Technical Review of "New Technologies on Mine Process Tailings Disposal" Through a Geotextile Tube Dewatering Lens
- Ben Lewis
- Feb 20
- 4 min read
Introduction
The 2016 paper New Technologies on Mine Process Tailings Disposal (attached within) provides a comparative analysis of three common tailings management methods: tailings dams, surface paste disposal, and geotextile tube dewatering. The study aims to evaluate the environmental and economic implications of these methods, focusing on a Pb-Zn mining operation. While the paper presents a structured cost analysis, some key aspects—such as water recovery benefits, risk mitigation, and operational flexibility—warrant further discussion.
This review examines the paper’s findings, considers additional technical factors relevant to tailings disposal, and explores areas where further research may be needed, particularly regarding geotextile tube dewatering.
Cost Comparisons and Adjustments for Inflation
The study reports the following cost estimates for tailings disposal methods (2016 USD):
Tailings dams: $2.25 per dry metric tonne
Surface paste disposal: $2.29 per tonne
Surface paste disposal (with cement): $2.79 per tonne
Geotextile tube dewatering: $7.39 per tonne
Adjusting for inflation (~3% per year) to reflect 2025 values:
Tailings dams: $2.93 per tonne
Surface paste disposal: $2.98 per tonne
Surface paste disposal (with cement): $3.63 per tonne
Geotextile tube dewatering: $9.63 per tonne
The study attributes the higher cost of geotextile dewatering primarily to the price of the geotextile tubes themselves. However, a more holistic cost-benefit analysis could better capture the advantages of this method in terms of water recovery, risk reduction, and operational flexibility.
Geotextile Tube Dewatering: Strengths and Limitations
The study acknowledges that geotextile tube dewatering is an emerging technology with specific applications, but it does not fully consider the method’s ability to function in challenging environments. A few notable advantages of this method include:
Water Recovery and Recycling: Geotextile tubes allow process water to be reclaimed, reducing reliance on external water sources. This could be a significant financial benefit in water-scarce regions.
Performance in High-Rainfall Areas: Unlike tailings dams, which can become unstable in extreme weather, geotextile tubes function effectively regardless of rainfall, as they retain solids while allowing excess water to drain.
Lower Risk of Catastrophic Failure: Tailings dam failures have resulted in severe environmental and financial consequences. By contrast, geotextile tubes operate as a contained system, mitigating the risk of large-scale spills.
Future Tailings Recovery Potential: Stored tailings can be more easily accessed and reprocessed compared to tailings stored in traditional dams.
Despite these benefits, geotextile dewatering does have certain constraints that need consideration:
Scalability and Deployment Challenges: The study does not discuss production capacity limitations, but industry estimates suggest that geotextile tubes are most practical for tailings volumes up to 500,000 tonnes per annum. For larger operations, manual deployment becomes a bottleneck, requiring multiple teams to manage stacking and filling processes effectively.
Land Area Requirements: While geotextile tubes offer flexibility in placement, they still require significant space for storage, particularly if high production rates are involved.
Flocculant Dependency: Effective dewatering within geotextile tubes relies on optimal flocculant use, which adds an operational variable that requires careful management.
Comparison with Tailings Dams and Surface Paste Disposal
The study provides a well-structured comparison of tailings disposal methods, noting that each approach has its own advantages and trade-offs.
Tailings Dams: Despite their widespread use, tailings dams present ongoing challenges related to stability, water loss, and environmental risk. The study notes that the cost of maintaining and monitoring tailings dams can increase significantly depending on site conditions and regulatory requirements.
Surface Paste Disposal: The method offers improved tailings stability and reduced water loss compared to conventional tailings dams, but the study highlights the sensitivity of paste disposal to rainfall. If water content fluctuates too much, achieving the required material strength becomes difficult.
Given these factors, geotextile tube dewatering may not be a direct replacement for tailings dams or paste disposal in all cases, but it presents a useful niche solution—particularly for sites where water recovery, rainfall resilience, or space constraints are major considerations.
Areas for Further Research
The study provides a solid foundation for cost comparisons but does not explore some additional technical and economic considerations that could influence decision-making:
Carbon Capture Potential: Some mining projects have explored whether geotextile tube dewatering could enhance CO₂ sequestration in mineral tailings. While this was not covered in the paper, further research could assess whether geotextile tubes provide any measurable benefits in this area.
Operational Cost Offsets: The study primarily focuses on capital and material costs but does not account for potential savings related to reduced water usage, risk mitigation, and lower long-term monitoring costs.
Long-Term Performance Data: While geotextile tube dewatering has been used in various industries, more long-term case studies specific to large-scale mining applications would help validate its effectiveness over time.
Conclusion
The study presents a well-structured comparison of three key tailings disposal methods, highlighting the cost implications of each. While geotextile tube dewatering is shown to be the most expensive option in direct material costs, the analysis does not fully explore its broader advantages, particularly in water recovery, operational safety, and adaptability to high-rainfall environments.
From a technical perspective, geotextile tube dewatering is best suited for mid-scale tailings operations where water recovery is a priority and where traditional tailings dams present environmental or permitting challenges. However, its scalability remains a limitation, with a practical upper capacity estimated at around 500,000 tonnes per annum, beyond which manual deployment becomes increasingly complex.
As mining operations continue to explore alternative tailings management strategies, further research into the long-term viability and economic offsets of geotextile tube dewatering would help refine its position as part of an integrated tailings management framework.
To see the referenced paper in full, sign up to the best geosynthetics community at GeoKonect and view it free among an array of other geosynthetics technical content. Direct link to the paper below:
Comments