metals

Review
The Use of Acid Leaching to Recover Metals from Tailings:
A Review
Valeria Maltrana and Jaime Morales *

Escuela de Ingeniería Química, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Avenida Brasil 2162,
Valparaíso 2362854, Chile; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Mine tailings deposits are often overlooked by the industry, posing significant environ-
mental challenges due to chemical hazards and inadequate maintenance. Nevertheless, such mineral
deposits hold considerable economic potential for processing, and the adoption of innovative tech-
nologies may also address critical chemical and physical stability issues. Existing research has
demonstrated the feasibility of recovering target metals—i.e., copper, iron, manganese, cobalt, zinc,
and others—through the application of acid leaching techniques with consistently high yields and
metal recovery rates. Therefore, a compilation was carried out from 2008 onwards, on working
conditions such as leaching agent, acid concentration, oxidizing-reducing reagent, particle size, O2
pressure, stirring speed, solid–liquid ratio, temperature, and leaching time. At present, there are no
reviews on the recovery of metals via acid leaching in tailings, so this study can serve as support
for future researchers who want to project themselves in this area, ordering the procedures and the
results obtained by the research carried out. Regarding the evaluation, it can be commented that
research has shown that acid leaching of tailings has achieved recoveries of over 90% in different
metals, such as Zn, Cu, and Fe, which indicates that the treatment is efficient and recommended for
different types of tailings.

Keywords: mine tailings; tailings reprocessing; acid leaching; hydrometallurgy; metal recovery

Citation: Maltrana, V.; Morales, J. 1. Introduction

The Use of Acid Leaching to Recover
In copper mining, various physicochemical processes [1,2] are employed to treat
Metals from Tailings: A Review.
ores and extract valuable commercial materials. The choice of ore processing depends on
Metals 2023, 13, 1862. https://
mineral composition, whether oxide or sulfide-based; though for both, material liberation
doi.org/10.3390/met13111862
processes must involve different particle sizes. Generally, oxide-rich materials are subjected
Academic Editors: Petros to hydrometallurgical treatment, while sulfide-rich materials are concentrated [3] before
E. Tsakiridis and Long Meng undergoing pyrometallurgical treatment. Both processing routes yield the desired products
but generate mining waste [4], much of which poses environmental and human health
Received: 10 October 2023
Revised: 26 October 2023
hazards [3,5–12].
Accepted: 3 November 2023
One particularly significant and recently studied waste stream is mine tailings, a
Published: 8 November 2023 byproduct of sulfide ore concentration procedure [13]. These tailings are transported
to tailings deposits [14] with a focus on achieving chemical and physical stability [2,6].
To meet these objectives, it is imperative to remove toxic agents and potential sulfuric
acid producers, including pyrite, which is the precursor of acid mine drainage (AMD)
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. formation due to oxygen and water exposure, where it is a serious environmental problem
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. for industries due to its low pH, less than pH 3, coupled with a high concentration of heavy
This article is an open access article metals such as cadmium (Cd), Cu, iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), lead (Pb), and zinc (Zn),
distributed under the terms and
and toxic metalloids such as arsenic (As) and selenium (Se) [15], and to ensure a robust
conditions of the Creative Commons
structural integrity to prevent spillage and leakage within the deposit. Further, emphasizing
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
the chemical stability of mine tailings is paramount since insufficient stability within a
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
tailings deposit significantly heightens the risk of environmental contamination [6]. The
4.0/).

Metals 2023, 13, 1862. https://doi.org/10.3390/met13111862 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/metals

Metals 2023, 13, 1862 2 of 17

composition of the tailings deposit may vary depending on the ore processing sector [16].
Furthermore, considering the state of the waste—active, non-active, or abandoned [6]—is
crucial, as it impacts the treatment approach. Many of these deposits are solely under
physical control, prompting current research into the chemical stability and the potential
extraction of valuable materials for use in fields like construction [17,18]. Finally, the
concentrated chemical composition of these tailings may hold economic value, particularly
for the steel and electromobility industries [14,19–21].
Since these deposits are exposed to the elements, contact with atmospheric oxygen
can lead to surface oxidation, which may have occurred over an extended period [22]. Con-
sequently, the application of hydrometallurgical treatment methods has been explored for
such materials. The uncertainty surrounding the behavior of tailings deposits has spurred
the implementation of metallurgical procedures. Indeed, researchers have proposed diverse
methodologies for recovering valuable minerals from these tailings, including bioremedi-
ation [23], bioleaching [4,24], phytostabilization [6,25], flotation [5,26], geopolymers [27],
agitated acid leaching [22,28–46]—both in columns [47,48] and in autoclave [49,50]—and
even utilizing this waste as a raw material for cement production in the construction
industry [51–53].
As the processing of tailings material is being evaluated, it is important to consider
the provenance of this sample. It is known that tailings are a residue from the mineral
concentration stage, so their mineralogy will be composed mostly of unwanted compounds,
e.g., quartz (SiO2 ), carbonates (CaCO3 ), some oxides (Al2 O3 , MgO, Fe2 O3 and Fe3 O4 ),
and pyrite (FeS2 ). To mitigate the inconveniences that these impurities can generate, it is
recommended to implement pre-treatments to the tailings sample such as milling, to release
trapped minerals and, thus, increase the contact surface of the tailings and to promote the
development of the tailings.
To mitigate the inconveniences that can generate these impurities, it is also recom-
mended to implement pre-treatments to the tailings sample such as grinding, to release
trapped mineral and, thus, increase the contact surface of this and promote the interaction
between the metal and the leaching agent. Another treatment is mineral flotation, in which
the valuable mineral will be concentrated and the inert material can be separated from the
material of interest. It is also possible to float pyrite in neutral environments, so that in the
future it will not be a problem. In the case of having an impurity rich in iron, specifically
magnetite, it is advisable to implement a magnetic treatment in order to remove most of
this iron oxide in a physical way.
This paper was written to satisfy the need for a review of the work carried out by
authors on the acid tailings leaching process and, thus, to be able to provide ordered
information for future researchers who require parameters and variables to carry out their
scientific research.

2. Bibliographic Review
As non-renewable resources, ore grades are declining, prompting increased considera-
tion of reprocessing for mining waste material within the mining industry. Mine tailings
harbor trace metals of interest, amenable to recovery via hydrometallurgical methods, such
as acid leaching. Various researchers have tackled tailings materials from their respective re-
gions, achieving substantial recoveries of copper, iron, cobalt, zinc, gold, and silver through
acid leaching techniques. The extractions of these metals help the chemical stability of
the tailings, because when the concentration of these species decreases, the formation of
AMD is interrupted, avoiding acid seepage and overflows. In addition, the reprocessing
of tailings helps sustainable mining; it reduces polluting emissions and is friendly to the
ecosystem.
In 2008, Antonijevic [28] proposed copper recovery from Bor copper mine tailings
through acid leaching. The tailings had around 21% sulfide content and 0.2% copper,
with a particle size of approximately 0.074 mm. He used a 1-L beaker with mechanical
and magnetic agitators, employing 500 mL of leaching solution and 100 g of sample
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 3 of 17

