| Home | << 1 2 3 >> |
|
Zinck, J. (2006). Icard 2006. St. Louis: Proceedings, International Conference of Acid Rock Drainage (ICARD).
Abstract: Sludge management is an escalating concern as the inventory of sludge continues to grow through perpetual “pump and treat” of acidic waters at mine sites. Current sludge management practices, in general, are ad hoc and frequently do not adress long-term storage, and in some cases, long-term stability. While a variety of sludge disposal practices have been applied, many have not been fully investigated and monitoring data on the performance of these technologies is limited and not readily available. This paper discusses options for treatment sludge management including conventionale disposal technologies and options for reclamation of sludge areas.
|
|
Kuyucak, N., Lindvall, M., Rufo Serrano, J. A., & Oliva, A. F. (1999). (R. Fernández Rubio, Ed.). Mine, Water & Environment. Ii: International Mine Water Association.
Abstract: Lime neutralization is a frequently used method in the mining industry for the treatment of acid waters. These waters contain metal ions such as zinc, manganese, copper, cadmium, lead, etc. The conventional, straight lime neutralization technology generates a Low Density Sludge (LDS) having only 1-2% solids content. This creates sludge disposal difficulties, and results in the loss of potentially large quantities of recovered water, which in turn increases the demand for fresh water requirements for mining/milling activities. The High Density Sludge (HDS) process, on the other hand, is the state-of-the-art technology in North America. It generates a dense sludge with less volume and better particulate properties. Furthermore, the typical gelatinous nature of the sludge changes to a granulated, sand-like texture. Boliden Apirsa, S.L. investigated the feasibility of an HDS process to increase the treatment capacity of their existing plant, and resolve the issues associated with the LDS process for their Los Frailes project. The project required, given that the production of ore was going to be doubled, a significant increase in water was needed without altering the water reservoir sitting north of the concentrator. In addition, the final effluent quality was a priority issue. First, a pilot-scale study was undertaken in 1996, and parameters critical to the design and performance of the process were determined. The results showed that the HDS process could significantly improve the sludge characteristics by increasing the solids fraction from 1.5 to 12.0%, thereby decreasing the sludge volume to be disposed to the tailings ponds by a factor of 10. A full-scale, HDS lime neutralization treatment plant for an average flow rate of 1500 m3/hr was designed and was commissioned in early 1998 in collaboration with Colder Associates, Ottawa, Canada. So far, the full-scale treatment plant has been generating a sludge with more than 30% solids content, exceeding its target value of 12% solids. It produces excellent effluent quality, and scaling in the handling equipment is virtually eliminated. The sludge has dense, easily settable granular particles rather than fluffy flocs, yet has low viscosity that facilitates its unassisted gravity flow. The process has resulted in an increase in the treated water volume. The rate of lime consumption per unit volume of water treated also decreased. The process principles and the steps taken in process development will be discussed and the results obtained to date will be summarized in this communication.
Keywords: HDS lime sludge mine water treatment
|
|
Nakazawa, H. (2006). Treatment of acid mine drainage containing iron ions and arsenic for utilization of the sludge. Sohn International Symposium Advanced Processing of Metals and Materials, Vol 9, , 373–381.
Abstract: An acid mine drainage in abandoned Horobetsu mine in Hokkaido, Japan, contains arsenic and iron ions; total arsenic ca.10ppm, As(III) ca. 8.5ppm, total iron 379ppm, ferrous iron 266ppm, pH1.8. Arsenic occurs mostly as arsenite (As (III)) or arsenate (As (V)) in natural water. As(III) is more difficult to be remove than As(V), and it is necessary to oxidize As(III) to As(V) for effective removal. 5mL of the mine drainage or its filtrate through the membrane filter (pore size 0.45 mu m) were added to arsenite solutions (pH1.8) with the concentration of 5ppm. After the incubation of 30 days, As(III) was oxidized completely with the addition of the mine drainage while the oxidation did not occur with the addition of filtrate, indicating the microbial oxidation of As(III). In this paper, we have investigated the microbial oxidation of As(III) in acid water below pH2.0.
|
|
Kuyucak, N. (1998). Mining, the Environment and the Treatment of Mine Effluents. Int. J. Environ. Pollut., 10(2), 315–325.
Abstract: The environmental impact of mining on the ecosystem, including land, water and air, has become an unavoidable reality. Guidelines and regulations have been promulgated to protect the environment throughout mining activities from start-up to site decommissioning. In particular, the occurrence of acid mine drainage (AMD), due to oxidation of sulfide mineral wastes, has become the major area of concern to many mining industries during operations and after site decommissioning. AMD is characterized by high acidity and a high concentration of sulfates and dissolved metals. If it cannot be prevented or controlled, it must be treated to eliminate acidity, and reduce heavy metals and suspended solids before release to the environment. This paper discusses conventional and new methods used for the treatment of mine effluents, in particular the treatment of AMD.
|
|
Coulton, R., Bullen, C., & Hallett, C. (2003). The design and optimisation of active mine water treatment plants. Land Contam. Reclam., 11(2), 273–280.
Abstract: This paper provides a 'state of the art' overview of active mine water treatment. The paper discusses the process and reagent selection options commonly available to the designer of an active mine water treatment plant. Comparisons are made between each of these options, based on technical and financial criteria. The various different treatment technologies available are reviewed and comparisons made between conventional precipitation (using hydroxides, sulphides and carbonates), high density sludge processes and super-saturation precipitation. The selection of reagents (quick lime, slaked lime, sodium hydroxide, sodium carbonate, magnesium hydroxide, and proprietary chemicals) is considered and a comparison made on the basis of reagent cost, ease of use, final effluent quality and sludge settling criteria. The choice of oxidising agent (air, pure oxygen, peroxide, etc.) for conversion of ferrous to ferric iron is also considered. Whole life costs comparisons (capital, operational and decommissioning) are made between conventional hydroxide precipitation and the high density sludge process, based on the actual treatment requirements for four different mine waters.
|