• No results found

Uranium mining

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Uranium mining"

Copied!
49
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

INOM EXAMENSARBETE TEKNIK, GRUNDNIVÅ, 15 HP , STOCKHOLM SVERIGE 2021

Uranium mining

A tool to evaluate and compare new suppliers

GUSTAV SVENNINGSSON

KTH

(2)

Preface

This thesis creates a tool to evaluate and compare potential uranium suppliers between each other. It is based on a case from Vattenfall Nuclear Fuel AB (VNF). I would therefore want to thank my supervisors from VNF, Fredrik Leijonhufvud, Malin Löwe and Esther Rodriguez. I would also want to thank my supervisors at the Royal Technical Institute, Bertil Wanner, Erik Flores Garcia and Monica Bellgran.

(3)

Abstract

Nuclear power plants produce electricity by energy produced by nuclear reactions in the nuclear core. The nuclear fuel that enables the reactions has uranium as its primary material. Uranium is processed in four steps before being put into the nuclear core and these four steps are uranium mining, conversion, enrichment and manufacturing. The first step in the life cycle, uranium mining, is primarily done by the mining methods: in-situ leaching, open pit mining and underground mining. To strive for a more environmentally friendly mining process these three methods need to be understood and evaluated to estimate their impact. With today’s sustainable development goals, companies running nuclear power plants needs to evaluate and compare uranium mining suppliers’ regarding their social, economic and environmental impact. Therefore, the purpose of this thesis is to create a tool that evaluates and compares uranium mining companies and methods regarding their environmental impact. This is done by a literature study and a single semi-structured interview.

In order to create the tool, an understanding of how uranium mining methods impact the environment differentiates from each other must be created. The thesis therefore includes the different technologies and environmental impact each method has and what the future holds for each method. When mining uranium, its orebody will slowly decline resulting that the ore grade will decline as well. As a result, the production becomes more energy intensified. In the future, with declining ore grades and more energy being needed, it will either require energy efficient technology or that the mining process is in a country with sustainable energy consumption or source so electric technologies can be used.

The thesis’s result presents a tool that consists of different templates: “The company”, “Open pit”, “Underground mining” and “In situ leaching”. Firstly, since the technology and environmental impact from each mining method varies from mine to mine due to equipment, location, waste management etc., it results in that some mines are better adapted in some areas and lesser so in others. Therefore, the tool this thesis creates gives a broader picture and understanding of each site being evaluated from an environmental perspective.

(4)

Sammanfattning

Kärnkraftverk producerar elektricitet genom energi som produceras genom kärnreaktioner i härden. Kärnbränslet som möjliggör reaktionerna har uran som sitt primära material. Uran bearbetas i fyra steg innan det sätts i härden. Dessa fyra steg är uranbrytning, omvandling, anrikning och tillverkning. Det första steget i livscykeln, uranbrytning, görs främst med gruvmetoderna: dagbrott, underjordisk gruva och in-situ leaching. För att sträva efter en mer miljövänlig gruvprocess måste dessa tre metoder förstås och utvärderas för att kunna förstå deras inverkan. Med dagens hållbarhetsmål måste företag som driver kärnkraftverken utvärdera och jämföra leverantörer angående deras sociala, ekonomiska och miljömässiga påverkan. Därför är syftet med denna kandidatuppsats att skapa ett verktyg som utvärderar och jämför uranbrytningsföretag och metoder angående deras miljöpåverkan. Detta görs genom en litteraturstudie och en semi-strukturerad intervju.

För att skapa verktyget måste en förståelse för hur uranbrytningsmetodernas miljöpåverkan skiljer sig från varandra skapas. Kanidatuppsatsen innehåller därför metodernas olika tekniker och miljöpåverkan samt metodernas utveckling. När man bryter uran kommer dess malmkropp långsamt att minska, vilket leder till att malmkvaliteten också minskar. Som ett resultat av detta kräver produktionen mer energi när malmkvaliteten minskar. Därmed kommer framtiden, med minskande malmkvaliteter, kräva mer energi under processerna. Det kommer därför antingen att krävas energieffektiv teknik eller att gruvprocessen utförs i ett land med hållbar energiförbrukning eller energikälla så att processer kan använda elektricitet som drivkraft för att miljöpåverkan ska minskas eller bibehållas.

Kandidatuppsatsens resultat presenterar ett verktyg som består av olika mallar: “The company”, “Open pit”, “Underground mining” och “In situ leaching”. För det första, eftersom teknik och miljöpåverkan från varje gruvmetod varierar från gruva till gruva på grund av utrustning, plats, avfallshantering med mera, resulterar det i att vissa gruvor är bättre anpassade inom vissa områden och mindre i andra. Därför ger verktyget som denna kandidatuppsats skapar en bredare bild och förståelse för varje gruva eller företag som utvärderas ur ett miljöperspektiv.

(5)

Table of Content

1. Introduction ... 1 1.1. Background ... 1 1.2. Problem formulation ... 3 1.3. Goal formulation ... 3 1.4. Limitations ... 4 2. Method ... 5 3. Theoretical background ... 7 3.1. Open pit ... 7

3.1.1. Open pit environmental impact ... 8

3.2. Underground mining ... 9

3.2.1 Underground mining environmental impact ... 11

3.3. In situ leach mining and environmental impact ... 12

3.4. Uranium mining standards ... 15

3.5. Uranium reserve and mining allocation ... 16

3.6. Uranium mining inputs ... 19

3.7. Uranium ore grade ... 22

4. Results ... 23

4.1. Tool suggestion ... 23

5. Discussion and analysis ... 26

5.1. Future of uranium mining ... 27

(6)

1

1. Introduction

This section consists of the background to the project of why a tool of evaluating and comparing new potential suppliers for uranium environmentally is needed and what the goal and purpose of the project is.

1.1. Background

The development of today is towards a more environmentally friendly society and to minimize the waste of natural resources. Therefore, governments set up requirements through safety, regulations, legislations, etc, to create a basis for a sustainable development and increase the quality of products that is consumed. Also, the consumers demand that their suppliers works with sustainable development. For an industry it means that to meet the requirements and achieve a greener production, they need to have a sustainable production development. This is also a work towards United Nation’s (UN) sustainable development goal (SDG) number 12, “Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns”, which covers both chemicals and waste as well as sustainable consumption and production. Sustainable production development is about the organization and the steering of all activities in the material flow, from raw material procurement to final consumer (United Nations 2021). In the nuclear industry for the nuclear fuel cycle this means from the uranium mining to the final repository of spent nuclear fuel.

Hence, to be competitive in todays, but more importantly the future markets and in the assurance that the future is sustainable, the company needs to have control and understanding over the entire life cycle of their products. Finding suppliers that meet the company’s goals and aim is therefore a requirement. Another reason to have suppliers with the same sustainability goals is to ensure the consumers that the promised product is delivered with the promised characteristics. If that is fulfilled it will increase the consumer satisfaction and it can be argued that the product is sustainable. Sustainable development is often referred to: “the development that meets the needs of the present without

compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Tost, et al. 2018).