(−0.0074 mm). Antonijevic investigated the effects of initial pH, pulp density, agitation
speed, particle size, Fe2 (SO4 )5 oxidant concentration, and temperature. Using three sulfuric
acid concentrations (1 M, 5 M, and 9 M), he achieved copper extractions of 62%, 65%, and
70% approximately within about 120 min. Varying pulp densities (20–50%) resulted in
copper recoveries of 60–64% and iron recoveries of around 2%. Agitation speed variation
(300–900 RPM) consistently yielded 60% copper recovery and approximately 2% iron
recovery. Particle size-based leaching showed recoveries below 10% for particle sizes larger
than +74 µm, roughly 57% copper recovery for −74 µm, and recoveries exceeding 70% for
−36 µm particle sizes. Concerning temperature, experiments at 20 ◦ C, 40 ◦ C, and 60 ◦ C
with 0.1 M acid, 20% solids, and an oxidizing agent at 5 g/L concentration demonstrated
that higher temperatures led to increased dissolution of Cu and Fe, achieving 80% recovery,
up from 68% at 20 ◦ C, in just 2 h, with 88% Cu extraction after 32 h.
In 2012, Guo [29] investigated heavy metal leaching from Dexing Copper mine tail-
ings. Material characterization was performed using acid digestion, ICP (AES), and XRD,
revealing contents of 455 ppm Cu, 31,750 ppm Fe, 775 ppm Mn, and 215 ppm Zn. Acid
leaching (25 g material, 250 mL HCl, room temperature, 50 days) explored pH, temperature,
and particle size. Lower pH (pH < 3) led to greater metal dissolution for all metals, with
pH = 2 (0.01 M hydrochloric acid concentration) yielding the highest extractions (Zn 5.4%,
Cu 5.8%, Fe 11.1%, Mn 34.1%). Elevated temperatures (5 and 27 ◦ C) over 10 days increased
recoveries (Zn 70%, Cu 60%, Fe 86%, Mn 63%). Smaller particle sizes (1700 µm and 150 µm)
had higher metal recoveries.
In 2014, Chen [30] focused on Dabaosan Mine tailings directly from flotation. Diges-
tions, atomic absorption, ICP-MS, SEM-EDX, QUEMSCAN, and Bond moisture analysis
showed 18% of the flotation tail contained metals of interest, with Cu, Zn, Fe, and Mg
concentrations of 2923.15, 1638.21, 108,671.20, and 590.80 ppm, respectively. The tailings
had about 4.43% oxidized iron, zinc was in sphalerite form, and copper existed as a mix
of oxides and sulfides (31.62% and 68.34%, respectively). Leaching experiments involved
varying sulfuric acid concentrations, agitation at 400 RPM, and assessing temperature, acid
dosage, leaching time, and solid–liquid ratio. Initial tests at temperatures from 30 ◦ C to
80 ◦ C, with 0.24 mL/g of sulfuric acid, 1:2 S:L ratio, and 2 h of treatment, resulted in similar
recoveries for Cu, Mn, Zn, and Fe, approximately 99%, 55%, 28%, and 15%, respectively.
Changing acid concentrations (0.18 to 0.40 mL/g) at a constant 30 ◦ C, 1:2 S:L ratio, and 2-h
duration led to consistent recoveries for all metals except copper, which increased from 70%
to nearly 98% at higher acid levels. Assessing leaching time at 0.24 mL/g (0.05 M) H2 SO4 ,
1:2 S:L ratio, and 30 ◦ C showed stable recoveries after 2 h, reaching almost 100% for copper,
55% for manganese, 30% for zinc, and less than 20% for iron. Examining solid–liquid ratios
from 1:9 to 1:1, corresponding to pulp densities of 10% to 50%, revealed varying extraction
behavior. Iron remained stable at around 20% recovery, while zinc recovery increased
linearly as pulp density decreased, reaching about 40%. Copper and manganese recoveries
increased and stabilized as the S:L ratio decreased (1:2–1:9), with maximum recoveries of
98.40% for Cu and 65% for Mn.
In 2015, Wang [31] conducted leaching experiments on Yangla, Yunnan Province,
China tailings. Wang characterized the material with XRD and SEM-EDS, revealing 0.41%
Cu, mostly oxidized (80.49%). Wang explored the influence of concentration, temperature,
solid–liquid ratio (S:L), and agitation speed. Testing a range of initial acid concentrations
(0.230–0.494 M) with 400 RPM agitation, 1:3 S:L ratio, 62 ◦ C, and a 60-min cycle, he observed
that higher acid concentration, up to 0.428 M H2 SO4 , led to a peak copper extraction
of around 50%. Wang also found a positive correlation between higher temperatures
(75–88 ◦ C) and increased copper recovery when using 0.428 M H2 SO4 . Regarding S:L ratios
(1:1 to 1:5) at 75 ◦ C, 0.428 M acid, and agitation, lower pulp densities yielded stable, high
extractions, while higher densities slowed extraction. Maximum copper extraction occurred
at 300 RPM, with constant recoveries beyond that speed. Wang concluded that an efficient
leaching process involved 0.428 M H2 SO4 , 75 ◦ C, 1:3 S:L ratio, 300 RPM agitation, and a
60-min cycle, resulting in a 53.8% copper recovery with 12.85 tons of acid consumption.
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 4 of 17

In 2015, Santos [32] processed tailings material from the Rio Doce Magnesio (RDM)
Company-Morro de Mina Unit in Conselheiro Lafaiete (MG, Brazil). The material was
characterized using sieving, XRD, acid digestion, ICP-AES, gravimetry, LOC, and the
Volhard–Wolff method, revealing a total Mn content of 24.8%, with 86.6% of particles mea-
suring less than 250 µm. Santos employed a 23 factorial experimental design to evaluate the
variables of acid concentration, leaching time, and waste amount, considering two particle
size ranges, sulfuric acid, 100 RPM agitation, and a solution volume of 10 mL. The acid
concentration, time, and amount of waste were varied in the ranges of 9.8–54% w/w, 1–6 h,
and 0.5–1.5 g, respectively. The experimental setup resulted in eight leaching experiments,
with five replicates of the midpoint levels for each variable. The findings indicated that
smaller particle sizes led to improved manganese recovery. Santos subsequently employed
a Doehlert experimental design to optimize the leaching process, identifying ideal parame-
ters: 9.8% H2 SO4 (w/w) (1M of sulfuric acid), 10 h of leaching, 0.1 g of tailings, 10 mL of
solution, and 100 RPM agitation, achieving a remarkable 95.5% manganese recovery.
In 2016, Liu [33] delved into copper recovery from tailings material abundant in
calcium salts. The material, sourced from Chuxiong, Yunnan Province, China, contained
0.68% copper and 3.15% iron, with 91.2% of the copper oxidized. Additionally, the sample
contained substantial acid-consuming impurities like CaO, MgO, and Al2 O3 . To address
the high acid consumption, Liu proposed a reverse flotation pretreatment using oleic acid
to separate these impurities. This pretreatment significantly reduced acid consumption
from 0.367 tons to 0.126 tons, enabling the recovery of 66.74% of the copper through acid
leaching. The leaching process utilized a 1:2 solid–liquid ratio (S:L), agitation at 300 RPM,
and a 30-min leaching time.
In 2017, Asadi [34] conducted leaching experiments on tailings from the Bama process-
ing plant in Isfahan, Iran. The material underwent crushing and grinding to reduce particle
size to less than 150 µm, with XRF revealing an 8.26% Zn content. Asadi employed a CCRD
experimental design with 32 iterations considering factors like agitation speed, sulfuric
acid concentration, H2 SO4 :Fe2 (SO4 )4 ratio, L:S ratio, and temperature. Initial experiments
focused on the effect of the oxidizing agent, Fe2 (SO4 )3 , showing that zinc recovery increased
up to 0.5 M Fe2 (SO4 )3 . Further analysis highlighted that higher H2 SO4 :Fe2 (SO4 )4 ratios
and temperatures led to increased Zn dissolution, with temperature being the most influ-
ential factor. Low L:S ratios, increased stirring speeds, and higher H2 SO4 concentrations
enhanced Zn extraction. The interaction of L:S, temperature, and stirring speed had a
significant impact. Optimizing Zn leaching, Asadi identified ideal parameters as 320 RPM
agitation, 1.14 M H2 SO4 concentration, 2.49 H2 SO4 :Fe2 (SO4 )4 ratio, L:S ratio of 10.10 mL/g,
and 80 ◦ C temperature, resulting in a remarkable 94.3% zinc recovery.
In 2018, Guiming [35] examined tailings material using two metallurgical methods.
The sample consisted of 93–94% non-metallic and 5–7% metallic components, with 0.5192%
copper, of which 93.64% was oxidized. Initially, a flotation process recovered 0.489% copper.
Subsequently, an agitated acid leaching process assessed the effects of acid concentration,
temperature, and time. The first analysis employed a 1-h leaching period, room temper-
ature, 500 g of material, and 1 L of solution, resulting in copper recoveries of 15.49%,
18.84%, 32.82%, and 53.11% for acid concentrations of 40, 60, 80, and 100 kg/t (0.2, 0.3,
0.4, and 0.5 M), respectively. The second analysis maintained the conditions but increased
acid concentrations and a temperature range of 45–55 ◦ C. Copper recoveries were 33.27%,
73.23%, 75.51%, and 91.71% for sulfuric acid dosages of 80, 100, 130, and 160 kg/t (0.4, 0.5,
0.65 M, and 0.8 M). In the third analysis, sulfuric acid remained at 160 kg/t, with equal S:L
ratios, a temperature range of 45–55 ◦ C, and a 2-h leaching time. The impact of time was
evaluated in 30-min intervals, yielding recoveries of 91.34%, 91.71%, 92.10%, and 92.86%
for leaching times of 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 h.
In 2018, Bai [36] worked with chrysocolla-rich tailings material from Zambia, Africa.
Characterization through XRD and SEM-EDS identified a 0.91% copper content, with
93.41% in oxidized form, primarily as chalcocite, malachite, and chrysocolla compounds.
Notably, 64.84% of the copper presented a challenging extraction profile. Consequently, Bai
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 5 of 17

