Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage with Fly Ash: Removal of Major Contaminants and Trace Elements.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage with Fly Ash: Removal of Major Contaminants and Trace Elements.
Authors: Gitari, M. W.1 wgitari@uwc.za, Petrik, L. F.1, Etchebers, O.1, Key, D. L.2, Iwuoha, E.3, Okujeni, C.4
Source: Journal of Environmental Science & Health. Part A. Toxic/Hazardous Substances & Environmental Engineering. Aug2006, Vol. 41 Issue 8, p1729-1747. 19p. 3 Charts, 6 Graphs.
Subject Terms: *Acid mine drainage, *Mine drainage, *Neutralization (Chemistry), *Fly ash, *Trace elements, *Sulfates, *Hydrogen-ion concentration, *Leaching, Gypsum
Abstract: Acid mine drainage (AMD) has been reacted with two South African fly ashes in a batch setup in an attempt to evaluate their neutralization and major, trace elements removal capacity. Different fly ash: acid mine drainage ratios (FA: AMD) were stirred in a beaker for a set time and the process water analyzed for major, trace elements and sulphate content. The three factors that finally dictated the nature of the final solution in these neutralization reactions were the FA: AMD ratio, the contact time of the reaction and the chemistry of the AMD. Efficiency of the elements removal was directly linked to the amount of FA in the reaction mixture and to the final pH attained. Most elements attained ≈100% removal only when the pH of minimum solubility of their hydroxides was achieved (i.e., Mg = 10.49–11.0, Cu 2+ = 6, Pb 2+ = 6–7). Dissolution of CaO and subsequent precipitation of gypsum and formation of Al, Fe oxyhydroxysulphates, Fe oxyhydroxides with subsequent adsorption of sulphate contributed to the sulphate attenuation. Significant leaching of B, Sr, Ba and Mo was observed as the reaction progressed and was observed to increase with quantity of fly ash in the reaction mixture. However B was observed to decrease at high FA: AMD ratios probably as result of co-precipitation with CaCO 3(s) . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Journal of Environmental Science & Health. Part A. Toxic/Hazardous Substances & Environmental Engineering is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: GreenFILE
Description
Abstract:Acid mine drainage (AMD) has been reacted with two South African fly ashes in a batch setup in an attempt to evaluate their neutralization and major, trace elements removal capacity. Different fly ash: acid mine drainage ratios (FA: AMD) were stirred in a beaker for a set time and the process water analyzed for major, trace elements and sulphate content. The three factors that finally dictated the nature of the final solution in these neutralization reactions were the FA: AMD ratio, the contact time of the reaction and the chemistry of the AMD. Efficiency of the elements removal was directly linked to the amount of FA in the reaction mixture and to the final pH attained. Most elements attained ≈100% removal only when the pH of minimum solubility of their hydroxides was achieved (i.e., Mg = 10.49–11.0, Cu 2+ = 6, Pb 2+ = 6–7). Dissolution of CaO and subsequent precipitation of gypsum and formation of Al, Fe oxyhydroxysulphates, Fe oxyhydroxides with subsequent adsorption of sulphate contributed to the sulphate attenuation. Significant leaching of B, Sr, Ba and Mo was observed as the reaction progressed and was observed to increase with quantity of fly ash in the reaction mixture. However B was observed to decrease at high FA: AMD ratios probably as result of co-precipitation with CaCO 3(s) . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:10934529
DOI:10.1080/10934520600754425