Mine Water and the Environment

, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 241–250 | Cite as

Operational Lessons Learned During Bioreactor Demonstrations for Acid Rock Drainage Treatment

  • Diana Bless
  • Brian Park
  • Suzzann Nordwick
  • Marek Zaluski
  • Helen Joyce
  • Randy Hiebert
  • Charles Clavelot
Technical Communication

Abstract

The US Environmental Protection Agency’s Mine Waste Technology Program (MWTP) has emphasized the development of biogeochemically-based treatment technologies for mitigation of acid rock drainage (ARD). Progressive technology demonstrations by the MWTP over the past 15 years have resulted in improved operation of sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) bioreactors. Although using SRB to treat ARD is now fairly widespread, it was uncommon in the early 1990s when the MWTP used this innovative biotechnology. The first and longest running demonstration was an in situ bioreactor installed within the flooded subsurface workings of the Lilly/Orphan Boy Mine in 1994. The second project, at the Calliope Mine, compared the performance of several SRB bioreactor configurations and operational attributes, including lime pretreatment and reactor temperature. The third demonstration, at the Golden Sunlight Mine, consisted of two treatment steps with a recycle stream. The fourth project was an investigation of existing bioreactor designs and resulted in an improved bioreactor configuration. Significant findings included: (1) a mineshaft could be used as a long-term, in situ bioreactor, (2) SRB thrive in temperature extremes, (3) sulfide recycle effectively avoids contact of ARD with bacterial populations, and (4) ideal bioreactor substrate provides short-term and long-term nutrients, good support matrix, and enhanced permeability.

Keywords

Acid rock drainage Bioreactor design Mine waste Montana SRB bioreactor Sulfate-reducing bacteria Technology demonstration Water treatment 

References

  1. Canty MC (1999) Overview of the sulfate-reducing bacteria demonstration project under the mine waste technology program. Min Eng 51(6):93–99Google Scholar
  2. Canty MC (2000) Innovative in situ treatment of acid mine drainage using sulfate-reducing bacteria. In:Proceedings of the 5th international conference on acid rock drainage (ICARD), Society of Mining Metallurgy and Exploration, pp 1139–1147Google Scholar
  3. Doshi SM (2006) Bioremediation of acid mine drainage using sulfate-reducing bacteria. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response and Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, p 65Google Scholar
  4. Elliot P, Ragusa S, Catcheside E (1998) Growth of sulfate-reducing bacteria under acidic conditions in an upflow anaerobic bioreactor as a treatment system for acid mine drainage. Water Res 32:3724–3730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Figueroa L, Seyler J, Wildeman T (2004) Characterization of organic substrates used for anaerobic bioremediation of mining impacted waters. In: Jarvis A (ed) Proceedings of the international mine water association conference, Newcastle, England, pp 43–52Google Scholar
  6. Gusek JJ (2002) Sulfate-reducing bacteria design and operating issues: is this the passive treatment technology for your mine drainage? In: Proceedings of the 2003 national association of abandoned mine land programs annual conference, Park City, UT, Technical paper session 15, part 3, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  7. Gusek JJ (2004) Scaling up design challenges for large scale sulfate reducing bioreactors. In: Proceedings of the 2004 National Meeting of the American Society of Mining and Reclamation and the 25th WV surface Mine Drainage Task Force, Morgantown, WV, pp 752–765Google Scholar
  8. Johnson DB, Hallberg KB (2005) Acid mine drainage remediation options: a review. Sci Total Environ 338:3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. McGregor R, Blowes D, Ludwig R, Pringle E, Pomeroy M (1999) Remediation of heavy metal plume using a reactive wall. In: Proceedings of the 5th international in situ and on-site bioremediation symposium, vol 5, issue 4, San Diego, CA, USA. Battelle Press, USA, pp 19–24Google Scholar
  10. Neculita CM, Zagury GJ, Bussiere B (2007) Passive treatment of acid mine drainage in bioreactors using sulfate-reducing bacteria: critical review and research needs. J Environ Qual 36:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Nordwick SM (2008) Final report—an integrated, passive biological treatment system. Mine Waste Technology Program, Activity III, project 16. http://www.epa.gov/minewastetechnology
  12. Nordwick SM, Bless DR (2002) Integrated, passive biological treatment process for acid mine drainage. In: CD Proceedings of the conference on hard rock mining 2002, Denver, Co, USA, New media poster session, p 2Google Scholar
  13. Robins RG, Huang JCY (1988) The adsorption of arsenate ion by ferric hydroxide. In: Proceedings of the arsenic metallurgy symposium TMS/AIME annual conference, Phoenix, AZ, USAGoogle Scholar
  14. Skousen J, Sexstone A, Ziemkiewicz P (2000) Acid mine drainage treatment and control. In: Barnhisel R, Daniels W, Darmody R (eds) Reclamation of drastically disturbed lands. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 131–168Google Scholar
  15. Tsukamoto TK, Miller GC (2002) Sustainable bioreactors for treatment of acid mine drainage at the Leviathan Mine. In: CD Proceedings of the conference on hard rock mining 2002, Denver, CO, USA, platform session 10, p 3Google Scholar
  16. Wildeman T, Updegraff D (1998) Passive bioremediation of metals and inorganic contaminants. In: Macalady DL (ed) Perspectives in environmental chemistry. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 473–495Google Scholar
  17. Younger P, Banwart S, Hedin R (2002) Mine water: hydrology, pollution, remediation. Kluwer, London, p 442Google Scholar
  18. Zaluski MH, Trudnowski JM, Canty MC, Harrington Baker MA (2001) Status and performance of engineered SRB reactors for acid mine drainage control. In: Proceedings of the 6th international symposium on in situ and on-site bioremediation. Battelle Press, USA, pp 35–42Google Scholar
  19. Zaluski MH (2002) Final report—sulfate-reducing bacteria reactive wall demonstration, USEPA Mine Waste Technology Program, Activity III, project 12Google Scholar
  20. Zaluski MH, Trudnowski JM, Harrington Baker MA, Bless DR (2003) Post-mortem findings on the performance of engineered SRB field bioreactors for acid mine drainage control. In: Proceedings of the 6th ICARD, Cairns, Australia, pp 845–853Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diana Bless
    • 1
  • Brian Park
    • 2
  • Suzzann Nordwick
    • 2
  • Marek Zaluski
    • 2
  • Helen Joyce
    • 2
  • Randy Hiebert
    • 2
  • Charles Clavelot
    • 2
  1. 1.US EPACincinnatiUSA
  2. 2.MSE Technology Applications, Inc.ButteUSA

Personalised recommendations