Talk:Acid mine drainage

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Update[edit]

I've noticed that quite a few of the links are out of date or no longer exist. Could someone fix this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flan318 (talk • contribs) 18:51, August 26, 2007 (UTC)


A pH of -2? can someone verify this?--Deelkar 02:42, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yes. There is no theoretical limit on pH in either direction. I did apparently have the number wrong. It looks like -3.6 was the actual record low.
http://ca.water.usgs.gov/water_quality/acid/
Also see Edwards et al Chemical Geology 169 (2000) 383-397
I'll fix this and add the link. Jmeppley 21:17, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ok that's what Textbook science gets you. Many thanks for the correction, and the interesting link! --Deelkar 04:10, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The above USGS link is broken. Another link to a relevant article is here. Incidentally, I know Kirk Nordstrom personally and attended a talk he gave about Iron Mountain, where the extremely acid water is generated. Simply walking into the underground workings and collecting samples is very risky, due to the highly corrosive nature of the waters there.Captain Selenium (talk) 19:08, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Acid Mine or Acid Rock?[edit]

Acid Rock Drainage seems like a more generalized term, but Acid Mine Drainage gets more google hits. Opinions? SReynhout 22:41, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has always been Acid Mine for me and all my coleagues who have to manage the problem across the UK. I guess it might depend on whether your approach is from the environmental impact, as in my case, or from a geological view. I would stick with Acid mine water if the choice was mine not least because most of the problems are associated with mines and their products. Velela 16:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Although the term perhaps originated from work related to "mine" drainage, it has become increasingly acknowledged as a more widespread environmental phenomena as the same drainage problems occur with any large scale ground disturbance and exposure of sulphide minerals to oxygen. Transportation corridors, large buildings, landscaping, foundations for wind farms as well as mine tailings and drainage can cause ARD. It is not a more general term, just one which better characterizes the environmental impact of ground disturbance. Like many issues it's important that the public recognize the broader implications of their use of land and not just assume one sector or group is solely responsible for negative impacts. [user:BGrant] July 2007.
I agree that acid rock drainage is the more generic term, and should be the first title used. Acid Mine Drainage is a subset of it, and could eventually become a WP:SPINOFF. Although AMD may be the predominant form, ARD from highway construction is receiving additional attention, particularly after the very expensive problems on Interstate 99 in Pennsylvania. Dhaluza (talk) 18:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ARD was introduced as a term after it was appreciated that acidic drainage can be generated from disturbed rock at non-mining site, as described above. I think the expansion of the Halifax Airport runway was one of the early examples that brought about the change. There are also examples of natural outcrops of sulfide minerals that are oxidizing and generating acidic drainage.
It is important to note that there is also a political subtext to this issue. Those who are favourable to mining tend to use the more generalized term ARD, intending to diffuse away responsibility. In contrast, environmentalists and mining opponents often insist on AMD, wishing to strictly associate acid drainage with mining activity. In North America, common usage has shifted from AMD to ARD, except among environmentalist groups. Captain Selenium (talk) 18:54, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your last comment, I regularly see ARD used in North America with regards to effluents which do not originate at mines. My opinion on this is that the article should be titled Acid Rock Drainage with a disambiguation sentence in the opening, While having Acid Mine Drainage redirect to the ARD article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.122.30.165 (talk) 22:20, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seems the bulk of the article is about mine drainage problems, so the name is appropriate. Perhaps the non-mine related material should be be in a section by itself and if it grows big enough then a separate article could be written. Currently the non-mine related bits are unsourced and adding references supporting them should be a priority. Vsmith (talk) 23:11, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't comment on the use outside of science but I am fairly certain that we should switch to acid rock drainage. To put the debate to rest we could contact someone from the international conference for acid rock drainage to see why they chose that name, or simply agree that mining is the primary cause of ARD but mining is not part of ARD. Not to mention I think that using the term acid mine drainage has a bit of a negative light on mining and based on that alone it should be changed to a more neutral term. Yes we all know mining causes ARD and that's important to mention, but it is more important to talk about how it's formed, what it's effects are, etc. If we focus on those topics then I don't think any of the mentioned mining aspects are that important to the topic anyways. The only section that seems to be specific about mining is the "list of selected acid mine drainage sites worldwide" which we can see from other comments is too long and could be much much longer. The best course of action would be to remove the mentions of mining from this article and create a subsection on mining induced ARD and change the list of notable cases to it's own page as well. We would use the current article for the science of ARD and focus on the chemistry and treatment.Jeffery.D.Sparks (talk) 07:46, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of sites getting out of hand[edit]