From this definition a “link between development and ecological limits” can be defined, where development involves the social and economic perspectives (Tost, et al. 2018). Therefore, by understanding the interrelation between social, economic and environmental aspects sustainable development can be created.

(7)

2

In the light water reactors used globally, uranium is primary material used in the nuclear fuel. The nuclear fuel is put into the nuclear core where nuclear reactions occur. The reactions create energy which is the energy used to create electricity in nuclear powerplants. In a nuclear core it consists of several hundred nuclear fuel elements. To manufacture the nuclear fuel the uranium is processed in four steps. These steps are uranium mining, conversion, enrichment and manufacturing. This project will focus on the first step, uranium mining, which is primarily done by three different methods: in-situ leaching, open pit mining and underground mining.

Vattenfall Nuclear Fuel AB (VNF) is a subsidiary company to Vattenfall AB. Vattenfall AB is an energy company with activities within energy production, energy distribution, district heating, electricity, heat, gas sales, energy services, and decentralized production (Vattenfall 2020). Vattenfall is majority owner of the nuclear power plants Ringhals and Forsmark, where it is VNF’s responsibility to provide the powers plants with nuclear fuel. One of Vattenfall’s goals is to drive development with climate smart solutions with customers and partners (Vattenfall 2020). It is therefore correlated to UN’s SDG number seven, “ensure access to affordable,

reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” (United Nations 2021). To drive the

sustainable development in the nuclear industry, an analysis of the nuclear fuel chain with respect of emissions, greenhouse gases and other environmental impact has to be performed. Therefore, if Vattenfall AB wants to improve their sustainability, it includes their suppliers. For Vattenfall to reach their goals the suppliers must either join the development process so the goals align or new suppliers must be found. In other words, the suppliers must have a plan or activities in line with UN’s SDG number 12 if their goals should converge with Vattenfall AB’s. Vattenfall AB and VNF have already conducted several life cycle analyses for nuclear power for their existing suppliers, so the environmental impact those suppliers have on the environment is already known. In other words, they already possess information about the quantity, impact and activities involved in the uranium mining processes. However, the information does not give a deep understanding on how different mining methods impact the environment differently, resulting in that each mining method’s true impact on the environment can be diffuse. This can make specific areas for the different mining methods that are dependent on circumstances become unclear and lead to a wrongful evaluation of different mines environmental impact. For instance, these circumstances can be what material the ground is made of or how waste is handled.

(8)

3

come from nuclear, coal, hydro, etc, which gives different CO2 or other emissions. In other

words, a mining method might give positive results for the emissions or other greenhouse effects but, due to where they are geographically located and what source of energy their equipment is using, the total impact on the environment can vary.

Even though the thesis is based on a case from VNF, it is a generic problem since, according to VNF, there is no efficient tool that can both evaluate and compare potential new suppliers. Therefore, the thesis is applicable for any company or organization.

1.2. Problem formulation

VNF’s responsibility is to provide the fuel to nuclear power plants. They need to choose suppliers that meet the standards Vattenfall Group have towards their suppliers within economic, social and environmental areas. VNF’s main task is to evaluate suppliers to deliver the best product overall to Vattenfall. According to VNF they have tools to evaluate new suppliers within the economic and social area, but they do not have an efficient tool to evaluate a supplier environmentally. Therefore, in connection with the development towards a more environmentally friendly society and for a sustainable development purpose, a tool to evaluate environmental impact is a must if suppliers or companies overall should be evaluated.

This thesis focuses on the uranium mining so that by understanding how the different uranium mining methods can impact the environment and the differences in their technology an evaluation of new suppliers can be performed. Areas, such as the fuel source’s impact can be addressed and not be an unclear area which is overseen. Also, by understanding the differences it makes it easier to have a projection of the future and how technical development can improve the environmental impact going forward. From these understandings, information of what should be evaluated and how to evaluate a potential new supplier is created, which allows uranium mining suppliers to be evaluated and compared to each other from an environmental perspective.

1.3. Goal formulation

The purpose of the thesis is to create a tool for evaluating the environmental impact of the uranium mining process and different mining methods based on a case from a Swedish Company since there is no existing efficient evaluation and comparison tool for potential new suppliers from an environmental perspective today, according to VNF. The tool should take into consideration the following areas:

- the differences in technology from each mining method - environmental impacts from or related to the mining methods - the geographical location of the mining site’s impact

- exploration and development for the future regarding the sustainability of the mining methods.

(9)

4

The thesis discusses, analyses and compares differences between the mining methods to give an overall picture of the uranium mining businesses environmental impact and to see if one method is better than another.

1.4. Limitations

The thesis analyses the environmental point of view of the mining methods and therefore the social and economic perspective will not be included. Also, the thesis is for uranium mining and will not discuss and analyze mining for other materials or involve any other steps in the uranium life cycle, for example enrichment or manufacturing. However, since uranium is usually a biproduct from a larger mining process the thesis will consider that the different mining methods is used for mining other materials as well. In other words, the thesis will view uranium as the final product of the mining process and not any other materials.

(10)

5

2. Method

The project is based on a literature study that is through understanding of uranium mining and its environmental impact be able to produce a tool when finding and potentially choosing new suppliers. Therefore, literature, scientific articles and studies has been used as the foundation of the project and to increase its credibility. The project has also included some examples of different countries techniques and possibilities regarding how they work with environmental issues or what challenges they face. This is to give an insight of how reality can look like and to help refine the thought process of choosing suppliers.

Databases that have been used in the project is Google, Primo and Google Scholar. Primo is a digital search platform and library that is provided from Royal Institute of Technology (KTH). The platform accesses scientific articles, journals, publication, e-books, etc. Google Scholar is the same platform as Primo but created by Google. Google has been the main database and has been used for information retrieval and the possibility to compare information to different sources. The comparison has been made to increase the credibility of each source and to ensure that the information that is applied is accurate and is for the correct circumstance. The articles and sources included in the report were chosen because their content was related to the thesis and purpose of the report and therefore gave more accuracy for the subject. For instance, articles that were used in comparison or when firstly examined might have discussed or touched the subject relevant to the thesis but their purpose could differ significantly. Therefore, that information could instead be an incitement for the next search. In other words, depending on the context the information is in, it may not reflect the purpose in the report and instead the context could contradict the purpose and be inaccurate information. But in a different context that mirrors the reports situation the information can be seen as accurate and that is what the final articles and sources include. Table 1 shows the keywords that were most relevant for the thesis and from these keywords different formulations or combinations were used to narrow the search.

Table 1: Keywords used in the thesis.

