Prediction of Acid Mine Drainage: Importance of Mineralogy and the Test Protocols for Static and Kinetic Tests

Static tests, which compare the acid-generating potential and acid-neutralizing potential for a given mine waste (tailings or waste rocks), are characterized by a wide uncertainty zone in which it is impossible to accurately predict the acid-generating potential (AGP). Then, to better assess long-te...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Mine water and the environment 2014-03, Vol.33 (1), p.54-65
Hauptverfasser: Bouzahzah, Hassan, Benzaazoua, Mostafa, Bussiere, Bruno, Plante, Benoit
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 65
container_issue 1
container_start_page 54
container_title Mine water and the environment
container_volume 33
creator Bouzahzah, Hassan
Benzaazoua, Mostafa
Bussiere, Bruno
Plante, Benoit
description Static tests, which compare the acid-generating potential and acid-neutralizing potential for a given mine waste (tailings or waste rocks), are characterized by a wide uncertainty zone in which it is impossible to accurately predict the acid-generating potential (AGP). Then, to better assess long-term AGP, kinetic tests are usually performed to provide more information about the reaction rates of the acid-generating and acid-neutralizing minerals. The present work compares the classic Sobek static test with three mineralogical static tests to assess the importance of sample mineralogy in acid mine drainage (AMD) prediction. We also investigated how experimental procedures related to static tests can influence prediction results. We used three synthetic tailings samples made by mixing well-characterized pure minerals in calibrated proportions. Although basically different in their principles and procedures, the modified Sobek and mineralogical static tests gave similar results. These AGP predictions were then validated by the use of a kinetic test. The kinetic test protocol was also modified in this study and the results obtained correlated well with the static test results, in contrast to the standard kinetic test protocol. The present work highlights the limitations of static and kinetic test procedures, and provides recommendations for a better use of these tests for more reliable AMD prediction.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10230-013-0249-1
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1524414425</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3224715391</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a368t-e0e23ce788d5ca3de8b5af825ff9af14698535188577e3f7ca338fff1c3516f13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10U1PAyEQBuCN0cRa_QHeSLx4WZ2BZZd6a-pXY41NrGeCLNRttlBhe-i_l7UejIknJvDMMMmbZecIVwhQXUcEyiAHZDnQYpTjQTbAEsscoRSHqQbK8xEiPc5OYlwBYFVSPsjcPJi60V3jHfGWjHVTk-fGGXIbVOPU0tyQ6XrjQ6ecNr3oH4Nq_XJHlKtJ92HIwsSOzIPvvPZtJNYH8tqprtHf4ik19HWv4ml2ZFUbzdnPOcze7u8Wk8d89vIwnYxnuWKl6HIDhjJtKiFqrhWrjXjnygrKrR0pi0U5EpxxFIJXlWG2SoYJay3qdFtaZMPscj93E_znNv0s103Upm2VM34bJXJaFFgUlCd68Yeu_Da4tF1SACWnICAp3CsdfIzBWLkJzVqFnUSQfQJyn4BMCcg-AdkvQfc9MVm3NOHX5H-bvgAUVIf2</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1500652080</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prediction of Acid Mine Drainage: Importance of Mineralogy and the Test Protocols for Static and Kinetic Tests</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Bouzahzah, Hassan ; Benzaazoua, Mostafa ; Bussiere, Bruno ; Plante, Benoit</creator><creatorcontrib>Bouzahzah, Hassan ; Benzaazoua, Mostafa ; Bussiere, Bruno ; Plante, Benoit</creatorcontrib><description>Static tests, which compare the acid-generating potential and acid-neutralizing potential for a given mine waste (tailings or waste rocks), are characterized by a wide uncertainty zone in which it is impossible to accurately predict the acid-generating potential (AGP). Then, to better assess long-term AGP, kinetic tests are usually performed to provide more information about the reaction rates of the acid-generating and acid-neutralizing minerals. The present work compares the classic Sobek static test with three mineralogical static tests to assess the importance of sample mineralogy in acid mine drainage (AMD) prediction. We also investigated how experimental procedures related to static tests can influence prediction results. We used three synthetic tailings samples made by mixing well-characterized pure minerals in calibrated proportions. Although basically different in their principles and procedures, the modified Sobek and mineralogical static tests gave similar results. These AGP predictions were then validated by the use of a kinetic test. The kinetic test protocol was also modified in this study and the results obtained correlated well with the static test results, in contrast to the standard kinetic test protocol. The present work highlights the limitations of static and kinetic test procedures, and provides recommendations for a better use of these tests for more reliable AMD prediction.