Mineralogy-Constrained Critical-Mineral Recovery Screening for Legacy Mine Waste
A completed geology and mineral-processing study screening legacy mine-waste classes for critical-mineral recovery while keeping mineral hosts, liberation, process compatibility, residue stability and evidence uncertainty visible.

Software compatibility
The released results use the frozen 30 August 2026 evidence catalogue, pinned Python packages, 20,000 uncertainty draws per material, and random seed 20260830. Site data or changed evidence positions require a fresh validation run.
Project definition
Problem statement
Legacy mine waste can contain critical minerals that were not targeted or recoverable when the material was produced.
The geology problem is to distinguish elemental occurrence from a plausible secondary resource by connecting grade to mineral host, association, liberation, process response and environmental liability.
Project objectives
- Compare ten legacy mine-waste archetypes across eight critical-mineral target groups.
- Apply hard mineral-host, liberation and residue-stability gates before ranking.
- Compare balanced, mineralogy-first, environmental and near-term deployment scenarios.
- Map thirteen validation criteria across eleven investigation stages.
- Quantify evidence-position uncertainty with 20,000 fixed-seed draws per material.
- Retain complete results, figures, tests, references and editable documentation.
Project structure
Project components
Waste-material register
Compares sulphide tailings, porphyry tailings, bauxite residue, coal-derived waste, phosphogypsum, historic tin-tungsten tailings, uranium tailings, laterite residue and lithium tailings.
Mineral-host model
Separates bulk grade from host certainty, grain size, association, liberation and deportment.
Recovery screening
Maps eight target groups to plausible materials under physical, flotation and hydrometallurgical process boundaries.
Environmental model
Retains water, energy, acid drainage, contaminant mobility and post-treatment residue stability.
Workflow FMEA
Ranks 143 stage-criterion combinations from historical records and sampling through characterization, testwork and decision.
Verification pipeline
Regenerates the study, tests the model, validates the documents and reproduces the analysis in Docker.
Methodology
Project workflow
- 01Define the waste feature
Establish ownership, access, history, geometry, material classes and environmental setting.
- 02Sample representatively
Stratify by unit, depth, grain size, oxidation and production period with field quality control.
- 03Establish mineral hosts
Combine chemistry, mineralogy, particle size, association, liberation and deportment.
- 04Test complete routes
Measure products, recoveries, impurities, water, reagents, energy and every residual stream.
- 05Review uncertainty
Inspect gates, scenario reversals, FMEA priorities, intervals and sensitivity before advancing.
Demonstration scenario
The retained analysis shows that historic tin-tungsten tailings can rank strongly when heavy-mineral liberation and mature physical separation align. Sulphide and reactive residues remain conditional on acid-drainage control and post-treatment residue evidence. Large tonnage or bulk grade cannot override a failed mineral-host gate.
Engineering
Tools and method
- Tools
- The project uses Python 3.12, NumPy, pandas, Matplotlib for subject analysis, simulation, and results.
- Declared inputs
- Python data structures retain every normalized evidence position, target-host link and decision boundary.
- Deterministic analysis
- NumPy and pandas generate all 1,280 material, target, context and evidence cases.
- Risk analysis
- Validation criteria, requirements crosswalk and FMEA expose sampling, mineralogical, process and residue risks.
- Uncertainty
- Fixed-seed Monte Carlo and one-factor sensitivity test stability of the declared evidence positions.
- Evidence
- CSV, JSON, PNG, PDF and Word files retain the complete analysis, source catalogue and report.
- Release verification
- Tests, linting, current package checks, vulnerability audit, document QA, repository validation and Docker verify the handover.
Testing
Evaluation
Evaluation measures
- Screening score and hard-gate result by material and target
- Mineral-host certainty, liberation potential and process compatibility
- Water, energy, residue-stability and acid-drainage positions
- Severity-weighted validation gaps and workflow FMEA priorities
- Requirements crosswalk and scenario reversals
- Monte Carlo intervals and evidence-position sensitivity
Project boundaries
- All numerical inputs are literature-informed evidence positions rather than site measurements.
- The study does not estimate a mineral resource or reserve and does not guarantee recovery.
- It does not select a final flowsheet, establish product quality or provide a feasibility result.
- It does not approve disturbance, remediation, closure, environmental acceptability or investment.
- A real project requires representative site sampling, qualified mineralogy and processing testwork, complete residue assessment and current legal review.
Included
- 01Complete Python source and declared study configuration
- 021,280 material, target, liability-context and evidence cases
- 03Ten waste archetypes and eight critical-mineral target groups
- 04Thirteen validation criteria and a 143-cell workflow FMEA
- 05Twelve generated figures and one attributed public-domain literature figure
- 0677-page project report in PDF and editable Word formats
- 0715-page project and defence guide in PDF and editable Word formats
- 08Fifty annotated references with evidence boundaries and source matrix
- 09Automated tests, repository validation and Docker reproduction
Project record
No information is collected on this page.
- Permanent project ID
- GP-GE-187C9E4
- Catalogued
- 21 Aug 2026
- Completed
- 30 Aug 2026
- Verified
- 30 Aug 2026
- Demonstration
- Included in repository
Handover
After purchase
- 01Payment is confirmed
The project is marked unavailable and cannot be purchased again.
- 02Repository access is granted
The buyer's submitted GitHub account receives access to the private repository.
- 03The purchase record is delivered
The certification sheet is prepared from the reviewed buyer details and sent privately by email.