(MERAF) for the Base Metals Smelting Sector - CCME

FINAL REPORT
Multi-pollutant Emission Reduction
Analysis Foundation (MERAF)
for the
Base Metals Smelting Sector
Prepared for:
Environment Canada
and
The Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment (CCME)
Prepared by:
MINERALS AND METALS DIVISION
NATIONAL OFFICE OF POLLUTION PREVENTION
ENVIRONMENT CANADA
Revision: September 17, 2002

Disclaimer
This report was prepared for the Canadian Council of Ministers of the
Environment (CCME) and Environment Canada (EC).
This publication is a working paper only. It contains information which has been
prepared for, but not approved by, the CCME or EC. CCME or EC are not
responsible for the accuracy of the data contained in the publications and do not
warrant, or necessarily share or affirm, in any way, any opinions expressed
therein.
Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
recommendation or endorsement of use.
This document does not purport to address all the safety aspects associated with
its use. Anyone using this document has the responsibility to consult the
appropriate authorities and to establish health and safety practices in conjunction
with any regulatory authority prior to use.
This report was prepared by the Minerals and Metals Division for the account of
Environment Canada. The material in it reflects the Minerals and Metals
Division’s judgment in light of the information available to it at the time of
preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on
or decisions to be made based on it, are the responsibility of such third parties.
The Minerals and Metals Division accepts no responsibility for damages, if any,
suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this
report.
While members of the Base-metals Environmental Multistakeholder Advisory
Group (BEMAG) participated in draft report reviews, the text of this report does
not necessarily incorporate all comments suggested by the BEMAG members
and therefore does not necessarily reflect the views of all BEMAG members.
i

Acknowledgments
The principal author of the report, Serge Langdeau, would like to acknowledge
and thank Hatch staff, particularly Mary Ann Crichton and Dianne Rubinoff and
all the members of the Base-metals Environmental Multistakeholder Advisory
Group (BEMAG) for their helpful comments and constant efforts to make this
draft report as complete and relevant as possible.
The Base-metals Environmental Multistakeholder Advisory Group (BEMAG)
members are listed in the following table.
Role Name Affiliation
Provincial Government Begoray, Larry Alberta
Industry Deveau, Paul Noranda
Federal Government Finlay, Patrick Environment Canada
Industry Fraser, Wayne Hudson Bay Mining &
Smelting
Provincial Government Grass, Don New Brunswick
Provincial Government Johnson, Carl British Columbia
Industry Hulett, Les INCO
Industry Kemp, Denis J. Falconbridge
Federal Government Koren, Dave Natural Resources Canada
Federal Government Langdeau, Serge Environment Canada
Industry Laurie-Lean, Justyna Mining Association of Canada
Industry MacQuarrie, Brian INCO
Industry Moulins, Jacques Noranda
Provincial Government Potvin, Raymond Ontario
Provincial Government Roy, Guy Québec
Federal Government Seed, Lorraine Health Canada
Industry Sentis, Randy Teck Cominco
Provincial Government Smith, Ken Ontario
Industry Surges, Leonard Noranda
Industry Szumylo, Wally INCO
Federal Government Ternan, Sarah Environment Canada
Public Interest Groups Tilman, Anna Save the Oak Ridges Moraine
Coalition
Federal Government Vance, Jim Natural Resources Canada
Public Interest Groups Walker, Bruce STOP
ii

Abstract
The purpose of the report is to provide technical feasibility studies of emission
reduction options and costs, and economic profiles of the Canadian Base Metals
Smelting sector, as input into development of sectoral actions in jurisdictional
plans. The report provides a profile of the Canadian base metals smelting sector
and associated facilities, processes, and emissions of sulphur dioxide, total
particulate matter and toxic substances. Included are reviews of national and
international environmental performance standards and technically feasible
emission reduction options for facilities.
iii

Summary
The purpose of the report is to provide technical feasibility studies of emission
reduction options and costs, and economic profiles, of the Canadian Base Metals
Smelting sector as input into the development of sectoral actions in jurisdictional
plans.
S.1 Introduction
Air pollution affects the health of all Canadians, especially children and the
elderly. A major air pollution concern is ‘smog’.
‘Smog’ refers to a noxious mixture of air pollutants that can often be seen as a
haze in the air. The two main ingredients in smog that are known to affect
human health are ground-level ozone and fine airborne particles. Other smog
pollutants of concern are nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide and carbon monoxide.
Studies from the Toronto Public Health Department, Government of Canada and
Ontario Medical Association all demonstrate the potential impacts of air pollution
on health. Research studies worldwide, including from Health Canada, have
demonstrated that air pollution can lead to premature death, increased hospital
admissions, more emergency room visits and higher rates of absenteeism.
Exposure to smog can lead to irritation of the eyes, nose and throat, it can
worsen existing heart and lung problems, and in extreme cases it can result in an
early death.
It should also be emphasized that both gaseous and particulate releases from
the Base Metals Smelting Sector involve substances which have been declared
toxic under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), and therefore
are of additional concern from a federal government perspective. An overview of
health and environmental effects associated with these substances is provided in
Appendix A to the MERAF report.
Environment Canada and the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment
(CCME) are committed to addressing particulate matter and ground-level ozone.
In June 2000, CCME Ministers, with the exception of Québec, endorsed Canadawide
Standards (CWS) for Particulate Matter (PM) and Ground-level Ozone.
These standards set ambient limits for PM less than 2.5 microns (PM 2.5 ) and
ozone to be obtained by the year 2010. The standards are as follows:
PM 2.5 : 30 micrograms/m 3 , 24 hour averaging time, by year 2010
(Achievement to be based on the 98 th percentile ambient measurement
annually, averaged over 3 consecutive years.)
Ozone: 65 parts per billion, 8 hour averaging time, by year 2010
(Achievement to be based on the 4 th highest measurement annually,
averaged over 3 consecutive years.)
When these CWS were endorsed, CCME Ministers also agreed to a list of Joint
Initial Actions aimed at reducing pollutant emissions contributing to PM and
iv

ozone. The Joint Initial Actions include the development of comprehensive Multipollutant
Emission Reduction Strategies (MERS) for key industrial sectors. The
MERS approach is an effort to pursue integrated solutions to problems of smog,
acid rain, toxic releases and climate change.
A MERS is considered to be a national picture of sectoral emission reduction
plans, to be built from jurisdictional PM and ozone plans and national multipollutant
emissions reduction analysis. Jurisdictional implementation plans on PM
and ozone will be prepared by individual jurisdictions, will outline actions to
achieve these (CWS).
The MERS are developed in partnership with provinces, territories and
stakeholders and will focus on three general activities:
• National Multi-pollutant Emission Reduction Analysis Foundation
(MERAF): Technical feasibility studies of emission reduction options
and costs, and economic profiles, as input into development of sectoral
actions in jurisdictional plans. Work contributing to the MERAF may be
conducted by industry, other stakeholders, and the federal
government.
• Forum for Information Sharing & Coordination: Jurisdictions and
stakeholders to share information on how a particular sector is being
dealt with in different parts of the country.
• National Sector Roll-up: The national picture of the sector is to be
assembled by 2003 based on actions in jurisdictional plans and
national multi-pollutant analysis.
This MERAF report for the Canadian Base Metals Smelting sector represents the
first phase in the MERS process. This MERAF report is intended as a source of
information on technically feasible emission reduction options for the sector for
consideration in the development of jurisdictional implementation plans under the
CWS for PM and Ozone. The report draws upon readily available information. It
is not intended as a policy document.
More specifically, the report provides:
• A profile of the Base metals smelting industry in Canada;
• A multi-pollutant inventory of emissions from the industry;
• A review of emission standards, programs and policies in Canada and
abroad;
• A set of available techniques (control technologies and management
practices) to reduce emissions from the industry;
• An evaluation of the potential emission reductions and costs
associated with the available techniques;
• Analyses of information gaps and uncertainties: and
v

• Recommendations to address information gaps and improve data
where uncertainties exist.
While reading this report, it is important to keep in mind the main assumptions
that support the facts and figures presented. It is assumed that:
• the current facility capacities will remain unchanged;
• no new facilities will be opened between now and 2015;
• no existing facilities will be closed between now and 2015;
• no new major players will join or leave the market between now and
2015.
These assumptions may not reveal to be right 13 years from now. Hence, the
possibility of new facilities at Voisey’s Bay or somewhere else does exist;
however, this possibility is not considered for the purpose of this report because
of inherent uncertainties and because such new facilities would likely have very
low emissions and contribute a small fraction of the sector’s releases.
Also, on March 28, 2002, Noranda Inc. announced that, effective April 30, 2002,
it permanently closed its Gaspé copper smelter, located in Murdochville.
Noranda had previously announced on November 30, 2001, that it would
temporarily close the smelter a six month period.
Finally, it should be noted that the industry is in a period of global consolidation.
S.2 Industry Profile
The Canadian base metals smelting and refining sector is composed of primary
producers of copper, lead, nickel, zinc and cobalt,.
With the recent permanent closure of the Noranda copper smelter in
Murdochville, there are now twelve (12) base metals metallurgical complexes in
Canada which are located in British Columbia (1), Alberta (1), Manitoba (2),
Ontario (4), Québec (3) and New Brunswick (1). They are operated by Teck-
Cominco Ltd., Sherritt International Corporation, Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting
Co. Ltd., Inco Limited, Falconbridge Ltd., and Noranda Inc.
Except for one, they are all members of the Mining Association of Canada
(MAC).
Economic data shows that:
• In 2000, the mining and mineral processing industries contributed
$27.97 billion to the Canadian economy, an amount equal to 3.5% of
the national Gross Domestic Product
• In 2000, the mining and mineral processing industries directly employed
401,000 Canadians. Although there is no statistic on the number of
employees directly engaged in base metals smelting and refining, the
number can be estimated at about 10,000 persons.
vi

• In 2000, minerals and metal exports were valued at $49.1 billion,
representing 12.8% of total Canadian exports.
S.3 Emission sources and data
In addition to the information supplied through the reports prepared by Hatch
Associates for Environment Canada, a series of other programs offer data.
Examples of such programs include:
• The National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) is a legislated,
national, publicly accessible database of pollutants released in the
Canadian environment. It requires facilities to report annually on
releases and transfers of over 260 substances of concern if they meet
certain reporting requirements. The first report presented data on a
select number of pollutant releases in 1993. As of 2002, the list of
substances will require the reporting of criteria air contaminants (e.g.,
oxides of nitrogen (as NO 2 ), sulphur dioxide, particulate matter (total,
PM 10 , PM 2.5 ), carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds).
Base metals smelting facilities have been required to report releases of
dioxins and furans to NPRI since 2000. Other recent modifications
include:
− the addition of hexavalent chromium at a lower threshold;
− lower thresholds for cadmium (and its compounds), lead (and its
compounds and tetraethyl lead), and arsenic (and its
compounds);
− an effluent based trigger for reporting from municipal water
treatment facilities;
− the delisting of phosphoric acid; and;
− the description of wood preservation.
• Accelerated Reduction/Elimination of Toxics (ARET): ARET is a
voluntary, non-regulatory program that targets 117 toxic substances,
including 30 that persist in the environment and may accumulate in
living organisms.
• Assessments of Releases from Primary and Secondary Copper
Smelters and Refineries and Primary and Secondary Zinc Plants:
Emissions to air of the following components were assessed: sulphur
dioxide (SO 2 ); the metals (largely in the form of particulate matter)
copper, zinc, nickel, lead, cadmium, chromium and arsenic; and
particulate matter less than or equal to 10 µm (PM 10 ).
• Other Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC), except for SO 2 which
represented 36% of all SO 2 emissions from industrial sources,
emissions from the BMS sector are relatively very small and were
therefore not considered further in this report.
vii

• The Minerals and Metals Foundation Paper has identified a series of
direct and indirect measures (pp. 164-167) to achieve energy efficiency
improvements and reduce emissions of Greenhouse Gases, which will
not be repeated in this report but should be taken into consideration
while developing final options for reducing sulphur dioxide emissions.
• Smelters Emissions Testing Program: in an effort to address the
Strategic Options Report for the Base Metals Smelting Sector
recommendation number 7 respecting dioxins and furans, as well as
other drivers such as the CWS for Dioxins and Furans, a Smelters
Emissions Testing Program (SET Program) was established to assist in
the characterization and quantification of dioxins and furans releases
from this sector.
It was decided to focus this report on emissions of Total Particulate Matter
(TPM), SO 2 , and metals compounds assessed as toxic under the Canadian
Environmental Protection Act.
The diagram below illustrates the processes generally involved in base metals
smelting and the main pollutants that they are associated with.
A general overview of the major processes currently employed by the base
metals smelting sector are summarized in section 2.3. Section 2.4 presents an
overview of environmental concerns related to the major activities and processes
used in the smelting and refining of base metals and typical preventative and
control measures taken in modern systems are indicated. Site-specific flow
sheets and process descriptions for existing facilities can be found in section 3.2
of the main report.
viii

Mining and Milling
Mineral Concentrate
Recycled Feedstock
Smelting / Refining
sintering
roasting
smelting
converting
fire-refining
electrorefining
carbonyl refining
leaching
electrowinning
casting
Air Emissions
e.g. TPM, PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 ,
metals, NO x , CO 2 , etc.
Refined Metals
Copper, Nickel, Lead,
Zinc, Silver, Cobalt,
Gold, Cadmium, and
Other co-products
By-Products
Sulphuric acid, Liquid
sulphur dioxide,
Sulphur, Gypsum,
Other
Legend
TPM: Total Particulate Matter
PM 10 : Particulate Matter less than 10 microns
PM 2.5 : Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns
TSS: Total Suspended Solids
ix

The next series of tables illustrate the trends from 1988 to 2000 of emissions of
these substances.
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
5,000
0
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
F.1 Historical Trends of Total Particulate Matter (TPM) Emissions
(tonnes/year)
1,800,000
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
400,000
200,000
0
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
F.2 Historical Trends of Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) Emissions
(tonnes/year)
x

350
300
250
200
150
100
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
50
0
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
F.4 Historical Trends of Arsenic Emissions (tonnes/year)
120
100
80
60
40
Total sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
20
0
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
F.5 Historical Trends of Cadmium Emissions (tonnes/year)
xi

1,800.00
1,600.00
1,400.00
1,200.00
1,000.00
800.00
600.00
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
400.00
200.00
0.00
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
F.6 Historical Trends of Lead Emissions (tonnes/year)
30
25
20
15
10
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
5
0
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
F.7 Historical Trends of Mercury Emissions (tonnes/year)
xii

1,400.00
1,200.00
1,000.00
800.00
600.00
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
400.00
200.00
0.00
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
F.8 Historical Trends of Nickel Emissions (tonnes/year)
xiii

S.4 Current emission management practices
This section reviews existing environmental performance standards existing in
various jurisdictions.
• Canadian Provinces/Territories:
− In British Columbia, the “Pollution Control Objectives for The Mining,
Smelting and Related Industries of British Columbia” (1979) establishes
recommended emission limits to be considered when issuing sitespecific
waste management permits. The BC guidelines specify:
ambient air control objectives; control objectives for gaseous and
particulate emissions; and control objectives for gaseous and
particulate emissions for specific process. The processes relevant to
the base metal smelting industry are copper smelting, lead smelting and
refining, and zinc smelting.
− In Alberta, the Substance Release Regulation (Alta. Reg. 124/93)
provides a limit on the concentration of particulates in each effluent
stream from prescribed operations expressed as mg/kg of effluent. This
regulation also establishes allowable limits for lead and particulate
matter emissions from secondary lead smelters, which reflects the
requirements of the CEPA Secondary Lead Smelter Release
Regulations.
− Manitoba enacted a site-specific regulation for Hudson Bay Mining &
Smelting and Inco Thompson to control emissions of particulate matter
and sulphur dioxide. The regulation is titled “Inco Limited and Hudson
Bay Mining and Smelting Co. Limited Smelter Complex Regulation
Manitoba Reg. 165/88.
− In Ontario, Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) emissions from INCO Ltd. and
Falconbridge Ltd. in Sudbury are regulated under orders issued by the
Ministry of the Environment in 1978, and revised in 1983. Under these
orders, the companies are limited to a maximum hourly ground level
concentration average of 0.5 parts per million (ppm) of SO 2 . On
September 6, 2001, the Ministry of the Environment proposed new
orders that will, among other things, lower the maximum hourly ground
level concentration average to 0.34 ppm of SO 2 and reduce the total
annual emissions by 34% from allowable levels set in 1983.
− In Quebec, emissions are regulated by the Loi sur la qualité de
l’environnement and its Règlement sur la qualité de l’atmosphère
(Regulation Respecting the Quality of the Atmosphere) R.R.Q. 1981. c.
Q-2,r.20. This regulation provides criteria for ambient air as well as for
emissions. It limits particulate emissions to the atmosphere for existing
sources on an hourly basis. Various schedules specify an allowable
emission standard in kg/h based on the process weight (tonnes/hour).
It contains specific emission requirements for copper and zinc smelting
xiv

plants respectively. Amendments to the Règlement sur la qualité de
l’atmosphère are under development. Also, on May 1, 2002, Quebec
adopted an order requiring facilities in the mining and primary metals
industry to hold a Depollution Attestation. The order takes effect under
the Programme de réduction des rejets industriels (PRRI). The
Depollution Attestation is tailored to specific features of a facility and is
renewable every five years. It contains conditions that may include the
identification of release points and sources, fees for contaminants
released, release standards and monitoring requirements.
− New Brunswick’s Air Quality Regulation classifies sources of air
pollution by the amount and type of contaminants they produce. It sets
maximum levels for smoke density (i.e., opacity) and limits the release
of air pollutants so that maximum permissible ground-level
concentrations are not exceeded.
− Montréal’s By-Law 90 pertaining to air purification, requires from
metallurgical facilities to have control devices to ensure particulate
matter releases do not exceed the specified concentration. This by-law
limits the emission of particulate matter from copper and other metal
facilities. The by-law also limits the release of lead and particulate
matter from lead facilities.
• United States:
− New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) are industry-specific
performance standards, which are applied to significantly modified or
new facilities and facilities in non-attainment areas of ambient air quality
standards. Standards exist for primary and secondary lead smelters,
copper smelters and zinc smelters. These standards limit emissions of
particulate matter, visible emissions (opacity) and sulphur dioxide from
specific sources within the facility.
− The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has the
authority to set emission standards for hazardous air pollutants, i.e.,
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
Arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead and nickel are on the USEPA
Hazardous Air Pollutants List. Lead smelters and copper smelters are
included in the list of sources of these pollutants. At this time, zinc
smelters and the one existing nickel smelter are not listed as sources of
these pollutants. There are two air emission standards that have been
promulgated that apply to the Base Metals Smelting Sector:
∗ Hazardous Air Pollutants for Primary Lead Smelting;
∗ Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Primary Copper Smelters.
The EPA also limits arsenic emissions by controlling emissions
of particulate matter.
xv

− The EPA has started developing particulate matter emission standards
for primary copper smelters. The National Emission Standards for
Primary Copper Smelters were proposed in 1998 and a series of
amendments were proposed on June 2000. US EPA personnel
reported that the final Rule package is in Washington Headquarters for
the Administrator’s signature. Dates of signature and publication in the
Federal Register are unknown.
− Under the U.S. EPA’s Risk Management Planning (RMP) Rule [s112 of
the Clean Air Act Amendments, 1990], sulphur dioxide is listed as a
toxic substance with a threshold quantity of 5,000 lbs. Therefore, those
facilities with the potential of hazardous emissions or releases, covered
by the RMP rule, must develop and implement a risk management
program and maintain documentation of the program at the site. The
program includes an analysis of the potential off-site consequences of
an accidental release, a 5-year accident history, a release prevention
program and an emergency response program. With the RMP rule,
releases of sulphur dioxide will be more closely monitored.
This summary presents controls and standards in existence in Canada and the
United States. In the MERAF report, standards from the World Bank, the United
Nations Economic Commission for Europe, European Union, Australia, and many
European countries are also presented and discussed.
An analysis was conducted by Hatch Associates to identify where further
reductions could be made in releases by the application of technically feasible
methods. Two time periods were chosen for the analysis: By 2008 and Beyond
2008. These dates correspond to the dates specified in Recommendation #1 of
the Strategic Options Report for Base Metals Smelting Sector dealing with
Release Reduction Targets and Schedules. For the purposes of this report, the
“Beyond 2008” option is given a finite time frame of “By 2015”.
The following assumptions were made for the reduction analysis:
• similar production levels of metals in Canada;
• existing facilities continue operations;
• additional air pollution control applied to some facilities (e.g., installed or
upgraded particulate control);
• air pollution prevention process applied to some facilities (e.g., changes
in smelting processes).
Based on a review of release data, the focus was placed on the following six
facilities representing a significant portion of the releases from this sector:
• Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting;
• Inco Thompson;
• Inco Copper Cliff;
xvi

• Falconbridge Sudbury;
• Noranda Horne; and
• Noranda Gaspé.
It has been assumed that a 10% reduction in aggregate releases is possible from
other the sites not analyzed in detail.
The economic data presented is based on the sector as it was in 1998. It should
be noted that the sector has made various changes to processes and controls
since that time.
These changes include:
• Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting is commissioning a $30 million
improvement systems for gas handling in 2000/2001 which should
result in a 30% decrease in total particulate matter releases
• The “Stack Tap Hole” at Noranda Horne, which was used to discharge
secondary gases from the Noranda Reactor and the Noranda
Continuous Converter, is no longer functional as of May 2000. The
gases are now collected and treated through a baghouse with lime
injection and directed through the converter stack (“Stack #2”)
• Reductions in releases at Noranda Horne have occurred due to
increasing percentage of matte being processed through the Noranda
continuous converter, since 1998 reported data.
• On March 28, 2002, Noranda announced the permanent closure of its
Gaspé smelter effective April 30, 2002.
xvii

T.1 Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting
Technical Option Description Applicability Comment Potential %
Reduction
Capital Cost
(million $)
Improve the dry gas handling
system
Further increase ESP capacity and add,
where appropriate, local baghouse
systems.
The amount of reduction depends
on the characteristics of the
particles now escaping the ESP
system.
10 – 50% of
CEPA-toxics
and PM
(SO 2 is not
affected.)
30 - 60
Modernize the Copper Smelter
and install state-of-the-art gas
cleaning equipment.
Replace roasting and reverberatory
smelting with flash smelting and Peirce-
Smith converting with flash converting.
Well established technology that
has been retrofitted at many
locations (or similar technology).
50 – 90%,
depending on
phasing.
500 – 1,000,
depending on
phasing.
Install an acid plant.
Could be done in phases: i.e. smelting
only; later followed by converting. Acid
plant could also be phased.
Economic scale is 250,000 to
350,000 tpa of copper product.
Would need sufficient supply of
economical concentrate.
Cost of shipping acid is costly and
greatly affects project economics
Also depends
on the
characteristics
of PM and
CEPA toxics.
Could be implemented by 2004,
depending on decision date.
Implement hydrometallurgical
processing of copper
concentrate.*
Several pressure leaching technologies
for copper concentrates are under
development and could be attractive.
Needs to be tested at pilot plant
scale.
Could be implemented by 2008.
> 90% of 500 - 800
CEPA-toxics,
PM and SO 2
Could only be justified economically
if it were feasible to increase
throughput considerably, say
150,000 tpa copper. Would need
sufficient supply of economical
concentrate.
xvi

T.2 Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Inco Thompson
Technical Option
Improve Existing Gas Cleaning
System
Description
Upgrade close capture hoods, install
local baghouses, generally reduce air
inleakage and upgrade main ESP.
Applicability
Comment
Possibly already part of
Inco’s plans
Potential
Reduction
(%)
20 to 50% of CEPA-toxics 20 – 70
and PM
No improvement in SO 2
Capital Cost
(million $)
Install Acid Plant Treat smelter off-gases in acid plant Justifiable only with smelter
modernization and capacity
increase
Modernize Process Equipment,
combined with state-of-the-art gas
processing and sulphuric acid
production.
Replace Roasting and Electric
Furnace Smelting with Flash Furnace
Continuous Converting
Economic Implications. An
increase in capacity of
about 50% would be
needed. Acid prices would
have to improve
considerably.
More research needed
> 90% of CEPA-toxics, PM
and SO 2
100 - 150
> 90% of CEPA-toxics, PM
and SO 2
500 -700
xvii

T.3 Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Falconbridge Sudbury
Technical Control Option
Install Wet Gas Scrubbing
Equipment
Install Additional Wet Gas
Cleaning and Acid Plant.
Description
Install scrubber on Electric Furnace,
Converting and Slag Cleaning off-gas
to recover dust, fumes and SO 2 as a
sludge.
Pass Electric Furnace, Converter and
Slag Cleaning through conventional
gas cleaning, acid plant system.
Applicability
Comment
High reagent costs.
Would need process equipment
modifications to concentrate SO 2
Potential Reduction Capital Cost
(%)
(million $)
> 90% of CEPA-toxics, 50 - 80
PM and SO 2
> 90% of CEPA-toxics, 60 - 90
PM and SO 2
xviii

T.4 Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Inco Copper Cliff
Technical Option
Install Wet Gas Scrubbing
Equipment
Improve Existing Gas
Cleaning System
Modernize Process
Equipment, combined with
state-of-the-art gas
processing, including an acid
plant.
Description
Install scrubber on Fluid Bed Roasting
off-gas and recover SO 2 in the exisiting
acid plant.
Install scrubber on TBRC smelting offgas
after ESP (Nickel Refinery)
Upgrade, relocate or replace ESP #5
(converting off-gas)
Install continuous converting technology
in the Smelter* .
Applicability
Comment
Already planned by Inco.
Exit concentrations not known
Sludge disposal costs, etc. need
to be addressed
The amount of reduction
depends on actual project
Development work is needed.
Potential Reduction Capital Cost (million $)
(%)
> 97% reduction from 60 - 80
Fluid Bed Roaster gas of
CEPA-toxics, PM and
SO 2
> 50% of releases from 10 - 40
TBRC of CEPA-toxics,
PM and SO 2
>50% reduction from 5 - 30
converting gas of CEPAtoxics
and PM
> 90% of smelter 200 - 350
releases of CEPA-toxics,
PM and SO 2
* This technology is currently under development and require additional development effort and pilot-scale testing
xix

T.5 Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Noranda Horne
Technical Option
Increasing percentage of matte
processed through the Noranda
continuous converter, expansion of the
acid plant and connection of Peirce-
Smith converters to acid plant.
Description
Treat all Continuous Converter gas in
acid plant
Applicability
Comment
Acid Plant expansion is
planned
Potential Reduction
(%) Capital Cost
(million $)
> 80 % of PM and 20 - 50
CEPA-toxics
> 90% SO 2
xx

T.6 Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Noranda Gaspé
Technical Option
Smelter Modernization
Description
One option is to replace reverberatory
furnace with Noranda Reactor and
treat all smelter’s process gas in acid
plant
Applicability
Comment
Not likely to occur until after
2008
Potential Reduction
(%) Capital Cost
(million $)
> 90% CEPA-toxics, 50 - 100
PM and SO 2
xxi

The predicted future releases and their related percentage reductions from the
1988 base year are shown in Table T.7 below.
T.7 Emission Forecasts for 2008 and 2015
1988 1998 2008 2015
tonnes
released
tonnes
released
% reduction
from 1988
tonnes
released
% reduction
from 1988
tonnes
released
% reduction
from 1988
Arsenic 327 167 49% 61 81% 35 89%
Cadmium 124 46 63% 19 84% 11 91%
Lead 1,836 543 70% 395 78% 223 88%
Mercury 28.1 2.5 91% 1.8 93% 0.5 98%
Nickel 1,436 314 78% 253 82% 160 89%
CEPA-toxics
Total
SOR
Targets
Total
Particulate
Matter
Sulphur
Dioxide
3,754 1,073 71% 730 81% 430 89%
80% 90%
22,938 7,404 68% 4,987 78% 2,000 91%
1,797,026 867,684 52% 671,000 63% 138,000 92%
Table T.8 summarizes the technical reduction options identified for the Base
Metals Smelting Sector for 2008 and 2015. Also included in the table are the
capital costs as estimated by Hatch Associates and a range of potential reduction
for toxics, total particulate matter (TPM) and sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) in percentage
terms from the 1988 levels. The value in brackets after the potential reduction
range indicates the value assumed by Hatch Associates for the purposes of
predicting future releases.
xxii

T.8 Summary of Emission Reduction Options (2008 and 2015)
Site Option for Reduction By 2008 Option for Reduction By 2015
Hudson Bay Mining
and Smelting
Inco Thompson
Falconbridge Kidd
Falconbridge
Sudbury
Inco Copper Cliff
Noranda Horne
Incremental improvements to gas
handling system
Capital Cost: $30 to 60 million
Operating Cost: $3 to 6 million/year
Reduction: 10% to 50% of toxics and
PM. (10% of 2000 estimate
assumed). No effect on SO 2 .
Improvements to gas handling
system
Capital Cost: $20 to 70 million
Operating Cost: $ 2 to 7 million/year
Reduction: 20% to 50% of toxics and
PM. (20% assumed). No effect on
SO 2,
Wet scrubbing technology or
High Temperature Particulate
Removal
Capital Cost: $6 to 20 million
Operating Cost: $1 to2 million
Reduction: Greater than 90% of
toxics, PM and SO 2 in Feed Prep
and Scrap Melting Stacks
Wet scrubbing technology
Capital Cost: $50 to 80 million
Operating Cost: $5 to 8 million/year
Reduction: Greater than 90% of
toxics, PM and SO 2 . (90%
assumed).
Wet scrubbing of Fluid Bed
Roaster off-gas
Capital Cost: $60 to 80 million
Operating Cost: $6 to 8 million/year
Reduction: Greater than 97% of
toxics, PM and SO 2 from Fluid Bed
Roaster stream. (97% of Fluid Bed
Roaster contribution assumed).
Increasing percentage of matte
processed through the Noranda
continuous converter expansion
of the acid plant and connection
of Peirce-Smith converters to
acid plant
Capital Cost: $20 to 50 million
Installation of hydrometallurgical
process*
Capital Cost: $500 to 800 million
Operating Savings: $2 to 3 million/year
Reduction: Greater than 90% of toxics,
PM and SO 2 . (90% of 2000 estimate
assumed for PM, 95% assumed for
SO 2 ).
Smelter modernization and acid
plant
Capital Cost: $500 to 700 million
Operating Cost: $35 to 45 million/year
Reduction: Greater than 90% of toxics,
PM and SO 2 . (90% assumed).
No major changes beyond 2008
No major changes beyond 2008
Continuous converting technology*
Capital Cost: $200 to 350 million
Operating Savings: $2 million/year
potential costs due to additional acid
production
Reduction: Greater than 90% of toxics,
PM and SO 2 of smelter releases. (90%
of copper stack releases assumed).
No major changes beyond 2008
xxiii

Noranda Gaspé
Rest of Sector**
Site Option for Reduction By 2008 Option for Reduction By 2015
Operating Savings: No savings
Reduction: Greater than 80% of
toxics, PM. Greater than 90% of
SO 2. . (Values for future projections
as provided by Horne assumed).
Incremental Improvements
Reduction: Assumed 10% of toxics,
PM and SO 2. .
Incremental Improvements
Reduction: Assumed 10% of toxics,
PM and SO 2. .
Smelter Modernization
Capital Cost: $50 to 100 million
Operating Savings: $2 million/year
potential costs due to additional acid
production
Reduction: Greater than 90% of toxics,
PM and SO 2 . (90% assumed).
Incremental Improvements
Reduction: Assumed 10% of toxics,
PM and SO 2. .
* These technologies are currently under development and require additional development effort
and pilot-plant scale testing.
** Reductions for the “Rest of Sector” are assumed to be 10% of the total releases for all the
facilities not specifically identified, not for each individual facility.
The removal of total particulate matter and/or the removal of sulphur dioxide is
likely to result in the removal of many of the CEPA-toxics that were the focus of
the Strategic Options Report (i.e., heavy metals).
With respect to the other pollutants subject to the MERS process (e.g., CO, VOC,
NO x ), these options should not lead to an increase in their production and
emission.
S.5 Conclusions and Recommendations
The following conclusions and recommendations were developed:
S.5.1 Conclusions
Except for emissions of SO 2 , which represent 36% of all SO 2 emissions from
industrial sources, it has been concluded that emissions of other precursors of
PM and ozone from the BMS sector are relatively very small.
This report’s primary focus was therefore on Total Particulate Matter (TPM),
metal compounds, and SO 2 .
The substances of most interest for the Base Metals Smelting Sector are either
on the List of Toxic Substances in Schedule 1 to the Canadian Environmental
Protection Act 1999 (e.g., Lead, Mercury, Inorganic arsenic compounds,
Inorganic cadmium compounds, etc.) or have been proposed by the Ministers for
addition to CEPA 1999 Schedule 1 (e.g., Sulphur Dioxide, Releases from copper
smelters and refineries and zinc smelters and refineries).
For the toxic substances currently on the List of Toxic Substances,
recommendations for their management were put forward to Ministers of the
Environment and Health in the June, 1997 Strategic Options Report (SOR),
xxiv

under CEPA 1988. These recommendations include release reduction targets
and schedules, the development of environmental performance standards and
the development of site-specific environmental management plans.
For substances not yet listed on CEPA Schedule 1, strategies are under
development and regulations or other instruments respecting preventive or
control actions will be proposed within the time requirements imposed by CEPA
1999.
To address the SOR recommendations and other emerging issues, Environment
Canada has already sponsored two National Workshops on the Environmental
Performance of BMS Sector and the development of Environmental Performance
Standards for the sector. Participants in the workshops include representatives
from the federal and provincial governments, industry, non-governmental
organizations, and the Aboriginal community.
An important outcome of the first Workshop, which was reiterated at the second,
is an agreement from stakeholders to work together in developing environmental
performance standards and initiatives to reduce releases from the BMSS through
the formation of and participation in a Base Metals Environmental Multi-
Stakeholder Advisory Group (BEMAG).
S.5.2 Recommendations
The analysis of technical options to reduce emissions from this sector shows
possible sectoral reductions of 81%, 78%, and 63% for CEPA-toxics, TPM, and
SO 2 respectively by 2008 and 89%, 91%, and 92% for CEPA-toxics, TPM, and
SO 2 respectively by 2015, from 1988 levels.
During the course of the research for this report, two important information areas
for further analysis were identified:
• whether the hydrometallurgical process and the continuous converting
technologies, identified as the best options to reduce emissions at
respectively Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting and Inco Copper Cliff, will
be developed successfully for full implementation by 2015;
• whether these technologies could be implemented economically by
2015.
Recommendation #1
It is recommended that when pollution prevention and control options are
considered and their economic, environmental, and social impacts are assessed,
the Base-Metals Environmental Multistakeholder Advisory Group (BEMAG)
should be used as the mechanism of choice.
Recommendation #2
It is recommended that the assessment of in-process and add-on emission
control options be done from a multi-pollutant emission perspective.
xxv

Recommendation #3
It is also recommended to consider Greenhouse Gas emissions while developing
options for reducing sulphur dioxide emissions consistent with the measures to
achieve energy efficiency improvements and reduce emissions of Greenhouse
Gases identified in the Minerals and Metals Foundation Paper.
xxvi

Table of Contents
DISCLAIMER……………………………………………………………………………………..………... i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS……………………………………………………………….……………….…ii
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………………..…… iii
SUMMARY………………………………………………………………………………………………… iv
1. INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................1
1.1. BACKGROUND .........................................................................................................................1
1.1.1. Particulate Matter and Ground Level Ozone .................................................................2
1.2. CANADA-WIDE STANDARDS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER AND GROUND-LEVEL OZONE..................4
1.2.1. Multi-pollutant Emission Reduction Strategies (MERS) ................................................4
1.3. MULTI-POLLUTANT EMISSION REDUCTION ANALYSIS FOUNDATIONS (MERAFS) FOR THE
INDUSTRIAL SECTORS.....................................................................................................................5
1.3.1. Scope of Pollutants........................................................................................................6
1.4. METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................7
2. INDUSTRY PROFILE...................................................................................................................9
2.1. SECTOR DEFINITION ................................................................................................................9
2.2. INFORMATION ON BASE METALS...............................................................................................9
2.2.1. Cobalt.............................................................................................................................9
2.2.2. Copper .........................................................................................................................10
2.2.3. Lead .............................................................................................................................10
2.2.4. Nickel ...........................................................................................................................10
2.2.5. Zinc ..............................................................................................................................10
2.3. BASE METALS SMELTING PROCESSES....................................................................................11
2.3.1. Pretreatment ................................................................................................................13
2.3.2. Sintering.......................................................................................................................13
2.3.3. Roasting.......................................................................................................................13
2.3.4. Smelting .......................................................................................................................13
2.3.5. Converting....................................................................................................................14
2.3.6. Fire-Refining (Anode Refining) ....................................................................................14
2.3.7. Electrorefining..............................................................................................................14
2.3.8. Carbonyl Refining ........................................................................................................15
2.3.9. Leaching ......................................................................................................................15
2.3.10. Electrowinning............................................................................................................15
2.3.11. Casting.......................................................................................................................15
2.3.12. Process Off-Gas Conditioning ...................................................................................16
2.4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS .................................................................................................17
2.4.1. Sintering.......................................................................................................................17
2.4.2. Roasting.......................................................................................................................17
2.4.3. Smelting .......................................................................................................................18
2.4.4. Converting....................................................................................................................18
2.4.5. Fire Refining.................................................................................................................19
2.4.6. Electrorefining..............................................................................................................19
2.4.7. Carbonyl Refining ........................................................................................................19
xxvii

2.4.8. Leaching ......................................................................................................................19
2.4.9. Electrowinning..............................................................................................................20
2.4.10. Casting.......................................................................................................................20
2.4.11. Process Off-Gas Conditioning ...................................................................................20
2.5. CANADIAN BASE METALS SMELTERS AND REFINERIES ............................................................21
2.6. COMPANY AND FACILITY PROFILES.........................................................................................22
2.6.1. Teck Cominco Ltd........................................................................................................22
2.6.2. Sherritt International Corporation.................................................................................23
2.6.3. Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Co. Ltd ......................................................................24
2.6.4. Inco Limited..................................................................................................................25
2.6.4.1. Inco Limited, Thompson Division, Thompson, Manitoba .....................................25
2.6.4.2. Inco Limited, Sudbury/Copper Cliff Operations, Copper Cliff, Ontario.................25
2.6.4.3. Inco Limited, Port Colborne, Ontario....................................................................26
2.6.5. Falconbridge Limited ...................................................................................................26
2.6.5.1. Falconbridge Limited, Kidd Metallurgical Division, Timmins, Ontario ..................26
2.6.5.2. Falconbridge, Sudbury Division, Sudbury, Ontario ..............................................27
2.6.6. Noranda Inc., ...............................................................................................................27
2.6.6.1. Noranda Inc., Horne Smelter, Rouyn-Noranda, Québec .....................................28
2.6.6.2. Noranda Inc., Division CEZ, Valleyfield, Québec.................................................29
2.6.6.3. Noranda Inc., Division CCR, Montréal, Québec...................................................29
2.6.6.4. Noranda Inc., Division Mines Gaspé, Murdochville, Québec...............................29
2.6.6.5. Noranda Inc., Brunswick Smelting Division, Belledune, New Brunswick.............30
2.7. KEY INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATIONS .............................................................................................31
2.8. ECONOMIC PROFILE OF CANADIAN BASE METALS SMELTING SECTOR......................................32
2.8.1. The mining industry’s contribution to the Canadian economy.....................................32
2.8.2. Review of the Canadian base metals production ........................................................32
2.8.3. Review of base metals smelting in Canada.................................................................33
2.8.4. Pricing of base metals .................................................................................................36
2.8.4.1. Cobalt ...................................................................................................................36
2.8.4.2. Copper..................................................................................................................36
2.8.4.3. Lead......................................................................................................................37
2.8.4.4. Nickel....................................................................................................................37
2.8.4.5. Zinc.......................................................................................................................38
2.8.4.6. London Metal Exchange.......................................................................................38
3. EMISSION SOURCES AND DATA ...........................................................................................40
3.1. EMISSIONS DATA SOURCES ...................................................................................................40
3.1.1. Total Particulate Matter (TPM) and Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) and Other substances toxic
pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) .........................................40
3.1.1.1. Strategic Options and Hatch Associates Reports ................................................40
3.1.1.2. Smelters Emissions Testing Program ..................................................................43
3.1.1.3. National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) I.....................................................43
3.1.1.4. Accelerated Reduction/Elimination of Toxics (ARET)..........................................44
3.1.1.5. Assessments of Releases from Primary and Secondary Copper Smelters and
Refineries and Primary and Secondary Zinc Plants..........................................................45
3.1.2. Other Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) .......................................................................46
3.1.3. Greenhouse Gases......................................................................................................46
3.2. DESCRIPTION OF BASE METALS SMELTERS PROCESSES AND ASSOCIATED INSTALLED CONTROL
TECHNOLOGIES , ...........................................................................................................................47
3.2.1. Teck Cominco Ltd., Trail Operations, Trail, British Columbia......................................47
3.2.1.1. Lead plant.............................................................................................................47
3.2.1.2. Zinc plant ..............................................................................................................49
3.2.2. Sherritt International Corporation, Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta..................................53
xxviii

3.2.2.1. Ammonia leaching................................................................................................53
3.2.2.2. Cobalt separation .................................................................................................54
3.2.2.3. Copper boil ...........................................................................................................54
3.2.2.4. Nickel recovery .....................................................................................................54
3.2.2.5. Cobalt conversion and reduction..........................................................................55
3.2.2.6. Sulphide precipitation ...........................................................................................55
3.2.2.7. Ammonia sulphate recovery.................................................................................56
3.2.2.8. Ammonia recovery................................................................................................56
3.2.3. Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting (HBM&S) Co. Ltd, Flin Flon, Manitoba , .....................58
3.2.3.1. Copper smelter .....................................................................................................58
3.2.3.2. Zinc plant ..............................................................................................................59
3.2.4. Inco Limited, Thompson Division, Thompson, Manitoba.............................................62
3.2.4.1. Nickel smelter .......................................................................................................62
3.2.4.2. Nickel refinery.......................................................................................................62
3.2.5. Falconbridge Limited, Kidd Metallurgical Division, Timmins, Ontario .........................65
3.2.5.1. Zinc plant ..............................................................................................................65
3.2.5.2. Copper Smelting and refining...............................................................................66
3.2.5.3. Indium plant ..........................................................................................................66
3.2.6. Falconbridge, Sudbury Division, Sudbury, Ontario .....................................................71
3.2.7. Inco Copper Cliff ..........................................................................................................74
3.2.7.1. Nickel/Copper smelter ..........................................................................................74
3.2.7.2. Nickel refinery.......................................................................................................75
3.2.7.3. Copper refinery.....................................................................................................75
3.2.8. Inco Port Colborne.......................................................................................................79
3.2.9. Noranda Inc., Horne Smelter, Rouyn-Noranda, Québec.............................................81
3.2.10. Noranda Inc., Division CEZ, Valleyfield, Québec ......................................................84
3.2.11. Noranda Inc., Division CCR, Montréal, Québec........................................................86
3.2.12. Noranda Inc., Division Mines Gaspé, Murdochville, Québec ....................................89
3.2.13. Noranda Inc., Brunswick Smelting Division, Belledune, New Brunswick , .................92
3.3. ANALYSIS OF EMISSIONS........................................................................................................95
3.3.1. Total Particulate Matter (TPM) and Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) and Other substances toxic
pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) .........................................95
3.3.2. Dioxins and Furans....................................................................................................108
3.4. OTHER CURRENT EMISSIONS INFORMATION ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
(RELEASE PER UNIT OF PRIMARY PRODUCTION) ............................................................................111
4. CURRENT EMISSION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ............................................................119
4.1. EMISSION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, LEGISLATION, STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS ACROSS
CANADA , ....................................................................................................................................119
4.1.1. Federal.......................................................................................................................119
4.1.2. Canadian Council of the Ministers of the Environment .............................................120
4.1.3. British Columbia.........................................................................................................120
4.1.4. Alberta........................................................................................................................120
4.1.5. Manitoba ....................................................................................................................121
4.1.6. Ontario (Sudbury) ......................................................................................................121
4.1.7. Ontario (Other)...........................................................................................................121
4.1.8. Québec ......................................................................................................................122
4.1.9. New Brunswick ..........................................................................................................123
4.1.10. City of Montréal........................................................................................................123
4.1.11. Canadian Jurisdiction’s Air Release and Ambient Standards .................................123
4.1.11.1. Particulate Matter .............................................................................................125
4.1.11.2. Sulphur Dioxide ................................................................................................128
4.1.11.3. Arsenic..............................................................................................................131
4.1.11.4. Cadmium ..........................................................................................................132
4.1.11.5. Lead..................................................................................................................133
xxix