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1025-9112</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1616-1068</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10230-013-0249-1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Acid mine drainage ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Earth Sciences ; Ecotoxicology ; Geology ; Hydrogeology ; Industrial Pollution Prevention ; Kinetics ; Mine drainage ; Mine tailings ; Mine wastes ; Mineral Resources ; Mineralogy ; Minerals ; Neutralizing ; Predictions ; Protocols ; Static tests ; Tailings ; Technical Article ; Test procedures ; Water pollution ; Water Quality/Water Pollution</subject><ispartof>Mine water and the environment, 2014-03, Vol.33 (1), p.54-65</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a368t-e0e23ce788d5ca3de8b5af825ff9af14698535188577e3f7ca338fff1c3516f13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a368t-e0e23ce788d5ca3de8b5af825ff9af14698535188577e3f7ca338fff1c3516f13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10230-013-0249-1$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10230-013-0249-1$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bouzahzah, Hassan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Benzaazoua, Mostafa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bussiere, Bruno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Plante, Benoit</creatorcontrib><title>Prediction of Acid Mine Drainage: Importance of Mineralogy and the Test Protocols for Static and Kinetic Tests</title><title>Mine water and the environment</title><addtitle>Mine Water Environ</addtitle><description>Static tests, which compare the acid-generating potential and acid-neutralizing potential for a given mine waste (tailings or waste rocks), are characterized by a wide uncertainty zone in which it is impossible to accurately predict the acid-generating potential (AGP). Then, to better assess long-term AGP, kinetic tests are usually performed to provide more information about the reaction rates of the acid-generating and acid-neutralizing minerals. The present work compares the classic Sobek static test with three mineralogical static tests to assess the importance of sample mineralogy in acid mine drainage (AMD) prediction. We also investigated how experimental procedures related to static tests can influence prediction results. We used three synthetic tailings samples made by mixing well-characterized pure minerals in calibrated proportions. Although basically different in their principles and procedures, the modified Sobek and mineralogical static tests gave similar results. These AGP predictions were then validated by the use of a kinetic test. The kinetic test protocol was also modified in this study and the results obtained correlated well with the static test results, in contrast to the standard kinetic test protocol. The present work highlights the limitations of static and kinetic test procedures, and provides recommendations for a better use of these tests for more reliable AMD prediction.</description><subject>Acid mine drainage</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Earth Sciences</subject><subject>Ecotoxicology</subject><subject>Geology</subject><subject>Hydrogeology</subject><subject>Industrial Pollution Prevention</subject><subject>Kinetics</subject><subject>Mine drainage</subject><subject>Mine tailings</subject><subject>Mine wastes</subject><subject>Mineral Resources</subject><subject>Mineralogy</subject><subject>Minerals</subject><subject>Neutralizing</subject><subject>Predictions</subject><subject>Protocols</subject><subject>Static tests</subject><subject>Tailings</subject><subject>Technical Article</subject><subject>Test procedures</subject><subject>Water pollution</subject><subject>Water Quality/Water Pollution</subject><issn>1025-9112</issn><issn>1616-1068</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp10U1PAyEQBuCN0cRa_QHeSLx4WZ2BZZd6a-pXY41NrGeCLNRttlBhe-i_l7UejIknJvDMMMmbZecIVwhQXUcEyiAHZDnQYpTjQTbAEsscoRSHqQbK8xEiPc5OYlwBYFVSPsjcPJi60V3jHfGWjHVTk-fGGXIbVOPU0tyQ6XrjQ6ecNr3oH4Nq_XJHlKtJ92HIwsSOzIPvvPZtJNYH8tqprtHf4ik19HWv4ml2ZFUbzdnPOcze7u8Wk8d89vIwnYxnuWKl6HIDhjJtKiFqrhWrjXjnygrKrR0pi0U5EpxxFIJXlWG2SoYJay3qdFtaZMPscj93E_znNv0s103Upm2VM34bJXJaFFgUlCd68Yeu_Da4tF1SACWnICAp3CsdfIzBWLkJzVqFnUSQfQJyn4BMCcg-AdkvQfc9MVm3NOHX5H-bvgAUVIf2</recordid><startdate>20140301</startdate><enddate>20140301</enddate><creator>Bouzahzah, Hassan</creator><creator>Benzaazoua, Mostafa</creator><creator>Bussiere, Bruno</creator><creator>Plante, Benoit</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140301</creationdate><title>Prediction of Acid Mine Drainage: Importance of Mineralogy and the Test Protocols for Static and Kinetic Tests</title><author>Bouzahzah, Hassan ; Benzaazoua, Mostafa ; Bussiere, Bruno ; Plante, Benoit</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a368t-e0e23ce788d5ca3de8b5af825ff9af14698535188577e3f7ca338fff1c3516f13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Acid mine drainage</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Earth Sciences</topic><topic>Ecotoxicology</topic><topic>Geology</topic><topic>Hydrogeology</topic><topic>Industrial Pollution Prevention</topic><topic>Kinetics</topic><topic>Mine drainage</topic><topic>Mine tailings</topic><topic>Mine wastes</topic><topic>Mineral Resources</topic><topic>Mineralogy</topic><topic>Minerals</topic><topic>Neutralizing</topic><topic>Predictions</topic><topic>Protocols</topic><topic>Static tests</topic><topic>Tailings</topic><topic>Technical Article</topic><topic>Test procedures</topic><topic>Water pollution</topic><topic>Water Quality/Water Pollution</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bouzahzah, Hassan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Benzaazoua, Mostafa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bussiere, Bruno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Plante, Benoit</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution &amp; Environmental Quality</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Mine water and the environment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bouzahzah, Hassan</au><au>Benzaazoua, Mostafa</au><au>Bussiere, Bruno</au><au>Plante, Benoit</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prediction of Acid Mine Drainage: Importance of Mineralogy and the Test Protocols for Static and Kinetic Tests</atitle><jtitle>Mine water and the environment</jtitle><stitle>Mine Water Environ</stitle><date>2014-03-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>54</spage><epage>65</epage><pages>54-65</pages><issn>1025-9112</issn><eissn>1616-1068</eissn><abstract>Static tests, which compare the acid-generating potential and acid-neutralizing potential for a given mine waste (tailings or waste rocks), are characterized by a wide uncertainty zone in which it is impossible to accurately predict the acid-generating potential (AGP). Then, to better assess long-term AGP, kinetic tests are usually performed to provide more information about the reaction rates of the acid-generating and acid-neutralizing minerals. The present work compares the classic Sobek static test with three mineralogical static tests to assess the importance of sample mineralogy in acid mine drainage (AMD) prediction. We also investigated how experimental procedures related to static tests can influence prediction results. We used three synthetic tailings samples made by mixing well-characterized pure minerals in calibrated proportions. Although basically different in their principles and procedures, the modified Sobek and mineralogical static tests gave similar results. These AGP predictions were then validated by the use of a kinetic test. The kinetic test protocol was also modified in this study and the results obtained correlated well with the static test results, in contrast to the standard kinetic test protocol. The present work highlights the limitations of static and kinetic test procedures, and provides recommendations for a better use of these tests for more reliable AMD prediction.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><doi>10.1007/s10230-013-0249-1</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1025-9112
ispartof Mine water and the environment, 2014-03, Vol.33 (1), p.54-65
issn 1025-9112
1616-1068
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1524414425
source SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Acid mine drainage
Earth and Environmental Science
Earth Sciences
Ecotoxicology
Geology
Hydrogeology
Industrial Pollution Prevention
Kinetics
Mine drainage
Mine tailings
Mine wastes
Mineral Resources
Mineralogy
Minerals
Neutralizing
Predictions
Protocols
Static tests
Tailings
Technical Article
Test procedures
Water pollution
Water Quality/Water Pollution
title Prediction of Acid Mine Drainage: Importance of Mineralogy and the Test Protocols for Static and Kinetic Tests
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T20%3A24%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prediction%20of%20Acid%20Mine%20Drainage:%20Importance%20of%20Mineralogy%20and%20the%20Test%20Protocols%20for%20Static%20and%20Kinetic%20Tests&rft.jtitle=Mine%20water%20and%20the%20environment&rft.au=Bouzahzah,%20Hassan&rft.date=2014-03-01&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=54&rft.epage=65&rft.pages=54-65&rft.issn=1025-9112&rft.eissn=1616-1068&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10230-013-0249-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3224715391%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1500652080&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true