Keyword: Number of hits:

Uranium mining 14 600 000

Open pit mining 32 000 000 Underground mining 89 500 000 In situ leaching 7 520 000 Uranium mining environmental impact 3 640 000 Environmental impact of mining after

closure

168 000 000 Mining impact on water 275 000 000 Uranium mining production and

distribution

(11)

6

The keywords shown in table 1 has many hits so in order to narrow it down to the references used in the thesis, different combinations of the keywords were used. Thereafter, the potential sources were investigated by prioritizing academic sources and well-known industrial organizations within the uranium or nuclear area. The academic sources were written within the last 10 years which also narrowed the search. By examining sources from the latest 10 years the results are also up to date. The only reason that academic sources older than 10 years were chosen is if they gave a better perspective or understanding of the subject in interest than the newer sources. When it comes to industrial organizations, they were chosen by either their willingness to control or develop the industry further or if they presented good practical usages of the methods. Sources of other types were used if they provided summarized information that could be found in academic or industrial sources. Even though this methodology does not cover every hit, it narrows the number of hits. Also, with the prioritization and constant comparison it gives an overview that makes the references in thesis reliable.

The project also involves an interview with Dr. Luminita Grancea, senior analyst at OECD Nuclear Energy Agency where she works in NEA Division of Nuclear Technology Development and Economic (NTE) and is an expert in the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle. The interview took half an hour and was conducted to give a greater insight in the challenges uranium mining companies face today regarding environmental impact and about how uranium mining and challenges it face may be seen in the future. The interview was conducted through a semi-structure interview which mean that there is no fixed script in how and when questions should be asked. Instead, it gives the opportunity to focus on more specific questions or areas. It also helps to clarify questions; that no information is left out. The main topics and questions asked and discussed during the interview were:

What challenges do uranium mining companies face today from an environmental perspective and how can they be overcome?

Is it through more legislation and/or standards that that will help the development?

Does Kazakhstan pose a risk of hindering competition growth and can that stagnate the environmental development?

Is a fast-track of electrification of technology a good or bad thing to do today regarding the current situation and how will this impact the environment?

Is there anything you would want to add, particularly for choosing new suppliers?

(12)

7

3. Theoretical background

Here is the underlying theory that is relevant for the goal presented.

3.1. Open pit

Open pit mining is used when uranium ore is located near the surface, which corresponds up to a maximum of 100-150 meters of depth. If exceeding that level of depth, it is more beneficial in an economic and ecologic perspective to use a different mining technique which is usually underground mining. Open pit mining is about removing all rocks and other material to reach and expose the uranium ore. The method used in open pit mining is called bench mining. To get further down into the ground, ore or other material is extracted in steps. Each step is usually around 15m high, but the height can differ, which is called the bench height (World Nuclear Association). The reason bench mining is used is because it gives a control over the blast holes and the overall slope of the walls of the pit. The determination of slope is the factor that eliminates or minimizes the risk for a collapse, but also eases the transportation to and from the mining location. Moreover, with bench mining it is easier to examine the ore since the ground is exposed, simplifying the process to ensure the right precautions and the most effective mining process (Energy Education 2021).

When the material from each level/bench is extracted, a downward spiral is created that also work as the road in the mine. Therefore, the larger the diameter of the hole is at ground level (the level where the mining begins), the deeper the open pit can go. The technique used to move to the next bench is done by drilling holes into the current bench which is then filled with explosives. When the explosives then detonate it breaks the rock and exposes the uranium ore. Before the ore is mined, the waste rock is removed so that the surrounding walls and ground can be secured. The waste is removed by large vehicles since the rock and ore location can easier be accessed. As a result, it becomes the most efficient way to extract ore due to larger vehicles allows faster removal. Thereafter, the uranium is transported to a milling and processing site, where it will be processed further before it can move on to the conversion of the uranium, the next step in the process. Since the mine is open it generates a large amount of waste rock. This waste can contain other materials which can be sold but most likely it is purely waste. The open pit therefore requires a separate location where the waste can be stored, preferably near the site so the transportation is not too long (Energy Education 2021). Figure 2 illustrates an open pit that uses bench mining.

(13)

8

3.1.1. Open pit environmental impact

Open pit mining has the greatest surface impact of all the methods. Firstly, digging the pit significantly changes the landscape of where the production is located and the bigger the pit, the bigger the landscape impact. The reason being that to access the ore all vegetation at the site must be removed, resulting in that there is no vegetation at the site. As a result, animals leave the area and life disappears. Secondly, since the extraction of waste rock needs to be dumped somewhere, the waste rock will also change the area’s environment as well.

Once the mining process has stopped, a plan of how plants and life can return to the site and other affected areas due to the site should be conducted to minimize the footprint of the mine. One way is to take the waste rock and cover the pit again. Another (that also can be done in combination with the first way) is to restore the ecosystem by replanting the vegetation. The benefit with replanting vegetation is that vegetation does not only help life to return to the site, but it also helps to stabilize the surface, preventing landslides and rockslides. Collapses of mining walls occur due to erosion which at a mine comes from material being exposed to air and humidity. In other words, erosion changes the structural stability in the ground and vegetation help to strengthen the ground. Even though landslides and rockslides does not seem bad at an abandoned pit, it still can impact the local people and especially the local ecosystem. Therefore, the second way should be a priority and there should be a rehabilitation plan in place before the mining process begins (World Nuclear Association 2021).

(14)

9

simplifying the monitoring of releases (OECD/NEA 1999). As a result, it leads to a greater control over the radioactive releases.

When the mining operations of an open pit discontinues the rehabilitation process begins. However, even though discussed earlier, that the restoration plan should be to revegetate the operation area to its prior state, it may not always be the best option. Since the ground and walls of the pit still has radioactive material inside it and that they now are exposed to air, it can be advantageous to use the pit as the tailing area instead. This to reduce or stop the continuous release of radioactive material such as heavy metals, radon (a gas that comes from radium with is decayed from uranium) or other radionuclides. But it also minimizes the area needed for tailings (since tailing is necessary). In other words, instead of building a new area for tailing, the existing area is used instead (OECD/NEA 2014).

In Saskatchewan, Canada, after they stopped their operations, they used the pit as a tailing disposal area. But before flooding the pit they placed “a porous sand layer between the pit

wall and the tailings. This helps limit releases to the environment as the water flow through the tailings is reduced to very low levels” (OECD/NEA 2014). However, this technique should

be used when the exact location of where the ore was extracted cannot be accessed. This can be due to returning of waste rock. Also, the usage of open pit as a tailing location is not a sufficient reason to not rehabilitate the local environment but purely a method to minimize the overall area used for uranium mining and processing. In other words, this is part of the rehabilitation plan but not the entirety of it.

Moreover, if the mining operations from the open pit lies underneath the water level, ground water will have to be drained to enable the mining process. Since it lies below the water level constant monitoring and eventual draining will have to occur to not risk water interfering with the operations. After the mining process finishes and the pit is to be restored it needs to be considered that the water level will restore to its original state by itself. Therefore, if creating a tailing location inside the pit there is a risk that the water level of the tailing will increase. This can lead to contaminated materials mitigating to surrounding areas and contaminating them as well (OECD/NEA 1999).