employed agitated acid leaching, investigating the effects of acid concentration, tempera-
ture, and leaching time, with a constant agitation speed of 700 RPM and S:L ratio of 1:2.
Through experimental design and data analysis, the study identified optimal parameters:
0.01 M acid concentration, 68.51 ◦ C temperature, and a 4.36-h leaching time, resulting in an
impressive 85.86% copper recovery.
In 2018, researcher Rogowski [37] conducted a study on radiotracer application in
tailings acid leaching using material from the Polish Geological Institute-National Re-
search Institute, characterized with 10,686.7 ppm copper content. Rogowski employed
various acids—H2 SO4 (98% pure), HNO3 (65% pure), C6 H8 O7 (pure), C6 H8 O6 (pure), and
CH3 COOH (99% pure)—at 25 ◦ C, with 20 g of material, 300 mL of acid solution, and leach-
ing times ranging from 24 to 48 h. Sulfuric acid concentrations of 2–8 M resulted in initial
and final copper recoveries of 15% and 22%, respectively. Nitric acid, in concentrations from
0.01 to 14 M, yielded maximum copper extraction at 10.5 M, achieving 71% Cu recovery,
with around 50% recovery within the 3–9 M HNO3 range. The other acids, except ascorbic
acid, achieved approximately 20% copper recovery.
In 2018, Stanković [38] conducted a comprehensive study on old tailings from the
Mining and Smelting Copper Co. Bor in Serbia. His analysis encompassed the physical,
mineralogical, and chemical properties of the tailings, employing wet granulometry and
polarized microscopy techniques. This characterization revealed that a substantial portion,
exceeding 75%, had a particle size of −37 µm. The tailings composition was identified as
90% gangue, 6% pyrite, 0.4% chalcopyrite, and 0.13% cuprite, with a total copper content of
0.192%, primarily in the oxidized form at 55.21%. Later, Stanković [39] introduced a copper
extraction process involving two metallurgical stages: an initial acidic agitated leaching
followed by flotation of the insoluble solids from the leaching step. In the first phase, he
applied parameters of 0.2 M H2 SO4 , an S:L ratio of 1:2, agitation at 300 RPM, a temperature
of 20 ◦ C, and a 1-h leaching duration. Subsequently, in the second stage, the aim was
to concentrate the insoluble solids from the leaching step to enhance copper recovery
from the tailings. Utilizing acid leaching alone, Stanković achieved a commendable 70%
copper recovery; however, with the incorporation of the flotation stage, the overall recovery
significantly improved to 80%, highlighting the effectiveness of the integrated process.
In 2018, researcher Han [49] investigated high-pressure leaching of tailings from
the Bor mining area in Serbia, characterized through ICP-OES, XRF, XRD, SEM-EDS,
revealing 0.34% Cu, 8.96% Fe, and mineral compounds like SiO2 , FeS2 , and Al2 Si2 O5 (OH)4 .
Han’s study comprised several phases: initially, a mineral concentration pretreatment
increased copper content from 0.34% to 0.65%. Subsequently, the influence of pyrite on
copper leaching was explored. High-pressure leaching tests examined factors like acid
concentration, oxygen pressure, temperature, pulp density, free acid, and iron precipitation.
Conducted in a 2 L autoclave, the experiments revealed that using distilled water resulted
in 98.1% Cu and 67.4% Fe extraction. Parameters like oxygen pressure, temperature, and
pulp density significantly impacted copper and iron recovery, with higher values leading to
increased extraction rates. The optimized conditions included 0 M H2 SO4 , i.e., without the
presence of acid, only leaching with distilled water, 2 MPa O2 pressure, 180 ◦ C temperature,
60-min leaching, and a pulp density of 400 g/L, yielding 2.9 g/L Cu recovery suitable for
subsequent solvent extraction processes.
In 2019, Pazhoohan [39] conducted leaching experiments on tailings from Dehne Siah
Zangaloo, Anabad, Iran, revealing a mineral composition of 3.44% iron and 0.62% oxidized
copper, primarily as azurite (13%) and malachite (87%). The tailings had a particle size
less than or equal to 100 µm. Pazhoohan conducted leaching tests with solids percentages
ranging from 30% to 45%, using 1000 mL of leaching solution, a 90-min leaching time, and
an agitation speed of 100 RPM. Two acid addition methods were employed. In the first
method, gradual acid addition resulted in 90% copper and 12% iron recoveries after 40 min.
In the second method, instantaneous acid addition achieved 93% copper and 11% iron
recoveries within the first 15 min.
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 6 of 17

In 2019, Constantin [22] evaluated acid leaching for precious metal extraction from
tailings sourced from the Baia Mare Central Flotation Pond, which contained chalcopyrite,
sphalerite, galena, and pyrite. Characterization through ICP-OES and FAAS revealed
trace amounts of gold and silver (<0.7 ppm and <10.8 ppm, respectively). Constantin’s
investigation involved two steps, each using different acid leaching techniques. In the first
step, with an S:L ratio of 1:1.5, 120 RPM agitation, a 7-day leaching time, and 2 M H2 SO4 or
2 M HNO3 solutions, only silver was recovered, yielding 1 ppm and 12.5 ppm for H2 SO4
and HNO3 , respectively. In the second step, insolubles from the first step underwent a
second acid leaching with 2 M H2 SO4 , an S:L ratio of 1:1.5, 120 RPM agitation, and a 7-day
leaching time, resulting in recoveries of 12.5 ppm silver and 0.5 ppm gold for H2 SO4 , and 1
ppm gold for HNO3 . Constantin also investigated the impact of oxidizing agents (H2 O2
and Fe2 (SO4 )3 ) on H2 SO4 leachates but observed no significant effect, likely due to the
already oxidized nature of the tailings.
In 2020, Shengo [40] developed a comprehensive approach to recover copper and
cobalt from tailings originating in Luiswishi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Africa. Char-
acterization revealed that the tailings contained 0.74% copper and 0.37% cobalt, primarily in
the oxidized form, with the highest concentrations in particles below −38 µm. To facilitate
mineral liberation, wet milling was employed, reducing the d80 particle size to 138 µm in
just 11 min. Shengo’s dual-pronged mineral processing strategy encompassed acid leaching
and flotation for ore concentration. Acid leaching experiments involved optimizing param-
eters such as time, temperature, and the addition of reducing agents, achieving notable
recoveries of 75% Cu and 62% Co at 120 min, with further enhancement to 79% Cu and 56%
Co at 60 ◦ C. The introduction of Na2 S2 O5 (10–15 g) at 120 min and 60 ◦ C yielded promising
results with 70% Cu and 80% Co recovery. Concurrently, ore concentration via flotation,
utilizing chemical reagents in both rougher and cleaner stages, resulted in recoveries of
56% Cu and 59% Co in the rougher stage, followed by improvements to 35% Cu and 43%
Co in the cleaner flotation stage.
In 2020, Conić [41] undertook a study focused on efficiently extracting copper from
tailings material sourced from Copper Mine Bor, Serbia. Characterization encompassed
chemical analysis, XRD, and particle size measurement, revealing a p80 particle size of
75 µm and a composition of 7.78% Fe, 10.52% S, and 0.24% Cu, with 0.12% existing as
oxidized forms and the remainder as sulfides. Conić employed three hydrometallurgical
techniques: acid leaching, bioleaching, and leaching with biogenic agents. In acid leaching,
utilizing 1 M H2 SO4 , 300 RPM agitation, 30% pulp density, 80 ◦ C temperature, and 120 min
of leaching time, a 55% copper recovery was achieved within the first 30 min, maintained
throughout the process. Bioleaching, with 10% pulp density, 45 ◦ C temperature, 250 RPM
agitation, 15 days of leaching, air and CO2 injection, reached its peak with an 84% copper
recovery on the ninth day. Leaching with biogenic agents involved a 240-min process using
ferrous sulfate pentahydrate, salts, and bacteria, extracting a maximum of 80% copper
within 10 min.
In 2021, Alvarez [42] processed tailings from Ramba del Real, Murcia, Spain, char-
acterized with WDXRF and XRD, revealing Zn and Cu contents of 1.38% and 0.0435%,
respectively. Alvarez conducted nine leaching trials using carbon-based materials (AC
and VC) and three H2 SO4 concentration levels (0.25, 0.5, and 1 M) at 90 ◦ C, 250 RPM,
and a 6-h processing time. Each experiment involved 2.5 g of tailings and 50 mL of leach-
ing solution, except for carbon-based tests with a 1:1.5 w/w tailings-AC/VC ratio. The
highest zinc extraction (99%) was achieved with tailings-1 M H2 SO4 -VC, tailings-0.5 M
H2 SO4 -AC, and tailings-0.25 M H2 SO4 after 6 h. For copper, the top extractions (48–61%) oc-
curred with tailings-1 M H2 SO4 -AC, tailings-1 M H2 SO4 -VC, and tailings-0.5 M H2 SO4 -AC
combinations.
In 2021, Tao [43] processed tailings from Yunnan Tin Group (Holding) Company
Limited, China, utilizing acid leaching to extract iron. Before leaching, Tao characterized
the tailings with various techniques, revealing a composition of 0.26% copper and 36.76%
iron. Tao’s investigation analyzed the impacts of temperature, acid concentration, solid-to-
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 7 of 17

