|
Faulkner, B. B., Skousen, J. G., Skousen, J. G., & Ziemkiewicz, P. F. (1996). Treatment of acid mine drainage by passive treatment systems. In Acid mine drainage control and treatment. Morgantown: West Virginia University and the National Mine Land Reclamation Center.
|
|
Emerick, J. C., Wildeman, T. R., Cohen, R. R., & Klusman, R. W. (1994). Constructed wetland treatment of acid mine discharge at Idaho Springs, Colorado Guidebook on the geology, history, and surface-water contamination and remediation in the area from Denver to Idaho Springs, Colorado (R. C. Severson, Ed.) (Vol. C 1097).
|
Davies, G. J., Holmes, M., Wireman, M., King, K., Gertson, J. N., & Stefanic, J. M. (2001). Water tracing at scales of hours to decades as an aid to estimating hydraulic characteristics of the Leadville Mine drainage tunnel.
Abstract: The Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel (LMDT) is a 3.3 kilometer structure that was constructed in the complicated geology of the Leadville mine district in the 1940's. Discharge from the LMDT is impacted by heavy metals and is treated at a plant built in 1992 operated by the United States Bureau of Reclamation. On the surface waste rock and other remnants of the mining operations litter the landscape and this material is exposed to precipitation. As a result of contact with this material, surface water often has pH of less than 3 and its containment and disposal is necessary before it impacts surface drainage and the nearby Arkansas River. Using a borehole drilled into the mine workings the U.S. EPA has devised a plan in which the impacted water is contained on the surface which then can be discharged into the mine workings to discharge from the LMDT and be treated. The percentage of water discharging from the mining district along the drainage tunnel is unknown, and since there is no access, information about the condition of the tunnel with regards to blockages is also relatively obscure. Application of quantitative water tracing using fluorescent dyes was used to model the flow parameters at the scale of hours in the tunnel and evaluate the likelihood of blockages. Because the tunnel has intersected several lithologies and faults, other locations such as discharging shafts, adits and surface streams that could be hydraulically connected to the LMDT were also monitored. An initial tracer experiment was done using an instantaneous injection, which was followed by additional injections of water. Another tracer injection was done when there was a continuous flow of impacted water into the workings. Analysis of the tracer concentration responses at water-filled shafts and at the portal were used to model the flow along the tunnel and estimate several hydraulic parameters. Waters in these settings are mixtures of components with different residence times, so, qualitative tritium data were used to evaluate residence times of decades. The combined injected tracer and tritium data as well as other geochemical data were used to infer the nature of flow and recharge into the tunnel.
|
Cram, J. C. (1996). Diversion well treatment of acid water, Lick Creek, Tioga County, PA. Ph.D. thesis, Pennsylvania State University at University Park,, University Park.
Abstract: Diversion wells implement a fluidized bed of limestone for the treatment of acid water resulting from acid mine drainage or acid precipitation. This study was undertaken to better understand the operation of diversion wells and to define the physical and chemical factors having the greatest impact on the neutralization performance of the system. The study site was located near Lick Creek, a tributary stream of Babb Creek, near the Village of Arnot in Tioga County, Pennsylvania. Investigative methods included collection and analysis of site water quality and limestone data and field study of this as well as other diversion well sites. Analysis of data led to these general conclusions: The site received surface water influenced by three primary sources 1) precipitation, 2) mine drainage baseflow, and 3) melted snow. Water mostly influenced by precipitation events and mine drainage baseflow was more acidic than water influenced by melting snow conditions. The diversion wells were generally able to treat only half or less of the total stream flow of Lick Creek and under extremely high flow conditions the treatment provided was minimal. A range of flow conditions were identified which produced the best performance for the two diversion wells. Treatment produced by the system decreased through the loading cycle and increases to a maximum value after each weekly refilling of limestone. Fine grained sediment in the stream was found to be limestone of the same general composition as the material placed within the wells. Neutralization of acid water was largely due to microscopic particles rather than the limestone sediment discharged to the stream. Additional downstream buffering due to the limestone sediment physically discharged from the vessels was not apparent. Diversion well systems are inexpensive and simple to construct. In addition, the systems were found to be highly reliable and able to effectively treat acid water resulting from mine drainage and acid precipitation. Diversion wells provide better treatment when the treatment site is located at the source of the acidity (such as a mine discharge), rather than at the receiving stream. Systems should be designed with 15 to 20 feet of hydraulic head and the site must have year-round access. Diversion well systems require weekly addition of limestone gravel to the vessels to facilitate continual treatment. A great deal of commitment is necessary to maintain a diversion well system for long periods of time. These systems are more economical and require less attention that conventional chemical treatment of acid water. However, these systems require more attention that traditional passive treatment methods for treatment of acid, including mine drainage.
|
|
Brown, M., Barley, B., & Wood, H. (2002). Minewater treatment; technology, application and policy. London: IWA Publishing.
|
