|
Ahmed, S. M. (1994). Surface chemical methods of forming hardpan in pyrrhotite tailings and prevention of the acid mine drainage.
|
Bolzicco, J., Carrera, J., & Ayora, C. (2004). Eficiencia de la barrera permeable reactiva de Aznalcollar (Sevilla, Espana) como remedio de aguas acidas de mina. Reactive permeable disposal barrier at Aznalcollar Mine, Seville, Spain; as remediation for acid mine drainage. Revista Latino-Americana de Hidrogeologia, 4, 27–34.
Abstract: As a result of the collapse of a mine tailing dam in april 1998 about 40 km of the Agrio and Guadiamar valleys were covered with a layer of pyrite sludge. Although most of the sludge was removed, a small amount remains in the soil of the Agrio valley and the aquifer remains polluted with acid water (ph<4) and metals (10 mg/L Zn, 5 mg/L Cu and Al). A permeable reactive barrier was build across the aquifer to increase the alcalinity and retain the metals. The barrier is made up of three sections of 30 m longX1.4 m thickX5 m deep (average) containing different proportions of limestone gravel, organic compost and zero-valent iron. The residence time of the water in the barrier is about two days. Within the barrier, the pH values increase to near neutral mainly due to calcite dissolution. Metals co-precipitate as oxyhydroxides, and they are also adsorbed on the organic matter surface. Down-stream the barrier, the total pollution removal is around 60-90% for Zn and Cu, and from 50 to 90% for Al and acidity.
|
|
Bowell, R. J. (2000). Sulphate and salt minerals; the problem of treating mine waste. Mining Environmental Management, 8(3), 11–13.
|
|
Kuyucak, N. (2001). Acid mine drainage; treatment options for mining effluents. Mining Environmental Management, 9(2), 12–15.
|
Kleinmann, R. L. P. (1990). Acid Mine Water Treatment using Engineered Wetlands. Int. J. Mine Water, 9(1-4), 269–276.
Abstract: 400 systems installed within 4 years During the last two decades, the United States mining industry has greatly increased the amount it spends on pollution control. The application of biotechnology to mine water can reduce the industry's water treatment costs (estimated at over a million dollars a day) and improve water quality in streams and rivers adversely affected by acidic mine water draining from abandoned mines. Biological treatment of mine waste water is typically conducted in a series of small excavated ponds that resemble, in a superficial way, a small marsh area. The ponds are engineered to first facilitate bacterial oxidation of iron; ideally, the water then flows through a composted organic substrate that supports a population of sulfate-reducing bacteria. The latter process raises the pH. During the past four years, over 400 wetland water treatment systems have been built on mined lands as a result of research by the U.S. Bureau of Mines. In general, mine operators find that the wetlands reduce chemical treatment costs enough to repay the cost of wetland construction in less than a year. Actual rates of iron removal at field sites have been used to develop empirical sizing criteria based on iron loading and pH. If the pH is 6 or above, the wetland area (in2) required is equivalent to the iron. load (grams/day) divided by 10. Theis requirement doubles at a pH of 4 to 5. At a pH below 4, the iron load (grams/day) should be divided by 2 to estimate the area required (in2).
|
