The Mine Water Leaching Procedure: Evaluating the Environmental Risk of Backfilling Mines with Coal Ash

  • Paul F. Ziemkiewicz
  • Jennifer S. Simmons
  • Anna S. Knox
Chapter

Abstract

Federal and State regulations encourage reduction of industrial waste streams to decrease the acreage consumed by landfills. In particular, applications that resolve environmental problems are recognized by state policy as “beneficial uses.” These large-scale projects may involve filling surface and underground coal mines with ash to address hydraulic problems, acid mine drainage, pit backfilling and subsidence. In some states, those mine filling projects classified as beneficial are not subject to industrial waste disposal conditions such as liners, leachate collection and monitoring. Coal Combustion Byproducts (CCBs) are attractive for such applications because they constitute a source of low cost alkalinity and favorable economics resulting from transport back to the mine in otherwise empty coal haulage trucks. The environmental risk of land filling CCBs is generally evaluated by the Toxic Characteristics Leaching Procedure (TCLP) or the Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP). However, there is doubt regarding the applicability of these tests to long-term CCBs leaching behavior in groundwater associated with coal mines. The Mine Water Leaching Procedure (MWLP) was developed to provide a site specific risk assessment tool. The MWLP procedure is presented in this chapter as a study case and comparisons with TCLP results were made.