liquid (S:L) ratio, and agitation speed. Temperature experiments ranged from 20–60 ◦ C,
with other parameters held constant (400 RPM, 0.53 M sulfuric acid, and an S:L ratio of
1:10). Recoveries increased from 49.53% at 20 ◦ C to 69.18% at 60 ◦ C. For acid concentration,
experiments at 40 ◦ C with varying concentrations (0.31–0.64 M) resulted in recoveries of
46.87% and 67.83% at 20 ◦ C and 60 ◦ C, respectively. S:L ratio variations (1:4, 1:6, 1:8, 1:10,
and 1:12) at 40 ◦ C, 0.53 M acid, and 400 RPM showed recoveries of approximately 40%,
50%, and 55% for the first three ratios and 65% for the last two ratios. Assessing agitation
speed at 40 ◦ C, 0.53 M H2 SO4 , and an S:L ratio of 1:10, recoveries increased with speeds of
100, 200, 300, 400, and 500 RPM, reaching 67% at 400 and 500 RPM.
In 2021, researcher Schueler [44] conducted leaching experiments on tailings material
from Neves Corvo, Portugal, with initial characterization revealing significant copper,
zinc, lead, and arsenic contents. Employing a Box–Behnken experimental design, Schueler
investigated the impacts of sodium chloride concentration, sulfuric acid concentration, and
temperature on the leaching process. The experiments maintained agitation at 250 RPM,
an S:L ratio of 1:10, a NaCl reducing agent dosage of 10–35–60 g/L, temperature ranges
of 20–45–70 ◦ C, and H2 SO4 concentrations of 0.01–0.5–1 M. The most favorable outcome,
achieved in just 4 h, involved conditions of 60 g/L NaCl, 0.01 M H2 SO4 , 45 ◦ C, and an S:L
ratio of 1:10, resulting in a 55% lead extraction. A second leaching process for the solid
residue using conditions from the highest Pb recovery tests (60 g/L NaCl, 0.5 M H2 SO4 ,
70 ◦ C, S:L ratio of 1:10) produced recoveries of 66.8% Cu, 84.1% Zn, 93.9% Pb, and 47.8%
As after 1 and 24 h.
In 2021, Godirilwe [50] conducted leaching experiments on tailings material from Bor
Copper Mine, Serbia, considering both raw tailings and a concentrated tailings variant.
Characterization of the samples revealed differences in copper and iron content, with the
raw tailings containing 0.24% Cu and 3.51% Fe, while the concentrated tailings had higher
levels at 0.65% Cu and 35.20% Fe, with a D50 particle size of 27 µm. High-pressure leaching
was performed for both conditions, featuring parameters such as 700 RPM agitation speed,
H2 SO4 concentrations ranging from 0.2 to 1 M, 2 MPa O2 pressure, a 1-h leaching time, a
temperature of 180 ◦ C, and varying pulp densities (100 g/L for raw tailings and 400 g/L
for concentrated tailings). Analysis of the resulting PLS, conducted using ICP-OES and
XRD, showed copper recoveries of 98.72% and 94.4% for the raw and concentrated tailings,
respectively, along with iron recoveries of 16.31% and 65.9% for the same conditions.
In 2022, researcher Santibáñez-Velásquez [45] conducted comprehensive leaching
experiments on tailings material from northern Chile to extract iron and other metals. The
tailings underwent meticulous chemical characterization involving SEM-EDS, XRD, and
granulometric analysis using Ro-Tap equipment. The experimental phase was characterized
by hydrochloric acid leaching, with varying concentrations (3, 6, 9, and 12 M), agitation set
at 550 RPM, 1 g of homogenized sample in 250 mL of solution, leaching times spanning
6, 16, and 62 h, and a temperature range from 25 ◦ C to 70 ◦ C. The experiments were
systematically divided into three distinct phases, each honing in on specific variables. In
the initial phase, the focus was on hydrochloric acid concentration, with a fixed time of 16 h
at 25 ◦ C. The second phase incorporated the concentration that yielded the best recovery
(9 M HCl) while maintaining a temperature of 25 ◦ C and examining leaching times of
6, 16, and 62 h. The third phase involved 9 M HCl concentration, a 16-h leaching time,
and temperature variations from 25 ◦ C to 70 ◦ C. The optimized parameters discerned by
Santibáñez-Velásquez included a 9 M acid concentration, a 16-h leaching duration, and
a temperature of 60 ◦ C, ultimately resulting in notable recoveries of 749.40 mg/L of Fe,
3.30 mg/L of Cu, and 38.78 mg/L of Mg.
In 2022, Zamarreño [46] utilized tailings from the Culebrón wetland in Coquimbo,
Chile, containing 15.3% iron and 1452 ppm cobalt. After pretreatment to remove magnetic
material and recording an initial pH of 7.11, two leaching experiments were conducted.
The first experiment involved four leachings using 50 g of sample, 60-h resting periods,
and 100 mL HCl solutions at 20% and 25% concentrations by weight, with results analyzed
gravimetrically. The second experiment utilized 200 mL of 0.5 M tartaric acid solution with
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 8 of 17

5 M H2 O2 addition for every 10 g of sieved and unsieved samples over 48 h. The outcomes
demonstrated an average cobalt recovery of 58.14% ± 26.27% and an iron recovery of
21.87%. Notably, unsieved material achieved a 91.06% cobalt recovery, while sieved material
exhibited an even higher 95% cobalt recovery rate.

3. Discussion
Our review shows that acid leaching has become a dominant method for metal extrac-
tion, consistently delivering high recovery rates. Several authors agree with the implemen-
tation of this hydrometallurgical method, since by extracting metals from these deposits,
two high impact problems are mitigated. One of them is the one that has been constantly
mentioned at the beginning of this paper, which is environmental pollution, and the second
problem addressed by the processing of mine tailings is the reuse of mining resources. It is
known worldwide that mineral reserves are decreasing their grades, so it is attractive to
process mining waste material in order to make the industrial process more efficient and
reduce the environmental impacts that mining has caused.
After this analysis, it is important to consider the following aspects in order to carry
out an efficient study on hydrometallurgical treatment of mine tailings.

