| Home | << 1 2 3 4 >> |
|
Sapsford, D., Barnes, A., Dey, M., Williams, K., Jarvis, A., & Younger, P. (2007). (R. Cidu, & F. Frau, Eds.). Water in Mining Environments. Cagliari: Mako Edizioni.
Abstract: This paper presents iron removal data from a novel low footprint mine water treatment system. The paper discusses possible design configurations and demonstrates that the system could treat 1 L/s of mine water containing 8.4 mg/L of iron to < 1 mg/L with a system footprint of 66 m2. A conventional lagoon and aerobic wetland system would require at least 160 m2 to achieve the same treatment. Other advantages of the system are that it produces a clean and dense sludge amenable to on-site storage and possible recycling and that heavy plant will generally not be required for construction.
Keywords: passive treatment iron mine water
|
|
Wolkersdorfer, C., & Younger, P. L. (2002). Passive mine water treatment as an alternative to active systems. Grundwasser, 7(2), 67–77.
Abstract: For the treatment of contaminated mine waters reliable treatment methods with low investment and operational costs are essential. Therefore, passive treatment systems recently have been installed in Great Britain and in Germany (e.g. anoxic limestone drains, constructed wetlands, reactive barriers, roughing filters) and during the last eight years such systems successfully treated mine waters, using up to 6 ha of space. In some cases with highly contaminated mine water, a combination of active and passive systems should be applied, as in any case the water quality has to reach the limits. Because not all the processes of passive treatment systems are understood in detail, current research projects (e.g. EU-project PIRAMID) were established to clarify open questions.
|
|
Younger, P. L. (2000). Holistic remedial strategies for short- and long-term water pollution from abandoned mines. Transactions of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy Section a-Mining Technology, 109, A210–A218.
Abstract: Where mining proceeds below the water-table-as it has extensively in Britain and elsewhere-water ingress is not only a hindrance during mineral extraction but also a potential liability after abandonment. This is because the cessation of dewatering that commonly follows mine closure leads to a rise in the water-table and associated, often rapid, changes in the chemical regime of the subsurface. Studies over the past two decades have provided insights into the nature and time-scales of these changes and provide a basis for rational planning of mine-water management during and after mine abandonment. The same insights into mine-water chemistry provide hints for the efficient remediation of pollution (typically due to Fe, Mn and Al and, in some cases, Zn, Cd, Pb and other metals). Intensive treatment (by chemical dosing with enhanced sedimentation or alternative processes, such as sulphidization or reverse osmosis) is often necessary only during the first few years following complete flooding of mine voids. Passive treatment (by the use of gravity-flow geochemical reactors and wetlands) may be both more cost-effective and ecologically more responsible in the long term. By the end of 1999 a total of 28 passive systems had been installed at United Kingdom mine sites, including examples of system types currently unique to the United Kingdom. Early performance data for all the systems are summarized and shown to demonstrate the efficacy of passive treatment when appropriately applied.
|
|
Younger, P. L. (2003). Passive in situ remediation of acidic mine waste leachates: progress and prospects. Land Reclamation: Extending the Boundaries, , 253–264.
Abstract: The reclamation of former mining sites is a major challenge in many parts of the world. In relation to the restoration of spoil heaps (mine waste rock piles) and similar bodies of opencast backfill, key challenges include (i) the establishment of stable slopes and minimization of other geotechnical hazards (ii) developing and maintaining a healthy vegetative cover (iii) managing the hydrological behaviour of the restored ground. Significant advances have been made over the past four decades in relation to all four of these objectives. One of the most recalcitrant problems is the ongoing generation and release of acidic leachates, which typically emerge at the toes of (otherwise restored) spoil heaps in the form of springs and seepage areas. Such features are testament to the presence of a “perched” groundwater circulation system within the spoil, and their acidity reflects the continued penetration of oxygen to zones within the heaps which contain reactive pyrite (and other iron sulphide minerals). Two obvious strategies for dealing with this problem are disruption of the perched groundwater system and/or exclusion of oxygen entry. These strategies are now being pursued with considerable success where spoil is being reclaimed for the first time, by the installation of two types of physical barrier (dry covers and water covers). However, where a spoil heap has already been revegetated some decades ago, the destruction of an established sward or woodland in order to retro-fit a dry cover or water cover is rarely an attractive option for dealing with the “secondary dereliction” represented by ongoing toe seepages of acidic leachates. More attractive by far are passive treatment techniques, in which the polluted water is forced to flow through reactive media which serve to neutralize its acidity and remove toxic metals from solution. A brief historical review of the development of such systems reveals a general progression from using limestone as the key neutralizing agent, through a combined use of limestone and compost, to systems in which almost all of the neutralization is achieved by means of bacterial sulphate reduction in the saturated compost media of subsurface-flow bioreactors. In almost all cases, these passive treatment systems include an aerobic, surface flow wetland as the final “polishing” step in the treatment process. Such wetlands combine treatment functions (efficient removal of metals from the now-neutralized waters down to low residual concentrations, and re-oxygenating the water prior to discharge to receiving watercourses) with amenity value (attractive areas for recreational walking, bird-watching etc) and ecological value.
Keywords: mine water treatment
|
|
Younger, P. L. (2000). The adoption and adaptation of passive treatment technologies for mine waters in the United Kingdom. Mine Water Env., 19(2), 84–97.
Abstract: During the 1990s, passive treatment technology was introduced to the United Kingdom (UK). Early hesitancy on the part of regulators and practitioners was rapidly overcome, at least for net-alkaline mine waters, so that passive treatment is now the technology of choice for the long-term remediation of such discharges, wherever land availability is not unduly limiting. Six types of passive systems are now being used in the UK for mine water treatment: ¨ aerobic, surface flow wetlands (reed-beds); ¨ anaerobic, compost wetlands with significant surface flow; ¨ mixed compost / limestone systems, with predominantly subsurface flow (so-called Reducing and Alkalinity Producing Systems (RAPS)); ¨ subsurface reactive barriers to treat acidic, metalliferous ground waters; ¨ closed-system limestone dissolution systems for zinc removal from alkaline waters; ¨ roughing filters for treating ferruginous mine waters where land availability is limited. Each of these technologies is appropriate for a different kind of mine water, or for specific hydraulic circumstances. The degree to which each type of system can be considered “proven technology” corresponds to the order in which they are listed above. Many of these passive systems have become foci for detailed scientific research, as part of a $1.5M European Commission project running from 2000 to 2003.
|