. With the exception of biooxidation,
atmospheric emissions were found to be the most significant area in which environmental control
technology was required. All three pretreatment processes require a degree of liquid effluent control, while
roasting can require the greatest overall pollution control effort. Roasting can be especially problematic
because particulates, SO 2, Hg, and AS203 in flue gas require a complex and expensive gas treatment
system. In addition the economics of roasting necessitate preparatory dry grinding of the ore which can be
an additional source of potential pollutants. By comparison pressure oxidation is a relatively clean process
with potential emissions limited to particulates and SO 2. Environmental considerations were a major driving
force behind the dev,elopment of biooxidation processes for treatment of refractory gold ores. Biooxidation
is the cleanest of the three processes, requires the least environmental control technology, and has the
lowest environment~d control costs.

As oxide gold ore deposits are depleted refractory gold ores will become increasingly important, and this
is already reflected :in the number of refractory gold pretreatment plants being constructed in the United
States: five gold pressure oxidation plants were constructed since the mid-1980s, and four new roasting
plants have been constructed over the last five years with two more under construction. Large-scale
applications of bio-heap leaching are still in the developmental stage in the United States, with ongoing
research into the development of new strains of bacteria. One major U.S. gold producer has announced
plans to construct a whole ore, heap leach biooxidation plant at its Carlin, Nevada, operations and several
other U.S. gold operators are attempting small-scale biooxidation of refractory gold ores [23].

The S~o Bento Minerac~o company selected pressure oxidation technology for the recovery of gold from
a refractory ore body primarily on the grounds of its superior environmental characteristics. The ore feed
contains 20 per cent sulphur and 15-18 per cent arsenic and were the highest levels ever to be treated in
Brazil. Since Brazilian legislation does not allow for the atmospheric discharge of sulphur above
80mg/NM 3 or the release of arsenic into drainage in concentrations above 0.2mg/litre, their recovery and
treatment was an essential part of the process. The capital costs of pressure oxidation were about 25 per
cent higher than the alternative fluosolid roasting process but achieving effective pollution control would
be substantially less; difficult. The pressure oxidation process produces a liquid effluent only, a distinct
advantage over the roasting alternative which produces gaseous and liquid effluents. Thus, taking into
account the serious environmental and plant hygiene problems associated with the roasting of concentrates
at those very high levels of arsenic, the pressure oxidation route with its inherent cleanliness was
preferred 2. In the o3ntext of an evolving environmental regulatory framework this choice was also seen
as a means to avoid future financial penalties 3. S~o Bento Minerac~o offers one of the few examples of a
developing-country company which has incorporated improved economic and environmental efficiency into
a new leaching operation, and the company is currently planning to double its production and at the same
time introduce bacterial oxidation to augment the pressure oxidation process [10,24].

2Another feature of the projectwas an environmentalcondition stipulated by the equipment supplier, which was that the arsenic level
in the effluentwould have been required to meetthe level specifiedin the countryof origin of the technology. Therefore, the Swedish
specification of 0.05mg/NM3 was applicable. These conditions remain to be met by the plant, although its discharges fall within
Brazilian limits, achiev¢,:lthrough lime ferric arsenate precipitation.
3 Like the Homvstakegold mining operation at McLaughlin mine, a series of environmentalcontrols were built into the Sic Bento
mine from the outset. The mining areas have all been terraced. Afar completionof the cut and fill excavationprocedure, terraces
are landscaped and sprayedwith a hydroseal mixtureof indigenous grass seed, fertilizerand water. A secondarygrowth of trees has
also started. About 50 per cent of barren tailings are placedas back-fillin the stoppedout areas, the remainderare collected in tailings
dams, and excesswater itsrecycled to the plant for treatmentprior to discharge. Finally, monitoringof water samplesfrom boreholes
near the tailings dam is undertaken fortnightly under COPAM (EnvironmentalPolicy Council) guidelines.
916 A. Warhurstand O. Bridge