4.1.11.6. Mercury.............................................................................................................135
4.1.11.7. Nickel................................................................................................................137
4.2. CURRENT INTERNATIONAL EMISSION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS , 138
4.2.1. United States .............................................................................................................138
4.2.2. World Bank ................................................................................................................144
4.2.3. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE) ..................................146
4.2.4. Australia .....................................................................................................................147
4.2.5. Japan .........................................................................................................................151
4.2.6. European Union.........................................................................................................152
4.2.7. Germany ....................................................................................................................154
4.2.8. The Netherlands ........................................................................................................156
4.2.9. France........................................................................................................................158
4.2.10. United Kingdom .......................................................................................................160
4.2.11. Sweden ....................................................................................................................164
4.2.12. Other European Countries.......................................................................................165
4.3. BEST AVAILABLE TECHNIQUES FOR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL ..........................167
4.3.1. United States .............................................................................................................167
4.3.2. European Union.........................................................................................................168
4.4. OPTIONS AND PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES FOR EMISSION REDUCTION , .............................169
4.4.1. Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Co. Ltd., Flin Flon, Manitoba...................................170
4.4.2. Inco Limited, Thompson Division, Thompson Manitoba............................................173
4.4.3. Falconbridge, Sudbury Division, Sudbury, Ontario ...................................................175
4.4.4. Inco Limited, Sudbury/Copper Cliff Operations, Copper Cliff, Ontario ......................177
4.4.5. Noranda Inc., Horne Smelter, Rouyn-Noranda, Québec...........................................179
4.4.6. Noranda Inc., Division Mines Gaspé, Murdochville, Québec ....................................181
4.4.7. Summary of Capital Costs .........................................................................................184
4.4.8. Summary of Operating Costs ....................................................................................185
4.4.9. Summary of potential emissions reductions with options and associated capital and
operating costs.....................................................................................................................187
4.4.10. Assessment of costs in relation to economic indicators ..........................................189
4.5. POSSIBLE CONFLICTING CONTROL OBJECTIVES AND TRADE-OFF ..........................................190
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................191
5.1. CONCLUSIONS.....................................................................................................................191
5.2. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................192
APPENDIX A: HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILES FOR CEPA SUBSTANCES
RELEASED BY THE BASE METALS SMELTING SECTOR……………………………… .........193
ACRONYMS……………………………………………………………………………………………..195
GLOSSARY OF TERMS……………………………………………………………………………….198
xxx

List of Figures
Figure 1: Canadian Base Metals Smelting and Refining Sector ....................................................21
Figure 2: Teck Cominco Lead Plant ...............................................................................................51
Figure 3: Teck Cominco Zinc Plant ................................................................................................52
Figure 4: Sheritt Metals Refinery....................................................................................................57
Figure 5 Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Copper Smelter..........................................................60
Figure 6: Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Zinc Plant..................................................................61
Figure 7: Inco Thompson Nickel Smelter .......................................................................................63
Figure 8: Inco Thompson Nickel Refinery ......................................................................................64
Figure 9: Falconbridge Kidd Zinc Plant ..........................................................................................68
Figure 10: Falconbridge Kidd Copper Smelter...............................................................................69
Figure 11: Falconbridge Kidd Copper Refinery..............................................................................70
Figure 12: Falconbridge Sudbury Nickel/Copper Smelter..............................................................73
Figure 13: Inco Copper Cliff Nickel/Copper Smelter ......................................................................76
Figure 14: Inco Copper Cliff Nickel Refinery ..................................................................................77
Figure 15: Inco Copper Cliff Copper Refinery ................................................................................78
Figure 16: Inco Port Colborne Input/Output Diagram.....................................................................80
Figure 17: Noranda Horne Copper Smelter ...................................................................................83
Figure 18: Noranda CEZ Zinc Plant ...............................................................................................85
Figure 19: Noranda CCR Copper Refinery ....................................................................................88
Figure 20: Noranda Gaspé Copper Smelter ..................................................................................91
Figure 21: Noranda Brunswick Lead Plant.....................................................................................94
Figure 22: Historical Trends of Total Particulate Matter (TPM) Emissions .................................104
Figure 23: Historical Trends of Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) Emissions ..............................................104
Figure 24: Historical Trends of Arsenic Emissions ......................................................................105
Figure 25: Historical Trends of Cadmium Emissions ..................................................................105
Figure 26: Historical Trends of Lead Emissions ..........................................................................106
Figure 27: Historical Trends of Mercury Emissions .....................................................................106
Figure 28: Historical Trends of Nickel Emissions ........................................................................107
Figure 29: 2000 Total Particulate Matter - Air Emission Performance Indicator..........................112
Figure 30: 2000 Sulphur Dioxide - Air Emission Performance Indicator......................................113
Figure 31: 2000 Arsenic - Air Emission Performance Indicator ...................................................114
Figure 32: 2000 Cadmium - Air Emission Performance Indicator................................................115
Figure 33: 2000 Lead - Air Emission Performance Indicator .......................................................116
Figure 34: 2000 Mercury - Air Emission Performance Indicator ..................................................117
xxxi

Figure 35: 2000 Nickel - Air Emission Performance Indicator .....................................................118
xxxii

List of Tables
Table 1: Selected Economic Indicators of the Mining Industry’s Contribution to the Canadian
Economy (year 2000).............................................................................................................32
Table 2: Estimate of Mineral Production of Canada, by Province, 2000........................................33
Table 3: 2000 Production rates of Canadian Base Metals Smelters and Refineries .....................34
Table 4: Canadian Base Metals Exports (year 2000) ....................................................................35
Table 5: Number of Employees......................................................................................................35
Table 6: Historical Trends of Total Particulate Matter (TPM) Emissions (tonnes) .........................97
Table 7: Historical Trends of Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) Emissions (tonnes) ......................................98
Table 8: Historical Trends of Arsenic Emissions (tonnes) .............................................................99
Table 9: Historical Trends of Cadmium Emissions (tonnes) ........................................................100
Table 10: Historical Trends of Lead Emissions (tonnes)..............................................................101
Table 11: Historical Trends of Mercury Emissions (tonnes) ........................................................102
Table 12: Historical Trends of Nickel Emissions (tonnes)............................................................103
Table 13: Releases of Dioxins and Furans. The sources of information for this table are noted
below....................................................................................................................................109
Table 14: Canadian Particulate Matter Release Standards 1 ........................................................125
Table 15: Canadian Ambient Particulate Matter Standards.........................................................127
Table 16: Canadian Sulphur Dioxide Release Standards............................................................128
Table 17: Canadian Ambient Sulphur Dioxide Standards............................................................130
Table 18: Canadian Arsenic Air Release Standards....................................................................131
Table 19: Canadian Ambient Arsenic Standards .........................................................................131
Table 20: Canadian Cadmium Air Release Standards ................................................................132
Table 21: Canadian Ambient Cadmium Standards......................................................................132
Table 22: Canadian Lead Air Release Standards........................................................................133
Table 23: Canadian Ambient Lead Standards .............................................................................134
Table 24: Canadian Mercury Air Release Standards...................................................................135
Table 25: Canadian Ambient Mercury Standards ........................................................................136
Table 26: Canadian Nickel Air Release Standards ......................................................................137
Table 27: Canadian Ambient Nickel Concentration .....................................................................137
Table 28: US Ambient Air Quality Standards ...............................................................................138
Table 29: US New Source Performance Standards Emission Limits ..........................................139
Table 30: US National Emission Standard for Primary Lead Smelting ........................................140
Table 31: US National Emission Standard for Inorganic Arsenic from Primary Copper Smelter 141
Table 32: US Proposed Particulate Matter Emission Standards for Primary Copper Smelters ..142
Table 33: World Bank Guidelines for Emissions from Copper Smelting......................................144
xxxiii

Table 34: World Bank Guidelines for Emissions from Lead/Zinc Smelters..................................145
Table 35: World Bank Guidelines for Emissions from Nickel Smelting and Refining ..................145
Table 36: UNECE Particulate Emissions Limits...........................................................................146
Table 37: Australian Ambient Air Quality Standards ....................................................................147
Table 38: Australia/New South Wales Sulphur Dioxide Standards..............................................148
Table 39: Australia/New South Wales Hazardous (Metals) Standards........................................149
Table 40: Australia/New South Wales Particle Emission Limits from Scheduled Premises........150
Table 41: Australia/New South Wales Particle Emission Limits from Non-Scheduled Premises 150
Table 42: Japan Ambient Air Quality Standards ..........................................................................151
Table 43: Japan Air Pollution Control Law ...................................................................................151
Table 44: EU Guide Values for Particulate Emissions for Non-Ferrous Metal Production ..........152
Table 45: EU Ambient Air Quality Limits ......................................................................................152
Table 46: Germany Particulate Matter and Metals Emission Standards .....................................154
Table 47: Germany Particulate Matter Emission Limits for Non-Ferrous Industry.......................155
Table 48: Germany Metal Emission Limits for Secondary Lead Production................................155
Table 49: The Netherlands Particulate and Metal Emission Standards.......................................156
Table 50: The Netherlands Particulate Matter Limits ...................................................................156
Table 51: The Netherlands Sulphur Dioxide Limits......................................................................157
Table 52: France Particulate Matter and Metal Emission Standards...........................................158
Table 53: France Particulate Matter Emission Limits...................................................................159
Table 54: France Sulphur Dioxide Emission Limits......................................................................159
Table 55: United Kingdom Maximum Concentrations of Pollutants to Air ...................................160
Table 56: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Primary Zinc Process............................................161
Table 57: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Secondary Zinc Process........................................161
Table 58: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Copper Production.................................................162
Table 59: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Primary Lead Process ...........................................162
Table 60: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Secondary Lead Process.......................................163
Table 61: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Nickel Production...................................................163
Table 62: Sweden Maximum Allowable Ambient Air Quality Concentrations..............................164
Table 63: Particulate Matter Emission Standards for other European Countries ........................165
Table 64: Mercury Emission Standards for other European Countries........................................165
Table 65: Lead Emission Standards for other European Countries.............................................165
Table 66: Cadmium Emission Standards for other European Countries .....................................166
Table 67: Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond................171
Table 68: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting .....172
Table 69: Inco Thompson Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond.........................................173
Table 70: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Inco Thompson ..............................174
xxxiv

Table 71: Falconbridge Sudbury Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond ..............................175
Table 72: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Falconbridge Sudbury....................176
Table 73: Inco Copper Cliff Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond.......................................177
Table 74: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Inco Copper Cliff ............................178
Table 75: Noranda Horne Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond.........................................179
Table 76: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Noranda Horne ..............................180
Table 77: Noranda Gaspé Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond........................................181
Table 78: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Noranda Gaspé..............................183
Table 79: Capital Cost Estimates .................................................................................................184
Table 80: Operating Cost Estimates ............................................................................................186
Table 81: Emission Forecasts for 2008 and 2015........................................................................187
Table 82: Summary of Emission Reduction Options (2008 and 2015) ........................................188
xxxv

1. Introduction
The purpose of the report is to provide technical feasibility studies of emission
reduction options and costs, and economic profiles of the Canadian Base Metals
Smelting sector, as input into development of sectoral actions in jurisdictional
plans.
1.1. Background
Air pollution affects the health of all Canadians, especially children and the
elderly. A major air pollution concern is ‘smog’.
‘Smog’ refers to a noxious mixture of air pollutants that can often be seen as a
haze in the air 1 . The two main ingredients in smog that are known to affect
human health are ground-level ozone and fine airborne particles. Other smog
pollutants of concern are nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide and carbon monoxide.
The source of these pollutants include fossil fuel burning, industrial and vehicle
emissions, road dust, agriculture, construction, and wood burning, among
others 2 .
Studies from the Toronto Public Health Department, Government of Canada and
Ontario Medical Association all demonstrate the potential impacts of air pollution
on health 3 . Research studies worldwide, including from Health Canada, have
demonstrated that air pollution can lead to premature death, increased hospital
admissions, more emergency room visits and higher rates of absenteeism 4 .
Exposure to smog can lead to irritation of the eyes, nose and throat, it can
worsen existing heart and lung problems, and in extreme cases it can result in an
early death 5 .
Environment Canada and the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment
(CCME) are committed to addressing particulate matter and ground-level ozone.
The implementation of the Canada-US Air Quality Agreement Ozone Annex and
Canada-wide Standards for Particulate Matter and Ozone, among other
initiatives, will contribute toward reducing ambient levels of particulate matter and
ground-level ozone.
It should also be emphasized that both gaseous and particulate releases from
the Base Metals Smelting Sector involve substances which have been declared
toxic under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), and therefore
1 Environment Canada. What is Smog?. Last updated 2001/08/01. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/air/smog_e.shtml
2 Health Canada. It’s Your Health - Smog. Last updated 2001/11/30. URL: http://www.hcsc.gc.ca/english/iyh/smog.htm
3 Environment Canada. Health (Air Pollution). Last updated 2001/08/01. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/air/health_e.shtml
4 Health Canada. Air Health Effects. URL: http://ww.hc-sc.gc.ca/air
5 Health Canada. It’s Your Health - Smog. Last updated 2001/11/30. URL: http://www.hcsc.gc.ca/english/iyh/smog.htm
1

are of additional concern from a federal government perspective. An overview of
health and environmental effects associated with these substances is provided in
Appendix A.
1.1.1. Particulate Matter and Ground Level Ozone
The primary drivers for reducing ambient levels of particulate matter and groundlevel
ozone are the effects these pollutants have on human health and the
environment.
Particulate matter refers to microscopic solid and liquid particles that remain
suspended in the air for some time. Particles give smog its colour and affect
visibility. Ground-level ozone is a colourless gas that forms just above the earth's
surface.
Ground-level ozone is considered a secondary pollutant because it is produced
through chemical reactions of two primary precursor pollutants: nitrogen oxides
(NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Particulate matter can be both
primary pollutants and secondary pollutants. Primary particles are emitted
directly into the atmosphere (e.g., windblown dust and soil, pollen, automobile
and industrial exhausts or emissions). Secondary particles are formed through
chemical reactions involving the precursors NOx, VOCs, sulphur oxides (SOx),
and ammonia (NH3) 6 .
PM 2.5 (fine fraction of PM) is mainly a secondary pollutant. PM is a problem
throughout all seasons and in all regions of Canada, while ozone can be
characterized as a summer regional problem. These pollutants and their
precursors (such as NOX, VOCs, SOx) can be transported long distances by air
currents. Therefore, the air quality at a given site results from a mixture of local,
regional, and/or distant sources 7 .
Extensive scientific studies indicate that there are significant health and
environmental effects associated with these pollutants. Particulate matter and
ozone are linked to serious health impacts including chronic bronchitis, asthma,
and premature deaths. PM 2.5 has been recognized to have the potential for the
greatest health impact on a larger segment of the general population 8 .
The 1998 Science Assessment Document on National Ambient Air Quality
Objectives for Particulate Matter (PM) reports that exposure to particulate matter
is strongly linked to daily mortality, increased hospitalizations, and cardiovascular
and respiratory diseases. It also reports that PM 2.5 is linked to an increase in
respiratory hospitalizations and visits to emergency rooms. Fine particles (i.e.,
PM 2.5 ) are shown to have a stronger and more significant association with
mortality than coarse particles, as either the coarse fraction of PM 10 (i.e., PM 10-
2.5), PM 10 and/or total suspended particulate (TSP). Sulphate, considered a
6 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Backgrounder - Particulate Matter and
Ozone Canada-wide Standards. June 2000. URL:
http://www.ccme.ca/pdfs/backgrounders_060600/PM_Ozone_Backgrounder_E.pdf
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
2

strong surrogate for fine particles from combustion sources, appears to have as
strong or stronger association than PM 2.5 with increased mortality and
hospitalizations 9 .
The 1999 Science Assessment Document on National Ambient Air Quality
Objectives for Ground-Level Ozone reports that exposure to ground-level ozone
is strongly linked to mortality, respiratory hospitalizations and visits to emergency
departments. The controlled human exposure studies reviewed, identified a
dose-response relationship between ozone and lung function changes,
symptoms and inflammation. Other studies identified that patients with preexisting
lung diseases (e.g., asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases
(COPD), etc.) are more susceptible to ozone-induced health effects than healthy
people. Emerging evidence suggests that long term exposure to ambient ozone
could be of public health and economic concern 10 .
Environment Canada’s Green Lane, provides a concise synopsis of the health
effects of PM and ozone as follows:
“Airborne particles that are small enough to be inhaled can also have a
significant effect on health. Those sensitive to ozone are also sensitive to
airborne particles – people who already suffer from heart or lung disease,
children and the elderly. Of greatest health concern are very fine particles
that can penetrate deeply into the lungs and interfere with the functioning
of the respiratory system. These fine particles have been linked to
increases in asthma symptoms, hospital admissions and even premature
mortality.
Ground-level ozone affects the body's respiratory system and causes
inflammation of the airways that can persist for up to 18 hours after
exposure ceases. It can cause coughing, wheezing and chest tightness.
It can also aggravate existing heart and lung conditions. There is
evidence that exposure heightens the sensitivity of asthmatics to
allergens” 11 .
For a more in-depth review and discussion of the health effects of air pollution,
visit Health Canada’s website at: www.hc-sc.gc.ca.
9 CEPA/FPAC Working Group on Air Quality Objectives. National Ambient Air Quality Objectives
for Particulate Matter - Executive Summary. Part 1: Science Assessment Document. Minister of
Public Works and Government Services. Cat. No. H46-2/98-220. 1998.
10 Federal-Provincial Working Group on Air Quality Objectives and Guidelines. National Ambient
Air Quality Objectives for Ground-Level Ozone - Summary Science Assessment Document. Cat.
No. En42-17/7-2-1999. July 1999.
11 Environment Canada. Smog and Your Health. Last updated 2001/08/01. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/air/health_e.shtml
3

Other effects of these pollutants include reduced visibility in the case of PM, and
crop damage and greater vulnerability to disease in some tree species in the
case of ozone 12 .
1.2. Canada-wide Standards for Particulate Matter and Groundlevel
Ozone
In June 2000, CCME Ministers, with the exception of Québec, endorsed Canadawide
Standards (CWS) for Particulate Matter (PM) and Ground-level Ozone 13 .
These standards set ambient limits for PM less than 2.5 microns (PM 2.5 ) and
ozone to be obtained by the year 2010. The standards are as follows:
PM 2.5 : 30 micrograms/m 3 , 24 hour averaging time, by year 2010
(Achievement to be based on the 98 th percentile ambient measurement
annually, averaged over 3 consecutive years.)
Ozone: 65 parts per billion, 8 hour averaging time, by year 2010
(Achievement to be based on the 4 th highest measurement annually,
averaged over 3 consecutive years.)
PM and ground-level ozone are two of the six substances selected as priorities
for development of CWS. Other substances being addressed through the CWS
process include benzene, mercury, dioxins and furans, and petroleum
hydrocarbons in soil.
1.2.1. Multi-pollutant Emission Reduction Strategies (MERS)
At the time of endorsing the CWS for PM and Ozone, CCME Ministers also
agreed to a list of Joint Initial Actions aimed at reducing pollutant emissions
contributing to PM and ozone 14 . The Joint Initial Actions include the development
of comprehensive Multi-pollutant Emission Reduction Strategies (MERS) for key
industrial sectors. The MERS approach is an effort to pursue integrated
solutions to problems of smog, acid rain, toxic releases and climate change.
The sectors identified for the development of a MERS include the electric power
generation, base metals smelting, iron and steel, pulp and paper, lumber and
allied wood products, concrete ready-mix, and asphalt hot-mix sectors. The
selection of these sectors was based on several factors including the following:
• These sectors are significant sources of direct emissions of PM and of
the precursor pollutants that form PM and ozone, as based on best
available information;
12 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Backgrounder - Particulate Matter and
Ozone Canada-wide Standards. June 2000. URL:
http://www.ccme.ca/pdfs/backgrounders_060600/PM_Ozone_Backgrounder_E.pdf
13 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). Canada-wide Standards for
Particulate Matter (PM) and Ozone. June 5-6, 2000. Québec City. URL:
http://www.ccme.ca/pdfs/backgrounders_060600/PMOzone_Standard_E.pdf
4

• These sectors are common to most jurisdictions and affect many
communities across Canada;
• Effective action requires a multi-jurisdictional approach; and
• Effective action can be initiated in the near-term.
A MERS is considered to be a national picture of sectoral emission reduction
plans, to be built from jurisdictional PM and ozone plans and national multipollutant
emissions reduction analysis. Jurisdictional implementation plans on
PM and ozone will be prepared by individual jurisdictions, will outline actions to
achieve the Canada-wide Standards (CWSs) for PM and ozone by 2010 and will
set out emission reduction initiatives.
The development of MERS will be done in partnership with provinces, territories
and stakeholders and will focus on three general activities:
• National Multi-pollutant Emission Reduction Analysis Foundation
(MERAF): Technical feasibility studies of emission reduction options
and costs, and economic profiles, as input into development of sectoral
actions in jurisdictional plans. Work contributing to the MERAF may be
conducted by industry, other stakeholders, and the federal
government.
• Forum for Information Sharing & Coordination: Jurisdictions and
stakeholders to share information on how a particular sector is being
dealt with in different parts of the country.
• National Sector Roll-up: The national picture of the sector is to be
assembled by 2003 based on actions in jurisdictional plans and
national multi-pollutant analysis.
At the time of writing, the development of a MERS for the electric power
generation is underway. For the remaining non-energy, industrial sectors, a
common approach for the first phase of MERS development has been
undertaken, as described in the following section.
1.3. Multi-pollutant Emission Reduction Analysis Foundations
(MERAFs) for the Industrial Sectors
A common approach for Phase 1 of MERS development for the non-energy,
industrial sectors was accepted in October 2001 by the Joint Actions
Implementation Coordinating Committee (JAICC) of the CWS for PM and Ozone.
The affected industrial sectors include base metals smelting, iron and steel, pulp
and paper, lumber and allied wood products, concrete ready-mix, and asphalt
hot-mix. The outlined approach calls for the development of Multi-pollutant
14 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Joint Initial Actions to Reduce Pollutant
Emissions That Contribute to Particulate Matter and Ground-level Ozone. June 6, 2000. URL:
http://www.ccme.ca/pdfs/backgrounders_060600/PMOzone_Joint_Actions_E.pdf
5

Emission Reduction Analysis Foundation (MERAF) Reports for each of the
identified sectors.
What follows is a MERAF Report for the Base Metals Smelting sector. This
MERAF report is intended as a source of information on technically feasible
emission reduction options for the Base Metals Smelting sector for consideration
in the development of jurisdictional implementation plans under the CWS for PM
and Ozone. The report draws upon readily available information. It is not
intended as a policy document.
To formulate a “National Multi-pollutant Emission Reduction Analysis
Foundation”, this report:
• Provides a profile of the sector;
• Examines the processes employed by facilities included in the sector
and sources of emissions;
• Determines the types and quantities of emissions by process, as well
as on a facility basis, and provincial/territorial basis;
• Reviews current national and international standards and best
available pollution prevention and control techniques as applicable to
the sector and the emissions being examined;
• Examines and quantifies emission reductions through the application of
best available techniques and best environmental management
practices and associated constraints, by process, facility (where
practicable) and jurisdiction;
• Identifies gaps in information and uncertainties where they exist; and
• Provides recommendations on achievable emission reduction options
for the sector on a national and jurisdictional basis.
1.3.1. Scope of Pollutants
The analysis in this report is intended to examine pollutants which contribute to
the problems of smog, acid rain, and toxic releases. As such, the scope of
pollutants addressed will cover those that contribute to particulate matter and
ozone, as well as toxics released.
For the purposes of this report, toxics are defined as those substances
scheduled as toxic under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act’s (CEPA) 15
List of Toxic Substances (Schedule 1) that are associated with air releases from
the Base Metals Smelting sector. These substances have been assessed by the
federal Ministers of the Environment and of Health to be toxic as they are
entering or may enter the environment in a quantity or concentration or under
conditions that
15 Government of Canada. Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. Canada Gazette Part
III. Vol.22, No.3. Ottawa, Thursday, November 4, 1999. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/CEPARegistry/the_act/
6

(a) have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the
environment or its biological diversity;
(b) constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life
depends; or
(c) constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or
health.
The pollutants examined in this analysis are:
• Particulate matter (Total,

for the CEPA-toxics, Particulate Matter (PM) and Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) and to
assess releases to air on a site-specific basis for each parameter for the most
recent (1998) data. Potential release reduction options were analyzed and future
releases were predicted (2008 and beyond).
In its report 20 on the releases from Base Metals Smelters, Hatch Associates
conducted an analysis to identify where further reductions could be made in
releases by the application of technically feasible methods. Two time periods
were chosen for the analysis: By 2008 and Beyond 2008. These dates
correspond to the dates specified in Recommendation #1 of the Strategic
Options Report dealing with Release Reduction Targets and Schedules.
However, for the purposes of this report, the “Beyond 2008” option is given a
finite time frame of “By 2015”.
In complement to the information found in the Hatch Associates Reports,
information from organizations such as Natural Resources Canada, the Mining
Association of Canada, individual company websites, etc. was used to conduct
this Analysis Foundation.
While reading this report, it is important to keep in mind the main assumptions
that support the facts and figures presented. It is assumed that:
• the current facility capacities will remain unchanged;
• no new facilities will be opened between now and 2015;
• no existing facilities will be closed between now and 2015;
• no new major players will join or leave the market between now and
2015.
These assumptions may not reveal to be correct thirteen years from now.
Hence, the possibility of new facilities at Voisey’s Bay or somewhere else does
exist; however, this possibility is not considered for the purpose of this report
because of inherent uncertainties and because such a new facility would likely
have very low emissions and contribute a small fraction of the sector’s releases.
Also, on March 28, 2002, Noranda Inc. announced that, effective April 30, 2002,
it permanently closed its Gaspé copper smelter, located in Murdochville.
Noranda had previously announced on November 30, 2001, that it would
temporarily close the smelter for only a six month period 21 .
Finally, it should be noted that the industry is in a period of global consolidation.
20 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000.
21 Noranda Inc. Press Release, March 28, 2002. URL: http://www.noranda.ca/
8

2. INDUSTRY PROFILE
2.1. Sector Definition
The Canadian base metals smelting and refining sector is composed of primary
producers of cobalt, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc. Depending upon the origin of
the ore or scrap metal, various coproduct metals such as gold, silver, indium,
germanium, cadmium, bismuth, and selenium may also be recovered.
Primary smelting and refining generally produces metals directly from ore
concentrates, while secondary smelting and refining produce metals from
recyclable materials. Most primary smelters have the technical capability to
supplement primary concentrate feed with recyclable materials. Several smelters
are using recyclable materials, where technical, logistical and economic factors
are favorable. Examples of recyclable material feedstock include post-consumer
goods such as telephone and computer components, metal parts, bars, turnings,
sheets, and wire that is off-specification or worn out.
Lead has a developed recycling market, due to the relatively short product life of
lead acid batteries and the relative ease of segregating batteries at source for
collection and recycling. However, secondary lead smelters are not part of this
study. They are being addressed under another Environment Canada initiative
pursuant to a recommendation of the Strategic Options for the Management of
Toxic Substances from the Base Metals Smelting Sector - Report of the
Stakeholder Consultations, June 23, 1997 22 .
2.2. Information on Base Metals
The following information on base metals was derived from information found on
the London Metal Exchange 23 and Natural Resources Canada 24 Websites. There
are many other information sources that could have been used. However, this
section is not intended to give a comprehensive use pattern of each base metal,
but to provide an overview of their main applications.
2.2.1. Cobalt
A major use of cobalt is in superalloys of iron, nickel and other metals to make
Alnico, an alloy of high strength, wear and corrosion-resistant characteristics at
elevated temperatures This alloy has many important uses including jet aircraft
engines and stationary gas turbines for pipeline compressors. Cobalt-based
alloys are also used in magnet steels and stainless steels where high abrasionresistant
qualities are required. Another use is in electroplating. Cobalt oxide is
22 Environment Canada URL: http://www.ec.gc.ca/sop/en/index.cfm?actn=s1
23 The London Metal Exchange Limited, 2001. URL: www.lme.co.uk
24 Natural Resources Canada, Minerals and Metals Sector, Minerals and Mining Statistics
Division. URL: www.nrcan.gc.ca
9

an additive in paints, glass and ceramics to impart a brilliant and permanent blue
color.
2.2.2. Copper
Copper was the first mineral that humans extracted from the earth and along with
tin gave rise to the Bronze Age. Copper is a conductor of electricity. Its main
industrial use is for the production of cable, wire and electrical products. The
construction industry accounts for copper’s second largest market in such areas
as pipes for plumbing, heating and ventilating as well as building wire and sheet
metal facings. Copper is also used in transportation applications.
2.2.3. Lead
Being very soft and pliable and highly resistant to corrosion, it was ideal for use
in plumbing as well as for the manufacture of pewter. In the early 20 th century
the rapid expansion in automobile production created markets for batteries and
leaded fuels. Batteries remain the main modern usage of lead but the over-all
total use of lead has declined due to conversion from leaded to leaded-free
gasoline. Lead’s unique properties are widely used for radiation shielding in
clinical settings and consumer products.
2.2.4. Nickel
In the mid 18th century, primary nickel was first isolated as a separate metal.
Prior to this, it was found in copper mines and thought to be an unsmeltable
copper ore. Primary nickel can resist corrosion and maintains its physical and
mechanical properties even when placed under extreme temperatures. When
these properties were recognized, the development of primary nickel began. It
was found that by combining primary nickel with steel, even in small quantities,
the durability and strength of the steel increased significantly as did its resistance
to corrosion. This partnership with steel has remained and the production of
stainless steel is now the single largest consumer of primary nickel today. It is
also used in the production of many different metal alloys for specialized
applications.
2.2.5. Zinc
Zinc is commonly mined as a co-product with lead. For zinc, the main market is
galvanizing. Its electropositive nature enables metals to be readily galvanized,
which gives added protection against corrosion to building structures, including
commercial and residential buildings, structures such as bridges, vehicles,
machinery, and household equipment. Zinc is a major constituent in brasses and
is also used in a wide range of zinc-based chemicals used in agricultural feed
supplements and fertilizers, tires, and many consumer products.
10

2.3. Base Metals Smelting Processes 25
The technical processes involved in the extraction and refining of base metals
generally proceed as follows in the following diagram. Site-specific flow sheets
and process descriptions for existing facilities can be found in section 3.2.
The key metal recovery technologies that are used to produce refined metals
are 26 :
• Pyrometallurgical technologies use heat to separate desired metals
from unwanted materials. These processes exploit the differences
between constituent oxidation potential, melting point, vapour pressure,
density, and/or miscibility when melted.
• Hydrometallurgical technologies use differences between constituent’s
solubility and/or electrochemical properties while in aqueous acid
solutions to separate desired metals from unwanted materials; and
• Vapo-metallurgical technologies apply to the Inco Carbonyl Process
whereby nickel alloys are treated with carbon monoxide gas to form
nickel carbonyl.
25 Environment Canada, Draft Environmental Code of Practice for Base Metals Smelters and
Refineries, First Edition, Partial Draft prepared for multi-stakeholder consultations, Revision
March 4, 2002, Tabled at: Second National Consultation on the Environmental Performance of
the Base Metals Smelting Sector, Ottawa, Ontario, March 7 & 8, 2002
26 Environment Canada, Strategic Options for the Management of Toxic Substances from the
Base Metals Smelting Sector - Report of the Stakeholder Consultations, June 23, 1997. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/sop/en/index.cfm?actn=s1
11

Mining and Milling
Mineral Concentrate
Recycled Feedstock
Smelting / Refining
sintering
roasting
smelting
converting
fire-refining
electrorefining
carbonyl refining
leaching
electrowinning
casting
Air Emissions
e.g. TPM, PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 ,
metals, NO x , CO 2 , etc.
Refined Metals
Copper, Nickel, Lead,
Zinc, Silver, Cobalt,
Gold, Cadmium, and
Other co-products
By-Products
Sulphuric acid, Liquid
sulphur dioxide,
Sulphur, Gypsum,
Other
Legend
TPM: Total Particulate Matter
PM 10 : Particulate Matter less than 10 microns
PM 2.5 : Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns
TSS: Total Suspended Solids
12

2.3.1. Pretreatment
Pretreatment of feed materials includes drying of slurry concentrates, milling,
sorting and separation of scrap material, and feed proportioning. Pretreatment is
conducted to ensure feeds are in appropriate condition and proportions for initial
processing.
2.3.2. Sintering
Sintering is used to agglomerate fine concentrate particles and to oxidize the
roast, releasing the sulphur in the ore as sulphur dioxide and converting the
minerals into oxides having suitable characteristics for feeding into the blast
furnace. Sintering may be used in the primary production of lead in Canada.
The concentrates are blended with recycled sinter fines and other process
materials and are fed in a layer into the sintering furnace. The feed is ignited
with gas burners and conveyed over a series of windboxes through which air is
blown. The sinter product is then crushed and screened to the correct size.
Undersize material is cooled and recycled back through the process.
2.3.3. Roasting
Roasting is the conventional technique used in the pyrometallurgical processing
of copper, nickel and zinc sulphide concentrates. During roasting, the sulphur is
removed by adding air and simultaneously heating and drying the concentrate to
achieve a sulphur content favourable for smelting. The sulphur is released as
sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ). Roasting to completion eliminates the sulphur and
produces the metal oxide for reduction by carbon or carbon monoxide, or for
leaching in a sulphuric acid solution followed by electrowinning. Incomplete
roasting is used to remove excess sulphur in copper and nickel sulphides in
preparation for the matte smelting process. The SO 2 produced is usually
converted to sulphuric acid, or sometimes liquefied.
2.3.4. Smelting
Smelting serves two functions – one to melt the concentrates to a molten state
and second to separate the metal of value from other less desirable metals,
impurities and gangue materials.
Concentrates are fed to the furnace along with fluxing agents, fuel (oil, natural
gas), and oxygen (in the form of air, technical oxygen or oxygen enriched air).
High temperatures from combustion and oxidation in the smelting furnace cause
the feed materials to melt. Separation of the metal of value from other impurities
and gangue materials occurs through fluxing, where the siliceous fluxing agent
forms a silica-iron-sulphur slag. Some impurities are also separated from the
metal of value through oxidation and volatilization (e.g., sulphur, some metal
compounds).
13

The resulting product from a smelter is a molten matte or bullion containing a
high concentration of the metal of value.
Layers of matte or bullion and slag are tapped from the furnace, or in the case of
continuous processes (e.g. Mitsubishi process), the materials travel through
covered gravity-flow launders to the next processing stage. Primary and
secondary emissions are captured through direct ductwork from the furnace
and/or overhead canopies. The collected off-gases are treated by a gas
conditioning system which may include removal of sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ),
particulate matter (PM), fume, etc. Smelter slags are treated or ‘cleaned’ to
recover any remaining metal of value 27 .
2.3.5. Converting
Converting is used primarily for copper and nickel matte processing and serves
to remove residual sulphur and iron in the matte from the smelter. Converters
also have the capability of processing high grade scrap materials. Both
continuous and batch converting processes are used in Canada. Air or oxygen
enriched air is blown through the matte, generating off-gases containing sulphur
dioxide and volatile metals such as lead and zinc. Continuous converting allows
for better capture of process off-gases and a consistent and/or higher
concentration of sulphur dioxide, enabling capture of the sulphur dioxide through
the production of sulphuric acid. Converting produces blister copper named for
the blisters of air/oxygen trapped in the molten material. Slag from the converter
typically has a high copper concentration and can be returned to the smelting
furnace for recovery of the copper.
2.3.6. Fire-Refining (Anode Refining)
Prior to final casting or electrorefining, impurities must be further removed from
metals. This process is sometimes used in the production of copper in Canada.
Fire-refining lowers the sulphur and oxygen levels in blister copper and removes
impurities as slag or volatile products. Reverberatory or rotary furnaces are
used. First, air is blown through the molten mixture to oxidize the copper and
volatilize the sulphur impurities, producing a small amount of slag. Sodium
carbonate flux may be added to remove arsenic and antimony. Then the copper
is reduced by a process known as “poling” with green wood poles or by feeding
ammonia or natural gas to remove the oxygen, forming the purer copper to be
cast as anodes.
2.3.7. Electrorefining
Electrorefining produces a purified metal from a less pure metal. This process is
used to refine copper, nickel and lead in Canada. The metal to be purified is cast
as an anode and placed in an electrolytic cell. A current is applied and the metal
is dissolved into an acidic aqueous electrolyte or molten salt. The pure metal is
electroplated or deposited on the starter plates which act as the cathodes.
27 European Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Bureau (EIPPCB), Reference Document on Best
Available Techniques in the Non Ferrous Metals Industries, Spain, May 2000. http://eippcb.jrc.es
14

Metallic impurities either dissolve in the electrolyte or precipitate out and form a
sludge. These anode slimes contain precious metals such as silver, gold and
tellurium and are recovered. The cathode deposits are washed, then cast into
bars, ingots, or slabs for sale.
2.3.8. Carbonyl Refining
The carbonyl process is used for refining crude nickel oxide. Carbon monoxide
and the crude nickel react to form nickel carbonyl at high pressure. The volatile
and highly toxic nickel carbonyl is refined by separation of solid impurities. With
further heating, the carbon monoxide separates and high purity nickel powder or
pellets are formed. The solid impurities contain copper and precious metals
which are recovered. The generated carbon monoxide off-gases are recycled
back to the process.
2.3.9. Leaching
Leaching requires the use of an acid or other solvent to dissolve the metal
content of ores and concentrates before refining and electrowinning. Leaching is
usually conducted using material in the form of an oxide, either an oxidic ore or
an oxide produced by roasting. Sulphidic ores can also be leached but require
conditions which promote oxidation of the ore or concentrate, such as high
pressure, presence of bacteria and/or the addition of oxygen, chlorine or ferric
chloride. The pregnant leach solution is processed by solvent extraction and is
purified. The purified solution is then used for electrowinning and refining of the
metal.
2.3.10. Electrowinning
Electrowinning is used to capture metal dissolved in the pregnant solution
produced during leaching (purified electrolyte). Electrowinning is used for
refining zinc, copper, nickel and cobalt in Canada. The process is conducted in
tank houses, with electrolytic cells containing the purified electrolyte, inert anodes
and starter cathodes of the pure metal (for copper refining) or permanent
cathodes of stainless steel or aluminum. Electric current is passed through the
cell and the dissolved metal ions (metal of value) are deposited onto the cathode.
Oxygen gas, acid mist, and spent electrolyte (acid) are generated through the
electrowinning process. The spent electrolyte is returned to the leaching
process. After a sufficient time lapse the cathodes are removed. The cathodes
are either sold directly, or the metal is stripped from the cathode, is melted and
cast.
2.3.11. Casting
The casting process involves melting the metal and passing it through a holding
furnace and into the caster where billets, blocks, slabs or cakes, and rods are
produced. Casting can be done continuously or in batches. Stationary casting
uses a casting wheel with a series of molds which can be on the circumference
of a rotating table that passes through a series of cooling water jets. Continuous
casting involves the production of a continuous bar or rod for reduction to wire
15

and is cut into shape using shears or by casting in special side dam blocs spaced
in defined intervals in the caster. The billets can be heated then extruded and
drawn into tubes. Slabs or cakes are preheated and rolled into sheets and strips.
Ingots are produced using a fixed mold casting process.
2.3.12. Process Off-Gas Conditioning
Off-gases from smelting facilities typically contain sulphur dioxide, particulate
matter, fume (e.g., volatile metals) and other pollutants of concern such as
carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides and organics. Off-gases are treated to remove
sulphur dioxide, particulate matter and/or other pollutants before being released
to ambient air.
For removal of particulate matter and dust, cyclones are used to remove medium
to large sized particles. Cyclones are not considered sufficient control devices
on their own to remove particulate matter. Other control devices with greater
dust removal efficiencies include electrostatic precipitators (ESPs), either hot or
wet, and fabric filter baghouses. Hot ESPs can withstand higher off-gas
temperatures than fabric filter baghouses. However baghouses can achieve
greater dust collection efficiencies than hot ESPs 28 . Scrubbers are also used to
remove both dust and soluble or acidic gases from the off-gas stream.
Process off-gases with a minimum sulphur dioxide concentration of 5 to 7
percent can be used for the manufacture of sulphuric acid, and thus remove the
sulphur dioxide from the off-gas stream. Double contact acid plants are able to
achieve a higher conversion rate of sulphur dioxide in the process off-gas to
sulphuric acid, than single contact acid plants.
28
European Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Bureau (EIPPCB), Reference
Document on Best Available Techniques in the Non Ferrous Metals Industries, Spain, May 2000.
http://eippcb.jrc.es
16

2.4. Environmental Concerns 29
The following section presents an overview of environmental concerns related to
the major activities and processes used in the smelting and refining of base
metals. Typical preventative and control measures taken in modern systems are
indicated.
2.4.1. Sintering
Emissions from the sintering process arise primarily from materials and handling
operations, which result in airborne dust, and from the combustion reaction on
the strand. The combustion gases contain dust entrained directly from the strand
along with products of combustion such as carbon monoxide (CO), carbon
dioxide (CO 2 ), sulphur oxides (SO x ), nitrogen oxides (NO x ) and particulate matter
(PM). Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) is the most significant gaseous pollutant from the
sintering process. Other substances typically released from the process to air
may include volatile organic compounds, sulphates, and compounds of lead,
cadmium, mercury and zinc.
Typically in modern systems, the off-gases are processed with an electrostatic
precipitator (ESP) to remove dust for recycle to the sinter plant. Strong sulphur
dioxide off-gases are treated for conversion to sulphuric acid. Weak gases are
treated by a cyclone and/or baghouse prior to discharge. Moist gases are
treated by wet scrubbers. All emission control dusts are returned to the sinter
machine as a dust or slurry, except if ESP dust is required to be bled from the
circuit to control impurity levels. During acid plant shutdowns, strong gases may
bypass the ESP. Sinter crushing and screening emissions are usually controlled
by ESPs or fabric filters.
2.4.2. Roasting
Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) and particulate matter are the principal air contaminants
generated during roasting of the concentrates. The SO 2 can be recovered at onsite
sulphuric acid plants if the type of roaster used generates a high enough
concentration in the off-gas. Otherwise, the roaster off-gases are cleaned in
ESPs, then released to atmosphere via a stack. Waste heat boilers, cyclones
and scrubbers may also be used to treat off-gases. Metals which may be
present in the particulate matter include copper and iron oxides, arsenic,
cadmium, lead, mercury and zinc.
29 Environment Canada, Draft Environmental Code of Practice for Base Metals Smelters and
Refineries, First Edition, Partial Draft prepared for multi-stakeholder consultations, Revision
March 4, 2002, Tabled at: Second National Consultation on the Environmental Performance of
the Base Metals Smelting Sector, Ottawa, Ontario, March 7 & 8, 2002
17

