Results of small-scale passive system trials to treat acid mine drainage, West Coast Region, South Island, New Zealand

Trumm, D.; Watts, M.

doi:10.1080/00288306.2010.509041

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At site 1 Fe, Al and Ni were removed to 97, 100 and 66 % (residence time 5 h). Corresponding results for site 2 were 99, 96 and 95 % for Fe, Al and Ni Trumm and Watts 2010 – Field experiment Incubation regimes where AMD was mixed with domestic wastewater and incubated for 72 h. Results showed that significant quantities of REE could be removed from solution Strosnider and Nairn 2010 Particle size <150 μm Laboratory investigation Jar Test. 40–160 g/L, contact time 240 min.…”

Section: Mine Drainage Removal Mechanisms Filter Materials and Expementioning

confidence: 88%

“…In addition, Potgieter-Vermaak et al ( 2006 ) found limestone to be a feasible alternative to lime. Limestone was also used by Trumm and Watts ( 2010 ) who tested the media in small-scale pilot systems, e.g. as reducing and alkalinity producing systems, with regard to two acid mine waters in New Zealand.…”

Section: Mine Drainage Removal Mechanisms Filter Materials and Expementioning

confidence: 99%

“…as reducing and alkalinity producing systems, with regard to two acid mine waters in New Zealand. Trumm and Watts ( 2010 ) performed laboratory column tests as well as field trials and concluded that the small-scale systems might work as reducing system as well as an alkalinity producing system depending on the character of mine water. Trumm and Watts ( 2010 ) reported high removal rates.…”

Section: Mine Drainage Removal Mechanisms Filter Materials and Expementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Trumm and Watts ( 2010 ) performed laboratory column tests as well as field trials and concluded that the small-scale systems might work as reducing system as well as an alkalinity producing system depending on the character of mine water. Trumm and Watts ( 2010 ) reported high removal rates. Strosnider and Nairn ( 2010 ) also investigated limestone in passive treatment systems for the removal of various elements; among them rare earth elements (REEs) found in some mine waters but usually not tracked according to the authors.…”

Section: Mine Drainage Removal Mechanisms Filter Materials and Expementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Working and abandoned mines world over are continuously discharging mine drainage into surface and groundwater bodies (Dybrowska et al 2006 ; Perez-Lopez et al 2007 ; Chockalingam and Subramanian 2009 ; Potgieter-Vermaak et al 2006 ; Strosnider and Nairn 2010 ; Trumm and Watts 2010 ; Prasad and Mortimer 2011 ; Goetz and Riefler 2014 ) and the worldwide mining industry is facing enormous challenges with the mine drainage. Mining effluents are characterised by high concentrations of heavy metals and high acidity, a combination that in many cases causes severe environmental problems such as acidification and lethal poisoning of aquatic organisms (Chockalingam and Subramanian 2009 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Filter materials for metal removal from mine drainage—a review

Westholm

Repo

Sillanpää

2014

Environ Sci Pollut Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A large number of filter materials, organic and inorganic, for removal of heavy metals in mine drainage have been reviewed. Bark, chitin, chitosan, commercial ion exchangers, dairy manure compost, lignite, peat, rice husks, vegetal compost, and yeast are examples of organic materials, while bio-carbons, calcareous shale, dolomite, fly ash, limestone, olivine, steel slag materials and zeolites are examples of inorganic materials. The majority of these filter materials have been investigated in laboratory studies, based on various experimental set-ups (batch and/or column tests) and different conditions. A few materials, for instance steel slag materials, have also been subjects to field investigations under real-life conditions. The results from these investigations show that steel slag materials have the potential to remove heavy metals under different conditions. Ion exchange has been suggested as the major metal removal mechanisms not only for steel slag but also for lignite. Other suggested removal mechanisms have also been identified. Adsorption has been suggested important for activated carbon, precipitation for chitosan and sulphate reduction for olivine. General findings indicate that the results with regard to metal removal vary due to experimental set ups, composition of mine drainage and properties of filter materials and the discrepancies between studies renders normalisation of data difficult. However, the literature reveals that Fe, Zn, Pb, Hg and Al are removed to a large extent. Further investigations, especially under real-life conditions, are however necessary in order to find suitable filter materials for treatment of mine drainage.

