Search Documents

By Richard D. Begley

This paper will present the results of an analysis of several abandoned coal mine projects and includes field data for over a dozen different reclamation projects recently completed in the state of West . Virginia. The analysis was performed with the objective of summarizing and or classification of the environmental consequences with reference to the characteristics of the mining facilities (surface, underground, etc.). The analysis also addressed the itemized cost of remediation with respect to procedures, environmental concerns and time. The results of the analysis are that each abandoned coal mine site in West Virginia have/had many unique features and in most cases include a combination of environmental concerns that complicate comparisons. The study also revealed that the abandoned mine land program for mines abandoned prior to 1977 that is being financed by a tax on the production of coal, has produced many benefits for the state of West Virginia. This grant program administered by the Office of Surface Mining, has resulted in a high quality methodology of remediation that has been successful for many years in greatly minimizing and/or eliminating environmental concerns from abandoned coal mines.

Jan 1, 1997

By Anthony B. Szwilski, Dalip Sarin, Richard D. Begley

This paper will present the results of an analysis of several abandoned coal mine projects and includes field data for over a dozen different reclamation projects recently completed in the state of West Virginia. The analysis was performed with the objective of summarizing and or classification of the environmental consequences with reference to the characteristics of the mining facilities (surface, underground, etc.). The analysis also addressed the itemized cost of remediation with respect to procedures, environmental concerns and time. The results of the analysis are that each abandoned coal mine site in West Virginia have/had many unique features and in most cases include a combination of environmental concerns that complicate comparisons. The study also revealed that the abandoned mine land program for mines abandoned prior to 1977, that is being financed by a tax on the production of coal, has produced many benefits for the state of West Virginia. This grant program administered by the Office of Surface Mining, has resulted in a high quality methodology of remediation that has been successful for many years in greatly minimizing and/or eliminating environmental concerns from abandoned coal mines.

Feb 24, 1997

By N. K. Dumakor-Dupey, K. J. Bansah

"We made site visits to determine potential environmental issues caused by artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) in the Tarkwa Mining Area (TMA) of Ghana. Activities of the diggers were observed to degrade vegetation, land and water. Improper handling of mercury was also identified as a major threat to people and ecosystem. Large abandoned pits and trenches posed fall traps to farmers, hunters and wildlife. We argue that lack of adequate monitoring and regulatory enforcement by Ghanaian authorities, together with inappropriate mining processes, probably due to lack of technical expertise are contributing factors to the environmental issues of artisanal and small-scale mining in the TMA. INTRODUCTION Environmental degradation caused by artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) has been a major concern to many people and governments around the world. ASM is often associated with health, safety and environmental issues in communities where it is practiced (Kitula, 2006; Asiedu, 2013; Sousa et al., 2010). Some of the environmental issues that have been reported include land degradation, mercury contamination, cyanide release, and pollution of rivers/streams. These issues have been attributed to improper mining methods, inefficient technology, lack of technical training and environmental awareness, and lack of regulatory enforcement (Serfor-Armah et al., 2005; Bansah et al., 2016a; Hentschel et al., 2002). In Ghana, ASM typically occurs in rural communities, providing jobs to many people and contributing towards socioeconomic growth of the country (Banchirigah & Hilson, 2010; Bansah et al., 2016b; Osei-Kojo & Andrews, 2016). As a result of the environmental issues, many people have called on government to develop drastic measures to control ASM operations. It is in this regard that this paper examines potential environmental issues caused by ASM in the Tarkwa Mining Area in Ghana, and suggests mitigation measures to ensure environmental sustainability. ASM in the area comprises of registered (licensed) and unregistered (unlicensed) operations that adopt surface or underground mining methods to exploit gold-bearing materials. Surface operations typically involve clearing of vegetation, removal of overburden, excavation of mineral deposit, washing/grinding of excavated gravels and processing with mercury. Except grinding, washing and mercury recovery, underground operations are conducted below ground with limited impact on the surface. Alluvial mining is also commonly practiced in streams and along river banks. These activities can have devastating impact on biodiversity of the ecosystem. To achieve the objective for this study, field visits were made to ASM sites to observe operations and interact with diggers. Visits were also made to host communities of ASM and government officials to obtain their perspectives on ASM in relation to environmental impact. The study area (Tarkwa Mining Area) is located in the Western Region of Ghana (see Figure 1). It is endowed with natural resources such as gold and manganese. Hence, mining is the major economic activity in the area. ASM is widespread, with 15 registered operations and several unregistered mines. The environmental issues observed in the study have been grouped into three main categories: vegetation and land depletion; water quality and pollution issues; and mercury contamination issues."