The List of AMD sites is getting quite lengthy. As the article notes, there are thousands of such sites. We should limit the list to sites with wiki articles or citations documenting the AMD problem. Plazak (talk) 11:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Without effort, I could double the present list by sitting down and writing for a half-hour. Even doubling the entries would only present but a fraction of the known sites generating acid drainage. It's probably best to list only a few high profile cases (e.g., Iron Mountain or Berkeley Pit or Wheal Jane) and otherwise refer to the best estimated number of sites in a given geographic area.Captain Selenium (talk) 20:35, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the best option is to change this section to it's own article on the list of notable cases so that we can remove any mentions of mining from this article other than the occurrences which would redirect to the main article.Jeffery.D.Sparks (talk) 07:34, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oxidation state of Fe in FeS2[edit]

I am curious about the chemical equation for the production of iron sulfate and sulfuric acid from the iron sulfide. My confusion is that the Iron Sulfide is written as FeS2 which implies the Fe has a +4 oxidation state or that the compound is charged. I did not think Iron could have any oxidation state besides +2 and +3.Stevemsmith (talk) 17:35, 14 February 2013 (UTC)stevemsmith[reply]

See Pyrite#Formal oxidation states for pyrite marcasite and arsenopyrite. Cheers, Bah dhara (talk) 01:36, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1st image caption confusing for page glancers without linik[edit]

Linked "yellow boy" of 1st image caption to section describing.

Was about to post the following here until I found wherewithall to scroll down:

This desperately needs clarification, if someone would be so kind.

Found nothing at either of these regarding this context:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/boy#Noun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_%28disambiguation%29

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.217.207.105 (talk) 19:06, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Acid mine drainage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:57, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Acid mine drainage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:18, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evaluation of Content and Quality[edit]

Content Evaluation

The material for this article is broken up and organized into understandable sections, starting with describing what it is and how it occurs, then describing what effects it has before finally explaining how we can treat it. The presentation is understandable. Some of ending sections seem like they were added at the list minute, with 1 or two sources each section. The topic is covered fairly comprehensively. While it covers the effects that acid mine drainage has on the water, the article doesn't really address how it harms the environment. The article is well referenced, with many of them being articles from scientific journals or reports written by agencies. One of the references refers to a Bucknell University news article, another to a New York Times article. The content could be improved with more sources. Many of the paragraphs have only one or two sources.

Content Quality

This article does have an introduction. While it is understandable, it does not summarize all of the key points. The sections regarding treatment, the metagenomic study and the "microbe and drug discovery" is not referenced to in the introduction. There are several headings, with the larger headings have several subheadings, making it easier to understand how the material is divided. This article contains only images, which are seen mostly in the first half of the article. There are no images in the treatment section or the sections after it. The foot notes are in the appropriate place. The coverage is neutral, with facts being emphasized. Most of the references are reliable, coming from peer-reviewed scientific journals or agency reports. Some of the references are news articles. At471413 (talk) 22:01, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Proposed merge with Uranium acid mine drainage[edit]

I propose that Uranium Acid Mine Drainage be merged into Acid mine drainage. The content in the Uranium Acid Mine Drainage article could easily be included as a section in the more mature Acid mine drainage article. 2620:117:503F:97:0:0:0:D016 (talk) 20:31, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed merge template lovkal (talk) 19:12, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, you didn't "fix" it; you put it back. I removed it, as it got no traction whatsoever after 3 months' time (which, quite likely, is because it's a very poor idea. Joefromrandb (talk) 21:29, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Negative pH[edit]

Hi. I noticed this line in the article "Negative pH occurs when water evaporates from already acidic pools thereby increasing the concentration of hydrogen ions" That's not true at all. The reason for negative pH according to "Quantitative Chemical Analysis 9th Ed." by Daniel C. Harris is that the activity coefficient of hydrogen ions increases hugely as the ionic strength of a solution increases. Because acid mine drainage has a very high concentration of sulfate and metal ions the ionic strength is very high. I hope this will help you improve this page. Science Is My Life (talk) 15:11, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Acid_mine_drainage&oldid=1197920737"