2.4.3. Smelting
The major environmental concerns associated with smelting are energy
consumption, releases of sulphur dioxide and releases of particulate matter to
air, and the generation of residues, such as slag and captured dust.
Bath smelting consumes more energy than alternative processes such as flash
smelting. Flash smelting makes use of the autogenous reaction between sulphur
and oxygen to fuel the smelting process, thus reducing fuel and energy
requirements as compared to bath smelting. Taking primary copper production
as an example, bath smelting has energy requirements ranging from 30 to 40
million British thermal units (Btu) per ton of cathode copper produced 30 . Flash
smelting has been reported to have energy requirements of approximately 20
million Btu per ton of cathode copper produced, which is about half of the energy
required for bath smelting 31 .
Emissions of sulphur oxides and sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) are a significant
environmental concern for primary smelters. Sulphur in the concentrate feed
which does not remain in the slag, matte or bullion, is oxidized to form SO 2 .
Smelter off-gases containing an SO 2 concentration of 5 -7% or higher can be
used for the manufacture of sulphuric acid. Flash smelting generates higher
percentages of sulphur dioxide in the off-gases, and both flash smelting and
continuous processes allow for better collection of the off-gases producing a
consistent concentration of sulphur dioxide in the off-gas, ideal for the production
of sulphuric acid.
Smelter off-gases also contain particulate matter, organics and volatile metals,
such as mercury.
Slag from the smelting process is also an environmental concern. In general,
smelter slags do not contain a high enough concentration of the metal of value to
be returned to the smelter. Slags are typically cleaned to recover remaining
metal of value and are then disposed of in landfills or tailings ponds. Cleaned
slags have been used as aggregate in the construction industry or as an abrasive
for sandblasting.
2.4.4. Converting
Off-gases from the converter require treatment to remove sulphur dioxide, dust/
particulate matter and fume prior to discharge to ambient air. Off-gases from
batch converters are high in volume and low in sulphur dioxide. With these
characteristics, the off-gas is unsuitable as a feed for acid plants. Therefore it is
often conditioned to remove particulate matter and is then vented to ambient air.
Continuous converting produces a more consistent and higher concentration of
30 World Bank Group. Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook 1998: Toward Cleaner Production.
July 1998. (url: http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/essd/essd.nsf/Docs/PPAH)
31 World Bank Group. Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook 1998: Toward Cleaner Production.
July 1998. (url: http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/essd/essd.nsf/Docs/PPAH)
18

sulphur dioxide in the off-gases than batch converting and the off-gases are
suitable for acid production/sulphur fixation 32 .
Slag generated during the converting process is often returned to the smelter to
recover metals.
2.4.5. Fire Refining
Air emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide, particulate matter and metals
arise from the fire-refining process.
The sulphur dioxide exiting the anode furnace is filtered to remove any dust. The
dust is recycled back into the smelter and the gas is fed into the sulphuric acid
plant where it is converted into sulphuric acid.
Fugitive emissions are generated during the charging and discharging of the
anode furnaces. These should be collected with a secondary hood or an
enclosure around the furnace with the minimum possible opening.
Slag produced from the anode furnace is minor in amount and can be recycled
within the plant.
2.4.6. Electrorefining
Electrolytic refining does not produce emissions to atmosphere unless the
associated sulphuric acid tanks are open to the atmosphere. However, spent
electrolyte and wash water contain significant quantities of metal compounds in
solution and are treated before discharge to water. The metal compounds that
are deposited at the bottom of the electrolytic cell during the electrorefining
process (i.e., the impurities), form what is known as an anode slime. The slimes
are collected and processed to extract precious metals such as silver, gold and
tellurium.
2.4.7. Carbonyl Refining
Carbonyl refining produces gas bleed streams that contain waste nickel carbonyl,
a highly toxic substance. Incinerators should be used to convert the nickel
carbonyl to nickel oxide and carbon dioxide. Particulate matter may be released
from the transfer of nickel oxide concentrate, from the drying of solids recovered
from the aqueous effluent and from local exhaust ventilation gases. Electrostatic
precipitators are typically used for dust abatement since inlet temperatures are
too high for fabric filters. The collected dust may be sluiced with water on
discharge and should be dried and recovered for recycling.
2.4.8. Leaching
A significant environmental issue arising from the leaching process is the
generation of ferrite residues. These iron-based residues contain various
32 European Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Bureau (EIPPCB), Reference Document on Best
Available Techniques in the Non Ferrous Metals Industries, Spain, May 2000. http://eippcb.jrc.es
19

concentrations of heavy metals, and present a risk to the environment by the
gradual leaching of heavy metals from the residue material. Residues generated
during the leaching process are landfilled or stored in a secure site, are stabilized
to immobilize the metals, or are sent to another process for recovery of remaining
metals of value.
2.4.9. Electrowinning
As electrowinning takes place in tank houses open to the atmosphere, oxygen
gas or other gas generated during the electrowinning process can entrain the
acid or other solvent into the air.
2.4.10. Casting
Air emissions of particulate matter and metals arise from the transfer of molten
metal to the mold and from the cutting to length of the product with torches.
Wastewater effluents are generated during the cooling and cleaning of the hot
metal and can contain scale particles and oil. Wastewater is typically treated and
reused or recycled. Solid waste is generated from the cutting of the metal but is
minor in amount and is recycled within the plant.
2.4.11. Process Off-Gas Conditioning
Process off-gas conditioning generates collected dusts and sludges which are
either returned to production processes for recovery of metals or are disposed of.
The type of off-gas conditioning technology is also of environmental concern.
The use of wet ESPs and wet scrubbers results in the cross-media transfer of
pollutants in air to water.
20

2.5. Canadian Base Metals Smelters and Refineries
As shown in Figure 1, there are thirteen (13) base metals metallurgical
complexes in Canada which are located in British Columbia (1), Alberta (1),
Manitoba (2), Ontario (4), Québec (4 including Noranda-Gaspé)* and New
Brunswick (1).
1
•
Trail
Fort
2
•
Saskatchewan
3
•
4
•
Thompson
Flin Flon
5
•
Timmins
6, 7
Sudbury
9
•
Rouyn-Noranda
10, 11
•
Montreal
12
•
13•
Belledune
Murdochville
8
Port Colborne
Province Company Site/Location Facility Map #
British Columbia Teck Cominco Trail Lead Plant,
1
Zinc Plant
Alberta Corefco/Sherritt Fort Saskatchewan Nickel & Cobalt Refinery 2
Manitoba Hudson Bay Flin Flon Copper Smelter,
3
Zinc Plant
Inco Thompson Nickel Smelter,
4
Nickel Refinery
Ontario Falconbridge Kidd/Timmins Copper Smelter,
5
Copper Refinery,
Zinc Plant
Falconbridge Sudbury Nickel/Copper Smelter 6
Inco Copper Cliff/Sudbury Nickel Copper Smelter,
7
Copper Refinery,
Nickel Refinery
Inco Port Colborne Cobalt Refinery 8
Québec Noranda Horne/Rouyn-Noranda Copper Smelter 9
Noranda CEZ/Valleyfield Zinc Plant 10
Noranda CCR/Montréal Copper Refinery 11
Noranda Gaspé/Murdochville* Copper Smelter 12
New Brunswick Noranda Brunswick/Belledune Lead Plant 13
Figure 1: Canadian Base Metals Smelting and Refining Sector
21

* On March 28, 2002, Noranda Inc. announced that, effective April 30, 2002, it
permanently closed its Gaspé copper smelter, located in Murdochville.
2.6. Company and Facility Profiles
This section provides basic information related to products produced at each
smelter, the type of processes used and the age of the installed capital 33,34 .
More information on the processes, flow sheets and sources of emissions will be
the subject of the next chapter.
2.6.1. Teck Cominco Ltd
Cominco 35 was incorporated in Canada in 1906. In 2000, Cominco Ltd. was the
world’s largest zinc-mining company and the fourth-largest zinc metal refiner. It
owned or had interests in mines, smelters and refineries in Canada, the United
States and Peru. The company also produced significant quantities of copper,
lead, silver and gold along with specialty metals such as germanium and indium,
and electricity all of which are important contributors to operating revenues.
In 2000, Teck Corporation of Vancouver was the majority shareholder holding
50.05% of Cominco’s common share.
In July 2001, Teck Corporation and Cominco Ltd. announced their proposed
merger to become Teck Cominco Limited.
The new Teck Cominco is a diversified mining and metals company with interests
in 12 operating mines producing gold, copper, zinc and metallurgical coal in
North and South America and Australia, as well as zinc refining complexes in
British Columbia and Peru. It is the fourth largest North American-based base
metals mining and refining company and the third largest in publicly held market
capitalization, after Phelps Dodge and Inco.
Teck Cominco Ltd. operates an integrated primary lead-zinc smelter and refinery,
and associated acid and fertilizer plants at Trail, British Columbia. The
operations, which have existed at the site in various forms for more than 100
years, have evolved into one of the largest integrated lead-zinc facilities in the
world. These plants process zinc and lead concentrates produced at the
company’s own mines in B.C. and Alaska, and custom concentrates purchased
world-wide. Pre-processed battery scrap and other lead scrap are also part of
the feedstock. In addition to the primary zinc and lead products, the operations
produce many co-products including silver, gold, bismuth, cadmium, indium,
germanium, copper sulphate, copper arsenate, ferrous slag granules, calomel,
sodium antimonate, sulphuric acid, liquid sulphur dioxide, elemental sulphur, and
33 Environment Canada Strategic Options for the Management of Toxic Substances from the
Base Metals Smelting Sector - Report of the Stakeholder Consultations, June 23, 1997. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/sop/en/index.cfm?actn=s1
34 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
Appendix A, Site Specific Information, prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000.
35 Cominco Annual Report, 2000. URL: http://www.teckcominco.com/invrel/reports/clt-00-ar.pdf
Teck Cominco. URL:: http://www.teckcominco.com/index.html
22

ammonium sulphate fertilizers. The ability to efficiently recover and market these
products profitably is key to the economic viability of the Trail Operations.
A major modernization program was begun in the late 70’s and was completed in
1997 with the start-up of a new lead smelter using state-of-art Kivcet oxygen
flash smelting technology. This eliminated several major emission sources
associated with old smelter and reduced overall plant emissions substantially.
2.6.2. Sherritt International Corporation
Sherritt International Corporation 36,37 is a diversified Canadian public company
with assets of $2 billion. Sherritt International Corporation operates in Canada,
the Republic of Cuba, and internationally.
Sherritt's span of operations includes an indirect 50% interest in Luscar Energy
Partnership which owns Luscar Ltd., Canada's largest coal producer; exploration,
development and production of oil and natural gas reserves worldwide; a 50%
indirect interest in a vertically-integrated commodity nickel/cobalt metals
business; and investments in power-generation, communications, soybean
processing, tourism and agriculture in Cuba.
Luscar Ltd. is Canada's largest coal company and one of the largest coal
producers in North America. Luscar mines approximately 37 million tonnes of
coal per year which is shipped to utilities, steelmakers and industrial companies
in Canada and abroad.
Sherritt International Corporation owns 50% of a vertically integrated commodity
nickel and cobalt business. This metals enterprise consists of three companies:
• Moa Nickel S.A., which has mining and associated processing facilities
at Moa Bay, Cuba;
• International Cobalt Company Inc. of Nassau, Bahamas, which is the
worldwide sales and marketing organization; and
• The Cobalt Refinery Company Inc. (Corefco), which owns and operates
the Metals Refinery at Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta.
Together, these three companies are known as the “Metals Enterprise”.
Sherritt International explores for, develops, and produces oil and natural gas
reserves worldwide. In addition to its tourism and agriculture assets in Cuba,
Sherritt International Corporation plans to expand its investment base to include
other industries which are fundamental to Cuba’s economic growth and
development.
Sherritt International Corporation is the sole owner and operator of facilities
producing fertilizers as well as providing utilities and services for the Metals
Enterprise. These facilities are:
36 Environment Canada, Strategic Options for the Management of Toxic Substances from the
Base Metals Smelting Sector - Report of the Stakeholder Consultations, June 23, 1997.
37 Sherritt. URL: http://www.sherritt.com/
23

• Ammonia Utilities (Ammonia I Plant, Utilities I Plant, and effluent
management system); and
• Chemical Utilities (Urea I Plant, Phosphate Plant, Sulphuric Acid Plant,
and Fertilizer Loadout).
The original refinery in Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta was commissioned. In 1955.
It consisted of the Leach, Copper Boil, Metals Recovery, Sulphide Precipitation,
and Ammonium Sulphate circuits. In 1992, the refinery was expanded and the
Cobalt Separation, Cobalt Recovery, and Ammonia Recovery Circuits were
constructed. In 1996, a further expansion was undertaken to increase the
capacity.
The Metals Refinery produces two products, three by-products, and one waste.
The products are pure nickel and pure cobalt. The by-products include
ammonium sulphate, copper sulphides, and zinc sulphides. The waste includes
solid tailings from the refining process.
2.6.3. Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Co. Ltd
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting 38,39 operations are centered at Flin Flon in the
province of Manitoba, Canada. It owns and operates several underground mines
in Manitoba and Saskatchewan which produces zinc, copper and gold ores. Gold
is produced as a by-product from refining of the copper anodes. A new shaft is
currently being sunk to exploit the recently discovered 777 deposit in Flin Flon. A
modern zinc electro-winning tank house is also under construction.
The Flin Flon ore body was discovered by David Collins, a local trapper, and
shown to Tom Creighton, a prospector, in 1914. It took more than a dozen years
to bring the mine into production. In 1927, the Whitney family of New York
created HBM&S which took over controlling interest in the Flin Flon property. By
1930, the mine, smelter, a hydroelectric dam and a railroad were all in full
operation.
Today, Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting is wholly-owned by Anglo American plc,
a natural resources company incorporated in England and Wales
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Co. Ltd. (HBM&S) operates a mill, copper smelter,
and zinc plant at their metallurgical complex in Flin Flon, Manitoba. Copper and
zinc ores from surrounding mines have been processed at the facility since 1930.
The zinc refinery originally used a roast-leach-electrowinning process, but in 1993
was converted to the world's first commercial application of the Sherritt two-stage
pressure leach process. Refined zinc is recovered by electrowinning.
38 Anglo American. URL: http://www.angloamerican.co.uk/
yahoo.marketguide.com
39 Flin Flon: URL: http://www.flinflon.net/
Canadian Mines Handbook 2001-02, Southam Publications Company, August 2001
24

The copper smelter uses pyrometallurgical processes to produce anode copper.
HBM&S also produces secondary metals such as cadmium, gold, and silver
contained in the anodes.
2.6.4. Inco Limited
Inco Limited 40 , a Canadian-based global company with operations and an
extensive marketing network in over 40 countries, is one of the world's premier
mining and metals companies and the world's second largest producer of nickel.
Inco is also an important producer of copper, cobalt and precious and platinumgroup
metals and a major producer of specialty nickel-based products.
The Copper Cliff Operations, located in Sudbury, is 100 % Inco-owned and
operates the largest fully-integrated mining, milling, smelting and refining
complex in Canada - indeed one of the largest in the world. Sudbury is also the
birthplace of Inco, where the Company's operations began in 1902.
The Manitoba Division located at Thompson, Manitoba, 100 % Inco-owned, is a
fully-integrated nickel production complex with underground mining operations
and high-capacity processing facilities which produces electrolytic nickel
products.
The Port Colborne Refinery, 100% Inco-owned, has been operated by Inco since
1918. This operation, part of the Ontario Division, focuses on production of
electrocobalt, the processing of precious metals, which are further purified at
other Inco operations and the packaging and distribution of finished nickel
products to market.
As of December 31, 2000, 21 607 shareholders held 182 million common shares.
Inco Limited is publicly traded with its common shares listed on seven major
stock exchanges around the world.
2.6.4.1. Inco Limited, Thompson Division, Thompson, Manitoba
The Inco operation at Thompson Manitoba is an integrated mining, milling,
smelting and refining operation. It was officially opened in 1961. This operation
processes ore to produce refined nickel with cobalt and an intermediate copper
calcine as byproducts.
2.6.4.2. Inco Limited, Sudbury/Copper Cliff Operations, Copper
Cliff, Ontario
The Inco facility at Sudbury, Ontario is an integrated mining, milling, smelting and
refining operation. The primary products of the operation are nickel, copper and
cobalt with a byproduct production of precious metals. The smelting process
used until 1994 for nickel concentrate dated from the 1930s and used multi
hearth roasters and reverbatory furnaces for smelting, Peirce-Smith converters to
eliminate iron and the majority of the sulphur, and flotation and magnetic
40 Inco. URL: http://www.incoltd.com/
25

separation for the production of a nickel-copper matte, a copper/nickel metallic
intermediate product. Copper concentrate and a reverted intermediate copper
sulphide were smelted in a copper flash furnace to produce copper matte which
was then processed in Peirce-Smith converters to blister copper.
In the 1990s a major rebuild of the Smelter changed the process to flash furnace
smelter of a bulk copper/nickel concentrate. Peirce-Smith converting was kept.
The Copper Refinery has a conventional anode furnace for smelting with
electrorefining of anodes in a tankhouse, and has undergone significant
upgrading in the last decade. The anode furnaces were relocated in 2001
resulting in an improved emission controls.
The Nickel Refinery came on line in the 1970s with top blown rotary converters
for pre-treatment and the Inco pressure carbonyl process for final refining.
2.6.4.3. Inco Limited, Port Colborne, Ontario
The Inco operation at Port Colborne Ontario is an electro-cobalt refinery.
2.6.5. Falconbridge Limited
Falconbridge 41,42 is an international, integrated, base metals company producing
nickel, copper, cobalt and platinum group metals. Falconbridge is also one of
the world's largest recyclers and processors of metal-bearing materials.
Falconbridge has been in the business since 1928 and operates in 15 countries
and its common shares are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange. The company
is 57% owned by Noranda Inc.
Under a newly adopted Policy for Inter-Company Dealings between Falconbridge
and Noranda, Falconbridge and Noranda are integrating a number of their
business operations and corporate office functions.
This will result in:
• the consolidation of some operating and functional activities
• certain employees being Officers of both Companies
• an increase in the number and size of inter-company transactions
• the joint pursuit and development of business, exploration and
acquisition opportunities
2.6.5.1. Falconbridge Limited, Kidd Metallurgical Division, Timmins,
Ontario
Falconbridge Limited’s Kidd Metallurgical Division, located in Timmins, Ontario is
an integrated, multi-plant facility for the mineral processing of base metal ores
and the metallurgical processing and refining of metals. The facility produces
41 Falconbridge. URL: http://www.falconbridge.com/
42 The Business Search Engine. URL: www.business.com
26

copper, zinc, cadmium and indium, as well as several by-products such as
sulphuric acid and liquid sulphur dioxide. The main source of feed is ore from the
Kidd Mine located 27 kilometers northeast of the metallurgical site and is
augmented by a variety of purchased primary and secondary feed materials.
This metallurgical complex entered service in the late 70s and early 80s.
2.6.5.2. Falconbridge, Sudbury Division, Sudbury, Ontario
Falconbridge Limited, Sudbury Division operates a nickel-copper smelter at
Falconbridge, Ontario. The plant commenced production in 1930 to process
nickel-copper concentrates produced by an associated mine-mill complex. In
1978, the sinter plant and blast furnaces were shut down and replaced by fluid
bed roasters and electric furnaces. An acid plant was also installed. The smelter
now processes copper-nickel concentrates from Falconbridge’s Strathcona
concentrator, Falconbridege’s Raglan mine in Northern Québec, and a variety of
purchased secondary nickel-cobalt materials to produce nickel-copper matte and
sulphuric acid.
2.6.6. Noranda Inc.
Noranda Inc. 43,44 is a leading international mining and metals company. It is one
of the world’s largest producers of zinc and nickel and a significant producer of
primary and fabricated aluminum, copper, lead, sulphuric acid, cobalt, gold,
silver, and wire rope. The company is also a major recycler of secondary copper,
nickel and precious metals. Noranda conducts mineral operations in nine
countries.
Noranda is a Canadian company incorporated in 1922 whose common shares
are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange.
Noranda has approximately 238 million common shares outstanding. Brascan, a
company that owns and operates real estate, power generating, natural resource
and financial businesses, located principally in North and South America, holds
40% of the company’s shares.
Noranda holds 57% of Falconbridge which accounts for 33% of total Noranda’s
revenues.
Under a newly adopted Policy for Inter-Company Dealings between Falconbridge
and Noranda, Falconbridge and Noranda are integrating a number of their
business operations and corporate office functions.
This will result in:
• the consolidation of some operating and functional activities
• certain employees being Officers of both Companies
• an increase in the number and size of inter-company transactions
43 Noranda. URL: http://www.noranda.ca
44 The Business Search Engine. URL: www.business.com
27

• the joint pursuit and development of business, exploration and
acquisition opportunities
2.6.6.1. Noranda Inc., Horne Smelter, Rouyn-Noranda, Québec
Noranda Inc., Horne Smelter, operates a copper smelter in Rouyn-Noranda,
Québec. The smelter produces copper anodes and sulphuric acid.
The plant began processing copper concentrates from an associated mine-mill
complex in 1927. Until the 1970s, the smelter utilized conventional copper
smelting technology which included reverberatory furnaces and Peirce-Smith
converters. Development and installation of Noranda’s patented reactor for the
treatment of copper concentrates permitted the gradual elimination of the
reverberatory furnaces. The mine closed in 1976, and the smelter now
processes custom and toll copper concentrates and secondary materials from a
variety of sources world-wide. Copper anodes of 99.1% copper are produced
from a feedstock of copper concentrates and precious metal-bearing recyclable
materials. The anodes are shipped to the company’s CCR Refinery in Montréal
where they are used to produced refined copper, precious metals and other byproducts.
A sulphuric acid plant entered service in 1989. In November 2001, Noranda
announced an investment of more that $16 million aimed at reducing sulphur
dioxide and total particulate matter emissions from its Horne facility.
Construction is expected to be completed by Fall 2002. The project includes
recovering sulphur dioxide gases and particulate emissions from the converters,
improving the sulphuric acid plant’s operating efficiency, as well as enhancing
ventilation systems.
The smelter ranks as the largest and most advanced recycling plant of its kind in
North America.
28

2.6.6.2. Noranda Inc., Division CEZ, Valleyfield, Québec
Noranda Inc., Division CEZ operates a zinc refinery at Valleyfield, Québec.
Canadian Electrolytic Zinc Limited was established by five Canadian mining
companies to process zinc concentrates produced by several mine-mill
complexes in Ontario and Québec. The plant was commissioned in 1963 and
became wholly-owned by Noranda during 1996. The refinery processes zinc
concentrates produced by several divisions of Noranda Mining and Exploration
Inc. and custom and toll zinc concentrates from a variety of sources, producing
refined zinc, cadmium, copper cake and sulphuric acid.
Noranda recently announced to establish the Noranda Income Fund and
maintain a 49% interest in the Fund, which will own the CEZ zinc refinery 45 .
2.6.6.3. Noranda Inc., Division CCR, Montréal, Québec
Noranda Inc., Division CCR operates a copper refinery in Montréal, Québec.
The plant commenced production in 1931 to process copper anodes produced by
the associated Horne smelter. The refinery now processes copper anodes
produced by Noranda’s smelters at Rouyn-Noranda and Murdochville, Québec
and from purchased copper scrap and blister cakes, producing high purity
cathode copper, copper sulphate, nickel sulphate, gold, silver and
platinum/palladium concentrate, selenium and tellurium.
With the closure of the Gaspé smelter, the CCR refinery is expected to process
some of the anodes produced by Noranda’s Altonorte smelter in Chile.
2.6.6.4. Noranda Inc., Division Mines Gaspé, Murdochville, Québec
Noranda Inc., Division Mines Gaspé operates an underground mine and a
copper smelter at Murdochville, Québec. The plant commenced production in
1955 to process copper concentrates produced by the associated mine-mill
complex. An acid plant entered service in 1974. The smelter now processes
copper concentrate produced by the company’s mines near Bathurst and
Miramichi, New Brunswick and custom concentrates from third party and a
variety of other sources. The smelter produces copper anodes and sulphuric
acid. Emission control dusts containing copper, lead, antimony, arsenic,
cadmium and other impurities are sent other Noranda plants.
On March 28, 2002, Noranda Inc. announced that, effective April 30, 2002, it
closes permanently its Gaspé copper smelter, located in Murdochville. Noranda
had previously announced on November 30, 2001, that it would temporarily close
the smelter a six month period 46 .
45 Noranda Inc. Press Releases April 2002. URL: http://www.noranda.ca/
46 Noranda Inc. Press Release, March 28, 2002. URL: http://www.noranda.ca/
29

2.6.6.5. Noranda Inc., Brunswick Smelting Division, Belledune, New
Brunswick
Noranda Inc., Brunswick Smelting Division operates a primary lead smelter at
Belledune, New Brunswick. The plant commenced production in 1967 and was
originally built and operated to process bulk lead-zinc concentrates using the
Imperial Smelting Process. An acid plant and fertilizer plant entered service in
1968. The smelter was converted to a lead smelter in 1972 and now processes
lead concentrate produced by the company’s mines near Bathurst and Miramichi,
New Brunswick, custom concentrates and other lead-bearing materials from a
variety of other sources. The smelter produces refined lead, lead alloys, silver
doré, sulphuric acid, and refined co-products containing copper, antimony,
arsenic, and other impurities.
30

2.7. Key Industrial Associations
Except for one company, all Canadian base metals smelters are members of the
Mining Association of Canada (MAC) 47 .
The Mining Association of Canada (MAC) is the national organization of the
Canadian mining industry. It comprises companies engaged in mineral
exploration, mining, smelting, refining and semifabrication. Member companies
account for the majority of Canada's output of metals and major industrial
materials.
The primary role of MAC is the presentation of industry information and views to
the federal government. The Association's broad functions are to promote the
interests of the industry nationally and internationally, to work with governments
on policies affecting minerals, to inform the public and to promote cooperation
between member firms to solve common problems. The MAC works closely with
provincial and other industry groups across Canada and in other countries.
A major part of the work of the Association is carried out by committees
comprising functional experts from the mining industry.
At present, MAC committees are active in the following fields:
• Customs and Sales Tax
• Environment
• Gold
• Health
• Human Resources and Productivity
• Public Relations
• Taxation
• Trade Policy
• Transportation
The MAC office is located at 350 Sparks Street, Suite 1105, Ottawa, Ontario,
K1R 7S8. The telephone number is (613) 233-9391 and fax number is (613) 233-
8897.
47 The Mining Association of Canada. URL: www.mining.ca
31

2.8. Economic Profile of Canadian Base Metals Smelting
Sector
2.8.1. The mining industry’s contribution to the Canadian economy
The following are some facts on the Canadian minerals and metals sector 48 :
• Canada produces more than 60 minerals and metals.
• In 2000, there were some 235 metal, non-metal and coal mines, 3000
stone quarries and sand and gravel pits, and over 50 non-ferrous
smelters, refineries and steel mills operating in Canada.
• More than 60% of Canadian non-fuel minerals production is accounted
for by Ontario (31%), Québec (20%) and Saskatchewan (12%).
• In 2000, about $321 million was spent on research and development.
Selected economic indicators 49 are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Selected Economic Indicators of the Mining Industry’s
Contribution to the Canadian Economy (year 2000)
Minerals and metals GDP* ($ billions) $ 27.97
Percentage of total Canadian GDP 3.55%
Total exports ($ billions) $ 49.1
Percentage of total Canadian exports 12.8%
Direct employment 401 386
* Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is made of Consumption (private and government) +
Investment + Trade Balance + Change in inventory
2.8.2. Review of the Canadian base metals production
Table 2 50 gives the quantity and value of base metals produced in each province
in year 2000. This data does not include metals recovered in Canadian smelters
from the treatment of foreign ores.
This table includes base metals only. It should be noted that important
coproducts such as silver, gold and platinum group metals are not included. For
example, the data does not take into account the value of silver coproduced with
lead at Noranda Brunswick
48 Natural Resources Canada, Natural Resources Statistics. URL:
www.nrcan.gc.ca/statistics/minerals/default.html
49 The Mining Association of Canada. URL: www.mining.ca
50 Natural Resources Canada, Minerals and Metals Sector, Minerals and Mining Statistics
Division, Canada’s Minerals Production, Preliminary Estimates 2000.
32

In terms of tonnage, zinc ranks first among base metals produced in Canada
followed by copper. However, in terms of economic value, nickel comes first
followed by zinc and copper.
Also in terms of value, almost half of base metals produced in Canada are mined
in Ontario followed by British Columbia and Québec.
Table 2: Estimate of Mineral Production of Canada, by Province, 2000
Cobalt
tonnes
($’000)
Copper
tonnes
($’000)
New Brunswick 9,423
(25,507)
Lead
tonnes
($’000)
66,570
(44,602)
Nickel
tonnes
($’000)
Zinc
tonnes
($’000)
Total
($’000)
237,535
(397,871) (467,980)
Québec 220
(11,047)
92,778
(251,150)
22,898
(298,205)
197,928
(331,529) (891,931)
Ontario 1,360
(68,269)
203,711
(551,446)
114,350
(1,489,186)
85,365
(142,986) (2,251,887)
Manitoba 433
(21,764)
47,258
(127,928)
43,778
(570,127)
80,929
(135,557) (855,376)
Saskatchewan 625
(1,692)
British Columbia 269,656
(729,959)
44,596
(29,880)
1,033
(1,731) (3,423)
147,710
(247,415) (1,007,254)
Nunavut 31,883
(21,361)
Canada
tonnes
($’000)
2,013
(101,080)
623,451
(1,687,681)
143,049
(95,843)
181,027
(2,357,518)
185,185
(310,184) (331,545)
935,686
(1,567,274) (5,809,396)
2.8.3. Review of base metals smelting in Canada
The figures shown in Table 2 does not necessarily represent smelter production
within each jurisdiction because ores in one province could be smelted in another
province or exported as concentrates. In the same manner Canadian smelters
process concentrates from ores mined in other countries.
Table 3 shows the production rate 51 of each facility for 2000.
51 Personal communication from Mining Association of Canada to Serge Langdeau April 3, 2002
33

Table 3: 2000 Production rates of Canadian Base Metals Smelters and
Refineries
Province Company Metals products Production
(tonnes)
British Columbia Teck Cominco Lead, Zinc 364,200
Alberta Corefco/Sherritt Nickel & Cobalt 30,800 52
Manitoba Hudson Bay Copper, Zinc 153,900
Inco Thompson Nickel 49,441
Ontario Falconbridge Kidd Copper, Zinc 264,361
Falconbridge
Sudbury
Nickel, Copper Cobalt
(reported as metals
content not total matte)
64,391
Inco Copper Cliff Nickel, Copper 216,000
Inco Port Colborne Cobalt 1,472
Québec Noranda Horne Copper 182,352
Noranda CEZ Zinc 263,112
Noranda CCR Copper 314,600
Noranda Gaspé Copper 115,531
New Brunswick Noranda Brunswick Lead 105,000
Table 4 53 shows the quantities and values of base metals exported from Canada
in 2000.
It is estimated that 80% of Canadian mineral and metals production is destined
for export. With respect to base metals production, Canada ranks second for
nickel, third for zinc and fifth for copper and lead.
In 2000, base metals exports were valued at $ 5.9 billion and accounted for 12%
of all minerals and metals exported from Canada. In terms of value, nickel is the
most important base metal exported followed at an almost equal value by zinc
and copper.
52 Canadian Mines Handbook 2001-02, Southam Publications Company, August 2001
53 Canadian Mines Handbook 2001-02, Southam Publications Company, August 2001
34

Table 4: Canadian Base Metals Exports (year 2000)
Base Metals
Quantities
(kg)
Values
($’000)
Cobalt 5,235,638 234,096
Copper 844,133,975 1,488,439
Lead 267,952,320 220,087
Nickel 181,801,334 2,366,529
Zinc 1,002,389,491 1,583,741
Table 5 54 displays the number of employees working at each facility.
Table 5: Number of Employees
Province Company Metals produces Number of employees
British Columbia Teck Cominco Lead, Zinc 1,780
Alberta Corefco/Sherritt Nickel & Cobalt 600 55
Manitoba Hudson Bay Copper, Zinc 1,820 56
Inco Thompson Nickel 1,375
Ontario Falconbridge Kidd Copper, Zinc 900
Falconbridge
Sudbury
Nickel, Copper Cobalt
(reported as metals
content not total matte)
1,450 57
Inco Copper Cliff Nickel, Copper, 4,400 58
Inco Port Colborne Cobalt 200
Québec Noranda Horne Copper 850
Noranda CEZ Zinc 757 59
Noranda CCR Copper 764
Noranda Gaspé Copper 325
New Brunswick Noranda Brunswick Lead 503
54 Canadian Mines Handbook 2001-02, Southam Publications Company, August 2001.
55 Fort Saskatchewan, Economic Development. URL: http://www.city.fortsaskatchewan.ab.ca/fortsask/homepage.nsf
56 Number includes employees in mines, mills and smelters. Personal communication, from
Wayne Fraser, Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting to Serge Langdeau April 10, 2002
57 Falconbridge. URL: http://www.falconbridge.com/. The number is the total number of
employees at the Sudbury site and includes underground mines, mill and smelter.
58 Inco. URL: http://www.incoltd.com/socialresponsibility/snapshots/sudbury.asp. The number is
total number of employees at the Copper Cliff complex which includes mining, milling, smelting
and refining.
59 Noranda. URL:
http://my.noranda.com/Noranda/Corporate/Our+Businesses/Zinc/Operations/CEZinc.htm
35

2.8.4. Pricing of base metals
Before reading this section, it should be noted that smelters have relatively little
exposure to metal price. Mines assume most of the price risk, and mine
revenues are cyclical as a result. The main purpose of the discussion below is to
indicate that the Base Metals Smelters operate in a price-taker environment.
2.8.4.1. Cobalt
During much of its history, the price of cobalt 60 was set primarily by producers.
Before World War II, Belgian, British, Canadian, Finnish and French producers
agreed to control cobalt supply and to maintain a uniform price. After WW II,
prices quoted by the Belgian Congo were generally followed by other producers.
Beginning in the mid-1980’s, Zaire and Zambia cooperated in setting the
producer price. In the early 1990’s, the African producers lost much of their
influence on cobalt prices. The producer price was renamed the reference price
in 1994, and since then, most cobalt has been sold at free market prices.
Because cobalt is considered to be a critical and strategic metal, purchases for
and sales from Government stockpiles have added to supply and demand and
have influenced cobalt prices.
2.8.4.2. Copper
Historically, wirebar was the dominant form of copper traded and the price for
refined copper wirebar was the “bellwether” price for copper 61 . By the middle
1970’s, technology had changed to continuous casting making the high-grade
copper cathode price the base price for most transaction.
Copper products from each stage of processing have their own independent
markets and are traded globally. Each product has its own pricing procedure that
is linked, for the most part, to its copper content and the market price for refined
copper. Copper concentrates are purchased on the basis of the refined copper
market value of their recoverable content, with charges taken for smelting and
refining. Penalties may be assessed by the smelter/refiner for unwanted
contaminants and credits may be given for recoverable byproducts. Similarly,
prices for copper scrap are discounted from the refined value of the recoverable
copper content to allow for processing costs and profit. Market conditions for
each type of scrap will affect their prices.
Until the late 1970’s, US copper prices were generally referenced to the producer
price. As a result of the nationalization of production in Africa and Chile, the US’
influence on world market weakened. As a result, pricing changed to a COMEX-
60 US Geological Survey, Minerals Information, Metal Prices in the United States through 1998.
URL: minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/metal_prices
61 US Geological Survey, Minerals Information Metal Prices in the United States through 1998.
URL: minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/metal_prices
36

ased 62 pricing system. In response to the greater volatility of COMEX-based
pricing, producers and consumers have increasingly used futures markets to
hedge their sales and purchases.
Although the price of copper has been influenced by business cycles,
government policies, and technological changes, production costs and the
balance between supply and demand have ultimately been the principal
determinants.
2.8.4.3. Lead
Historically, lead has not been and is not a price-elastic commodity 63 . Its
significant uses in any given area have not depended on prices and, for the most
part, other metals cannot substitute for lead in these cases.
Prior to the early 1900’s, uses of lead were primarily for shot, bullets, water lines
and pipes, pewter, brass, glazes, paints and coatings, burial vault liners and
leaded glass or crystal.
With the advent of the electrical age and communication, cable lead and solders
became preeminent. With the growth in production of motorized vehicles and the
associated use of starting-lighting-ignition (SLI) lead-acid storage batteries,
demand for lead increased again. In addition to their continued uses in SLI
applications, new uses of storage batteries have expanded. After WW II,
demand for lead accelerated further and peaked between 1977 and 1979 due to
demand for leaded gasoline and with electronic developments.
With the near phase out of lead in gasoline, paints, and water systems and the
imposition of strict environmental production controls, the demand for lead
decreased.
The industry has recovered since owing to massive retrenchment in the primary
and secondary producing sectors with attendant cost reductions, and to
expansion in demand for SLI and industrial-type battery systems.
2.8.4.4. Nickel
In the late 1990’s, stainless steel production accounts for more that 60% of world
nickel consumption and is the primary factor in nickel pricing 64 . For the next 20
years, stainless steel production is expected to play a prominent role in
determining nickel price levels.
Nickel, as cobalt, is needed to make superalloys for engines that propel jet
aircraft and guided missiles and as such is considered as critical commodity in
wartime. Thus, merchant nickel prices traditionally spike in wartime when
62 COMEX is a division of the New York Mercantile Exchange. URL: http://www.nymex.com/
63 US Geological Survey, Minerals Information Metal Prices in the United States through 1998.
URL: minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/metal_prices
64 US Geological Survey, Minerals Information, Metal Prices in the United States through 1998.
URL: minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/metal_prices
37

demand exceeds supply while producer prices, in contrast, have been frozen in
several crises by war-production boards or emergency price-control regulations.
In the 1960’s, Canada was the dominant nickel-producing country in the world, its
two largest nickel producers (Inco and Falconbridge) accounted for 48% of world
production. In 1969, the industry was shut down by a prolonged series of strikes.
This spurred producers accelerated efforts to expand existing operations and to
bring new projects onstream. Between 1969 and 1974, new mines and
processing plants were commissioned in Australia, Canada, the Dominican
Republic and New Caledonia. The increased capacity resulted in a reduction of
Canada’s share of the world market and thus a reduction of its influence on
prices. This was a turning point in the history of nickel marketing.
On April 23, 1979, nickel contracts were introduced for the first time on the
London Metal Exchange (LME). Leading nickel producers opposed the LME
pricing mechanism. Nickel business on the LME, however, steadily grew in spite
of the producers’ opposition, convincing the producers to reverse their position.
Producer participation has increased considerably since 1985. Today, LME
prices are the principal pricing mechanism used worldwide by producers and
consumers of nickel.
2.8.4.5. Zinc
During the first half of the twentieth century, two pricing centres emerged in the
US, St.-Louis MO and New York, NY 65 . The New York price was usually higher
because it included shipping charges.
In the 1970’s, Metals Week became the main pricing medium for zinc in the US
and the weighted average price, which is based on daily sales was introduced in
1980.
In the 1980’s, US refinery production supplied only about one-third of US
demand. As a result, world price became the dominant factor. The world pricing
basis for zinc is essentially the London Metal Exchange (LME), which introduced
its first zinc contract in 1915.
For more that ten years now, the price for zinc remained rather uneventful,
reflecting the supply and demand of the market.
2.8.4.6. London Metal Exchange
As indicated above, except for cobalt, all of the base metals discussed in this
report are traded on the London Metal Exchange (LME) 66 . The next paragraphs
described what is the LME and how it works.
The origins of the London Metal Exchange can be traced as far back as the
opening of the Royal Exchange in 1571. Since its opening in 1877, the main
purpose of the LME has been to serve as a futures market.
65 US Geological Survey, Minerals Information Metal Prices in the United States through 1998,.
URL: minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/metal_prices
66 The London Metal Exchange Limited. URL:: http://www.lme.co.uk/
38

The LME has a multi-tiered membership structure with a current membership of
over 100 firms. These are divided into different categories depending on their
interest in the Exchange. The main division is between broker members and
trade members. The broker members are subdivided into three categories: ring
dealing members, associated broker clearing members and associated broker
members.
The LME operates as a 24-hour market through inter-office trading between its
members and customers with defined periods of open-outcry trading between
ring dealing members, which takes place on the market floor.
The LME also serves as a centre for physical trading and has an international
network of approved warehouses.
The LME is regulated by the British Treasury under the Financial Services Act of
1985.
39

3. EMISSION SOURCES AND DATA
3.1. Emissions Data Sources
3.1.1. Total Particulate Matter (TPM) and Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) and
Other substances toxic pursuant to the Canadian Environmental
Protection Act (CEPA)
3.1.1.1. Strategic Options and Hatch Associates Reports
The Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) requires the Minister of the
Environment and the Minister of Health to prepare and publish a Priority
Substances List (PSL) that identifies substances that may be harmful to the
environment or constitute a danger to human health. CEPA then requires both
Ministers to assess the substances on this list and determine whether they are
toxic as defined by section 64 of the Act.
The first CEPA Priority Substances List, which was published in 1989, identified
44 substances for priority assessment. Assessment of these substances was
completed in 1994; 25 substances were declared toxic, 6 were declared nontoxic,
and for 13 substances, insufficient information was available to make a
determination.
In 1994, Environment Canada established a consultative, multi-stakeholder
Strategic Options Process (SOP) to identify and evaluate options and provide
advice to the Ministers regarding management of substances declared toxic
under CEPA. The Base Metals Smelting Sector (BMSS) releases substances
that have been declared CEPA toxic. The BMSS SOP started in July 1995. An
Issue Table be established for the BMSS SOP to prepare a Strategic Options
Report containing recommendations to Ministers regarding: “the most costeffective
options for the sector to reduce emissions of and exposure to CEPA
toxic substances; and the best means to implement the recommended options
(regulatory, voluntary, market based instrument, etc.)”.
At its first meeting in May 1996, the Issue Table (IT) agreed to focus its efforts on
the following substances (hereafter collectively referred to as the CEPA
Substances for the purposes of this Report):
• inorganic arsenic compounds;
• inorganic cadmium compounds;
• dioxins and furans;
• lead;
• mercury; and
• oxidic, sulphidic and soluble inorganic nickel compounds.
40

The BMSS IT held ten meetings between May 1996 and February 1997 to
produce this Strategic Options Report (SOR). Stakeholders represented at the
IT included the federal government (members and observers from Environment
Canada, Health Canada, Natural Resources Canada and Industry Canada), the
base metals smelting industry (including two secondary lead smelters), some
provincial governments, and public advocacy groups (including one individual
representing the Trail Lead Program, a community interest group; one individual
representing the Canadian Lung Association; and two individuals representing
the Toxics Caucus of the Canadian Environmental Network).
During its deliberations, the IT considered information available in the public
domain, information generated by the various members of the IT and information
generated by consultants.
The SOP culminated in the development of a Strategic Options Report 67 . Ten
recommendations were made including release reduction targets and schedules,
release standards, and the development of site-specific Environmental
Management Plans.
Further to the acceptance of the SOR recommendations by the Minister, Hatch
Associates Ltd. 68 was contracted by Environment Canada to assess the
appropriateness of the content and commitments made in the context of the
Strategic Options Process (SOP) for the Base Metals Smelting Sector (BMSS)
and to identify the best environmental release performance in the BMSS.
In addition to the toxic substances addressed under the SOP, Hatch Associates
was also asked to include data on Total Particulate Matter (TPM) and Sulphur
Dioxide (SO 2 ).
Preliminary information on industry practices and releases was obtained through
publicly available sources such as annual reports, papers and websites. This
information was validated and supplemented through the use of a detailed
questionnaire. An Environmental Performance Profile Data Sheet was
developed in consultation with members of the Mining Association of Canada
(MAC). Available data for each site was entered into the questionnaire by Hatch
Associates and these partially completed questionnaires were distributed to
industry. The information on releases was analyzed to determine overall trends
for the CEPA-toxics, Total Particulate Matter (TPM) and Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 )
and to assess releases to air on a site-specific basis for each parameter for the
most recent (1998) data. Potential release reduction options were analyzed and
future releases were predicted (2008 and beyond).
To address the SOR recommendations and other emerging issues, Environment
Canada has already sponsored two National Workshops on the Environmental
Performance of BMS Sector and the development of Environmental Performance
67 Strategic Options for the Management of Toxic Substances from the Base Metals Smelting
Sector - Report of the Stakeholder Consultations, June 23, 1997.
68 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
41

Standards for the sector. Participants of the workshops included representatives
from the federal and provincial governments, industry, non-governmental
organizations, and the Aboriginal community.
An important outcome of the first Workshop, which was reiterated at the second,
is an agreement from stakeholders to work together in developing environmental
performance standards and initiatives to reduce releases from the BMSS through
the formation of and participation in a Base-metals Environmental Multistakeholder
Advisory Group (BEMAG).
42