3.2. Underground mining

Underground mining is used when the ore is located further down under the surface (further down than 100-150 meters). To reach the ore, shafts are created and used until the ore height is reached. Once reached, the tunnels, ramps and chambers are used to reach and extract the ore. The extraction can be done by blasting the ore, primarily by open stoping mining, or two common methods to avoid blasting: raisebore mining and jet bore mining.

(15)

10

continues to a thickening machine where it is made into liquid slurry by adding fluids. The slurry can then be pumped up to the surface (Energy education 2021).

Jet bore mining starts by freezing brine which is then pumped down to the ore location, freezing the surrounding rock and ore. This is done by inserting pipes around and inside the ore and letting the brine circulate through them for a longer period of time. Afterwards, a shaft is created under the ore location where the mining process will take place. The process is done through drilling a hole up through the ore. Then a nozzle is inserted and sprays out a high-pressured jet of water doing so the ore detaches and falls down the hole. The ore as well as the water is then captured in a slurry cart where additional water is added. The slurry can then be pumped to a location inside the mine where it can be settled, and the water can be recycled back to the process. Once settled the ore continues to a mill where it goes through the same process as in the raisebore mining technique (Energy Education 2021). Figure 3 illustrates the jet bore raisebore mining method.

Figure 3: Jet bore (to the left) and raisebore (to the right) technique illustration (Cameco 2021) Open stoping is commonly done by either: block caving, cut and fill, sublevel stoping or sublevel caving. Block caving is performed by developing a grid at the lower level of the ore, the extraction level which leads to the development process being long in comparison to other methods. Afterwards ore is extracted at the bottom, creating a gap to the remaining ore above it. As a result, there will not be enough support for the overlaying ore mass and “together will

rock stress and gravity will cause the rock to cave” (Atlas Copco 2018). To be able to extract

the ore, the grid is used to have several draw points/extraction points where the ore can be collected. The ore is then brought to a crusher and later one transported to the surface. The block caving mining method can only be used if the “orebody is large enough and the rock

conditions to be favorable for natural breakage” (Atlas Copco 2018). Furthermore, since the

entire orebody is mined a great void will be created resulting in subsidence due to the surrounding rock not being able to withstand the surface mass, the rock caves. However, this method is highly productive and does not need as much human interaction in the mine as other methods might need (Atlas Copco 2018).

(16)

11

The mining process is done by starting at the bottom and mining a tunnel horizontally to the body. Before mining is made further up, the tunnel is filled with waste rock and concrete as well as additional support is added to the walls. The filled tunnel later becomes the ground for the next tunnel mined above it. It then continues in the described order. Therefore, the primary benefit with this method is that it barely creates any waste since it is rehabilitated in the mine (Atlas Copco 2018).

Sublevel mining method is mostly used for orebodies that are regular shaped, steep dip and has “defined ore boundaries” (Atlas Copco 2018). The method is about blasting large stopes. To create the size of the stopes and to enable the mining process, tunnels or drifts are created above and below the stope. Furthermore, to ensure that the rock is overly stressed, primary and secondary stopes are blasted. This means that the primary stopes are blasted first where the secondary functions as support. Once the primary is blasted, they are refilled with waste and concrete and then the secondary can be blasted since the primary stopes now function as support. To further ensure stability and support in the stops, the walls in the tunnels are additionally reinforced with bolts and concrete. Afterwards the ore is collected and transported to the surface (Atlas Copco 2018).

Sublevel caving is used for orebodies that are sloped compared to the surface (not close to 90-degree angle) and has a steep dip. The mining process takes place on the lower side of the orebody due to the mining process blasts the ore and lets it fall into the drifts or tunnels created below. To control the caving process of the surrounding rock, the mining process starts at the top of the orebody and continues downwards. In other words, the method is about allowing the orebody to collapse from the mass and weight from itself and the surrounding rock. Therefore, it will result in subsidence. However, before mining can start, the drifts need to be additionally supported. The support also helps control how the blasted ore falls due to affecting how the blasted ore will fragment. The ore is later transported to a crusher and afterwards to the surface (Atlas Copco 2018).

3.2.1 Underground mining environmental impact

(17)

12

release carbon dioxide, but if it is from electricity it depends on the country’s energy mix instead.

Furthermore, since underground mining has the same processes as open pit mining, a tailing location is needed. The advantage with underground mining is that the tailing location can be located underground. Even though it needs to be designed so it does not contaminate the groundwater, it prevents the risk of the tailing content to not be near animals or other organisms or plants. However, the tailing location can be outside the mine as well if it is seen more appropriate (World Nuclear Association 2021).

Another risk with underground mining is the subsidence that can occur. When extracting material from the ground it creates a void from the shafts and tunnels. To continue the mining activities these areas must be supported so they do not collapse. It is when the mine collapses that the subsidence can occur. Therefore, subsidence needs to be considered both short term and long term. Short term as discussed for the safety of the mining activity, but long term for environmental and social impacts. The reason for subsidence occurring is either from the mining activities due to wrongfully supported walls or that the activities compel too much force on the walls. The other reason is time, because after a while the rock starts to deform which can lead to the subsidence. Depending on what materials the ground is based on the impact of the subsidence varies. One impact is that it changes the surface since new ground levels are created. It can then damage the infrastructure or buildings. Another impact is because the subsidence changes the grounds formation, new flow channels or paths for the groundwater may be created. The water can then flow towards a new area and contaminate it (Atlas Copco 2018).

To reduce the impact of subsidence, the waste created from the mine can be used to fill the shafts and tunnels. Also, by replanting the waste inside its origin, the waste does not have to be treated as much since the local environment affects the area equally. Therefore, when comparing underground mines to each other, the rehabilitation plan should include a thorough risk analysis and risk management of subsidence. Another way is to look at different countries regulations towards sustainability in the mining industry (Sanmiquel, Bascomta 2018).

Moreover, to simplify the mining procedure from underground mining, the groundwater encountered is pumped out of the ground. This lowers the water level and if too much groundwater is pumped out it can lead to that a funnel is being created. The funnel drain water from an area that is much larger than the area used for the mining activity. As a result, other areas can be affected by the mining activity. One of the main reasons of why the funnel is created and why other areas can feel the impact is because once the water is pumped out it does not have a usage and is therefore wasted. In other words, to minimize the impact from pumping water out of the ground is to put it to use to in areas that can be affected by a funnel or by rehabilitating it into the ground (Jhariya, Khan, Thakur 2016).

3.3. In situ leach mining and environmental impact

(18)

13

the orebody. This causes the ore to detach from its surroundings. Hence, it is advantageous to perform the process where the ground contains “porous unconsolidated material” otherwise underground mining may be favorable (World nuclear association 2021). An extraction well then pumps the ore solution up to the surface where it can be transported away. Since ISL puts down a solution in the ground the ground and especially the ground water needs to be monitored. Therefore, the process should before the insert of the injection wells, insert monitoring wells. These wells monitor the area around the production area by making sure that the solution does not migrate away. To minimize the risk of migration of the solution due to ground water movement, a bit of ground water is removed from the area so the movement easier can be controlled (World nuclear association 2021). Figure 4 illustrates an ISL production site.

