|
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.
|
|
|
Jarvis, A. P., & Younger, P. L. (2001). Passive treatment of ferruginous mine waters using high surface area media. Water Res., 35(15), 3643–3648.
Abstract: Rapid oxidation and accretion of iron onto high surface area media has been investigated as a potential passive treatment option for ferruginous, net-alkaline minewaters. Two pilot-scale reactors were installed at a site in County Durham, UK. Each 2.0m high cylinder contained different high surface area plastic trickling filter media. Ferruginous minewater was fed downwards over the media at various flow-rates with the objective of establishing the efficiency of iron removal at different loading rates. Residence time of water within the reactors was between 70 and 360s depending on the flow-rate (1 and 12l/min, respectively). Average influent total iron concentration for the duration of these experiments was 1.43mg/l (range 1.08-1.84mg/l; n=16), whilst effluent iron concentrations averaged 0.41mg/l (range 0.20-1.04mg/l; n=15) for Reactor A and 0.38mg/l (range 0.11-0.93mg/l; n=16) for Reactor B. There is a strong correlation between influent iron load and iron removal rate. Even at the highest loading rates (approximately 31.6g/day) 43% and 49% of the total iron load was removed in Reactors A and B, respectively. At low manganese loading rates (approximately 0.50-0.90g/day) over 50% of the manganese was removed in Reactor B. Iron removal rate (g/m3/d) increases linearly with loading rate (g/day) up to 14g/d and the slope of the line indicates that a mean of 85% of the iron is removed. In conclusion, it appears that the oxidation and accretion of ochre on high surface area media may be a promising alternative passive technology to constructed wetlands at certain sites.
|
|
|
Jarvis, A. P., & Younger, P. L. (1999). Design, construction and performance of a full-scare compost wetland for mine-spoil drainage treatment at quaking houses. Jciwem, 13(5), 313–318.
Abstract: Acidic spoil-heap drainage, containing elevated concentrations of iron, aluminium and manganese, has been polluting the Stanley Burn in County Durham for nearly two decades. Following the success of a pilot-scale wetland (the first application of its kind in Europe), a full-scale wetland was installed. Waste manures and composts have been used as the main substrate which is contained within embankments constructed from compacted pulverized fuel ash. The constructed wetland, which cost less than £20,000 to build, has consistently reduced iron and aluminium concentrations and has markedly lowered the acidity of the drainage. A third phase of activities at the site aims to identify and eliminate pollutant-release 'hot spots' within the spoil.
|
|
|
Banks, D., Younger, P. L., Arnesen, R. - T., Iversen, E. R., & Banks, S. B. (1997). Mine-water chemistry: The good, the bad and the ugly. Environ. Geol., 32(3), 157–174.
Abstract: Contaminative mine drainage waters have become one of the major hydrogeological and geochemical problems arising from mankind's intrusion into the geosphere. Mine drainage waters in Scandinavia and the United Kingdom are of three main types: (1) saline formation waters; (2) acidic, heavy-metal-containing, sulphate waters derived from pyrite oxidation, and (3) alkaline, hydrogen-sulphide-containing, heavy-metal-poor waters resulting from buffering reactions and/or sulphate reduction. Mine waters are not merely to be perceived as problems, they can be regarded as industrial or drinking water sources and have been used for sewage treatment, tanning and industrial metals extraction. Mine-water problems may be addressed by isolating the contaminant source, by suppressing the reactions releasing contaminants, or by active or passive water treatment. Innovative treatment techniques such as galvanic suppression, application of bactericides, neutralising or reducing agents (pulverised fly ash-based grouts, cattle manure, whey, brewers' yeast) require further research.
|
|