3.1. Chemical Composition of Tailings

Before implementing a metallurgical process, it is essential to know the chemical and
mineralogical composition of the sample, so that it is possible to choose the suitable agents
and parameters to obtain the desired extraction. The table below summarizes the chemical
composition used from the study.
Table 1 shows that each tailings material differed in chemical and mineralogical
composition, due to the fact that they are found in different geographical locations and
originate from different metal flotation processes. In addition, the researchers implemented
methodologies that, while all focused on the extraction of metals from an acid leaching
process, these techniques differed in the variables of leaching agent, acid concentration,
oxidizing/reducing reagents, stirring speed, S:L ratio, temperature, and leaching time.
Researchers have effectively optimized key parameters such as temperature, agitation,
and acid concentration. The following table (Table 2) shows the optimal parameters and
corresponding metal recoveries in each study.
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 9 of 17

Table 1. Chemical composition of tailings from the bibliographic review (wt, %).

Author Type of Tailings Mine Location Cu Fe S Co * Ag * Au * Mg Mn Zn Al Sb * Pb As Cd * Al2 O3 SiO2 CaO Fe2 O3 MgO
Bor Copper Mine,
[28] Flotation tailings 0.20 8.69 10.58 --- 3.0 0.35 --- --- 0.003 --- --- --- 0.014 --- 8.52 53.34 --- --- ---
Serbia
Mine Dexing Copper
[29] 0.046 3.175 --- --- --- --- 1.12 0.078 0.022 8.354 --- ≤5 * --- ≤5 --- --- --- --- ---
tailings Mine, China
Copper
Dabaoshan Mine
[30] sulfide 0.292 10.87 --- 8.81 --- --- 2.528 0.059 0.164 3.362 9.45 0.018 0.018 8.48 --- 15.06 --- --- ---
region, China
tailing
Copper flotation Yangla Copper
[31] 0.41 20.21 0.27 --- --- --- --- 0.19 --- --- --- --- --- --- 5.69 42.90 9.30 --- 0.68
tailings Mine, China
Manganese
MG,
[32] ore 0.024 4.72 0.689 198 --- --- 1.54 24.76 0.013 5.49 <24 0.005 0.009 <7 --- --- --- --- ---
Brazil
tailing
Copper flotation
[33] Chuxiong, China 0.68 3.15 0.07 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 10.65 62.81 11.28 --- 1.38
tailings
Tailings
Bama processing
[34] from --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 8.26 --- --- --- --- --- 5.99 21.75 16.77 18.97 2.91
plant, Iran
lead-zinc flotation
Tailings
from
[35] --- 0.519 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
oxy-sulfur copper
ore
Refractory Zambia, Africa
[36] 0.91 4.34 0.035 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 14.62 58.46 0.62 --- 5.62
flotation tailings
Polish Geological
[37] Flotation tailings 1.069 0.888 --- 123.8 61.1 --- --- 0.124 0.052 --- 4.2 0.309 --- 2.8 --- --- --- --- ---
Institute
Old
[38] RTB Bor, Serbia 0.217 4.72 5.41 --- 1.45 0.36 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 13.45 69.3 --- --- ---
flotation tailings
[49] Flotation tailings Bor Mining, Serbia 0.34 8.96 11.2 --- --- --- --- --- --- 8.12 --- --- --- --- --- 57.8 --- --- ---
Dehne Siah
[39] Flotation tailings 0.62 3.44 9.4 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 10.36 47.26 7.8 --- ---
Zangaloo, Iran
Central Flotation,
[22] Flotation tailings 0.056 7.04 1.882 15.8 <10.8 <0.7 0.586 0.620 0.589 3.207 150 0.235 0.061 8.4 --- --- --- --- ---
Romania
[40] Flotation tailings Luiswishi, Africa 0.74 --- 0.20 0.37 --- --- --- 0.10 0.01 --- --- --- --- --- 8.12 63.61 2.36 1.87 ---
Bor Copper Mine,
[41] Flotation tailings 0.24 7.78 10.52 --- 3.0 0.5 --- 0.016 0.01 6.58 <50 <0.03 0.022 <10 --- --- --- --- ---
Serbia
Mine Ramba del Real,
[42] 0.044 9.07 1.94 --- --- --- 0.283 0.029 1.38 8.32 --- 2.18 0.151 --- --- 38.9 --- --- ---
tailings Spain
Copper Yunnan Tin Group,
[43] 0.26 36.76 0.17 --- --- --- 1.03 0.11 2.06 2.45 --- --- 0.17 --- --- --- --- --- ---
tailings China
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 10 of 17

Table 1. Cont.

Author Type of Tailings Mine Location Cu Fe S Co * Ag * Au * Mg Mn Zn Al Sb * Pb As Cd * Al2 O3 SiO2 CaO Fe2 O3 MgO
Sulfidic Neves Corvo,
[44] 0.401 28.62 24.9 211 20 --- 0.946 0.064 1.032 3.041 251 0.365 0.432 --- --- --- --- --- ---
tailings Portugal
Mine
[50] Bor Mine, Serbia 0.24 3.51 4.88 --- --- --- --- --- --- 3.45 --- --- --- --- --- 61.7 --- --- ---
tailings
Copper
[45] Vallenar, Chile 0.160 17.70 0.783 --- 40 --- 1.706 0.014 0.026 3.320 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
tailings
Mining Humedal
[46] 0.42 7.77 --- 1404 8 --- 1.17 --- 0.007 7.3 --- 0.004 0.004 --- --- --- --- --- ---
tailings Culebrón, Chile
* corresponds to ppm.
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 11 of 17

Table 2. Metal extractions from mine tailings via acid agitated leaching.

Stirring
Leaching Acid Oxidizing/ S:L Temperature Leaching %
Author Speed
Agent Concentration Reducing Reagent Ratio (◦ C) Time (h) Recovery
(RPM)
[28] H2 SO4 0.1 M Fe2 (SO4 )3 600 1:5 60 2 80% Cu
34.1% Mn
11.1% Fe
[29] HCl 0.01 M (pH 2) * --- --- 1:10 27 1200
5.8% Cu
5.4% Zn
98.45% Cu
0.05 M 56.13% Mn
[30] H2 SO4 --- 400 1:2 30 2
(0.24 mL/g) * 21.41% Zn
17.25% Fe
[31] H2 SO4 0.428 M --- 300 1:3 75 1 53.8% Cu
1M
[32] H2 SO4 --- 100 --- 25 10 95.5% Mn
(9.8% p/p) *
[33] H2 SO4 --- --- 300 1:2 25 0.5 66.74% Cu
[34] H2 SO4 1.14 M Fe2 (SO4 )3 320 1:10 80 1 94.3% Zn
0.8 M
[35] H2 SO4 --- --- 1:3 45–55 0.5 91.34% Cu
(160 kg/t) *
0.01 M
[36] H2 SO4 --- 700 1:2 68.51 4.36 85.86% Cu
(85 kg/t) *
[37] HNO3 10.5 M --- --- 1:15 25 24–48 71% Cu
[38] H2 SO4 0.2 M --- 300 1:2 20 1 70% Cu
98.1% Cu
[49] H2 SO4 0M Pressure O2 --- 1:10 180 1
67.4% Fe
0.5 M
[39] H2 SO4 --- 100 1:2.5 30 1.5 92.67% Cu
(110 kg/t) *
[22] HNO3 2M --- 120 1:1.5 25 168 12.5 ppm Ag
5M 70% Cu
[40] H2 SO4 Na2 S2 O5 600 1:2.5 60 2
(500 g/L) * 80% Co
[41] H2 SO4 0.1 M --- 300 1:3 80 2 50% Cu
99% Zn
[42] H2 SO4 1M VC and H2 O2 250 1:2 90 6
61% Cu
66.45% Fe
[43] H2 SO4 0.53 M --- 400 1:10 40 2 65.32% Cu
59.95% Zn
93.9% Pb
84.1% Zn
[44] H2 SO4 0.01–0.5 M NaCl 250 1:10 45–70 1–24
66.8% Cu
47.8% As
94.4% Cu
[50] H2 SO4 1M Pressure O2 700 1:2.5 180 1
65.9% Fe
82.61% Fe
[45] HCl 9M --- 550 --- 60 16
82.5% Cu
HCl and 20–25% and 91.06% Co
[46] H2 O2 --- --- 25 60–48
C4 H6 O6 0.5 M 21.87% Fe
* corresponds to the original research values.