Jan 1, 2017

By Robert L. P. Kleinmann

Mining has been a significant component of the Appalachian economy for about 200 years. The region continues to be adversely affected by the environmental degradation associated with these past activities. In addition, companies today are being denied permits at sites where acid generation appears likely. And air emission limitations at power plants now threaten the economic health of many moderate- to high-sulfur coal mines. Thus, when considering the environmental impacts of mining coal in Appalachia, it is important to consider abandoned and active mine issues. For example, abandoned mines generate acidic, iron-rich waters that adversely affect more than 6,400 km (4,000 miles) of rivers and streams in Appalachia. In contrast, operations that were active after the enactment of the 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) cause little water pollution. However, the costs of water treatment at such sites exceed $1 million a day. Even where water quality is not dimished, water supplies can be affected by mining. Subsidence-induced fractures can lower water table elevations or drain a surface stream dry. Subsidence can also cause damage to surface and subsurface structures.

Jan 1, 1995

By Thomas R. Mills

Under contract to the U. S. -Department of.-Interior, Office of Coal. Research, Hittman Associates recently completed a 16 month study of the environmental-factors associated with the siting, construction, and operation of large scale coal refineries. (1 2) The objective of this study was to identify the environmental effects and to define the magnitude of these effects and the approaches which can be used to mitigate adverse environmental consequences. In the study, the five major coal bearing regions of the country having reserves adequate to support a number of large scale coal refineries were considered. The regions considered were: Appalachian, Eastern Interior, Fort Union, Powder River, and Four Corners.

Jan 1, 1975

By Michael Stanwood

Project feasibility no longer involves just technical and economic viability-today's feasibility study must include environmental, regulatory, and political considerations as well. While the US now appears at least somewhat committed to developing synthetic fuels, including oil shale, it is the environmental issues, rules, regulations, and guidelines that will play the major role in determining the timing, magnitude, and overall scope of synfuel development in the coming years. The key environmental obstacle affecting oil shale development is uncertainty. Although oil shale may be the most environmentally studied "new" technology in the world, little is known with much degree of certainty about potential environmental consequences of one full-scale commercial facility, or the effects of a massive development effort in a relatively pristine and sparsely populated area. Other primary environmental uncertainties include: • Environmental compliance costs and their effects on investment decisions; • The reliability and acceptability of anticipated pollution control technologies; and • The confusing, time-consuming environmental regulatory framework, which requires more than 100 permits, clearances, and reviews before development occurs. This discussion will focus on the latter uncertainty, and will describe he current status of potential constraints to oil shale industry development in five areas: water availability; water quality degradation; air quality degradation; reclamation and spent shale disposal; and community impacts.