Figure 4: Illustration of the ISL mining process (Pannier 2009)

When the ISL mining is finished, water is pumped out of the ground to reduce the volume and concentration of the solution. Once pumped out the water is either evaporated or cleaned by reverse osmosis and then pumped back into the ground. The water pumping process is repeated until the baseline standard levels of the water is reached. This is to make as small footprint as possible. The baseline standard is determined before production and should be accepted by different parties. Thereafter, the process stops, and equipment can be removed. However, the monitoring wells should be in place for a longer period, a minimum of three years, to ensure that the water remains at the baseline standard. The reason is to prevent future disasters. Since ISL uses an unhealthy solution for humans the method is not licensed to perform production near water supplies (World nuclear association 2021).

(19)

14

to install the wells is by placing a row of injection wells and then a row of extraction well followed by a row of injection wells and so forth. Other ways of placing them are five spot pattern and seven-spot pattern. Here the seven-spot pattern has the closest distance between wells resulting in the most efficient way to extract uranium time wise. Figure 5 illustrates the installation ways described above for the ISL mining method (World nuclear association 2021).

Figure 5: Different ways to install injection and extraction well for an ISL mining process (World Nuclear Association 2021).

In the production process for ISL most of the uranium is extracted within the first year. Then the production continues for one to three years. By choosing a more efficient well placement, the production can quicker switch location and give larger focus on treatment. Another reason is that the longer the production process takes, the more the injection wells flow capacity decreases (World Nuclear Association 2021).

The solution injected into the orebody is “determined by geology and groundwater” (World nuclear association 2021). If the orebody has a calcium level of over 2% alkaline leaching is used and if it is lower acid leaching is used. Orebodies with high calcium rates are found in limestone or gypsum. However, acid leaching is advantageous out of an economical perspective due to it recovers more uranium and is cheaper than using alkaline leaching. The differences are 70-90% recovery compared to 60-70%, and the costs is almost halved. It also recovers the uranium at a faster rate in average (World nuclear association 2021). The reason is that acid leaching has a lower PH-value resulting in the dissolution of the ore. Therefore, acid leaching will require less volume than alkaline leaching. However, since the PH-level is so low (2-3), specialized equipment that cannot corrode is needed. The cost of buying equipment will then increase. For alkaline leaching common material and equipment can be used instead (Taylor, et al. 2004).

(20)

15

chemical reaction between the surrounding rocks and the uncontaminated groundwater. For alkaline leaching this reaction cannot happen and since the amount needed is higher, the risk is increased. Therefore, alkaline leaching will need a closer monitoring process towards the risk of leakage compared with acid leaching. However, the treatment period for acid leaching is longer due to PH-level. This to ensure that the baseline standard is reached. Also, as of today, more sites have reached more baseline standards from alkaline treatment than for acid leaching even though the environmental impact on the groundwater, if treated correctly, is lower for acid leaching (World Nuclear Association 2021).

3.4. Uranium mining standards

As of today, there are many countries that have not implemented “mining and environmental

legislation” and regulations (Falck 2015). Therefore, the companies operating in different

countries will have different standards to follow. As a result, companies can lack in social and environmental areas to be competitive on the market since there will be no, little or large enforcement on laws. To ensure that many companies operate under the same standards it exists several organizations that help to set up standards in the mining industry. Since it is not a requirement to follow these standards many short-lived mines or smaller choose not to follow or subscribe do them. However, larger companies should choose to implement the environmental and social standards. There exist many standards and most organizations has it as a requirement that their voluntary standards should be followed to allow the company to say they are members in them. Examples of organizations that sets up standards or helps promote the nuclear and mining industry is International Council on Mining & Metals (ICMM), World Nuclear Association (WNA), World Association of Nuclear Operations (WANO), Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (Falck 2015).

(21)

16 3.5. Uranium reserve and mining allocation

Almost all the uranium reserves are dispersed throughout 16 countries, ~95%. It is for that reason where most of the largest companies perform their mining production. These countries and their fraction of the world’s reserve are presented in the table 2:

Table 2: Distribution of world uranium reserve (World Nuclear Association 2021).

Country Percentage of the world

Australia 28% Kazakhstan 15% Canada 9% Russia 8% Namibia 7% South Africa 5% Brazil 5% Niger 4% China 4% Mongolia 2% Uzbekistan 2% Ukraine 2% Botswana 1% Tanzania 1% Jordan 1% USA 1% Other 5%

However, even though some countries have more uranium reserves than another it does only show the potential of uranium extraction. Therefore, a country with less reserves than another can today extract more uranium than the country with larger reserves. Figure 6 shows the amount of tons uranium the largest uranium extraction countries extracted.

Figure 6: Fraction of uranium mining by countries with production from mines in tons uranium (World Nuclear Association 2021).

22808 6937 6613 5476 3500 2983 2911 1885 801 846 491

Fraction of uranium mining by country (tonnes U)

(22)

17

From the graph it can be seen that Kazakhstan is the greatest uranium producer since it is around 40-45% of the world’s production. Even though Kazakhstan produces significantly more than other countries the graph also shows that countries with larger uranium reserves is also the countries that produce the most uranium. Furthermore, it is some diversity in countries as well. However, according to Dr. Luminita Grancea, senior analyst at the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, more diversity is needed. Mainly the reason is for Kazakhstan’s big production since “some companies only buy from only there” they are put into a high risk if something would happen like a political problem (Grancea 2021). It is therefore encouraged that other countries or parties invest in mines to increase the level of diversification. In other words, “there is a need to invest more in exploration and to bring this project from exploration

to mining stage” in order to involve more parties (Grancea 2021).

What mining methods used at each mine depends on several factors, but some main factors are the material of the ground (hard rock, porous sand, etc.) or the orebody’s location and shape (near the surface or not, or is it sloped, vertical, etc.). Due to that the choice of a method depends on several factors Dr. Luminita Grancea says that “mining methods are related to the

world, so you have everything from the mineralogy to the grade, to the depth”, etc. (Grancea

2021). Therefore, each method is linked to something specific and allows you to work “in a

good environmental way” and there is no method that is “better than another method”

(Grancea 2021). The fraction of what method used in the uranium mining today is shown in table 3:

Table 3: Mining method used for recovery of uranium (World Nuclear Association 2021).

