|
Skousen, J., & Jenkins, M. (2001). Acid mine drainage treatment costs with calcium oxide and the Aquafix machine. Green Lands, 31(3), 46–51.
|
|
Skousen, J., Rose, A., Geidel, G., Foreman, J., Evans, R., & Hellier, W. (1998). A handbook of technologies for avoidance and remediation of acid mine drainage.
|
Stark, L. R., & Williams, F. M. (1994). The roles of spent mushroom substrate for the mitigation of coal mine drainage. Compost Science and Utilization, 2(4), 84–94.
Abstract: Spent mushroom substrate (SMS) has been used widely in coal mining regions of the USA as the primary substrate in constructed wetlands for the treatment of coal mine drainage. In laboratory and mesocosm studies, SMS has emerged as one of the substrates for mine water treatment. Provided the pH of the mine water does not fall below 3.0, SMS can be used in the mitigation plan. However, neither Mn nor dissolved ferric Fe appears to be treatable using reducing SMS wetlands. Since after a few years much of the nonrefractive organic carbon in SMS wil have been decomposed and metabolized, carbon supplementation can significantly extend the life of the SMS treatment wetland and improve water treatment. -from Authors
|
|
Stewart, B. R. (1996). The influence of fly ash additions on acid mine drainage production from coarse coal refuse. Ph.D. thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,, Blacksburg.
|
Tarutis Jr, W. J., Stark, L. R., & Williams, F. M. (1999). Sizing and performance estimation of coal mine drainage wetlands. Ecological Engineering, 12(3-4), 353–372.
Abstract: The effectiveness of wetland treatment of acid mine drainage (AMD) was assessed using three measures of performance: treatment efficiency, area-adjusted removal, and first-order removal. Mathematical relationships between these measures were derived from simple kinetic equations. Area-adjusted removal is independent of pollutant concentration (zero-order reaction kinetics), while first-order removal is dependent on concentration. Treatment efficiency is linearly related to area-adjusted removal and exponentially related to first-order removal at constant hydraulic loading rates (flow/area). Examination of previously published data from 35 natural AMD wetlands revealed that statistically significant correlations exist between several of the performance measures for both iron and manganese removal, but these correlations are potentially spurious because these measures are derived from, and are mathematical rearrangements of, the same operating data. The use of treatment efficiency as a measure of performance between wetlands is not recommended because it is a relative measure that does not account for influent concentration differences. Area-adjusted removal accounts for mass loading effects, but it fails to separate the flow and concentration components, which is necessary if removal is first-order. Available empirical evidence suggests that AMD pollutant removal is better described by first-order kinetics. If removal is first-order, the use of area-adjusted rates for determining the wetland area required for treating relatively low pollutant concentrations will result in undersized wetlands. The effects of concentration and flow rate on wetland area predictions for constant influent loading rates also depend on the kinetics of pollutant removal. If removal is zero-order, the wetland area required to treat a discharge to meet some target effluent concentration is a decreasing linear function of influent concentration (and an inverse function of flow rate). However, if removal is first-order, the required wetland area is a non-linear function of the relative influent concentration. Further research is needed for developing accurate first-order rate constants as a function of influent water chemistry and ecosystem characteristics in order to successfully apply the first-order removal model to the design of more effective AMD wetland treatment systems.
|
