McGregor, R. (2000). The use of an in-situ porous reactive wall to remediate a heavy metal plume. ICARD 2000, Vols I and II, Proceedings, , 1227–1232.
Abstract: The oxidation of sulfide minerals at an ore transfer location in Western Canada has resulted in widespread contamination of underlying soil and groundwater. The oxidation of sulfide minerals has released sulfate [SO4] and heavy metals including cadmium [Cd], copper [Cu], nickel [Ni], lead [Pb], and zinc [Zn] into the groundwater. A compost-based sulfate-reducing reactive wall was installed in the path of the plume in an attempt to reduce the potential impact of the heavy metals on a down-gradient marine inlet. Monitoring of the reactive wall over a 21-month period has shown that Cu concentrations decrease from over 4000 mug/L to less than 5 mug/L. Cadmium, Ni, Pb, and Zn concentrations also show similar decreases with treated concentrations generally being observed near or below detection limits.
|
Banks, S. B. (2003). The UK coal authority minewater-treatment scheme programme: Performance of operational systems. Jciwem, 17(2), 117–122.
Abstract: This paper summarises the performance of minewater-treatment schemes which are operated under the Coal Authority's National Minewater Treatment Programme. Commonly-used design criteria and performance indicators are briefly discussed, and the performance of wetland systems which are operated by the Coal Authority is reviewed. Most schemes for which data are available remove more than 90% iron, and average area-adjusted iron-removal rates range from 1.5 to 5.5 g Fe/m(2). d. These values, which are based on performance calculations, can be distorted by several factors, including the practice of maximising wetland areas to make best use of available land. Removal rates are limited by influent iron loadings, and area-adjusted iron-removal rates should be used with caution when assessing wetland performance. Sizing criteria for all types of treatment system might be refined if more detailed data become available.
|
|
Smit, J. P., & Pretorius, L. E. (2000). The treatment of polluted mine water. J. Afr. Earth Sci., 31(1), 72.
|
Wiessner, A. (1998). The treatment of a deposited lignite pyrolysis wastewater by adsorption using activated carbon and activated coke. Colloids and Surfaces a-Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 139(1), 91–97.
Abstract: To study the functions of activated carbon and activated coke adsorption for the treatment of highly contaminated discolored industrial wastewater with a wide molecular size distribution of organic compounds, the deposited lignite pyrolysis wastewater from a filled open-cast coal mine was used for continuous and discontinuous experiments.
|
Stark, L. R., & Williams, F. M. (1994). The roles of spent mushroom substrate for the mitigation of coal mine drainage. Compost Science and Utilization, 2(4), 84–94.
Abstract: Spent mushroom substrate (SMS) has been used widely in coal mining regions of the USA as the primary substrate in constructed wetlands for the treatment of coal mine drainage. In laboratory and mesocosm studies, SMS has emerged as one of the substrates for mine water treatment. Provided the pH of the mine water does not fall below 3.0, SMS can be used in the mitigation plan. However, neither Mn nor dissolved ferric Fe appears to be treatable using reducing SMS wetlands. Since after a few years much of the nonrefractive organic carbon in SMS wil have been decomposed and metabolized, carbon supplementation can significantly extend the life of the SMS treatment wetland and improve water treatment. -from Authors
|