Jan 1, 1981

By Clayton J. Parr

Introduction This chapter contains brief discussions of various environmental protection requirements that relate to underground mining operations. Environmental disturbances at an underground mining operation can result from subsidence; water discharges; waste dumps; construction and operation of access roads and utility lines; construction and operation of surface facilities such as maintenance shops, bathhouses, and storage yards; and emanation of dust and noise from surface crushers. Construction and operation of a concentrator or washing plant may result in the emission of air pollutants, the discharge of water pollutants, the creation of noise, and disturbance of the surface. Tailings ponds can be the source of fugitive dust.1 This chapter is not intended to provide a detailed discussion and analysis of laws and regulations dealing with environmental protection. Rather, its purpose is to provide the engineer with a basic awareness of the existence and nature of such laws and regulations, as well as the procedural requirements that must be followed in complying with them. The body of law relating to environmental protection has grow" very rapidly and should continue to do to for some time. Because many of the laws have been enacted recently, numerous court decisions are being rendered to resolve disputes over their interpretation. Hence, the reader is cautioned to be alert for subsequent modifications of statutes and regulations, and new case law. Rules and regulations pertaining to environmental protection are implemented at all governmental levels. The most widely known laws are those enacted by the federal government that have nationwide applicability. However, separate requirements exist in each state, county, and municipality. Because of their general applicability, federal laws are discussed most extensively in this chapter. Ownership of the property is the most significant factor considered in ascertaining what rules govern the conduct of an operation thereon. If the land is held under lease, reference to the lease terms must be made in the first instance to determine what obligations must be met in order to prevent default and possible loss of the property. If the land is held under a lease from the federal government, the operator is subject not only to compliance with the lease terms, but also to a large body of laws and administrative regulations that pertain generally to the conduct of mining operations on land held under federal leases. Although operations on unpatented mining claims, the legal title to which remains in the federal government, are not subject to the same rules and regulations that are applicable to operations conducted pursuant to federal leases or permits, they soon will be governed by a special set of regulations that provide for protection of surface resource.2 Operations conducted on lands leased from a state usually are subject to numerous environmental protection requirements specified in the lease terms, in addition to rules and regulations promulgated by the state agency having jurisdiction over mining on state lands. Operations conducted on privately held lands are subject to fewer such requirements. Leases from private parties sometimes have environmental protection and reclamation requirements written into them, but generally to a far lesser extent than governmental leases. Operations conducted on properties owned by the operator are subject only to those laws and regulations that have general applicability without regard to land ownership. COAL SURFACE MINING CONTROL AND RECLAMATION ACT OF 1977 Introduction On Aug. 3, 1977, the Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 was signed into law.3 It governs coal-mine operations on private lands, as well as on public lands. The Act is pervasive in its scope and is extremely long and complex. The basic purpose of the Act is to control and minimize the environmental effects of surface coal mining. Surface coal-mining operations are defined as activities conducted on the surface of lands in connection with a surface coal mine and surface impacts incident to an underground coal mine.4 The Act is administered by the Secretary of the Interior through a new agency named the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.5 The Act contains detailed environmental protection standards and reclamation requirements, and it establishes a permit system for all surface coal-mining operations. Mining in certain areas and under ceri-in conditions is restricted or prohibited, and a mechanism for enforcement by the states is provided. Stiff penalties are provided in the event of noncompliance. Implementation Schedule Nonfederal Lands: As required by Section 501 of the Act, interim regulations setting mining and reclamation performance standards based on and incorporating standards set out in Section 502(c) were adopted effective Dec. 13, 1977.6 They will. be incorporated as amendments to Chapter VII of Title 30, Code of Federal Regulations. Permanent regulatory procedures for surface coal-mining and reclamation operations performance standards, which were directed to be promulgated by Aug. 3, 1978, were published in proposed form on Sept. 10, 1978. 7 They govern surface coal-mining operations in any state until a permanent state or federal program is adopted. As of Feb. 3, 1978, all new operations, and as of May 3, 1978, all existing surface coal-mining operations, on lands on which such operations are regulated by a

Jan 1, 1982

By James A. Holtkamp

Environmental regulation in Mexico has matured dramatically and effectively in the last decade. The gap between environmental regulation in the United States and Mexico is rapidly narrowing. From a regulatory perspective, it is no longer necessarily less burdensome to operate in Mexico. Principal laws and regulations Mexico has two principal environmental regulatory systems. The first consists of the laws and regulations governing domestic activities. The second consists of the treaties, agreements and understandings between the United States and Mexico dealing with transboundary pollution and maquiladoras (see Maquiladora Decree, next column). The following are the principal major laws and regulations governing environmental protection in Mexico: General Law: The General Law on Ecological Balance and Protection of the Environment, effective March 1, 1988. Water Regulations: Regulations for the Prevention and Control of Water Pollution, effective May 29, 1973. Environmental Impact Regulations: Regulations of the General Law on Ecological Balance and Protection of the Environment, regarding Environmental Impact, effective June 8, 1988.

Jan 1, 1994

By J. A. Holtkamp

Environmental regulation in Mexico has matured dramatically and effectively in the last decade. The gap between environmental regulation in the United States and Mexico is rapidly narrowing, so much so that it is no longer necessarily less burdensome to operate in Mexico from a regulatory perspective. This paper is intended to give a general overview of the system of environmental regulation in Mexico. The actual application of Mexican laws and regulations governing the environment to a specific operation will require a much more detailed review of the applicable environmental standards.

