|
Ziemkiewicz, P. F., Meek, F. A., Jr., Skousen, J. G., & Ziemkiewicz, P. F. (1996). Long term behavior of acid forming rock; results of 11-year field studies. In Acid mine drainage control and treatment. Morgantown: West Virginia University and the National Mine Land Reclamation Center.
|
|
Tabak, H. H., & Govind, R. (2004). Advances in biotreatment of acid mine drainage and biorecovery of metals 19th annual international conference on Soils, sediments, and water; abstracts. In Soil & Sediment Contamination (pp. 171–172). 13.
|
LaPointe, F., Fytas, K., & McConchie, D. (2005). Using permeable reactive barriers for the treatment of acid rock drainage. International journal of surface mining, reclamation and environment, 19(1), 57–65.
Abstract: Acid mine drainage (AMD) is the most serious environmental problem facing the Canadian mineral industry today. It results from oxidation of sulphide minerals (e.g. pyrite or pyrrhotite) contained in mine waste or mine tailings and is characterized by acid effluents rich in heavy metals that are released into the environment. A new acid remediation technology is presented, by which metallurgical residues from the aluminium extraction industry are used to construct permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) to treat acid mine effluents. This technology is very promising for treating acid mine effluents in order to decrease their harmful environmental effects
|
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.
|
Potgieter-Vermaak, S. S., Potgieter, J. H., Monama, P., & Van Grieken, R. (2006). Comparison of limestone, dolomite and fly ash as pre-treatment agents for acid mine drainage. Minerals Engineering, 19(5), 454–462.
Abstract: The physical, chemical and biological nature of Vaal Dam water, the main source of water in Gauteng, South Africa, is often affected by underground water pollution (acid mine water) and industrial effluents. The ecological significance and detrimental effects necessitate investigations into treating the water prior to discharge into public streams. Although several acid mine water treatment techniques and methods exist, they all have certain disadvantages. Lime treatment is the most common approach. In this investigation, limestone, dolomite and fly ash were selected as pre-treatment agents based on their low cost. Simulated acid mine water containing these agents was tested using a Jar Test apparatus. Samples were analyzed before and after treatment for pH, ferrous, ferric, calcium, magnesium and sulphate ions. The study demonstrated that the quality of the water improved with an increase in the amount and surface area of the raw material dosed and an increase in contact time. It was also influenced by the chemical composition of the acid mine water and aeration. Chemical cost savings of 38% are achieved when lime is replaced with limestone, and cost savings of 23% and 48% can be accomplished when limestone is substituted with dolomite and fly ash respectively. This could result in significant savings to the gold and coal mining industries, and could lead to a mutual benefit/gain between industrialists/polluters and the public.
|
