Laserfiche WebLink
Referring back to Table V, columns 5 and 8, the data show an <br />excellent correspondence between electrical conductivity and • <br />corrected r(cations), with the latter values seldom exceeding <br />conductivity concentration ranges. Such confirmation between <br />test results lends credulence to the individual cation analyses. <br />Some of the data do appear large for the combined E cations (;=>:tracteul; <br />however, in no case do the totals exceed 12.5 meq./liter. This result <br />supports the evidence that the extracts are actually dilute, saline <br />solutions. <br />In addition to the determination of soluble cations, several <br />common aniens--bicarbonate, sulfate, phosphate, chloride, and <br />flUDT'lde ions--~.vere also determined or tested for. Results of these <br />tests first appear as raw data in Table VI, with corrected <br />values given in Table VIII. A perusal of the data shocas <br />z~: <br />}IC03 and S04 were the predominant anions in the extracts. <br />Bicarbonate concentrations range from a minimum of 1.03 meq./liter <br />for the A horizon (~~38) to a maximum of 8.56 meq./liter in sample 2 <br />HC03 values are seen to fluctuate without showing a relationship <br />to depth. Some of the larger bicarbonate 1e~.~e1s measured sho*.~ a <br />correlation between interburden identity and bicarbonate concentration, <br />with etracts from shales having greater HC03- than extracts from <br />sandstones, 5 to 8.6 meq./liter. In general, the bicarbonate <br />data are not considered as highly accurate since repeatability <br />is not good. <br />Sulfate measurements are considered very accurate, especially <br />at low levels, based on personnel performance. Sulfate data in <br />Table VIII range from a minimum of < 0.05 meq./lifer to a <br />maximum value of 5.89 meq./liter. It is interesting to observe <br />that sulfates are generally below detection limit of 0.05 meq./liter <br />in the upper strata of overburden, between the A horizon and <br />45-foot depth. Considering the sulfur level in Colowyo coal <br />for \ scam has an averal;e x value of 0.27%, it is not surprising <br />{!ir <br />the sulfur in some interburden is also low. The remainder of <br />ovcr.burdcn between 45-foot depth and 123-foot depth shocas a • <br />definite correlation of higher sulfate levels and cation concen- <br />_rat~ons for extractions frori s:~al.e. This sug~eats t::e sulfate <br />