| Home | << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >> |
|
Al-Abed, S., Allen, D., Bates, E., & Reisman, D. (2002). Lime treatment lagoons technology for treating acid mine drainage from two mining sites.
Keywords: acid mine drainage; case studies; Copper Mine; drainage; geochemistry; heavy metals; hydrochemistry; Leviathan Mine; mining; Nevada; pH; pollutants; pollution; precipitation; remediation; runoff; surface water; Tennessee; United States; waste lagoons; water treatment 22 Environmental geology; 02B Hydrochemistry
|
|
Burgess, J. E., & Stuetz, R. M. (2002). Activated Sludge for the Treatment of Sulphur-rich Wastewaters. Miner. Eng., 15(11), 839–846.
Abstract: The aim of this investigation was to assess the potential of activated sludge for the remediation of sulphur-rich wastewaters. A pilot-scale activated sludge plant was acclimatised to a low load of sulphide and operated as a flow-through unit. Additional sludge samples from different full-scale plants were compared with the acclimatised and unacclimatised sludges using batch absorption tests. The effects of sludge source and acclimatisation on the ability of the sludge to biodegrade high loads of sulphide were evaluated. Acclimatisation to low-sulphide concentrations enabled the sludge to degrade subsequent high loads which were toxic to unacclimatised sludge. Acclimatisation was seen to be an effect of selection pressure on the biomass, suggesting that the treatment capability of activated sludge will develop after acclimation, indicating potential for treatment of acid mine drainage (AMD) by a standard wastewater treatment process. Existing options for biological treatment of AMD are described and the potential of activated sludge treatment for AMD discussed in comparison with existing technologies. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd.
|
|
Younger, P. L., & Cornford, C. (2002). Mine water pollution from Kernow to Kwazulu-Natal; geochemical remedial options and their selection in practice.
Abstract: Pollution by mine drainage is a major problem in many parts of the world. The most frequent contaminants are Fe, Mn, Al and SO (sub 4) with locally important contributions by other metals/metalloids including (in order of decreasing frequency) Zn, Cu, As, Ni, Cd and Pb. Remedial options for such polluted drainage include monitored natural attenuation, physical intervention to minimise pollutant release, and active and passive water treatment technologies. Based on the assessment of the key hydrological and geochemical attributes of mine water discharges, a rational decision-making framework has now been developed for deciding which (or which combinations) of these options to implement in a specific case. Five case studies illustrate the application of this decision-making process in practice: Wheal Jane and South Crofty (Cornwall), Quaking Houses (Co Durham), Hlobane Colliery (South Africa) and Milluni Tin Mine (Bolivia). In many cases, particularly where the socio-environmental stakes are particularly high, the economic, political and ecological issues will prove even more challenging than the technical difficulties involved in implementing remedial interventions which will be robust in the long term. Hence truly “holistic” mine water remediation is a multi-dimensional business, involving teamwork by a range of geoscientific, hydroecological and socio-economic specialists.
|
|
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.
|
|
Demin, O. A., Dudeney, A. W. L., & Tarasova, I. I. (2002). Remediation of Ammonia-rich Minewater in Constructed Wetlands. Environ. Technol., 23(5), 497–514.
Abstract: A three-year study of ammonia removal from minewater was carried out employing constructed wetland systems (surface flow wetland and subsurface flow wetland cells) at the former Woolley Mine in West Yorkshire, UK The 1.4 Ha surface flow wetland (constructed in 1995) reduced the ammonia concentration from 3.5 – 4.5 mg l(-1) to < 2 3 mg V during the first half of the study and to essentially zero in the last year (2000 – 2001). About 25 % of contained ammonia was converted to nitrate, about 10 % was consumed by the plants and up to 30 % was converted to nitrogen gas. This maturation effect was attributed to increased depth of sludge from sedimentation of ochre, providing increased surface area for immobilisation of ammonia oxidising bacteria. The surface flow wetland finally removed 23 g m(-2) day(-1) ammonia in comparison with 3.8 g m(-2) day' for the subsurface flow (pea gravel) wetland cells, constructed for the present work and dosed with ammonium salts. Removal of ammonia by both systems was consistent with well-established mechanisms of nitrification and denitrification. It was also consistent with ammonia removal in wastewater wetland systems, although the greater aeration in the minewater systems obviated the need for special aeration cycles. The general role of wetland plants in such aerated conditions was attributed to maintaining hydraulic conditions (such as hydraulic efficiency and hydraulic resistance of substratum in subsurface flow systems) in the wetlands and providing a suspended solids filter for minewater.
|