Method Percentage

ISL 57%

Underground and Open pit 36%

By-product 7%

As seen in the table above, ISL is the dominant mining method. The main reason for that is because of it being a fast-mining process as well as being cheap compared to an underground mine (since they mostly operate at the same levels). But more importantly, it is because Kazakhstan is the country that extract the most uranium yearly and they mainly use the ISL method because of the geology in the country. The table can therefore be a little misleading since ISL can be seen as the most popular method used worldwide. Instead, it reflects the circumstances at each country. The table could therefore be more interesting from an economical perspective. However, it is an interesting area to explore from an environmental area if the ISL method is more sustainable or if it is because ISL is more cost efficient. Nevertheless, the table gives a good indication of what method is used and what a company looking for a new supplier will most likely encounter. By-product in the table is not a defined method to recover uranium, it means that uranium is recovered from mining process that is not intended for uranium, for instance copper or coal.

(23)

18

is electrified the environmental impact from emissions comes from the electricity’s power source which is supplied by the country the mine is located in. For instance, the power source can be driven by oil, coal, renewables, biofuels, etc. Therefore, depending on the country the mine is located, the energy consumption may vary. Table 4 shows the total energy supplied from the countries in table 2.

Table 4: Total energy supply for the top 16 uranium reserve countries (International Energy Agency 2021)

Country Total energy supply (TES)

Australia Oil 33%, coal 31%, natural gas 29%, biofuels and waste 4%, renewables 2%, hydro 1%

Kazakhstan Coal 49%, oil 25%, natural gas 25%, hydro 1%, other < 1%

Canada Natural gas 35%, oil 35%, hydro 11%, nuclear 9%, coal 5%, biofuels and waste 4%, renewables 1%

Russia Natural gas 55%, oil 20%, coal 16%, nuclear 7%, hydro 2%, other < 1% Namibia Oil 75%, biofuels and waste 19%, hydro

6%, other < 1%

South Africa Coal 73%, oil 15%, biofuels and waste 6%, natural gas 3%, nuclear 2%, renewables 1%, other < 1%

Brazil Oil 36%, biofuels and waste 32%, hydro 12%, coal 5%, renewables 2%, nuclear 1%

Niger Biofuels and waste 77%, oil 21%, coal 2%

China Coal 62%, oil 19%, natural gas 7%,

biofuels and waste 4%, hydro 3%, renewables 3%, nuclear 2%

Mongolia Coal 72%, oil 25%, biofuels and waste 3%, other < 1%

Uzbekistan Natural gas 85%, oil 9%, coal 5%, hydro 1%

Ukraine Coal 30%, natural gas 28%, nuclear 24%, oil 14%, biofuels and waste 3%, hydro 1%

Botswana Coal 42%, oil 37%, biofuels and waste 21%

Tanzania Biofuels and waste 83%, oil 12%, natural gas 3%, coal 2%, hydro 1%

Jordan Oil 54%, natural gas 38%, renewables 4%, coal 2%, biofuels and waste 1%, other < 1%

USA Oil 36%, natural gas 33%, coal 13%,

(24)

19

However, it should be said that the table above includes the entire country’s energy supply and not purely the uranium mining industry. Therefore, it gives an overall view of how developed from an environmental perspective each country is and from that, small conclusions of what energy the mines equipment most likely will use. Also, it is the energy consumption from each country and not the country’s energy mix. The reason for this is that countries may import electricity or other fuels to enable that they can supply their consumers inside the country. Therefore, as discussed before, the numbers should not be seen as the exact usage from each mine and should thereby not be a major part of the decision-making process. Although, it gives an indication of the countries and therefore mine’s energy source and if the country works sustainable or not.

Furthermore, electrification of techniques might not be the best way for every mine to choose. According to Dr. Luminita Grancea, the conditions the mine is located in provides the opportunities or boundaries for a transition. Firstly, transitioning requires investments which are large. These investments are connected to the market price of uranium. If the market price is low then buyers need to “pay a premium for” the utility and to the producers that “are doing

the investments” in a sustainability transition (Grancea 2021). In other words, a transition

costs money and this money needs to come from somewhere. Therefore, to fast-track a sustainable transition, you need to find buyers who are willing to pay extra so investments can be funded.

Secondly, the location of the mine comes with its own challenges. For instance, you have “many mines in remote areas” which makes it “quite difficult to have electric things or with

batteries or things like this” because it either must be connected to the local power grid or be

built on site (Grancea 2021). Some examples of mines in remote areas or difficult areas are the Ranger Mine in Australia, which is located Kakadu Park, but other mines could be located in the middle of the desert or other national parks. Therefore, “because it is local conditions

[…] there is no one side that is a solution for everyone” but instead it is what companies are

doing to help their local environment today (Grancea 2021). By looking at how the local environment will be impacted, companies can help the environment in the best way today. However, you need to “have a long-term view” because market prices will differ, new technologies will emerge, etc. (Grancea 2021). So, it is not enough do the best today but also the best in the future.

3.6. Uranium mining inputs

(25)

20

Figure 7: Energy and heat consumption for 1kg uranium from open pit mining (Farjana; Huda 2018).

(26)

21

Figure 9: Energy and heat consumption for 1kg uranium from ISL mining (Farjana; Huda 2018). The first observation that can be seen is the usage of electricity. For the open pit there is no usage of electricity to power the machinery (that has a major impact of the mining process), but instead is powered purely from fossil fuels. For the underground mining process the main power source is from fossil fuels, but also uses electricity. The last method, ISL, is mainly powered by electricity but uses fossil fuels in the process as well. Therefore, open pit mining will use the greatest amount of fossil fuels which comes from their equipment and machinery being much larger than the other methods equipment. They have therefore not yet been electrified so when looking into uranium suppliers that mines with an open pit method the key element in extracting phase is the age of equipment. The reason for the age of equipment being the key factor is the energy efficiency that has increased over the years. However, it should also be said that laws in different countries can vary regarding the level of emissions allowed from the equipment and should therefore also be taken into the consideration. When looking at the ISL method the key element is the energy mix or energy consumption in the country where the process takes place. This because electricity is the main power source. Also, since ISL is the only method the consistently uses chemical substances in the mining process it should be reviewed to ensure the environmental impact of it. For underground mining, the energy mix or consumption is highly relevant but does not impact the process as much since the usage of fossil fuels is the major source of power.

(27)

22 3.7. Uranium ore grade

The material that is mined is referred to the ore and the amount of valuable material inside the ore is referred as the ore grade. Therefore, the uranium ore grade is a percentage of the ore mass, which is pure valuable material which in this case is the uranium. When mining, the uranium ore grade will gradually decrease due to the orebody diminishing. In other words, the valuable material for each ton ore that is mined will decline (Extractives Hub 2021). As a result, to be able to extract the uranium larger deposits of ore is needed. Table 5 shows the definition of different ore grades

Table 5: Definitions of different ore grades (World Nuclear Association 2021). Very high ore grade ~20%

High ore grade ~2%

Low ore grade ~0.1%

Very low ore grade ~0.01%

To be able to understand how different ore grades can impact the environment different relationships needs to be established. Figure 10 shows different sites water and energy usage as well as their CO2 emissions and ore grade.

Figure 10: Different mines ore grade, water usage, energy usage and CO2 emissions (Mudd

2013).

(28)

23

4. Results

This section consists of collected data and data from the performed interview.