MANAGING TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE: BIOLEACHING

The development of heap, dump, vat and in-situ bioleaching for a range of non-ferrous metals has
revolutionised metal recovery techniques enabling the processing of low grade and chemically complex
ores. In addition to having lower capital and operating costs and being flexible in scale, bio-leaching is a
potentially cleaner production process for many metals, since it can obviate the need for the energy
intensive and traditionally polluting roasting, smelting, and refining stages. Bioleaching utilises a particular
group of bacteria (the obligate chemolithoautotrophs) which obtain energy through the oxidation of
insoluble inorganic sulphides or ferric iron [25, 26]. The bacteria occur naturally, and are responsible for
the processes which generate acid mine drainage. Productive use of the bacteria's oxidation of sulphide
minerals has been made since Roman times, but it has only been in the last two decades that a series of
incremental improvements have enabled bioleaching to become a large-scale commercial prospect.
Important advances include an increase in the capacity of earth moving equipment facilitating dump and
heap leaching, developments in ion-exchange technology to improve the concentration ofraffinate solutions
to the point at which they can be efficiently electrolysed, and improvements in procedures for data analysis,
modelling, and process control sufficient to produce a consistently high quality product. To date bioleaching
has been applied commercially to the recovery of gold, uranium, copper, and nickel.

BIOX and BioNIC

Gencor pioneered the BIOX process for the biological oxidation of sulphide gold deposits in laboratory
research during the late 1970s and by 1986 a full-scale commercial plant was operating at Fairview in
South Africa, In the BIOX process ore is crushed to liberate sulphide minerals from gangue, then floated
to produce a concentrate. The concentrate is fed to slurry tanks containing bacteria (ThiobaciUus
ferrooxidans) in which temperature, oxygen and pH conditions are controlled to achieve an optimum rate
of reproduction. Average residence time for the slurry is four to five days, after which it is thickened and
treated in a conventional cyanidation plant. Arsenic in the ore is recovered in the solution from the
thickeners and precipitated as inert and environmentally stable ferric arsenate suitable for tailings disposal
[25]. The advantages of the process over conventional treatments are its reduced capital and operating
costs, improved recovery rates which are not constrained by grade, very robust bacteria able to withstand
considerable variations in ambient conditions, and the potential to be a non-polluting process. Gencor
reports that the replacement of roasters with the BIOX process at Fairview contributed significantly to
solving the problems of sulphur dioxide and arsenic trioxide pollution. Gencor's bioleaching technology
is licensed to other producers, with the first licensed plant commissioned at Ashton's Harbour Lights in
Western Australia in 1991. This was followed by ASARCO's Wiluna plant in 1993, and Ashanti
Goldfield's Sansu Mine in 1994. At 1 Mt/y, Ashanti is the largest BIOX installation and has been very
successful with recovery rates of over 94 % (direct cyanidation yielded 5-40 %). The success of the process
has led Gencor to a review its policy of technology licensing, and opt for a programme of equity
participation, such as the planned joint venture between Gencor and Lonrho at Yamantoto in Uzbekistan.

In the last five years Gencor has pioneered the bioleaching of nickel sulphides. The BioNIC process
provides a means of treating nickel sulphides where the head grade is too low to allow sufficient
concentration. It avoids the need to roast ores and provides an effective way of dealing with high levels
of impurities such as arsenic which currently prevent the development of many nickel sulphide ores.
BioNIC is a three stage process: the bioleaching of concentrates to take metals into solution; ion exchange
and solvent extraction to separate iron and nickel into a pure solution; followed by electrowinning to yield
a pure ferronickel product. Arsenic is taken off in solution and precipitated out in the same manner as the
BIOX process. In 1994 Gencor entered into a joint venture with an Australian producer, Maggie Hays
Nickel, in which Gencor will supply BioNIC process technology to the Lake Johnston nickel project in
Western Australia. The venture will significantly reduce processing costs, avoid many of the environmental
problems of conventional nickel processing technologies, and produce a high-grade ferronickel that can be
fed directly to stainless steel plants.
 Improvingenvironmentalperformancefllroughinnovation 917

Newmont's Heap Bioleach

Newmont Gold's inttovative approach to bioleaching combines biooxidation with a patented ammonium
thiosulphate treatment as an alternative to cyanidation for refractory ores. Ores are pre-treated by bio-
oxidation (using a mixture of ThiobaciUusferrooxidans and Leptospirillum ferrooxidans) for four to six
months prior to leaching with ammonium thiosulphate. The technology extends the grade range for gold,
making viable the re-mining of waste dumps. A 500,000 t/y two-stage heap leach process has been used
at Mt Leyshon Gold Mine, 24km south of Charters Towers, northern Queensland, since August 1992,
treating copper/gold ore. The process employs a first stage bacterial heap leach to remove the copper prior
to ore neutralisation and a second stage heap leach gold extraction using cyanide. Considerable oxidation
has already taken place in a run-of-mine ore stockpile and, once processing starts, secondary oxidation
occurs in a crushed ore stockpile assisted by the introduction of bacteria, air and moisture. The heaps are
sprayed with fresh water at a rate of 8 mm/h using a twelve-hour-on/twelve-hour-off cycle. This has been
shown to assist in maintaining copper grades to the copper recovery plant while not adding to the overall
time of the acid leach cycle--currently 45 days. No sulphuric acid is added to the ore as all metals are
solubilised by the acid produced from sulphide mineral oxidation. Copper metal is recovered from the
acidic leach solution by means of cementation onto scrap steel [25].

