ORF Technologies
Overview
- Portfolio of patents related to mineral extraction
- Intellectual property was developed over 50 years at a cost in excess of $20 million
- The metallurgical specialists will continue to operate under ORF Technologies
- The ORF technology suite can support Temas’ internal La Blache Project development as well as unrelated third-party mining projects
Advantages
- Significantly reduces capital and processing costs (30-50%) and improves recoveries in complex deposits
- Allows for production of metal or high value product on-site
- Greatly enhances the mine gate economics compared to conventional concentrators
- The technologies are especially suitable for high-acid-consuming carbonate (oxide) hosted ores
- Environmentally friendly and reduces carbon footprint when compared to conventional processing methods
- Targeting base metals that are essential for the supply of raw materials for the electric vehicle revolution, energy generation and storage technologies
- Aligned with ESG (Environmental, Social & Governance) policies
Comparison of Nickel Technologies
|
Pyrometallurgical |
Caron |
HPAL |
ORF Laterite |
|
|
Ores that can be treated |
Med-high Ni (1.8-2.5 %), low-med Fe (10-20 %) ores |
Low Ni (1.2-1.5 %), high iron (>40 %) ores |
Low Ni (1.2-1.5 %), high iron (>40 %) ores |
Both low Fe/MgO and high Fe/MgO ores |
|
Ni recovery |
~95 % |
~75 % |
~95% |
> 90 % |
|
Co recovery |
None |
< 50% |
~95% |
> 90 % |
|
Fe recovery |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Mg recovery |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Capital cost |
High |
Medium |
High |
Can be lower |
|
Operating cost |
High |
Medium |
High |
Can be medium |
|
Energy requirement |
High (due to water removal from ore and high temperature processing) |
High (due to water removal from ore and high temperature processing) |
Low (no water removal from ore and low temperature process) |
Medium (no water removal from ore and low temperature process) |
|
Reagents |
Not recycled |
Not recycled |
Not recycled |
Recycled |
|
Residue amount |
High volume |
High volume |
High volume |
Lower volume |
|
Environmental |
Slag disposal |
Residue disposal containing ammonia |
High volume residue disposal |
Potentially inert residue |
ORF Technology Processing of Nickel
Comparison of Technologies with ORF Process for TiO₂ production
| Chloride | Sulphate | ORF | |
| Raw material | High cost, rutile | Low cost, Ilmenite | Lowest cost, Ilmenite |
| ($/ton of TiO2 feed) | ($2000 +) | $300 | $250 |
| TiO2 product | High value | Low value | High value |
| ($/ton of TiO2) | ~4500 | ($3500 +) | ~4500 |
| Capex | Highest | Medium | Lowest |
| (including front-end) | |||
| Opex | Highest | Medium | Lowest |
| (including front-end) | |||
| Environmental | Medium challenges | Major challenges | Most environmentally friendly |
| Flexibility in processing raw material | Limitation (Mn, Mg, size) | Limitation (Cr, V) | Can process |
| (Flexible) | |||
| Process Condition | High Temp. | High Temp. | Atmospheric |
| Chlorine | Sulphuric Acid | Mixed Chloride | |
| (800-1000 0C) | (140-180 0C) | (70 0C) | |
| Technology | Old | Old | Patented, New |
| End to end in one location | Not practiced | Possible | Possible |
| Pigment production | Rutile | Rutile/Anatase | Rutile/Anatase |
| Commercially Proven process | In practice | In practice | Innovatively applied, will soon be in practice |
| Environmental challenges | Disposal of iron and other byproduct chlorides | Disposal of large iron sulphate product and dilute acid | Minimum environmental impact, Iron oxide as byproduct |
| Safety Requirements | High | High | Low |
| (Cl2 at high and low temperature) | (High temperature acid digestion) | (no pressurized vessel and low temperature) | |
| chlorine and carbon/carbon containing chemicals at high temperature | Challenges to handle | N/A | N/A |
| Energy consumption | High | High | Efficient |
| Sulfur price | No effect | Substantial effect | No effect |
Simplified ORF TiO2 Flowsheet and layout
