During 2009 the technical services staff at Barrick Gold Corporation's Australian Business Unit conducted a review of their five underground mines that utilise pastefill as the backfill component for these operations. Of the five mines reviewed three use dry tailings and two use wet tailings plants._x000D_
The primary aim for these reviews was to determine whether pastefill was the right option to be used, and if not, what where the alternatives. The reviews undertaken focus on several areas including, paste plant operation, reticulation and barricade techniques, the geotechnical requirements for pastefill in regards to the current mining methods, the consideration of alternative methods, capital and operating cost histories compared to initial estimates, and a cost benefit analysis of pastefill against other mining methods._x000D_
The main benefits from the use of pastefill is increasing the extraction of the resource, reducing or eliminating the need to leave pillars. In some mines the use of pastefill is geotechnically driven, to manage high stress environments or mining induced seismicity. A third benefit of using pastefill in some circumstances is that it reduces dilution, however it is considered that this is not a valid argument for most of the mines reviewed._x000D_
At two mines no alternative to pastefill was determined, whilst differing extraction and filling strategies were potentially identified at the other three mines._x000D_
The reviews developed cost benefit curves for those sites that had alternative mining methods to assist in determining whether pastefill is the right option to use for any particular stope. At the grades typically mined in each operation, pastefill was the preferred option to use. In all mines, pastefill was determined to be the best option at this time.