Characterization of tailings from Camaquã mines for sustainable reuse
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2236130818717Keywords:
Mining, Sustainability, Environment, Reuse, Waste,Abstract
The reuse of waste stemmed from mining activities is extreme important because it is a possible polluters of the environment. This work coverd sustainable social and economic waste reuse remainder of ore copper processing from the Minas do Camaquã. In the first phase of the study were employed: sampling methodologies, particle size separation, physical-chemical analyzes, mineralogical analysis, physical and chemical tests concentration of minerals, iso-contour map elaboration of contents to director element, the copper. In the second phase the particle size analysis detailed the percentage of fine distribution, classification of waste according to ABNT 10004 and evaluation of economic pre-viability to verify recovery alternative of copper through leaching method and test for using of the material in contruction. In conclusion, the economic recovery of copper by leaching is impossible, according to economic analysis model. The technical pre-viability of use in brick factory, was found as results of the simulations in testing done of the agreement with an industrial manufacturing and quality index standards (NBR 8492). The residue, it performed "inert" of the agreement with ABNT 10004 and fine sand grain size between even very fine sand.
Downloads
References
ABIB, P. Projeto expansão Camaquã. Caçapava do Sul, (1979).
ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE NORMAS TÉCNICAS- ABNT. Resíduos Sólidos- Classificação. NBR 10004. Rio de Janeiro, 77 pp, (2004).
ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE NORMAS TÉCNICAS. Tijolo maciço de solo-cimentoDeterminação da resistência á compressão e da absorção de água: NBR 8492. Rio de Janeiro, 5p, (1984).
ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE NORMAS TÉCNICAS. Tijolo maciço de solo-cimento: NBR 8491. Rio de Janeiro, 4p, (1994).
BALDO, J.B; MARTINS, C.A. Resíduo zero na indústria de pisos. Universidade Federal de São Carlos, Departamento de engenharia e materiais, Anais do 47° Congresso Brasileiro de Cerâmica. (2003).
CAMARGO, M.G. SysGran: um sistema de codigo aberto para analises granulométricas do sedimento. Revista Brasileira de Geociências 345: 345–352, (2006).
CARVALHO, M.T; JUNIOR, I.F; ZAMPIERONR, J.V. Estudo Preliminar da Interação de Escória de Níquel em argamassa de Cimento Portland. UEMG Depto. Engenharia Civil- Laboratório de Materiais de Construção Civil-LabMCC. (2007).
CHAVES, A.P. Teoria e Prática do Tratamento de Minérios, A Flotação no Brasil. São Paulo: Editora Signus. Vol.4. PP.199-217 (2009).
DUARTE, A.P. Contenção de Rejeitos de Mineração e de Resíduos Industriais no Estado de Minas Gerais em Relação ao Potencial de Risco. UFMG, Programa de pós - graduação em Saneamento, Meio Ambiente e Recursos Hídricos. Belo Horizonte, 130 pp, (2008).
FLECK, A; ZAGO, L.E. Estudo e caracterização para o reaproveitamento do rejeito remanescente da mineração de cobre das Minas do Camaquã Caçapava do Sul – RS, 107 pp, (2013).
FOLK, R.L. & Ward, W.C. Brazos River Bar: A study in the significance of grain size parameters. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 27: 3-27, (1957).
JOHN, V.M.; ZORDAN, S.E. Research & development methodology for recycling residues as building materials - a proposal, Waste Management, 21, pp. 213-219 (2001).
LME - London Metal Exchange 2014. Disponível em: https://www.lme.com/.
NETO, R.O., SOUZA, L.E., PARANHOS, R. S., FLECK, A; ZAGO, L.E., TRINDADE, A.O., BRUM, I.A.S. Waste characterization of copper ore processing for sustainable management in the closure of mining. In proceedings: International Conference of Solid Waste Management – ICSW. (2014).
RIBEIRO, J.A.S. Cobre. Balanço Mineral Brasileiro, 52pp, (2001).
VEIRA, A; CECHINEL, B; DEGHENHARD, C; MAGNUS, D; HOLTHAUSEN, R; TASSI, R; MODESTO, C; JUNIOR, A, N; CARGNIN, M. Estudo do Processo de Obtenção e Caracterização de Tijolos Solo-Cimento. Instituto Maximiliano Gaidzinski (IMG). Cerâmica Industrial. 47 pp. (2007).
PETRUCCI, E. Concreto de Cimento Portland. Globo, ISBN 85-250-0225-9, (1987).
PETTER, C.O; CARRICONDE,M.C.Verificação da aplicabilidade do programa MAFMO como ferramenta auxiliar na estimativa de custos em projetos conceituais, UFRGS,2010,disponível em: http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/handle/10183/25053?show=full.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The REMOA is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
