|
Wingenfelder, U., Hansen, C., Furrer, G., & Schulin, R. (2005). Removal of heavy metals from mine waters by natural zeolites. Environ Sci Technol, ES & T, 39(12), 4606–4613.
|
|
Kingham, N. W., Semenak, R., Powell, G., & Way, S. (2002). Reverse osmosis coupled with chemical precipitation treatment of acid mine leachate at the Basin-Luttrell Pit, Ten Mile Creek Site, Lewis and Clark County, Montana Hardrock mining 2002; issues shaping the industry..
|
|
Ballivy, G., & Bienvenu, L. (1998). Stabilisation des rejets miniers a l'aide de rejets de cimenterie. Stabilization of mining wastes using cement factory wastes Activites de recherche du Ministere des Ressources Naturelles du Quebec sur le drainage minier acide; rapport 1997-1998. Research activities of the Quebec Natural Resources Ministry on acid mine drainage; report 1997-1998 (Vol. Rn 98-5034).
|
Banks, S. B. (2003). The Coal Authority Minewater Treatment Programme: An update on the performance of operational schemes. Land Contam. Reclam., 11(2), 161–164.
Abstract: The performance of mine water treatment schemes, operated under the Coal Authority's national Minewater Treatment Programme, is summarised. Most schemes for which data are available perform successfully and remove over 90% iron. Mean area-adjusted iron removal rates for reedbed components of treatment schemes, range from 1.5 to 5.5 g Fe/m2, with percentage iron removal rates ranging from 68% to 99%. In the majority of cases, calculated area-adjusted removal rates are limited by influent iron loadings, and the empirical sizing criterion for aerobic wetlands, based on American removal rates of 10 g Fe/m2day, remains a valuable tool in the initial stages of treatment system design and estimation of land area requirements. Where a number of schemes have required modification after becoming operational, due consideration must always be given to the potential for dramatic increases in influent iron loadings, and to how the balance between performance efficiency and aesthetic appearance can best be achieved. Continual review and feedback on the performance of treatment systems, and the problems encountered during design implementation, will enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the Minewater Treatment Programme within the UK.
|
Coulton, R., Bullen, C., & Hallett, C. (2003). The design and optimisation of active mine water treatment plants. Land Contam. Reclam., 11(2), 273–280.
Abstract: This paper provides a 'state of the art' overview of active mine water treatment. The paper discusses the process and reagent selection options commonly available to the designer of an active mine water treatment plant. Comparisons are made between each of these options, based on technical and financial criteria. The various different treatment technologies available are reviewed and comparisons made between conventional precipitation (using hydroxides, sulphides and carbonates), high density sludge processes and super-saturation precipitation. The selection of reagents (quick lime, slaked lime, sodium hydroxide, sodium carbonate, magnesium hydroxide, and proprietary chemicals) is considered and a comparison made on the basis of reagent cost, ease of use, final effluent quality and sludge settling criteria. The choice of oxidising agent (air, pure oxygen, peroxide, etc.) for conversion of ferrous to ferric iron is also considered. Whole life costs comparisons (capital, operational and decommissioning) are made between conventional hydroxide precipitation and the high density sludge process, based on the actual treatment requirements for four different mine waters.
|
