Talvivaara

Soil map

Topography of the area

How this was possible?

Mining lawClaim documentation Permission to land redemption Review

of permissions

Exploration Prospecting permission Mining permission

Discovery, exploration, economic evaluation/feasibility study, investment decision, construction of mine, mining activity

Environmental legislationRequired notifications, EIA-procedure, Environmental permissions

Land use and construction law

Plans, construction code

Nature conservation law

Global Reporting Initiative, G3.1 standard

Background materials

• EIA-report (YVA-selonteko) 2005 and 2012• Tukes report on lethal occupational accident 2012• Annual reports of Talvivaara 2011, 2012• Stuk statements

Economically important, enriched in metals such as V, Cr, Co, Ni, Ti, Cu, Pb, Zn, Mo, U, Ag, Sb, Tl, Se, Cd Formed during eustatic sea-level highstands: Ord-Dev, Jurassic-Paleogene Ocean Anoxic Events (OAEs) Examples: Cambro-Ordov. Alum shale, Scandanavia Devonian New Albany Shale, Indiana Present day example: Black Sea (Mn, Co, Cu, Ni and V) Chemistry: R(CH2O)2 + SO42- -> R+ 2 HCO3- + H2S HS- + Me2+ -> MeS + H+ Where R(CH2O) is a complex carbohydrate molecule, Me : Metal

What experts knew (but obviously the public did not..)• Existence of U in Talvivaara ore deposit were known for

long (about 17 ppm)– Small concentrations of U is a characteristic of black shales– Radiation at normal background level (0.05-0.3 mSv/h)– U not considered in EIA of Talvivaara

• Metallurgical processing of Ni-produces small amounts of U in Harjavalta (small amounts produced and sold for nuclear fuel production abroad) – The process more or less applied to extract U from Talvivaara

solutions

Process• Bioleaching, (microbes, sulfuric acid+ air)

• H2S-odours• Sulfate emissions in waste

waters• Lethal H2S-emission

(occupational death)• Failure in water balance

estimation/preparedness to intensive rain

• Filling of gypsum-pool with acid leachates

• Mobilization of radioactive sludge

• Dam failures at “gypsum pool”

What went wrong?

Inter-related problems I• The metals are removed in three steps by H2S-

dissolution (Cu, Zn, Ni+Co), • Other metals in the final steps

– pH-control between Ni-Co-step by adding slaked lime (Ca(OH)2), (EIA 2005) or “limestoneslurry” (Occupational accident investigation report)

– further reactions also released CO2(g), diffusion of H2S to gas face caused emissions to air (odours and complaints)

– To reduce odours (apparently), caustic soda (NaOH) was used instead (EIA report 2012)

– No CaSO4-buffering!

– Sulfate concentrations in the waste waters jumped above 1500 mg/l!

Inter-related problems II• The leaching process had some

problems due to preferred flow paths and skin coverage– Exogenic process not effective,

less evaporation• 2013: 100 year record rain fall in

the region• Some of the pools were used to

store sulfate waste waters• Mine site was “soaked” with water

some of which is acidic!!• .

Inter-related problems III

• Process waters, drainage from waste rock and open pits is directed to water treatment pools directly or through gypsum pool.

• Storage of the gypsum (sludge) created in the metal plant

• Other metal containing waters, ”extra water”• ”pH in the gypsum-pool HIGH and metals

precipitate efficiently”, ”enough time for settling of chemical precipitates”, ”significan amount of water bound chemically to gypsum-sludge”.

•

Environmental improvement programme 2012• 1. Significant reductions in water emissions• We will improve water balance management, increase internal water circulation, and reduce raw water intake.

We will also develop entirely new techniques for removing sodium sulphate from process water.• 2. Continued reductions in odours• Continued efforts are being made to identify, locate and eliminate the odour sources at the metals recovery plant.

Burning hydrogen sulphide is a new technique we will introduce to reduce the unpleasant odours.• 3. Restricting dust emissions from the mine• We will continue to prevent dust emissions from extraction, construction and traffic everywhere in the mine area.

