|
|
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
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Kuyucak, N. (2002). Acid mine drainage prevention and control options. CIM Bull., 95(1060), 96–102.
Abstract: Acid mine drainage (AMD) is one of the most significant environmental challenges facing the mining industry worldwide. It occurs as a result of natural oxidation of sulphide minerals contained in mining wastes at operating and closed/decommissioned mine sites. AMD may adversely impact the surface water and groundwater quality and land use due to its typical low pH, high acidity and elevated concentrations of metals and sulphate content. Once it develops at a mine, its control can be difficult and expensive. If generation of AMD cannot be prevented, it must be collected and treated. Treatment of AMD usually costs more than control of AMD and may be required for many years after mining activities have ceased. Therefore, application of appropriate control methods to the site at the early stage of the mining would be beneficial. Although prevention of AMD is the most desirable option, a cost-effective prevention method is not yet available. The most effective method of control is to minimize penetration of air and water through the waste pile using a cover, either wet (water) or dry (soil), which is placed over the waste pile. Despite their high cost, these covers cannot always completely stop the oxidation process and generation of AMD. Application of more than one option might be required. Early diagnosis of the problem, identification of appropriate prevention/control measures and implementation of these methods to the site would reduce the potential risk of AMD generation. AMD prevention/control measures broadly include use of covers, control of the source, migration of AMD, and treatment. This paper provides an overview of AMD prevention and control options applicable for developing, operating and decommissioned mines.
|
|
|
|
Herbert, R. B., Jr., Benner, S. G., & Blowes, D. W. (1998). Reactive barrier treatment of groundwater contaminated by acid mine drainage; sulphur accumulation and sulphide formation. In M. Herbert, & K. Kovar (Eds.), Groundwater Quality: Remediation and Protection (pp. 451–457). IAHS-AISH Publication, vol.250.
Abstract: A permeable reactive barrier was installed in August 1995 at the Nickel Rim Mine near Sudbury, Ontario, Canada, for the passive remediation of groundwater contaminated with acid mine drainage. The reactive component of the barrier consists of a mixture of municipal and leaf compost and wood chips: the organic material promotes bacterially-mediated sulphate reduction. Hydrogen sulphide, a product of sulphate reduction, may then complex with aqueous ferrous iron and precipitate as iron sulphide. This study presents the solid phase sulphur chemistry of the reactive wall after two years of operation, and discusses the formation and accumulation of iron sulphide minerals in the reactive material. The results from the solid-phase chemical analysis of core samples indicate that there is an accumulation of reduced inorganic sulphur in the reactive wall, with levels reaching 190 mu mol g (super -1) (dry weight) by July 1997.
|
|
|
|
Smyth, D., Blowes, D., Ptacek, C., & Bain, J. (2004). Application of permeable reactive barriers for treating mine drainage and dissolved metals in groundwater. Geotechnical News, 22(1), 39–44.
|
|