MINBAC Process

The MINBAC bacte~rial oxidation process has been developed and proven over the last ten years during
which time process fundamentals, benefits of pre-treatment, and procedures for testing the amenability of
ores to bacterial oxidation have been established. The process is actively promoted by three international
mineral organisations (Mintek, Anglo American Corporation of South Africa, and Bateman Project
Holdings Ltd) which have joined forces to promote, design, construct and commission bacterial oxidation
gold plants. MINBAC plants include a 1 t/d ore evaluation facility located on-site at Mintek, and a 20 t/d
plant at Anglo American's Val Reefs mine. The operation of these plants, using a ThiobaciUus
ferrooxidans/Leptospirillumferrooxidans culture, has enabled an extensive database of process kinetics and
scale-up requirements for mixing, aeration and cooling to be established. To date approximately fifty
refractory ores have been evaluated [25].

INNOVATION FOR RE-MEDIATION AND RE-USE

Although many companies are moving towards pollution prevention through source reduction, the legacy
of mining operations (and other industrial activity) in many areas has left land sufficiently contaminated
to foreclose productive re-use. Regulatory pressure to rehabilitate lands for environmental, health, and
commercial reasons has encouraged innovation in the field of clean-up technologies. Since any one
company will have ~Lportfolio of operative and abandoned properties (often on the same site), individual
mining companies may use a combination of technologies for environmental management. In some
circumstances it has/proved possible to combine clean-up treatment operations with the recovery and re-use
of saleable metals and minerals. Liability provisions in the regulatory framework, however, can militate
against this by increasing the risk of re-mining or innovative waste utilisation schemes [27].

Innovative Smelter Feedstocks

Regulatory limitations on waste disposal methods in the U.S. have generated some innovative approaches
to sludge wastes. Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act a defined set of hazardous wastes
can not be disposed of through landfill. During the clean up of its Superfund site at California Gulch in
Colorado, ASARCO was prevented from disposing metal-rich waste-water sludge on land. A search for
alternative disposal :methods led the company to introduce a cost-effective procedure for utilising sludge
as a smelter feed stock. Not only did this innovative approach facilitate clean-up at the site and produce
a solid waste that could be used as a lime flux replacement at ASARCO's lead smelting operations, but it
also enabled the recovery of saleable metals [28]. The development of the versatile ISASMELT process
for the smelting of copper in the late 1970s has also enabled innovative sourcing of smelter feed. Consisting
918 A. Warhurstand G. Bridge

of a patented lance design with oxygen enrichment, the process not only reduces coal and oil consumption,
decreases fume emissions, and enables an increase in output, but it can also treat slag concentrates and
thereby turn an otherwise costly waste product into a resource [29]. In addition to copper, the process has
been applied to lead and, following the licensing in 1990 of the technology to AGIP Australia, it is also
applicable to nickel [30].

Tailings Re-Use

A number of refractory gold operations are re-using waste pyrite tailings as an energy-feed for their
autoclaves. Homestake's McLaughlin mine operates autoclaves for refractory ores, but the local orebody
does not contain enough sulphide for the autoclaves to be autogeneously heated. Homestake needed to
source pyrite and ended up using sulphide tallings from an old gold mine. These tailings also contained
unrecovered gold from the previous operation which assayed 0.24 oz/ton, considerably better than the
mine's autoclave feed of 0.17oz/ton. Homestake was able to purchase the tailings at $50 per ton and
recover gold to the value of $100 from each ton of tailings, in addition to avoiding the costs of steam
generation for the autoclave. Barrick has similarly purchased pyrite tailings from a carbon-in-pulp facility
operated by Sonora Gold in Nevada and used it as feed for its autoclave plant north of Carlin, Nevada [31].