Jan 1, 1994

By William P. Blacutt

This paper examines Bolivia's General Environmental Bill recently passed by Congress: a multi-purpose law with two primary objectives: a) the protection and conservation of the environment, and b) the promotion of sustainable development. In this law, environmental benefits are emphasized by stating general principles, not by attempting to define the means. Regulations are left to the writing of subsequent complementary codes. This paper shows that much of the controversy surrounding the legislation disappears when it is seen as guide rather than an operational part of Bolivia's industrial policy. In essence, the law addresses recent environmental awareness in a region more anxious than ever to speed economic growth.

Jan 1, 1992

By M. S. Bickers

Prior to 1970, the environmental liabilities associated with mine construction and management were few. Mostly, they were aimed at health and safety matters. At that time less than two dozen codes were incorporated into the engineering design and they were somewhat static and well known by the engineering designers and managers. These codes issued by governmental agencies and professional associations are listed in Table 1

Jan 1, 1988

By J. S. Walstrom

Debate on an appropriate, acceptable method of regulating mine and mineral processing wastes has been ongoing since Congress passed the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) on October 21. 1976. Final regulatory determination on which mineral processing wastes are excluded from the RCRA hazardous waste regulations under the Bevill amendment was made by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on June 13, 1991. Regardless of whether a mining or mineral processing facility?s waste stream(s) lost or maintained its exclusion status under the Bevill amendment, that facility can expect more stringent regulation of affected waste streams. These more stringent regulations will be added to an already complex regulatory maze, which includes the Clean Air Act (CAA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), as well as state and municipal environmental regulations.

Jan 1, 1992

By M. Murphy

The multibillion dollar cost of cleaning up thousands of environmentally contaminated sites across the country created by decades of inadequate disposal of hazardous waste has led to a search for "deep-pocket" sources of cleanup funds. The resul1:: is the emergence of a growing body of law that could have a profound impact on commercial financing transactions and other investment activities when present or past owners of contaminated property are involved.

Jan 1, 1988

By J. Singh

Recently, a Maryland bank became the overnight owner of a toxic waste site through a foreclosure. The original property owners had operated a crash and garbage business on the site and obtained loans for their business venture through the bank. In 1980, their son purchased the property from his parents with mortgage monies obtained from the bank. Failing to make his loan payments, the son defaulted on the mortgage. The bank foreclosed on the property and eventually purchased the property at a foreclosure sale. Shortly after the bank's purchase of the site, toxic wastes were found on the property--the result of disposing solid wastes on the site for 10 years. The bank declined responsibility for contaminating the site and consequently for its cleanup. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) took corrective actions to clean up the site. EPA then handed the bill to the bank, citing the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 (more commonly known as "Superfund"). CERCLA imposes liability on the current owners and operators of hazardous waste sites.

Jan 1, 1988

By M. Kawulak

The necessity to protect the environment can limit mining activities and make some areas less attractive for the prospecting and exploration of mineral deposits. In Poland, the main environmental factors that restrain Irumng are: 1. Regional A Protection of the landscape B. Protection of ground water from contamination and depletion 2. Local A Conservation of fertile soils B. Conservation of forest resources C. Preservation of natural, cultural, and historical monuments The regional factors listed above that can limit mining are presented on a map of Poland. These data, combined with maps of known and potential mineral deposits, make it possible to delineate general levels of limitation for various mining-related activities varying from "no existing environmental limitations" to "no allowed industrial activity" As an example, a compilation of such data is presented for lignite exploration and mining in Poland. Lignite deposits occur within Upper Paleocene to Upper Miocene clastic strata at depths ranging from a few to 300 m. The thickness of the lignite is generally a few meters, but can locally reach over 100 m within grabens. As a result, the overburden-to-lignite thickness ratio varies from less than 1 to over 20. Within the same Tertiary strata, and within overlying Quaternary strata, several aquifers exist that produce good quality water that may be contaminated or depleted during lignite mining. The protection of these ground waters is the main factor limiting lignite mining and should be addressed in mining and environmental policy and planning.

