3.9 Article

Heavy metals in coal mine groundwater responding to mining activity: concentration, temporal variation and speciation

期刊

WATER PRACTICE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 10, 期 2, 页码 390-401

出版社

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/wpt.2015.049

关键词

coal mine; groundwater; heavy metals; mining activity

资金

  1. State Natural Science Fund Projects [41173106, 41373095]
  2. Anhui College [KJ2013B291]
  3. Project for Outstanding Young Talent of Suzhou University [2013XQRL05]
  4. Foundation for Suzhou Regional Development Cooperation and Creatively Center [2013szxtcx001]
  5. Program for Innovative Research Team of Suzhou University [2013kytd01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Six groundwater samples were collected from four aquifers in Renlou coal mine, northern Anhui Province, China, and concentration, temporal variation and speciation of five heavy metals (Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn) were analyzed. The results of physicochemical parameters and major ions showed that the selected groundwater were representative samples of Quaternary aquifer (QA), coal measure aquifer (CA), Taiyuan limestone aquifer (TA) and Ordovician limestone aquifer (OA). Cr, Ni and Zn increased in the four aquifers from 2002 to 2014, but Pb decreased from 2006 to 2014. Cu concentration increased in QA and TA, but decreased in CA and OA. Although all monitoring results met the standards recommended by WHO and GB5749-2006, Cr and Cu in some groundwater samples exceeded GB/T 14848-93, especially in CA. Soluble metallic hydroxides were the dominant species of heavy metals in QA, while free ions were the main species in TA and OA. Excepted Ni2+ and Zn2+, CuCO3(aq) and PbCO3(aq) were the dominant species of Cu and Pb in CA, respectively, indicating more CO2 had been flooded and dissolved in groundwater from ground atmospheric environment. The enhanced concentration and special dominant species of heavy metals revealed that the 'closed' characteristics of CA in Renlou coal mine might have been broken due to coal mining activity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据