Evaluates methanesulfonic acid for leaching copper and zinc from seafloor massive sulfides, suggesting an eco-friendly alternative.
Seafloor massive sulfides (SMS) represent promising resources of copper (Cu) and zinc (Zn), but their polymetallic mineralogy complicates conventional pyrometallurgical treatment. This study evaluates methanesulfonic acid (MSA), a low-corrosive and non-volatile organic acid, as a lixiviant for SMS ore composed of chalcopyrite (CuFeS 2 ), sphalerite (ZnS), pyrite (FeS 2 ), and anglesite (PbSO 4 ). Shake-flask leaching tests were performed under varied MSA concentrations (0–40 g/L), temperatures (20–70°C), pulp densities (1–10%), and H 2 O 2 dosages (0–5%). At 30 g/L MSA, 60°C, and 1% pulp density, >40% of Cu and Zn were leached within 3 days, while Pb and Fe dissolved at 32% and 17%, respectively. Adding 1% H 2 O 2 increased Cu and Zn leaching to >75% and raised Fe dissolution to 39%, while suppressing Pb dissolution to <2.5% due to re-precipitation as PbSO 4 . Kinetic analysis (20–70°C) indicated shrinking-core behavior, where CuFeS 2 dissolution was best described by a product-layer diffusion model but exhibited a relatively high apparent activation energy (56.1 kJ/mol), suggesting a notable contribution from interfacial chemical reactions. In contrast, ZnS showed mixed diffusion–reaction control with a lower activation energy (31.6 kJ/mol). Chloride effects were examined under industrially relevant conditions (10% pulp density, 30 g/L MSA, 1% H 2 O 2 , 45°C). Addition of 2% NaCl or synthetic seawater increased Cu dissolution from 45% to 56% in 15 days, while Zn remained largely unchanged. Cl⁻ likely promoted CuFeS 2 dissolution via stabilization of intermediate Cu oxidation states and Cu–Cl complexation, and simultaneously reduced Fe dissolution to <4% due to jarosite formation. This study provides the first detailed evaluation of MSA for SMS ore leaching, demonstrating its potential as an environmentally compatible alternative for hydrometallurgical processing of deep-sea mineral resources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gowthaman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: