Laserfiche WebLink
dams were treated. Robinson #2 Dam did not require access <br /> road construction and was treated from the crest. Upon com- <br /> pletion of these areas , a small area of the old tailing pond <br /> was treated ( Figure 1 ) . Coherex treatment of all tailing <br /> areas was completed approximately three months later on <br /> August 28. <br /> As in the past at Climax , Coherex was applied using 2800 <br /> gallon Terra-Gator agricultural sprayers with 60 ' spray <br /> booms. Approximately 148 , 500 gallons of Coherex was applied <br /> at a water to Coherex dilution ratio of 8. 3 : 1 , slightly more <br /> concentrated than the 9 : 1 ratio discussed in the Plan . <br /> Application rates were as stated in the Plan. <br /> In addition to Coherex, 1100 gallons each of two other com- <br /> mercial dust suppressants , Soil Seal and Nalco #1271, were <br /> tested on tailing areas , and magnesuim chloride was tested on <br /> the county road paralleling the Robinson tailing pond to the <br /> southeast (Figure 1 ) . Soil Seal was tested on the west end <br /> of the crest of #1 Dam, on a portion of the face of #1 Dam, <br /> and on the west end of the crest of #3 Dam. Nalco #1271 was <br /> tested on the west end of the crest of #1 Dam, on the lower <br /> face of #1 Dam, and on the face of #1 Dam at the curve. A <br /> total of 1100 gallons each of Soil Seal and Nalco were used <br /> in the tests at dilution ratios of 16 : 1 , 24. 5 : 1 , and 49. 9 : 1 <br /> for each product . For Nalco # 1270 , only the 16 : 1 ratio <br /> proved comparable to or better than Coherex relative to <br /> suppression efficiency. Soil Seal was a bit better with the <br /> 24 . 5 : 1 ratio being comparable to Coherex. Those areas with <br /> the higher dilution ratios remained unstable and were treated <br /> with Coherex later in the summer. No other product was <br /> tested on the tails during 1987. Kiln dust and cement were <br /> discussed, but neither was considered feasible because of <br /> large scale application problems , consistent high volume <br /> availability (particularly kiln dust) , and/or unanswered <br /> long-term reclamation questions. <br /> Between Soil Seal and Nalco # 1270 , Soil Seal produced a <br /> better crusting effect. Indeed, in many places, Soil Seal <br /> exhibited a better crust than Coherex. However, the cost <br /> benefit of both products relative to Coherex appears <br /> extremely low. The delivered cost of Coherex was $0. 94 per <br /> gallon whereas the delivered cost for Soil Seal and Nalco <br /> #1270 was $8. 64 per gallon and $7. 40 per gallon respectively. <br /> At the dilution ratios comparable in efficiency to Coherex, <br /> Soil Seal was 3. 36 times more expensive than Coherex while <br /> Nalco #1270 was 4. 32 times more expensive. In the harsh high <br /> altitude ( 10, 500 '-11, 200 ' msl ) environment of Climax where <br /> high winds are the norm, it seems unlikely that either Soil <br /> Seal or Nalco # 1270 will maintain their dust suppressant <br /> efficiencies three to four times longer than Coherex. <br /> -2- <br />