首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


Life cycle assessment analysis of active and passive acid mine drainage treatment technologies
Institution:1. AgResearch Limited, Ruakura Research Centre, Private Bag 3123, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand;2. University of Waikato, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand;3. AgResearch Limited, Invermay Research Centre, Private Bag 50034, Mosgiel 9053, New Zealand;1. GNS Science, 1 Fairway Drive, Lower Hutt 5010, New Zealand;2. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, 266 Woods Hole Road, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA;3. Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University, 75 Geoinformatics Centre, 61 Route 9W, Palisades, NY 10964-8000, USA;4. Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, NOAA, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115-6349, USA;1. Department of Geology, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand;2. GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, D-24148 Kiel, Germany;3. ACEBB and SGC, School of Biological Sciences, Benham Bldg DX 650 312, The University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia;4. Department of Botany, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand;5. GNS Science, PO Box 30-368, Lower Hutt, New Zealand
Abstract:Acid mine drainage (AMD), resulting from open-cast coal mining, is currently one of the largest environmental challenges facing the mining industry. In this study, a life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with the construction, operation and maintenance of different AMD treatment options typically employed. LCA is a well-reported tool but is not documented for AMD treatment systems despite their ubiquitous implementation worldwide. This study conducted detailed LCA analysis for various passive and active AMD treatment approaches implemented or considered at a major coal mine in New Zealand using a comparative functional unit of kg acidity removed per day for each treatment option. Eight treatment scenarios were assessed including active limestone and hydrated lime treatments, and compared to passive treatments using limestone and waste materials such as mussel shells. Both midpoint and endpoint LCA impact categories were assessed. Generally, the active treatment scenarios demonstrated greater LCA impacts compared to an equivalent level of treatment for the passive treatment approaches. Lime slaking had the greatest LCA impacts, while passive treatment approaches incurred consistently less impacts except for one passive treatment with a purchased energy scenario. A 50% reduction in transportation distances resulted in the lowest LCA impacts for all scenarios. This study highlights the importance of evaluating the environmental and social impacts of AMD treatment for the mining industry.
Keywords:Acid mine drainage  Life cycle assessment  Passive treatment  Active treatment  Midpoint assessment  Endpoint assessment
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号