Sizing and performance estimation of coal mine drainage wetlands

Abstract The effectiveness of wetland treatment of acid mine drainage (AMD) was assessed using three measures of performance: treatment efficiency, area-adjusted removal, and first-order removal. Mathematical relationships between these measures were derived from simple kinetic equations. Area-adjusted removal is independent of pollutant concentration (zero-order reaction kinetics), while first-order removal is dependent on concentration. Treatment efficiency is linearly related to area-adjusted removal and exponentially related to first-order removal at constant hydraulic loading rates (flow/area). Examination of previously published data from 35 natural AMD wetlands revealed that statistically significant correlations exist between several of the performance measures for both iron and manganese removal, but these correlations are potentially spurious because these measures are derived from, and are mathematical rearrangements of, the same operating data. The use of treatment efficiency as a measure of performance between wetlands is not recommended because it is a relative measure that does not account for influent concentration differences. Area-adjusted removal accounts for mass loading effects, but it fails to separate the flow and concentration components, which is necessary if removal is first-order. Available empirical evidence suggests that AMD pollutant removal is better described by first-order kinetics. If removal is first-order, the use of area-adjusted rates for determining the wetland area required for treating relatively low pollutant concentrations will result in undersized wetlands. The effects of concentration and flow rate on wetland area predictions for constant influent loading rates also depend on the kinetics of pollutant removal. If removal is zero-order, the wetland area required to treat a discharge to meet some target effluent concentration is a decreasing linear function of influent concentration (and an inverse function of flow rate). However, if removal is first-order, the required wetland area is a non-linear function of the relative influent concentration. Further research is needed for developing accurate first-order rate constants as a function of influent water chemistry and ecosystem characteristics in order to successfully apply the first-order removal model to the design of more effective AMD wetland treatment systems.

[1]  R. Brooks,et al.  Behavior of sedimentary Fe and Mn in a natural wetland receiving acidic mine drainage, Pennsylvania, U.S.A. , 1992 .

[2]  D. Helsel,et al.  Statistical methods in water resources , 2020, Techniques and Methods.

[3]  R. Kadlec.  An autobiotic wetland phosphorus model , 1997 .

[4]  Robert H. Kadlec,et al.  Deterministic and stochastic aspects of constructed wetland performance and design , 1997 .

[5]  Robert H. Kadlec,et al.  Application of residence time distributions to stormwater treatment systems , 1996 .

[6]  P. F. Cooper,et al.  Constructed wetlands in water pollution control. , 1990 .

[7]  L. Stark,et al.  Iron loading, efficiency and sizing in a constructed wetland receiving mine drainage. , 1990 .

[8]  R. Wieder.  Ion input/output budgets for five wetlands constructed for acid coal mine drainage treatment , 1993 .

[9]  R. F. Unz,et al.  Using Decomposition Kinetics to Model the Removal of Mine Water Pollutants in Constructed Wetlands , 1994 .

[10]  Tony Hoong Fatt Wong,et al.  Adaptation of wastewater surface flow wetland formulae for application in constructed stormwater wetlands , 1997 .

[11]  T. Wildeman,et al.  Adsorption compared with sulfide precipitation as metal removal processes from acid mine drainage in a constructed wetland , 1992 .

[12]  William J. Mitsch,et al.  Water quality, fate of metals, and predictive model validation of a constructed wetland treating acid mine drainage , 1998 .

[13]  IRON RETENTION AND VEGETATIVE COVER AT THE SIMCO CONSTRUCTED WETLAND: AN APPRAISAL THROUGH YEAR EIGHT OF OPERATION , 1994 .

[14]  R. Brooks,et al.  WATER QUALITY DURING STORM EVENTS FROM TWO CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS RECEWING MINE DRAINAGE , 1994 .

[15]  Lloyd R. Stark,et al.  Assessing the performance indices and design parameters of treatment wetlands for H+, Fe, and Mn retention , 1995 .

[16]  R. F. Unz,et al.  CHEMICAL DIAGENESIS OF IRON AND MANGANESE IN CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS RECEIVING ACIDIC MINE DRAINAGE , 1990 .

[17]  D. Rickard.  Kinetics and the mechanism of sulfidation of goethite , 1974 .

[18]  S. Fennessy.  Design and use of wetlands for renovation of drainage from coal mines. , 1989 .

[19]  J. A. Hobson,et al.  REED BED TREATMENT SYSTEMS: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION , 1990 .

[20]  Sven Erik Jørgensen,et al.  Ecological engineering : an introduction to ecotechnology , 1989 .

[21]  S. Sommer,et al.  Sedimentary iron monosulfides: Kinetics and mechanism of formation , 1981 .

[22]  W. Mitsch,et al.  Predicting metal retention in a constructed mine drainage wetland , 1994 .

[23]  Robert W. Nairn,et al.  SIZING AND PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS: CASE STUDIES , 1990 .

[24]  L. Stark,et al.  Effects of iron concentration and flow rate on treatment of coal mine drainage in wetland mesocosms: An experimental approach to sizing of constructed wetlands , 1997 .

[25]  P. Lemke,et al.  Metal removal efficiencies from acid mine drainage in the Big Five constructed wetland. , 1990 .

[26]  R. Kelman Wieder,et al.  Alkalinity generation by Fe(III) reduction versus sulfate reduction in wetlands constructed for acid mine drainage treatment , 1993 .

[27]  M. Siobhan Fennessy,et al.  Designing wetlands for controlling coal mine drainage: an ecologic-economic modelling approach , 1991 .

[28]  E. Arnold,et al.  Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 16th ed. , 1985 .

[29]  Robert H. Kadlec,et al.  Detention and mixing in free water wetlands , 1994 .

[30]  Gerald A. Moshiri,et al.  Constructed Wetlands for Water Quality Improvement , 1993 .

[31]  R. F. Unz,et al.  Iron and manganese release in coal mine drainage wetland microcosms , 1995 .