|
|
Kleinmann, R., Majumdar, S. K., Miller, E. W., & Brenner, F. J. (1998). Ecology of wetlands and associated systems. 25: The Pennsylvania Academy of Science Book Publications.
|
|
|
|
Karathanasis, A. D., & Barton, C. D. (1999). The revival of a failed constructed wetland treating a high Fe load AMD. In K. S. Sajwan, A. K. Alva, & R. F. Keefer (Eds.), Proceedings; biogeochemistry of trace elements in coal and coal combustion byproducts. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
|
|
|
|
Pettit, C. M., Scharer, J. M., Chambers, D. B., Halbert, B. E., Kirkaldy, J. L., & Bolduc, L. (1999). Neutral mine drainage. In D. Goldsack, N. Belzile, P. Yearwood, & G. J. Hall (Eds.), Sudbury '99; mining and the environment II; Conference proceedings. Sudbury: Sudbury Environmental.
Abstract: Acid mine drainage is recognized as a serious environmental issue at mine sites world wide. While sulphate and metal concentrations in acidic drainage can reach exceptionally high levels, these can also be elevated and of concern in neutral drainage from waste rock and tailings. “Neutral mine drainage” (NMD) has not yet received as widespread attention as acid mine drainage (AMD). The oxidation of sulphide minerals and the production of either acidic or neutral contaminated drainage is affected by many factors. This paper examines the specific factors that result in the production of “neutral mine drainage” from mine wastes. Several case studies are presented which involve predictive geochemical modelling to illustrate the possible time frame and magnitude of contaminated neutral drainage.
|
|
|
|
Parker, G., Noller, B., & Waite, T. D. (1999). Assessment of the use of fast-weathering silicate minerals to buffer AMD in surface waters in tropical Australia. In D. E. Goldsack, N. Belzile, P. Yearwood, & G. J. Hall (Eds.), Sudbury '99; Mining and the environment II; Conference proceedings.
Abstract: Surface waters in the Pine Creek Geosyncline (located in Australia's “Top End”, defined as the area of Australia north of 15 degrees S) are characterized by their low carbonate buffering capacity. These waters are buffered by silicate weathering and hence are slightly acidic, ranging in pH from 4.0 to 6.0. The Pine Creek Geosyncline contains most of the Top Ends' economic mineral deposits and characteristically shows no correlation between carbonate minerals and sulfidic orebodies hosting gold deposits (unlike uranium deposits). Thus many gold mines do not have ready access to carbonate minerals for buffering acid mine drainage (AMD). It is possible that locally available fast-weathering silicate minerals may be used to buffer AMD seeps. The buffering intensity of silicate minerals exceeds that of carbonate minerals, but their slow dissolution kinetics has ensured that these materials have received little attention in treating AMD. In addition, carbonate mineral dissolution is retarded when contacted with intense AMD solutions due to the formation of surface coatings of iron minerals. The lower pH range of silicate mineral dissolution may prevent the formation of such coatings. The Pine Creek Geosyncline consists of a complex geochemistry, and a number of fast-weathering silicate minerals have been noted in various areas. The difficulty in assessing such minerals for use in buffering AMD is the lack of kinetic data available under conditions prevalent AMD (i.e., low pH solutions saturated with aluminium and silica). This study sets out to evaluate the applicability of using such minerals to treat AMD surface seeps.
|
|
|
|
Berg, G. J., & Arthur, B. (1999). Proposed mine water treatment in Wisconsin. In D. Goldsack, N. Belzile, P. Yearwood, & G. J. Hall (Eds.), Sudbury '99; mining and the environment II; Conference proceedings. Sudbury: Sudbury Environmental.
Abstract: Water quality standards are driving wastewater effluent limits to ultra-low levels in the nanogram/L range. Standards are proposed that require discharges to match background water quality. The new ultra-low level standards require cautious sampling techniques, super clean laboratory methods and more advanced treatment technologies. This paper follows a case history through water quality standards for ultra-low metals, laboratory selection, and the design of a wastewater treatment system that can meet the water quality standards which are required to permit a proposed copper and zinc mine in Northern Wisconsin. A high degree of care must be taken when sampling for ultra-low level metals. Both surface water and treated effluent samples present new challenges. Sampling methods used must assure that there are no unwanted contaminants being introduced to the samples. The selection of a laboratory is as critical as the construction of a state of the art wastewater treatment system. Treatment methods such as lime and sulfide precipitation have had a high degree of success, but they do have limitations. Given today's ultra-low standards, it is necessary to assess the ability of reverse osmosis, deionization, and evaporation to provide the high level of treatment required.
|
|
