MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Review on recovery of valuable metals from complex copper–cobalt co-associated mines

2024· article· en· W6922612347 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Extraction and Bioleaching
Canadian institutionsNickel Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRoastingLeaching (pedology)PyrometallurgySulfideRaw materialCopperCobaltLimitingBase metal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Copper and cobalt, both strategic metals, play an indispensable role in many fields, such as national infrastructure and defense science and technology. Copper, one of the earliest nonferrous metals discovered, extracted, and applied by humans, teams up with cobalt—a silver-white metal—that serves as a crucial raw material for superalloys, permanent magnets, and chemical industries. The production and consumption of these metals significantly affect the development of national infrastructure, essentially controlling the lifeblood of the national economy. The wide-ranging application of copper and cobalt necessitates an efficient extraction process for these resources. For instance, Congo, Africa, hosts complex copper–cobalt co-associated deposits where the copper–cobalt ratio can reach 3∶1, making it a significant resource. Given the increasing global demand for copper and cobalt, extracting these valuable elements from complex copper–cobalt co-associated ores is of paramount importance. This paper reviews the mineralogical characteristics of these complex resources, including oxidized ores and sulfide ores. It compares and discusses the characteristics of extraction processes such as roasting and leaching. Ultimately, it evaluates the prospects and challenges of extracting copper and cobalt from complex co-associated copper–cobalt deposits. The review reveals that copper–cobalt oxide ores are more compatible with pure wet process treatment, while sulfide ores are better suited for an enhanced leaching process combined with roasting and leaching. The thermodynamic characteristics and kinetic limiting factors of metal extraction from copper–cobalt ores are also compared in this review. In the extraction of the copper–cobalt oxide ore, the mature extraction process is reduction leaching, and different reducing agents show different leaching effects. It is worth noting that there are significant differences in the degree of weathering of copper oxide cobalt ores. Considering Africa’s relatively underdeveloped power facilities and the shortage of chemical reagents, biological leaching and heap leaching present alternative methods for copper oxide cobalt ores. For copper and cobalt sulfide ores, the promising approach for industrial application is a method that combines enrichment, roasting, and leaching. As the copper–cobalt sulfide ore is nearly the only cobalt occurrence mineral, strengthening the phase transformation of copper–cobalt sulfide ore is vital for cobalt extraction. This can be optimized from both thermodynamic and kinetic perspectives. The aim of this paper is to provide some references for the efficient and reasonable collaborative extraction and utilization of copper–cobalt resources.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.342
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicMetal Extraction and BioleachingFrench-language works237,207