4.1. Tool suggestion

In order to evaluate and compare companies and mining methods from an environmental perspective the tool found in the chapter “Appendix” is created. The tool is chosen to be presented in the “Appendix” to increase its usability and make the result section more comprehensive. The tool consists of four templates: “The company”, “Open pit”, “Underground mining” and “In situ leaching”. The reason for it being different templates is because the mining methods differ from each other in regards of technology, methodology and environmental impacts which makes the evaluated areas for each method different. For instance, ISL has more focus on the groundwater impact since the method uses chemicals emitted into the ground to dissolve the orebody, but an open pit focuses more on the rehabilitation plan since its surface impact is much greater. “The company” is its own template because the company owning the mine sets the foundation for the mine’s environmental work. In other words, the tool has two functions; evaluating and comparing companies with each other and evaluating and comparing mines to each other.

There are seven columns in each template. In the first column is the main question, that introduces a key area for the company or mining method. The second column is a follow-up question, so if a key area has several aspects to consider follow-up questions will help investigate them. Each question or follow-up question have one to three alternatives which each correspond to a specific point between one and three. Column three is where you write your answer and columns five to seven shows the point your answer corresponds to.

Table 6 shows the layout for templates of the three mining methods. The template “The company” has the same format but includes different questions. The three templates, “Open pit”, “Underground mining” and “In situ leaching”, starts with five generic questions which are the ones shown in table 6. After the generic questions n different method specific questions is asked. With the first question in table 6 as an example, the question has three different answer options: “yes, to some degree, no”. Depending on the answer to the question it gives one to three points. This is then repeated until all questions are answered. The points received from each question is later added together in the bottom of the layout, “Total points”. Afterwards the total points are divided with the maximum number of points of the template (found in the top of column four, see table 6). It will then give a number between 0 and 1 which corresponds to a percentage. The lower the percentage, the more sustainable the mine or company is.

Table 6: Layout of the tool for the three mining methods.

Question Follow up question

Answer Points (max x p):

1p 2p 3p

(29)

24

Does the mine work towards reducing its energy consumption or fuel usage? (actively, somewhat, barely anything)

Actively Somewhat Barely anything

Does the mine actively work with local organizations, governments, etc, about local impacts? (actively, somewhat, barely anything)

Actively Somewhat Barely anything

Can the mine show a work or an action that they have completed with regard to the local environment and describe successes, difficulties or similar? (in depth, only discussing the subject, no) Yes, in depth

Yes, but only discussing the subject

No

Does the mine have biodiversity plans (revegetation, remigration, registration of species)? (little, average, substantial) Yes, substantial

Yes, average No or little

(30)

25

The templates are percentage based because each template has a different number of questions and/or maximum points. The percentage received can therefore be used to compare mines to each other despite mining method. There are a different number of questions and/or maximum points dependent on mining method and there can be a different number of key areas. Also, since environmental questions, challenges or issues constantly evolve, new questions can be added into the tool or old questions could be removed, which will change the maximum points. The percentage will then help overcome those changes so methods and companies can still be compared.

The questions in the tool are based on the information in the theoretical background. Some of the answers can therefore be found further up in the thesis, for example to the question: “what energy mix/consumption does the country mainly consist of?”. Other questions are dependent on the user to find information from the company or mine but can use information from previous factors to help the user know what areas to look for. An example of such a question is: “does the company actively work with reducing their environmental impact/footprint?”. As a result, the questions in the tool are chosen to give an insight in several key areas which are identified by understanding the mining process as well as the local circumstances and the processes environmental impact.

(31)

26

5. Discussion and analysis

Uranium mining has many different aspects of environmental impact and is therefore a broad area to limit and specify what has the greatest impact or not. The reason being that the mining process can be conducted in many ways, where each mining method has its own environmental challenges and advantages. However, there are also areas where the methods are similar to each other. For instance, similarities can be found in waste management, technology efficiency, energy usage, etc. Therefore, when comparing mines to each other, an understanding of what areas and how each mining method impacts the environment is necessary. The tool suggestion produced in this thesis is made to compare mines to each other by identifying some key areas for each mining method and/or for companies’ environmental goals and work.

How the tool in the thesis differs from other tools is that it is created for potential new suppliers and not existing suppliers. An example of a tool that also evaluates suppliers is World Nuclear Association’s checklist, Internationally Standardized Reporting on the Sustainable Development Performance of Uranium Mining and Processing Sites (“Checklist”). It is a checklist created “in cooperation with from some of the Association’s member organizations” to help organizations to evaluate uranium mining and processing sites (World Nuclear Association 2017). The World Nuclear Association’s checklist involves all aspects of sustainable development. Therefore, it does not mainly focus on the environmental aspect and is primarily used in the last stages of procurement when establishing a contract with a new supplier or for existing suppliers. The usage of the tool in the thesis is therefore created to complement for example World Nuclear Association’s checklist to be used before a contact with the supplier is created.

Because of the many environmental impacts, the tool should not be seen as a tool that is fixed in its layout and questions, but instead as something each user should be able to adapt to what they think is more or less important. It is therefore encouraged to add or remove questions and not to be seen as a limitation. The reason being that the environmental issue is constantly evolving since new information is found, provided, or created. In addition, new technology shifts todays focus areas regarding the environment since they can mitigate the weight of or remove the existing problems today. But also, new technology can create new challenges or problems. Therefore, by adding or removing questions in the tool, the tool will constantly evolve to meet and identify the challenges that uranium mining has to date. Nonetheless, the questions that exists in the tool today should be seen as a basis to what areas uranium mining impacts the environment and how companies and mining sites works with environmental issues. In conclusion the tool is a standardized tool, meaning that it is applicable from start but due to each user’s interest it can work as a basis when comparing mines and companies to each other but has the potential to evolve to meet future environmental problems.

(32)

27

questions, the tool could instead be implemented in for example Excel to automate the calculations of the points.

5.1. Future of uranium mining

The future of uranium mining mainly depends on the energy usage on mining sites but also the ability to locate and plan the mining process of the orebodies. With the gradual decrease in the ore grade the energy usage to extract the uranium will increase. Therefore, when choosing a new supplier and especially if the goal of the contract is to establish a long-term relationship, then the ore grade decline will need to be taken into consideration. From an environmental perspective the increase of energy usage put a bigger responsibility on the supplier to have energy efficient technology or that the technology is electric, and that the country has a sustainable energy consumption. This to meet the future demands and to maintain a sustainable production.

However, as Dr. Luminita Grancea said, even if an electrification of machinery and equipment is good, it should not be rushed into. Since each mine has its own conditions and circumstances it can be less environmentally friendly to implement an electrification. Instead “you need to take all matters in sense and calculate all the risks and to have improvement and

continuous verification” in order to perform mining processes in good conditions and most

sustainable way today (Grancea 2021). Therefore, depending on the location the “challenges

will vary and can be major to keep the environmental impact to zero or minimum” but this can

only be overcome if the right conditions is applied (Grancea 2021). In the discussion of an electrification, the right conditions will only be if the mine can have a secure and sustainable energy source connected to it. That is done by either connecting it to the local power grid which can require large investments or if the mine can have its own energy source, like a generator, but that is today too expensive and unprofitable to have. Nevertheless, since suppliers has different mining methods due to their local conditions, how can the different mining methods be developed to meet the upcoming demands?