REFIMET--Cleaning of Arsenic Rich Concentrates

The Chilean company REFIMET, in collaboration with the Centro de Investigaciones Minero Metalurgico
(CIMM), has developed an innovative process to clean arsenic-rich concentrates [32]. The process is so
successful that, in addition to processing Chilean ores, REFIMET imports concentrates from Lepanto in
the Philippines and from Greece containing 10 per cent arsenic. An increasing proportion of the by-
product--arsenic trioxide--is exported at a profit to the United States at $335/tonne. This still leaves surplus
supplies, however, and as yet no safe solution to their disposal has been found. This is an area of ongoing
research in Chile [10].

Liquid Effluents

Liquid effluents from mining operations have become a major concern of public groups, and this concern
has translated into increased regulation of water quality impacts. Much public attention has focused on the
possibility of cyanide escape from gold cyanidation operations, and several innovative methods for
destroying or recycling cyanide have been developed in recent years in response to increased scrutiny of
the water quality impacts of leaching operations. A number of commercial technologies have been
developed for the destruction of cyanide. INCO, for example, has commercialised a process which employs
sulphur dioxide and air which, in the presence of a copper catalyst, produces oxidising conditions sufficient
to destroy cyanide [33]. This technique has been applied at a number of operating sites across North
America. Noranda Inc. has developed a similar process and this approach is being used at Noranda's
subsidiary, Hemlo Gold Mines Inc, Golden Giant Mine [34]. However, some unattractive features remain
in all chemical destruction systems. These include the use of expensive reagents which may have
environmental impacts, residual precipitated heavy-metal cyanide complexes, and the loss of cyanide
reagent.

In assessing cyanide treatment techniques for a new gold mine near Waitii in New Zealand's North Island,
the U.S.-based Cyprus Copper Company tested several methods of destroying cyanide so that the process
water could be safely discharged to the Waitekaurie River. Cyprus, however, chose a new technology:
acidification, volatisation and reneutralisation (AVR). This technology allows the company to remove and
recycle cyanide before it goes to the tailings pond. Not only does AVR help Cyprus solve its environmental
problems and facilitate future permitting and mine development, but it also economises on the use of
cyanide (an expensive reagent) and improves the recovery levels of gold and silver. Cyprus has spent $1
million in developing AVR; it has patent applications pending and isaggressively seeking to commercialise
the technology to help recoup its R&D costs [10, 35].
 Improving environmental performancethrough innovation 919

Homestake Mining Company has also turned regulatory pressure to clean up a cyanide seepage problem
to its advantage. Its own R&D staff developed a proprietary biological technique to treat the effluent which
led to the fast recovery of local fisheries and water quality in the mine's vicinity at Lead in South Dakota.
This process is now lt)eing commercialised in other operations [10]. CANMET has completed a multi-year
program to investigate the chemistry, generation and treatment of thiosalts in process effluents. Much of
this work was done in collaboration with the Noranda Technology Centre and its findings have provided
important informaticm for the development of possible control methods. Oxidation with hydrogen peroxide
catalysed by ferrous iron appeared to be most acceptable but it was recognised that a bio-oxidation process
might be economically more attractive, although no methods were found to meet the performance and cost
limitations needed by industry [36, 37]. The problem of delayed acid generation caused by thiosalts in
effluents remains a concern, and currently forms a part of CANMET's long term research plans.

CONCLUSIONS

The mining industry is not generally regarded as a high technology sector. Nonetheless, many
developments in advanced technology, such as information systems, data processing, and biotechnology
are revolutionising ]rdning by improving process efficiency and improving the capacity of companies to
achieve and sustain best-practice environmental management. Market and environmental pressures are
providing a renewed incentive for many companies to innovate and/or acquire and assimilate new
technologies and raanagement practices as a means of improving competitiveness and achieving
environmental best-practice. There has been a shift within the more dynamic companies away from short-
term investment in end-of-pipe control technologies towards pollution prevention through source reduction.
Recent research into implicit and explicit corporate technology strategies towards smelting and leaching
processes suggest that some companies may be assessing the capacity of the process to meet current and
future environmental standards in their development and acquisition of alternative processing techniques.

