Coal - Municipal-water Needs vs. Strip Coal Mining

The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers
Gregory M. Dexter
Organization:
The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers
Pages:
22
File Size:
1905 KB
Publication Date:
Jan 1, 1950

Abstract

Recent litigation in Pennsylvania between three coal-mining companies and a private water company resulted in the payment by the coal companies of the equivalent of about $500,000 to buy a new water supply to replace that which had been damaged by acid drainage from strip mining. An investigation of the relevant facts indicates that the water could have been treated by spending about $40,000 on equipment and $15,000 yearly for chemicals, labor, and power until the contarnination could be reduced about 80 pct. The water company's supply, furthermore, had deteriorated largely by reason of dry weather before stripping was begun by the coal companies. Payment to the water company should not have exceeded $300,000 and could have been as low as $100,000. Strip mining of coal is common in Pennsylvania. The most important objection to it in Pennsylvania is generally acid pollution of runoff water. An outline of the methods, therefore, that could be used to reduce such pollution, to compare acid-contaminated waters. and to treat such waters to make them satisfactory for public and industrial use is worth-while. The watershed of the West Penn Water Co. covers about 4.5 square miles, 20 miles west of Pittsburgh, and has two 90,000,000 gal reservoirs supplying about 1,300,000 gal daily for public and industrial use of which 450,000 gal daily are for two railroads. The pollution arises from weathered derivatives of typical'" Coal Measures"' rocks, the principal source being pyrite (and marcasite) in Pittsburgh and Rooster coals. Springs and seeps on hillsides issue from sandstone and limestone formations intersecting shale or clay land surfaces, or from perched water tables. The two reservoirs create an artificial permanent water table. Soap-hardness tests on three seepage samples taken in a dry summer ranged from 150 to 500 ppm. Water sampled came from aquifers above Pittsburgh and Rooster coals, obviating the possibility of contact with pyrite-containing coal. Since acid contamination of mine waters is the result of chemical reactions of oxygen and water with pyrite, it will be reduced by the exclusion of either air or water. The Sunnyhill Coal Co. has applied this principle in its "contouring" method of strip mining by burying contaminated coal-waste material under a compact, smoothed-up surface of top-soil, gravel, clay, and sand at a cost
Citation

APA: Gregory M. Dexter  (1950)  Coal - Municipal-water Needs vs. Strip Coal Mining

MLA: Gregory M. Dexter Coal - Municipal-water Needs vs. Strip Coal Mining. The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, 1950.

Export
Purchase this Article for $25.00

Create a Guest account to purchase this file
- or -
Log in to your existing Guest account