| Home | << 1 2 3 >> |
|
Becker, G., Wade, S., Riggins, J. D., Cullen, T. B., Venn, C., & Hallen, C. P. (2005). Effect of Bast Mine treatment discharge on Big Mine Run AMD and Mahanoy Creek in the Western Middle Anthracite Field of Pennsylvania.
Abstract: The Bast Mine (reopened in 2001) and Big Mine are two anthracite coal mines near Ashland, PA, that were abandoned in the 1930's and that are now causing drastic and opposite effects on the water quality of the streams originating from them. To quantify these effects, multiple samples were taken at 5 different sites: 3 along Big Mine Run and 2 from Mahanoy Creek (1 upstream and 1 downstream of the confluence with Big Mine Run). At each site, one set of the samples was treated with nitric acid for metals survey, one set was acidified with sulfuric acid for nitrate preservation, one set was filtered for sulfate and phosphate tests, and one set was unaltered. Measurements of pH, TDS, dissolved oxygen, and temperature were made in the field. Alkalinity, acidity, hardness, nitrates, orthophosphates and sulfates were analyzed using Hach procedures. Selected metals (Fe, Ni, Mg, Ca, Cu, Zn, Hg, Pb) were analyzed utilizing flame atomic absorption spectroscopy. Drainage from the Bast Mine is actively treated with hydrated lime before the water is piped down to Big Mine Run. pH and alkalinity values were much higher at the outflow compared to those in the water with which it merged. The two waters could be visibly distinguished some distance downstream. pH values decreased, sulfate and dissolved iron increased and alkalinity was reduced to zero until the confluence with Mahanoy Creek. The high alkalinity, turbidity, TDS and calcium values in Mahanoy Creek were somewhat reduced downstream of the confluence with the much lower discharge Big Mine Run.
|
|
Ziemkiewicz, P. F., Skousen, J. G., Brant, D. L., Sterner, P. L., Lovett, R. J., Skousen, J. G., et al. (1996). Acid mine drainage treatment with armored limestone in open limestone channels. In Acid mine drainage control and treatment. Morgantown: West Virginia University and the National Mine Land Reclamation Center.
Keywords: abandoned mines; acid mine drainage; acidification; carbonate rocks; case studies; chemical reactions; coal mines; controls; decontamination; effluents; environmental management; experimental studies; ground water; heavy metals; hydrology; limestone; mines; Pennsylvania; pollution; reclamation; sedimentary rocks; soils; surface water; United States; water treatment; watersheds; West Virginia 22, Environmental geology
|
|
Dutcher, R. R., Jones, E. B., Lovell, H. L., Parizek, R., & Stefanko, R. (1966). Mine drainage; Part 1, Abatement, disposal, treatment. Mineral Industries (University Park), 36(3), 1–7.
|
|
Cram, J. C. (1996). Diversion well treatment of acid water, Lick Creek, Tioga County, PA. Ph.D. thesis, Pennsylvania State University at University Park,, University Park.
Abstract: Diversion wells implement a fluidized bed of limestone for the treatment of acid water resulting from acid mine drainage or acid precipitation. This study was undertaken to better understand the operation of diversion wells and to define the physical and chemical factors having the greatest impact on the neutralization performance of the system. The study site was located near Lick Creek, a tributary stream of Babb Creek, near the Village of Arnot in Tioga County, Pennsylvania. Investigative methods included collection and analysis of site water quality and limestone data and field study of this as well as other diversion well sites. Analysis of data led to these general conclusions: The site received surface water influenced by three primary sources 1) precipitation, 2) mine drainage baseflow, and 3) melted snow. Water mostly influenced by precipitation events and mine drainage baseflow was more acidic than water influenced by melting snow conditions. The diversion wells were generally able to treat only half or less of the total stream flow of Lick Creek and under extremely high flow conditions the treatment provided was minimal. A range of flow conditions were identified which produced the best performance for the two diversion wells. Treatment produced by the system decreased through the loading cycle and increases to a maximum value after each weekly refilling of limestone. Fine grained sediment in the stream was found to be limestone of the same general composition as the material placed within the wells. Neutralization of acid water was largely due to microscopic particles rather than the limestone sediment discharged to the stream. Additional downstream buffering due to the limestone sediment physically discharged from the vessels was not apparent. Diversion well systems are inexpensive and simple to construct. In addition, the systems were found to be highly reliable and able to effectively treat acid water resulting from mine drainage and acid precipitation. Diversion wells provide better treatment when the treatment site is located at the source of the acidity (such as a mine discharge), rather than at the receiving stream. Systems should be designed with 15 to 20 feet of hydraulic head and the site must have year-round access. Diversion well systems require weekly addition of limestone gravel to the vessels to facilitate continual treatment. A great deal of commitment is necessary to maintain a diversion well system for long periods of time. These systems are more economical and require less attention that conventional chemical treatment of acid water. However, these systems require more attention that traditional passive treatment methods for treatment of acid, including mine drainage.
|
|
Demchak, J., Morrow, T., Skousen, J., Donovan, J. J., & Rose, A. W. (2001). Treatment of acid mine drainage by four vertical flow wetlands in Pennsylvania Evolution and remediation of acid-sulfate groundwater systems at reclaimed mine-sites. Geochemistry – Exploration, Environment, Analysis, 1(1), 71–80.
Abstract: Acid mine drainage (AMD) is a serious problem in many watersheds where coal is mined. Passive treatments, such as wetlands and anoxic limestone drains (ALDs), have been developed, but these technologies show varying treatment efficiencies. A new passive treatment technique is a vertical flow wetland or successive alkalinity producing system (SAPS). Four SAPS in Pennsylvania were studied to determine changes in water chemistry from inflow to outflow. The Howe Bridge SAPS removed about 130 mg l (super -1) (40%) of the inflow acidity concentration and about 100 mg l (super -1) (60%) iron (Fe). The Filson 1 SAPS removed 68 mg l (super -1) (26%) acidity, 20 mg l (super -1) (83%) Fe and 6 mg l (super -1) (35%) aluminium (Al). The Sommerville SAPS removed 112 mg l (super -1) (31%) acidity, exported Fe, and removed 13 mg l (super -1) (30%) Al. The McKinley SAPS removed 54 mg l (super -1) (91%) acidity and 5 mg l (super -1) (90%) Fe. Acid removal rates at our four sites were 17 (HB), 52 (Filson1), 18 (Sommerville) and 11 (McKinley) g of acid per m (super 2) of surface wetland area per day (g/m (super 2) d (super -1) ). Calcium (Ca) concentrations in the SAPS effluents were increased between 8 and 57 mg l (super -1) at these sites. Equilibrators, which were inserted into compost layers to evaluate redox conditions at our sites, showed that reducing conditions were generally found at 60 cm compost depths and oxidized conditions were found at 30 cm compost depths. Deeply oxidized zones substantiated observations that channel flow was occurring through some parts of the compost. The Howe Bridge site has not declined in treatment efficiency over a six year treatment life. The SAPS construction costs were equal to about seven years of NaOH chemical treatment costs and 30 years of lime treatment costs. So, if the SAPS treatment longevity is seven years or greater and comparable effluent water quality was achieved, the SAPS construction was cost effective compared to NaOH chemical treatment. Construction recommendations for SAPS include a minimum of 50 cm of compost thickness, periodic replacement or addition of fresh compost material, and increasing the number of drainage pipes underlying the limestone.
|