In the studies mentioned, sulfuric acid consistently stands out as a preferred option
for leaching due to its cost-effectiveness and widespread accessibility [37]. It is noteworthy
that when sulfuric acid is combined with agitation in the process, it consistently delivers
highly efficient copper extractions, typically ranging from 50% to nearly 100%. Moreover, it
often allows for shorter processing times compared to acids like HCl and HNO3 .
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 12 of 17

3.2. Effect of Leaching Agent

The selection of a leaching agent will depend on a set of conditions regarding the
material to be processed. It is imperative to consider the type of material, its surface
condition, its chemical and mineralogical composition, the process from which it was
generated, as well as other details.
In addition to the above, depending on the leaching efficiency it is possible to confirm
the choice of leaching agent. It should be noted that for each metal to be extracted, the
investigation should be approached in a different way.
The extractions obtained from the studies reviewed above are shown in Table 3, where
the concentrations obtained after using an agitated leaching technique with the optimum
parameters for some of the studies can be visualized.

Table 3. Chemical characterization of the leach solution from the bibliographic review (mg/L).

Leaching
Author Cu Fe Co Ag Mg Mn Zn Al
Agent
[29] HCl 4.0 145 --- --- --- 19 0.26 ---
[30] H2 SO4 1450 9310 --- --- --- 170 170 ---
[32] H2 SO4 66.3 * 9320 * 110.7 * --- 8100 * 128,600 * 63.3 * 2557 *
[38] H2 SO4 364 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
[49] H2 SO4 2890 103,000 --- --- --- --- --- ---
[22] HNO3 450 --- 8* 12.5 * 3490 4460 --- 1780
[40] H2 SO4 2530 1400 1* --- --- 300 --- ---
[41] H2SO4 360 5450 --- --- --- --- --- ---
[50] H2 SO4 2900 102,900 --- --- --- --- --- ---
[45] HCl 3.3 749.4 --- --- 38.78 --- --- 25.11
HCl and
[46] --- --- 11.58 * --- --- --- --- ---
C4 H6 O6
* corresponds to ppm.

The incidence of the leaching agents H2 SO4 and HCl will be evaluated by their reaction
mechanisms.

3.2.1. Sulfuric Acid

Copper within a tailings deposit can be found in silicate, oxidized, and sulfide forms,
so the following mechanisms were used to demonstrate the dissolution of the copper
species in the presence of H2 SO4 . Table 1 shows that the copper content in the tailings
analyzed in each study does not exceed 1%, so some of the researchers used sulfuric acid
as a leaching solution, since it can generate soluble compounds and copper ions.

CuFeS2 (s) + 1/2O2 (g) + H2 SO4 (aq)→CuS(s) + FeSO4 (s) + H2 O(l) + S0 (s) (1)

CuS(s) + 1/2O2 (g) + H2 SO4 (aq)→CuSO4 (s) + H2 O(l) + S0 (s) (2)

CuCO·Cu(OH)2 (s) + 2H2 SO4 (aq)→2CuSO4 (s) + 3H2 O(l) + CO2 ↑ (3)

CuSiO3 ·2H2 SO4 (s) + H2 SO4 (aq)→CuSO4 (s) + H2 SiO3 (aq) + 2H2 O(l) (4)

CuO(s) + H2 SO4 (aq)→CuSO4 (s) + H2 O(l) (5)

Metals 2023, 13, 1862 13 of 17

CuO(s) + 2H+ (aq)→Cu2+ (aq) + H2 O(l) (6)

Equation (1) shows the decomposition of chalcopyrite to form chalcocite, which later
(Equation (2)) will form copper sulfate, which is soluble in water and decomposes in acid
environments (pH < 4.5). Equations (3) and (4) show how complex copper compounds
decompose, forming a soluble product while Equations (5) and (6) show the behavior of an
oxidized copper material in the presence of sulfuric acid.
Regarding the amount of iron, it can be said that the tailings have a high iron content,
so the extraction of iron is a tentative idea. The nature of this metal will depend on the
conditions in which the tailings deposit was left, so within this material iron can be found
as an ion, hydroxide, silicate, or oxide.

Fe3+ (aq) + H2 O(l)→FeOH2+ (aq) + H+ (aq) (7)

2Fe(OH)3 + 3H2 SO4 (aq)→Fe2 (SO4 )3 (s) + 6H2 O(l) (8)

Fe3 O4 (s) + H2 SO4 (aq)→FeSO4 (s) + Fe2 O3 (s) + H2 O(l) (9)

Fe2 SiO4 (s) + 2H2 SO4 (aq)→2FeSO4 (s) + H4 SiO4 (aq) (10)
When iron compounds come into contact with sulfuric acid they decompose form-
ing iron sulfates (Equations (8)–(10)), in the case of silicates, a silicic acid is formed
(Equation (10)) and in the case of an oxide, such as magnetite, an iron oxide (hematite) is
formed (Equation (9)).
There are tailings that stand out for their high Zn content, so the use of H2 SO4 for
the leaching of this residue has also been carried out. The reaction mechanisms for zinc
compounds in contact with sulfuric acid are as follows:

ZnS(s) + H2 SO4 (aq)→ZnSO4 (s) + H2 S(g) (11)

ZnS(s) + H2 SO4 (aq) + 1/2O2 (g)→ZnSO4 (s) + H2 O(l) + S0 (s) (12)

Zn2 SiO4 (s) + 2H2 SO4 (aq)→2ZnSO4 (s) + Si(OH)4 (aq) (13)

Zn4 SiO7 ·(OH)2 ·H2 O(s) + 4H2 SO4 (aq)→4ZnSO4 (s) + Si2 O(OH)6 + 3H2 O(l) (14)

ZnO(s) + H2 SO4 (aq)→ZnSO4 (s) + H2 O(l) (15)

For all Zn compounds, when leached with sulfuric acid, ZnSO4 is formed, but de-
pending on the mineralogy of the compound, the reaction will have different products,
such as the leaching of spharelite, H2 S (Equation (11)), and S0 in the presence of oxygen
(Equation (12)); silicon hydroxides for zinc silicates (Equations (13) and (14)) and water
formation for Zn oxides (Equation (15)).
One of the most common impurities in tailings, besides quartz, are carbonates, which
are commonly known to be high acid consumers disrupting the efficiency of valuable metal
extraction.
CaCO3 (s) + H2 SO4 (aq)→CaSO4 (s) + H2 O(l) + CO2 ↑ (16)

CaO(s) + H2 SO4 (aq)→CaSO4 (s) + H2 O(l) (17)

Metals 2023, 13, 1862 14 of 17

It can be seen that the reactions between carbonate compounds and calcium oxides
(Equations (16) and (17)) and the product formed is anhydrite, which directly affects the
leaching of metals.
There are toxic metals that need to be extracted to avoid further environmental con-
tamination. One of them is lead. The mechanisms associated with the leaching of lead in
the presence of sulfuric acid are shown in Equation (18).

PbS(s) + H2 SO4 (aq)→PbSO4 (s) + H2 S(g) (18)

3.2.2. Hydrochloric Acid

The second acid to be evaluated is hydrochloric acid, which is decomposed by the
mechanism provided by Equation (19).

6HCl(aq)→6H+ (aq) + 6Cl− (aq) (19)

The manganese compounds in the tailings are mostly complex compounds that can be
separated into ions, thereby releasing the metal of interest.

Ca3 Mn(SO4 )2 (OH)6 (H2 O)3 (s) + 6H+ (aq)→3Ca2+ (aq) + Mn4+ (aq) + 2SO4 2− + 9H2 O(l) (20)

Ca3 Mn(SO4 )2 (OH)6 (H2 O)3 (s)+6HCl(aq)→3Ca2+ (aq)+ Mn4+ (aq)+2SO4 2− + 6Cl− + 9H2 O(l) (21)
In Equations (20) and (21), it can be seen how the use of hydrochloric acid allows
this ion separation without contaminating the desired metal and allowing an efficient
extraction.
In the case of lead, which is a toxic metal, the chlorine ion allows the formation of
PbCl2 (seen in Equation (22)), which can encapsulate the metal and, thus, reduce the
damage caused by this metal in solution.

