You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 8 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
Metals are among the most useful materials we have, but the ores we extract them from are a finite resource — once a rich ore body has been mined out, it is gone for good. As the easy, high-grade ores run low, chemists face two challenges: how to win metals from low-grade ores (rock containing only a tiny percentage of metal) without using huge amounts of energy, and how to keep the metals we already have in use through recycling. This lesson, part of Topic C6 of OCR Gateway Combined Science A, looks at the newer biological methods of phytomining and bioleaching, at the case for recycling, and at how a life cycle assessment (LCA) measures the whole environmental cost of a product.
By the end of this lesson you should be able to explain why ores are finite, describe phytomining and bioleaching as ways of extracting metals from low-grade ores, explain the benefits of recycling metals, and describe the four stages of a life cycle assessment and why an LCA is not wholly objective.
This lesson develops AO1 (recalling phytomining, bioleaching and the four LCA stages) alongside AO3, where you interpret and evaluate life-cycle-assessment data and judge why an LCA is not wholly objective.
An ore is a rock that contains enough of a metal (or its compound) to make extraction economically worthwhile. Ores are finite: they took millions of years to form and are not being replaced on any human timescale, so the supply is limited. As the richest, most accessible high-grade ores are used up, mining companies are left with low-grade ores that contain only a small percentage of the metal.
Extracting metal from low-grade ore by the traditional methods you met last lesson is wasteful: enormous amounts of rock must be dug up, transported and processed to obtain a small amount of metal, using a great deal of energy and leaving large amounts of waste rock and scarred landscape. This is the problem that the new biological methods are designed to solve — they can reach metal in low-grade ores that would not be worth mining conventionally. Copper is the classic example: most rich copper ores have already been used, so chemists increasingly extract copper from low-grade sources.
Exam Tip: Ores are finite — they took millions of years to form. As high-grade ores run out, we are left with low-grade ores, which are wasteful to mine traditionally. That is why biological methods matter.
Phytomining uses plants to gather metal from low-grade soil or ore. The idea is elegantly simple: certain plants naturally absorb metal compounds from the ground as they grow. The process has clear stages.
flowchart TD
A["Plants grown on low-grade ore or contaminated soil"] --> B["Plants absorb metal compounds through their roots as they grow"]
B --> C["Plants are harvested and burned"]
C --> D["Ash contains a high concentration of metal compounds"]
D --> E["Metal extracted from the ash (e.g. by displacement or electrolysis)"]
In words: plants are grown on land that contains the metal; as they grow they absorb metal compounds through their roots and build them up in their tissues. The plants are then harvested and burned, and the ash left behind is rich in the metal compound — much richer than the original ore. The metal is then extracted from the ash, for example by reacting an acidic solution of the ash with scrap iron (displacement) or by electrolysis.
The advantages are that phytomining uses low-grade ores that could not be mined economically any other way, it needs less energy than traditional smelting, and it causes less damage to the landscape. Its big disadvantage is that it is very slow — it depends on plants growing season after season, so it can take many harvests to gather a worthwhile amount of metal.
Exam Tip: The marks for phytomining are the sequence: plants absorb metal compounds → harvested → burned → the ash contains the metal compound → metal extracted from the ash. The headline advantage is "accesses low-grade ore with less energy"; the headline drawback is "slow".
Bioleaching uses bacteria to extract metal from low-grade ores. Some bacteria can grow on the ore and, through their natural chemical processes, produce a solution called a leachate that contains the metal compound dissolved in it. The metal is then extracted from the leachate.
flowchart TD
A["Bacteria grown on low-grade ore"] --> B["Bacteria produce a leachate solution containing metal compounds"]
B --> C["Metal extracted from the leachate"]
C --> D["By displacement with scrap iron, or by electrolysis"]
In words: bacteria are added to the low-grade ore; their activity produces a leachate — a solution of metal compounds (for copper, a solution of copper compounds). The copper is then extracted from the leachate, either by displacement using scrap iron (Fe+CuSO4→FeSO4+Cu) or by electrolysis.
The advantages are that, like phytomining, bioleaching can win metal from low-grade ores, it needs less energy than smelting (there is no high-temperature smelting at all — the bacteria do the work at ordinary temperatures), and it causes less landscape damage. Its disadvantages are that it is slow, and it can release toxic substances (including toxic chemicals and acidic solutions) that can harm the environment if not controlled.
Exam Tip: Bioleaching uses bacteria to make a leachate — it does not need high temperatures. A common misconception is that bioleaching is a high-temperature smelting process; in fact the absence of smelting is exactly why it saves energy.
| Feature | Traditional extraction | Phytomining | Bioleaching |
|---|---|---|---|
| Uses low-grade ore? | No (needs high-grade ore) | Yes | Yes |
| Energy needed | High (smelting / electrolysis) | Lower | Lower (no smelting) |
| Speed | Fast | Very slow (depends on plant growth) | Slow |
| Main agent | Heat + carbon, or electricity | Plants | Bacteria |
| Landscape damage | Large (mining, waste rock) | Less | Less |
| Drawbacks | Uses finite high-grade ore, high energy | Slow | Slow; can release toxic substances |
Extracting metal from ore is energy-hungry and uses up a finite resource, so wherever possible it is better to recycle the metal we already have. Recycling a metal means melting it down and re-using it, rather than throwing it away and extracting fresh metal from ore.
The benefits of recycling metals are that it:
Crucially, a metal is an element, so recycling does not "use up" or degrade the metal itself — the same atoms can be melted and re-used many times, and the recovered metal is just as good as freshly extracted metal.
Exam Tip: The four recycling benefits to quote are conserves finite ore, saves energy, reduces mining/landscape damage, and reduces landfill waste. Add that recycling does not degrade the metal because it is an element — a misconception worth heading off.
Evaluate the use of bioleaching to extract copper from a low-grade ore, compared with traditional extraction by smelting.
Step 1 — state the advantages: bioleaching uses bacteria to produce a leachate, so it can extract copper from low-grade ore that smelting cannot use economically. It needs far less energy because there is no high-temperature smelting, and it causes less landscape damage.
Step 2 — state the disadvantages: it is slow, and it can release toxic substances that must be managed to protect the environment.
Step 3 — reach a judgement: because most high-grade copper ores are exhausted, bioleaching is a sensible, more sustainable choice for low-grade ore — provided the slow rate is acceptable and the toxic by-products are controlled.
Answer: bioleaching is more sustainable for low-grade copper ore (less energy, less damage, uses otherwise-wasted ore) but its slowness and possible toxic by-products are the price paid.
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 8 lessons in this course.