3.1.1.2. Smelters Emissions Testing Program
A recommendation of the SOR called for testing and reporting of dioxins and
furans from smelters processing chlorinated scrap or chlorinated substances.
Further knowledge on the formation and release of dioxins and furans from a
variety of industrial sources indicated that many factors can play a role in the
release of these substances, and as such, all base metals smelting facilities
could potentially release dioxins and furans.
In an effort to address the SOR recommendation respecting dioxins and furans,
as well as other drivers such as the CWS for Dioxins and Furans, a Smelters
Emissions Testing Program (SET Program) was established to assist in the
characterization and quantification of dioxins and furans releases from this
sector. To aid its implementation, a SET Technical Advisory Network (SET
Network) was formed to exchange information on dioxins and furans emissions
testing of base metals smelters and refineries.
To date the SET Network has focused its attention on two areas:
• the development of a ‘Generic Emissions Testing Protocol’, which
provides guidance in the selection of sources for emission testing, and
provides guidance on the collection of process and operational
information during the emission testing; and
• emission testing plans and activities at the base metals smelting
facilities.
To date, all primary facilities have committed to conducting emission testing for
dioxins and furans by the end of 2002, if not already done so.
It is anticipated that the results of the SET Network’s activities will result in a
better understanding of releases of dioxins and furans from this sector, in terms
of emission release concentrations (pg ITEQ/Nm 3 ) and estimated annual
releases (grams ITEQ/year) 69 .
3.1.1.3. National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) I 70
The National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) is a legislated, national, publicly
accessible database of pollutants released in the Canadian environment. It
requires facilities to report annually on releases and transfers of over 260
substances of concern if they meet certain reporting requirements.
The Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999 (CEPA 1999) requires
Environment Canada to have a “national inventory of releases of pollutants” and
69 Personal Communication, from Sarah Ternan, Environment Canada to Serge Langdeau April
25, 2002
70 Environment Canada, National Pollutant Release Inventory. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/npri/npri_home_e.cfm
43

equires Environment Canada to “publish the national inventory of releases of
pollutants”. If they meet criteria, owners and operators of facilities are required
by CEPA 1999 to report to the NPRI. The results of the first NPRI were released
in 1995, it covered data on pollutants released during 1993.
The NPRI is a consistently evolving program. Since the NPRI began,
substances have been added and deleted; the thresholds at which some
substances have to be reported have been reduced; and requirements for
reporting on recycling and energy recovery have been added. The year 2000 list
of reportable substances was 268 substances.
As of 2002, the list of substances will require the reporting of criteria air
contaminants (e.g., oxides of nitrogen (as NO 2 ), sulphur dioxide, particulate
matter (total, PM 10 , PM 2.5 ), carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds).
Base metals smelting facilities have been required to report any releases of
dioxins and furans and hexachlorobenzene to NPRI since 2000. Other recent
modifications include:
• the addition of hexavalent chromium at a lower threshold;
• lower thresholds for cadmium (and its compounds), lead (and its
compounds), tetraethyl lead, mercury (and its compounds), and arsenic
(and its compounds);
• an effluent based trigger for reporting from municipal water treatment
facilities;
• the delisting of phosphoric acid.
3.1.1.4. Accelerated Reduction/Elimination of Toxics (ARET)
ARET 71 is a voluntary, non-regulatory program that targets 117 toxic substances,
including 30 that persist in the environment and may accumulate in living
organisms.
ARET’s long term goal is:
• Virtual elimination of emission of 30 persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic
substances
• Reduction of another 87 toxic substances to levels insufficient to cause
harm
ARET’s short-term goal for the year 2000 is to reduce:
• Persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic substance emissions by 90 percent
• All other toxic substance emissions by 50 percent
ARET participants voluntarily commit to reduce their emissions of toxic
substances to the environment. Their action plans, which outline how they will
71 Environment Canada. Accelerated Reduction/Elimination of Toxics. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/aret/homee.html
44

achieve their commitments, are publicly available. Each year, participants
monitor their emissions and report their results.
Results to date (1998) show that ARET participants have made significant
progress toward the goals committed to in their action plans. Together, 316
facilities from companies and government organizations have reduced toxic
substance emissions to the environment by 26,358 tonnes - a decrease of 67%
from base year levels to December 1998. Participants also commit to further
reduce their emissions of toxic substances by another 3,052 tonnes by the year
2000, for a total reduction of 29,410 tonnes, a 75 per-cent reduction from baseyear
levels.
The Mining Association of Canada (MAC) represents the mining and smelting
sector in the ARET program. Involvement of MAC members in ARET is at 97 per
cent. Emissions reported to ARET from this sector include emissions of Zinc,
Cyanides, Lead, Hydrogen Sulphide, Arsenic, Nickel and Copper.
3.1.1.5. Assessments of Releases from Primary and Secondary
Copper Smelters and Refineries and Primary and
Secondary Zinc Plants
Releases from Primary and Secondary Copper Smelters and Copper Refineries
and Releases from Primary and Secondary Zinc Smelters and Zinc Refineries
were added to the Priority Substances List (PSL) following a recommendation
made by the Minister’s Expert Advisory Panel on the Second Priority Substances
List 72 .
“ The individual chemical components of releases
from these facilities include particulate matter, copper,
lead, arsenic and sulphuric acid. (…) given the large
volumes released and the persistent and hazardous
nature of some of these substances, an assessment
is required to determine the nature and extent of local
and long-range ecological and health effects.”
(Ministers’ Expert Advisory Panel. 1995. Report of the
Minister’s Expert Advisory Panel on the Second
Priority Substances List, under the Canadian
Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). Government of
Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, 26pp.
Releases from copper smelters and refineries and zinc plants are complex
mixtures containing varying amounts of numerous substances. As most releases
(on a mass basis) are discharged to air, these assessments focused on air
emissions. Releases to water from all but three of these facilities will be subject
to the revised Metal Mining Effluent Regulation (MMER) of the Fisheries Act
which includes a requirement for environmental effects monitoring. Such
72 Environment Canada / Health Canada, Assessment Report: Releases from Primary and
Secondary Copper Smelters and Copper Refineries, Releases from Primary and Secondary Zinc
Smelters and Zinc Refineries Draft Report, June 28, 2000.
45

eleases were therefore not examined in these assessments. Screening
evaluations of the environmental effects of aquatic releases from the other three
facilities (Teck Cominco-Trail, Noranda-CCR and Noranda-CEZinc) that do not
report their aquatic releases under the current regulations and guidelines were
conducted.
Emissions to air of the following components were assessed: sulphur dioxide
(SO 2 ); the metals (largely in the form of particulate matter) copper, zinc, nickel,
lead, cadmium, chromium and arsenic; and particulate matter less than or equal
to 10 µm (PM 10 ).
3.1.2. Other Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC)
Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) 73 include total particulate matter (TPM),
particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns (PM 10 ), particulate matter less
than or equal to 2.5 microns (PM 2.5 ), NOx, SOx, VOCs, CO and NH 3 .
For the Base Metals Smelting Sector, the two main criteria air contaminants of
concern are particulate matter (TPM, PM 10 and PM 2.5 ), and sulphur dioxide, as
discussed previously. Based on the Environment Canada's 1995 Criteria Air
Contaminant (CAC) inventory, emissions from the Base Metals Smelting Sector
were 3,532 tonnes, 75 tonnes, and 399 tonnes for NOx, VOC, and CO,
respectively. When these are related to the total national emissions from all
industrial sectors, NOx ( 620,351 tonnes), VOC (940,821 tonnes ), and CO
(2,177,266 tonnes) emissions from the BMS sector account for less than 1% of
the total. The focus will therefore be on SO 2 which represented 36% of all SO 2
emissions from industrial sources. For this reason, NOx, VOC and CO
emissions from the BMS sector are considered to be relatively very small and will
therefore not be considered further in this report.
3.1.3. Greenhouse Gases
Canada's Greenhouse Gas Inventory: 1997 Emissions and Removals with
Trends included in the national inventory emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) 74
from the oxidation of fossil-fuel based reducing agents in the production of other
metals (excluding iron and steel, aluminum, and magnesium). The report found
that "emissions from carbon evolving from the processing of ores are not
inventoried due to lack of data. These are assumed to be small."
A recent report 75 concluded that the non-ferrous (base metals plus magnesium
and other metals excluding aluminum) made a contribution of 0.5% to Canadian
Greenhouse Gas emissions.
73 Environment Canada. Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/ape/cape_home_e.cfm
74 Environment Canada Canada’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1997 Emissions and Removals
with Trends, April 1999. URL: http://www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/ghg/ghg_home_e.cfm
75 The Minerals and Metals Working Group of the Industry Issues Table, Minerals and Metals
Foundation Paper, Prepared for The National Climate Change Secretariat, March 1999.
46

All the companies mentioned in this report as well as the Mining Association of
Canada are participants in the Voluntary Challenge Registry Inc. (VCR) 76 , which
is a non-profit partnership between Industry and governments across Canada to
address the Greenhouse gas issue. Participants in the VCR Inc. have developed
action plans to reduce their emissions of GHG and they also submit annual
progress reports and report emissions to VCR Inc.
The Minerals and Metals Foundation Paper has identified a series of direct and
indirect measures (pp. 164-167) to achieve energy efficiency improvements and
reduce emissions of Greenhouse Gases, which will not be repeated in this report
but should be taken into consideration while developing final options for reducing
sulphur dioxide emissions.
3.2. Description of Base Metals Smelters Processes and
Associated Installed Control Technologies 77,78
Before reviewing and analyzing emissions from the Canadian Base Metals
Smelting Sector review the various smelting processes currently in use and their
associated emission control technologies are outlined.
3.2.1. Teck Cominco Ltd., Trail Operations, Trail, British Columbia
Figure 2 and Figure 3 contain schematic block flow diagrams for the Lead Plant
and Zinc Plant respectively. Each shows the general sequence of the major unit
operations, from the receipt of raw materials to the production of metals. When
these unit operations are referred to in the text, the corresponding words starts
with an upper case letter. These diagrams are highly simplified and are included
solely to aid in the discussion and understanding of the pollution control at the
facility.
3.2.1.1. Lead plant
The feed mixture for the smelter consists of lead concentrates, silica and
limestone for fluxing, zinc plant residues, recycled battery scrap, dry fine coal for
fuel and coke (about 5 to 15 mm). All but the coke are carefully proportioned in
the Feed Proportioning area, and then dried to less than 1 percent moisture and
milled to disintegrate lumps in the Drying and Milling plant. Conventional dust
and fume control systems capture and revert the fugitive Particulate Matter (PM)
in these areas.
In the Smelting and Reduction step, the dry feed is injected at the top of the
Kivcet furnace reaction shaft with the oxygen. Recycle PM (from various
sources) and coke are also added. The sulphur in the lead sulphide concentrate
76 URL: http://www.vcr-mvr.ca/
77 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
78 Modifications on description and flow sheets of processes are based on personal
communication from Randy Sentis, Teck Cominco to Serge Langdeau, April 11, 2002
47

and the fine coal ignite instantly to form a hot, concentrated sulphur dioxide gas.
The lead, zinc, iron and other metals form metal oxides. The fluxing agents and
the oxides form a semi-fused slag which falls to the bottom of the first
compartment in the furnace along with the coarse coke. The coke collects as a
surface layer, called a “coke checker,” floating on top of the molten slag. When
the metal oxides percolate through this layer of burning coke, they are reduced
and the lead is converted to crude metal (crude lead bullion).
One key environmental feature of this process is its ability to efficiently treat
feeds with a high proportion of iron, zinc and lead oxides (or sulphates) in the
feed. Thus, substantial quantities of stockpile (and ongoing production of) zinc
plant residue can be economically recycled.
The bullion continues to settle through the molten slag layer beneath the coke
checker. Together with the zinc-bearing iron slag, the bullion passes under a
partition wall into a second compartment, which is an electric furnace. This
partition wall extends into the molten slag to prevent any egress of hot sulphur
dioxide gas into the furnace. The gas passes vertically through a radiant waste
heat boiler and then through a horizontally connected convection waste heat
boiler, followed by an electrostatic precipitator. The gas is cooled further in an
evaporative cooler and then mixed with the Zinc Plant sulphur dioxide gas for
further cleaning and acid manufacture.
The larger second compartment serves primarily as a settling area where the
heat from large graphite electrodes keeps the bullion-slag bath in a molten state.
The lighter slag continues to float to the surface and the heavier bullion sinks to
the bottom of the compartment. This separation enables them to be tapped
separately from the furnace.
The slag contains virtually all the iron and zinc. To recover the zinc, the molten
slag is transferred to the Slag Fuming area and charged into the slag fuming
furnace where fine coal and air are injected into it. This injection generates more
heat and causes the zinc to vaporize to form a mainly zinc oxide fume (also
contains residual lead and silver, cadmium, indium and germanium), which is
collected in baghouse, leached with soda ash to remove fluorine and chlorine,
filtered and further treated in the leaching area of the Zinc Plant to recover the
zinc, indium, germanium and cadmium. The cleaned gas from the baghouse
goes directly to the stack.
The molten slag is held in the slag furnace until the practical limit of 2 percent
zinc in slag is reached. Then the slag is poured into a stream of water to solidify
it into a black sand-like barren slag which is collected and sold to various cement
manufacturers. This is an effective solid waste control system.
The bullion produced in the Kivcet furnace contains silver, gold, bismuth and
copper which must be removed before the lead can be sold to customers,
primarily battery manufacturers. The copper is removed in the Drossing Plant
adjacent to the Kivcet furnace. There, the Continuous Drossing Furnace cools
the lead bullion down from 900 degrees C to just over 400 degrees C. This
cooling step forces copper matte to form and float to the surface where it can be
48

emoved for processing in the Copper Products Plant. The bullion, which still
contains silver, gold, bismuth, arsenic and antimony, is next put through a
“softening” stage which uses oxygen to remove some of the arsenic and
antimony in the form of a slag. The bullion is then transferred to the Lead
Refinery.
For electrorefining, the softened bullion is re-melted and cast into anodes which
are placed in the electrorefining cells together with pure lead cathode starting
sheets. Lead is corroded from the anodes and deposited on the cathodes. This
occurs in batch cycles of five days, after which the cathodes and the anodes are
removed from the cells. The cathode deposits are washed and cast into ingots
for sale.
The impurities in the crude bullion are retained in the anodes in the form of a
black slime which is collected and partially dried before treatment in the Silver
and Gold Recovery area (Silver Plant). Here the slimes are dried, and then
melted to form a slag which is reverted to the Kivcet furnace, and a metallic
phase called black metal. The black metal is treated for the removal of antimony
and arsenic which are subsequently converted to copper arsenate and sodium
antimonate. The antimony and arsenic slag from the previous softening slag are
converted to antimonial and arsenical lead products in the Lead Alloys plant.
The metal, after the removal of arsenic and antimony, is further processed to
produce bismuth metal, silver and gold.
The process gases are collected, cleaned in baghouses and a packed bed
scrubber prior to release to the atmosphere. The solid wastes are recycled.
3.2.1.2. Zinc plant
The principal feedstocks for the zinc production processes are coming from the
Sullivan and Red Dog mine concentrates. Various custom concentrates are also
treated. Approximately 25 percent of the zinc concentrate is reground and then
leached in an autoclave with oxygen and sulphuric acid, under pressure. The
remaining portion of the concentrate is roasted (in two parallel fluid bed roaster
and dry gas handling systems) to produce calcine which is leached with sulphuric
acid at atmospheric pressure.
In Oxygen Pressure Leaching, elemental sulphur, a zinc sulphate solution and a
residue are produced. Sulphur Separation and Sulphur Cleaning produces a
Clean Sulphur which is sold. The zinc sulphate leach solution and plumbojarosite
leach residue are pumped from Sulphur Separation to the Acid Leaching circuit.
During Roasting, approximately one-half of the oxidized concentrate (calcine)
leaves the roaster via the bed overflow and the rest is carried out by roaster
process gas. Calcine is separated as the gas passes through Gas Cooling (a
waste heat boiler), Cycloning and Electrostatic Precipitation. Most of the airborne
calcine is collected from the waste heat boiler and cyclones, with less than 5%
being collected in the electrostatic precipitator. Gases from the electrostatic
precipitators from each roaster line are combined. This mixed gas is further
cleaned and cooled in Wet Gas Cleaning where it is first scrubbed for fine dust
49

and fume removal, and cooling, then passed through wet electrostatic
precipitators for mist removal. Mercury Removal is the final cleaning step before
the gas is processed for the recovery of sulphur dioxide.
Approximately 95 percent of the sulphur dioxide is recovered from the cleaned
gas in the Acid Plant which has three parallel lines. Some of the marketable
sulphuric acid product is used to make ammonium sulphate fertilizer.
Residual sulphur dioxide and acid mist remaining in the Acid Plant tailgas is
removed by ammonia scrubbing followed by a mist eliminator. The ammonia
scrubbing system produces an ammonium bisulphite product that is acidified with
sulphuric acid to produce an ammonium sulphate solution and a 100% SO 2 gas
stream. Both are subsequently converted to marketable products - crystalline
ammonium sulphate and liquid SO 2 .
The calcine from Roasting is cooled and then comminuted in the Calcine
Grinding step. The ground calcine is leached in sulphuric acid solutions to
produce a zinc sulphate solution and a residue. The residue is separated from
the solution in the Acid Thickening and Filtration areas, and then recycled to the
Smelting and Reduction area in the Lead Plant.
Zinc oxide fume, produced from the smelter Slag Fuming process, is also
leached in sulphuric acid to produce a zinc sulphate solution and a residue. The
residue is filtered, washed and recycled back to the Kivcet furnace. A solvent
extraction process integrated in the zinc oxide leaching circuit is used for the
production of indium and germanium products. (These operations are not shown
on the flowsheet.)
Zinc sulphate solutions produced from Oxygen Pressure Leaching and oxide
fume leaching are added to Acid Leaching, which is the first step in leaching the
roaster calcine. Acid Leaching is followed by Neutral Leaching where fresh
calcine is added to the acidic zinc sulphate solution to utilize some of the
solution’s acid. Neutral Thickening separates the solids into a slurry which is
recycled, while the overflow is pumped from the leaching area to Purification.
In Purification, sulphuric acid and zinc dust are used in various stages to
selectively remove impurities and by-products. Cadmium bars, extrusions and
balls are made for sale, thallium is produced for sale, and gypsum and
copper/cobalt/nickel cake are reverted to the Lead Plant.
The Electrowinning process utilize electrolysis to remove zinc from the purified
solution and deposit it on aluminum cathodes. The pure zinc is subsequently
stripped from the aluminum starter sheet, melted, alloyed and cast into various
shapes for market.
The Weak Acid Effluent from the scrubbing of the zinc roaster gas, other Zinc
Plant aqueous process bleeds, Lead Plant effluents and site run-off water are
treated in the Effluent Treatment Plant. Quicklime is added to precipitate a heavy
metals and gypsum sludge. The sludge is dewatered and the resulting residue is
reverted to the Kivcet furnace in the Lead Plant. Treated effluent is discharged to
the Columbia River as are other effluents via two other outfalls.
50

Lead Concentrate
Zinc Residue
Lead Scrap
Coal
Flux
Oxygen
Feed
Proportioning
Drying and
Milling
Recycle
Dross
3
Gas Cleaning
in a Baghouse
Thallium
For Sale
Gas Cleaning in
a Wet Scrubber
ETP
Cleaned Gas
To Stack
Cleaned Gas
To Atmosphere
Copper Matte
To Products Plant
Coke
Smelting and
Reduction
Drossing
Plant
Electrorefining
Lead Ingots
For Sale
Coal 5
Gas Cooling in
WHB
1
Gas Cleaning in an
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Recycle
PM
2
Slag
Fuming
Gas Cooling in a
WHB
4
Recycle
Slag
3
Antimony and
Arsenic
Slags
Antimony
and
Arsenic
Oxides
Silver and Gold
Recovery
Granulated Slag
For Sale
Antimony and Arsenic
To Copper Products Plant
Silver Bars for Sale
Gold Bars for Sale
Bismuth Bars for Sale
Gas Cooling by
Water Injection
Zinc Dusts
Gas Cleaning
in a Baghouse
Lead Alloys
Plant
Antimonial and Arsenical
Lead Products
LEGEND
Main Process Stream
Recycle Stream
Gas Stream
E
T
P
SO 2 Gas
To Acid Plant
Clean Gas
To Stack
(1) WHB = Waste Heat Boiler which is part of the Kivcet Furnace
(2) PM = Particulate Matter
(3) Recycle to Smelting and Reduction
(4) The WHB is an integral part of the slag fuming fiurnace
(5) To Slag Fuming
Soda Ash
Fume Leach
Halide Bearing Water
ZnO Slurry
To Zinc Plant
Figure 2: Teck Cominco Lead Plant
51

Figure 3: Teck Cominco Zinc Plant
Liquid SO 2
To Sale
Acid Fixation
Solution
To Ammonium
Zinc
Concentrate
Zinc
Concentrate
Roasting
Gas Cooling
Acid Plant
Ammonia
Scrubbing
Stack
To Atmosphere
Sulphuric Acid
To Fertilizer & Metallurgical
Plants and Sales
Regrinding
Sulphide
Calcine
Cooling
Cycloning
Electrostatic
Precipitaion
Wet Gas
Cleaning
Mercury
Removal
Impure Calomel
To Sale
Oxygen
Pressure
Leaching
Sulphur
Separation
Calcine
Grinding
Acid
Leaching
Calcine
Lead Plant
Weak
Acid
Effluent
Other Effluents
Quicklime
Effluent
Treatment
Plant
Treated Effluent
To Columbia River
Residue
To Lead Plant
Sulphur
Cleaning
Acid
Thickening
Filtration
Residue
To Lead Plant
Return Acid
Neutral
Leaching
Neutral
Thickening
Zinc Dust
Purification
Zinc Dust
Cadmium
Sponge
Cadmium
Plant
Gypsum
To Lead Plant
Thallium
To Storage
Cadmium Balls, Extrusion Bars
To Market
Colbalt/Copper Cake
To Lead Plant
Clean Sulphur
Electrowinning
Melting
Casting
Cast Zinc Products
To Market
Alloy Metals
(Al, Pb)
52

3.2.2. Sherritt International Corporation, Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta 79
The refinery consists of eight operating areas: Ammonia Leaching, Cobalt
Separation, Cobalt Conversion and Reduction, Copper Boil, Nickel Recovery,
Sulphide Precipitation, Ammonium Sulphate Recovery and Ammonia Recovery
circuits. Each of these areas is described in the subsections below.
Figure 4 contains a schematic block flow diagram for the Metals Refinery. This
shows the general sequence of the major unit operations, from the receipt of raw
materials to the production of metals. When these unit operations are referred to
in the text, the corresponding words starts with an upper case letter. This
diagram is highly simplified and is included solely to aid in the discussion and
understanding of the pollution control at the facility.
The Nickel Powder Drying, Nickel Briquetting, Cobalt Powder Drying and Cobalt
Powder Briquetting circuits are also shown in Figure 4.
3.2.2.1. Ammonia leaching
There are three leach circuits in the Ammonia Leaching Plant. These are
Hexamine Leach, Adjustment Leach and Final Leach circuits. The purpose of
these leaching circuits is to dissolve the metals that are present in the feed
materials.
Prior to entering a leach circuit, the nickel feed is segregated into high and low
cobalt feeds.
The high cobalt feed materials are blended with ammonium sulphate liquor and
pumped to the Hexamine Leach autoclave circuit where the majority of the metal
sulphides, oxygen (in air) and ammonia react to form a soluble nickel and cobalt
hexamine complex. After additional treatment and solids separation, the leach
liquor, which contains the hexamine complexes, is pumped to the Cobalt
Separation Circuit. The autoclave vent gases are sent to the tail gas scrubber for
ammonia recovery.
The low cobalt feeds are sent directly to the Adjustment Leach circuit. The feed
is added to autoclaves where ammonia, air and other reagents are added. In the
pressurized and heated autoclaves, the nickel dissolves to form primarily nickel
amine. The resulting slurry is pumped into a lamella thickener and the solids are
separated. Any solids remaining are sent to the Final Leach Circuit. The
Adjustment Leach liquor is sent to the Copper Boil circuit area. The autoclave
vent gases are sent to the tail gas scrubber for ammonia recovery.
The Final Leach process is similar to the Hexamine and Adjustment Leach. In
the autoclaves, residual metals are extracted and a final iron oxide residue is
produced. The autoclave slurry is sent to thickeners and a centrifuge where the
solids and liquids are separated. The liquid is recycled to the process and the
residue is sent to the Metals Tailings Pond. Tailings pond return water is used to
79 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
53

transport the residue to the Metals Tailings Pond. Sulphuric acid is added to the
tailing pond carrier water to minimize the ammonia losses in the tailings pond.
3.2.2.2. Cobalt separation
The leach liquor from the Hexamine Leach circuit is processed in the Cobalt
Separation area to separate the nickel and cobalt. The nickel bearing solution is
sent to the Copper Boil area. The cobalt rich solution is sent to the Copper
Conversion and Reduction to produce cobalt powder. Some powder is
briquetted. Powder and briquettes are packaged for sale.
All tanks and filter vents in this circuit are sent to the Cobalt Separation Scrubber
and the ammonia present in the vent gases is recovered and sent to the
Ammonia Recovery Circuit.
3.2.2.3. Copper boil
Nickel rich leach liquors from the Adjustment Leach circuit and the Cobalt
Separation area are processed in the Copper Boil area. Here copper is removed
as a copper sulphide precipitate which is washed and filtered, and sent to
customers.
3.2.2.4. Nickel recovery
The Nickel Recovery area includes three main circuits for the production of nickel
powder and briquettes. These are Oxydrolysis, Nickel Reduction and Metals
Handling.
In the Oxydrolysis circuit, the unsaturated sulphur based compounds are oxidized
to minimize the sulphur content of the nickel product.
The purified solution from the Oxydrolysis circuit is transferred to the Nickel
Reduction circuit. Ferrous sulphate and nickel solution are added to create a fine
nickel powder seed in the autoclaves at the beginning of a production cycle. The
purified solution and hydrogen are added to the autoclaves and the autoclaves
are agitated. The nickel amine complex reacts with the hydrogen and produces
nickel metal and ammonium sulphate. The nickel is deposited onto the nickel
powder seed. When the precipitation is complete, the depleted solution is drawn
off and fresh solution is added. This cycle is repeated until the nickel particles
meet production specifications.
The slurry is then discharged into flash tanks. The vent from the tanks vent to
the atmosphere. The solution from the flash tank, know as reduction end
solution, is sent to the Sulphide Precipitation circuit for additional metals
recovery. The nickel powder, from the flash tank, is transferred to a pan filter and
the nickel particles are washed with water. The nickel powder is then sent to the
Metals Handling circuit where it is dried and either packaged, or compacted into
briquettes, which are then sintered, and packaged.
54

3.2.2.5. Cobalt conversion and reduction
In the Cobalt Conversion and Reduction circuits, the solution from the Cobalt
Separation circuit, sulphuric acid, and recycle cobalt powder are added to the
conversion tanks. There, in preparation for metal production, the cobaltic ions are
converted to cobaltous. Some solids are precipitated and recycled for further
processing. The filtrate is sent to the reduction autoclaves.
The reduction of cobalt to the solid state occurs as a batch operation in a
reduction autoclave. Nucleation catalyst (fine cobalt powder) and cobalt solution
are added to create a fine cobalt powder seed at the beginning of each
production cycle. Converted solution and hydrogen are added to the autoclave
and the autoclave is agitated. The aqueous cobalt compound reacts with
hydrogen to produce cobalt metal and ammonium sulphate solution. The solid
cobalt precipitates out on the cobalt seed.
The autoclave slurry is discharged to a flash tank and then to a pan filter where
the cobalt particles are washed. The powder is then dried and sent to the Metals
Handling circuit. In the Metals Handling circuit, the cobalt is either packaged in
powder form or compacted into briquettes. The latter are sintered, and
packaged. The solution from the flash tank is recycled to Cobalt Separation.
Vapours from the autoclave are vented to the flash tank. Vapours from the flash
tank are passed through a condenser before being vented to the atmosphere.
The condensed aqueous ammonia solution is recycled to the process or sent to
the ammonia recovery circuit.
Reduction end solution from the Nickel Recovery Circuit still contains some
nickel, cobalt, and zinc. This is sent to the continuous Sulphide Precipitation
Circuit to remove all metal ions from the solution.
3.2.2.6. Sulphide precipitation
First, the zinc is precipitated and then the mixed nickel and cobalt is removed in
the second stage. In the zinc precipitation tank, hydrogen sulphide gas is added
to the liquor and the zinc forms insoluble zinc sulphides. The resulting slurry is
passed through a lamella thickener. The solid zinc sulphides are washed, settled,
and filtered. The zinc sulphide is sold off-site for further reprocessing.
The clarified lamella solution is pumped to the second stage. In the mixed
sulphide precipitation tank, hydrogen sulphide and ammonia are added to the
solution and insoluble metal sulphides are formed. The resulting slurry is settled
in a lamella thickener. The solution, that contains mainly ammonium sulphate,
termed barren liquor, is filtered and pumped to the Ammonium Sulphate
Recovery area. The solids are recycled to Ammonia Leaching.
Gases from processing tanks vent into the Hydrogen Sulphide Vent Scrubber
where hydrogen sulphide is recovered by scrubbing with a dilute aqueous
ammonia solution. The scrubbed gases are burned by methane in the Hydrogen
Sulphide Scrubber Flare Stack.
55

3.2.2.7. Ammonia sulphate recovery
Ammonium sulphate crystals are recovered from the barren liquor in a series of
crystallizers. The crystals are then fully dried in dryers. The gases then exhaust
to the atmosphere via a stack. The sulphate product is sold as fertilizer. The
evaporated water is condensed and recycled to the process or disposed of in the
effluent sewer.
Intermittently, solution is purged from the feed tank to remove excess chlorides
from the system.
The water collected in the well for the condensers (commonly known as Hotwell)
is recycled and used in a number of locations. The excess is discharged to the
storm pond so that it can be treated to remove its ammonia content.
3.2.2.8. Ammonia recovery
Ammonia which is recovered as a solution from the other circuits is distilled in
Ammonia Recovery and then recycled.
Ammonia laden atmospheric vent gases from the Copper Boil circuit and Leach
circuits are scrubbed with water in the Vent Gas Scrubbers. The ammonia
present in the vent gases are absorbed by the water. The scrubbers vent to the
atmosphere and the resulting ammonia water solution is sent to the aqua storage
sphere.
Ammonia laden pressurized vents from the leach autoclaves are scrubbed with
water in the Tail Gas Scrubbers. The ammonia present in the vent gases is
absorbed by the water. The scrubbers vent to the Still Bottoms Evaporator and
the resulting ammonia water solution is sent to recycle storage.
The ammonia rich vents from Cobalt Separation and some Cobalt Conversion
and Reduction vents are scrubbed with water in the Cobalt Separation scrubber.
The ammonia present in the vent gases are absorbed by the water. The
scrubber vents to atmosphere and the resulting ammonia water solution is sent to
the recycle storage.
Solution from storage is pumped into the High Pressure Still. In the still, the
solution is heated and the ammonia is evaporated. The ammonia is condensed,
stored in an ammonia storage drum, prior to re-use. The resulting liquid stream
is pumped to the Still Bottoms Evaporator and is reused in the process.
The Tail Gas Scrubber vent gases and the High Pressure Still liquid stream enter
the Still Bottoms Evaporator. In the evaporator, some of the water is evaporated
and vented to the atmosphere. The resulting evaporator bottoms solution is
reused by the process.
56

Figure 4: Sherritt Metals Refinery
Tailing Return Water
Nickel/Cobalt Feed
Ammonia
Air
Sulphuric Acid
Ammonia
Leaching
Vent Gas
Ammonia
Recovery
Tailings
Pond
Vent Gas
Atmosphere
Recycle Ammonia
Zinc and
Copper Sulphides
To Market
Cobalt
Separation
Copper
Boil
Sulphide
Precipitator
Ammonium
Sulphate
Recovery
Ammonium Sulphate
To Market
Hydrogen
Sulphur 1
SO 2 2 End
1 2
Solution
Cobalt
Conversion and
Reduction
Nickel
Recovery
Nickel
Powder
Nickel
Powder
Drying
Nickel
Briquetting
Nickel Powder
To Market
Nickel Briquettes
To Market
Cobalt
Powder
Cobalt
Powder
Drying
Cobalt
Briquetting
Cobalt Briquettes
To Market
Cobalt Powder
To Market
LEGEND
Main Process Stream
Recycle Stream
Gas Stream
57

3.2.3. Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting (HBM&S) , Flin Flon,
Manitoba 80,81
Figure 5 and Figure 6 contain schematic block flow diagrams for the Copper
Smelter and Zinc Plant respectively. Each shows the general sequence of the
major unit operations, from the receipt of raw materials to the production of
metals. When these unit operations are referred to in the text, the corresponding
words starts with an upper case letter. These diagrams are highly simplified and
are included solely to aid in the discussion and understanding of the pollution
control at the facility.
3.2.3.1. Copper smelter
The smelter treats HBM&S copper concentrates from Flin Flon, Snow Lake and
Ruttan, purchased copper concentrates, and recycle residues and flux. Total
feed to the roasters is nominally 1,300 tonnes per day of concentrate, flux, and
dust, with dust totalling 45 tonnes per day.
The feed is blended and charged to multiple hearth roasters where it is dried and
partially oxidized. The gas from the roasters which contains PM and SO 2 are
cleaned in an electrostatic precipitator and then released to the atmosphere via a
tall stack. The collected PM is recycled.
The roaster product (calcine), recycle dust and converter slag are smelted in a
Reverberatory Furnace. This operation separates the bulk of the non-sulphide
gangue and flux into a molten slag which is tapped intermittently and dumped.
The copper and iron sulphide minerals form a molten matte which separates
below the slag because of its higher density. It is also tapped intermittently into
ladles. The reverberatory gases, and other volatile impurities pass to an
electrostatic precipitator for PM removal prior to release to the atmosphere.
This matte is then processed in Peirce-Smith converters on a batch basis with
air. The first step converts the iron sulphide to iron oxide. Iron oxide combines
with added flux to form a slag which separates from the copper sulphide. This
slag is recycled to the reverberatory furnace where its relatively high copper
content is recovered as it mixes with the molten bath in the reverberatory
furnace.
As the converting operation continues, the copper sulphide is then converted to
blister copper which contains only small quantities of sulphur and oxygen. The
conversion of sulphides to oxides with air produces converter off-gases
containing substantial quantities of sulphur dioxide, total particulate matter (TPM)
and volatile impurities. Converter off-gases are combined with those from the
reverberatory furnace for electrostatic precipitator PM removal.
80 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
81 Modifications made to process flow sheets based on personal communication from Wayne
Fraser, Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting to Serge Langdeau April 10, 2002
58

The blister copper is then treated in an anode refining furnace for the removal of
most of the small quantities of oxygen and sulphur dissolved in the copper. The
refined copper is cast into anodes which then have the proper composition and
shape for electrorefining. Anodes are currently shipped to an external electrolytic
refinery for the final refining step. Anode production capacity is approximately
80,000 tonnes per year.
3.2.3.2. Zinc plant
Zinc concentrates are processed in the zinc pressure leaching facility along with
zinc ferrite residue from the former calcine leaching circuit.
The zinc concentrate is reground and transferred to the two stage pressure
leaching process in which partially neutralized returned acid is used to leach
fresh concentrates. Then the partially leached concentrates are leached with
fresh return acid. The second stage pressure leach underflow is filtered and
washed before being directed to an impoundment area. This material may be
treated in the future for either sulphur or precious metals recovery or both.
The pressure leach liquor is partially neutralized by zinc hydroxide sludge in a
Gypsum Removal.
Copper is removed from the partially neutralized pressure leach liquor by
cementation with zinc dust.
This copper removal liquor is then transferred for further neutralization to
precipitate residual iron.
The iron removal liquor is then purified with zinc dust and transferred to
electrowinning wherein the zinc is electrodeposited on cathodes, regenerating
sulphuric acid.
The zinc is removed from the cathode, then melted, alloyed, and cast for sale.
Return acid (spent electrolyte) from electrowinning is recycled to the pressure
leaching stages, and to the atmospheric Ferrite Leach step. The latter treats a
stockpile of ferrite residue. The upgraded ferrite leach residue is treated in the
copper smelter for precious metal recovery while ferrite leach liquor is directed to
the first stage pressure leach.
Zinc-rich dust from the copper smelter and zinc casting plant dross are passed
through a kiln for halogen removal and then leached in a small quantity of return
acid.
The dust leach liquor is combined with wash liquors, and contacted with lime in
the waste water treatment circuit to recover zinc as a zinc hydroxide sludge. This
sludge is recycled to the gypsum removal and iron removal steps to be used for
neutralizing.
59

Figure 5 Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Copper Smelter
Copper/Zinc
Concentrates/
Flux
Zinc-rich Dusts
(To Zinc Plants)
Multiple
Hearth
Roasting
Offgas
Electrostatic
Precipitation
Stack
Offgases
(To Atmosphere)
PM
Copper-rich Dusts
PM
PM
Matte
Reverbatory
Smelting
Offgas
Electrostatic
Precipitation
Stack
Offgases
(To Atmosphere)
Converter Slag
Zinc-rich Dusts
(To Zinc Plants)
Converting
Offgas
PM
Slag
(To Slag Dump)
Anode
Refining
Anode
Casting
Copper Anodes
(To Markets)
60

Figure 6: Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Zinc Plant
Zinc Concentrates
Stockpiled Ferrite
3
Return Acid
Feed
Preparation
Return Acid
Ferrite
Leach
Ferrite Leach Residue
(To Copper Smelter)
3
Ferrite Leach Liquor
1
Zinc Hydroxide Sludge
First
Stage Leach
Gypsum
Removal
(To Talls)
2
Zinc Dust
Second
Stage Leach
Copper
Removal
Copper Cake
(To Copper Smelter)
1
Zinc Hydroxide Sludge
Iron
Removal
Iron Residue
Filter Cake
(To Impoundment Area)
2
Zinc Dust
Zinc-rich Dusts
Purification
(from Copper Smelter)
Kiln
Calcining
Electowinning
Return Acid
3
Return Acid
Dust Leach
Kiln
Calcining
Zinc
Dross
Casting
Zinc
(To Markets)
Wash Liquor
Lime
Zinc Dust
2
Waste Water
Treatment
Zinc Hydroxide Sludge
1
61

3.2.4. Inco Limited, Thompson Division, Thompson, Manitoba 82
Figure 7 and Figure 8 contain schematic block flow diagrams for the Nickel
Smelter and Nickel Refinery respectively. Each shows the general sequence of
the major unit operations, from the receipt of raw materials to the production of
metals. When these unit operations are referred to in the text, the corresponding
words starts with an upper case letter. These diagrams are highly simplified and
are included solely to aid in the discussion and understanding of the pollution
control at the facility.
3.2.4.1. Nickel smelter
The concentrate slurry is pumped from the flotation section of the mill where it is
thickened to the roaster building where it is filtered. The fluid bed roasters
oxidize approximately one-half the concentrate's sulphur and its associated iron.
Flux is also added to the roasters.
Most of the roasted concentrate is carried out of the roasters by the off-gas. The
roasted concentrate, or calcine is separated from the off-gas in cyclones and
electrostatic precipitators. The treated off-gas is then discharged directly to the
atmosphere via the main smelter stack.
The calcine is fed into electric furnaces where it separates into slag (oxide) and
matte (sulphide) phases. The slag is skimmed, granulated with water and then
pumped to the slag storage area.
The finished matte from the converters is cast as anodes for further processing in
the Inco Thompson Refinery. Off-gas from the converters also pass through
electrostatic precipitators and to the main smelter stack.
High copper concentrates are treated separately to produce high copper calcine
which is sent directly to the Inco smelter in Sudbury.
3.2.4.2. Nickel refinery
Matte anodes are transferred to the Nickel Refinery where they are electrorefined
in electrolytic tanks to produce high purity nickel cathodes. The tanks
contain a standard chloride-sulphate solution as the electrolyte. The cathodes
are washed and then sheared into pieces for the markets. Trademark products
are also produced. INCO S-ROUNDS and INCO R-ROUNDS are button shaped
products which are flat on the back and about one inch in diameter.
By-product residue is sent to Inco’s Port Colborne Refinery for cobalt and
precious metal recovery.
Excess water is treated with lime to precipitate heavy metals and their releases
to the environment.
82 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
62

Figure 7: Inco Thompson Nickel Smelter
Nickel
Concentrates/
Reverts
Flux
Thickening
and
Filtering
Fluid Bed
Roasting
Offgas
Cyclone
Collection
Electrostatic
Precipitation
Stack
To Atmosphere
Dust
Granulated
Slag
Electric
Furnace
Smelting
Offgases
Slag
Flux
Furnace
Matte
Converting
Offgases
Converter
Matte
Matte Anode
Casting
Matte Anodes
To Thompson Nickel Refinery
Slag
To Disposal Area
63

Figure 8: Inco Thompson Nickel Refinery
Matte Anodes
Scrap Matte
Separation
and Grinding
Spent
Anodes
Electrorefining
Nickel
Cathodes
Cathode
Cleaning and
Shearing
Nickel
To Markets
Anolyte
Anode Sludge
To Smelter
Hydrogen
Sulphide Copper Residue
Copper/Arsenic
Removal
Revert to Smelter
Sulphuriic
Acid, Air
Nickel
Replenishment
Purified
Electrolyte
Chlorine
Cobalt/Iron
Removal
Basic Nickel
Carbonate
Cobalt/Nickel/Iron
Residue
Chlorine, Soda Ash,
Sulphuric Acid,
Sulphur Dioxide
Cobalt
Purification
Cobalt Oxide
To Market
Iron Hydroxide
To Smelter
64

3.2.5. Falconbridge Limited, Kidd Metallurgical Division, Timmins,
Ontario 83
Figure 9, Figure 10, and Figure 11 contain schematic block flow diagrams for the
Zinc Plant, Copper Smelter and Copper Refinery respectively. Each shows the
general sequence of the major unit operations in each facility, from the receipt of
raw materials to the production of metals. When these unit operations are
referred to in the text, the corresponding words starts with an upper case letter.
These diagrams are highly simplified and are included solely to aid in the
discussion and understanding of the pollution control at the facility.
3.2.5.1. Zinc plant
The Zinc Plant which began operation in 1972, is based on standard electrolytic
zinc plant technology. Zinc concentrates are first roasted in two standard Lurgi
fluid bed roasters to remove the sulphur and produce a calcine (primarily zinc
oxide). The sulphur in the concentrate is converted to sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) and
collected in the off-gas.
The off-gas is cleaned, dried and sent to the (Roaster) Acid Plant where it is
converted to sulphuric acid. The Acid Plant is a Monsanto single-absorption
plant with a design conversion efficiency of approximately 98%.
After the roasting process, the calcine is leached with sulphuric acid to dissolve
the zinc and the resultant zinc sulphate solution is further treated to remove
impurities. Iron, which is co-extracted with the zinc, is precipitated as sodium
jarosite and sent to tailings for disposal. Recovery, purification, melting and
casting of cadmium metal also takes place in the Zinc Leach Plant.
The zinc sulphate solution (neutral solution) is then cooled and pumped to
storage tanks, from which it is fed continuously to the circulating electrolyte in the
Electrolytic Cellhouse. In the electrowinning process, direct current is applied,
forcing the zinc to deposit onto aluminum cathodes. The cathodes are then
removed from the cells and the zinc is stripped off.
The zinc sheets are then melted in one of two induction furnaces and cast into
either 25 kg slabs or jumbos weighing in excess of one tonne.
In 1983/84 a pressure leach system was installed to increase the capacity of the
Zinc Plant. This system utilizes oxygen and high temperature in an autoclave to
directly produce zinc sulphate from the zinc concentrate, thus eliminating the
need for roasting. Approximately 20% of the zinc concentrate is processed using
this system. Both the residue and the zinc solution from this circuit are routed to
the conventional circuit for final treatment.
83 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
65