The rapid and extensive liberalisation of economic activity in many countries over the last five years has
encouraged an inflow of foreign investment which may provide an effective vehicle for the transfer of
pollution prevention technology and best-practice management techniques. Since 1989 over seventy-five
countries have liberalised their investment regimes for mining. New, clean technological developments are
especially attractive to governments in developing countries since they hold the promise of reducing
environmental damage costs while at the same time maintaining the social and economic benefits of mining
(e.g. jobs, taxes, toreign exchange earnings, skill and technology transfer, royalty payments). The
opportunities for technological leapfrogging through the transfer of innovative production techniques are
rapidly expanding as many less developed countries encourage large exploration programmes and design
new mining laws while establishing codes of environmental practice. As the mining industry enters a new
phase of globalisatkpn, facilitated by economic deregulation and the privatisation of formerly state-owned
mining concerns, mining companies and equipment suppliers are forming a range of joint-venture
agreements with remaining state-owned and newly privatised operations. New investment and strategic
partnering provide an opportunity for technology tie-ins in which recipient companies use externally
acquired technology to leverage technological and organisational innovation for their competitive advantage.
Greenfield investment provides an opportunity to select state-of-the-art processing technologies from the
outset and integrate', new production methods with pollution prevention techniques and environmental
management systems to achieve lower cost and environmentally proficient production. Strategic alliances
with an environmenl:ally proficient company using state-of-the-art technology could be a route to achieving
a sound environmental track record to enhance investment opportunities.

This paper has arg~aed that the ability to improve competitiveness and environmental performance is
strongly influenced by the capacity of a company to effect and sustain technological and organisational
change in response 1:ochanging regulatory and market pressures. The importance of managerial capability
to the successful diffusion of best practice techniques is especially relevant in the context of new mineral
developments in newly liberalising economies. Investment in environmental control technology or cleaner
production techniq~tes is, by itself, an insufficient condition for achieving and sustaining best practice
environmental man~Lgement. The acquisition, assimilation, and operation of innovative production processes
920 A. Warhurstand G. Bridge

in an efficient and clean manner is dependent on the capacity of management to understand, adapt, and
master the process, and not solely on the technical specifications of plant and equipment. Innovative
technological hardware does not by itself ensure a high level of environmental performance, and efforts
to achieve environmental best-practice need to address the building of managerial capacity in environmental
management alongside the development of innovative technologies. Future business research in this area
will therefore need to address the role of strategic alliances and technology transfer agreements in enabling
companies to assimilate new technology and acquire innovative capacity to achieve both low cost,
competitive production and best practice environmental management.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This paper draws on the reserach activities of the Mining and Environmental Research Network (MERN),
directed by Professor Alyson Warhurst in the School of Management, University of Bath. MERN is an
international network of centres of excellence in mineral producing countries throughout the world and was
established in 1991 with the aim of informing both the stategy of mining firms and the policies of
governments towards achieving cost-effective and rational improvements in the environmental management
of mining operations. In particular the paper builds on an on-going research project into "Technology
Transfer and the Diffusion of Clean Technology in the International Mining Industry" which is supported
by the U.K. Economic and Social Research Council's Global Environmental Change Programme. Gavin
Bridge is a Research Officer with MERN at the University of Bath and a post-graduate in Geography at
Clark University, Massachusetts. We would also like to acknowledge the secretarial assistance olD. Milton
and Y. Skjonnemand in the preparation of this paper.

REFERENCES

. U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment, Copper, Technology, and Competitiveness. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington D.C. (1988).
2. Andrews, C., Mineral sector technologies: policy implications for developing countries. Natural
Resources Forum, 212-220 (Aug. 1992).
3. Brinsden, W., Innovate or perish. AuslMM Bulletin, 3, 13-16 (1992).
4. Humphreys, D., Global trends in mineral sector investment. Proc. InternationalMining Investment
and Regulation Conference, Centre for Petroleum and Mineral Law and Policy, Dundee (1995).
5. Clark, G., Global competition and the environmental performance of Australian mineral
companies. International Environmental Affairs, 5(3), 147-172 (1994).
6. Graves, A.P., Design houses and the introduction of new technology: a case study. International
Motor Vehicle Programme Working Paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, (May 1988).
7. Kosich, D., Freeport's Indonesia may prophesy mining's political future. Mining Worm News,
1(3), (1995).
8. Krauss, R., Pollution prevention in mining: Homestake Mining Company's McLaughlin mine.
Proc. International Conference on Pollution Prevention in Mining and Mineral Processing, eds.
K. Anderson and S. Purcell, 108-115 (1994).
. Archer, H. & Wolff, M., Foundry calculates the value of pollution prevention. Water,
Environment, and Technology, 6(6), 59-60 (1994).
10. Warhnrst, A., The limitations of environmental regulation in mining. In Mining and the
Environment: International Perspectives on Public Policy, ed. R. Eggert, Washington DC:
Resources for the Future (1994).
11. Porter, M. & van der Linde, C., Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. Harvard Business
Review, 120-134 (Sept. 1995).
12. Sudbury, M., Sulphur abatement at Ontario operations of Falconbridge Limited. Paper presented
at 82nd Annual Meeting and Exhibition of the Air Waste Management Association, Anaheim,
California, (25-30 June 1989).
13. Noranda Minerals Inc., Environmental Report. Noranda (1990).
 Improvingenvironmentalperformancethroughinnovation 921

