|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Benner, S. G., Blowes, D. W., & Ptacek, C. J. (1997). A full-scale porous reactive wall for prevention of acid mine drainage. Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation, 17(4), 99–107.
Abstract: The generation and release of acidic drainage containing high concentrations of dissolved metals from decommissioned mine wastes is an environmental problem of international scale. A potential solution to many acid drainage problem is the installation of permeable reactive walls into aquifers affected by drainage water derived from mine waste materials. A permeable reactive wall installed into an aquifer impacted by low-quality mine drainage waters was installed in August 1995 at the Nickel Rim mine site near Sudbury, Ontario. The reactive mixture, containing organic matter, was designed to promote bacterially mediated sulfate reduction and subsequent metal sulfide precipitation. The reactive wall is installed to an average depth of 12 feet (3.6 m) and is 49 feet (15 m) long perpendicular to ground water flow. The wall thickness (flow path length) is 13 feet (4 m). Initial results, collected nine months after installation, indicate that sulfate reduction and metal sulfide precipitation is occurring. Comparing water entering the wall to treated water existing the wall, sulfate concentrations decrease from 2400 to 4600 mg/L to 200 to 3600 mg/L; Fe concentration decrease from 250 to 1300 mg/L to 1.0 to 40 mg/L, pH increases from 5.8 to 7.0; and alkalinity (as CaCO<inf>3</inf>) increases from 0 to 50 mg/L to 600 to 2000 mg/L. The reactive wall has effectively removed the capacity of the ground water to generate acidity on discharge to the surface. Calculations based on comparison to previously run laboratory column experiments indicate that the reactive wall has potential to remain effective for at least 15 years.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