show abstract

Section: Mine Drainage Removal Mechanisms Filter Materials and Expementioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Mine Drainage Removal Mechanisms Filter Materials and Expementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mine Drainage Removal Mechanisms Filter Materials and Expementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mine Drainage Removal Mechanisms Filter Materials and Expementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Filter materials for metal removal from mine drainage—a review

Westholm

Repo

Sillanpää

2014

Environ Sci Pollut Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Controls on Zn Concentrations in Acidic and Neutral Mine Drainage from New Zealand’s Bituminous Coal and Epithermal Mineral Deposits

Pope¹,

Trumm²

2015

Mine Water Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zinc is one of the most abundant transition metals in mine water from coal mines and epithermal metal mines in New Zealand. Zinc is commonly conservative in mine drainage systems and remains soluble at concentrations that exceed guideline values for protection of aquatic ecosystems. This study presents a compilation of Zn concentrations and geochemical data from acid and neutral mine drainage sites. Geochemical modelling using PhreeqC indicates that secondary Zn minerals are unlikely to influence Zn concentrations except where Zn exceeds 100 mg/L and mine drainage pH [ 7. Adsorption modelling using WHAM indicates that Zn is unlikely to be attenuated by adsorption onto Fe and Al precipitates that could form during neutralisation or oxidation of mine drainages, except when the ratio of precipitate to dissolved Zn is high (&100 mg/L precipitate and 0.1 mg/L Zn) and the pH [ 6. Instead, Zn concentration is controlled by the source minerals and their rate of dissolution and dilution, rather than precipitation of secondary Zn minerals or adsorption. At some abandoned mine sites, or mineral prospects where leachate testing has been completed, Zn (±acidity) is the main chemical parameter that must be removed before discharge to the aquatic environment. Our results and interpretations constrain options for water management at future mine sites in New Zealand where Zn is present to: active treatment, passive treatment using reducing systems, or passive treatment that incorporate CaO-bearing reagents to achieve a pH [ 7. Conventional limestone-based passive treatment systems are unlikely to remove Zn because pH [ 6 is seldom achieved in such systems in an acceptable reaction time. Active treatment is unlikely to be possible at sites established to clean up abandoned mines sites, and therefore passive treatment should include a reducing system to remove Zn in order to meet guidelines for protection of aquatic ecosystems.

show abstract

Economic Performance of Active and Passive AMD Treatment Systems Under Uncertainty: Case Studies from the Brunner Coal Measures in New Zealand

Eppink¹,

Trumm²,

Weber³

et al. 2020

Mine Water Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acid mine drainage (AMD) often requires management long after mining operations have ceased. Cost-effective long-term passive treatment systems (PTS) are required for closure of mine sites. However, PTS research seldom defines well-constrained operational and financial parameters to enable confident decision making by mining companies. PTS are generally assumed to be a lower-cost alternative to active systems when used in favorable circumstances, but there is little objective information to define when they are more suitable than active treatment. Instead, general 'rules-of-thumb' for flow rates or acid loads are used to determine when PTS are best used. We used well-characterized AMD from multiple historic and active coal mine sites in New Zealand to test these rules-of-thumb from a financial perspective by modelling capital and operational costs over a 100 year timeframe. We present static and uncertainty-based cost assessments of a mussel shell reactor PTS compared to typical active AMD treatment systems at six mine drainage sources from the Brunner Coal Measures. We show that for expected AMD characteristics and duration of treatment, savings on operational costs with PTS can exceed the higher initial capital costs. In addition, the financial advantage of PTS over time may be achieved at flow rates and acidity loads that exceed the industry rules-of-thumb PTS limits. However, in some circumstances, cost projections for high up-front capital costs of purchasing all treatment media for the life span of the PTS is less favorable than discounted treatment media in active treatment systems over time. Understanding financial models of AMD treatment options during mine site design can help reduce the costs of operating and closing mine sites.

show abstract

Results of small-scale passive system trials to treat acid mine drainage, West Coast Region, South Island, New Zealand

Cited by 6 publications

References 24 publications

Filter materials for metal removal from mine drainage—a review

Filter materials for metal removal from mine drainage—a review

Controls on Zn Concentrations in Acidic and Neutral Mine Drainage from New Zealand’s Bituminous Coal and Epithermal Mineral Deposits

Economic Performance of Active and Passive AMD Treatment Systems Under Uncertainty: Case Studies from the Brunner Coal Measures in New Zealand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About