3.2.5.2. Copper Smelting and refining
The Copper Smelter and Refinery were commissioned in 1981.
The smelter is divided into four main process areas: feed preparation, continuous
smelting, melting and casting, and auxiliaries. Figure 10 84 shows several circuits
within these four areas.
In the feed preparation area, the various feed materials (copper concentrate,
silica flux, limestone, recycle slag, revert material, secondary feeds) are dried
and stored. Off-gases from the anode furnaces are used as a source of heat for
drying the feed materials.
The continuous smelter is based on the Mitsubishi process and consists of three
furnaces (Smelting, Slag Cleaning, Converting), interconnected by gravity flow
launders. Blended feed is pneumatically conveyed to the smelting furnace
through feed pipes which are sheathed in process lances through which oxygenenriched
air is blown, resulting in a smelting reaction which is almost autogenous.
The matte and slag overflow continuously down a launder to the slag cleaning
furnace, where the matte and slag separate. The slag overflows to a granulation
system and is discarded. The matte is siphoned out of the furnace and flows to
the converting furnace where it is oxidized to blister copper. The blister copper is
then siphoned out of the furnace and directed into a holding furnace, from which
it is periodically transferred to the anode furnaces by ladle.
The off-gases from the smelting and converting furnaces pass through waste
heat boilers (heat recovery for steam generation), are cleaned in electrostatic
precipitators and scrubbers, dried and sent to the (Smelter) Acid Plant where
they are converted to sulphuric acid. The Acid Plant is a double-contact, double
absorption plant with a design conversion efficiency of 99.5%. Approximately
10% of the sulphur dioxide contained in the off-gas stream is recovered as liquid
sulphur dioxide.
Following oxidation and reduction in the anode furnaces, the copper is poured
from the furnace to a Hazelett casting machine which produces a continuous
strip of solid copper. Anodes are then pressed from the strip and transported to
the Copper Refinery.
Figure 11 contains a schematic block flow diagram for the Copper Refinery.
At the refinery, the copper anodes are submerged, along with stainless steel
cathodes, in an electrolyte solution. An electric current is applied which causes
the anodes to dissolve and copper is plated onto the stainless steel cathode,
from which it is later stripped.
3.2.5.3. Indium plant
The Indium Plant/Dust Treatment Plant, which is formally associated with the
Zinc Operations, was commissioned in late 1990. The Plant processes
84 Modifications made to process flow sheet based on personal communication, from Tony
Fontana, Falconbridge to Sarah Ternan January 31, 2002
66

electrostatic precipitator dust from the Copper Smelter to produce a copper
residue, a lead/silver residue, and a zinc solution. Indium is separated by solvent
extraction, recovered by cementation, refined by electrolysis, and cast into bars.
67

Figure 9: Falconbridge Kidd Zinc Plant
ZINC
CONCENTRATE
STACK
ZINC
CONCENTRATE
Tailgas
To Atmosphere
ROASTING
ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATION
ACID PLANT
PRESSURE
LEACHING
NEUTRAL
LEACHING
Sulphuric Acid
To Markets
THICKENING
JAROSITE
LEACHING
THICKENING
Calcine
THICKENING
To Neutral
Leaching
FILTRATION
OXIDATION
COPPER
CEMENTATION
Zinc Dust
Zinc Dust
Residue
To Impoundment
Copper Residue
To Copper Smelter
1ST STAGE
PURIFICATION
2ND STAGE
PURIFICATION
Zinc Dust
1st Stage Cake
For As and Cu Recovery
2nd Stage Cake
For Cd Recovery
ELECTROLYSIS
MELTING
CASTING
Refined Zinc
To Markets
68

Figure 10: Falconbridge Kidd Copper Smelter
FLUX / REVERTS
COPPER
CONCENTRATES
1
Off-gas
SLAG
DRYING
CRUSHING
CONCENTRATE
DRYING
BAGHOUSE
To Atmosphere
Dust
SMELTING
WASTE HEAT
BOILER
ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR
Dust
To Indium Plant
Dust
Tail Gas
To Atmosphere
Slag
SLAG
CLEANING
To Concentrate Drying
1
ACID
PLANT
Sulphuric Acid
To Markets
Copper
Matte
Liquid SO 2
To Markets
Slag
CONVERTING
WASTE HEAT
BOILER
Dust
Slag
To Disposal or Sales
ANODE
REFINING
To Concentrate Drying
1
CASTING
SHEARING
Copper Anodes
To Kidd Copper Refinery
Scrap Copper Anodes
From Kidd Copper Refinery
SCRAP
MELTING
Offgas
To Atmosphere
69

Figure 11: Falconbridge Kidd Copper Refinery
COPPER ANODES
FROM SMELTER
ELECTROLYTIC
REFINING
Copper Cathodes to Markets
Scrap to Kidd Copper Smelter
Slime
SULPHURIC
ACID
Commercial
Electrolyte
ELECTROLYTIC
RECIRCULATION
Return
Electrolyte
PRIMARY
LIBERATION
Primary
Liberator
Cathodes
To Markets
SLIME SLURRY
THICKENING
Slimes
ELECTROLYTE
FILTRATION
SECONDARY
LIBERATION
Secondary
Liberator
Cathodes
To Kidd Copper
Smelter
COPPER
REMOVAL
ELECTROLYTE
Electrolytic Bleed
To Zinc Plant
Hydrogen
Peroxide
SELENIUM
LEACHING
Selenous
Acid
NEUTRALIZING
PLANT
Soda
Ash
SLIME
CONVERSION
Soda Ash
METAL / ACID
SEPARATION APU
NEUTRALIZATION
SLIME
FILTRATION
Sodium Sulphate
FILTRATION
Ni/Cu Cake
To Falc. Sudbury Smelter
Filtrate
Acetic
Acid
LEAD
REMOVAL
POLISHING
FILTRATION
To Tailings Pond
CENTRIFUGE
Leach Acetate
Solids
To Thickener
Dried Leach Slimes
To Market
70

3.2.6. Falconbridge, Sudbury Division, Sudbury, Ontario 85
Figure 12 contains a schematic block flow diagram for Falconbridge’s
Nickel/Copper Smelter in Sudbury. This shows the general sequence of the
major unit operations, from the receipt of raw materials to the production of
metals. When these unit operations are referred to in the text, the corresponding
words starts with an upper case letter. This diagram is highly simplified and is
included solely to aid in the discussion and understanding of the pollution control
at the facility.
Nickel-copper concentrate is received from the Strathcona concentrator as a
slurry which is repulped to a consistent density prior to processing in the fluidized
bed roasters. Most of the nickel, copper, iron and sulphur in the smelter feed is
contained in sulphide minerals. Silica is proportioned to ensure a low viscosity
FeO-CaO-SiO 2 slag, with low nickel and copper content, in the subsequent
smelting step. The roasters oxidize part of the iron and approximately 60% of the
sulphide sulphur. Roaster off-gases are treated by a cyclone and electrostatic
precipitator to remove dust. The cleaned gases are treated by a single absorption
sulphuric acid plant to remove sulphur dioxide before being released to the
atmosphere. Weak acid from the gas cleaning section of the acid plant is
neutralized with lime.
The solid product from the roasters is charged to an electric furnace for smelting
together with custom concentrate and coke. The non-ferrous gangue minerals,
fluxes and iron oxides separate to form a molten oxide slag over the molten
nickel-copper-iron sulphide matte phase. Electric furnace slag is granulated and
pumped to the slag disposal area where the water is drained and recycled. Offgases
from the electric furnace are treated by cyclones and an electrostatic
precipitator for removal of dusts containing metals before being released to the
atmosphere. All dusts recovered from electric furnace off-gases are returned to
the electric furnace.
Electric furnace matte is transferred to conventional Peirce Smith converters
where iron and sulphide sulphur are further oxidized to iron oxide and sulphur
dioxide. Iron oxide and fluxes combine to form a molten oxide slag over the
molten nickel-copper matte, which also contains cobalt and some iron. The
higher density matte separates from the converter slag and is granulated,
dewatered, then shipped to Falconbridge’s Nikkelverk refinery in Norway.
Converter slag contains economic concentrations of metals and is cleaned prior
to disposal. Off-gases from the electric furnace are treated by cyclones and an
electrostatic precipitator for removal of dusts containing metals before being
85 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
71

eleased to the atmosphere. All dusts recovered from converter off-gases are
returned to the electric furnace.
72

Figure 12: Falconbridge Sudbury Nickel/Copper Smelter
NICKEL/COPPER
CONCENTRATE SLURRY
FLUX
CUSTOM FEED
COKE
LIME
RECEIVING/
SETTLING
ELECTRIC
SMELTING
CONVERTING
NEUTRALIZATION
Neutralized Effluent
To Disposal Area
Weak Acid Effluent
ROASTER FEED
PREPARATION
ROASTING
Offgas
CYCLONE
DUST
RECOVERY
ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATION
ACID
PLANT
Sulphuric Acid
To Markets
Dust
Tailgas
Dust
SLAG
GRANULATION
ELECTRIC
SMELTING
CYCLONE
DUST
RECOVERY
ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATION
STACK
To Atmosphere
Matte
SLAG
CLEANING
Slag
CONVERTING
Offgas
Matte Slag
Slag
To Slag Disposal Area
MATTE
CASTING
CRUSHING
AND PACKAGING
Nickel/Copper Matte
To Falconbridge’s Nickel Refinery in Norway
Slag
To Slag Disposal Area
73

3.2.7. Inco Copper Cliff 86
Figure 13, Figure 14, and Figure 15 contain schematic block flow diagrams for
the Nickel/Copper Smelter, Nickel Refinery and Copper Refinery respectively.
Each shows the general sequence of the major unit operations, from the receipt
of raw materials to the production of metals. When these unit operations are
referred to in the text, the corresponding words starts with an upper case letter.
These diagrams are highly simplified and are included solely to aid in the
discussion and understanding of the pollution control at the facility.
3.2.7.1. Nickel/Copper smelter
The Nickel/Copper Smelter treats bulk nickel-copper concentrate by drying filter
cake in fluid bed dryers and then flash smelting this material with silica flux
(sand) and technical oxygen in flash furnaces. The slag from the furnaces is
skimmed to railcars and transported to a dump area where it is later removed for
use as aggregate in railbeds and roads.
The sulphide matte from the flash furnaces is transported to the Peirce Smith
converters by ladle and further oxidized for iron and sulphur removal. The slag
from the converting stage is returned to the flash furnaces for metal recovery.
The finished matte from the converters is slow cooled in large ingots to allow
growth and selective precipitation of nickel sulphide, copper sulphide and metallic
crystals. These ingots are crushed ground and processed by magnetic
separation and flotation to concentrates of nickel sulphide, copper sulphide and a
metallic copper nickel fraction.
Some of the nickel sulphide fraction is roasted in fluid bed roasters to produce a
nickel oxide product suitable for the steel industry, or further treatment at Inco’s
Nickel Refinery. The copper sulphide fraction with some nickel sulphide is
processed by flash converting and two stages of finishing converting to anode
grade metal which is cast at the smelter and refined at the Copper Refinery. The
off gas from the smelter copper processing is treated in ESPs. The metallic
fraction, some nickel sulphide and some nickel oxide are processed further at
Inco’s Nickel Refinery.
The offgases from the fluid bed dryers are treated for particulate removal in
baghouses, and then vented to the atmosphere via the main stack. The flash
furnace offgases are treated in a wet process for particulate removal and sent to
the acid plant for sulphur dioxide removal. Process gases from the nickel
converting stage are treated in electrostatic precipitators for particulate removal
and then vented to atmosphere via the main stack. These gases contain lower
concentrations of sulphur dioxide that together with their intermittent flow make
them unsuitable for acid plant feed. In addition low strength fugitive emissions
are removed from the workplace by venting to atmosphere. The process gases
86 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
74

from the fluid bed roasters are treated in cyclones and electrostatic precipitators
for particulate removal and then vented to atmosphere.
3.2.7.2. Nickel refinery
Metallic nickel-copper, nickel oxide and nickel sulphide concentrates from the
smelter form the feed for the Nickel Refinery. This is smelted with oxygen in Top
Blown Rotary Converters to remove residual sulphur, then granulated in water
and conveyed to the Inco pressure carbonyl refinery. The nickel in the granules is
extracted with carbon monoxide at high pressure to form nickel carbonyl. The
nickel carbonyl is distilled into two fractions; nickel carbonyl and nickel-iron
carbonyl which are decomposed into pellets and powder for sale to market. The
residue from the extraction process is pumped to the Electrowinning section of
the Copper Refinery.
The Nickel Refinery Top Blown Rotary Converter off gases are processed in
electrostatic precipitators for particulate removal prior to release to the
atmosphere.
3.2.7.3. Copper refinery
Copper Refinery receives anodes from the smelter and electrorefines these to
cathodes. The cathodes are a market product.
The residue pumped from the Nickel Refinery to the Electrowinning Plant is
leached and electrowon to recover copper, with the remaining residue sent to the
Port Colborne Refinery for cobalt recovery.
75

Figure 13: Inco Copper Cliff Nickel/Copper Smelter
Copper/Nickel
Concentrate/Flux
Offgas
Stack
(To Atmosphere)
Drying
Acid
Plant
Sulphuric Acid
(To Markets)
Liquid Sulphur Dioxide
(To Markets)
Matte Casting
And Cooling
Oxygen
Converter
Matte
Flash
Smelting
Converting
Flash Furnace
Matte
Slag
Recycle
Slag
(To Slag Dump)
Crushing
And Grinding
Dust
Electrostatic
Precipitation
Smelter
Stack
(To Atmosphere)
Magnetic
Separation
Electrostatic
Precipitation
Dust
Nickel
Oxide
Flotation
Fluid Bed
Roasting
Drying
Flash
Converting
Finishing
Dust
Electrostatic
Precipitation
Blister Copper
(To Inco’s Copper Refinery)
Legend
Main Process Stream
Recycle Stream
Gas Stream
76

Figure 14: Inco Copper Cliff Nickel Refinery
Nickel Oxide / Sulphide
Metallic Concentrate
TBRC
Smelting
Electrostatic
Precipitation
Stack
To Atmosphere
Granulation
Dust
Overflow Water
To Tailings Pond
Recycle
Water
Dewatering
And Drying
Nickel
Carbonyl
Storage
Nickel
Carbonyl
Vapourization
Nickel Powder
Production
Nickel Powder
To Markets
Nickel
Granules
Residue
Pressure
Carbonylation
Condensation
Nickel-iron
Carbonyl Vapour
Nickel Carbonyl Vapour
Condensation
And Storage
Fractional
Distillation
Nickel
Pellet
Production
Nickel Pellets
To Market and Inco Alloys
Iron-nickel
Carbonyl
Storage
Carbon Monoxide
Production
And Storage
Iron-nickel
Carbonyl
Vapourization
Iron-nickel
Powder
Production
Iron-nickel Powder
To Markets
Residue
To Inco’s Copper Refinery
77

Figure 15: Inco Copper Cliff Copper Refinery
Residue
From the Nickel Refinery
Blister Copper
From the Smelter
Off-gas to atmosphere
Solution
First Stage
Pressure
Leaching
Anode Refining
and Casting
Electrorefining
Copper Cathodes
Solids
Silver Refinery
Gold, Silver,
Other Precious
Metals
To Markets
Oxygen
Spent Electrolyte
Selenium/Tellruium Residue
Second Stage
Pressure
Leaching
Selenium,
Tellurium
Removal
Electrowinning
Copper Cathodes
To Markets
Sodium
Hydrosulphide
Solids
Precious Metals Residue
To Port Colborne Refinery
Copper Clean-up
Solution
Oxygen
Lime
Iron/Arsenic
Removal
Nickel/Cobalt
Recovery
Nickel/Cobalt Carbonate
To Port Colborne Refinery
Barren Solution
To Effluent
Iron Hydroxide/Iron Arsenate
To Tailings Disposal Area
78

3.2.8. Inco Port Colborne 87
Figure 16 shows the inputs and outputs of the Port Colborne facility.
The Port Colborne Cobalt plant was constructed as a best available technology
hydrometallurgical plant in 1982.
87 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
79

Figure 16: Inco Port Colborne Input/Output Diagram
REAGENTS
NATURAL GAS / BUNKER C
ELECTRICITY
WATER
AIR
COBALT - NICHEL CARBONATE FEEDSTOCK
PORT COLBORNE
REFINERY
ELECTROLYTIC COBALT ROUNDS
NICKEL CARBONATE
MISCELLANEOUS BY-PRODUCTS
TREATED EFFLUENT WATER
SCRUBBED, VENT AIR TO ATMOSPHERE
80

3.2.9. Noranda Inc., Horne Smelter, Rouyn-Noranda, Québec 88
Figure 17 contains a schematic block flow diagram for the Copper Smelter. This
shows the general sequence of the major unit operations, from the receipt of raw
materials to the production of metals. When these unit operations are referred to
in the text, the corresponding words starts with an upper case letter. The
diagram is highly simplified and is included solely to aid in the discussion and
understanding of the pollution control at the facility.
Copper concentrates and fluxing materials (silica) are proportioned to form a low
viscosity FeO-SiO 2 slag with low copper content on smelting. New feed is mixed
with recycled slag concentrate and dust from the smelter and processed in a
single Noranda Reactor. Most of the copper in the smelter feed is contained in
sulphide minerals and reports to the molten sulphide matte phase, while the bulk
of the non-sulphide gangue forms an oxide slag containing copper at low, but
economically recoverable concentrations. The higher density matte separates
from the slag, which is combined with converter slag and is slowly cooled, ground
and processed by flotation to recover most of the contained copper.
Off-gases from the Noranda Reactor are treated by a dry electrostatic precipitator
to remove total particulate matter. The clean reactor off-gases are then directed
to a single absorption sulphuric acid plant for recovery of sulphur dioxide.
Dust is returned to the reactor for recovery of copper and is also bled from the
circuit to control impurity levels and reduce emissions. The gas cleaning section
of the acid plant includes a mercury tower to minimize mercury emissions and
ensure acid quality. Weak acid solution from the acid plant is neutralized with
lime and mixed to react with a ferric sulphate solution to precipitate metals in
solution, combined with mill tailings from slag flotation and co-deposited in the
tailings impoundment area.
Part of the Noranda reactor matte is processed in the Noranda Continuous
Converter in order to produce semi-blister copper. The semi-blister copper is
treated in a desulphurization vessel to complete the sulphur oxidation prior to the
anode furnace. Initially, oxygen-enriched air is used to convert iron sulphide to
iron oxide, which combines with added flux to form an oxide slag that then
separates itself from the copper sulphide matte phase.
The rest of the reactor matte is processed in Peirce Smith Converters in batches.
The blister copper is then directed toward the anode furnace.
In the course of these two processes, the slag treated along with the Noranda
reactor slag produces a slag concentrate, which is returned to the reactor.
The blister copper is processed in an anode-refining furnace to remove most of
the dissolved oxygen and sulphur. The copper is then cast into anodes which
are shipped to Noranda’s Canadian Copper Refinery (CCR) for the final refining
step.
88 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
81

Off-gases from the Noranda Continuous Converter and the Peirce-Smith
converters are treated in electrostatic precipitators to remove particulates. Dust
is returned to the reactor for the recovery of copper, and is also bled from the
circuit to control impurity levels and reduce emissions. The Noranda Continuous
Converter off-gases are also treated for sulphur dioxide recovery by the acid
plant. The Peirce-Smith converter off-gases go directly to atmosphere after the
ESP via a tall stack.
82

Figure 17: Noranda Horne Copper Smelter
Custom Recycle
Materials
Copper Concentrates
Shredding
Stack 4
Tail Gas
To Atmosphere
Recycle
Slag
Cooling
Slag
Noranda Reactor
Electrostatic
Precipitation
SO 2
Acid
Plant
Sulphuric Acid
To Markets
Recycle
Dust
Dust
Fugitives
Crushing
Slag
Noranda
Converter
Dust
Treatment
Bleed
Dust
Effluent
Treatment
Slag
Slag Concentrate
Grinding
Peirce
Smith
Converter
Electrostatic
Precipitation
Stack 2
To Atmosphere
Flotation
Desulphuration Vessel
Slag
Tailings
Pyro-refining Furnace
Effluent
Anode Refining
Copper Anodes
To Noranda Inc., Canadian Copper Refinery
Tailings / Residue
To Tailings Pond
horne.ppt
83

3.2.10. Noranda Inc., Division CEZ, Valleyfield, Québec 89
Figure 18 contains a schematic block flow diagram for the Zinc Plant. This
shows the general sequence of the major unit operations, from the receipt of raw
materials to the production of metals. When these unit operations are referred to
in the text, the corresponding words starts with an upper case letter. The
diagram is highly simplified and is included solely to aid in the discussion and
understanding of the pollution control at the facility.
Zinc concentrates are first processed in fluidized bed roasters where sulphide
sulphur is oxidized to sulphur dioxide and zinc sulphide minerals to zinc oxides.
The iron sulphide minerals are converted to iron oxide and zinc ferrite.
Roaster off-gases are treated in turn by a waste heat boiler, electrostatic
precipitator and venturi scrubber before being directed to a sulphuric acid plant
for recovery of sulphur dioxide.
The scrubber produces a weak acid which is treated to remove selenium and
mercury prior to being neutralized with lime to precipitate gypsum and metal
hydroxides and transferred to an on -site area for impoundment as a mining
residue.
The zinc calcine from the roaster is leached with sulphuric acid in three stages to
extract zinc and other metals. In the first two stages, zinc oxides are selectively
leached while zinc ferrites are not. In the third stage, the leach residue is
subjected to higher temperatures and free acid concentrations to extract zinc
from the more refractory zinc ferrites, resulting in dissolution of iron as well as
zinc. Iron is removed from solution with ammonia as ammonium jarosite, which is
stabilized, and then impounded on-site.
The leach liquor contains zinc sulphate and impurities that must be removed
before zinc can be electrowon from solution. Solution purification is achieved
primarily by adding zinc dust to cement out impurities. Minor amounts of
antimony trioxide and arsenic trioxide are also used to control cobalt levels. The
resulting purification residue is further processed to produce copper cake and
metallic cadmium for sale.
Zinc is then recovered by electrowinning from the purified zinc sulphate solution,
and the spent electrolyte is reused in the leaching section.
Zinc cathodes are mechanically stripped, melted and cast into slabs for shipment
to customers. Some molten zinc is atomized to produce zinc dust for use in
solution purification.
89 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
84

Figure 18: Noranda CEZ Zinc Plant
Tailgas
To Atmosphere
1
Acid Plant
Sulphuric Acid
To Markets
Concentrates
Scrubbing
Weak Acid
Effluent
Roasting
Offgases
Gas Cooling
(WHB)
Electrostatic
Precipitation
Se/Hg
Selenium/Mercury Sludge
(Se/Hg) Removal 6
Calcine
Sodium Carbonate
Other Effluent
Lime
Effluent
Treatment
Treated
Effluent
Sludge
To Impoundment
3
4
Calcine
Leaching
Jarosite
Conversion
Process
Stabilization
Residue
To Impoundment
5
Fugitives
2
Spent Electrolyte
Purification
Copper / Cadmium
Separation
Copper Cake
Cadmium
Electrowinning
Dross
Melting And
Casting
Zinc Dust
Production
Zinc Slabs
To Sales
85

3.2.11. Noranda Inc., Division CCR, Montréal, Québec 90
Figure 19 contains a schematic block flow diagram for the Copper Refinery
showing the general sequence of the major unit operations, from the receipt of
raw materials to the production of metals. When these unit operations are
referred to in the text, the corresponding words starts with an upper case letter.
This diagram is highly simplified and is included solely to aid in the discussion
and understanding of the pollution control at the facility.
The refinery removes very small quantities of metal impurities from feed
materials to produce high purity copper and other products. Most of the copper
anodes to be refined are received from Noranda’s copper smelters at Rouyn-
Noranda and Murdochville. Anodes are also produced from scrap purchased by
the refinery and may be purchased from other copper producers or refined on a
toll basis.
Anodes are refined by electrorefining in which a solution of sulphuric acid is used
as the electrolyte and direct current is applied to dissolve copper at the anode.
Impurities including precious and platinum group metals are distributed between
the electrolyte and the anode slimes. The copper cathode product is plated onto
copper starting sheets. Electrolyte is continuously withdrawn for removal of
nickel sulphate and other impurities such as arsenic, bismuth and antimony. The
nickel sulphate is sold, the recovered sulphuric acid is re-used in the tankhouse
and the impurities are recycled back to the smelters. Spent anodes are removed
from the cells after 21 days while approximately half of the cathodes are removed
from the cell every 10 or 11 days. A significant portion of the anode is not
dissolved. Spent anodes are remelted and cast into new anodes for
reprocessing. Off-gases from melting and anode casting are treated by a
baghouse prior to release to the atmosphere. Baghouse dust is returned to the
Horne smelter for recycling
Some of the cathodes produced are melted and cast into copper billets or other
shapes for the market, while most are sold directly. Off-gases from cathode
melting and casting are not treated prior to release to the atmosphere.
Anode slimes are washed from the spend anodes and removed from the cells for
further processing to recover precious, platinum group and specialty metals. The
slimes are first treated to remove tellurium and copper and then smelted in a Top
Blown Rotary Converter (TBRC). Solutions from the tellurium recovery stage are
further processed to produce metallic tellurium and copper sulphate.
The TBRC produces Doré anodes which are further refined to produce metallic
silver, gold and a platinum-palladium concentrate. TBRC slags are milled and
floated to recover a precious metals concentrate while the tailings are recycled to
the Horne Smelter. Dust, and volatile metals and metal oxides leave the TBRC
with the off-gas which is treated by wet scrubbing to remove dust and fume.
90 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
86

Fugitive emissions from the TBRC operation are collected in an enclosure and
treated by a baghouse prior to release to the atmosphere. Slag handling prior to
milling is carried out in an area ventilated by a separate baghouse.
The gold refining process is connected to a wet scrubber for sulphur dioxide
capture and the silver refining process has a water absorption tower for NOx and
total particulate matter capture.
The selenium processing plant uses baghouse, cartridge filter and wet scrubbing
technologies to control emissions.
All process liquid effluents from the site are treated by an effluent treatment plant
prior to discharge to the municipal water system.
87

Figure 19: Noranda CCR Copper Refinery
Copper Anodes
Impure Copper
Scrap
Dust
To Noranda Inc., Horne Smelter
Dust Collection
To Atmosphere
Copper
Anodes
Melting and
Anode Casting
Spent
Anodes
Electrorefining
Melting
and Casting
Copper Cakes, Billets
Copper Cathodes
Anode
Slimes
Nickel Sulphate
Purification
Acid Recovery
Acid Recycle
Impure Copper Scrap
Drying
Copper
Sulphate
Slimes
Treatment
Tellurium
Recovery
Tellurium
Selenious Acid
To Selenium Plant
TBRC
Smelting
Wet Gas
Cleaning
Stack
To Atmosphere
Doré
Silver
Electrolytic
Refining
Melting and Casting
Silver
Slimes
Gold
Gold Refining
Melting and Casting
Platinum / Palladium Concentrate
Various Plant
Effluents
Effluent
Treatment
Treated Effluent
To MWWS
Legend
Main Process Stream
Recycle Stream
Gas Stream
88

3.2.12. Noranda Inc., Division Mines Gaspé, Murdochville, Québec 91
What follows is the situation at Noranda, Gaspé prior to March 28, 2002. On that
day, Noranda Inc. announced that, effective April 30, 2002, it closes permanently
its Gaspé copper smelter, located in Murdochville. Noranda had previously
announced on November 30, 2001, that it would temporarily close the smelter a
six month period 92 .
Figure 20 contains a schematic block flow diagram for the Copper Smelter
showing the general sequence of the major unit operations, from the receipt of
raw materials to the production of metals. When these unit operations are
referred to in the text, the corresponding words starts with an upper case letter.
This diagram is highly simplified and is included solely to aid in the discussion
and understanding of the pollution control at the facility.
Copper concentrate and silica are proportioned to form a low viscosity silica slag
with low copper content. New feed is mixed with silica flux and processed in a
single reverberatory furnace. Most of the copper, iron and sulphur in the smelter
feed is contained in sulphide minerals and reports to the molten sulphide matte
phase, while the bulk of the non-sulphide gangue forms a barren oxide slag. The
higher density matte separates from the slag, which is poured into slag pots and
conveyed to a disposal area.
Off-gas from the reverberatory furnace is treated by a dry electrostatic
precipitator to remove total particulate matter prior to release. All emission control
dusts from the electrostatic precipitator are returned to the Peirce Smith
converters via the injection system.
Matte is processed on a batch basis in three extended Peirce Smith converters to
oxidize sulphur and iron and reduce copper to the metallic state. Part of the
concentrate is dried and added directly to the Peirce Smith converters by
pneumatic injection through the tuyeres. Oxygen-enriched air is used to convert
the iron sulphide to iron oxide, which combines with added flux to form an oxide
slag and separates from the copper sulphide matte phase. This slag contains
relatively high copper levels and is returned to the reverberatory furnace. As the
converter cycle continues, copper sulphide is converted to blister copper
containing dissolved sulphur and oxygen.
Conversion of iron and copper sulphides produces converter off-gases containing
substantial quantities of sulphur dioxide at concentrations which vary over the
course of the batch operation. Converter off-gases are treated by a dry
electrostatic precipitator to remove total particulate matter. Dust is returned to the
converters via the injection system for recovery of copper and is also bled from
the circuit to control impurity levels and reduce emissions of the more volatile
metals. The dust bleed stream containing lead at >40% Pb in addition to
cadmium, arsenic and other impurities is pelletized and shipped to Brunswick
91 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
92 Noranda Inc. Press Release, March 28, 2002. URL: http://www.noranda.ca/
89

Smelting Division for recovery of lead. The clean converter off-gases are then
directed to a single absorption sulphuric acid plant for recovery of sulphur
dioxide.
Weak acid solution from the acid plant is treated in a new water treatment plant
using lime, hydrogen peroxide and ferric sulphate to precipitate arsenic and
metals. Sludges are deposited in the tailings impoundment area.
Blister copper is processed in an anode refining furnace to remove most of the
dissolved oxygen and sulphur. The product is then cast into copper anodes which
are shipped to Noranda Metallurgy Inc.’s CCR Division in Montréal-East for
electrolytic refining.
90

Figure 20: Noranda Gaspé Copper Smelter
Copper Concentrates
Recycle Materials/
Flux/Other
Slag
To Disposal Area
Offgas
Reverberatory
Smelting
Electrostatic
Precipitators
Stack
To Atmosphere
Slag
Matte
Dust
Converting
Offgas
Electrostatic
Precipitators
Acid Plant
Suphuric Acid
To Markets
Weak Acid
Effluent
Blister
Copper
Dust
Lime
Effluent
Treatment
Effluent
To Trailings Impoundment
Anode
Refining
Pelletizing
Pellets
To Brunswick Lead Smelter
Anode
Casting
Copper Anodes
To Noranda Canadian Copper Refinery
91

3.2.13. Noranda Inc., Brunswick Smelting Division, Belledune, New
Brunswick 93,94
Figure 21 contains a schematic block flow diagram for the Lead Smelter showing the
general sequence of the major unit operations, from the receipt of raw materials to the
production of metals. When these unit operations are referred to in the text, the
corresponding words starts with an upper case letter. This diagram is highly simplified
and is included solely to aid in the discussion and understanding of the pollution control
at the facility.
Lead-bearing materials are received by road, rail or sea, both in bulk and in drums or
other packages. Lead-bearing materials are unloaded and stored in buildings. A
battery breaker and a new facility for concentrate handling and storage were
commissioned in 1996. Battery plates and pastes are processed, plastics are sold for
recycling and acidic wash water is collected and used for pH control at the wastewater
treatment plant.
In the proportioning plant, the lead concentrate, limestone and silica are proportioned
to form a low viscosity, low melting point FeO-CaO-SiO 2 slag with low lead content and
suitable refining properties. New feed is mixed with recycled materials from the smelter
and processed in a sinter machine to oxidize sulphide sulphur to sulphur dioxide.
Moisture is added to sinter plant return fines and fresh feed to produce a porous and
reactive basic lead-iron silicate sinter with suitable mechanical properties.
New feed is mixed with recycled materials from the smelter and processed in a sinter
machine to oxidize sulphide sulphur to sulphur dioxide. Moisture is added to sinter
plant return fines and fresh feed to produce a porous and reactive basic lead-iron
silicate sinter with suitable mechanical properties.
The sinter plant off-gas is processed through an electrostatic precipitator which
removes the bulk of the dust for recycle to the Sinter Plant. Strong off-gas are treated
by a venturi scrubber and wet electrostatic precipitator, cooled and directed to a single
absorption sulphuric acid plant for conversion to sulphuric acid. Weak gases are
treated by the sinter baghouse prior to discharge. Moist gases from the sinter machine
and sinter recycle cooling containing submicron fines are treated by wet scrubbers. All
emission control dusts from the sinter plant and gas cleaning are returned to the sinter
machine as a dust or slurry, except if electrostatic precipitator dust is required to be
bled from the circuit to control impurity levels.
Sinter at

with water to preserve the environmentally stable high temperature, vitreous structure
and is dewatered and trucked to an engineered impoundment area.
Two short rotary furnaces are used primarily for the melting of scrap battery plates but
may also be used to further process a wide variety of smelter or refinery by-products.
Off-gases from the short rotary furnaces are treated by a baghouse prior to release.
Lead bullion is processed in batches by a thermal refinery using the conventional kettle
method to produce refined lead at >99.9% Pb and specialty lead/cadmium alloy.
Pumps in some sections have replaced bailing or pouring of lead bullion to minimize
safety risks and re-oxidation of lead. The lead refinery is ventilated to minimize worker
exposure and all off-gases are treated by a baghouse prior to release.
Copper dross is first removed and processed in a Reverberatory Furnace to recover
entrained lead and other values by separating four distinct phases:
• an oxide slag containing iron and zinc,
• intermetallic speiss containing copper arsenide, antimonide and stannide and
enriched in silver and gold
• copper-lead sulphide matte enriched in silver
• metallic lead bullion enriched in silver and gold
Matte and speiss are sold for processing by a copper smelter. Bullion is further refined
by removing residual copper with sulphur, softening the lead by oxidizing residual
antimony, tin and arsenic with caustic soda, removing silver by precipitation with zinc,
removing zinc with caustic soda, removing bismuth with magnesium and calcium and
finally removing any residual impurities with caustic soda.
Zinc-silver crust is oxidized to produce Doré metal, an impure silver bullion containing
more than 96% silver which is shipped for further refining.
Other refinery by-products may be further processed or sold.
Refined lead may be alloyed with calcium, tin or antimony prior to casting into a variety
of shapes for shipment to customers.
A recycled process water system collects process water from the sinter and acid plants
for reuse in order to minimize raw water use and metal discharges to the environment.
Under normal operating conditions there is no discharge. Any surplus process water is
directed to the cooling recycle pond, which receives slag granulation water as well as
surface water. Water from the cooling recycle pond is used for slag granulation and
cooling of the furnace top.
A wastewater treatment plant treats all excess water prior to discharge for removal of
arsenic, cadmium, lead, copper, zinc and other metals by lime neutralization and air
oxidation of iron and arsenic to precipitate metal hydroxides and gypsum. Water
treatment sludge is reprocessed by the smelter.
93

Figure 21: Noranda Brunswick Lead Plant
Concentrates and
Secondaries
Feed
Preparation
Stack
(To
2
Tailgas
Sintering
Offgas
Electrostatic
Precipitation
Acid Plant
Sulphuric Acid
(To Market)
Dust
Fugitive
Charge
Preparation
Dust Collection
Offgas
Stack
(To Atmosphere)
1
Blast Furnace
Smelting
Offgas
Dust Collection
Offgas
Stack
(To Atmosphere)
Lead Bullion
Slag
(To Disposal Area)
Copper
Drossing
Copper Dross
Copper
Dross
Furnace
Copper Matte
(To Market)
Antimony Dross
1
Slag
Baghouse
(To Atmosphere)
Softening
Antimony Smelting
1
Litharge
Antimony Slag
(To Rotary furnace
or Market)
Desilvering
Silver Crust
Zinc
Liquation
Kettles
Vacuum
Induction
Retorts
BBOC
(Bottom Blown
Oxygen Cupel)
Doré Metal
(To Noranda’s CCR)
Dross
Offgas
Offgas
Dezincing
Baghouse
(To Atmosphere)
5
Lead-Bismuth
Debismuthing
(To Market)
Refining
Alloying
and Casting
Lead and Lead/Calcium
(To Market)
94

3.3. Analysis of Emissions
3.3.1. Total Particulate Matter (TPM) and Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) and Other
substances toxic pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Protection
Act (CEPA)
Table 6 to Table 12 show the historical trends (from 1988 to 1998 for PM, SO 2 and
from 1998 to 2000 for Arsenic, Cadmium, Lead, Mercury and Nickel ) by facilities and
by provinces 95 . Trends per provinces and per substances are all also shown in Figure
22 to Figure 28.
All information, up to 1998, presented in this section is based on data provided by the
BMSS facilities through the Environmental Performance Profile Data Sheet
questionnaire referred to above and summarized by Hatch Associates 96 . For years
1999 and 2000, data for metals on metals is extracted from the National Pollutant
Releases Inventory 97 , while data for total particulate matter and sulphur dioxide is from
the Mining Associate of Canada 98,99 .
It should be noted that not all sites provided historical data for each of the years.
Facilities for which data is missing is noted in each section. All sites are included
whether or not they release or reported releases of the substances.
The following notations are used:
•

emissions: process sources and open sources. Process sources are those associated
with industrial operations. These emissions normally occur within buildings and, unless
captured, are discharged to the atmosphere through forced- or natural-draft ventilation
systems. Open dust sources are those where the forces of wind or machinery entrain
solid particles into the atmosphere. Sources include open transport, storage and
transfer of materials and unpaved roads.
96

Table 6: Historical Trends of Total Particulate Matter (TPM) Emissions (tonnes)
Province Facility 1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
British Columbia Teck Cominco 2,212 1,631 2,149 2,140 706 490 212 197
Alberta Sheritt 9.2 4.4
Manitoba Hudson Bay 5,156 4,093 650 1,151 2,155 1,359 1,810 1,711
Inco, Thompson 2,917 1,587 980 788 634 919 664 1,180
Total Manitoba 8,073 5,680 1,630 1,939 2,789 2,278 2,474 2,891
Ontario Falconbridge, Kidd 940 940 423 357 304 367 358 386
Falconbridge, 1,066 681 617 431 506 471 634 438
Sudbury
Inco, Copper Cliff 6,410 2,381 2,053 2,473 2,345 1,981 2,161 2,507
Inco, Port Colborne n.m/e n.m/e 17 n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e
Total Ontario 8,416 4,002 3,110 3,261 3,155 2,819 3,153 3,331
Québec Noranda, Horne 2,900 1,070 1,290 1,500 1,180 1,063 1,082 770
Noranda, CEZ not
238 154 170 154 152 90 40
measured
Noranda, CCR 40 30 34.9 38 32.9 36.53 39 47
Noranda, Gaspé 1,230 515 425 425 273 450 480
estimated
184
measured
Total, Québec 4,170 1,853 1,904 2,133 1,640 1,702 1,691 1,041
New Brunswick Noranda, Belledune 67 80 32 68 30.4 115.8 67 86
Total Canada 22,898 13,225 8,794 9,503 8,287 7,368 7,597 7,546
97

Table 7: Historical Trends of Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) Emissions (tonnes)
Province Facility 1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
British Columbia Teck Cominco 20,075 14,235 15,111 13,578 4,453 3,041 3,066 3,117
Alberta
Sheritt
Manitoba Hudson Bay 265,804 268,366 162 ,104 183,280 178,924 185,200 185,559 137,608
Inco, Thompson 283,200 253,000 196,000 195,000 210,000 217,000 139,362 214,502
Total Manitoba 549,004 521,366 358,104 378,280 388,924 402,200 324,921 352,110
Ontario Falconbridge, Kidd 5,980 5,947 6,180 6,510 5,240 4,090 5,110 3,820
Falconbridge, 59,600 57,300 45,200 53,200 53,600 57,200 35,800 27,654
Sudbury
Inco, Copper Cliff 658,515 357,751 236,033 236,041 200,003 235,000 220,987 222,906
Inco, Port Colborne
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
Total Ontario 724,095 420,998 287,413 295,751 258,843 296,290 261,897 254,380
Québec Noranda, Horne 420,000 168,000 172,000 148,000 144,000 112,556 94,000 90,000
Noranda, CEZ 5,000 3,860 3,311 3,900 4,100 3,923 5,025 6,143
Noranda, CCR 340 247 190 246 451 313 338 368
(MAC Report)
Noranda, Gaspé 57,498 42,906 43,188 38,594 33,958 31,448 34,222 43,192
Total, Québec 482,838 215,013 218,689 190,740 182,509 148,240 133,585 139,703
New Brunswick Noranda, Belledune 21,204 5,694 12,056 11,467 12,010 12,770 12,220 11,938
Total Canada 1,797,216 1,177,306 891,373 889,816 846,739 862,541 735,689 761,248
98

Table 8: Historical Trends of Arsenic Emissions (tonnes)
Province Facility 1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
British
Columbia
Teck Cominco 16.3 7.1 14.9 7.2 3.6 1.2 1.94 1.86
Alberta Sheritt 0.08
Manitoba Hudson Bay 40.62 27.4 4.49 11.72 24.28 13.2 18.83 21.21
Inco, Thompson 20 6.16 4.49 3.17 2 3.72 2.28 3.39
Total Manitoba 60.62 33.56 8.98 14.89 26.28 16.92 21.11 24.60
Ontario Falconbridge, Kidd 6.52 6.52 5.77 5.66 5.12 1.44 1.42 1.29
Falconbridge,
11.73 0.21 0.28 0.08 0.12 0.08 0.36 0.12
Sudbury
Inco, Copper Cliff 35 10.62 9.4 40.8 55.13 52.87 67.94 58.69
Inco, Port Colborne n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e
Total Ontario 53.25 17.35 15.45 46.54 60.37 54.39 69.72 60.10
Québec Noranda, Horne 113 23.03 34.5 68.01 60.01 79.14 69.2 60.16
Noranda, CEZ 0.9 0.07 0.2 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00
Noranda, CCR 0.29 0.34 0.09 0.15 0.70 0.7 0.65 0.2
Noranda, Gaspé 54.2 19.22 16 8.5 5.46 9.92 9.6 15.4
New
Brunswick
Total Canada
Total, Québec 168.39 42.68 50.79 76.68 66.19 89.78 79.45 75.76
Noranda, Belledune 4.66 5.5 2 1.71 1.85 3.1 3.78 1.36
303.01 105.93 90.13 146.87 157.59 164.69 176.00 163.68
99

Table 9: Historical Trends of Cadmium Emissions (tonnes)
Province Facility 1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
British
Columbia
Teck Cominco 3.9 3.4 4.9 6.3 1.2 0.37 0.6 0.25
Alberta Sheritt 0.03
Manitoba Hudson Bay 57.59 66.79 5.97 14.43 34.7 26.78 26.22 21.32
Inco, Thompson
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Total Manitoba 57.59 66.79 5.97 14.43 34.7 26.78 26.22 21.32
Ontario Falconbridge, Kidd 1.61 1.09 0.76 0.64 0.61 1.26 0.48 0.55
Falconbridge,
2.66 3.98 3.53 2.76 3.79 2.74 2.60 1.52
Sudbury
Inco, Copper Cliff 2.76 n.m/e 0.95 n.m/e 7.001 4.3 6.76
Inco, Port Colborne
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
Total Ontario 4.27 7.83 4.29 4.35 4.40 11.01 7.38 8.83
Québec Noranda, Horne 39 5.4 3.9 2.7 2.1 2.55 2.32 2.47
Noranda, CEZ 2 0.312 0.9 1.54 1.54 1.72 1.64 1.13
Noranda, CCR n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e n.m/e 0.00 0.00
Noranda, Gaspé 1.6 0.29 0.22 0.22 0.13 0.2 0.24 0.24
New
Brunswick
Total Canada
Total, Québec 42.6 6.11 5.12 4.46 3.77 4.47 4.29 3.84
Noranda, Belledune 3.4 3.1 1.6 1.68 0.68 2.9 0.84 1.36
111.79 87.33 21.98 31.22 44.75 45.529 40.94 34.08
100

Table 10: Historical Trends of Lead Emissions (tonnes)
Province Facility 1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
British
Columbia
Teck Cominco 117 83 103 127 38 22 17.04 6.68
Alberta Sheritt 0.01
Manitoba Hudson Bay 254 521.5 30.6 139.7 174.4 95.87 172.57 166.87
Inco, Thompson 2.92 1.42 0.94 0.78 0.63 0.92
Total Manitoba 256.92 522.92 31.54 140.48 175.03 96.79 172.57 166.87
Ontario Falconbridge, Kidd 34.2 32.1 75.16 74.20 63.08 75.46 28.69 29.56
Falconbridge,
17.24 18.00 10.20 8.023 11.97 10.40 7.13 3.5
Sudbury
Inco, Copper Cliff 133 111.6 83.78 68.95 67.29 146.70 89.16 138.02
Inco, Port Colborne 0.02
Total Ontario 184.44 161.72 169.14 151.18 142.34 232.56 124.98 171.08
Québec Noranda, Horne 850 215.70 355 318.4 212.4 153.20 115.30 84.7
Noranda, CEZ 1.50 0.85 0.90 0.48 0.48 0.47 0.00 0.00
Noranda, CCR 5.30 0.64 1.271 1.412 1.46 1.00 0.91 0.67
Noranda, Gaspé 183.20 20.85 17.00 12.75 8.17 14.87 24.00 19.5
New
Brunswick
Total Canada
Total, Québec 1,040.0 238.04 373.17 332.04 221.51 169.54 140.21 104.87
Noranda, Belledune 56.38 21.70 12.20 16.90 14.62 11.80 8.90 13.89
1,648.53 926.42 691.64 766.41 590.41 531.69 463.70 463.39
101

