|
Rees, B. (2005). An overview of passive mine water treatment in Europe. Mine Water Env., 24(1), 26–28.
|
|
Coulton, R. H., & Williams, K. P. (2005). Active treatment of mine water; a European perspective. Mine Water Env., 24(1), 23–26.
|
Canty, G. A., & Everett, J. W. (2006). Injection of Fluidized Bed Combustion Ash into Mine Workings for Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage. Mine Water Env., 25(1), 45–55.
Abstract: A demonstration project was conducted to investigate treating acid mine water by alkaline injection technology (AIT). A total of 379 t of alkaline coal combustion byproduct was injected into in an eastern Oklahoma drift coal mine. AIT increased the pH and alkalinity, and reduced acidity and metal loading. Although large improvements in water quality were only observed for 15 months before the effluent water chemistry appeared to approach pre-injection conditions, a review of the data four years after injection identified statistically significant changes in the mine discharge compared to pre-injection conditions. Decreases in acidity (23%), iron (18%), and aluminium (47%) were observed, while an increase in pH (0.35 units) was noted. Presumably, the mine environment reached quasi-equilibrium with the alkalinity introduced to the system.
|
Novák, J. (2001). Groundwater Remediation in the Stráz Leaching Operation. Mine Water Env., 20(4), 158–167.
Abstract: An area of the Czech Republic in the northeastern part of the Ceská Lípa district has been affected by “in situ” chemical mining of uranium. The risks associated with the contaminants have been assessed and a complex groundwater remediation project has been generated. The remediation alternatives for both the Cenomanian and Turonian aquifers are presented, relative to time requirements, economics, ecological considerations and the elimination of unacceptable risks for the population and environment. Finally, the present progress of remediation and a concept of what is necessary to complete remediation are presented.
|
Younger, P. L. (2000). The adoption and adaptation of passive treatment technologies for mine waters in the United Kingdom. Mine Water Env., 19(2), 84–97.
Abstract: During the 1990s, passive treatment technology was introduced to the United Kingdom (UK). Early hesitancy on the part of regulators and practitioners was rapidly overcome, at least for net-alkaline mine waters, so that passive treatment is now the technology of choice for the long-term remediation of such discharges, wherever land availability is not unduly limiting. Six types of passive systems are now being used in the UK for mine water treatment: ¨ aerobic, surface flow wetlands (reed-beds); ¨ anaerobic, compost wetlands with significant surface flow; ¨ mixed compost / limestone systems, with predominantly subsurface flow (so-called Reducing and Alkalinity Producing Systems (RAPS)); ¨ subsurface reactive barriers to treat acidic, metalliferous ground waters; ¨ closed-system limestone dissolution systems for zinc removal from alkaline waters; ¨ roughing filters for treating ferruginous mine waters where land availability is limited. Each of these technologies is appropriate for a different kind of mine water, or for specific hydraulic circumstances. The degree to which each type of system can be considered “proven technology” corresponds to the order in which they are listed above. Many of these passive systems have become foci for detailed scientific research, as part of a $1.5M European Commission project running from 2000 to 2003.
|