14. Minerals, Metals, and the Environment. London, Institution of Mining and Metallurgy with
Elsevier Applied Science (1992).
15. Dimock, R., President of Kennecott Utah Copper Corp., in Kennecott has modern mettle for
mining. 7he Salt Lake Tribune, (April 16 1995).
16. Chiaro, P., Waste minimization and pollution prevention at Kennecott. In Proc. International
Conference on Pollution Prevention in Mining and Mineral Processing, eds. K. Anderson and S.
Purcell, 100-107 (1994).
17. Kosich, D., Kennecott's vision may revolutionize smelter technology. Mining World News, 1(3),
(1995).
18. Kennecotl:'s smelter and refinery modernisation. Mining and Environmental Management, 3(4),
9 (1995).
19. Romm, J., Lean and Clean Management: How to Boost Profits and Productivity by Reducing
Pollution. Kodansha America, New York (1994).
20. Koppel, V., Automation in Mining and Mineral Processing. IFAC Symposia Series, Number 10
(1989).
21. Hoffman, S., EPA's case studies. In Proc. International Conference on Poll1~tion Prevention in
Mining and Mineral Processing, eds. K. Anderson and S. Purcell, 95-99 (1994).
22. World Gold: a minerals availability appraisal. Special publication, U.S. Bureau of Mines (1995).
23. Slater, L., DiFrancesco, C., Palencia, C. & Fogg, C., Comparative analysis of U.S.
environmental control technologies for refractory gold pretreatment processes. United Nations
Environment Programme Industry and Environment, (3), (April 18 1995)..
4. Fewell, P., Brazilian case study. Mining Journal Environment Supplement, 23rd February 3
(1990).
25. Brewis, T., Metal extraction by bacterial oxidation. Mining Magazine, 197-207 (Oct. 1995).
26. Warhurst, A., Metals biotechnology for developing countries and case studies from the Andean
Group, Chile and Canada. Resources Policy, 17(1), 54-68 (1991).
27. Tilton, J., Mining wastes and the polluter-pays principle in the United States. In Mining and the
Environ~ent: International Perspectives on Public Policy, ed. R. Eggert, Resources for the
Future, Washington D.C. (1994).
28. Mosher, J., Heavy metal sludges as smelter feedstock. E&MJ, (Sept. 25-30 1994).
29. Chadwick, J., Mt Isa--processing and metallurgy. Mining Magazine, (July 24-32 1992).
30. Isasmelt first in Ni-Cu. Mining Magazine, (Sept. (1990).
31. Shoemaker, R., Interesting business practices in the U.S. refractory gold industry. Minerals
Industry International, (Nov. 1995).
32. Crozier, R., Chile's legacy--pollution. Mining Journal Environment Supplement, 10-11 (Aug. 24
1990).
33. Devuyst, E., Conard, B., Robbins, G. & Vergunst, R., The Inco SO2-air process, Proc. Gold
Mining Effluent Treatment Seminar, Vancouver, Environment Canada (1989).
34. Ferguson, R. & Walker, H., Cyanide destruction process. Can. Pat, 1,183,617 (March 1985).
35. McNamara, V., The AVR process for cyanide recovery, and cyanogen control for barren recycle
and barren bleed. Proc. Gold Mining Effluent Treatment Seminar, Vancouver, Environment
Canada (1989).
36. Rolia, E. & Tan, K., Chemical oxidation of thiosalt-containing milling effluents. Proc. CIM 15th
Annual ttydrometaUurgical Meeting, 27-31, Vancouver.
37. Wasserlauf, M. & Condy, A., Techno-economic evaluations ofthiosalt treatment processes. Proc.
CIM 15ti~ Annual Hydrometallurgical Meeting, 31-41 Vancouver.
38. Jameson Cells in Large Operations. E&MJ, 40-41 (April 1996).
39. Australian plans for mining code of practice. Environment Digest, 1, 5 (1996).

I,~ g:g-B