PbSO4 (s) + 2Cl− (aq) → PbCl2 (s) + SO4 2− (22)

PbCl2 (s) + 2Cl− (aq) → PbCl2− (aq) (23)

Further processing of the lead compound in contact with the chlorine ion will result
in a lead compound in solution (Equation (23)), which can be recovered by leach solution
refining processes.

3.3. Leached Solution Refining Processes

The product recovered from acid leaching of mine tailings material has a high content
of metals in solution, which are recovered by electrochemical, chemical, and metallurgical
processes, such as fractional precipitation [30] and solvent extraction with subsequent
electrowinning [49,50]. With the above processes it is possible to recover the metal from the
leached solution and deliver a solid commercial product for direct industrial use.

4. Conclusions
This comprehensive review consolidates procedures, parameters, and data for recov-
ering metals from mine tailings, serving as a foundational resource for related research.
Prior to processing tailings, conducting chemical and physical characterizations is essential.
This deep understanding of tailings composition, species, and quantities forms the basis
for designing experiments to optimize metal extraction efficiently.
The choice of chemical agents for leaching depends on various factors, including tail-
ings’ chemical composition, oxidation state, valuable material percentage, acid-consuming
impurities, particle size, and more. Tailoring each acid leaching operation meticulously
involves adjusting acid concentration, agitation parameters, and pulp density to suit
material-specific characteristics. Depending on material requirements, introducing chemi-
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 15 of 17

cal agent dosages, applying elevated temperatures, and controlling particle sizes, preferably
on a micron scale, may be necessary.
Moreover, evaluating whether tailings processing steps like grinding, additional
leaching, ore concentration (flotation), roasting, magnetic separation, or other metallurgical
processes should precede or follow leaching is crucial. This assessment ensures alignment
with recovery goals and material characteristics in the chosen processing sequence.
In the future, and depending on the metal being extracted, it is necessary to select the
correct refining process to obtain a final product, such as the implementation of solvent
extraction plus electrowinning for copper or fractional precipitation in the case of refining
multiple metals.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, V.M.; methodology, V.M.; software, V.M.; validation, J.M.;
formal analysis, J.M.; investigation, V.M.; resources, J.M.; data curation, V.M.; writing—original draft
preparation, V.M.; writing—review and editing, V.M. and J.M.; visualization, V.M.; supervision, J.M.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the postgraduate department of the Pontifical
Catholic University of Valparaíso for the tuition scholarship awarded to student V.M.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Lottermoser, B.G. Mine Wastes: Characterization, Treatment and Environmental Impacts, 3rd ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg,
Germany, 2010.
2. Beylot, A.; Bodénan, F.; Guezennec, A.-G.; Muller, S. LCA as a Support to More Sustainable Tailings Management: Critical Review,
Lessons Learnt and Potential Way Forward. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 183, 106347. [CrossRef]
3. Cacciuttolo, C.; Cano, D. Environmental Impact Assessment of Mine Tailings Spill Considering Metallurgical Processes of Gold
and Copper Mining: Case Studies in the Andean Countries of Chile and Peru. Water 2022, 14, 3057. [CrossRef]
4. Fashola, M.; Ngole-Jeme, V.; Babalola, O. Heavy Metal Pollution from Gold Mines: Environmental Effects and Bacterial Strategies
for Resistance. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 1047. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Yin, Z.; Sun, W.; Hu, Y.; Zhang, C.; Guan, Q.; Wu, K. Evaluation of the Possibility of Copper Recovery from Tailings by Flotation
through Bench-Scale, Commissioning, and Industrial Tests. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 171, 1039–1048. [CrossRef]
6. Mendez, M.O.; Maier, R.M. Phytostabilization of Mine Tailings in Arid and Semiarid Environments-An Emerging Remediation
Technology. Environ. Health Perspect. 2008, 116, 278–283. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Menédez, J.; Muñoz, S. Water and Soil Contamination from Mining Tailings. Paideia XXI 2021, 11, 141–154.
8. Fitch, V.; Parbhakar-Fox, A.; Crane, R.; Newsome, L. Evolution of Sulfidic Legacy Mine Tailings: A Review of the Wheal Maid
Site, UK. Minerals 2022, 12, 848. [CrossRef]
9. Piatak, N.M.; Parsons, M.B.; Seal, R.R., II. Characteristics and Environmental Aspects of Slag: A Review. Appl. Geochem. 2015, 57,
236–266. [CrossRef]
10. Wang, X.-B.; Yan, X.; Li, X.-Y. Environmental Risks for Application of Magnesium Slag to Soils in China. J. Integr. Agric. 2020, 19,
1671–1679. [CrossRef]
11. Krishnan, S.; Zulkapli, N.S.; Kamyab, H.; Taib, S.M.; Din, M.F.B.M.; Majid, Z.A.; Chaiprapat, S.; Kenzo, I.; Ichikawa, Y.; Nasrullah,
M.; et al. Current Technologies for Recovery of Metals from Industrial Wastes: An Overview. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2021, 22,
101525. [CrossRef]
12. Yu, H.; Lu, X.; Miki, T.; Matsubae, K.; Sasaki, Y.; Nagasaka, T. Sustainable Phosphorus Supply by Phosphorus Recovery from
Steelmaking Slag: A Critical Review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 180, 106203. [CrossRef]
13. Cacciuttolo, C.; Atencio, E. Past, Present, and Future of Copper Mine Tailings Governance in Chile (1905–2022): A Review in One
of the Leading Mining Countries in the World. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13060. [CrossRef]
14. Drobe, M.; Haubrich, F.; Gajardo, M.; Marbler, H. Processing Tests, Adjusted Cost Models and the Economies of Reprocessing
Copper Mine Tailings in Chile. Metals 2021, 11, 103. [CrossRef]
15. Park, I.; Tabelin, C.B.; Jeon, S.; Li, X.; Seno, K.; Ito, M.; Hiroyoshi, N. A Review of Recent Strategies for Acid Mine Drainage
Prevention and Mine Tailings Recycling. Chemosphere 2019, 219, 588–606. [CrossRef]
16. Oberle, B.; Brereton, D.; Mihaylova, A. Towards Zero Harm: A Compendium of Papers; Global Tailings Review: St. Gallen,
Switzerland, 2020.
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 16 of 17

