|
Bowell, R. J., Connelly, R. J., Ellis, J., Cowan, J., Wood, A., Barta, J., et al. (1997). A review of sulfate removal options from mine waters.
|
|
Bloom, N. S., Preus, E., Kilner, P. I., von der Geest, E., & Hensman, C. E. (2002). Very efficient removal of toxic metals from acid mine drainage water (Berkeley Pit, Montana) with a recycled alkaline industrial waste product Hardrock mining 2002; issues shaping the industry..
|
Berg, G. J., & Arthur, B. (1999). Proposed mine water treatment in Wisconsin. In D. Goldsack, N. Belzile, P. Yearwood, & G. J. Hall (Eds.), Sudbury '99; mining and the environment II; Conference proceedings. Sudbury: Sudbury Environmental.
Abstract: Water quality standards are driving wastewater effluent limits to ultra-low levels in the nanogram/L range. Standards are proposed that require discharges to match background water quality. The new ultra-low level standards require cautious sampling techniques, super clean laboratory methods and more advanced treatment technologies. This paper follows a case history through water quality standards for ultra-low metals, laboratory selection, and the design of a wastewater treatment system that can meet the water quality standards which are required to permit a proposed copper and zinc mine in Northern Wisconsin. A high degree of care must be taken when sampling for ultra-low level metals. Both surface water and treated effluent samples present new challenges. Sampling methods used must assure that there are no unwanted contaminants being introduced to the samples. The selection of a laboratory is as critical as the construction of a state of the art wastewater treatment system. Treatment methods such as lime and sulfide precipitation have had a high degree of success, but they do have limitations. Given today's ultra-low standards, it is necessary to assess the ability of reverse osmosis, deionization, and evaporation to provide the high level of treatment required.
|
Becker, G., Wade, S., Riggins, J. D., Cullen, T. B., Venn, C., & Hallen, C. P. (2005). Effect of Bast Mine treatment discharge on Big Mine Run AMD and Mahanoy Creek in the Western Middle Anthracite Field of Pennsylvania.
Abstract: The Bast Mine (reopened in 2001) and Big Mine are two anthracite coal mines near Ashland, PA, that were abandoned in the 1930's and that are now causing drastic and opposite effects on the water quality of the streams originating from them. To quantify these effects, multiple samples were taken at 5 different sites: 3 along Big Mine Run and 2 from Mahanoy Creek (1 upstream and 1 downstream of the confluence with Big Mine Run). At each site, one set of the samples was treated with nitric acid for metals survey, one set was acidified with sulfuric acid for nitrate preservation, one set was filtered for sulfate and phosphate tests, and one set was unaltered. Measurements of pH, TDS, dissolved oxygen, and temperature were made in the field. Alkalinity, acidity, hardness, nitrates, orthophosphates and sulfates were analyzed using Hach procedures. Selected metals (Fe, Ni, Mg, Ca, Cu, Zn, Hg, Pb) were analyzed utilizing flame atomic absorption spectroscopy. Drainage from the Bast Mine is actively treated with hydrated lime before the water is piped down to Big Mine Run. pH and alkalinity values were much higher at the outflow compared to those in the water with which it merged. The two waters could be visibly distinguished some distance downstream. pH values decreased, sulfate and dissolved iron increased and alkalinity was reduced to zero until the confluence with Mahanoy Creek. The high alkalinity, turbidity, TDS and calcium values in Mahanoy Creek were somewhat reduced downstream of the confluence with the much lower discharge Big Mine Run.
|
Aube, B. C., & Zinck, J. M. (1999). Comparison of AMD treatment processes and their impact on sludge characteristics.
Abstract: Lime neutralisation for the treatment of acid mine drainage is one of the oldest water pollution control techniques practised by the mineral industry. Several advances have been made in the process in the last thirty years, particularly with respect to discharge concentrations and sludge density. However, the impact of different treatment processes on metal leachability and sludge handling properties has not been investigated. A study of treatment sludges sampled from various water treatment plants has shown that substantial differences can be related to the treatment process and raw water composition. This study suggests that sludge densities, excess alkalinity, long-term compaction properties, metal leachability, crystallinity and cost efficiency can be affected by the neutralisation process and specific process parameters. The study also showed that the sludge density and dewatering ability is not positively correlated with particle size as previously suggested in numerous studies. The treatment process comparisons include sludge samples from basic lime treatment, the conventional High Density Sludge (HDS) Process, and the Geco HDS Process.
|
