|
Hulshof, A. H. M., Blowes, D. W., & Douglas Gould, W. (2006). Evaluation of in situ layers for treatment of acid mine drainage: A field comparison. Water Res, 40(9), 1816–1826.
Abstract: Reactive treatment layers, containing labile organic carbon, were evaluated to determine their ability to promote sulfate reduction and metal sulfide precipitation within a tailings impoundment, thereby treating tailings effluent prior to discharge. Organic carbon materials, including woodchips and pulp waste, were mixed with the upper meter of tailings in two separate test cells, a third control cell contained only tailings. In the woodchip cell sulfate reduction rates were 500 mg L-1 a-1, (5.2 mmol L-1 a-1) this was coupled with the gradual removal of 350 mg L-1 Zn (5.4 mmol L-1). Decreased δ13CDIC values from -3‰ to as low as -12‰ indicated that sulfate reduction was coupled with organic carbon oxidation. In the pulp waste cell the most dramatic change was observed near the interface between the pulp waste amended tailings and the underlying undisturbed tailings. Sulfate reduction rates were 5000 mg L-1 a-1 (52 mmol L-1 a-1), Fe concentrations decreased by 80–99.5% (148 mmol L-1) and Zn was consistently <5 mg L-1. Rates of sulfate reduction and metal removal decreased as the pore water migrated upward into the shallower tailings. Increased rates of sulfate reduction in the pulp waste cell were consistent with decreased δ13CDIC values, to as low as -22‰, and increased populations of sulfate reducing bacteria. Lower concentrations of the nutrients, phosphorus, organic carbon and nitrogen in the woodchip material contribute to the lower sulfate reduction rates observed in the woodchip cell.
|
|
|
Jage, C. R., & Zipper, C. E. (2000). Acid-mine drainage treatment using successive alkalinity-producing systems. Powell River Project research and education program reports.
|
|
|
Johnson, D. B., & Hallberg, K. B. (2005). Acid mine drainage remediation options: a review. Science of the Total Environment, 338(1-2), 3–14.
Abstract: Acid mine drainage (AMD) causes environmental pollution that affects many countries having historic or current mining industries. Preventing the formation or the migration of AMD from its source is generally considered to be the preferable option, although this is not feasible in many locations, and in such cases, it is necessary to collect, treat, and discharge mine water. There are various options available for remediating AMD, which may be divided into those that use either chemical or biological mechanisms to neutralise AMD and remove metals from solution. Both abiotic and biological systems include those that are classed as “active” (i.e., require continuous inputs of resources to sustain the process) or “passive” (i.e., require relatively little resource input once in operation). This review describes the current abiotic and bioremediative strategies that are currently used to mitigate AMD and compares the strengths and weaknesses of each. New and emerging technologies are also described. In addition, the factors that currently influence the selection of a remediation system, and how these criteria may change in the future, are discussed.
|
|
|
Kuyucak, N. (2001). Acid mining drainage prevention and control. Mining Environmental Management, 9(1), 12–15.
|
|
|
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.
|
|