Voices from the Animas Project
https://storycorps.me/interviews/voices-from-the-animas-animas-high-school-student-garrett-hagen-and-county-commissioner-julie-westendorff/
History of Acid Mine Drainage
Before mining began in the area of Silverton, Cement creek had a pH of 3.5 with high iron concentrations up to 10,000 years ago. Settlers that explored America were told not to drink out of this and other creeks like it in the region because of its “sickness”. This can be shown through ferricrete in the banks of the river. Ferricrete is a rock formation caused by a low pH and high contents of iron. These formations are sampled and dated to confirm this claim. The formation can also be dated back to the last glaciation which would likely be the cause of the acid rock drainage.
Mining began in Sunnyside along Hurricane peak in 1873. Miners had only found silver up until 1882 when they struck gold. Then to shut down in 1929 because of the stock market crash. In 1959, Standard Metal Corp. opened the mining backup and also found gold shortly after. On June 4th 1978, water from lake Emma collapsed a shaft and flowed throughout the tunnels with ease. A result of this, it blew into Cement Creek toppling a locomotive that weighed 20 tons. The mine opened back up in 1980 and ran until 1991.
In the mid 1990s Sunnyside went through work to plug a shaft called the American Tunnel. Before the work, the Gold King flowed at seven gallons per minute. The work only caused this to increase to 250 gallon per minute after they plugged the tunnel. The EPA assigns Superfund to sites that are particularly hazardous. A Superfund has been proposed in Silverton before but it was shot down by locals that thought it would ruin their tourism. Also, Sunnyside being known for being the main source of income to the area until shutdown in 1991 made it hard to pass. After the Gold King spilled into Cement Creek and eventually into the Animas, there has been rumor of a Superfund being passed.
Mining only increased the breaking down of minerals, giving them more surface area to interact with erosion factors. The result of this is a drop in pH due to the increase in concentrations. This acidic drop is because of the oxidation of iron sulfide which is more commonly known at “fools gold” or pyrite. The more relevant form of this is FeS₂ which is what you would find more often in Silverton mines. This chemical reaction is so common because pyrite is frequently in conjugation with most valuable metals. Just add water and air to this metal and it creates sulfuric acid. This is the main hazard when working to clean up Sunnyside and those like it in the area.
Mining began in Sunnyside along Hurricane peak in 1873. Miners had only found silver up until 1882 when they struck gold. Then to shut down in 1929 because of the stock market crash. In 1959, Standard Metal Corp. opened the mining backup and also found gold shortly after. On June 4th 1978, water from lake Emma collapsed a shaft and flowed throughout the tunnels with ease. A result of this, it blew into Cement Creek toppling a locomotive that weighed 20 tons. The mine opened back up in 1980 and ran until 1991.
In the mid 1990s Sunnyside went through work to plug a shaft called the American Tunnel. Before the work, the Gold King flowed at seven gallons per minute. The work only caused this to increase to 250 gallon per minute after they plugged the tunnel. The EPA assigns Superfund to sites that are particularly hazardous. A Superfund has been proposed in Silverton before but it was shot down by locals that thought it would ruin their tourism. Also, Sunnyside being known for being the main source of income to the area until shutdown in 1991 made it hard to pass. After the Gold King spilled into Cement Creek and eventually into the Animas, there has been rumor of a Superfund being passed.
Mining only increased the breaking down of minerals, giving them more surface area to interact with erosion factors. The result of this is a drop in pH due to the increase in concentrations. This acidic drop is because of the oxidation of iron sulfide which is more commonly known at “fools gold” or pyrite. The more relevant form of this is FeS₂ which is what you would find more often in Silverton mines. This chemical reaction is so common because pyrite is frequently in conjugation with most valuable metals. Just add water and air to this metal and it creates sulfuric acid. This is the main hazard when working to clean up Sunnyside and those like it in the area.
Project Reflection
How have geological, biological and human factors created and exacerbated acid mine drainage and water quality issues in the Animas River?
Geological formations of pyrite make it easy for water to pass through them to create sulfuric acid. This creates sulfuric acid and in turn, lowers the pH. It can be shown in the ferricrete along the river that show a low pH up to 10,000 years ago. Ferricrete begins formation at a pH of 3.5 along with having a high concentration of iron. These rock formations are dated and aged to have started around the last glaciation. When mining began in 1873 alone Sunnyside, it only sped up this process making the river even more toxic. It increased the breaking down of metals causing them to have more surface area for erosion and the creation of sulfuric acid. Also, before the American Tunnel was plugged, the Gold King Mine was discharging at a rate of seven gallons per minute. After the work it was gushing as 250 gallons per minute into Cement Creek.
