首页> 外文学位 >Analysis and comparison of cyanide detoxification methods from spent heaps.
【24h】

Analysis and comparison of cyanide detoxification methods from spent heaps.

机译:废堆中氰化物解毒方法的分析和比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This work entailed the testing of cyanide degradation of microorganisms isolated by the U.S. Bureau of Mine's Salt Lake Research Center (SLRC) and native strains isolated from an Alaskan mine, development of conceptual designs for in situ biological detoxification of leached heaps, and comparison of common in situ and ex situ heap detoxification processes using a cost comparison, sensitivity analysis, and Monte Carlo simulation.; Microorganisms from an Alaskan mine site and SLRC were tested for cyanide degradation. Testing of samples from the Ryan Lode site indicated that several bacterial colonies could tolerate cyanide, but no degradation was found. Once degradation was confirmed in the SLRC sample, a winter survival rate test and an in situ heap detoxification test were performed.; Winter survival experiments indicated approximately 5-20% of the bacterial population in heap agglomerate samples were viable after a winter and subsequent coldroom wait. In addition, bacteria colonized the agglomerate where nutrients were available.; During August 1993, a 250 ton test heap was constructed on a heap that was undergoing detoxification using the INCO air-SO{dollar}sb2{dollar} process. The test heap was inoculated with bacteria in October 1993 and September 1994. Unfortunately, the test was terminated at an early stage, limiting the conclusions.; The detoxification processes chosen for comparison were in situ biological, peroxide, and chlorination, and ex situ biological, INCO air-SO{dollar}sb2,{dollar} peroxide, and chlorination. To compare the costs, a hypothetical heap of 1 million tons was used. In situ biological detoxification had a cost of {dollar}0.41 per ton of ore treated, followed by ex situ biological detoxification, with a cost of {dollar}0.92 per ton. The remaining methods ranged from {dollar}1.05 to {dollar}1.35 per ton. The biological detoxification methods were most sensitive to the rinsing rate, labor costs, and capital costs. The chemical detoxification methods were most sensitive to oxidant cost, oxidant to cyanide ratio, and starting cyanide concentration. For the Monte Carlo simulation, in situ biological detoxification had a cost of {dollar}0.63 per ton treated, followed by in situ peroxide with a cost of {dollar}1.09 per ton. The remaining methods ranged from {dollar}1.11 to {dollar}1.45 per ton.
机译:这项工作需要测试美国矿山盐湖研究中心(SLRC)分离出的微生物和从阿拉斯加矿山分离出的天然菌株的氰化物降解,开发沥滤堆的原位生物解毒概念设计,并比较常见的使用成本比较,敏感性分析和蒙特卡洛模拟进行原位和异位堆解毒过程。测试了来自阿拉斯加矿场和SLRC的微生物的氰化物降解。对来自Ryan Lode站点的样品进行的测试表明,一些细菌菌落可以耐受氰化物,但未发现降解。一旦在SLRC样品中确认降解,就进行了冬季存活率测试和原位堆解毒测试。冬季生存实验表明,堆聚结块样品中大约5-20%的细菌种群在冬天和随后的冷藏室等待后是可行的。此外,细菌在聚集营养的地方聚集。 1993年8月,在使用INCO air-SO {dollar} sb2 {dollar}工艺进行排毒的堆上构造了250吨的测试堆。测试堆在1993年10月和1994年9月接种了细菌。不幸的是,测试在早期被终止,限制了结论。选择用于比较的排毒过程为原位生物,过氧化物和氯化,以及异位生物,INCO air-SO {sb2sb2,{dolal}过氧化物和氯化。为了比较成本,使用了一个假设的100万吨的堆。原位生物解毒的成本为每吨矿石0.41美元,然后异地生物解毒的成本为每吨0.92美元。其余方法范围从每吨{dollar} 1.05到{dollar} 1.35。生物排毒方法对冲洗率,人工成本和资本成本最敏感。化学解毒方法对氧化剂成本,氧化剂与氰化物的比例以及氰化物起始浓度最敏感。对于蒙特卡罗模拟,原位生物解毒的成本为每吨处理0.63美元,其次是原位过氧化物,其成本为每吨1.09美元。其余方法的范围从每吨{dollar} 1.11到{dollar} 1.45。

著录项

  • 作者

    Kroeger, Edwin Bane.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Alaska Fairbanks.;

  • 授予单位 University of Alaska Fairbanks.;
  • 学科 Engineering Mining.; Biology Microbiology.; Engineering Environmental.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1997
  • 页码 263 p.
  • 总页数 263
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 矿业工程;微生物学;环境污染及其防治;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号