To achieve this, we will invest in new dust recovery equipment.• 4. More effective environmental communication• We will inform the general public, the media and, most importantly, local residents, of all environmental affairs

related to the mine, either immediately or beforehand.• We will continue to arrange open discussion events for the public, open day events and school visits. At these

events, we will review current environmental issues and the results of our environmental monitoring activities.• 5. We will set new long-term environmental targets• »»Raw water intake has been reduced to a minimum and internal water circulation has been materially

increased.• »»Cleaned process water is only discharged into surface waters in exceptional cases. Even then, the quality of

water will not cause changes in the water systems.• »»Dusting at the mine is well under control, dusting does not cause harm to the surrounding area.• »»Hydrogen sulphide odour emissions are under control and the odours do not cause harm to the surrounding

area.

Geotechnical investigations based on EIA– Soil and bedrock investigations since 1970

– spring 2005, 53 dug pits into soil– spring 2004 and 2005, 11 drillholes to lakes sediments

Hovinlahti– In 1980-luvulla, 19 geotechnical drillings and 47 soil

samples (general geotechnical properties and constructability of earth dams)

– About 150 holes for drill core sampling of the ore, near the open pit areas

– Estimates of hydraulic properties of soil based on 5 samples analysed in laboratory!

• NO in situ hydraulic tests of soil or bedrock!!!• NO geophysical soundings made to support

conclusions

Critical observation on EIA-documentation • Where are conservative assessments?• Overstatements considering the level of hydrogeological

investigations– “Maanpoisto ja rakentaminen voivat vaikuttaa pohjaveden muodostumiseen sekä olemassa oleviin

lähteisiin.– Vedenpoisto avolouhoksista voi alentaa pohjaveden pinnankorkeutta louhosten läheisyydessä sekä

muuttaa pohjaveden virtaussuuntia Rikastushiekka-allas voi paikallisesti nostaa pohjaveden pinnankorkeutta ja vaikuttaa virtaussuuntiin”

• In-flow of water into open pits under-estimated if not ignored?– Same bacteria that is used in the process have caused acid generation in soil and bedrock

• Background pH in a spring <3.5– Trees clear cut, drained by ditches and soil horizons mixed by plowing

• Acidification of soil water?• Reduced evapotranspiration

Questions risen after reviewing EIA!• Where did all the acidic water come from? Process or drainage?• Evidence of natural acid drainage exist in the report!• Also land has been thoroughly overturn and the tree and soil cover

removed..• Acid generation of sulfides in glacial till not accounted

appropriately? (Inadequate description in EIA)• How about inflow of groundwater to open pits? Was it estimated AT

ALL? Not described!!• Was it necessary to pump acidic water to the gypsum pool?

– Was the mining company unaware that this will remobilize U deposited in the sludge (STUK statement: U-radiation 300-900 Bqr/kg)

• The failure of the dam was close due to piping of dam seepage/leakage ! Was this risk taken into account?

• Why not considered geotechnically demanding? – Investigation and risk assessment levels typical to standard geotechnical project

(Eurocode level II)

• Environmental legislation requires adequate knowledge about the environmental impacts of its operations

• Nuclear energy legislation requires operator to show understanding of relevant issues for the (nuclear) safety

Lessons learned

• Obviously, interdependencies of different steps of waste production and management or “problem solutions” not clear neither to operators nor (environmental) regulators

• Should division of responsibilities made more clear?– How dam safety was effected by acidic seepage?– Who should make this kind of questions?

• Should U-containing ore deposits considered as potential sources of radwastes until otherwise proved?– Mines considered nuclear facilities unless otherwise proved?

• Conservative models to support conclusions• Multiple barrier concepts/depth in defense

Talvivaara strives to become a pioneerin sustainable mining and to outperformminimum requirements in all dimensions of itsoperations. To achieve this goal, Talvivaaramust make continued efforts to improve itsoperating policies. In 2011, efforts focused onimproving water emissions management, activeco-operation with stakeholder groups, and ondeveloping management systems that promotesustainable development.