Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 188, Issue 1–4, pp 205–212 | Cite as

Source Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage at a Backfilled Coal Mine Using Remote Sensing and Biogeochemistry

  • Song Jin
  • Paul H. Fallgren
  • Jeffrey M. Morris
  • Jeffrey S. Cooper
Article

Abstract

A biological source treatment (BST) technique using remote sensing and biogeochemistry has been developed to address acid mine drainage (AMD) at its source. The BST technique utilizes down-hole injections of microbial inoculum and substrate amendments to establish a biofilm on the surface of metal sulfides (AMD source material). The treatment results in an elevated groundwater pH (from acidic to circum-neutral levels) and prevents further oxidation of AMD source material. The first 2 years of an ongoing field study of the BST technique at a reclaimed coal mine in central Tennessee (USA) has produced successful results. For instance, the water chemistry in a monitoring well down-gradient from injection wells has improved substantially as follows: the pH increased 1.3 units from 5.7 to 7.3, the dissolved (0.45 µm-filtered) iron concentration decreased by 84% from 93 to 15 mg/l, the conductivity decreased by 379 µS/cm, and sulfate decreased by 78 mg/l. Electromagnetic induction surveys were conducted to identify AMD source material and monitor BST performance by measuring changes in subsurface resistivity throughout the site. These surveys revealed a treatment zone created between injection wells where the resistance of contaminated groundwater from up-gradient AMD sources increased as it flowed past injection wells, thus, suggesting this technique could be used to treat AMD sources directly or to intercept and neutralize sub-surface AMD.

Keywords

Acid mine drainage Biological source treatment Bioremediation Electromagnetic induction survey Pyrite 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Joel Mason and Roger Gray for conducting field sampling and EM surveys. Financial support was provided by the United States Department of Energy (DoE) and Rio Tinto Energy America through WRI’s Cooperative Agreement No. DE-FC26-98FT40322 with DoE. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed herein are those of the authors and do not reflect the view of the DoE.

