Transcript No Slide Title

pecomines
INVENTORY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF MINING WASTE
HAZARDS IN CENTRAL & EASTERN EUROPEAN CANDIDATE COUNTRIES
Erik Puura, Gyözö Jordan, Marco D’Alessandro and Giovanni Bidoglio, JRC-IES Soil and Waste Unit
INTRODUCTION
EARLY RESULTS
Mining wastes rank first in the relative contribution of wastes in many
Central and Eastern European Countries, thus these countries are facing
more acute problems than EU Member States. In general, there is a
substantial gap in information on European level, how mining wastes in
EU Candidate Countries are managed and where the sites generating
largest hazards are located, including those that have been abandoned.
In the frames of the INVENTORY and IMPACT ASSESSMENT
workpackages of the PECOMINES project (2001-2003), the information
already existing in Candidate Countries on geological deposits, mining
sites and environmental impacts is collected and analysed using tools of
site assessment and modelling. The main focus is concentrated on the
sites with existing or potential releases of chemicals that may cause
hazards.
MINERAL RESOURCES
FUELS
Nuclear
fuels
METALS
Fossil
fuels
Ferrous
metals
INDUSTRIAL MINERALS
Non-ferrous
metals
Precious
metals
Construction
materials
Minor
metals
Non-construction
materials
Selected
list
Uranium
Oil
Coal
Oil shale
Other
Asbestos
Fluorite
Gypsum
Magnesite
Phosphate
Salt
Sulphur
Sulphides in
overburden
of open
mines and
quarries
1. The countries have identified ‘mining waste hot spots’ that are connected with
metals, uranium or fossil fuels mining and are either single tailings ponds, larger
mined-out areas with high number of waste heaps, or releases from mine voids.
2. According to preliminary screening, from 10 Candidate Countries, only 2 - Latvia
and Lithuania are not facing ‘burdens from the past’ caused by mining activities.
The following table indicates significance of the problems.
METALS
ESTONIA
URANIUM
SOLID FUELS
+
++
OTHER
phosphate
LATVIA
LITHUANIA
POLAND
+++
++
+++
CZECH REP
+++
+++
+++
SLOVAKIA
+++
+
++
HUNGARY
+++
+++
++
SLOVENIA
++
++
+
ROMANIA
+++
+++
+++
BULGARIA
+++
+++
+++
sulphur, salt
sea salt
salt
3. Detailed study of 4 sites has been carried out, contributing to the development of
pressures & impacts classification and finding the indicators for qualitative impact
assessment. These are:
• Smolnik site in Slovakia: an acid drainage from underground copper mine,
concentrated into 1 point source at 10-20 l/s and covering river bed with Fe-Al
oxyhydroxides and heavy metals for tens of kilometres
METHODOLOGY
For receiving the information, multiple sources are used, as presented on
the scheme. A crucial role is given to the Steering Group (SG) of the
project - 18 experts from 10 Candidate Countries (mainly from
environmental ministries and geological surveys and institutes), who assist
in finding appropriate information sources and comment on project
deliverables. The first group meeting took place in Ispra in October 2001,
the second is associated with the Workshop ‘Mine and Quarry Waste - The
Burden from the Past’ at Lago D’Orta, May 27-28, 2002.
INVENTORY
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
SG
QUESTIONNAIRE
SG
DATABASES
AVAILABLE
DATABASES
LOCAL
DATA
SG
MAPS
(PHARE-URANIUM)
(TISZA CATCHMENT)
(COUNTRIES)
RESULTS
MAPS
PAST
INVENTORIES
LITERATURE
DATA
(GEOLOGICAL
BACKGROUND)
(MINING AREAS)
(GEOECOLOGY)
REPORTS
SG
COMMUNICATIONS
LOCAL
MAPS
EXPERTS
EXISTING
KNOWLEDGE
(GISCO) (CORINE
LAND COVER)
REMOTE
SENSING
DATA
DETAILED
MODELLING
OF
SELECTED
SITES
WORKSHOPS
REMOTE SENSING
INTERPRETATIONS
PRESSURES
ADM-TERR DATA
GIS
SOLUTIONS
PRESSURES & IMPACTS
CLASSIFICATION
RELEVANT
SITES/AREAS
IDENTIFICATION
IMPACTS
CONCEPTUAL
MODEL
QUALITATIVE
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
SG
• Banska Stiavnica site in Slovakia: quartzite mine including lenses of pyritic clay,
impact of acid drainage to soils
• Maardu site in Estonia: an open phosphate mine containing black shale with high
pyrite, organic matter and heavy metals content in the overburden, with problems
of metals transport and spontaneous combustion
INDICATORS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND RISKS MAPS 1:1000000
INVENTORY
METHODOLOGY
METALS
SG
FOSSIL FUELS
URANIUM
OTHER RELEVANT
OVERVIEWS
HOT SPOTS REVIEW
SG
• Recsk site in Hungary: metals-rich acid drainage from waste rock and
underground mine
SG
SELECTED AREAS
METHODOLOGICAL STUDIES
ADVICE TO DG
ENVIRONMENT
FILLED QUESTIONNAIRES
The main method for obtaining uniformly structured information on
mining sites is through a specially designed QUESTIONNAIRE that
is accompanied by a detailed guide.
