Here is a new document from the US EPA on treating mine-affected waters. Free to download at this link and worth so doing.
The document is titled: Reference Guide to Treatment Technologies for Mining-Influenced Water (EPA 505-F-12-001).
I read it and found it pretty comprehensive, although I am no expert in the topic. Still, there appears to be much need for such a survey and I am sure many will find it useful and informative.
Not that mining is the only place needing water treatment technologies. As the North Carolina folk have determined there is groundwater contamination at all their ash disposal sites. See this link where the following is written:
More ground water supplies around the state may be contaminated by coal ash. Those are the findings of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Resources.
Director Tom Reeder told the state’s environmental review commission further examination beyond the Dan River spill indicates that trouble may be found in other parts of the state.
“We’ve known that for a long time now. Yeah, there is some level of ground water contamination at every coal ash facility,” he said.
The Dan River impact by spillage from one such facility has prompted these “revelations.” Nothing like a major failure to shock officials into action!
Although there is still much muddle. Today I spoke with folk doing a closure plan. Their approach is to compare the cost of doing nothing at closure (no covers) and treating lots of seepage versus low permeability covers and little treatment. The fallacy of this comparison is that limited seepage implies limited treatment. In fact, low seepage may be more contaminated than high seepage: the water has more time to pick up constituents. So much for elementary logic!
Let us know you perspectives and experiences.