|
Brown, M., Barley, B., & Wood, H. (2002). Minewater treatment; technology, application and policy. London: IWA Publishing.
|
Banks, S. B., & Banks, D. (2001). Abandoned mines drainage; impact assessment and mitigation of discharges from coal mines in the UK. In R. N. Yong, & H. R. Thomas (Eds.), Geoenvironmental engineering Engineering Geology (pp. 31–37). 60.
Abstract: The UK has a legacy of pollution caused by discharges from abandoned coal mines, with the potential for further pollution by new discharges as groundwaters continue to rebound to their natural levels. In 1995, the Coal Authority initiated a scoping study of 30 gravity discharges from abandoned coal mines in England and Scotland. Mining information, geological information and water quality data were collated and interpreted in order to allow a preliminary assessment of the source and nature of each of the discharges. An assessment of the potential for remediation was made on the basis of the feasibility and relative costs of alternative remediation measures. Environmental impacts of the discharges and of the proposed remediation schemes were also assessed. The results, together with previous Coal Authority studies of discharges in Wales, were used by the Coal Authority, in collaboration with the former National Rivers Authority and the former Forth and Clyde River Purification Boards, to rank discharge sites in order of priority for remediation.
|
|
Brown, M. M., Atkinson, K., & Wilkins, C. (1994). Acid mine drainage amelioration by wetlands; study of a natural ecosystem. In Special Publication – United States. Bureau of Mines, Report: BUMINES-SP-06B-94 (406). Proceedings of the International land reclamation and mine drainage conference and Third international conference on The abatement of acidic drainage; Volume 2 of 4; Mine drainage.
|
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.
|
|
Boonstra, J., van Lier, R., Janssen, G., Dijkman, H., & Buisman, C. J. N. (1999). Biological treatment of acid mine drainage. In R. Amils, & A. Ballester (Eds.), Process Metallurgy, vol.9, Part B (pp. 559–567). Biohydrometallurgy and the environment toward the mining of the 21st century; proceedings of the International biohydrometallurgy symposium IBS'99, Part B, Molecular biology, biosorption, bioremediation.
|
