|
Coulton, R. H., & Williams, K. P. (2005). Active treatment of mine water; a European perspective. Mine Water Env., 24(1), 23–26.
|
|
Rees, B. (2005). An overview of passive mine water treatment in Europe. Mine Water Env., 24(1), 26–28.
|
Novák, J. (2001). Groundwater Remediation in the Stráz Leaching Operation. Mine Water Env., 20(4), 158–167.
Abstract: An area of the Czech Republic in the northeastern part of the Ceská Lípa district has been affected by “in situ” chemical mining of uranium. The risks associated with the contaminants have been assessed and a complex groundwater remediation project has been generated. The remediation alternatives for both the Cenomanian and Turonian aquifers are presented, relative to time requirements, economics, ecological considerations and the elimination of unacceptable risks for the population and environment. Finally, the present progress of remediation and a concept of what is necessary to complete remediation are presented.
|
Canty, G. A., & Everett, J. W. (2006). Injection of Fluidized Bed Combustion Ash into Mine Workings for Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage. Mine Water Env., 25(1), 45–55.
Abstract: A demonstration project was conducted to investigate treating acid mine water by alkaline injection technology (AIT). A total of 379 t of alkaline coal combustion byproduct was injected into in an eastern Oklahoma drift coal mine. AIT increased the pH and alkalinity, and reduced acidity and metal loading. Although large improvements in water quality were only observed for 15 months before the effluent water chemistry appeared to approach pre-injection conditions, a review of the data four years after injection identified statistically significant changes in the mine discharge compared to pre-injection conditions. Decreases in acidity (23%), iron (18%), and aluminium (47%) were observed, while an increase in pH (0.35 units) was noted. Presumably, the mine environment reached quasi-equilibrium with the alkalinity introduced to the system.
|
Ziemkiewicz, P. F., Skousen, J. G., & Simmons, J. (2003). Long-term Performance of Passive Acid Mine Drainage Treatment Systems. Mine Water Env., 22(3), 118–129.
Abstract: State and federal reclamation programs, mining operators, and citizen-based watershed organizations have constructed hundreds of passive systems in the eastern U.S. over the past 20 years to provide reliable, low cost, low maintenance mine water treatment in remote locations. While performance has been reported for individual systems, there has not been a comprehensive evaluation of the performance of each treatment type for a wide variety of conditions. We evaluated 83 systems: five types in eight states. Each system was monitored for influent and effluent flow, pH, net acidity, and metal concentrations. Performance was normalized among types by calculating acid load reductions and removals, and by converting construction cost, projected service life, and metric tonnes of acid load treated into cost per tonne of acid treated. Of the 83 systems, 82 reduced acid load. Average acid load reductions were 9.9 t/yr for open limestone channels (OLC), 10.1 t/yr for vertical flow wetlands (VFW), 11.9 t/yr for anaerobic wetlands (AnW), 16.6 t/yr for limestone leach beds (LSB), and 22.2 t/yr for anoxic limestone drains (ALD). Average costs for acid removal varied from $83/t/yr for ALDs to $527 for AnWs. Average acid removals were 25 g/m2/day for AnWs, 62 g/m2/day for VFWs, 22 g/day/t for OLCs, 28 g/day/t for LSBs, and 56 g/day/t for ALDs. It appears that the majority of passive systems are effective but there was wide variation within each system type, so improved reliability and efficiency are needed. This report is an initial step in determining passive treatment system performance; additional work is needed to refine system designs and monitoring.
|