Table 11: Historical Trends of Mercury Emissions (tonnes)
Province Facility 1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
British
Columbia
Teck Cominco 4.16 1.56 1.82 2.8 0.71 0.08 0.07 0.15
Alberta Sheritt 0.01
Manitoba Hudson Bay 19.90 7.97 1.74 1.68 1.21 1.55 1.43 1.27
Inco, Thompson
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
Not
Significant
.003
Total Manitoba 19.90 7.97 1.74 1.68 1.21 1.55 1.43 1.27
Ontario Falconbridge, Kidd 0.01 0.01

Table 12: Historical Trends of Nickel Emissions (tonnes)
Province Facility 1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
British
Columbia
Teck Cominco
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
Alberta Sheritt 4.8 4.86 2.20 0.92 0.63
Manitoba Hudson Bay not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
Inco, Thompson 318 149.8 94.67 75.47 64.33 91.59 69.64 119.29
Total Manitoba 318 149.8 94.67 75.47 64.33 91.59 69.64 119.29
Ontario Falconbridge, Kidd 0.3 0.3 0.31 0.31 0.29 0.28 0.22 0.24
Falconbridge,
20.42 7.076 8.459 8.959 11.64 14.06 12.47 13.09
Sudbury
Inco, Copper Cliff 1 019 334.3 509.4 221.5 238.4 189.6 206.59 241.32
Inco, Port Colborne 2.3 3.035 1.235 0.527 0.502 0.599 0.56 0.54
Total Ontario 1,042.02 344.711 519.404 231.296 250.832 204.539 219.84 255.19
Québec Noranda, Horne not
0.725 1.5 0.17 1.64 0.51 0.96 0.50
measured
Noranda, CEZ not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
not
significant
Noranda, CCR 0.28 0.043 0.027 0.039 0.049 0.04 0.06 0.06
Noranda, Gaspé n.m/e 0.85 0.78 0.89 0.55 0.99 0.96 1.71
New
Brunswick
Total Canada
Total, Québec 0.28 1.618 2.307 1.099 2.239 1.54 1.98 2.27
Noranda, Belledune 0.02 not
not
not
not
measured measured measured measured
1 364.82 500.946 618.554 308.746 317.982 297.629 291.46 376.75
103

25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
5,000
0
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Figure 22: Historical Trends of Total Particulate Matter (TPM) Emissions
(tonnes/year)
1,800,000
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
400,000
200,000
0
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Figure 23: Historical Trends of Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) Emissions
(tonnes/year)
104

350
300
250
200
150
100
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
50
0
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Figure 24: Historical Trends of Arsenic Emissions (tonnes/year)
120
100
80
60
40
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
20
0
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Figure 25: Historical Trends of Cadmium Emissions (tonnes/year)
105

1,800.00
1,600.00
1,400.00
1,200.00
1,000.00
800.00
600.00
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
400.00
200.00
0.00
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Figure 26: Historical Trends of Lead Emissions (tonnes/year)
30
25
20
15
10
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
5
0
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Figure 27: Historical Trends of Mercury Emissions (tonnes/year)
106

1,400.00
1,200.00
1,000.00
800.00
600.00
Total Sector
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
400.00
200.00
0.00
1988 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Figure 28: Historical Trends of Nickel Emissions (tonnes/year)
107

3.3.2. Dioxins and Furans
Table 13 summarizes available dioxins and furans data. These data have been
obtained from a variety of sources which are noted at the end of the table. Where there
has been conflicting data (i.e., values from one source of information differ from values
from another source), those representing the highest value have been used.
108

Table 13: Releases of Dioxins and Furans. The sources of information for this table are noted below.
Province Facility Emission
Concentratio
n (pg
ITEQ/m 3 )
British-
Columbia
Teck
Cominco Trail
No test data
available.
Test Date
Estimated Annual Release
(grams ITEQ)
1999 2000 2001
April 2002 (1) 0.0004 0.0153
(2) (3)
Comments
2000 annual release based on dust analysis,
not emissions testing. Emission testing of 4
different sources conducted in April 2002. (1)
Manitoba Hudson Bay No test data
available.
June 2002 (4) Emission testing of main stack summer 2002.
(1)
Inco
34 (5) August 2001 0.34 Emission testing of main stack.
(Thompson)
(6)
Ontario Falconbridge,
Kidd
2.3 (7) June 2001 0.002
(7)
Emission testing of copper smelter acid plant
tail gas.
Falconbridge,
Sudbury
559 (8)
459 (9)
May 1999
April 2000
2.9 (8) 2.38 (11) 1.13
(6)
Emission testing of main stack.
Québec
New
Brunswick
Inco, Copper
Cliff
Noranda,
Horne
Noranda,
CEZ
Noranda,
CCR
Noranda,
Gaspé
Noranda,
Brunswick
286 (10) June 2001
No test data November
0.66
available. 2001
(6)
3.2 (12) June 2000 0.01 (12) 0.09
(6)
1.1 (13) October 2001 0.003
(13)
No test data Planned for
available. 2002. (4)
82 (14) August 2001 0.19 (11) 0.10
(6)
No test data Planned for
0.00477 0.10
available. 2002. (4)
(2) (6)
Emission test report not available.
Emission testing of acid plant tail gas (treats
Noranda Reactor off-gas).
Emission testing of acid plant tail gas (treats
zinc roaster off-gas).
Emissions testing planned for summer 2002.
Emission testing of main stack (acid plant tail
gas and smelter off-gas).
2000 annual release based on dust analysis,
not emissions testing. Emissions testing
planned for summer 2002.
TOTAL 2.9 2.6 2.4 Total based on available information only.
Notes: Sherritt and Inco Port Colborne are not included in this table, as both facilities use hydrometallurgical processes and therefore are not
considered to release significant quantities of dioxins and furans.
109

(1) A. Lanfranco and Associates Inc. PCDD/PCDF/PAH Emission Survey Monitoring Report. Prepared for Teck
Cominco, Trail, BC. June 2002.
(2) The Mining Association of Canada. Environmental Progress Report 2001: Fact Sheet on Dioxin and Furan Releases.
December 2001.
(3) Kniel, Ed. Personal communication to Sarah Ternan, Environment Canada, re: Dioxins/Furan emission testing at Teck
Cominco’s Trail B.C. Pb-Zn smelter. August 26, 2002.
(4) Environment Canada. Meeting notes for the Smelters Emission Testing (SET) Network. Unpublished. April 2001 -
March 2002.
(5) Church & Trought Inc. Stack Emissions Report Dioxins/Furans. Prepared for Inco - Manitoba. CTI Project P2141.
August 2001. Revised April 2002.
(6) Environment Canada. National Pollutant Release Inventory: 2001 Data. URL: http://www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/npri/
(7) Charles E. Napier Co. Ltd. Assessment of Dioxin/Furan Emission Test Results for Falconbridge Ltd. Kidd Smelter
Stack. Unpublished. November 20, 2001.
(8) Charles E. Napier Co. Ltd. Assessment of Dioxin/Furan Emission Test Results for Falconbridge Ltd. Smelter Stack.
Unpublished. April 2, 2001.
(9) Conor Pacific. Spring 2000 Smelter Stack Acid Gases and Organics Emission Testing. Prepared for Falconbridge
Ltd. Sudbury Smelter Business Unit. June, 2000.
(10) Canadian Ortech Environmental. Smelter Dioxin and Furan Emission Testing Report. Prepared for Falconbridge Ltd.
Sudbury Smelter Business Unit. September 2001.
(11) Environment Canada. National Pollutant Release Inventory: 2000 Data. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/npri/npri_dat_rep_e.cfm
(12) Charles E. Napier Co. Ltd. Assessment of Dioxin/Furan Emission Test Results for Noranda Horne Smelter Stack.
Unpublished. November 15, 2001.
(13) Cossette, Daniel. Test sur les émissions de dioxines et furanes à la sortie de la cheminée de l’usine d’acide #1 de la
fonderie CEZ de Noranda Inc. lors de l’étape de grillage du minerai. March 2002.
(14) Charles E. Napier Co. Ltd. Assessment of Dioxin/Furan Emission Test Results for Noranda Gaspé Smelter Stack.
Unpublished. November 29, 2001.
110

3.4. Other Current Emissions Information Environmental
Performance Indicators (release per unit of primary
production)
Figure 29 to Figure 35 provide Environmental Performance Indicators (EPIs) for
each substance and each site based on 2000 data. These EPIs describe the air
emissions per unit of primary production (kg of release per tonne of production).
Production data used to calculate each EPI are based on data supplied by
industry and is summarized in Table 3.
While EPIs identify facilities that warrant closer scrutiny, the many reasons for
differences in EPIs from facility to facility should be considered. Differences in
constituents in the feed and in processes are all important in determining
releases and EPI. Feed quality varies widely between smelters and feeds to
custom smelters can be very variable. In addition, the facilities in these sectors
produce different metals. The incoming concentration in the feed material varies
depending on which metal is being produced (e.g., copper concentrate feed is
approximately 30% copper, while zinc feed is approximately 50% zinc). More
material therefore needs processing to produce one tonne of copper product
compared with one tonne of zinc product.
Releases per tonne naturally vary if a facility is a smelter versus a refinery or an
integrated producer versus a standalone facility. An integrated operation has a
higher total production and therefore has a larger denominator versus nonintegrated
facilities.
The EPIs presented in the following pages can be a useful guide for comparison
between facilities or to determine performance over time of a specific facility, but
do not tell everything. For example, as noted by some reviewers, an increase in
production levels with a corresponding increase in the amount of pollutants
released in the environment would not change the EPI. However, the total
loading of pollutants into the environment would increase. In the same manner,
where both quantities decrease accordingly and the EPI is constant, it is not
possible to measure improvement in performance.
111

Particulate Matter - Air EPI
25
20
15
10
5
0
Teck Cominco
Hudson Bay
Inco-Thompson
Falconbridge - Kidd
Falconbridge -
Sudbury
Ino - Copper Cliff
Noranda - Horne
Noranda - CCR
Noranda - CEZ
Noranda - Gaspé
Noranda - Brunswick
FACILITY
PRODUCTION RATE
(tonnes)
2000 AIR RELEASES
(tonnes)
Teck Cominco 364,200 197 0.54
Sheritt N/A N/A N/A
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting 153,900 1,711 11.12
Inco - Thompson 49,441 1,180 23.87
Falconbridge - Kidd 264,361 386 1.46
Falconbridge - Sudbury 64,391 438 6.80
Inco - Copper Cliff 216,000 2,507 11.61
Inco - Portcolborne 1,472 N/A N/A
Noranda - Horne 182,352 770 4.22
Noranda - CCR 314,600 47 0.15
Noranda - CEZ 263,112 40 0.15
Noranda - Gaspé 115,531 184 1.59
Noranda - Brunswick 105,000 86 0.82
EPI
(kg/t)
Figure 29:
2000 Total Particulate Matter - Air Emission Performance
Indicator
112

Sulphur Dioxide - Air EPI
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Teck Cominco
Hudson Bay
Inco-Thompson
Falconbridge - Kidd
Falconbridge -
Sudbury
Ino - Copper Cliff
Noranda - Horne
Noranda - CCR
Noranda - CEZ
Noranda - Gaspé
Noranda - Brunswick
FACILITY
PRODUCTION RATE
(tonnes)
2000 AIR RELEASES
(tonnes)
Teck Cominco 364,200 3,117 8.56
Sheritt N/A N/A N/A
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting 153,900 137,608 894
Inco - Thompson 49,441 214,502 4,339
Falconbridge - Kidd 264,361 3,820 14.45
Falconbridge - Sudbury 64,391 27,654 429
Inco - Copper Cliff 216,000 222,906 1,032
Inco - Portcolborne 1,472 N/A N/A
Noranda - Horne 182,352 90,000 494
Noranda - CCR 314,600 368 1.17
Noranda - CEZ 263,112 6,143 23.35
Noranda - Gaspé 115,531 43,192 374
Noranda - Brunswick 105,000 11,938 114
EPI
(kg/t)
Figure 30: 2000 Sulphur Dioxide - Air Emission Performance Indicator
113

Arsenic - Air EPI
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Teck Cominco
Hudson Bay
Inco-Thompson
Falconbridge - Kidd
Falconbridge -
Sudbury
Ino - Copper Cliff
Noranda - Horne
Noranda - CCR
Noranda - CEZ
Noranda - Gaspé
Noranda - Brunswick
FACILITY
PRODUCTION RATE
(tonnes)
2000 AIR RELEASES
(tonnes)
Teck Cominco 364,200 1.86 0.005
Sheritt N/A N/A N/A
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting 153,900 21.21 0.14
Inco - Thompson 49,441 3.39 0.07
Falconbridge - Kidd 264,361 1.29 0.005
Falconbridge - Sudbury 64,391 0.12 0.002
Inco - Copper Cliff 216,000 58.69 0.27
Inco - Portcolborne 1,472 N/A N/A
Noranda - Horne 182,352 60.16 0.33
Noranda - CCR 314,600 0.2 0.001
Noranda - CEZ 263,112 0.0 0.00
Noranda - Gaspé 115,531 15.4 0.13
Noranda - Brunswick 105,000 1.36 0.13
EPI
(kg/t)
Figure 31: 2000 Arsenic - Air Emission Performance Indicator
114

Cadium - Air EPI
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Teck Cominco
Hudson Bay
Inco-Thompson
Falconbridge - Kidd
Falconbridge -
Sudbury
Ino - Copper Cliff
Noranda - Horne
Noranda - CCR
Noranda - CEZ
Noranda - Gaspé
Noranda - Brunswick
FACILITY
PRODUCTION RATE
(tonnes)
2000 AIR RELEASES
(tonnes)
Teck Cominco 364,200 0.25 0.001
Sheritt N/A N/A N/A.
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting 153,900 21.32 0.14
Inco - Thompson 49,441 N/A N/A
Falconbridge - Kidd 264,361 0.55 0.002
Falconbridge - Sudbury 64,391 1.52 0.023
Inco - Copper Cliff 216,000 6.76 0.03
Inco - Portcolborne 1,472 N/A N/A
Noranda - Horne 182,352 2.47 0.01
Noranda - CCR 314,600 0.0 0.00
Noranda - CEZ 263,112 1.13 0.004
Noranda - Gaspé 115,531 0.24 0.002
Noranda - Brunswick 105,000 1.36 0.01
EPI
(kg/t)
Figure 32: 2000 Cadmium - Air Emission Performance Indicator
115

Lead - Air EPI
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Teck Cominco
Hudson Bay
Inco-Thompson
Falconbridge - Kidd
Falconbridge -
Sudbury
Ino - Copper Cliff
Noranda - Horne
Noranda - CCR
Noranda - CEZ
Noranda - Gaspé
Noranda - Brunswick
FACILITY
PRODUCTION RATE
(tonnes)
2000 AIR RELEASES
(tonnes)
Teck Cominco 364,200 6.68 0.02
Sheritt N/A N/A N/A
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting 153,900 166.87 1.08
Inco - Thompson 49,441 N/A N/A
Falconbridge - Kidd 264,361 29.56 0.11
Falconbridge - Sudbury 64,391 3.5 0.05
Inco - Copper Cliff 216,000 138.02 0.64
Inco - Portcolborne 1,472 N/A N/A
Noranda - Horne 182,352 84.7 0.46
Noranda - CCR 314,600 0.67 0.002
Noranda - CEZ 263,112 0.0 0.00
Noranda - Gaspé 115,531 19.5 0.17
Noranda - Brunswick 105,000 13.89 0.13
EPI
(kg/t)
Figure 33: 2000 Lead - Air Emission Performance Indicator
116

Mercury- Air EPI
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Teck Cominco
Hudson Bay
Inco-Thompson
Falconbridge -
Kidd
Falconbridge -
Sudbury
Ino - Copper Cliff
Noranda - Horne
Noranda - CCR
Noranda - CEZ
Noranda - Gaspé
Noranda -
Brunswick
FACILITY
PRODUCTION RATE
(tonnes)
2000 AIR RELEASES
(tonnes)
Teck Cominco 364,200 0.15 0.41
Sheritt N/A N/A N/A
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting 153,900 1.266 8.22
Inco - Thompson 49,441 0.003 0.06
Falconbridge - Kidd 264,361 N/A N/A
Falconbridge - Sudbury 64,391 N/A N/A
Inco - Copper Cliff 216,000 0.002 0.01
Inco - Portcolborne 1,472 N/A N/A
Noranda - Horne 182,352 0.33 1.81
Noranda - CCR 314,600 N/A N/A
Noranda - CEZ 263,112 0.0 0.00
Noranda - Gaspé 115,531 0.052 4.50
Noranda - Brunswick 105,000 0.076 7.24
EPI
(g/t)
Figure 34: 2000 Mercury - Air Emission Performance Indicator
117

Nickel- Air EPI
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Teck Cominco
Hudson Bay
Inco-Thompson
Falconbridge - Kidd
Falconbridge -
Sudbury
Ino - Copper Cliff
Inco - Port Colborne
Noranda - Horne
Noranda - CCR
Noranda - CEZ
Noranda - Gaspé
Noranda - Brunswick
FACILITY
PRODUCTION RATE
(tonnes)
2000 AIR RELEASES
(tonnes)
Teck Cominco 364,200 N/A N/A
Sheritt N/A N/A N/A
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting 153,900 N/A N/A
Inco - Thompson 49,441 119.29 2.41
Falconbridge - Kidd 264,361 0.24 0.001
Falconbridge - Sudbury 64,391 13.09 0.20
Inco - Copper Cliff 216,000 241.32 1.12
Inco - Portcolborne 1,472 0.54 0.37
Noranda - Horne 182,352 0.5 0.003
Noranda - CCR 314,600 0.06 0.0002
Noranda - CEZ 263,112 N/A N/A
Noranda - Gaspé 115,531 1.71 0.014
Noranda - Brunswick 105,000 N/A N/A
EPI
(kg/t)
Figure 35: 2000 Nickel - Air Emission Performance Indicator
118

4. CURRENT EMISSION MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES
4.1. Emission Management Practices, Legislation, Standards
and Regulations Across Canada 102,103
This section documents the Canadian federal, provincial, and local regulations
and environmental performance requirements that apply to the Canadian Base
Metals Smelting Sector.
A brief description of the regulations is presented followed by a series of tables
showing the release limits and the ambient air quality criteria for each specific
pollutant.
4.1.1. Federal
The Canadian Environmental Protection Act,1999 104 (CEPA) is the central statute
used by the federal government in regulating the generation, use, or release into
the environment of toxic substances.
The Secondary Lead Smelter Release Regulations 105 (SLSRR) under the
Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 establish concentration limits for
emissions of lead in particulate matter as well as procedures for sampling,
analysis and reporting.
The National Pollutant Release Inventory 106 (NPRI) gathers and provides
information on releases to air, water and land of specified substances. For the
2000 reporting year, there are 268 substances listed in the NPRI, 55 of which are
CEPA toxic substances. Facilities meeting the reporting requirements are
required to submit annual reports.
National Ambient Air Quality Objectives 107 (NAAQOs) were established by the
federal government in the early 1970s. These objectives were established to
protect human health and the environment by setting limits for the following
common air pollutants: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, sulphur
dioxide and total suspended particulates. The National Air Pollution Surveillance
102 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
Appendix B, Canadian Environmental Standards, prepared for Environment Canada, dated
November 2000
103 Hatch Associates, Proposed Emissions Standards for Particulate Matter and Sulphur Dioxide
for the Base Metals Smelting Sector, Appendix A, Canadian Environmental Standards, prepared
for Environment Canada, dated May 2002
104 Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/ceparegistry/the_act/download/cepa_full_en.htm
105 Environment Canada, CEPA Registry. URL: http://www.ec.gc.ca/CEPARegistry/regulations/
106 Environment Canada, National Pollutant Release Inventory. URL:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/npri/npri_home_e.cfm
107 Environment Canada, Environmental Technology Centre. URL:
http://www.etcentre.org/divisions/aaqd/english/aqfact_e.html
119

(NAPS) Network measures these substances in ambient air. Objectives are
described for three ranges of pollutant concentration in the ambient air: desirable,
acceptable and tolerable, and these correspond to degrees of environmental
damage or potential health effects. The desirable objectives are levels the most
stringent of NAAQOs.
4.1.2. Canadian Council of the Ministers of the Environment
The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) has established
Canada-Wide Standards (CWS). Other than standards for PM and Ozone which
are the object of this report, the standards relevant for the Base Metals Smelting
Sector are those for Mercury 108 . Existing facilities are expected to make a
determined effort to meet the mercury standard by 2008. New facilities will be
expected to achieve compliance immediately upon full-scale operation.
As discussed in Chapter 3, there are activities underway to characterize
emissions of dioxins and furans from Canadian base metals smelters.
4.1.3. British Columbia
The “Pollution Control Objectives for The Mining, Smelting and Related
Industries of British Columbia 109 ” (1979) established recommended emission
limits to be considered when issuing site-specific waste management permits.
The BC guidelines specify: ambient air control objectives; control objectives for
gaseous and particulate emissions; and control objectives for gaseous and
particulate emissions for specific process. The processes relevant to the base
metal smelting industry are copper smelting, lead smelting and refining, and zinc
smelting.
4.1.4. Alberta
The Substance Release Regulation 110 (Alta. Reg. 124/93) provides for certain
operations a limit on the concentration of particulates in each effluent stream
from prescribed operations expressed as mg/kg of effluent. Effluent is defined in
the regulation as, “any substance in a gaseous medium released by or from a
plant”.
This regulation also establishes allowable limits for lead and particulate matter
emissions from secondary lead smelters, which reflects the requirements of the
CEPA Secondary Lead Smelter Release Regulations.
108 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, Canada-wide Standards for Mercury. URL:
http://www.ccme.ca/3e_priorities/3ea_harmonization/3ea2_cws/3ea2.html
109 Pollution Control Objectives for the Mining, Smelting, and Related Industries of British
Columbia, Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment, 1979
110 Substance Release Regulation Alta. Reg. 124/93, As amended by: Alta. Reg. 191/96 made
under the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act [Formerly: Air Emissions Regulation -
changed by Alta. Reg. 191/96]
120

The “Alberta Ambient Air Quality Guidelines 111 ”, provide ambient environmental
air quality objectives for Alberta.
4.1.5. Manitoba
Manitoba enacted a site-specific regulation 112 for Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting
and Inco Thompson to control emissions of particulate matter and sulphur
dioxide. The regulation is titled “Inco Limited and Hudson Bay Mining and
Smelting Co. Limited Smelter Complex Regulation Manitoba Reg. 165/88.
Manitoba’s Objectives and Guidelines for Various Air Pollutants Ambient Air
Quality Criteria provide ambient environmental air quality objectives for Manitoba.
4.1.6. Ontario (Sudbury)
Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) emissions from INCO Ltd. and Falconbridge Ltd. in
Sudbury are regulated under orders issued by the Ministry of the Environment in
1978, and revised in 1983 113 . Under these orders, the companies are limited to a
maximum hourly ground level concentration average of 0.5 parts per million
(ppm) of SO 2 . On September 6, 2001, the Ministry of the Environment proposed
new orders that became effective April 1, 2002. These require, among other
things, Inco Ltd. and Falconbridge Ltd. smelter emissions to not exceed a
maximum hourly ground level concentration of 0.34 ppm of SO 2 on a rolling
hourly average basis. In addition, both facilities will have their annual SO 2
emissions cap reduce by 34% by 2007 from the emissions cap set in 1994.
4.1.7. Ontario (Other)
Ontario’s General - Air Pollution Regulation 114 (Environmental Protection Act
R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 346) is designed to regulate most stationary sources of air
pollution. The regulation requires that prescribed ambient air concentrations for
prescribed pollutants are met at the Point of Impingement (POI) as determined
by atmospheric modelling protocols set out in the guidelines for these substances
are provided in the Summary of Point of Impingement Standards, Point of
Impingement Guidelines and Ambient Air Quality Criteria (AAQCs) 115 .. The
regulated party is required to meet the point of impingement limits through
changes such as modifying process equipment, changing stack height, installing
control equipment and/or switching to less harmful feed substances. The
regulation also specifies opacity standards.
111 Alberta Ambient Air Quality Guidelines
112 Inco Limited and Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Co., Limited Smelter Complex Regulation
Man. Reg. 165/88
113 Ontario Ministry of the Environment. URL:
http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/sudbury/sudbury.htm
114 General -- Air Pollution (Environmental Protection Act R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 346), As amended
by: O. Reg. 795/94; 526/98. URL: http://192.75.156.68:81/ISYSquery/IRL30D5.tmp/4/doc
115 Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Standards Development Branch, Summary of Point of
Impingement Standards, Point of Impingement Guidelines and Ambient Air Quality Criteria
(AAQCs), November 1999.
121

Point-of-Impingement concentrations for substances not listed in this regulation
can be included in a Certificate of Approval.
Ontario MOE has also published ambient air quality criteria for the protection of
human health and the environment “Ambient Air Quality Criteria R.R.O. 1990,
Reg. 337 116 ”.
4.1.8. Québec
Emissions are regulated in Québec by the “Regulation Respecting the Quality of
the Atmosphere R.R.Q.A.. 1981. c. Q-2,r.20 117 ”. This regulation provides criteria
for ambient air as well as for emissions.
The regulation (Section 24, Schedule A) limits particulate emissions to the
atmosphere for existing sources on an hourly basis. Various schedules specify
an allowable emission standard in kg/h based on the process weight
(tonnes/hour).
Section 25 of the regulation specifies limits on particulate matter from the
handling of concentrate.
Sections 91 and 92 have specific emission requirements for copper and zinc
smelting plants respectively.
Amendments to the regulation have been proposed. For copper and zinc
production plants, they include changes to standards on particulate matter and
SO 2 emissions, the addition of mercury standards, and requirements for annual
particulate matter and SO 2 compliance sampling.
Also, on May 1, 2002, Quebec adopted an order requiring facilities in the mining
and primary metals industry to hold a Depollution Attestation 118 , 119 . The order
takes effect under the Programme de réduction des rejets industriels (PRRI).
The Depollution Attestation is tailored to specific features of a facility and is
renewable every five years. It contains conditions that may include the
identification of release points and sources, fees for contaminants released,
release standards and monitoring requirements. The roughly 65 industrial
facilities in the mining, cement, and metallurgy sectors (aluminium smelters, steel
mills, copper, zinc, and magnesium production facilities) targeted by this new
order will have six months after its date of entry into force to apply to the
Environment Department for a Depollution Attestation.
116 Ambient Air Quality Criteria R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 337
117 Regulation respecting the quality of the atmosphere R.R.Q. 1981, c. Q-2, r. 20, made under
the Environment Quality Act, As amended by: O.C. 240-85; 1004-85; 187-88; 715-90; 584-92;
1544-92; 448-96; 1310-97
118 O.C. 515-2002, Gazette officielle du Québec, May 15, 2002, Vol. 134, No. 20, page 2341
119 Environnement Québec, Communiqué de presse, 31 mai 2002 (from translation by
Environment Canada). URL:
http://www.menv.gouv.qc.ca/Infuseur/mois_communiques.asp?mois=5&annee=2002
122

4.1.9. New Brunswick
New Brunswick’s Air Quality Regulation 120 classifies sources of air pollution by
the amount and type of contaminants they produce. It sets maximum levels for
smoke density (i.e., opacity) and limits the release of air pollutants so that
maximum permissible ground-level concentrations are not exceeded.
4.1.10. City of Montréal
The City of Montréal By-Law 90 121 , pertaining to air purification, requires from
metallurgical facilities to have control devices to ensure particulate matter
releases do not exceed the specified concentration.
This by-law limits the emission of particulate matter from copper and other metal
facilities. The by-law also limits the release of lead and particulate matter from
lead facilities.
In addition to the industry specific emission limits, the by-law includes generic
emission limits for Point of Impingement (POI). These limits are based on a
calculation that takes into account several parameters including the flow rate of
the gas, height of the stack and wind speed.
4.1.11. Canadian Jurisdiction’s Air Release and Ambient Standards
Air release limits can exist at different control points. There are four main
mechanisms used to regulate releases to the air:
• Source Release Limits whereby the concentration of a specific
substance is measured at/inside the stack (point of release). Limits are
typically expressed as mg/Nm 3 .
• Point of Impingement whereby a system of modelling and remote (often
at fence-line) monitors determines the ambient concentration of a
specific substance. Typically, this is expressed as µg/m 3 .
• Weight per Unit Time set a total value that can not be exceeded.
Usually set for an entire site on a monthly or annual basis.
• Weight per Unit of Feed or Product which relates emissions of
particulate matter and SO 2 as a ratio to the quantity of smelter feed or
product (e.g., kg of pollutant per tonne of product).
The following series of tables present, for each substance addressed in this
report, the numeric values for the regulations relevant to the Base Metals
Smelting Sector.
Where a numeric standard does not exist for a specific jurisdiction, this is noted
with N/A in the comments column and blanks in the other columns.
120 Air Quality Regulation (N.B. Reg. 97-133)
121 Règlement 90-3, Règlement modifiant le règlement 90 relatif à l’assainissement de l’air, URL:
http://applicatif.ville.montréal.qc.ca/framville.asp?url=http://services.ville.montréal.qc.ca/aireau/fr/accuairf.htm
123

Where a standard exists, it is noted in the appropriate column as either a stack
concentration, point-of-impingement or loading limit. The other columns (for the
different types of standards) are left blank.
124

4.1.11.1. Particulate Matter
Table 14 shows the Canadian environmental release standards applicable to the
Base Metals Smelting Sector for particulate matter. Table 15 shows the ambient
air quality standards for particulate matter.
Table 14: Canadian Particulate Matter Release Standards 1
Jurisdiction
Stack
Concentration
Federal 0.046 1 g/Nm 3
Point-of-Impingement Loading Comments
0.023 2 g/Nm 3 SOR/91-155
secondary lead smelters
BC 1.5 kg/tonne Copper Pollution Control Objectives
1979 - Copper Smelters
BC 4.5 kg/tonne Lead Pollution Control Objectives
1979 - Lead Smelters
BC 1.0 kg/tonne Zinc Pollution Control Objectives
1979 - Zinc Smelters
Alberta 0.046 2 g/Nm 3
0.023 3 g/Nm 3 Alta. Reg. 124/93
for secondary lead smelters
Alberta 0.20 g/kg effluent Alta. Reg. 124/93
for certain operations
Manitoba
Manitoba
Manitoba 0.046 a g/Nm 3
(46 mg/Nm 3 )
0.023 b g/Nm 3
(23 mg/Nm 3 )
Ontario
100 µg/m 3 - ½ hour avg.
(PM< 44µm diameter)
310 tonnes/month
3000 tonnes/yr
258 tonnes/month
2500 tonnes/yr
Man. Reg. 165/88
Inco Thompson
Man. Reg. 165/88
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting
“By informal agreement with
Canada, Manitoba’s
Environment Act licences for
secondary lead smelters reflect
the federal emission
requirements.”
Ont. Reg. 346
Québec 50 mg/Nm 3 R.R.Q. 1981, c. Q-2, r-.20
Concentrate handling
Québec 50 mg/m 3 R.R.Q. 1981, c. Q-2, r-.20
Zinc smelting plants
Québec
0.75 kg/tonne of
copper concentrate
proposed new
standards are from
1.2 to 0.6 kg/tonne
of copper
concentrate
proposed new
standards are from
R.R.Q. 1981, c. Q-2, r-.20
For new copper smelters
For existing copper plants
using a continuous reactor
For existing copper
125

Jurisdiction
Stack
Concentration
Point-of-Impingement Loading Comments
3.0 to 1.75 kg/tonne
of copper
concentrate
reverberatory furnaces
Proposed new
standard is 0.3
kg/tonne of copper
concentrate
For new copper smelters
NB
N/A
Montréal 25-50 mg/m 3 CUM Reg. 90
Copper/other metal operations
Montréal 23 mg/m 3 CUM Reg. 90 lead facility
Montréal 40 µg/m 3 - 15 min. avg. CUM Reg. 90
1 – Total Particulate Matter (TPM) unless otherwise specified
2 – For Operations involving the use of blast furnaces, cupolas or reverberatory furnaces. (secondary lead
smelters)
3 - For operations involving the use of holding furnaces, kettle furnaces or lead oxide production units or
involving scrap handling and material handling, crushing, furnace tapping, furnace slagging, furnace cleaning
or casting. (secondary lead smelters)
126

Table 15: Canadian Ambient Particulate Matter Standards
Total Particulate Matter (TPM) unless otherwise stated
Jurisdiction/
Ambient
Regulation
Regulation/Source
Federal
Federal and Canada
Wide Standards
British Columbia
Alberta
Manitoba
Manitoba
Ontario
Desirable: 60 µg/m 3 - annual
Acceptable: 70 µg/m 3 - annual
PM 2.5 a
30 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
60-70 µg/m 3 - annual geom. mean
150-200 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
60 µg/m 3 - annual geom. mean
100 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
requirement for monitoring
(no numeric limits specified in this
regulation)
Desirable: 60 µg/m 3 - annual
Acceptable: 70 µg/m 3 - annual
60 µg/m 3 - annual geom. mean
120 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
National Ambient Air Quality Objectives, 1989
By 2010
Source: Environment Canada/Health Canada
Canada Gazette, Part I, Feb. 5, 2000 and
CCME - CWS, June 2000
Pollution Control Objectives 1979
Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives, 1979
Man. Reg. 165/88
Inco and Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting
Smelter Complex Regulation
Manitoba’s Objectives and Guidelines for
Various Air Pollutants Ambient Air Quality
Criteria March 1997
Ont. Reg. 337, 1990
Ambient Air Quality Criteria
Ontario
Québec
PM 10 b
50 µg/m 3 - 24 hr avg.
0-70 µg/m 3 - annual geom. mean
0-150 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
Interim Ambient Air Quality Criterion (AAQC)
R.R.Q. 1981, c. Q-2, r-.20
Regulation Respecting the Quality of the
Atmosphere
New Brunswick
70 µg/m 3 - annual geom. mean
120 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
Montréal
300 µg/m 3 - 8 hr. avg.
190 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
150 µg/m 3 - 1 month avg.
70 µg/m 3 - 1 year avg.
Notes:
a - PM 2.5: Particulate Matter 2.5 micron or less in size
b - PM 10: Particulate matter 10 microns or less in size
N.B. Reg. 97-133
Air Quality Regulation
CUM By-law 90
By-law pertaining to Air Purification
127

4.1.11.2. Sulphur Dioxide
Table 16 shows the Canadian environmental release standards applicable to the
Base Metals Smelting Sector for sulphur dioxide. Table 17 shows the ambient
air quality standards for sulphur dioxide.
Table 16: Canadian Sulphur Dioxide Release Standards
Jurisdiction
Stack
Concentration
Point-of-Impingement Loading Comments
Federal
BC
Alberta
Manitoba
Manitoba
23 ktonnes/month
220 ktonnes/yr
23 ktonnes/month
220 ktonnes/yr
Ontario 830 µg/m 3 - ½ hr. avg. Inco-Copper Cliff
(current 265 kt
reduced to 175 kt by
2007)
N/A
N/A
N/A
Man. Reg. 165/88
Inco Thompson
Man. Reg. 165/88
Hudson Bay Mining
and Smelting
Ont Reg 660/85
+ Director’s Order
Falconbridge-Sudbury
(current 100 kt
reduced to 66 kt by
2007)
Ont Reg 661/85
+ Director’s Order
Québec
See Table below
New Brunswick
N/A
Montréal 860 µg/m 3 - 15 min. avg. CUM Reg. 90
N/A - A numeric standard does not specifically exist in regulations for this jurisdiction
128

Sulphur Dioxide Releases from Copper Plants (Québec)
Category of Plant
Quantity of Sulphur Dioxide
Existing plant using a continuous
reactor
Any other existing plants
From 1990: 50 % of total annual emissions in 1980
(New proposed standards are from 25% to 10%)
275 kg/tonne of dry concentrate introduced into the process
(New proposed standards are from 30% to 20%)
Any new plant
5% in the form of sulphur dioxide, of the sulphur contained in the concentrate,
flux, fuels, and other matters introduced into the process
Note: From R.R.Q. 1981, c. Q-2, r-.20
The Québec regulations (R.R.Q.A. 1981, c. Q-2, r-.20) specify limits for sulphur
dioxide from zinc smelters as follows:
• As sulphur dioxide, more than 8% of the total sulphur introduced
monthly into an existing zinc smelter plant, or more than 20 kilograms of
sulphur dioxide per tonne of sulphuric acid at 100% produced by an
existing sulphuric acid plant used to reduce sulphur dioxide emissions
into the atmosphere
• As sulphur dioxide, more than 4% of the total sulphur introduced
monthly into a new zinc smelting plant, or more than 5 kilograms of
sulphur dioxide at 100% produced by a new sulphuric acid plant used to
reduce sulphur dioxide emissions to the atmosphere (This standard is
proposed as the new standard for all existing new zinc smelting plants)
• More than 0.5 kilograms of sulphuric acid mist per tonne of acid at
100% produced, for an existing sulphuric acid plant used to reduce
sulphur dioxide emissions into the atmosphere
• More than 0.075 kilograms of sulphuric acid mist per tonne of acid at
100% produced, for a new sulphuric acid plant used to reduce sulphur
dioxide emissions into the atmosphere.
129

Table 17: Canadian Ambient Sulphur Dioxide Standards
Jurisdiction Ambient Concentration Comments
Federal
Federal
BC
Alberta
450 µg/m 3 - 1 hr. avg. (172 ppb)
150 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
30 µg/m 3 - annual mean
900 µg/m 3 - 1 hr. avg. (344 ppb)
300 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
60 µg/m 3 - annual mean
450-900 µg/m 3 - 1 hr. avg.
375-665 µg/m 3 - 3 hr. avg.
160-260 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
25-75 µg/m 3 - annual mean
450 µg/m 3 - 1 hr. avg.
150 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
30 µg/m 3 - annual mean
National Ambient Air Quality Objectives -
Desirable Levels, 1989
National Ambient Air Quality Objectives -
Acceptable Levels, 1989
Pollution Control Objectives 1979
Alberta Ambient Air Quality Guidelines, 1979
Manitoba requirement for monitoring Man. Reg. 165/88
Inco and Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting
Smelter Complex Regulation
Manitoba
Ontario
Québec
New Brunswick
Montréal
450 µg/m 3 - 1 hr. avg.
150 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
30 µg/m 3 - annual mean
0.25 ppm- 1 hr. avg.
(654 µg/m 3 )
0.10 ppm - 24 hr. avg.
(262 µg/m 3 )
0.02 ppm- annual mean
(52 µg/m 3 )
0-1310 µg/Nm 3 - 1 hr. avg.
0-288 µg/Nm 3 - 24 hr. avg.
0-52 µg/Nm 3 - annual mean
900 µg/m 3 - 1 hr. avg.
300 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
60 µg/m 3 - annual mean
(ground level)
1300 µg/m 3 - 8 hr. avg.
490 µg/m 3 - 24 hr. avg.
260 µg/m 3 - 1 month avg.
Manitoba’s Objectives and Guidelines for
Various Air Pollutants Ambient Air Quality
Criteria March 1997
Ont. Reg. 337 a , 1990
Ambient Air Quality Criteria
R.R.Q. 1981, c. Q-2, r-.20
Regulation respecting the Quality of the
Atmosphere
N.B. Reg. 97-133
Air Quality Regulation
MUC By-law 90
By-law pertaining to Air Pollution
52 µg/m 3 - annual mean
Note: (a) Standard specified in ppm. Conversion to µg/m 3 supplied for comparison purposes
130

4.1.11.3. Arsenic
Table 18 shows the Canadian environmental release standards applicable to the Base
Metals Smelting Sector for arsenic. Table 19 shows the ambient air quality standards for
arsenic.
Table 18: Canadian Arsenic Air Release Standards
Jurisdiction
Stack
Concentration
Point-of-Impingement Loading Comments
Federal
BC
BC
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
1.0 µg/m 3 –½ hour avg.
(proposed
0.15 µg/m 3 –½ hour avg.)
0.1 kg/ tonne Copper
(Copper smelters)
0.1 kg/tonne Lead
(Lead smelters)
N/A
Pollution Control
Objectives, 1979
Pollution Control
Objectives, 1979
N/A
N/A
Summary of POI
Standards &
Guidelines and
AAQCs
Québec
N/A
New Brunswick
N/A
Montréal 0.15 µg/m 3 –15 min. avg. CUM Reg. 90
Table 19: Canadian Ambient Arsenic Standards
Jurisdiction Ambient Concentration Comments
Federal
N/A
BC 0.1-1.0 µg/m 3 Pollution Control Objectives, 1979
Alberta
N/A
Manitoba
N/A
Ontario
0.3 µg/m 3 – 24 hour avg
Ontario 0.3 µg/m 3 – 24 hour avg Summary of POI Standards & Guidelines and AAQCs
Québec
N/A
New Brunswick
N/A
Montréal
0.09 µg/m 3 -1 hr. avg.
0.05 µg/m 3 – 8 hr. avg.
CUM Reg. 90
131

4.1.11.4. Cadmium
Table 20 shows the Canadian environmental release standards applicable to the
Base Metals Smelting Sector for cadmium. Table 21 shows the ambient air
quality standards for cadmium.
Table 20: Canadian Cadmium Air Release Standards
Jurisdiction
Stack
Concentration
Point-of-Impingement Loading Comments
Federal
N/A
BC
N/A
Alberta
N/A
Manitoba
N/A
Ontario 5.0 µg/m 3 - ½ hour avg. Ont. Reg. 346
Québec
N/A
New Brunswick
N/A
Montréal 1.5 µg/m 3 – 15 min. avg. CUM Reg. 90
Table 21: Canadian Ambient Cadmium Standards
Jurisdiction Ambient Concentration Comments
Federal
N/A
BC 0.05-0.1 µg/m 3 Pollution Control Objectives (1979)
Alberta
N/A
Manitoba
N/A
Ontario 2.0 µg/m 3 – 24 hour avg. Ont. Reg. 337
Québec
N/A
New Brunswick
N/A
Montréal
0.96 µg/m 3 – 1 hour avg.
0.5 µg/m 3 – 8 hour avg.
CUM Reg. 90
132

4.1.11.5. Lead
Table 22 shows the Canadian environmental release standards applicable to the
Base Metals Smelting Sector for lead. Table 23 shows the ambient air quality
standards for lead.
Table 22: Canadian Lead Air Release Standards
Jurisdiction
Stack
Concentration
Point-of-Impingement Loading Comments
Federal
BC
concentration of
lead in PM not to
exceed 63% by
weight of PM 1
Alberta 0.029 2 g/Nm 3
Manitoba
0.5 kg/tonne Lead
(Lead smelters)
SOR/91-155
Pollution Control
Objectives 1979
Alta. Reg. 124/93
0.014 3 g/Nm 3 for secondary lead
smelters
Ontario 6.0 µg/m 3 - ½ hour avg Ont. Reg. 346
Québec
New Brunswick
Montréal 15 mg/m 3 CUM Reg. 90
lead facility
Montréal 15 µg/m 3 – 15 min. avg. CUM Reg. 90
Notes:
1 - This formula calculates to 0.029 g/Nm 3 for operations listed in Note 2 and 0.014 g/Nm 3 for operations
listed in Note 3
2 – For Operations involving the use of blast furnaces, cupolas or reverberatory furnaces. (secondary lead
smelters)
3 – For operations involving the use of holding furnaces, kettle furnaces or lead oxide production units or
involving scrap handling and material handling, crushing, furnace tapping, furnace slagging, furnace cleaning
or casting. (secondary lead smelters)
N/A
N/A
N/A
133

Table 23: Canadian Ambient Lead Standards
Jurisdiction Ambient Concentration Comments
Federal
BC 1.0-2.5 µg/m 3 Pollution Control Objectives 1979
Alberta
Manitoba
Ontario
5 µg/m 3 – 24 hr. avg. Manitoba’s Objectives and Guidelines for Various Air
Pollutants Ambient Air Quality Criteria March 1997
2.0 µg/m 3 – 24 hr. avg.
Ont. Reg. 337
0.7 µg/m 3 – 30 day mean
Québec 0-2 µg/m 3 – annual avg. R.R.Q. 1981, c. Q-2, r-.20
New Brunswick
Montréal
10 µg/m 3 – 8 hr. avg.
5 µg/m 3 – 24 hr. avg.
N/A
N/A
N/A
CUM Reg. 90
134

