|
Kuyucak, N. (2002). Acid mine drainage prevention and control options. CIM Bull., 95(1060), 96–102.
Abstract: Acid mine drainage (AMD) is one of the most significant environmental challenges facing the mining industry worldwide. It occurs as a result of natural oxidation of sulphide minerals contained in mining wastes at operating and closed/decommissioned mine sites. AMD may adversely impact the surface water and groundwater quality and land use due to its typical low pH, high acidity and elevated concentrations of metals and sulphate content. Once it develops at a mine, its control can be difficult and expensive. If generation of AMD cannot be prevented, it must be collected and treated. Treatment of AMD usually costs more than control of AMD and may be required for many years after mining activities have ceased. Therefore, application of appropriate control methods to the site at the early stage of the mining would be beneficial. Although prevention of AMD is the most desirable option, a cost-effective prevention method is not yet available. The most effective method of control is to minimize penetration of air and water through the waste pile using a cover, either wet (water) or dry (soil), which is placed over the waste pile. Despite their high cost, these covers cannot always completely stop the oxidation process and generation of AMD. Application of more than one option might be required. Early diagnosis of the problem, identification of appropriate prevention/control measures and implementation of these methods to the site would reduce the potential risk of AMD generation. AMD prevention/control measures broadly include use of covers, control of the source, migration of AMD, and treatment. This paper provides an overview of AMD prevention and control options applicable for developing, operating and decommissioned mines.
|
|
|
Srivastave, A., & Chhonkar, P. K. (2000). Amelioration of coal mine spoils through fly ash application as liming material. J. Ind. Res., 59(4), 309–313.
Abstract: The feasibility of fly ash as compared to lime to ameliorate the low pH of acidic coal mine spoils under controlled pot culture conditions are reported using Sudan grass (Sorghum studanens) and Oats (Avena sativa) as indicator crops. It is observed that at all levels of applications, fly ash and lime significantly increase the pH of mine spoils, available phosphorus, exchangeable potassium, available sulphur and also uptake of phosphorus, potassium, sulphur and oven-dried biomass of both these test crops. The fly ash significantly decreases the bulk density of coal mine spoils, but, there is no effect on bulk density due to lime application. However, when the spoils are amended with either fly ash or lime, the root growth occurs throughout the material. Fly ash and lime do not cause elemental toxicities to the plants as evidenced from the dry matter production by the test crops. The results indicate that fly ash to be a potential alternative to lime for treating acidic coal mine spoils.
|
|
|
Zinck, J. M., & Aube, B. C. (2000). Optimization of lime treatment processes. CIM Bull., 93(1043), 98–105.
Abstract: Lime neutralization technology is widely used in Canada for the treatment of acid mine drainage and other acidic effluents. In many locations, improvements to the lime neutralization process are necessary to achieve a maximum level of sludge densification and stability. Conventional lime neutralization technology effectively removes dissolved metals to below regulated limits. However, the metal hydroxide and gypsum sludge generated is voluminous and often contains less than 5% solids. Despite recent improvements in the lime neutralization technology, each year, more than 6 700 000 m3 of sludge are generated by treatment facilities operated by the Canadian mining industry. Because lime neutralization is still seen as the best available approach for some sites, sludge production and stability are expected to remain as issues in the near future. Several treatment parameters significantly impact operating costs, effluent quality, sludge production and the geochemical stability of the sludge. Studies conducted both at CANMET and NTC have shown that through minor modifications to the treatment process, plant operators can experience a reduction in operating costs, volume of sludge generated, metal release to the environment and liability. This paper discusses how modifications in plant operation and design can reduce treatment costs and liability associated with lime treatment.
|
|
|
Eger, P., Melchert, G., & Wagner, J. (2000). Using passive treatment systems for mine closure – A good approach or a risky alternative? Min. Eng., 52(9), 78–83.
Abstract: In 1991, LTV Steel Mining decided to close an open-pit taconite mine in northeastern Minnesota using a passive-treatment approach consisting of limiting infiltration into the stockpiles and wetland treatment to remove metals. More than 50 Mt (55 million st) of sulfide-containing waste had been stockpiled adjacent to the mine during its 30 years of operation. Drainage from the stockpiles contained elevated levels of copper, nickel, cobalt and zinc. Nickel is the major trace metal in the drainages. Before the closure, the annual median concentrations ranged from 1.5 to 50 mg/L. Copper, cobalt and zinc are also present but they are generally less than 5% of the nickel values. Median pH levels range from 5 to 7.5, but most of the stockpile drainages have pH levels greater than 6.5. Based on the chemical composition of each stockpile, a cover material was selected. The higher the potential that a stockpile had to produce acid drainage, the lower the permeability of the capping material required. Covers ranged from overburden soil removed at the mine to a flexible plastic liner. Predictions of the reduction in infiltration ranged from 40% for the native soil to more than 90% for the plastic liner. Five constructed wetlands have been installed since 1992. They have removed 60% to 90% of the nickel in the drainages. Total capital costs for all the infiltration reduction and wetlands exceeded $6.5 million, but maintenance costs are less than 1% of those for an active treatment plant. Because mine-drainage problems can continue for more than 100 years, the lower annual operating costs should pay for the construction of the wetland-treatment systems within seven years.
|
|
|
Smith, I. J. H. (2000). AMD treatment, it works but are we using the right equipment? Tailings and mine waste ', , 419–427.
Abstract: For the past 40 years various approaches have been developed to treat acid waters coming from abandoned as well as operating mining operations. System designs have evolved to meet increasingly stringent discharge permit limits for treated water, as well as to provide solid disposal within economic constraints. A treatment system for remediation of acid mine drainage (AMD) or acid groundwater (AG) requires two main steps: 1. The addition of chemicals to precipitate dissolved metals contained in the waters, and if necessary, to coagulate the precipitated solids ahead of physical separation. 2. Physical separation of the precipitated solids from the water so the water can be lawfully discharged from the site. Choosing the appropriate technology and equipment results in the most efficient plant design, the lowest capital outlay, and minimum operating cost. The goal of these plants is to discharge liquids and solids able to meet standards. The separation of solids from liquids can be achieved through various means, including gravity settling, flotation, mechanical dewatering, filtration and evaporation. As important as the liquid solids separation unit operations are, they are driven by the chemistry of the water to be treated. The content of the dissolved solids will influence the quality and quantity of the solids produced during precipitation. Thus the two aspects must be integrated, with chemistry first, then mechanical engineering. This presentation will provide an overview of a number of liquid solids separation tools currently being used to treat AMD-AG at several sites in the USA. It will also discuss how their operations are impacted by the chemistry of their particular acid water feeds. The tools used include clarifier-thickeners, solids contact clarifiers, dissolved air flotation, polishing filters, membrane filters, and mechanical dewatering devices (belt and filter presses, vacuum filters, and driers).
|
|