Weathering of sulfidic shale and copper mine waste: secondary minerals and metal cycling in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee, and North Carolina, USA

Abstract

Metal cycling via physical and chemical weathering of discrete sources (copper mines) and regional (non-point) sources (sulfide-rich shale) is evaluated by examining the mineralogy and chemistry of weathering products in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee, and North Carolina, USA. The elements in copper mine waste, secondary minerals, stream sediments, and waters that are most likely to have negative impacts on aquatic ecosystems are aluminum, copper, zinc, and arsenic because these elements locally exceed toxicity guidelines for surface waters or for stream sediments. Acid-mine drainage has not developed in streams draining inactive copper mines. Acid-rock drainage and chemical weathering processes that accompany debris flows or human disturbances of sulfidic rocks are comparable to processes that develop acid-mine drainage elsewhere. Despite the high rainfall in the mountain range, sheltered areas and intermittent dry spells provide local venues for development of secondary weathering products that can impact aquatic ecosystems.

Occurrence, properties and pollution potential of environmental minerals in acid mine drainage

“…Consequently, they reduce the mobility of toxic elements, including metals and metalloids, which are retained by adsorption and coprecipitation (Smith et al, 1998;Carlson et al, 2002;Hammarstrom et al, 2003;Lottermoser, 2003). The ability to indicate, sometimes in an expeditious way, the prevailing conditions in the contaminated environment, in which they are stable, gives another sense to the specific mention of environmental minerals.…”

Assessment of heavy metals contamination in Mamut river sediments using sediment quality guidelines and geochemical indices

“…Besides, Co, Cu, Pb, and Zn were ranged from <0.01 to 4.39; <0.01 to 15.22; <0.01 to 0.13, and <0.01 to 0.33, respectively. Enrichment factor of heavy metals Hammarstrom et al (2003) d Bhattacharya et al (2006) (except Ni) in sediments at the tributaries (T2) were lower than 1.5, suggesting natural source of Ni. However, the degree of enrichment that exhibits great spatial distribution basically corresponds to the difference in metals removal rate from the sediments or the variations in the magnitude of metals sorption.…”

Secondary minerals from extrapedogenic per latus acidic weathering environments at geomorphic edges, Eastern Nebraska, USA

“…Thus, the potential for widespread acidic weathering of pyrite-bearing Cretaceous sedimentary rocks, whether by per latus or per descensum processes, bears myriad potential effects that are associated with the formation of diverse new minerals. Such weathering can change bulk rock chemical and physical properties; influence the evolution of soils, surface waters, and ground waters; impact local environmental chemistry and microbial diversity; and affect road building, mass movement remediation, and waste disposal (e.g., Ivarson et al, 1979;Eberlin, 1985;Mermut and Arshad, 1987;Michel and van Everdingen, 1987;De Putter et al, 2000;Jambor et al, 2000;Daniels and Orndroff, 2003;Hammarstrom et al, 2003;Fanning et al, 2004;Joeckel et al, 2005;Darmody et al, 2007;Ji et al, 2007;Shand and Degens, 2008;Long et al, 2009). In the case of the American Great Plains, and large parts of adjacent regions, these aspects need to be considered as a matter of course for the first time.…”