Jan 1, 1996

By J. N. Economopoulos

The mining industry is becoming increasingly aware of environmental issues and has made big forward steps in the field of environmental management. Legislation, social pressure and competition introduced changes in the industry?s policies and practices in order to conform to the new standards of environmental performance. The paper addresses the need for an integrated and systematic approach to the issues of environmental management within the mining industry.

Jan 1, 2002

By Raymond E. Krauss

The McLaughlin Mine is a world class epithermal gold deposit located in the coastal thrust fault of Northern California, U.S.A. Homestake adopted a proactive strategy in the permitting of the Mine. Extensive environmental baseline studies were undertaken. Engineering and process alternatives were evaluated for environmental impact along with other factors. A unique pressure oxidation process was selected. Screening studies were conducted as a basis for the selection of waste rock and tailings disposal sites. Project engineering and permitting were fast tracked. Construction required eighteen months, and the first gold bar was poured in March of 1985, six years after the initial discovery. Project facilities are designed and operated so as to minimize environmental impacts. A comprehensive monitoring program demonstrates permit compliance. Reclamation of the site is ongoing throughout the Mine's twenty year life. Nonmined lands are managed to maximize wildlife habitat value.

Jan 1, 1990

By R. E. Krauss

The McLaughlin Mine is a world class epithermal gold deposit located in the coastal thrust fault of Northern California, U.S.A. Homestake adopted a proactive strategy in the permitting of the Mine. Extensive environmental base line studies were undertaken. Engineering and process alternatives were evaluated for environmental impact along with other factors. A unique pressure oxidation process was selected. Screening studies were conducted as a basis for the selection of waste rock and tailings disposal sites. Project engineering and permitting were fast tracked. Construction required eighteen months and the first gold bar was poured in Parch of 1985, six years after the initial discovery. Project facilities are designed and operated so as to minimize environmental impacts. A comprehensive monitering program demonstrates permit compliance. Reclamation of the site is ongoing throughout the Mine?s twenty year life. Non-mined lands are managed to maximize wildlife habitat value.

Jan 1, 1990

By Campbell J. McKenzie

Following on from the successful completion of three exploration programs and the discovery of two new inactive Seafloor Massive Sulphide (SMS) deposits within New Zealand?s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), Neptune is now poised to take the next step from explorer to developer. Neptune considers that commercialization of SMS deposits represents the future of the mining industry, providing a new source of metals to the world economy, and enabling host countries to benefit from this new industry. Neptune recognizes that marine biodiversity is among the greatest treasures of New Zealand. The geological isolation, range and complexity of habitats, and a number of major ocean currents that influence New Zealand have created diverse marine communities. Neptune, recognizing both the environmental importance of marine biodiversity and the value it provides to all New Zealanders has made commitments to ensure sustainable development. There are many unanswered questions regarding how the marine environment may be affected by SMS development, however best practice environmental management is a key aspect of the Company?s approach to our activities and the code for ?Environmental Management of Marine Mining? prepared by the IMMS has played a part in this approach. Neptune has close relationships with the scientific community to ensure that appropriate environmental strategies and plans are developed in order to minimize the effects of our activities on the environment.

Jan 1, 2008

By A. A. Davis

The decade of the 70?s saw a series of landmark environmental resource programs enacted by the Congress. Many states followed suit, so that by the end of the decade air quality, water pollution, and the conservation of other natural resources, including minerals, were the subject of a wide-ranging body of laws, policies, regulations, and procedures. Many of the actions required or permitted by this rule-making involved areas for which adequate information and substantial experience were not available. Moreover, goals and objectives were sometimes established which were enormously difficult to achieve technically, or of such formidable expense as to cause concern about their consequences in the marketplace. It is therefore hardly surprising that one product of all this activity has been a mass of litigation. Court dockets are crowded with suits and counter-suits involving both substantive and procedural aspects of environmental protection. Indeed, it is probably fair to say that the volume and range of environmentally-related disputes brought before the courts parallels that generated by the civil rights movement a decade ago. There were also some new dimensions to the environmental movement. For the first time, the national environmental policy act required agencies to prepare environmental impact statements when proposed projects or activities would have substantial impacts on environmental resources. Another requirement of many of the new programs mandated meaningful citizen participation in public decision-making. Here, as elsewhere, the purpose was admirable, but guidelines were vague, and the result often was inaction, polarization, and litigation.

Jan 1, 1986