Skousen, J., Rose, A., Geidel, G., Foreman, J., Evans, R., & Hellier, W. (1998). A handbook of technologies for avoidance and remediation of acid mine drainage.
|
Greben, H. A., Matshusa, M. P., & Maree, J. P. (2005). (J. Loredo, & F. Pendás, Eds.). Mine Water 2005 – Mine Closure. Oviedo: University of Oviedo.
Abstract: Mining is implicated as a significant contributor to water pollution, the prime reason being, that pyrites oxidize to sulphuric acid when exposed to air and water. Mine effluents, often containing sulphate, acidity and metals, should be treated to render it suitable for re-use in the mining industry, for irrigation of crops or for discharge in water bodies. This study describes the removal of all three mentioned pollutants in mine effluents, from different origins, containing different concentrations of various metals. The objectives were achieved, applying the biological sulphate removal technology, using ethanol as the carbon and energy source. It was shown that diluting the mine effluent with the effluent from the biological treatment, the pH increased due to the alkalinity in the treated water while the metals precipitated with the produced sulphide. When this treatment regime was changed and the mine water was fed undiluted, it was found that the metals stimulated the methanogenic bacteria (MB) as trace elements. This resulted in a high COD utilization of the MB, such that too little COD was available for the SRB. Metal removal in all three studies was observed and in most instances the metals were eliminated to the required disposal concentration.
|
Brown, M., Barley, B., & Wood, H. (2002). Minewater treatment; technology, application and policy. London: IWA Publishing.
|
Dugan, P. R. (1987). Prevention of formation of acid drainage from high-sulfur coal refuse by inhibition of iron- and sulfur-oxidizing microorganisms. II. Inhibition in run of mine refuse under simulated field conditions. Biotechnol. Bioeng., 29(1), 6.
|
Baker, K. A., Fennessy, M. S., & Mitsch, W. J. (1991). Designing wetlands for controlling coal mine drainage: an ecologic- economic modelling approach. Ecological Economics, 3(1), 1–24.
Abstract: A simulation model is developed of the efficiency and economics of an application of ecotechnology – using a created wetland to receive and treat coal mine drainage. The model examines the role of loading rates of iron on treatment efficiencies and the economic costs of wetland versus conventional treatment of mine drainage. It is calibrated with data from an Ohio wetland site and verified from multi-site data from Tennessee and Alabama. The model predicts that iron removal is closely tied to loading rates and that the cost of wetland treatment is less than that of conventional for iron loading rates of approximately 20-25 g Fe m “SUP -2” day “SUP -1” and removal efficiencies less than 85%. A wetland to achieve these conditions would cost approximately US$50 000 per year according to the model. When higher loading rates exist and higher efficiencies are needed, wetland systems are more costly than conventional treatment. -Authors
|