|
|
Scharp, R. A., Kawahara, F., Burckle, J., Allan, J., & Govind, R. (2002). Recovery of metals from acid mine drainage Hardrock mining 2002; issues shaping the industry..
|
|
|
|
Nuttall, C. A. (2002). Mine Water Treatment.
|
|
|
|
Kingham, N. W., Semenak, R., Powell, G., & Way, S. (2002). Reverse osmosis coupled with chemical precipitation treatment of acid mine leachate at the Basin-Luttrell Pit, Ten Mile Creek Site, Lewis and Clark County, Montana Hardrock mining 2002; issues shaping the industry..
|
|
|
|
Johnson, D. B., & Hallberg, K. B. (2002). Pitfalls of passive mine water treatment. Reviews in Environmental Science & Biotechnology, 1(5), 335–343.
Abstract: Passive (wetland) treatment of waters draining abandoned and derelict mine sites has a number of detrac-tions. Detailed knowledge of many of the fundamental processes that dictate the performance and longevity of constructed systems is currently very limited and therefore more research effort is needed before passive treatment becomes an “off-the-shelf” technology.
|
|
|
|
Gusek, J. J. (2002). Proceedings, Annual Conference – National Association of Abandoned Mine Land Programs. Park City.
Abstract: There are basically two kinds of biological passive treatment cells for treating mine drainage. Aerobic Cells, containing cattails and other plants, are typically applicable to coal mine drainage where iron and manganese and mild acidity are problematic. Anaerobic Cells or Sulfate-Reducing Bioreactors are typically applicable to metal mine drainage with high acidity and a wide range of metals. Most passive treatment systems employ one or both of these cell types. The track record of aerobic cells in treating coal mine drainage is impressive, especially in the eastern coalfields. Sulfate-reducing bioreactors have tremendous potential at metal mines and coal mines, but have not seen as wide an application. This paper presents the advantages of sulfate-reducing bioreactors in treating mine drainage, including: the ability to work in cold, high altitude environments, handle high flow rates of mildly affected ARD in moderate acreage footprints, treat low pH acid drainage with a wide range of metals and anions including uranium, selenium, and sulfate, accept acid drainagecontaining dissolved aluminum without clogging with hydroxide sludge, have life-cycle costs on the order of $0.50 per thousand gallons, and be integrated into “semi-passive” systems that might be powered by liquid organic wastes. Sulfate reducing bioreactors might not be applicable in every abandoned mine situation. However a phased design program of laboratory, bench, and pilot scale testing has been shown to increase the likelihood of a successful design.
|
|
