|
Jage, C. R., & Zipper, C. E. (2000). Acid-mine drainage treatment using successive alkalinity-producing systems. Powell River Project research and education program reports.
|
|
|
Bienvenu, L. (1994). Activites de recherche du ministere des Ressources naturelles du Quebec sur le drainage minier acide; activites realisees dans le cadre de l'Entente auxiliaire Canada-Quebec 1992-1998 sur le developpement mineral; rapport 1993-1994. Research activities of Quebec Natural Resources Ministry on acid mine drainage; research related to the Canada-Quebec agreement 1992-1998 on mineral development; report 1993-1994.
|
|
|
Smith, I. J. H. (2000). AMD treatment, it works but are we using the right equipment? Tailings and mine waste ', , 419–427.
Abstract: For the past 40 years various approaches have been developed to treat acid waters coming from abandoned as well as operating mining operations. System designs have evolved to meet increasingly stringent discharge permit limits for treated water, as well as to provide solid disposal within economic constraints. A treatment system for remediation of acid mine drainage (AMD) or acid groundwater (AG) requires two main steps: 1. The addition of chemicals to precipitate dissolved metals contained in the waters, and if necessary, to coagulate the precipitated solids ahead of physical separation. 2. Physical separation of the precipitated solids from the water so the water can be lawfully discharged from the site. Choosing the appropriate technology and equipment results in the most efficient plant design, the lowest capital outlay, and minimum operating cost. The goal of these plants is to discharge liquids and solids able to meet standards. The separation of solids from liquids can be achieved through various means, including gravity settling, flotation, mechanical dewatering, filtration and evaporation. As important as the liquid solids separation unit operations are, they are driven by the chemistry of the water to be treated. The content of the dissolved solids will influence the quality and quantity of the solids produced during precipitation. Thus the two aspects must be integrated, with chemistry first, then mechanical engineering. This presentation will provide an overview of a number of liquid solids separation tools currently being used to treat AMD-AG at several sites in the USA. It will also discuss how their operations are impacted by the chemistry of their particular acid water feeds. The tools used include clarifier-thickeners, solids contact clarifiers, dissolved air flotation, polishing filters, membrane filters, and mechanical dewatering devices (belt and filter presses, vacuum filters, and driers).
|
|
|
Srivastave, A., & Chhonkar, P. K. (2000). Amelioration of coal mine spoils through fly ash application as liming material. J. Ind. Res., 59(4), 309–313.
Abstract: The feasibility of fly ash as compared to lime to ameliorate the low pH of acidic coal mine spoils under controlled pot culture conditions are reported using Sudan grass (Sorghum studanens) and Oats (Avena sativa) as indicator crops. It is observed that at all levels of applications, fly ash and lime significantly increase the pH of mine spoils, available phosphorus, exchangeable potassium, available sulphur and also uptake of phosphorus, potassium, sulphur and oven-dried biomass of both these test crops. The fly ash significantly decreases the bulk density of coal mine spoils, but, there is no effect on bulk density due to lime application. However, when the spoils are amended with either fly ash or lime, the root growth occurs throughout the material. Fly ash and lime do not cause elemental toxicities to the plants as evidenced from the dry matter production by the test crops. The results indicate that fly ash to be a potential alternative to lime for treating acidic coal mine spoils.
|
|
|
Conca, J. L., & Wright, J. (2006). An Apatite II permeable reactive barrier to remediate groundwater containing Zn, Pb and Cd. Appl. Geochem., 21(12), 2188–2200.
Abstract: Phosphate-induced metal stabilization involving the reactive medium Apatite II(TM) [Ca10-xNax(PO4)6-x(CO3)x(OH)2], where x < 1, was used in a subsurface permeable reactive barrier (PRB) to treat acid mine drainage in a shallow alluvial groundwater containing elevated concentrations of Zn, Pb, Cd, Cu, SO4 and NO3. The groundwater is treated in situ before it enters the East Fork of Ninemile Creek, a tributary to the Coeur d'Alene River, Idaho. Microbially mediated SO4 reduction and the subsequent precipitation of sphalerite [ZnS] is the primary mechanism occurring for immobilization of Zn and Cd. Precipitation of pyromorphite [Pb10(PO4)6(OH,Cl)2] is the most likely mechanism for immobilization of Pb. Precipitation is occurring directly on the original Apatite II. The emplaced PRB has been operating successfully since January of 2001, and has reduced the concentrations of Cd and Pb to below detection (2 μg L-1), has reduced Zn to near background in this region (about 100 μg L-1), and has reduced SO4 by between 100 and 200 mg L-1 and NO3 to below detection (50 μg L-1). The PRB, filled with 90 tonnes of Apatite II, has removed about 4550 kg of Zn, 91 kg of Pb and 45 kg of Cd, but 90% of the immobilization is occurring in the first 20% of the barrier, wherein the reactive media now contain up to 25 wt% Zn. Field observations indicate that about 30% of the Apatite II material is spent (consumed).
|
|