8. Host rock
PART 1
9. Type of overburden (surface mining)
(complete only if you selected “Surface mine” at point 4. above)
QUESTIONNAIRE TO BE COMPLETED FOR EACH MINING SITE
10. Thickness of overburden (surface mining)
(complete only if you selected “Surface mine” at point 4. above)
SECTION I. MINING SITE IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION
SECTION IV.MINERAL PROCESSING AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
1. Mining site identification
11. Waste rock and waste management
1.1 Mining site code
1.2 Customary site name(s)
1.3 Administrative unit
2. Mining site location
Geographic co-ordinates:
Latitude:…………………. Longitude:………………….
SECTION II. STATUS AND PRODUCTION
3. Mineral commodity(ies) mined
4. Extraction type :  Surface mine
 Underground mine
5. Status:  Active
 Temporarily suspended
 Closed
6. Operation and production
6.1 Start of operation
6.2 End of operation (if abandoned or temporarily suspended)
6.3 Total exploited quantity
6.4 Total mined-out area
6.5 Total annual production in 1980 (if applicable)
6.6 Total annual production in 2000 (if applicable)
SECTION III. GEOLOGICAL CHARACTERISATION OF MINERAL DEPOSIT
11.1 Total quantity of waste rock produced
11.2 Disposed on site as waste
11.3 Used for backfilling in the mine
11.4 Used for construction or other purposes
on mining site
11.5 Further processed on mining site
11.6 Transported out from the site
 Yes, volume: ________________ No
 Yes, volume: ________________ No
 Yes, volume: ________________ No
12. Mineral processing
12.1 Mineral processing on mining
site of excavation
 Yes
 No
12.2 Market product leaving the processing plant
12.3 Chemicals used in the treatment
12.4 Volume and area of disposed tailings
12.5 Chemical characteristics of solid tailings
12.6 Surface water on tailings
 Yes, volume: ________________ No
12.7 Chemical characteristics of tailings water (complete only if you selected “Yes” at 12.6)
SECTION V. EMISSIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
13. Types of emissions
14. Quantities and characteristic composition of the emissions
15. The mining site is an environmental ‘hotspot’
 Yes
7. Mineral deposit
7.1 Main constituents
7.2 Mineralogical composition
7.3 Mineral deposit type
7.4 Age
7.5 Geological setting, main tectonic or petrogenetic unit
 Yes, volume:_____, area: ______ No
 Yes, volume: ________________ No
For these sites, a lot of quantitative and qualitative emissions data are existing, and
the on-going work is focussed on how to use these data for development of
qualitative assessment criteria. However, the early results of the inventory show,
that for most of the sites, reliable emissions data are not available.
16. Main environmental impacts
SECTION VI.NOTES, COMMENTS AND REFERENCES
 No
HOW TO CARRY OUT SITES ASSESSMENT?
Understanding the problems of site-specificity with tens and hundreds of
parameters being significant, the practice of Canadian MEND-programme and
USGS, but also PECOMINES early results indicate the need to create and use
‘TOOLBOXES’ or ‘TOOL KITS’ for sites screening and assessment. These include:
• SCREENING TOOLS: sampling strategy, leachability, NAP determination etc
• NON-INVASIVE RAPID SCREENING TOOLS: remote sensing, geophysics
• RESIDENCE PHASES DETERMINATION: X-Ray analyses, extractions etc
• PUTTING MINES INTO CONTEXT: use of geological data and spatial modelling.
Related to the tasks and cost-effectiveness, appropriate tools should be chosen.
CONTACTS: website http://arno.ei.jrc.it:8181/pecomines/; project leader [email protected] authors [email protected] [email protected]