My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2022-02-09_PERMIT FILE - M2021046 (5)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2021046
>
2022-02-09_PERMIT FILE - M2021046 (5)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2022 4:05:07 PM
Creation date
2/9/2022 2:26:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2021046
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
2/9/2022
Doc Name Note
Appendix B Gem Services Report
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response
From
Zephyr Gold USA Ltd
To
DRMS
Email Name
TC1
MAC
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
41 GEM SERVICES <br /> Dawson Project—Tailings Characterization Page 7 <br /> 3.1.2 Acid Generation Potential <br /> The potential of the development rock and tailings to generate net acidity was assessed using the <br /> modified Acid Base Accounting test. The laboratory reports are provided in Appendix B. A <br /> summary table of results is presented in Table 3. <br /> The paste pH is a measure of a sample's current acidity status. Rinse pH was also measured for <br /> the development rock samples to determine the current acidity status of the development rock <br /> surfaces. The paste pH for all samples ranged from 6.9 to 9.6, indicating all samples are neutral <br /> to slightly alkaline. Rinse pH for development rock ranged from 8.8 to 9.4. <br /> Sulfur is predominantly present as sulfide (its reduced form) or sulfate(its oxidized form). <br /> Sulfide is the sulfur species that once exposed to air and water will oxidize and produce acid. <br /> Sulfur speciation was completed on all samples to determine the sulfide content and is shown in <br /> Figure 2. While all samples contain sulfur, only one development rock sample (and its duplicate) <br /> contain sulfide sulfur above the detection limit of 0.01 wt%. <br /> 0.10 <br /> 0.09 <br /> 0.08 <br /> 0.07 • <br /> 0.06 <br /> g 0.05 <br /> 0 <br /> i✓ <br /> 0.04 • <br /> 0.03 • <br /> 0.02 • • <br /> 0.01 • <br /> 0.00 <br /> 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 <br /> Sulfide S <br /> •Tailings •Development Rork <br /> Figure 2: Total Sulfur vs. Sulfide Sulfur <br /> The neutralization potential determination by the modified Sobek method(used in this study)is <br /> the measurement of the ability of a known amount of pulverized sample to neutralize a known <br /> volume and strength of a strong acid over a short exposure period. This bulk neutralization <br /> potential will account for the neutralization contributed by both carbonate and aluminosilicate <br /> minerals. However,the speed of neutralization and the pH to which these minerals will <br /> neutralize is different. The most effective neutralization is from carbonate minerals,which react <br /> with acid rapidly and neutralize water to a circum-neutral pH. For this study, carbonate <br /> neutralization was measured by determining the amount of total inorganic carbon present in the <br /> samples. As discussed in Section 3.1.1 above, siderite was measured in the altered tailings <br /> DDSldds Zephyr DawsortTailings_Charactedzation_Final Report,Feb.3,22,1:1 B PM Feb 2022 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.