Keywords

Acid Mine Drainage Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure Coal Combustion Product Leach Cycle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Adriano, D.C., A.L. Page, A.A. Elseewi, A.C. Chang, and I Straughan. 1980. “Utilization and Disposal Of Fly Ash and Other Coal Residues in Terrestrial Ecosystems: A Review.” Journal of Environmental Quality. 9: 333–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ainsworth, C.C., and D. Rai. 1987. Chemical Characterization of Fossil Fuel Wastes, Report EA-5321, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo, California, USA.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    American Coal Ash Association. 1998. Innovative Applications Of Coal Combustion Products (CCPs). Alexandria, Virginia: American Coal Ash Association, Inc.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1988. Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Section 4: Construction, Vol. 04. 01: Cement, Lime, Gypsum.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ashby, James C. 2001. “Injecting Alkaline Lime Sludge and FGD Material Into Underground Mines For Acid Abatement.” In Proceedings of the 22 nd West Virginia Surface Mine Drainage Task Force Symposium, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA. April 3–4.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bhumbla, D.K. 1991. “Ameliorative Effect of Fly Ashes.” Ph.D. dissertation. West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bhumbla, D.K., R.N. Singh, and R.F. Keefer. 2000. “Coal Combustion By-Product Utilization For Land Reclamation.” In Reclamation Of Drastically Disturbed Lands, edited by R.I. Barnhisel, R.G. Darmody, and W.I. Daniels. Madison, Wisconsin, USA: American Society of Agronomy, Inc., Crop Science Society of America, Inc., and Soil Science Society of America, Inc.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Butalia, Tarunjit S., and William E. Wolfe. 2000. “Market Opportunities For Utilization Of Ohio Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) and Other Coal Combustion Products (CCPs), Volume 1-Executive Summary.” Available at http://ccohio.eng.ohio-state.edu/ccpohio/Marketing/Volumel.PDF
  9. 9.
    Capp, J.P. 1978. “Power Plant Fly Ash Utilization For Land Reclamation in Eastern United States.” In Reclamation Of Drastically Disturbed Lands, edited by F.W. Schaller and P. Sutton. Madison, Wisconsin, USA: American Society of Agronomy, Inc.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chang, A.L., L.J. Lund, A.L. Page, and J.E. Warneke. 1977. “Physical Properties Of Fly Ash Amended Soils.” Journal of Environmental Quality. 6: 267–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dhaliwal, S.S., R.N. Singh, D.K. Bhumbla, P. Saini, and R.F. Keefer. 1995. “Effects of Weathering On Trace Metal Distribution In Fly Ash Amended Mine Soils.” In Proceedings of the 11 th International Symposium On Use and Management Of Coal Combustion By-Prodcts (CCBs), Vol. 2, Orlando, Florida. American Coal Ash Association, Washington, DC, and Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California, USA. 57–1 to 57–11.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Elseewi, A.A., I.R. Straughan, and A.L. Page. 1980. “Sequential Cropping Of Fly Ash Amended Soils: Effects On Soil Chemical Properties and Yield and Elemental Composition Of Plants.” The Science of the Total Environment. 15: 247–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    EPRI, Allegheny Energy Supply and US Department of Energy. 2001. Omega Mine Injection Program: Monongalia County, West Virginia. #1004032.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hamric, R. 1993. “Utilization of CFB Ash In Reclamation To Prevent Post-Mining AMD.” In Proceedings of 14 th Annual West Virginia Surface Mine Drainage Task Force Symposium. Morgantown, West Virginia, USA. April 7–8.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hodgson, D.K., and R. Holliday. 1966. “The Agronomic Properties Of Pulverized Fuel Ash.” Chemistry and Industry. 20: 785–790.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hodgson, D.K., and D.A. Brown. 1982. “Nuetralization and Dissolution Of High-Calcium Fly Ash.” Journal of Environmental Quality. 11: 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jastrow, J.D., C.A. Zimmerman, A.J. Dvorak, and R.R. Hinchman. 1981. “Plant Growth and Trace Element Uptake On Acidic Coal Refuse Amended With Lime Or Fly Ash.” Journal of Environmental Quality. 10: 154–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Keefer, R.F., R.N. Singh, O.L. Bennett, and D.J. Horvath. 1983. “Chemical Composition Of Plants and Soils From Vegetated Mine Soils.” In Proceeding of the 1983 Symposium for Surface Mine Hydrology, Sedimentology, and Reclamation. University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentcky, USA.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Martens, D.C. 1971. “Availability Of Plants Nutrients in Fly Ash.” Compost Science. 12 (6): 15–18.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Muraka, I.P., S.V. Mattigod, and R.F. Keefer. 1993. “An Overview of Electric Power Institute (EPRI) Research Related To Effective Management of Coal Combustion Residues.” In Trace Elements in Coal and Combustion Residues, edited by R.F. Keefer and K.S. Sajwan, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Phung, H.T., L.J. Lund, and A.L. Page. 1978. “Potential Use Of Fly Ash As a Liming Material.” In Environmental Chemistry and Cycling Processes, edited by D.C. Adrinao, and L. Brisbin. U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, Virginia, USA: Tech. Inform. Cent. Publ. CONF-760429.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Punshon, T., A.S. Knox, D.C. Adrian, J.C. Seaman, and J.T. Weber. 1999. “Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) Residue: Potential Applications and Environmental Issues.” In Biogeochemistry Of Trace Elements In Coal Combustion Byproducts, edited by Sajwan et al. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rafalko, L., and P. Petzrick. 1999. “The Western Maryland Coal Combustion By-product/Acid Mine Drainage Initiative, The Winding Ridge Project.” In Proceeding: The 13 th International Symposium on Use and Management of Coal Combustion Products Volume 3 (TR-111829-V3). January 1999, Orlando, Florida paper 70: pp 70–1 to 70–16.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Roy, W.R., and R.A. Griffin. 1982. “A Proposed Classification System For Coal Fly Ash In Mulitdisciplinary Research.” Journal of Environmental Quality. 11, 563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Singh, R.N., D.K. Bhumbla, R.F. Keefer, and D.J. Horvath. 1992. “Improving Crop Production By Altering Chemical Properties Of Mineland With Industrial Wastes.” In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Nutrient Management, edited by M.S. Bajwa and P.S. Sidhu. Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India. 366–380.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tishmack, Jody K. 1996. “Bulk Chemical and Mineral Characteristics of Coal Combustion By-Products (CCB).” In Proceedings of: Coal Combustion By-Products Associated With Coal Mining—Interactive Forum: Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, October 29–31.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1992. Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure. SW 846, Method 1311. http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/main.html
  28. 28.
    Yan, Jinying, Luis Moreno, and Ivars Neretnieks. 2000. “The Long-Term Acid Neutralizing Capacity Of Steel Slag.” Department of Chemical Engineering and Technology. Royal Institute of Technology. SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden: Elsevier Science Ltd.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ziemkiewicz, P.F. and Black, D.C. 2000. “Disposal and use of coal combustion byproducts in mined environments.” Paper presented at the 2000 ICARD Conference, May 21–24 2000, Denver CO, USA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul F. Ziemkiewicz
    • 1
  • Jennifer S. Simmons
    • 1
  • Anna S. Knox
    • 2
  1. 1.West Virginia Water Research Institute National Mine Land Reclamation CenterWest Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA
  2. 2.Savannah River Ecology LaboratoryUniversity of GeorgiaAikenUSA

Personalised recommendations