Hydrologic Characteristics of a 35-Year-Old Underground Mine Pool

2007 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 150-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jay W. Hawkins ◽  
Mike Dunn
Keyword(s):  
2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 487-503
Author(s):  
Jay W. Hawkins ◽  
◽  
Eric F. Perry ◽  
Mike Dunn

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (24) ◽  
pp. 15-19
Author(s):  
O.Yu. Kozlov ◽  
◽  
V.V. Kozlov ◽  
V.V. Agafonov ◽  
◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 34-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Kalybekov ◽  
◽  
K.B. Rysbekov ◽  
A.A. Toktarov ◽  
O.M. Otarbaev ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 581-584
Author(s):  
Shu-min XIONG ◽  
Li-guan WANG ◽  
Zhong-qiang CHEN ◽  
Jian-hong CHEN

1996 ◽  
Vol 34 (10) ◽  
pp. 141-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. P. Maree ◽  
G. J. van Tonder ◽  
P. Millard ◽  
T. C. Erasmus

Traditionally acid mine water is neutralised with lime (Ca(OH)2). Limestone (CaCO3) is a cheaper alternative for such applications. This paper describes an investigation aimed at demonstrating that underground mine water can be neutralised with limestone in a fluidised-bed. The contact time required between the limestone and the acid water, chemical composition of water before and after treatment, and economic feasibility of the fluidised bed neutralisation process are determined. A pilot plant with a capacity of 10k1/h was operated continuously underground in a gold mine. The underground water could be neutralised effectively using the limestone process. The pH of the water was increased from less than 3 to more than 7, the alkalinity of the treated water was greater than 120 mg/l (as CaCO3) and the contact time required between mine water and limestone was less than 10 min (the exact contact time depends on the limestone surface area). Chemical savings of 56.4% can be achieved compared to neutralisation with lime.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document