References

  1. Adams, D. J., Gardner, K. R., Davidson, R. A ., Esplin, D. N., Pickett, T. M., Heyrend, T. T., et al (1995). Biotechnology for pollution prevention in the mining industry, the North West Mining Association Open Industry Briefing, Spokane, WA. Dec 4–8.Google Scholar
  2. American Public Health Association (APHA) (1998). Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (20nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Public Health Association.Google Scholar
  3. Batten, K. M., & Scow, K. M. (2003). Sediment microbial community composition and methylmercury pollution at four mercury mine-impacted sites. Microbial Ecology, 46, 429–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Canty, M. (1998). Overview of the sulfate-reducing bacteria demonstration project under the Mine Waste Technology Program. Mineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy Review, 9, 61–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlson, L., Bigham, J. M., Schwertmann, U., Kyek, A., & Wagner, F. (2002). Scavenging of As from acid mine drainage by schwertmannite and ferrihydrite: A comparison with synthetic analogues. Environmental Science & Technology, 36, 1712–1719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chang, I. S., Shin, P. K., & Kim, B. H. (2000). Biological treatment of acid mine drainage under sulphate-reducing conditions with solid waste materials as substrate. Water Research, 34, 1269–1277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Characklis, W. G. (1990). Laboratory biofilm reactors. In W. G., Characklis, K. C., & Marshall (Eds.) Biofilms. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Christensen, B. E., & Characklis, W. G. (1990). Physical and chemical properties of biofilms. In W. G., Characklis, K. C., & Marshall (Eds.) Biofilms. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Dvorak, D. H., Hedin, R. S., Edenborn, H. M., & McIntire, P. E. (1992). Treatment of metal-contaminated water using bacterial sulfate reduction: Results from pilot scale reactors. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 40, 609–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. El Bayoumy, M., Bewtra, J. K., Hamdy, I. A., & Biswas, N. (1999). Removal of heavy metals and COD by SRB in UAFF reactor. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 125, 532–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elliot, P., Ragusa, S., & Catcheside, D. (1998). Growth of sulfate-reducing bacteria under acidic conditions in an anaerobic bioreactor as a treatment system for acid mine drainage. Water Research, 32, 3724–3730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hammarstrom, J. M., Sibrell, P. L., & Belin, H. E. (2003). Characterization of limestone reacted with acid-mine drainage in a pulsed limestone bed treatment system at the Friendship Hill National Historical Site, Pennsylvania, USA. Applied Geochemistry, 18, 1705–1721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jin, S., Fallgren, P. H., Morris, J. M., & Gossard, R. B. (2007). Biological source treatment of acid mine drainage using microbial and substrate amendments: microcosm studies. Mine Water and the Environment, (in press).Google Scholar
  14. Johnson, D. B., Dziurla, M. A., Kolmert, A., & Hallberg, K. B. (2002). The microbiology of acid mine drainage: Genesis and biotreatment. South African Journal of Science, 98, 249–255.Google Scholar
  15. Johnson, D. B., & Hallberg, K. B. (2005). Acid mine drainage remediation options: A review. Science of the Total Environment, 338, 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jong, T., & Parry, D. L. (2003). Removal of sulfate and heavy metals by sulfate reducing bacteria in short-term bench scale upflow anaerobic packed bed reactor runs. Water Research, 37, 3379–3389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kalin, M. (2004). Passive mine water treatment: The correct approach? Ecological. Engineering, 22, 299–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kalin, M., & Chaves, W. L. C. (2003). Acid reduction using microbiology: Treating AMD effluent emerging from an abandoned mine portal. Hydrometallurgy, 71, 217–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Keeney, D. R., & Nelson, D. W. (1982). Nitrogen-inorganic forms. In A. L., Page, R. H., Miller, D. R., & Keeney (Eds.) Methods of soil analysis, Part 2. Chemical and microbiological properties-agronomy monograph no. 9(2nd ed.). Madison, WI: ASA.Google Scholar
  20. Kim, S. D., Kilbme, J. J., & Cha, D. K. (1999). Prevention of acid mine drainage by sulfate reducing bacteria: organic substrate addition to mine waste piles. Environmental Engineering Science, 16, 139–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Levings, C. D., Barry, K. L., Grout, J. A., Piercey, G. E., Marsden, A. D., Coombs, A. P., et al. (2004). Hydrobiologia, 525, 185–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lyew, D., Knowles, R., & Sheppard, J. (1994). The biological treatment of acid mine drainage under continuous flow conditions in a reactor. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, 72(B), 42–47.Google Scholar
  23. Machemer, S. D., & Wildeman, T. R. (1992). Adsorption compared with sulfide precipitation as metal removal processes from acid mine drainage in a constructed wetland. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 9, 115–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Paterson, N. (1995). Application of geophysical methods to the detection and monitoring of acid mine drainage. In Proceedings of SAGEEP 1995, Orlando, FL (pp.181–184). Denver, Colorado, Environmental and Engineering Geophysical SocietyGoogle Scholar
  25. Spindler, K. M., & Olyphant, G. A. (2004). Geophysical investigations at an abandoned mine site subjected to reclamation using coal-combustion byproducts. Environmental & Engineering Geoscience, 10, 243–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tabak, H. H., Scharp, R., Burckle, J., Kawahara, F. K., & Govind, R. (2003). Advances in biotreatment of acid mine drainage and biorecovery of metals: 1. Metal precipitation for recovery and recycle. Biodegradation, 14, 423–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tuttle, J. H., Dugan, P. R., & Randles, C. I. (1969). Microbial sulfate reduction and its potential utility as an acid mine water pollution abatement procedure. Applied Microbiology, 17, 297–302.Google Scholar
  28. Ueshima, M., Fortin, F., & Kalin, M. (2004). Development of iron-phosphate biofilms on pyretic mine waste rock surfaces previously treated with natural phosphate rocks. Geomicrobiology Journal, 21, 313–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Van Houten, R. T., Hulshoff Pol, L. W., & Lettinga, G. (1994). Biological sulphate reduction using gas lift reactors fed with hydrogen and carbon dioxide as energy and carbon sources. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 44, 586–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Watten, B. J., Sibrell, P. L., & Schwartz, M. F. (2004). Effect of acidity and elevated PCO2 on acid neutralization within pulsed limestone bed reactors receiving coal mine drainage. Environmental Engineering Science, 21, 786–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Webb, J. S., McGinness, S., & Lappin-Scott, H. M. (1998). Metal removal by sulphate-reducing bacteria from natural and constructed wetlands. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 84, 240–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhang, X. V., Borda, M. J., Schoonen, M. A. A., & Strongin, D. R. (2003). Pyrite oxidation inhibition by a cross-linked lipid coating. Geochemical Transactions, 4, 8–11.Google Scholar
  33. Zhang, X. V., Kendall, T. A., Hao, J., Strongin, D. R., Schoonen, M. A. A., & Martin, S. T. (2006). Physical structures of lipid layers on pyrite. Environmental Science & Technology, 40, 1511–1515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Song Jin
    • 1
  • Paul H. Fallgren
    • 1
  • Jeffrey M. Morris
    • 1
  • Jeffrey S. Cooper
    • 1
  1. 1.Western Research InstituteLaramieUSA

Personalised recommendations