17. Martins, N.P.; Srivastava, S.; Simão, F.V.; Niu, H.; Perumal, P.; Snellings, R.; Illikainen, M.; Chambart, H.; Habert, G. Exploring the
Potential for Utilization of Medium and Highly Sulfidic Mine Tailings in Construction Materials: A Review. Sustainability 2021,
13, 12150. [CrossRef]
18. Carmignano, O.; Vieira, S.; Teixeira, A.P.; Lameiras, F.; Brandão, P.R.; Lago, R. Iron ore tailings: Characterization and applications.
J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 2021, 32, 1895–1911. [CrossRef]
19. Edraki, M.; Baumgartl, T.; Manlapig, E.; Bradshaw, D.; Franks, D.M.; Moran, C.J. Designing mine tailings for better environmental,
social and economic outcomes: A review of alternative approaches. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 84, 411–420. [CrossRef]
20. Marín, O.A.; Kraslawski, A.; Cisternas, L.A. Estimating Processing Cost for the Recovery of Valuable Elements from Mine Tailings
Using Dimensional Analysis. Miner. Eng. 2022, 184, 107629. [CrossRef]
21. Adrianto, L.R.; Pfister, S. Prospective Environmental Assessment of Reprocessing and Valorization Alternatives for Sulfidic
Copper Tailings. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 186, 106567. [CrossRef]
22. Constantin, I.; Soare, V.; Burada, M.; Domitrescu, D.V.; Mitrica, D.; Olaru, M.T.; Carlan, B.A.; Dragut, V.D. Methods for processing
mining wastes from copper extraction for the recovery of precious metals. Univ. Politeh. Din Bucures, ti 2019, 81, 207–214.
23. Ayangbenro, A.S.; Olanrewaju, O.S.; Babalola, O.O. Sulfate-Reducing Bacteria as an Effective Tool for Sustainable Acid Mine
Bioremediation. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 1986. [CrossRef]
24. Borja, D.; Nguyen, K.; Silva, R.; Park, J.; Gupta, V.; Han, Y.; Lee, Y.; Kim, H. Experiences and Future Challenges of Bioleaching
Research in South Korea. Minerals 2016, 6, 128. [CrossRef]
25. Huang, L.; Baumgartl, T.; Mulligan, D. Is Rhizosphere Remediation Sufficient for Sustainable Revegetation of Mine Tailings? Ann.
Bot. 2012, 110, 223–238. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26. Santander, M.; Valderrama, L. Recovery of Pyrite from Copper Tailings by Flotation. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2019, 8, 4312–4317.
[CrossRef]
27. Paiva, H.; Yliniemi, J.; Illikainen, M.; Rocha, F.; Ferreira, V. Mine Tailings Geopolymers as a Waste Management Solution for A
More Sustainable Habitat. Sustainability 2019, 11, 995. [CrossRef]
28. Antonijević, M.M.; Dimitrijević, M.D.; Stevanović, Z.O.; Serbula, S.M.; Bogdanovic, G.D. Investigation of the Possibility of Copper
Recovery from the Flotation Tailings by Acid Leaching. J. Hazard. Mater. 2008, 158, 23–34. [CrossRef]
29. Guo, Y.-G.; Huang, P.; Zhang, W.-G.; Yuan, X.-W.; Fan, F.-X.; Wang, H.-L.; Liu, J.-S.; Wang, Z.-H. Leaching of heavy metals from
Dexing copper mine tailings pond. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 2013, 23, 3068–3075. [CrossRef]
30. Chen, T.; Lei, C.; Yan, B.; Xiao, X. Metal recovery from the copper sulfide tailing with leaching and fractional precipitation
technology. Hydrometallurgy 2014, 147–148, 178–182. [CrossRef]
31. Wang, Y.; Wen, S.; Feng, Q.; Xian, Y.; Liu, D. Leaching Characteristics and Mechanism of Copper Flotation Tailings in Sulfuric
Acid Solution. Russ. J. Non Ferr. Met. 2015, 56, 127–133. [CrossRef]
32. De Santos, O.S.H.; de Carvalho, C.F.; da Silva, G.A.; Santos, C.G.D. Manganese Ore Tailing: Optimization of Acid Leaching
Conditions and Recovery of Soluble Manganese. J. Environ. Manag. 2015, 147, 314–320. [CrossRef]
33. Liu, D.; Li, J.; Wen, S.; Wang, Y.; Xian, Y. New Process of Recovering Copper from Tailings with High Combination Rate and High
Calcium Salt. Electron. J. Geotech. Eng. 2016, 21, 4787–4796.
34. Asadi, T.; Azizi, A.; Lee, J.-C.; Jahani, M. Leaching of zinc from a lead-zinc flotation tailing sample using ferric sulphate and
sulfuric acid media. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 4769–4775. [CrossRef]
35. Guiming, S.; Yichao, Z.; Changbing, Y. Leaching of a tailings from oxy-sulfur copper ore with sulfuric acid. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth
Environ. Sci. 2018, 199, 042017. [CrossRef]
36. Bai, X.; Wen, S.; Liu, J.; Lin, Y. Response surface methodology for optimization of copper leaching from refractory flotation tailings.
Minerals 2018, 8, 165. [CrossRef]
37. Rogowski, M.; Smolinski, T.; Pyszynska, M.; Brykala, M.; Chmielewski, A.G. Studies on hydrometallurgical processes using
nuclear techniques to be applied in copper industry. II. Application of radiotracers in copper leaching from flotation tailings.
Nukleonika 2018, 63, 131–137. [CrossRef]
38. Stanković, V.; Milošević, V.; Milićević, D.; Gorgievski, M.; Bogdanović, G. Reprocessing of the old flotation tailings deposite don
the RTB Bor tailings pond-A case study. Chemical 2018, 24, 333–344.
39. Pazhoohan, J.; Beiki, H.; Esfandyari, M. Experimental investigation and adaptative neutral fuzzy inference system prediction of
copper recovery from flotation tailings by acid leaching in a batch agitated tank. Int. J. Miner. 2019, 26, 538–546. [CrossRef]
40. Shengo, L.M. Potentially Exploitable Reprocessing Routes for Recovering Copper and Cobalt Retained in Flotation Tailings. J.
Sustain. Met. 2021, 7, 60–77. [CrossRef]
41. Conić, V.; Stanković, S.; Marković, B.; Božić, D.; Stojanović, J.; Sokić, M. Investigation of the optimal technology for copper
leaching from old flotation tailings of the copper mine bor (Serbia). Met. Mater. Eng. 2020, 26, 209–222. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
42. Álvarez, M.L.; Méndez, A.; Rodríguez-Pacheco, R.; Paz-Ferreiro, J.; Gascó, G. Recovery of Zinc and Copper from Mine Tailings by
Acid Leaching Solutions Combined with Carbon-Based Materials. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 5166. [CrossRef]
43. Tao, L.; Wang, L.; Yang, K.; Wang, X.; Chen, L.; Ning, P. Leaching of iron from copper tailings by sulfuric acid: Behavior, kinetics
and mechanims. R. Soc. Chem. 2021, 11, 5741–5752. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Schueler, T.A.; de Aguiar, P.F.; Vera, Y.M.; Godmann, D. Leaching of Cu, Zn, and Pb from Sulfidic Tailings Under the Use of
Sulfuric Acid and Chloride Solutions. J. Sustain. Met. 2021, 7, 1523–1536. [CrossRef]
Metals 2023, 13, 1862 17 of 17

45. Santibáñez-Velásquez, L.E.; Guzmán, A.; Morel, M.J. Extraction of Iron and Other Metals from Copper Tailings through Leaching.
Metals 2022, 12, 1924. [CrossRef]
46. Zamarreño-Batías, R.; Mera, A.C. Recovery of iron compounds and cobalt solutions from mining tailings. Int. Technol. Sci. Soc.
Rev. 2022, 11, 1–12.
47. Khoeurn, K.; Sakaguchi, A.; Tomiyama, S.; Igarashi, T. Long-Term Acid Generation and Heavy Metal Leaching from the Tailings
of Shimokawa Mine, Hokkaido, Japan: Column Study under Natural Condition. J. Geochem. Explor. 2019, 201, 1–12. [CrossRef]
48. Fu, S.; Lu, J.M.; Yuan, F.Q. Multivariate analysis of Co, Fe and Ni leaching from tailings following simulated temperature change.
IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2018, 191, 012125. [CrossRef]
49. Han, B.; Altansukh, B.; Haga, K.; Stevanović, Z.; Jonović, R.; Avramović, L.; Urosević, D.; Takasaki, Y.; Masuda, N.; Ishiyama, D.;
et al. Development of Copper Recovery Process from Flotation Tailings by a Combined Method of High-pressure Leaching-solvent
Extraction. J. Hazard. Mater. 2018, 352, 192–203. [CrossRef]
50. Godirilwe, L.L.; Haga, K.; Altansukh, B.; Takasaki, Y.; Ishiyama, D.; Trifunovic, V.; Avramovic, L.; Jonovic, R.; Stevanovic, Z.;
Shibayama, A. Copper Recovery and Reduction of Environmental Loading from Mine Tailings by High-Pressure Leaching and
SX-EW Process. Metals 2021, 11, 1335. [CrossRef]
51. Gao, S.; Cui, X.; Zhang, S. Utilization of Molybdenum Tailings in Concrete Manufacturing: A Review. Appl. Sci. 2019, 10, 138.
[CrossRef]
52. Gou, M.; Zhou, L.; Then, N.W.Y. Utilization of Tailings in Cement and Concrete: A Review. Sci. Eng. Compos. Mater. 2019, 26,
449–464. [CrossRef]
53. Maruthupandian, S.; Chaliasou, A.; Kanellopoulos, A. Recycling Mine Tailings as Precursors for Cementitious Binders—Methods,
Challenges and Future Outlook. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 312, 125333. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.