Abstract: The factors influencing uranium recovery in water-rock systems during acid in-situ leaching (ISL) were studied at the Kujieertai uranium deposit in Xinjiang. Using an ISL unit, a field leach trial (FLT) had been carried out to test the sequential effects of a leaching solution without oxidant (H2SO4 solution 4–8 g/L) and a leaching solution with oxidant (H2SO4 3–7 g/L, and Fe (III) 2–6 g/L). The observation of the leaching process revealed clearly defined stages of uranium release from the solid mineral to solution. Uranium mobilization from solid mineral into solution can be described in four stages. At the beginning of the acid ISL process, there was no oxidant to be added to the leaching solution and the desorption of hexavalent uranyl ions in the open pores, as well as dissolution of hexavalent uranium minerals, led to a short-term peak in the pregnant solution, which happened while pH decreased from about 5.3 to 2.62. Following the depletion of the adsorbed hexavalent uranium and a decline in uranium dissolution intensity, the addition of Fe(III) facilitated the oxidation of tetravalent uranium, which enabled intensive uranium mobilization again. During this process, the dissolution of uranium had a strong positive correlation with the reduction of Fe(III) and Eh in the leach solution. Beside hydrochemical factors, the deportment of uranium was also an important factor affecting uranium recovery. Uranium located in the open pores can be completely exposed to the solution and the mobilization intensity was significantly affected by hydrogeochemical conditions; but the uranium present in microfissures and in the ore matrix could not be fully exposed to the solution, so, their dissolution intensity was primarily controlled by corrosion and permeability of the ore. In general, the hydrogeochemical conditions and the deportment of uranium were the external and internal factors that significantly affected the dissolution and recovery of uranium in the early and middle stages of the FLT. However, in the latest stages, due to uranium depletion, enhancing the chemical potential of the leaching solution, specifically acidity and/or the amount of oxidant, had little improvement on uranium recovery.

Abstract: In this study, the application of the Well Reversal Technique (WRT) and the impact of reversal time on the efficiency of uranium mining via In-Situ Leaching (ISL) were investigated. A prevalent issue in ISL mineral extraction is the formation of stagnant zones caused by limited access of the lixiviant, which leads to increased operating expenditures. The WRT, which involves altering the function of some wells from injection to production or vice versa, is a potential solution to this problem. The efficiency of WRT is heavily dependent on the well pattern and reversal time. Two commonly used well patterns in ISL are the 9-spot (row arrangement) and 7-spot (hexagonal arrangement). The objective of this study was to determine the optimal reversal time for a 9-spot well pattern through mathematical modeling of hydrodynamic and physico-chemical processes and subsequent economic assessment. A mathematical model of uranium extraction processes was developed using the principles of mass conservation, Darcy’s, and mass action laws. The results obtained for a 9-spot well pattern without reversal, with two reversal options, and a 7-spot scheme were analyzed comparatively. The 7-spot scheme without reversal was found to be the most effective of the options examined. The application of WRT on a 9-spot well pattern allows to enhance production efficiency to a level comparable to that of a 7-spot well pattern. Additionally, the effect of reversal time on recovery was studied based on two well reversal options. The results from calculation revealed that the optimal scenario was when the well reversal is conducted immediately after the time point at which the average concentration of the pregnant solution in the production wells reaches its peak value. The overall efficiency of WRT application was determined through economic calculations of capital (CAPEX) and operating (OPEX) expenditures. Based on economic calculations, it was determined that the utilization of WRT results in a 3–18% increase in mineral production efficiency for a 9-point scheme, depending on the chosen reversal method.

Abstract: Applications of a complex surfactant developed in-house to in-situ leaching of low permeable sandstone uranium deposits are described based on results from agitation leaching, column leaching, resin adsorption, and elution experiments using uranium containing solution from the in-situ leaching site. The results of agitation leaching experiments show that adding surfactant with different concentrations into leaching solution improves the leaching rate of uranium. The maximum leaching rate of uranium from agitation leaching reached 92.6% at an added surfactant concentration of 10mg/l. Result of column leaching experiment shows that adding surfactant with varying concentrations into leaching solutions increased the permeability coefficient of ore-bearing layer by 42.7–86.8%. The leaching rate of uranium from column leaching increased by 58.0% and reached 85.8%. The result of kinetic analysis shows that for the extraction of uranium controlled by diffusion without surfactant the apparent rate constant 0.0023/d changed to 0.0077/d for the extraction with surfactant controlled by both diffusion and surface chemical reactions. Results from resin adsorption and elution experiments show that there was no influence on resin adsorption and elution of uranium with an addition of 50mg/l surfactant to production solution from in-situ leaching. The adsorption curve, sorption capacity of resin, recycling of resin remained the same as without adding any surfactant. Introducing complex surfactant to leaching solution increased the peak concentration of uranium in eluents, reduced the residual uranium content in resin, and promoted the elution efficiency. The method of using a complex surfactant for in-situ leaching is useful for low permeable sandstone uranium deposits.