An open pit will still have the greatest surface impact but it also releases many emissions because of its machinery. The usage for example from heavy oils is the reason to the emissions, which gives a disadvantage towards the other methods since the machinery needs a complete change of what power source they got. Therefore, if the machinery with giant vehicles can be electrified then open pit mining can more or less remove their emissions. Of course, this will put greater focus on what country the mining process occurs in and the explosives used to blast the ground open will still release some emissions. But the explosives’ impact can almost be neglected if the rest is electrified since the machinery is the main environmental issue for the method.

(33)

28

since the operating area becomes more centered. If it is intended to switch mining method the groundwork is important, so the environment is not impacted more than necessary. An underground mine has the same impact as an open pit mine but uses more electricity instead. Therefore, the conclusion for an underground mine is that electrification of the equipment used is the main objective for the method. Since underground mining has developed mining techniques that avoids blasting and if the non-blasting techniques are suitable for the orebody, the underground mining method can minimize its emissions. This because it easier can electrify the equipment and the no usage of explosives. However, the greatest advantage with an underground mine is because of its possibility to follow an orebody. With the declining ore grade underground mines can more easily extract uranium from different locations due to building strategical shafts and tunnels.

(34)

29

6. Conclusion

The purpose of the thesis is to create a tool for evaluating the environmental impact of the uranium mining process and different mining methods based on a case from a Swedish company. The tool suggestion produced in this thesis is made to compare and evaluate mines by identifying some key areas for each mining method and/or for companies’ environmental goals and work. It is from findings from a review of literature and a single semi-structured interview that together laid the groundwork for the tool. Therefore, to understand the content of the tool the mining methods technology differences, environmental impacts and what the future holds for the methods as well as the geographical location of the mine, is needed to be known. These areas have been analyzed in the thesis in order to create the tool.

The theoretical findings indicates that the technology for each method differs and are dependent on the local environment, which means that each method has different environmental impacts and challenges. Some similarities between each method are that they all impact the groundwater in some way and every method needs to have a rehabilitation plan for the site once operations stop. Because of the similarities in impacts it also means that despite method used, the uranium mining industry faces equal challenges but in different forms. Therefore, sections 3.1.1., 3.2.1. and 3.3. shows in depth what these challenges are. However, one impact that will affect the future, despite method, is the usage of fossil fuels for the technology or machinery. To reduce the environmental impact from uranium mining, a transition towards electric technology and machinery is the future for sustainable uranium mining if and only if the local conditions allow it and if the energy source is sustainable. The tool created in the thesis has not yet been tested and therefore the efficiency of it is still unknown. A future work could therefore be to test its efficiency in reality. Moreover, since it has not been tested certain areas, the tool could be adapted by adding or removing questions. Since the tool is not fixed in its layout and questions it is possible to adapt it to the user. Nonetheless, the tool can also be seen as a start of evaluating suppliers through the entire life cycle. Another future work could therefore be to include the next steps of the life cycle, conversion, enrichment and/or manufacturing.

(35)

30

7. References

Advisera. What is ISO 14001?. Retrieved March 14, 2021.

https://advisera.com/14001academy/what-is-iso-14001/

Atlas Copco. (2018, February 10). Atlas Copco- Block Caving Mining Method. Black Diamond Drilling Services Australia. Retrieved March 19, 2021.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFVUqy3a6WQ&list=PLMyC5Emri6e317vtA9DX4sNHL9 I7neFwp

Atlas Copco. (2018, February 10). Atlas Copco- Cut And Fill Mining Method. Black Diamond Drilling Services Australia. Retrieved March 19, 2021.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4yPsbkBg2M&list=PLMyC5Emri6e317vtA9DX4sNHL9I 7neFwp&index=2

Atlas Copco. (2018, February 10). Atlas Copco- Sublevel Caving Mining Method. Black Diamond Drilling Services Australia. Retrieved March 19, 2021.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NG2Zinhpe9s&list=PLMyC5Emri6e317vtA9DX4sNHL9I7 neFwp&index=4

Atlas Copco. (2018, February 10). Atlas Copco- Sublevel Stoping Mining Method. Black Diamond Drilling Services Australia. Retrieved March 19, 2021.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ruo0YrLGAwA&list=PLMyC5Emri6e317vtA9DX4sNHL9I 7neFwp&index=3

Cameco. Mining Methods. Retrieved March 19, 2021.

https://www.cameco.com/businesses/mining-methods

CamecoCorporation. (2015, December 11). In situ mining process. Retrieved March 6, 2021.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmaNoyfQtWQ

Dilthy, Max Roman. Open pit mining pros & cons. Sciencing. Retrieved March 6, 2021.

https://sciencing.com/open-pit-mining-pros-cons-12083240.html

Dr. Luminita Grancea. (Senior analyst at OECD Nuclear Energy Agency). May 11, 2021. (Video interview, Zoom)

Energy Education. Jet bore mining. Retrieved March 4, 2021.

https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Jet_bore_mining

Energy Education. Raisebore mining. Retrieved March 4, 2021.

https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Raisebore_mining

Energy Education. Uranium Mining. Retrieved March 4, 2021.

https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Uranium_mining

Extractives Hub. Mineral Exploration, Evaluation and Planning. Centre for Energy, Petroleum and Mineral Law and Policy University of Dundee. Retrieved May 4, 2021.

References

Related documents

The specific research questions that have been answered in this thesis is the result of an analysis of how a development project within unknown areas is conducted, in this case

Using News Articles to Predict Stock Price Movements Gidofalvi, 2001 News Sensitive Stock Trend Prediction Fung et al., 2002 Forecasting Intraday Stock Price Trends with Text

We attempted to quantify the total effect on employment including indirect effects and arrived at an employment multiplier of 2.47, or an average of 1575

Hon vänder sig således inte väsentligen till den internationellt sett fåtaliga kategorin skandinavis- ter utan till det betydligt större antalet företrädare för

Loup de Fages behärskar svenska väl, han har omsorgsfullt ta­ git del av Edith Södergranforskningen, i främsta rummet Gunnar Tideströms monografi och Olof

Bland annat utreder Stenkvist frågan om Lunda- Clarté hade kommunistisk eller socialdemokra­ tisk dominans under den aktuella tiden och diskuterar orsakerna till

In terms of self-reported health, the results indicate that the policy implementation has been successful as people living in Torreon were more likely to report Very Good health

From the extraction of uranium from rock formations, through the milling, refining, and enriching of uranium, to the operation of reactors, and the unsolved dilemma of what to do