4.1.11.6. Mercury
Table 24 shows the Canadian environmental release standards applicable to the
Base Metals Smelting Sector for mercury. Table 25 shows the ambient air
quality standards for mercury.
Table 24: Canadian Mercury Air Release Standards
Jurisdiction
Federal
Canada-Wide
Standard
Canada-Wide
Standard
Stack
Concentration
Point-of-Impingement Loading Comments
2 g/tonne finished
metal
N/A
For existing facilities 1
1 g/tonne Copper For new and
expanding facilities 2
Canada-Wide
Standard
BC
Alberta
Manitoba
0.2 g/tonne Zinc,
Nickel or Lead
For new and
expanding facilities 2
Ontario 5.0 µg /m 3 - ½ hour avg Ont. Reg. 346
Québec
New Brunswick
New proposed
standards are:
2 g/tonne finished
metal
&
0.2 g/tonne finished
metal
N/A
N/A
N/A
For existing copper
facilities
For new copper
facilities and all
existing and new zinc
facilities
Montréal 5 µg/m 3 – 15 min. avg. CUM Reg. 90
Notes:
1 Based on the best available pollution prevention and control techniques economically achievable
2 Application of best available pollution prevention and control techniques to minimize mercury emission
N/A
135

Table 25: Canadian Ambient Mercury Standards
Jurisdiction Ambient Concentration Comments
Federal
N/A
BC 0.1–1.0 µg/m 3 Pollution Control Objectives 1979
Alberta
N/A
Manitoba
N/A
Ontario 2.0 µg/m 3 – 24 hr. avg. Ont. Reg. 337
Québec
N/A
New Brunswick
N/A
Montréal
3.9 µg/m 3 – 8 hr. avg.
2.5 µg/m 3 – 24 hr. avg.
2.0 µg/m 3 – 1 month avg.
1.0 µg/m 3 – 1 year avg.
CUM Reg. 90
136

4.1.11.7. Nickel
Table 26 shows the Canadian environmental release standards applicable to the
Base Metals Smelting Sector for nickel. Table 27 shows the ambient air quality
standards for nickel.
Table 26: Canadian Nickel Air Release Standards
Jurisdiction
Stack
Concentration
Point-of-Impingement Loading Comments
Federal
N/A
BC
N/A
Alberta
N/A
Manitoba
N/A
Ontario 5.0 µg/m 3 - ½ hour avg. Ont. Reg. 346
Québec
N/A
New Brunswick
N/A
Montréal 15 µg/m 3 – 15 min. avg. CUM Reg. 90
Table 27: Canadian Ambient Nickel Concentration
Jurisdiction Ambient Concentration Comments
Federal
N/A
BC 0.01-0.1 µg/m 3 Pollution Control Objectives 1979
Alberta
N/A
Manitoba
N/A
Ontario 2.0 µg/m 3 – 24 hr. avg. Ont. Reg. 337
Québec
N/A
New Brunswick
N/A
Montréal
9.6 µg/m 3 – 8 hr. avg.
5 µg/m 3 – 24 hr. avg.
CUM Reg. 90
137

4.2. Current International Emission Management Practices,
Standards and Regulations 122,123
4.2.1. United States
This section presents information on air regulatory mechanisms in the US. In the
US, Federal air emission standards are promulgated under the authority of the
Clean Air Act (CAA). These standards establish a minimum stringency, which
must be enforced on all facilities. Enforcement is usually delegated to the states,
which issue permits for air, water and solid waste.
Ambient air quality standards have been developed for six pollutants; particulate
matter, lead, nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and ozone.
These are known as criteria pollutants because ambient air quality criteria exists
for them. These standards are found in CFR 40, Part 50 124 . Air quality in
designated geographical regions were then categorized as an attainment area if
the air quality met the ambient standard or non-attainment if the ambient air
quality standard was not met. Table 28 shows the US Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
Table 28: US Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant
Particulate Matter (PM 10)
Particulate Matter (PM 2.5)
Lead
Ambient Standard
150 µg/m 3 (24 hour average)
50 µg/m 3 (annual average)
65 µg/m 3 (24 hour average)
15.0 µg/m 3 (annual average)
1.5 µg/m 3 (quarterly average)
Sulphur Dioxide
1310 µg/m 3 (3 hour average)
365 µg/m 3 (24 hour maximum)
80 µg/m 3 (annual average)
122 Hatch Associates Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
Appendix C, International Environmental Standards, prepared for Environment Canada, dated
November 2000
123 Hatch Associates Proposed Emissions Standards for Particulate Matter and Sulphur Dioxide
for the Base Metals Smelting Sector, Appendix B, International Environmental Standards,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated May 2002
124 US Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register, 40 CFR, Part 50 National Primary
and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards, Subparts 50.4-50.7
138

New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) are industry-specific performance
standards, which are applied to significantly modified or new facilities and
facilities in non-attainment areas of ambient air quality standards. Standards
exist for primary lead smelters 125 and secondary lead smelters 126 , copper
smelters 127 and zinc smelters 128 . These standards limit emissions of particulate
matter, visible emissions (opacity) and sulphur dioxide from specific sources
within the facility. The particulate matter (concentration and opacity) and sulphur
dioxide limits are summarized in Table 29.
Table 29: US New Source Performance Standards Emission Limits
Operation Type
Secondary Lead
Smelters
Primary Copper
Smelter
Primary Zinc
Smelters
Primary Lead
Smelters
Regulatory
Reference
CFR 40
Part 60
Subpart L
CFR 40
Part 60
Subpart P
CFR 40
Part 60
Subpart Q
CFR 40
Part 60
Subpart R
Notes: dscm – dry standard cubic meter
Equipment
Pot Furnaces with more than
250 kg charging capacity
Blast (cupola) furnaces
Reverberatory furnaces
Dryer
Roaster
Smelting Furnace
Copper Converter
Roaster
Sintering Machine
Sintering machine
Sintering Machine Discharge
End
Blast Furnace
Dross reverberatory furnace
Electric Smelting furnace
Converter
Particulate
matter
50 mg/dscm
20% opacity
50 mg/dscm
20% opacity
50 mg/dscm
20% opacity
50 mg/dscm
20% opacity
Sulphur
Dioxide
0.065 % (by
volume)
0.065 % (by
volume)
0.065 % (by
volume)
0.065 % (by
volume)
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has the authority
to set emission standards for hazardous air pollutants, i.e., National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
The USEPA has a list of 189 hazardous air pollutants 129 . Arsenic, mercury,
cadmium, lead and nickel are among the pollutants listed. The USEPA then
developed a list of sources of these pollutants. Lead smelters and copper
smelters are included in the list of sources. At this time, zinc smelters and the
one existing nickel smelter are not listed as sources of these pollutants.
125 US Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register, 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart R, 1977
126 US Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register, 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart L, 1977
127 US Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register, 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart P, 1977
128 US Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register, 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart Q, 1977
129 US Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register, 40 CFR, Part 61, 1986
139

There are two air emission standards that have been promulgated that apply to
the Base Metals Smelting Sector:
• Hazardous Air Pollutants for Primary Lead Smelting (Table 30)
• Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Primary Copper Smelters (Table 31)
The EPA also limits arsenic emissions by controlling emissions of particulate
matter.
Table 30: US National Emission Standard for Primary Lead Smelting 130
Source Limit Conditions
Aggregated lead emissions from
the following process and
process fugitive sources:
1. Sinter machine;
2. Blast furnace;
3. Dross furnace;
4. Dross furnace charging
location;
5. Blast and dross furnace
tapping locations;
6. Sinter machine charging
location;
7. Sinter machine discharge
end;
8. Sinter crushing and sizing
equipment;
9. Sinter machine area.
500 g Pb /Mg of lead produced
(500 g/tonne)
(1.0 lb/ton of lead produced)
The lead compound emission
limit is a surrogate for all metal
HAP's and will apply to both
existing and new sources.
Requires that the charging,
tapping, and sinter handling
sources identified above (items 4
through 8) be equipped with a
hood ventilated to a control
device.
Each primary lead smelter would
be required to develop a
Standard Operating Procedures
(SOP) manual for fugitive dust
sources that details procedures
to limit fugitive dust emissions.
130 40 CFR, Part 63, Subpart TTT (63.1541-63.63.1550) National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Primary Lead Smelting (published in the Federal Register on June 4,
1999). URL: www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_99/40cfrv9_99.html
140

Table 31: US National Emission Standard for Inorganic Arsenic from
Primary Copper Smelter 131
Source Limit Conditions
Any copper smelter which the
total arsenic charging rate is
75 kg/hr or more, on an
annual average
11.6 mg/m 3 of particulate
matter from control device
treating copper converter
secondary emissions
Install, operate and maintain a
secondary hood system on
each copper converter.
Optimize the capture of
secondary inorganic
emissions
Comply with inspection and
maintenance requirements
The EPA has started developing particulate matter emission standards for
primary copper smelters. The National Emission Standards for Primary Copper
Smelters were proposed in 1998 and a series of amendments were proposed on
June 2000 132 . (Table 32). US EPA personnel reported that the final Rule package
is in Washington Headquarters for the Administrator’s signature. Dates of
signature and publication in the Federal Register are unknown 133 .
131 40 CFR, Part 63, Subpart O, 1986 (61.170-61.177, National Emission Standards for Inorganic
Arsenic from Primary Copper Smelters. URL:
www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_99/40cfrv7_99.html
132 National Emission Standards for Primary Copper Smelters, Proposed Rule, 1998. URL:
www.epa.gov/ttnuatw1/copper/fr20ap98.txt
40 CFR Part 63, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source
Categories: National Emission Standards for Primary Copper Smelters, [Federal Register: June
26, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 123)][Proposed Rules] URL: http://www.epa.gov/EPA-
AIR/2000/June/Day-26/a15915.htm
133 Personal communication from Gene Crumpler (USEPA) to Dianne Rubinoff (Hatch
Associates) February 24, 2002
141

Table 32:
US Proposed Particulate Matter Emission Standards for
Primary Copper Smelters
Source Limit Conditions
Existing Copper Concentrate
Dryers
New Copper Concentrate
Dryers
Smelting Vessels
Slag Cleaning Vessels
Copper Converter
Copper Converter
Fugitive Dust
PM - 50 mg/m 3
PM - 23 mg/m 3
Same for Existing and New
PM - 23 mg/m 3
Same for Existing and New
PM – 46 mg/m 3
PM - 23 mg/m 3
Existing
3% opacity from converter
building
PM - 23 mg/m 3
New
No visible emissions
Any type of PM device that
meets these values allowed.
Bag leak detection on
baghouses and continuous
parameter monitoring on
ESPs and scrubbers
Any type of PM device that
meets these values allowed.
Bag leak detection on
baghouses and continuous
parameter monitoring on
ESPs and scrubbers
No applicable conditions
No applicable conditions
Use of primary and secondary
hooding on Peirce-Smith type
converters
No applicable conditions
Development of a fugitive dust
control plan
142

In the permitting process, facilities must demonstrate compliance with all federal,
state and local regulations. Pollutants, which are reasonably suspected to be
emitted from the source will have limits, set in the permit. Permits for the base
metals industry will typically contain limits for a combination of PM10 (particulate
matter of less than 10 microns in diameter), sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ), carbon
monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), lead and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs). Limits on these pollutants may also have the effect of controlling the
releases of heavy metals. Alternatively, limits for toxic substances may also be
specified in the permit.
Permits may also control releases by specifying the use of specific technologies
so as to reach the desired level.
In general, air permits:
• Must comply with National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP), National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS), New Source Performance Standards (NSPS);
• Must demonstrate Best Achievable Control Technology (BACT) in
attainment areas;
• Must demonstrate Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) in nonattainment
areas;
• Include requirements for scheduling air stack testing and installation of
continuous environmental monitoring; and
• May include additional limits for heavy metals and other toxics.
Under the U.S. EPA’s Risk Management Planning (RMP) Rule [s112 of the Clean
Air Act Amendments, 1990], sulphur dioxide is listed as a toxic substance with a
threshold quantity of 5,000 lbs. Therefore, those facilities with the potential of
hazardous emissions or releases, covered by the RMP rule, must develop and
implement a risk management program and maintain documentation of the
program at the site. The program includes an analysis of the potential off-site
consequences of an accidental release, a 5-year accident history, a release
prevention program and an emergency response program. With the RMP rule,
releases of sulphur dioxide will be more closely monitored.
143

4.2.2. World Bank
The World Bank has set guidelines 134 for emissions from:
• copper smelting (Table 33);
• lead and zinc smelting (Table 34); and
• nickel smelting and refining (Table 35).
Table 33: World Bank Guidelines for Emissions from Copper Smelting
Parameter Maximum Value (mg/Nm 3 )
SO 2 1,000
Arsenic 0.5
Cadmium 0.05
Copper 1
Lead 0.2
Mercury 0.05
Particulate Matter – Smelter 20
Particulate Matter - Other 50
The guidelines indicate that modern plants using good industrial practices should
set as targets total dust releases of 0.5-1.0 kg / t of copper and SO 2 discharges
of 25 kg / t of copper.
The guidelines indicate that the double contact double adsorption plants should
emit no more than 0.2 kg of sulphur dioxide per ton of sulphuric acid produced
(based on a conversion efficiency of 99.7%).
134 Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook, 1998, The World Bank, ISBN-0-8213-2628-4.
URL: www.worldbank.org
144

Table 34: World Bank Guidelines for Emissions from Lead/Zinc Smelters
Parameter Maximum Value (mg/Nm 3 )
SO 2 400
Arsenic 0.1
Cadmium 0.05
Copper 0.5
Lead 0.5
Mercury 0.05
Zinc 1.0
Particulate Matter 20
The guidelines indicate that the target pollutant load for lead and zinc smelting
operations for particulate matter is 0.5 kg / t of concentrated ore processed.
The guidelines indicate that the double contact double adsorption plants should
emit no more than 2 kg of sulphur dioxide per ton of sulphuric acid produced
(based on a conversion efficiency of 99.7%). This value is inconsistent with the
value of 0.2 kg/t sulphuric acid as indicated for copper smelting. Clarification
from the World Bank has been received and the correct value should be 0.2
kg/ton acid.
Table 35: World Bank Guidelines for Emissions from Nickel Smelting and
Refining
Parameter Maximum Value (mg/Nm 3 )
SO 2
0.2 kg/t sulphuric acid
Particulate Matter 20
There is a printing error in the World Bank publication. The same section on
nickel smelting also indicates that “double contact double adsorption plants
should emit no more than 0.2 kg of sulphur dioxide per ton of sulphuric acid
produced (based on a conversion efficiency of 99.7%).” Clarification from the
World Bank has been received and the correct value should be 0.2 kg/ton
acid 135 .
135 Hatch Associates Proposed Emissions Standards for Particulate Matter and Sulphur Dioxide
for the Base Metals Smelting Sector, Appendix B, International Environmental Standards,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated May 2002
145

4.2.3. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE)
UNECE’s Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air
Pollution of Heavy Metals 136 deals with the emissions and emission control of
cadmium, lead and mercury in the primary and secondary production of nonferrous
metals like lead, copper, zinc, tin and nickel.
The Protocol requires each party to apply the limit values specified in annex V of
the protocol to each new stationary source within a major stationary source
category.
The limit values are also to be applied to each existing source within a major
stationary source category insofar as this is technically and economically
feasible.
“Installation for the production of copper, lead and zinc from ore, concentrate or
secondary raw materials by metallurgical process” is one of the major stationary
sources identified in the protocol.
Two types of limit values are used in the Protocol for heavy metal emission
control:
• Values for specific heavy metals or groups of heavy metals; and
• Values for emissions of particulate matter in general.
Table 36 shows the applicable limits for the non-ferrous industry:
Table 36: UNECE Particulate Emissions Limits
Category
Production of copper and zinc, including
Imperial Smelting furnaces
Limit
(mg/m 3 )
Production of lead 10
20
136 UNECE, Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution of
Heavy Metals. URL: www.unece.org/env/lrtap/protocol/98hm.htm
146

4.2.4. Australia
Air quality is controlled on a federal level with the National Environment
Protection Measure for Ambient Air Quality 137 . Table 37 shows the Australian
Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Table 37: Australian Ambient Air Quality Standards
Parameter
Sulphur Dioxide
Lead
Particles as PM 10
Maximum Concentration
0.20 ppm (1 hour)
0.08 ppm (1 day)
0.02 ppm (1 year)
0.50 µg/m 3 (1 year)
50 µg/m3 (1 day)
The Australian National Guideline for Control of Emission on Air Pollutants from
New Stationary Sources sets the following limits for particulate matter:
• Stack concentration - 100 mg/m 3 , and
• Opacity - 20%
The Guideline also set a limit for sulphur dioxide from “Any trade, industry or
process manufacturing sulphuric acid” as follows:
• 2.0 kg per tonne of 100% acid.
The various states and territories are responsible for the control of air pollution
from stationary sources. Each state has established industry specific air
emission standards. The Clean Air Regulation 1997 for the state of New South
Wales has been included as an example of typical Australian limits.
The state of New South Wales regulates emissions to air with the Clean Air
Regulation 1997 138 . This regulation limits the release of several parameters. The
following parameters with emission limits are relevant to the base metal smelting
industry:
• Sulphur (Table 38)– The sulphur regulations included below are for any
trade, industry or process manufacturing sulphuric acid otherwise than
from elemental sulphur.
137 National Environmental Protection Council National Environmental Protection Measure for
Ambient Air Quality, June 26, 1998
138 Clean Air (Plant and Equipment) Regulation 1997 under the Protection of the Environment
Operations Act 1997, New South Wales, July 1999. URL:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/caaer1997352/
147

• Hazardous Substances (Table 39)– These regulations are applicable to
any trade, industry or process. The elements have been grouped as
follows:
− Type 1 element – means antimony, arsenic, cadmium, lead or
mercury.
− Type 1 substance – means any type 1 element or any compound
of which a type 1 element forms part.
− Type 2 element – means beryllium chromium, cobalt,
manganese, nickel, selenium, tin or vanadium
− Type 2 substance – means any type 2 element or any compound
of which a type 2 element forms part.
Table 38: Australia/New South Wales Sulphur Dioxide Standards
SO 2
SO 2
Parameter Description Limit
Applies to any trade, industry or process
manufacturing sulphuric acid using as the
source of sulphur other than elemental
sulphur
Applies if the facility does not have a
pollution control approval or if the
application for approval was made before
January 1, 1972
Applies to any trade, industry or process
manufacturing sulphuric acid using as the
source of sulphur other than elemental
sulphur
Applies if application for pollution control
approval was made on or after January 1,
1972
7.2 g of SO 2 /m 3 of the
resulting gases
7.2 g of SO 2 /m 3 of the
resulting gases
148

Table 39: Australia/New South Wales Hazardous (Metals) Standards
Parameter Description Limit
Type 1 substance
(As, Cd, Hg and Pb)
Type 1 substance
(As, Cd, Hg and Pb)
Type 1 substance
(As, Cd, Hg and Pb)
No pollution control approval or approval
before January 1, 1972
Pollution control approval on or after
January 1, 1972 and before July 1, 1986
Pollution control approval made on or
after July 1, 1986.
20.0 mg of type 1 elements
per m 3 of resulting gases
20.0 mg of type 1 elements
per m 3 of resulting gases
10.0 mg of type 1 elements
or 3.0 mg or Cd or Hg per
m 3 of the resulting gases
Type 1 or 2
substance ( As, Cd,
Pb, Hg, Ni)
Premises that become scheduled on or
after August 1, 1997
5.0 mg of type 1 and 2
elements or 1.0 mg Cd or
Hg per m 3 of resulting gases
With respect to emissions of Particulate Matter, activities that require a licence
are listed under Schedule 1 139 of the Protection of the Environment Operations
Act. These premises are referred to as scheduled premises. Non-ferrous
activities are listed in Schedule 1 as follows:
• Mineral processing or metallurgical works for the commercial production
or extraction of ores (using methods including chemical, electrical,
magnetic, gravity or physico-chemical) or the refinement, processing or
reprocessing of metals involving smelting, casting, metal coating or
metal products recovery that:
− process into ore concentrates an intended capacity of more than
150 tonnes per day of material, or
− smelt, process, coat, reprocess or recover an intended capacity
of more than 10,000 tonnes per year of ferrous or non-ferrous
metals, alloys or their ore-concentrates, or
− crush, grind, shred, sort or store:
° more than 150 tonnes per day, or 30,000 tonnes per year,
of scrap metal and are not wholly contained within a
building, or
° more than 50,000 tonnes per year and are wholly
contained within a building.
Table 40 shows the Particulate Matter limits for scheduled premises and Table
41 shows the Particulate Matter limits for non-scheduled premises
139 Protection Of The Environment Operations Act 1997 - Schedule 1 Schedule of EPA-licensed
activities. URL:http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/poteoa1997455/sch1.html
149

Table 40: Australia/New South Wales Particle Emission Limits from
Scheduled Premises
Facility Description Limit
Any industrial plant (not
being a cold blast cupola)
used for heating metals
Limit applies if no pollution control approval
has been granted or if an application for an
approval was made before January 1, 1972
250 mg/m 3
Any industrial plant (not
being a cold blast cupola)
used for heating metals
Scheduled Premises
Limit applies if an application for a pollution
control approval was made on or after
January 1, 1972
Limit applies if premises became a scheduled
premise on or after August 1, 1997
200 mg/m 3
100 mg/m 3
Table 41: Australia/New South Wales Particle Emission Limits from Non-
Scheduled Premises
Facility Description Limit
Any trade, industry
or process and any
fuel burning
equipment or
industrial plant
Any trade, industry
or process and any
fuel burning
equipment or
industrial plant
Operation commenced before August
1, 1997
Operation commenced on or after
August 1, 1997
400 mg/m 3
250 mg/m 3
150

4.2.5. Japan
Environmental quality standards in Japan are defined in the Basic Law for
Environmental Pollution Control 140 . They define the pollutant levels aimed at
protecting health and the environment from ambient pollutants. Table 42 shows
Japan Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Table 42: Japan Ambient Air Quality Standards
Substance Value Time Frame
SO 2 under 0.1 ppm one hour
SO 2 under 0.04 ppm daily average of one hour value
CO under 20 ppm 8 hour average of one hour value
CO under 10 ppm daily average of one hour value
Suspended Particulate Matter under 0.20 mg/m 3 one hour value
Suspended Particulate Matter under 0.10 mg/m 3 daily average of one hour value
NO 2
within 0.04-0.06 ppm or
below
daily average of one hour value
Photo chemical oxidant under 0.06 ppm one hour value
The Air Pollution Control Law regulates (Table 43) the releases of pollutants. All
standards in this law were set to meet the environmental quality standards.
Table 43: Japan Air Pollution Control Law
Cadmium
Lead
Sulphur Dioxide
Substance
1.0 mg/Nm3
10-30 mg/Nm3
K control value*
Limit
140 International Union of Air Pollution Prevention Associations Clear Air Around the World, 2 nd
Edition, 1991, ISBN 1-871688-01-9, also Environmental Quality Standards in Japan
- Air Quality. URL: http://www.env.go.jp/en/lar/regulation/aq.html
151

4.2.6. European Union
The European Union (EU) has set in place directives that govern releases of
lead, particulate and sulphur dioxide to the air. Directives are binding on
Member States as to the results to be achieved, while leaving a degree of
flexibility on how the measure will be implemented in national legislation.
Guide values for particulates from new and existing Lead and Zinc works are
reported in the UN Heavy Metals Protocol Annex I, Control Measures for
Emissions of Cadmium, Lead and Mercury and their Compounds from Stationary
Sources 141 . Table 44 shows those Guide Values.
Table 44: EU Guide Values for Particulate Emissions for Non-Ferrous Metal
Production
Source
New Plants
Existing Plants
(mg/m 3 )
(mg/m 3 )
Lead Works 10 10
Zinc Works 20 20
Directive 1999/30/EC 142 of 22 April 1999 relating to limit values for sulphur
dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in
ambient air sets air quality limits as shown in Table 45.
Table 45: EU Ambient Air Quality Limits
Parameter
Limit
(µg/m 3 )
Particulate (PM10) 50 Daily by 2005
Timeframe and Schedule
Particulate (PM10) 40 Annual by 2005
Particulate (PM10) 50 Daily by 2010
Particulate (PM10) 20 Annual by 2010
Sulphur Dioxide 350 Hourly
Sulphur Dioxide 125 Daily
Sulphur Dioxide 20 Annual
141 UN Heavy Metal Protocol, Annex 1, Control Measures for Emissions of Cadmium, Lead, and
Mercury and Their Compounds from Stationary Sources, February 1996
142 Community Legislation in Force. URL: http://europa.eu.int/eurlex/en/lif/dat/1999/en_399L0030.html
152

Sulphur dioxide, particulate matter, lead, cadmium, arsenic nickel and mercury
are identified among the substances for which specific Directives must be
developed pursuant to the requirements of Council Directive 96/62/EC 143 of 27
September 1996 on ambient air quality assessment and management.
The IPPC (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) Directive 96/61/EC 144
lays down a framework requiring Member States to issue operating permits for
certain industrial installations. These permits must contain conditions based on
best available techniques as defined in the Directive. Article 16.2 of the Directive
requires the European Commission to organise an exchange of information
between Member States and the industries concerned on best available
techniques, associated monitoring and developments in them. It is the intention
to develop a series of reference documents over a period of at least 5 years so
as to cover, as far as practicable, the activities listed in Annex 1 to the Directive,
including non-ferrous installations. The Reference Document on Best Available
Techniques in the Non Ferrous Metals Industries 145 was published in May 2000.
143 Community Legislation in Force. URL: http://europa.eu.int/eurlex/en/lif/dat/1996/en_396L0062.html
144 IPPC Legislation. URL: http://www2.unimaas.nl/~egmilieu/Legislation/ippc.htm
145 European Commission, Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Reference
Document on Best Available Techniques in the Non-Ferrous Industries, May 2000. URL:
http://eippcb.jrc.es/pages/FAbout.htm
153

4.2.7. Germany
The basic law for air pollution in Germany is the Federal Imission Control Act
(FICA) 146,147 . The law requires industrial plants to be built and operated so that
they do not cause any effects which are harmful to the environment. The
Technical Instruction on Air Pollution (TA Luft) is the most important regulation to
implement FICA.
In general, air emission limits will be detailed in the permit (Genehmigung nach
BImSchG) of the facility.
Table 46 outlines the General emissions standards as detailed in Annex I of the
UN Heavy Metals Protocol.
Table 46: Germany Particulate Matter and Metals Emission Standards
Parameter
Lower Mass
Flow Threshold
(kg/h)
Limit Value
(mg/m 3 )
Upper Mass
Flow Threshold
(kg/h)
Limit Value
(mg/m 3 )
Particulate ≤0.5 150 >0.5 50
Parameter
Mass Flow
(g/h)
Limit Value
(g/ m 3 )
Mercury > 1 0.2
Lead > 25 5
Cadmium > 1 0.1
In addition, there are specific limits for the non-ferrous metals industry. Tables
47 and 48 outline the emissions standards as detailed in Annex II of the EC IPPC
Reference Document on BAT for Non-Ferrous Industries.
146 UN Heavy Metal Protocol, Annex 1, Control Measures for Emissions of Cadmium, Lead, and
Mercury and Their Compounds from Stationary Sources, February 1996
147 European Commission, Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Reference
Document on Best Available Techniques in the Non-Ferrous Industries, May 2000. URL:
http://eippcb.jrc.es/pages/FAbout.htm
154

Table 47: Germany Particulate Matter Emission Limits for Non-Ferrous
Industry
Type of Facility
Limit Value for Particulate
(mg/ m 3 )
Non-Ferrous 20
Lead 10
Table 48: Germany Metal Emission Limits for Secondary Lead Production
Type of Furnace Lead (g/kg dust) Cadmium (g/kg dust)
Short rotary furnaces 200 – 540 0.7 – 7
Reverberatory furnaces 300 – 500 0.1 – 5
Shaft furnaces 300 - 550 0.1 – 0.4
155

4.2.8. The Netherlands
The Air Pollution Act 148,149 is aimed at preventing and controlling air pollution and
covers stationary sources. No installation may be set up or operated without a
permit issued by the provincial authority. In general air emission limits will be
detailed in the environmental permit ("milieuvergunning") of the facility.
Table 49 outlines the General emissions standards as detailed in Annex I of the
UN Heavy Metals Protocol. In The Netherlands, the limit value of 10 mg/m 3
applies to all installations equipped with fabric filters independant of mass flow.
Table 49: The Netherlands Particulate and Metal Emission Standards
Parameter
Lower Mass
Flow Threshold
(kg/h)
Limit Value
(mg/m 3 )
Upper Mass
Flow Threshold
(kg/h)
Limit Value
(mg/m 3 )
Particulate 1 0.2
Cadmium > 1 0.2
Lead > 5 1
Table 50 and Table 51 outline the emissions standards for various facilities
Table 50: The Netherlands Particulate Matter Limits
Type of Facility
Limit Value for Particulate
(mg/ m 3 )
Zinc Operation 30
General Industry 25
Facility equipped with fabric filters independent of mass flow 10
148 UN Heavy Metal Protocol, Annex 1, Control Measures for Emissions of Cadmium, Lead, and
Mercury and Their Compounds from Stationary Sources, February 1996
149 European Commission, Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Reference
Document on Best Available Techniques in the Non-Ferrous Industries, May 2000. URL:
http://eippcb.jrc.es/pages/FAbout.htm
156

Table 51: The Netherlands Sulphur Dioxide Limits
Type of Facility
Limit Value
Zinc 1,200 mg/Nm 3
157

4.2.9. France
The Act of 19 July 1976 on Installations Registered of Environmental
Consideration 150,151 covers installations which present any kind of environmental
risk. Base metals smelters are likely to be classified installations for which prior
authorisation is required. The French permitting regime uses an integrated
approach where a single operating permit covers all environmental media and
stipulates the specific environmental protection measures to be observed by the
facility.
The Order of 2 February 1998 details the minimum requirements to be observed.
With regard to emissions of particulate matter, a distinction is made on the basis
of the volume of emissions. The same order also restricts emissions cadmium,
lead and mercury together with cadmium and thallium on the basis of the volume
of emissions.
Table 52 outlines France Particulate Matter and Metal Emission Standards.
Table 52: France Particulate Matter and Metal Emission Standards
Parameter
Particulate
Matter
Lower Mass
Flow Threshold
(kg/h)
Limit Value
(mg/m 3 )
Upper Mass
Flow Threshold
(kg/h)
Limit Value
(mg/m 3 )
1 0.2 (total metal*)
Cadmium > 1 0.2
Lead > 25 5
Note: Total Metal is the sum of Mercury+Cadmium+Thallium
Table 53 and Table 54 outline the emissions standards as detailed in Annex II of
the EC IPPC Reference Document on BAT for Non-Ferrous Industries.
150 UN Heavy Metal Protocol, Annex 1, Control Measures for Emissions of Cadmium, Lead, and
Mercury and Their Compounds from Stationary Sources, February 1996
151 European Commission, Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Reference
Document on Best Available Techniques in the Non-Ferrous Industries, May 2000. URL:
http://eippcb.jrc.es/pages/FAbout.htm
158

Table 53: France Particulate Matter Emission Limits
Type of Facility
Limit Value for Particulate
Zinc/Lead pyrometallurgical 10 mg/ m 3
Zinc/Lead pyrometallurgical
2.5 kg/hour
Table 54: France Sulphur Dioxide Emission Limits
Type of Facility
Limit Value for Sulphur Dioxide
Zinc/Lead pyrometallurgical 10 kg per tonne of sulphuric acid (H 2 SO 4 )
159

4.2.10. United Kingdom
In the UK, the Environmental Protection Act 1990 legislated for integrated
pollution control (IPC) under the authority of Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of
Pollution. SI No. 472 1991 sets out processes and substances to be covered by
IPC. Industry Sector Guidance Note IPR2 gives the limits achievable for
releases to water, air and land using appropriate techniques.
In general air emissions limits will be detailed in the relevant authorisation for the
facility. For the most complex and polluting or potentially polluting industrial
processes (Part A processes) this authorisation is an Integrated Pollution Control
(IPC) authorisation and is regulated under Environmental Protection Act 1990
Part I, IPC by the Environment Agency in England and Wales and in Scotland by
SEPA. Other industries, identified as Part B industries under Part 1 of the EPA
1990, fall under Local Authority Air Pollution Control where the authorisations are
issued by local authorities in England and Wales and by the Scottish
Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) in Scotland.
Table 55 shows the particulate matter and metals maximum concentrations from
the UK Environmental Protection Act 1990, Industry Sector Guidance Note IPR2.
Table 55: United Kingdom Maximum Concentrations of Pollutants to Air
Parameter
Non-Ferrous metals
processes
Smelting processes
(mg/m 3 )
(mg/m 3 )
Particulate Matter 50 50
Mercury and its compounds
(as mercury)
1 1
Cadmium 1 1
Lead 5 5
In granting an authorization, the enforcing authority must seek to ensure that the
“best available techniques not entailing excessive cost” (BATNEEC) are
employed to prevent, or where this is impracticable, to minimize and render
harmless, the release of any substance prescribed for any environmental
medium.
A series of reports have been published for various metallurgical industries.
These notes provide a brief description of the process, detail of the best available
techniques for the control of pollution from the process, levels of release
achievable by their use and aspects of monitoring specific to the process. They
provide guidance to the regulatory authority setting conditions to the
authorisation.
160

The Environment Protection (Prescribed Processes and Substances) Regulation
1991 s 6 prescribes the discharge to air of those substances listed in Schedule 4,
which include metals; metalloids and their compounds.
Emissions of dark smoke and black smoke are prohibited under the Clean Air Act
1993 (as amended) from chimneys serving boilers and industrial plant. Dark
smoke is defined as that as dark or darker than Shade 2 on the Ringlemann
Chart and regulations under the act provide specific emission limits for this.
The Chief Inspector for Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution issued a guide for
inspectors regarding processes for the production of zinc and zinc alloys 152 . The
Process Guidance Note IPR 2/4 has established achievable releases to air for
new processes for both primary (Table 56) and secondary zinc (Table 57)
production. The values given are taken at the point of discharge and are based
on using the best combination of techniques to limit environmental impact.
Table 56: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Primary Zinc Process
Parameter
Abated average
concentration
(mg/m 3 )
Total particulate matter 10
Lead and its compounds 2
Arsenic, selenium, tellurium and their compounds taken together 1
Antimony, copper, tin and their compounds taken together 2
Cadmium, mercury, thallium and their compounds taken together 0.5
Oxides of sulphur (as SO 2 ) other than directly associated sulphuric
acid plants and combustion gases
800
Table 57: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Secondary Zinc Process
Parameter
Abated average
concentration
(mg/m 3 )
Total particulate matter 20
Lead and its compounds 2
Cadmium and its compounds 0.5
Note: Concentrations are 1 hour mean concentrations
152 Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution (HMIP)(UK) Chief Inspector’s Guidance to Inspectors -
Processes for the Production of Zinc and Zinc Alloys, Environmental Protection Act 1990,
Process Guidance Note IPR 2/4
161

The Chief Inspector for Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution issued a guide for
inspectors regarding processes for the production of copper and copper alloys 153 .
The Process Guidance Note IPR 2/9 has established achievable releases to air
for new processes for copper production (Table 58). The values given are taken
at the point of discharge and are based on using the best combination of
techniques to limit environmental impact.
Table 58: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Copper Production
Parameter
Abated average
concentration
(mg/m 3 )
Total particulate matter 10
Lead and its compounds 2
Nickel and its compounds 5
Oxides of sulphur (SO 2 ) 500
Note: Concentrations are 1 hour mean concentrations
The Chief Inspector for Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution issued a guide for
inspectors regarding processes for the production of lead and lead alloys 154 . The
Process Guidance Note IPR 2/5 has established achievable releases to air for
new processes for both primary (Table 59) and secondary (Table 60) lead
production. The values given are taken at the point of discharge and are based
on using the best combination of techniques to limit environmental impact.
Table 59: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Primary Lead Process
Parameter
Abated average
concentration
(mg/m 3 )
Total particulate matter 10
Lead and its compounds 2
Arsenic, selenium, tellurium and their compounds taken together 1
Antimony, copper, tin and their compounds taken together 2
Cadmium, mercury, thallium and their compounds taken together 0.5
Oxides of sulphur (as SO 2 ) other than directly associated sulphuric
acid plants and combustion gases
Note: Concentrations are 1 hour mean concentrations
800
153 Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution (HMIP)(UK) Chief Inspector’s Guidance to Inspectors -
Processes for the Production of Copper and Copper Alloys, Environmental Protection Act 1990,
Process Guidance Note IPR 2/9
154 Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution (HMIP)(UK) Chief Inspector’s Guidance to Inspectors -
Processes for the Production of Lead and Lead Alloys, Environmental Protection Act 1990,
Process Guidance Note IPR 2/5
162

Table 60: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Secondary Lead Process
Parameter
Abated average
concentration
(mg/m 3 )
Total particulate matter 10
Lead and its compounds 2
Arsenic, selenium, tellurium and their compounds taken together 1
Antimony, copper, tin and their compounds taken together 2
Cadmium, mercury, thallium and their compounds taken together 0.5
Oxides of sulphur (as SO 2 ) – non-combustion sources 800
Note: - Concentrations are 1 hour mean concentrations
The Chief Inspector for Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution issued a guide for
inspectors regarding processes for the production of cobalt and nickel alloys 155 .
The Process Guidance Note IPR 2/11 has established achievable releases to air
for new processes for the production of nickel (Table 61). The values given are
taken at the point of discharge and are based on using the best combination of
techniques to limit environmental impact.
Table 61: United Kingdom Releases to Air - Nickel Production
Parameter
Abated average
concentration
(mg/m 3 )
Particulate – Carbonyl process 30
Particulate – Other processes 10
155 Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution (HMIP)(UK) Chief Inspector’s Guidance to Inspectors -
The extraction of Nickel by the Carbonyl Process and the Production of Cobalt and Nickel Alloys,
Environmental Protection Act 1990, Process Guidance Note IPR 2/11
163

4.2.11. Sweden
In general air emission limits will be detailed in the environmental permit
(miljötillstånd) of the facility. The Ordinance (SFS 1998:899) on Environmentally
Hazardous Activities and Protection of Health (Förordningen om miljöfarlig
verksamhet och hälsoskydd), designates five regional environmental courts as
the authorities issuing licences for industrial operations such as refineries and
metal smelters (activities that the Ordinance classifies as “A-activities”) 156 .
In addition, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency has issued the
Regulations (SNFS 1993:11) on Permissible Concentrations of Dust (Kungörelse
med föreskrifter om högsta tillåtna halt av sot (svävande partiklar)) establishing
national binding limit values for dust in the outdoor air between October and
March each year as shown in Table 62.
Table 62: Sweden Maximum Allowable Ambient Air Quality Concentrations
Parameter
24-hour limit
Six-month average limit
(µg/m 3 )
(µg/m 3 )
Particulate Matter 90 40
156 Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. URL: http://www.environ.se/
164

4.2.12. Other European Countries
Table 63, Table 64, Table 65 and Table 66 outline Particulate Matter, Mercury,
Lead and Cadmium emission standards for Switzerland, Italy and Denmark.
Table 63: Particulate Matter Emission Standards for other European
Countries
Country
Upper Mass Flow Threshold
Limit Value
(kg/h)
(mg/m 3 )
Switzerland ≥ 0.5 50
Italy ≥0.5 50
Denmark ≥ 5 20 - 40
Table 64: Mercury Emission Standards for other European Countries
Country
Mass Flow Threshold
(g/h)
Limit Value
(g/m 3 )
Switzerland > 1 0.2
Italy > 1 0.2
Denmark > 1 0.1
Table 65: Lead Emission Standards for other European Countries
Country
Mass Flow Threshold
(g/h)
Limit Value
(g/m 3 )
Switzerland > 25 5
Italy > 25 5
Denmark > 5 1
165

Table 66: Cadmium Emission Standards for other European Countries
Country
Mass Flow Threshold
(g/h)
Limit Value
(g/m 3 )
Switzerland > 1 0.2
Italy > 1 0.2
Denmark > 0.5
> 25
0.1-0.5
1-5
166

4.3. Best Available Techniques for Pollution Prevention and
Control
4.3.1. United States
As detailed above, in the United States 157 , there are different standards that have
been developed under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for some base metals smelters.
CAA standards are based on different technologies:
• Best Available Control Technology (BACT) is required on major new or
modified sources in clean areas (attainment areas). BACT means the
pollution control method that is recognized as the one removing the
greatest amount of air pollutants for a particular industry or process
taking into account costs;
• Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) is required on major new or
modified sources in non-attainment areas. LAER means the air
emission rate that is the lowest possible for a type of facility for a
specific pollutant; required of air pollution sources in air quality nonattainment
areas. LAER is the most stringent emission limitation
among control technologies;
• Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) is required for a
published list of industrial sources referred to as "source categories"
which are emitting one or more of the 188 Hazardous Air Pollutants
(HAPs) listed under section 112 of the CAA. MACT means the
maximum degree of reduction in HAP determined achievable
considering the cost of achieving the reduction and any non-air-quality
health and environmental impacts and energy requirements.. For new
sources, MACT is the emission control achieved in practice by the best
controlled similar source. For existing sources, MACT is the average
emission limitation achieved by the best performing 12% of existing
sources if there are more than 30 sources or the best performing 5 if
there are less than 30 sources. Currently, there is a list of regulations
at different stage of development (completed, proposed, and
upcoming), which are also known as National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). NESHAP are based on Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards.
• Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) is required on
existing sources in areas that are not meeting national ambient air
quality standards (non-attainment areas). RACT means the lowest
emission limit that a facility is capable of meeting by using control
technology that is reasonably available, considering technological and
economic feasibility;
157 US Environmental; Protection Agency. URL: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/eparules.html
167

4.3.2. European Union
The European Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) 158 Bureau
exists to catalyze an exchange of technical information on best available
techniques under the IPPC Directive 96/61/EC and to create reference
documents (BREFs) which must be taken into account when the competent
authorities of Member States determine conditions for IPPC permits. IPPC will
apply to a wide range of industrial activities and the objective of the information
exchange exercise is to assist the efficient implementation of the directive across
the European Union. The BREFs will inform the relevant decision makers about
what may be technically and economically available to industry in order to
improve their environmental performance and consequently improve the whole
environment.
The Reference Document on Best Available Techniques (BAT) in the Non
Ferrous Metals Industries 159 was published in May 2000.
The exchange of information during the preparation of the BREF for non-ferrous
metals has allowed conclusions on BAT to be reached for the production and
associated processes. However, the range of raw materials available to the
various facilities is wide and means that there is a need to include a variety of
metallurgical production processes in the BAT selection of the majority of the
base metals. Thus, this variety of raw materials and associated processes has
lead to a BREF document of well over 800 pages which cannot be summarized
in a few paragraphs. Therefore, readers interested in an understanding of BAT
and the associated processes and emissions should refer to the appropriate
sections of the chapters that describe BAT.
158 European Commission, Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Reference
Document on Best Available Techniques in the Non-Ferrous Industries, May 2000.
URL:http://eippcb.jrc.es/FAbout.htm
159 URL: http://eippcb.jrc.es/pages/FAbout.htm
168

4.4. Options and Preliminary Cost Estimates for Emission
Reduction 160,161
In its report on the releases from Base Metals Smelters, Hatch Associates
conducted an analysis to identify where further reductions could be made in
releases by the application of technically feasible methods. Two time periods
were chosen for the analysis: By 2008 and Beyond 2008. These dates
correspond to the dates specified in Recommendation #1 of the Strategic
Options Report dealing with Release Reduction Targets and Schedules.
However, for the purposes of this report, the “Beyond 2008” option is given a
finite time frame of “By 2015”.
Another report prepared by Hatch Associates was tabled at the National
Workshop on Environmental Performance of Base Metals Smelting Sector held
in Ottawa, Ontario on March 7 and 8, 2002. Comments were received from the
multi-stakeholder participants at and subsequent to the workshop. All comments
received were considered and many of the comments have been incorporated
into the MERAF. Some issues could not be resolved and a list of topics 162 for
further discussion by the Base Metals Smelter Environmental Multi-stakeholder
Advisory Group (BEMAG) was prepared.
Based on an analysis of release data (both absolute and EPI) as presented in
section 3, the focus was placed on the following facilities due to their position as
the major releasers:
• Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting;
• Inco Thompson;
• Inco Copper Cliff;
• Falconbridge Sudbury;
• Noranda Horne; and
• Noranda Gaspé.
The economic data presented in this report is based on the sector as it was in
1998. It should be noted that the sector has made various changes to processes
and controls since that time.
These changes include:
160 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
161 Hatch Associates Implementation Scenario for Proposed Emission Standards for Particulate
Matter and Sulphur Dioxide for the Base Metals Smelting Sector, prepared for Environment
Canada, dated May 2002.
162 Personal communication from Dianne Rubinoff (Hatch Associates) to Patrick Finlay,
(Environment Canada) April 9, 2002
169

• Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting is commissioning a $30 million
improvement system for gas handling in 2000/2001 which should result
in a 30% decrease in particulate matter releases
• The “Stack Tap Hole” at Noranda Horne, which was used to discharge
secondary gases from the Noranda Reactor and the Noranda
Continuous Converter, is no longer functional as of May 2000. The
gases are now collected and treated through a baghouse with lime
injection and directed through the converter stack (“Stack #2”)
• Reductions in releases at Noranda Horne have occurred due to
increasing percentage of matte being processed through the Noranda
continuous converter, since 1998 reported data.
• On March 28, 2002, Noranda announced the permanent closure of its
Gaspé smelter effective April 30, 2002.
4.4.1. Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Co. Ltd., Flin Flon, Manitoba
The two measures which offer the greatest reduction potential are:
• Copper Smelter modernization including gas scrubbing and recovery of
sulphur dioxide to produce sulphuric acid.
• Processing the copper concentrate by using a hydrometallurgical
process.
In both cases, an accompanying significant increase in throughput would improve
the economics of the projects considerably, but such an increase would only be
possible if sufficient supply of economic concentrates were available.
The best option is the hydrometallurgical approach, which has the potential for
the maximum reduction of air emissions of pollutants while recovering elemental
sulphur that can be stored or shipped more economically and safely than
sulphuric acid. The implementation schedule would be longer than for a smelter
modernization, since this process still requires development and would have to
be tested first on a pilot plant scale. There are a number of pressure leaching
technologies under development. Given the state of the development of the
technology, installation of a facility by 2008 might not be achievable. Further, this
option could only be justified if it were feasible to increase the copper capacity to
approximately 150,000 tonnes per year. Current production at the Copper
Smelter is approximately 80,000 tonnes per year.
Copper smelter modernization using currently available proven technology has a
shorter implementation schedule, compared with a hydrometallurgical facility.
However, the minimum economic capacity of a modern copper smelter is
approximately 250,000 to 350,000 tonnes per year, considerably higher than the
current production. The SO 2 is converted to sulphuric acid (rather than sulphur)
which is more costly and difficult to ship. The proposed technology would be
flash smelting followed by flash converting, and a double absorption, contact acid
170

plant. It would be possible to install a facility by 2004, and it could be phased.
The costs associated with producing acid and moving it to distant markets might
make this option uneconomical.
In the interim, additional improvements to the present system would reduce total
particulate matter and CEPA toxics in the range of 10 to 50%, depending on the
substance and its specific characteristics.
Table 67 provides a summary of the potential emission reductions in 2008 and
beyond 2008 for the Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting complex.
Table 67: Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Emission Reductions in 2008 and
Beyond
Parameter 1988 1998 2008 projection 2015 projection
Total
Particulate
Matter
Sulphur
Dioxide
(tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) % reduction from
1988
(tonnes)
% reduction from
1988
5,156 1,359 930 82% 100 98%
265,804 185,200 185,200 30% 9,260 97%
Arsenic 40.62 13.2 12 70% 1 97%
Cadmium 57.59 4 93% 1 99%
Lead 254 95.87 75 70% 9 96%
Mercury 19.9 1.55 1 95% 0.1 99%
Nickel
Not significant
Table 68 contains a summary of options to reduce air emissions.
171

Table 68: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting
Technical Option Description Applicability Comment Potential %
Reduction
Capital Cost
(million $)
Improve the dry gas handling
system
Further increase ESP capacity and add,
where appropriate, local baghouse
systems.
The amount of reduction depends
on the characteristics of the
particles now escaping the ESP
system.
10 – 50% of
CEPA-toxics
and PM
(SO 2 is not
affected.)
30 - 60
Modernize the Copper Smelter
and install state-of-the-art gas
cleaning equipment.
Replace roasting and reverberatory
smelting with flash smelting and Peirce-
Smith converting with flash converting.
Well established technology that
has been retrofitted at many
locations (or similar technology).
50 – 90%,
depending on
phasing.
500 – 1,000,
depending on
phasing.
Install an acid plant.
Could be done in phases: i.e. smelting
only; later followed by converting. Acid
plant could also be phased.
Economic scale is 250,000 to
350,000 tpa of copper product.
Would need sufficient supply of
economical concentrate.
Cost of shipping acid is costly and
greatly affects project economics
Also depends
on the
characteristics
of PM and
CEPA toxics.
Could be implemented by 2004,
depending on decision date.
Implement hydrometallurgical
processing of copper
concentrate.*
Several pressure leaching technologies
for copper concentrates are under
development and could be attractive.
Needs to be tested at pilot plant
scale.
Could be implemented by 2008.
> 90% of 500 - 800
CEPA-toxics,
PM and SO 2
Could only be justified economically
if it were feasible to increase
throughput considerably, say
150,000 tpa copper. Would need
sufficient supply of economical
concentrate.
* This technology is currently under development and requires additional effort and pilot-plant scale testing.
172

4.4.2. Inco Limited, Thompson Division, Thompson Manitoba
Reductions of air emissions (other than sulphur dioxide) in the order of 20 to
50%, depending on the substance, might be achieved by improving the existing
gas cleaning system. This would involve:
• Increasing the capacity of the main stack electrostatic precipitator
(ESP)
• Improving all of the collection systems at source to reduce the amount
of leakage air
• Installing local baghouse collection and dust recycle systems where this
is appropriate
Any further reduction in total particulate matter and CEPA-toxics or a reduction of
SO 2 emissions would likely require the installation of wet scrubbing of smelter
gases, followed by recovery of SO 2 to produce sulphuric acid. This could
probably be justified only if it were part of a smelter modernization and capacity
increase program.
Table 69 provides a summary of the potential emission reductions in 2008 and
beyond 2008 for the Inco Thompson complex.
Table 69: Inco Thompson Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond
Parameter 1988 1998 2008 projection 2015 projection
Total
Particulate
Matter
Sulphur
Dioxide
(tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) % reduction
from 1988
(tonnes)
% reduction from
1988
2917 919 735 75% 90 97%
283,200 217,000 217,000 23% 21,700 92%
Arsenic 20.7 4.03 3 85% 0.4 98%
Cadmium
No releases reported
Lead 3.2 1.08 11 75% 0.1 97%
Mercury
No releases reported
Nickel 343.5 103.9 85 75% 10 97%
Table 70 contains a summary of options to reduce air emissions.
173

Table 70: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Inco Thompson
Technical Option
Improve Existing Gas Cleaning
System
Description
Upgrade close capture hoods, install
local baghouses, generally reduce air
inleakage and upgrade main ESP.
Applicability
Comment
Possibly already part of
Inco’s plans
Potential
Reduction
(%)
20 to 50% of CEPA-toxics 20 – 70
and PM
No improvement in SO 2
Capital Cost
(million $)
Install Acid Plant Treat smelter off-gases in acid plant Justifiable only with smelter
modernization and capacity
increase
Modernize Process Equipment,
combined with state-of-the-art gas
processing and sulphuric acid
production.
Replace Roasting and Electric
Furnace Smelting with Flash Furnace
Continuous Converting
Economic Implications. An
increase in capacity of
about 50% would be
needed. Acid prices would
have to improve
considerably.
More research needed
> 90% of CEPA-toxics, PM
and SO 2
100 - 150
> 90% of CEPA-toxics, PM
and SO 2
500 -700
174

4.4.3. Falconbridge, Sudbury Division, Sudbury, Ontario
Two options to substantially reduce air emissions are:
• Wet scrubbing all or part of the smelter gases that are now cleaned in
ESPs and then released to atmosphere via the main stack. SO 2 would
be converted to gypsum. TPM and base metals would be pumped as a
sludge to the tailings disposal area or to secure storage, depending on
the composition.
• Wet scrubbing the gases as above, but using a weak acid solution so
the SO 2 could subsequently be recovered to produce sulphuric acid.
Falconbridge has indicated that it is considering technologies other than
scrubbing, such as superior bag performance or secondary/additional baghouse
capacity and/or possible process changes.
Table 71 provides a summary of the potential releases from the Falconbridge
Sudbury Smelter in 2008 and beyond 2008.
Table 71: Falconbridge Sudbury Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond
Parameter 1988 1998 2008 projection 2015 projection
Total
Particulate
Matter
Sulphur
Dioxide
(tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) % reduction
from 1988
(tonnes)
% reduction from
1988
1,066 471 47 96% 47 96^
59,600 57,200 5,700 90% 5,700 90%
Arsenic 11.73 0.163 0.02 >99% 0.02 >99%
Cadmium 2.699 2.744 0.3 89% 0.3 89%
Lead 18.107 10.4 1 90% 1 90%
Mercury 0.6

Table 72: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Falconbridge Sudbury
Technical Control Option
Install Wet Gas Scrubbing
Equipment
Install Additional Wet Gas
Cleaning and Acid Plant.
Description
Install scrubber on Electric Furnace,
Converting and Slag Cleaning off-gas
to recover dust, fumes and SO 2 as a
sludge.
Pass Electric Furnace, Converter and
Slag Cleaning through conventional
gas cleaning, acid plant system.
Applicability
Comment
High reagent costs.
Would need process equipment
modifications to concentrate SO 2
Potential Reduction Capital Cost
(%)
(million $)
> 90% of CEPA-toxics, 50 - 80
PM and SO 2
> 90% of CEPA-toxics, 60 - 90
PM and SO 2
176

4.4.4. Inco Limited, Sudbury/Copper Cliff Operations, Copper Cliff,
Ontario
The following process and environmental control options might possible further
reduce air emissions:
• Wet scrubbing of off-gas from the Fluid Bed Roaster in the smelter, and
recovery of SO 2 to produce sulphuric acid.
• Optimize or replace electrostatic precipitator (ESP #5) used for off-gas
from converting.
• The implementation of continuous converting of flash furnace matte,
wet scrubbing of the process gases and recovery of S0 2 for sulphuric
acid production. This would be substantially more costly than the first
option, but would result in a very much larger reduction of emissions.
Inco Copper Cliff was required under a Control Order from the Ontario Ministry of
Environment to study technically and economically feasible ways to reduce
sulphur dioxide emissions to 175,000 tonnes per year. A study was submitted to
the MOE in 1999. Fluidized Bed Roaster off-gas scrubbing was identified as the
most promising option to achieved this reduction.
Table 73 provides a summary of the potential releases from the Inco Copper Cliff
complex in 2008 and beyond 2008.
Table 73: Inco Copper Cliff Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond
Parameter 1988 1998 2008 projection 2015 projection
Total
Particulate
Matter
Sulphur
Dioxide
(tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) % reduction
from 1988
(tonnes)
% reduction from
1988
6,410 1,981 1,430 78% 275 96%
658,515 235,000 168,200* 74% 31,500 95%%
Arsenic 35 52.9 14 59% 10 80%
Cadmium
Data not
provided
7.01 6 cannot be
calculated
1 cannot be
calculated
Lead 133 146.7 116 13% 23 83%
Mercury
Not significant
Nickel 1019.3 190 165 84% 146 86%
CEPA-toxics
Total
1187 396.6 301
(total of
above)
75% 180 85%
* Inco Copper Cliff was required under a Control Order from the Ontario Ministry of Environment to study
technically and economically feasible ways to reduce sulphur dioxide emissions to 175,000 tonnes per year.
Inco provided this estimate for sulphur dioxide emissions if the Fluid Bed Roaster off-gas was scrubbed.
Table 74 contains a summary of options to reduce air emissions.
177

Table 74: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Inco Copper Cliff
Technical Option
Install Wet Gas Scrubbing
Equipment
Improve Existing Gas
Cleaning System
Modernize Process
Equipment, combined with
state-of-the-art gas
processing, including an acid
plant.
Description
Install scrubber on Fluid Bed Roasting
off-gas and recover SO 2 in the exisiting
acid plant.
Install scrubber on TBRC smelting offgas
after ESP (Nickel Refinery)
Upgrade, relocate or replace ESP #5
(converting off-gas)
Install continuous converting technology
in the Smelter* .
Applicability
Comment
Already planned by Inco.
Exit concentrations not known
Sludge disposal costs, etc. need
to be addressed
The amount of reduction
depends on actual project
Development work is needed.
Potential Reduction Capital Cost (million $)
(%)
> 97% reduction from 60 - 80
Fluid Bed Roaster gas of
CEPA-toxics, PM and
SO 2
> 50% of releases from 10 - 40
TBRC of CEPA-toxics,
PM and SO 2
>50% reduction from 5 - 30
converting gas of CEPAtoxics
and PM
> 90% of smelter 200 - 350
releases of CEPA-toxics,
PM and SO 2
* This technology is currently under development and requires additional development effort and pilot-scale testing.
178

4.4.5. Noranda Inc., Horne Smelter, Rouyn-Noranda, Québec
As the percentage of matte processed through the new converter increases to
approach 100% in 2002, the amounts of pollutants released will decrease.
Noranda reports that this would increase the fixation of incoming sulphur to 90%.
The absolute amount of sulphur dioxide released represents a reduction of
approximately 90% of the 1980 releases (i.e., 552,000 tonnes). Noranda also
reported a reduction of particulate emissions by 50% from current levels. This is
a cost effective and environmentally positive next step. It is likely that the
emissions reductions of total particulate matter and CEPA-toxics would be much
greater than 50%, depending on the extent to which the equipment is modified.
This approach is summarized in Table 76.
Table 75 provides a summary of the potential releases from the Noranda Horne
Smelter in 2008 and beyond 2008.
Table 75: Noranda Horne Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond
Total
Matter
Parameter 1988 1998 2008 projection 2015 projection
Particulate
(tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) % reduction
from 1988
(tonnes)
% reduction
from 1988
2,900 1,063 500 83% 500 83%
Sulphur Dioxide 420,000 117,700 45,000 90% 45,000 90%
Arsenic 113 79.1 15.7 86% 15.7 86%
Cadmium 39.39 2.55 2.55 90% 2.55 90%
Lead 851 153.2 80 90% 80 90%
Mercury 1.7 0.25 0.20 88% 0.20 88%
Nickel n.m/e 0.5 0.5 cannot be
calculated
0.5 cannot be
calculated
179

Table 76: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Noranda Horne
Technical Option
Increasing percentage of matte
processed through the Noranda
continuous converter, expansion of the
acid plant and connection of Peirce-
Smith converters to acid plant.
Description
Treat all Continuous Converter gas in
acid plant
Applicability
Comment
Acid Plant expansion is
planned
Potential Reduction
(%) Capital Cost
(million $)
> 80 % of PM and 20 - 50
CEPA-toxics
> 90% SO 2
180

4.4.6. Noranda Inc., Division Mines Gaspé, Murdochville, Québec
What follows includes discussion of the Gaspé facility as it was prepared prior to
the announcement made on prior to March 28, 2002. On that day, Noranda Inc.
announced that, effective April 30, 2002, it permanently closed its Gaspé copper
smelter, located in Murdochville. Noranda had previously announced on
November 30, 2001, that it would temporarily close the smelter a six month
period 163 .
The primary smelting reverberatory furnace produces off-gas that is first cleaned
in an ESP and then dispersed to the atmosphere through a tall stack. This offgas
constitutes all of Gaspé’s reported air emissions. The volume of the gas is
too high to be economically cleaned further by adding more ESP capacity or wet
scrubbing.
Therefore the best option would be to modify the primary smelting operation (i.e.,
smelter modernization) in order to produce a lower volume, higher strength gas.
This could be wet scrubbed for particulate removal and then treated in an acid
plant to recover the SO 2 , and produce acid.
One approach is installing a Noranda Reactor to replace the reverberatory
furnace, and expand gas cleaning and the present acid plant to accommodate all
of the smelter’s process gases. Noranda is intending to apply the experience
gained at its other smelters to determine the best process changes for Gaspé. A
smelter modernization would mean that probably more than 90% of the total
particulate matter and SO 2 would be captured. The capital investment would be
in the order of $50 to 100 million.
Table 77 provides a summary of the potential releases from the Noranda Gaspé
Smelter in 2008 and beyond 2008.
Table 77: Noranda Gaspé Emission Reductions in 2008 and Beyond
Parameter 1988 1998 2008 projection 2015 projection
Total Particulate
Matter
(tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) % reduction
from 1988
(tonnes)
% reduction from
1988
1,230 450 405 67% 45 96%
Sulphur Dioxide 57,498 31,448 28,300 51% 3,100 95%
Arsenic 54.36 9.94 9 83% 1 98%
Cadmium 1.85 0.21 0.19 90% 0.02 99%
Lead 184 15.65 14 92% 2 99%
Mercury 0.50 0.5 0.5 0% 0.02 96%
Nickel 1.47 1.336 1.2 18% 0.1 93%
163 Noranda Inc. Press Release, March 28, 2002. URL: http://www.noranda.ca/
181

Table 78 contains a summary of options to reduce air emissions.
182

Table 78: Technical Options for Emission Reductions from Noranda Gaspé
Technical Option
Smelter Modernization
Description
One option is to replace reverberatory
furnace with Noranda Reactor and
treat all smelter’s process gas in acid
plant
Applicability
Comment
Not likely to occur until after
2008
Potential Reduction
(%) Capital Cost
(million $)
> 90% CEPA-toxics, 50 - 100
PM and SO 2
183

In addition to these measures, Hatch Associates has estimated that a 10%
reduction in emissions was feasible from the facilities not analyzed. This 10%
reduction for the “Rest of Sector” is assumed to be for the total releases for all
the facilities not specifically identified, not for each individual facility
4.4.7. Summary of Capital Costs
The capital costs of release reductions were estimated in Hatch Associates’
report, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting
Sector 164 . This report was reviewed by the Base Metals Environmental Technical
Advisory Group (BETAG) and there is general agreement on the overall
correctness of the estimates.
Table 79 presents a summary of the capital costs discussed above.
Table 79: Capital Cost Estimates
Site Option for Reduction By 2008 Option for Reduction By 2015
Hudson Bay Mining
and Smelting
Inco Thompson
Falconbridge Kidd
Falconbridge Sudbury
Inco Copper Cliff
Noranda Horne
Incremental improvements to
gas handling system
Cost: $30 to 60 million
Improvements to gas handling
system
Cost: $20 to 70 million
Wet scrubbing technology or
High Temperature Particulate
Removal
Cost: $6 to 20 million
Wet scrubbing technology
Cost: $50 to 80 million
Wet scrubbing of Fluid Bed
Roaster off-gas
Cost: $60 to 80 million
Increasing percentage of matte
processed through the Noranda
continuous converter, expansion
of the acid plant and connection
of Peirce-Smith converters to
acid plant
Cost: $20 to 50 million
Installation of hydrometallurgical
process*
Cost: $500 to 800 million
Smelter modernization and acid
plant
Cost: $500 to 700 million
No major changes beyond 2008
No major changes beyond 2008
Continuous converting
technology*
Cost: $200 to 350 million
No major changes beyond 2008
164 Hatch Associates, Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000
184

Site Option for Reduction By 2008 Option for Reduction By 2015
Noranda Gaspé Incremental Improvements Smelter Modernization
Cost: $50 to 100 million
Rest of Sector** Incremental Improvements Incremental Improvements
TOTAL $186 to 360 million $1,250 to 1,950 million
*-These technologies are currently under development and require additional development effort
and pilot-scale testing
** Reductions for the “Rest of Sector” are assumed to be 10% of the total releases for all the
facilities not specifically identified, not for each individual facility.
The total capital expenditure for the sector for the implementing the options to
reduce releases is estimated at:
• $186 to $360 million in the time period until 2008; and
• $1,250 to $1,950 million between 2008 and 2015.
4.4.8. Summary of Operating Costs
Typically operating costs for a pollution control measure are estimated at 10% of
capital costs per annum. For example, the wet scrubbing technology identified for
Falconbridge Sudbury has an estimated capital cost of $50 to $80 million. The
annual operating cost is, therefore, estimated at $5 to $8 million per year.
The installation of a hydrometallurgical process at Hudson Bay Mining and
Smelting could result in operating cost savings due to reduced labour costs and
lower fuel costs. Savings are estimated at approximately 10% of current costs or
$2 to 3 million per year.
The option for a smelter modernization and acid plant at Inco Thompson could
also result in lower energy and labour costs. However, it is estimated that the
production of sulphuric acid will result in a net loss of $80 to $105 165 per tonne of
acid produced. If the 283,200 tonnes of sulphur dioxide released in 1988 was
made into sulphuric acid, 442,500 tonnes of acid would be produced costing
between $35 and $45 million per year in additional operating costs. These
losses far exceed any realized operating cost savings.
The installation of continuous converting technology at Inco Copper Cliff could
result in an estimated savings of $2 million per year due to reduced labour and
energy costs .
The option for increasing the percentage of matte through the Noranda
continuous converter does not result in any operating savings as the Peirce-
Smith converters will continue to operate as pyrorefining vessels (desulphirization
of blister copper) when the Noranda continuous converter is operating and as
165 PentaSul Inc., Byproduct Sulphuric Acid at Smelters in Manitoba from 2007 - Marketing and
Disposal Options with Associated Costs, February 2002
185

converters when the continuous converter is not operating. According to
Noranda, based on the current acid marketing dynamics, more sulphur dioxide
captured means more sulphuric acid is produced, and the larger the losses on an
operating and cash cost basis.
A smelter modernization at Noranda Gaspé could result in lower manpower and
energy costs estimated at $2 million per year. The modernization would result in
more sulphuric acid being produced. According to Noranda, based on the current
acid marketing dynamics, more sulphur dioxide captured means larger the losses
on an operating and cash cost basis.
Table 80 provides a summary of the estimates on the impact on the operating
costs.
Table 80: Operating Cost Estimates
Site Option for Reduction By 2008 Option for Reduction By 2015
Hudson Bay Mining
and Smelting
Inco Thompson
Falconbridge Kidd
Falconbridge
Sudbury
Inco Copper Cliff
Noranda Horne
Incremental improvements to gas
handling system
Annual Cost: $3 to 6 million
Improvements to gas handling
system
Annual Cost: $2 to 7 million
Wet scrubbing technology
Annual Cost: $1 to 2 million
Wet scrubbing technology
Annual Cost: $5 to 8 million
Wet scrubbing of Fluid Bed
Roaster off-gas
Annual Cost: $6 to 8 million
Increasing percentage of matte
processed through the Noranda
continuous converter, expansion of
the acid plant and connection of
Peirce-Smith converters to acid
plant
Installation of hydrometallurgical
process*
Annual Savings: $2 to 3 million
Smelter modernization and acid
plant
Annual Cost: $35 to 45 million
No major changes beyond 2008
No major changes beyond 2008
Continuous converting
technology**
Annual Savings: $2 million
Potential costs due to additional
acid production
No major changes beyond 2008
No operating savings identified as
Peirce-Smith converters will
continue to operate. Potential costs
due to additional acid production
Noranda Gaspé Incremental Improvements Smelter Modernization
Annual Savings: $2 million
186

Site Option for Reduction By 2008 Option for Reduction By 2015
Potential costs due to additional
acid production
Rest of Sector** Incremental Improvements Incremental Improvements
* These technologies are currently under development and require additional development effort
and pilot-plant scale testing.
** Reductions for the “Rest of Sector” are assumed to be 10% of the total releases for all the
facilities not specifically identified, not for each individual facility.
4.4.9. Summary of potential emissions reductions with options and
associated capital and operating costs
The predicted future releases are shown in Table 81. Data for 1988 and 1998
are from the questionnaires, while predictions for 2008 and 2015 are Hatch
Associates estimates assuming the implementation of the options identified in
Table 82.
Also shown in Table 81 are the percentage reductions which these release levels
represent when compared to the 1988 base year.
Based on these assumed scenarios, the sector is close to the targets of a sectorwide
reduction in the total of the CEPA-toxics of 80% by 2008 and 90% reduction
by 2015.
Table 81: Emission Forecasts for 2008 and 2015
1988 1998 2008 2015
tonnes
released
tonnes
released
% reduction
from 1988
tonnes
released
% reduction
from 1988
tonnes
released
% reduction
from 1988
Arsenic 327 167 49% 61 81% 35 89%
Cadmium 124 46 63% 19 84% 11 91%
Lead 1,836 543 70% 395 78% 223 88%
Mercury 28.1 2.5 91% 1.8 93% 0.5 98%
Nickel 1,436 314 78% 253 82% 160 89%
CEPA-toxics
Total
SOR
Targets
Total
Particulate
Matter
Sulphur
Dioxide
3,754 1,073 71% 730 81% 430 89%
80% 90%
22,938 7,404 68% 4,987 78% 2,000 91%
1,797,026 867,684 52% 671,000 63% 138,000 92%
187

Table 82 shows the technical reduction options identified for the Base Metals
Smelting Sector for 2008 and 2015. Also included in the table are the capital
costs as estimated by Hatch Associates 166 and a range of potential reduction for
toxics, total particulate matter (TPM) and sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) in percentage
terms from the 1988 levels. The value in brackets after the potential reduction
range indicates the value assumed by Hatch Associates for the purposes of
predicting future releases.
Table 82: Summary of Emission Reduction Options (2008 and 2015)
Site Option for Reduction By 2008 Option for Reduction By 2015
Hudson Bay Mining
and Smelting
Inco Thompson
Falconbridge Kidd
Falconbridge
Sudbury
Inco Copper Cliff
Incremental improvements to gas
handling system
Capital Cost: $30 to 60 million
Operating Cost: $3 to 6 million/year
Reduction: 10% to 50% of toxics and
PM. (10% of 2000 estimate
assumed). No effect on SO 2 .
Improvements to gas handling
system
Capital Cost: $20 to 70 million
Operating Cost: $ 2 to 7 million/year
Reduction: 20% to 50% of toxics and
PM. (20% assumed). No effect on
SO 2,
Wet scrubbing technology or
High Temperature Particulate
Removal
Capital Cost: $6 to 20 million
Operating Cost: $1 to2 million
Reduction: Greater than 90% of
toxics, PM and SO 2 in Feed Prep
and Scrap Melting Stacks
Wet scrubbing technology
Capital Cost: $50 to 80 million
Operating Cost: $5 to 8 million/year
Reduction: Greater than 90% of
toxics, PM and SO 2 . (90%
assumed).
Wet scrubbing of Fluid Bed
Roaster off-gas
Capital Cost: $60 to 80 million
Operating Cost: $6 to 8 million/year
Installation of hydrometallurgical
process*
Capital Cost: $500 to 800 million
Operating Savings: $2 to 3 million/year
Reduction: Greater than 90% of toxics,
PM and SO 2 . (90% of 2000 estimate
assumed for PM, 95% assumed for
SO 2 ).
Smelter modernization and acid
plant
Capital Cost: $500 to 700 million
Operating Cost: $35 to 45 million/year
Reduction: Greater than 90% of toxics,
PM and SO 2 . (90% assumed).
No major changes beyond 2008
No major changes beyond 2008
Continuous converting technology*
Capital Cost: $200 to 350 million
Operating Savings: $2 million/year
potential costs due to additional acid
166 Hatch Associates Review of Environmental Releases for the Base Metals Smelting Sector,
prepared for Environment Canada, dated November 2000.
188

Noranda Horne
Site Option for Reduction By 2008 Option for Reduction By 2015
Reduction: Greater than 97% of
toxics, PM and SO 2 from Fluid Bed
Roaster stream. (97% of Fluid Bed
Roaster contribution assumed).
Increasing percentage of matte
processed through the Noranda
continuous converter expansion
of the acid plant and connection
of Peirce-Smith converters to
acid plant
production
Reduction: Greater than 90% of toxics,
PM and SO 2 of smelter releases. (90%
of copper stack releases assumed).
No major changes beyond 2008
Noranda Gaspé
Rest of Sector**
Capital Cost: $20 to 50 million
Operating Savings: No savings
Reduction: Greater than 80% of
toxics, PM. Greater than 90% of
SO 2. . (Values for future projections
as provided by Horne assumed).
Incremental Improvements
Reduction: Assumed 10% of toxics,
PM and SO 2. .
Incremental Improvements
Reduction: Assumed 10% of toxics,
PM and SO 2. .
Smelter Modernization
Capital Cost: $50 to 100 million
Operating Savings: $2 million/year
potential costs due to additional acid
production
Reduction: Greater than 90% of toxics,
PM and SO 2 . (90% assumed).
Incremental Improvements
Reduction: Assumed 10% of toxics,
PM and SO 2. .
* These technologies are currently under development and require additional
development effort and pilot-plant scale testing.
** Reductions for the “Rest of Sector” are assumed to be 10% of the total
releases for all the facilities not specifically identified, not for each individual
facility.
4.4.10. Assessment of costs in relation to economic indicators
There are a number of technical options available to the Base Metals Smelting
Sector to reduce releases of total particulate matter and sulphur dioxide.
A series of indicators could be used to assess the economic impact of the
proposed emission reduction options on the sector.
It is recommended that the Base Metals Smelter Environmental Multi-
Stakeholder Advisory Group (BEMAG) be used to undertake a more
comprehensive analysis of the economic and financial impacts of implementing
the proposed emission reduction options.
189

4.5. Possible Conflicting Control Objectives and Trade-Off
The removal of total particulate matter and/or the removal of sulphur dioxide is
likely to result in the removal of many of the CEPA-toxics that were the focus of
the Strategic Options Report (i.e., heavy metals).
With respect to the other pollutants subject to the MERS process (e.g., CO, VOC,
NO x ), these options should not lead to an increase in their production and
emission
190

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Conclusions
Except for emissions of SO 2 , which represent 36% of all SO 2 emissions from
industrial sources, it has been concluded that emissions of other precursors of
PM and ozone from the BMS sector are relatively very small.
This report’s primary focus was therefore on Total Particulate Matter (TPM),
metal compounds, and SO 2 .
The substances of most interest for the Base Metals Smelting Sector are either
on the List of Toxic Substances in Schedule 1 to the Canadian Environmental
Protection Act 1999 (e.g., Lead, Mercury, Inorganic arsenic compounds,
Inorganic cadmium compounds, etc.) or have been proposed by the Ministers for
addition to CEPA 1999 Schedule 1 (e.g., Sulphur Dioxide, Releases from copper
smelters and refineries and zinc smelters and refineries).
For the toxic substances currently on the List of Toxic Substances,
recommendations for their management were put forward to Ministers of the
Environment and Health in the June, 1997 Strategic Options Report (SOR)167,
under CEPA 1988. These recommendations include release reduction targets
and schedules, the development of environmental performance standards and
the development of site-specific environmental management plans.
For substances not yet listed on CEPA 1999 Schedule 1, strategies are under
development and regulations or other instruments respecting preventive or
control actions will be proposed within the time requirements imposed by CEPA
1999.
To address the SOR recommendations and other emerging issues, Environment
Canada has already sponsored two National Workshops on the Environmental
Performance of BMS Sector and the development of Environmental Performance
Standards for the sector. Participants in the workshops include representatives
from the federal and provincial governments, industry, non-governmental
organizations, and the Aboriginal community.
An important outcome of the first Workshop, which was reiterated at the second,
is an agreement from stakeholders to work together in developing environmental
performance standards and initiatives to reduce releases from the BMSS through
the formation of and participation in a Base Metals Environmental Multi-
Stakeholder Advisory Group (BEMAG).
167 Strategic Options Report for the Management of Toxics from the Base Metals Sector,
Environment Canada, June 23, 1997
191

5.2. Recommendations
The analysis of technical options to reduce emissions from this sector shows
possible sectoral reductions of 81%, 78%, and 63% for CEPA-toxics, TPM, and
SO 2 respectively by 2008 and 89%, 91%, and 92% for CEPA-toxics, TPM, and
SO 2 respectively by 2015, from 1988 levels.
During the course of the research for this report, two important information areas
for further analysis were identified:
• whether the hydrometallurgical process and the continuous converting
technologies, identified as the best options to reduce emissions at
respectively Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting and Inco Copper Cliff, will
be developed successfully for full implementation by 2015;
• whether these technologies could be implemented economically by
2015.
Recommendation #1
It is recommended that when pollution prevention and control options are
considered and their economic, environmental, and social impacts are assessed,
the Base-Metals Environmental Multistakeholder Advisory Group (BEMAG)
should be used as the mechanism of choice.
Recommendation #2
It is recommended that the assessment of in-process and add-on emission
control options be done from a multi-pollutant emission perspective.
Recommendation #3
It is also recommended to consider Greenhouse Gas emissions while developing
options for reducing sulphur dioxide emissions consistent with the measures to
achieve energy efficiency improvements and reduce emissions of Greenhouse
Gases identified in the Minerals and Metals Foundation Paper.
192

Appendix A: Health and Environmental Profiles
for CEPA Substances Released by the Base
Metals Smelting Sector
A number of substances released, produced or used by the Base Metals
Smelting Sector and present in particulate or gaseous form, have been assessed
and declared toxic under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA).
Among these are inorganic compounds of arsenic, cadmium, hexavalent
chromium, and nickel (oxidic, sulphidic and soluble), and polychlorinated
dibenzodioxins (PCDDs), polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs), and respirable
particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns. Mercury and lead, formerly
regulated under the Clean Air Act, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), also
released by this sector, were added to Schedule 1, the List of Toxic Substances
contained in CEPA.
Regarding the metals, the assessment of inorganic arsenic, cadmium,
hexavalent chromium and nickel compounds concluded that inhalation of these
substances is associated with the development of respiratory cancer. Ingestion
of inorganic cadmium compounds is also associated with the development of
kidney disease and there is evidence that mild effects on the kidney are
associated with levels of cadmium at or near those to which a portion of the
general Canadian population is exposed. Ingestion of arsenic is linked with skin
cancer and cancers of various internal organs. These compounds are
considered by Health Canada to be carcinogens with no threshold, that is,
substances for which the critical health effect is believed not to have a threshold.
Therefore it is assumed that there is some probability of harm at any level of
exposure. This assumption is considered appropriate for mutagenic or genotoxic
carcinogens.
In consideration of the environmental impacts of these metals, the assessments
concluded that levels of these compounds in the vicinity of major anthropogenic
sources exceeded the estimated effects threshold for sensitive environmental
species.
It has been shown that long-term exposure to either organic or inorganic mercury
can permanently damage the brain, kidneys, and developing fetuses. Mercury
also bioaccumulates and biomagnifies in the food chain, which may contribute to
increased exposure. Long-term exposure to lead is associated with blood and
kidney problems, and in particular, neurological disorders. Both mercury and
lead may enter the body through ingestion, inhalation or depending upon the
compound, dermal contact. Lead has also been demonstrated to cause adverse
effects in several environmental species.
Dioxins and furans are highly persistent, fat-soluble compounds which have been
found in all compartments of the ecosystem including air, water, soil sediments
animals and foods, and have a high potential for accumulating in biological
193

tissues. The compound 2,3,7,8-TCDD (and to a lesser extent, the other dioxins
and furans substituted in the 2, 3, 7 and 8 positions) is extremely toxic to
mammals. Exposure to these substances is associated with a wide range of
health consequences including cancer and developmental, reproductive,
neurobehavioural, immunological and dermal effects. Adverse effects elicited by
exposure of environmental species to dioxins and furans have been clearly
documented. Polychlorinated biphenyls have demonstrated a range of
environmental and health effects similar to those of dioxins and furans and may
also contribute to the formation of these substances.
The goal of Environment Canada and Health Canada with respect to these
substances is to minimize risks to the environment and human health associated
with these substances. In particular, because of the classification of inorganic
arsenic, cadmium, hexavalent chromium and nickel compounds as substances
for which the critical health effect (cancer) is believed not to have a threshold,
effort should be directed toward reducing human exposure to the extent
practicable. In view of the fact that mercury and lead have been shown to cause
severe non-neoplastic health effects and that both have the potential to persist in
the body, efforts should also be directed toward minimizing exposure to these
substances. Because dioxins and furans and polychlorinated biphenyls are
highly persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic, continued release of these
chemicals into the environment could unnecessarily prolong exposures, with a
resultant increase in the risk to the environment and human health. Therefore
the goal of the federal government with respect to these substances is the virtual
elimination of anthropogenic releases to the environment.
The health effects associated with exposure to particulate matter with a diameter
less than or equal to 10 microns, the form in which many of the above metals are
released, have been detailed at length in Section 1.1 of this report. There is a
statistically significant and concentration-related association between ambient
concentrations of particulate matter and a pyramid of related cardiorespiratory
effects, headed by increases in mortality. Further information on the impact of air
pollution on human health can be found on the Health and Air Quality Division of
Health Canada’s web site (www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/air_quality).
194

List of Acronyms
AAQ
AAQC
ARET
BACT
BATNEEC
BEMAG
BETAG
BMS
BMSS
CAA
CAC
CAG
CCME
CEPA
COPD
CUM
CWS
EC
EPI
ESP
EU
GDP
GHG
HAP
HBMS
HC
IPPC
IT
ITEQ
JIA
Ambient Air Quality
Ambient Air Quality Criteria
Accelerated Reduction/Elimination of Toxics
Best Achievable Control Technology
Best Available Techniques not Entailing Excessive Cost
Base Metals Environmental Multistakeholder Advisory Group
Base Metals Environmental Technical Advisory Group
Base Metals Smelting
Base Metals Smelting Sector
Clean Air Act
Criteria Air Contaminants
Core Advisory Group
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment
Canadian Environmental Protection Act
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases
Communanté urbaine de Montréal
Canada-wide Standard
Environment Canada
Environmental Performance Indicator
Electrostatic Precipitator
European Union
Gross Domestic Product
Greenhouse Gases
Hazardous Air Pollutant
Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting
Health Canada
Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control
Issue Table
International Toxicity Equivalency Quotient.
Joint Initial Action
195

JAICC
LAER

UN/ECE
URL
USEPA
VCR
VOC
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
Universal Resource Locator
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Voluntary Challenge Registry
Volatile Organic Vompounds
197

Glossary of Terms
Acid Plant:
Baghouse:
(Fabric filter)
Blast Furnace:
Converting:
Dry Scrubber
Effluent:
Electric Furnace:
Electrorefining:
(Electrolytic
Refining)
a process that converts sulphur dioxide into sulphuric acid. At a
base metal smelter sulphur dioxide is produced by the oxidation
of sulphide mineral concentrates and other minerals contained in
smelter feed materials. The acid plant converter oxidizes
sulphur dioxide to sulphur trioxide in the presence of a catalyst.
Single or double absorption stages may be used to absorb
sulphur trioxide in water.
removes particulate matter from a gas stream by passing the
stream through a porous fabric.
a shaft furnace in which metallurgical coke is burned with air and
the resulting carbon monoxide reduces lead sinter to the metallic
state, producing molten bullion and slag phases.
process of removing impurities or metallic compounds from
molten metal by blowing air through the liquid matte. The
impurities or metallic compounds are changed either to gaseous
compounds, which are removed by volatilization, or to liquids,
which are removed as slags.
a dry scrubber is any device that separates gas-borne particles
from a gas stream by such methods as gravitational deposition,
flow-line interception, diffusional deposition, and electrostatic
deposition. Most forms of dust collection systems use more
than one of these collection mechanisms.
a release of an aqueous flow.
a furnace using electricity to supply heat/thermal energy. The
chief types of such furnaces are: direct arc, in which the electric
current passes through the charge; indirect arc, in which the arc
is struck between the electrodes only; induction furnace, in
which the metal charge is heated by magnetic susceptibility.
separates the desired metal from impure metal by electrolysis in
a solution normally containing an aqueous sulphate form of the
metal and sulphuric acid. Metallic impurities which do not
dissolve form a sludge which is removed and treated to recover
precious metals. An electric current dissolves the impure metal
198

at the anode and selectively plates high purity metal at the
cathode.
Electrostatic
Precipitator:
Electrowinning:
Emission:
Flash Converting:
Flash Smelting:
Fluid Bed
Roasting:
Fugitive
Emissions:
Matte:
a particle collection device that uses electrostatic forces to move
particles out of the flowing gas stream and on to collector plates.
The particles are given an electrostatic charge as they pass
through a corona that is produced by electrodes maintained at
high voltage in the centre of the flow lane. The charged particles
are then forced to the collection plates where they are collected.
production of high purity metal from a metal-bearing solution.
The process takes place in cells containing a number of closely
spaced rectangular metal plates acting as anodes and as
cathodes. A series of reactions occurs in the electrolysis cells
that results in deposition of the desired metal at the cathode and
the regeneration of sulphuric acid in the electrolyte at the anode.
This differs from electrorefining in that the source metal is
already in solution.
a release of a gaseous flow.
very fast smelting of copper can be accomplished in a converter
by feeding the matte and supplying oxygen. The oxygen
efficiency is high, no fuel is required, and the offgas is very high
in SO 2
combines the operations of roasting and smelting to produce a
high grade matte. Dried ore concentrates and finely ground
fluxes are injected together with oxygen, preheated air or a
mixture of both into a furnace of special design where the
temperature is maintained.
oxidation of finely ground pyritic minerals by means of upward
currents of air, blown through a reaction vessel with sufficient
force to cause the bed of material to fluidise.
these emissions are usually resulting from process leakages and
spills of short duration, and are associated with storage, material
handling, charging, tapping and other process operations.
a molten solution of metal sulphides produced during smelting.
199

Matte Separation:
Mitsubishi
Continuous
Smelting:
Noranda Process
Reactor and
Converters:
Particulates:
Peirce-Smith
converters:
Primary Smelting:
Pressure Leach:
Roasting:
Roast-Leach:
Secondary
Smelting:
Sedimentation:
after controlled cooling of a nickel-copper matte, involves
crushing, grinding, magnetic separation and flotation to separate
copper and nickel sulphides for future processing.
injects dried concentrate through a lance into the smelting
furnace. Oxygen rich air conveys the concentrate and oxidizes
the bath.
produces copper matte by feeding fuel, flux and coal while
oxygen enriched air is blown into the liquid matte. A long
settling zone in the reactor allows for the separation of slag and
matte. The matte proceeds on to a converter while the slag is
cooled, a sulphide rich fraction concentrated and sent for recycle
to the reactor.
Particulates are any finely divided solid or liquid particles in the
air or in an emission. Particulates include dust, smoke, fumes
and mist, etc.
the most common type of converters are refractory lined,
cylindrical, steel shells mounted on trunions on either end and
rotated about the major axis for charging and pouring. Air or
oxygen rich air is blown through the molten matte where iron
and sulphur are oxidized.
a process where mine concentrate or calcine is smelted.
in chemical extraction of valuable ore constituents, use of
autoclaves to accelerate attack by means of increased
temperatures and pressures.
the charge material of metal sulphides (ore concentrates) is
heated in air partially eliminating the sulphur as sulphur dioxide
in order to facilitate smelting.
roasting of sulphide concentrates followed by acid leaching acid
and electrowinning for recovery of metals.
involves the smelting of scrap materials or the
reclaiming/recycling of a metal into a usable form.
In wastewater treatment, the settling out of solids by gravity.
200

Sinter:
Slag:
Slag cleaning:
Top Blown Rotary
Converter
Smelting (TBRC):
Wet Scrubbers:
an intermediate silicate material with suitable porosity and
mechanical properties, produced by the oxidation of mineral
concentrates blended with fluxes in the solid phase for removal
of sulphide as sulphur dioxide.
a molten layer formed on top of a bath of liquid metal or matte
when iron and other impurities in the charge oxidize and mix
with flux.
slag containing significant amounts of the desired metal is
treated in a slag cleaning furnace to extract the desired metal
and reduce the amount of magnetite. Usually slag from flash
furnaces and converter furnaces requires cleaning. The slags
are charged to a slag cleaning furnace (usually an electric
furnace) where the metals and metal sulphides are allowed to
settle under reducing conditions with the addition of coke or iron
sulphide.
converter that allows rapid and independent temperature and
atmosphere control by the introduction of oxygen, an oxygenfuel
mixture or other gases above the furnace bath which is
stirred by the rotation of the vessel.
remove particles from the gas stream by capturing the particles
in liquid (usually water) droplets and separating the droplets
from the gas stream. The droplets act as conveyors of the
particulate out of the gas stream.
201