Adam, K. (2003). Solid wastes management in sulphide mines: From waste characterisation to safe closure of disposal sites. Minerals and Energy Raw Materials Report, 18(4), 25–35.
Abstract: Environmentally compatible Waste Management schemes employed by the European extractive industry for the development of new projects, and applied in operating sulphide mines, are presented in this study. Standard methodologies used to assess the geotechnical and geochemical properties of the solid wastes stemming from mining and processing of sulphidic metal ores are firstly given. Based on waste properties, the measures applied to ensure the environmentally safe recycling and disposal of sulphidic wastes are summarised. Emphasis is given on the novel techniques developed to effectively prevent and mitigate the acid drainage phenomenon from sulphidic mine wastes and tailings. Remediation measures taken to minimise the impact from waste disposal sites in the post-closure period are described.
|
|
Beers, W. F., Ciolkosz, E. J., & Kardos, L. T. (1974). Soil as a medium for the renovation of acid mine drainage water.
|
McKenzie, R. (2005). Software Update to Better Predict Costs of Treating Mine Drainage. Mine Water Env., 24(4), 213–215.
Abstract: The U.S. Office of Surface Mining (OSM) is updating a popular software program that helps government agencies and mine water practioners predict what it will cost to treat acid mine drainage (AMD). Developers expect to release the update, AMDTreat Version 4.0, before the end of 2005. The new version will offer additional tools, expanded features, and a better user interface.
|
Simmons, J. A., Andrew, T., Arnold, A., Bee, N., Bennett, J., Grundman, M., et al. (2006). Small-Scale Chemical Changes Caused by In-stream Limestone Sand Additions to Streams. Mine Water Env., 25(4), 241–245.
Abstract: In-stream limestone sand addition (ILSA) has been employed as the final treatment for acid mine drainage discharges at Swamp Run in central West Virginia for six years. To determine the small-scale longitudinal variation in stream water and sediment chemistry and stream biota, we sampled one to three locations upstream of the ILSA site and six locations downstream. Addition of limestone sand significantly increased calcium and aluminum concentrations in sediment and increased the pH, calcium, and total suspended solids of the stream water. Increases in alkalinity were not significant. The number of benthic macroinvertebrate taxa was significantly reduced but there was no effect on periphyton biomass. Dissolved aluminum concentration in stream water was reduced, apparently by precipitation into the stream sediment.
|
Tarutis Jr, W. J., Stark, L. R., & Williams, F. M. (1999). Sizing and performance estimation of coal mine drainage wetlands. Ecological Engineering, 12(3-4), 353–372.
Abstract: The effectiveness of wetland treatment of acid mine drainage (AMD) was assessed using three measures of performance: treatment efficiency, area-adjusted removal, and first-order removal. Mathematical relationships between these measures were derived from simple kinetic equations. Area-adjusted removal is independent of pollutant concentration (zero-order reaction kinetics), while first-order removal is dependent on concentration. Treatment efficiency is linearly related to area-adjusted removal and exponentially related to first-order removal at constant hydraulic loading rates (flow/area). Examination of previously published data from 35 natural AMD wetlands revealed that statistically significant correlations exist between several of the performance measures for both iron and manganese removal, but these correlations are potentially spurious because these measures are derived from, and are mathematical rearrangements of, the same operating data. The use of treatment efficiency as a measure of performance between wetlands is not recommended because it is a relative measure that does not account for influent concentration differences. Area-adjusted removal accounts for mass loading effects, but it fails to separate the flow and concentration components, which is necessary if removal is first-order. Available empirical evidence suggests that AMD pollutant removal is better described by first-order kinetics. If removal is first-order, the use of area-adjusted rates for determining the wetland area required for treating relatively low pollutant concentrations will result in undersized wetlands. The effects of concentration and flow rate on wetland area predictions for constant influent loading rates also depend on the kinetics of pollutant removal. If removal is zero-order, the wetland area required to treat a discharge to meet some target effluent concentration is a decreasing linear function of influent concentration (and an inverse function of flow rate). However, if removal is first-order, the required wetland area is a non-linear function of the relative influent concentration. Further research is needed for developing accurate first-order rate constants as a function of influent water chemistry and ecosystem characteristics in order to successfully apply the first-order removal model to the design of more effective AMD wetland treatment systems.
|