What is the role of science in making policy decisions?
It would be logical to incorporate facts into policy making. Although, it hasn’t always been this way it is growing more and more prevalent. The Bush Administration were constantly biased against politicizing science. “Unfortunately, most Federal politicians generally had little interest in, or made requests for, scientific information to guide policy decisions during the 8 years of President George W Bush’s Administration.” says Gene Elden Likens, a leading pioneer on acid rain and ecology. When it comes to situations like the Gold King Mine spill, the policies weigh a lot on the scientific studies on the Animas and Sunnyside Mines. The policy changes based on the situation and there is no assessment of the situation without science.
To what degree do scientists have an obligation to communicate scientific concepts and data to the public in an understandable manner?
There has always been a problem of the public not understanding science because of communication errors. I don’t feel scientists have an obligation because they can do what they want with their research. Although, it should be more common than it is to have scientific studies communicated to the relevant audience. Some concepts require explanation for the general public to understand. Basic chemistry, biology, or physics don’t go remembered throughout an average person’s life. If the science is relevant to the safety of an audience, it absolutely should be communicated in a understandable manner.
How has your understanding of scientific knowledge and/or the process of doing science changed throughout the semester as you’ve examined and manipulated data collected by professional scientists and performed analogous experiments to collect and analyze your own data?
Throughout this semester it felt like this project had not been relevant or useful. It had seemed like a boring 3 months on nothing but “river spill” over and over. But just the other day I understood what the 3 months was suppose to teach us. The river was used as an example of how a real-world scientific process looks like. A independent lab or University would take the same steps we did if they were posed the same project. It wasn’t just a project to learn about our river, it was meant to help us understand scientific concept by relating them to our environment. The reason why we didn’t use the ICP-AES was because we gained material that we otherwise just would have read about.
Geological formations of pyrite make it easy for water to pass through them to create sulfuric acid. This creates sulfuric acid and in turn, lowers the pH. It can be shown in the ferricrete along the river that show a low pH up to 10,000 years ago. Ferricrete begins formation at a pH of 3.5 along with having a high concentration of iron. These rock formations are dated and aged to have started around the last glaciation. When mining began in 1873 alone Sunnyside, it only sped up this process making the river even more toxic. It increased the breaking down of metals causing them to have more surface area for erosion and the creation of sulfuric acid. Also, before the American Tunnel was plugged, the Gold King Mine was discharging at a rate of seven gallons per minute. After the work it was gushing as 250 gallons per minute into Cement Creek.
What is the role of science in making policy decisions?
It would be logical to incorporate facts into policy making. Although, it hasn’t always been this way it is growing more and more prevalent. The Bush Administration were constantly biased against politicizing science. “Unfortunately, most Federal politicians generally had little interest in, or made requests for, scientific information to guide policy decisions during the 8 years of President George W Bush’s Administration.” says Gene Elden Likens, a leading pioneer on acid rain and ecology. When it comes to situations like the Gold King Mine spill, the policies weigh a lot on the scientific studies on the Animas and Sunnyside Mines. The policy changes based on the situation and there is no assessment of the situation without science.
To what degree do scientists have an obligation to communicate scientific concepts and data to the public in an understandable manner?
There has always been a problem of the public not understanding science because of communication errors. I don’t feel scientists have an obligation because they can do what they want with their research. Although, it should be more common than it is to have scientific studies communicated to the relevant audience. Some concepts require explanation for the general public to understand. Basic chemistry, biology, or physics don’t go remembered throughout an average person’s life. If the science is relevant to the safety of an audience, it absolutely should be communicated in a understandable manner.
How has your understanding of scientific knowledge and/or the process of doing science changed throughout the semester as you’ve examined and manipulated data collected by professional scientists and performed analogous experiments to collect and analyze your own data?
Throughout this semester it felt like this project had not been relevant or useful. It had seemed like a boring 3 months on nothing but “river spill” over and over. But just the other day I understood what the 3 months was suppose to teach us. The river was used as an example of how a real-world scientific process looks like. A independent lab or University would take the same steps we did if they were posed the same project. It wasn’t just a project to learn about our river, it was meant to help us understand scientific concept by relating them to our environment. The reason why we didn’t use the ICP-AES was because we gained material that we otherwise just would have read about.
Proud Piece: Lab Report 4
Treatment of Contaminated Cement Creek Samples
Garrett Hagen
Abstract:
When the Gold King plume rolled through the Animas River, I never thought of it as an opportunity to apply learning to my environment. Instead, we have spent up to 3 months studying the river. It was more of an opportunity in chemistry, than any other class, to sample and experiment on acid mine drainage. The purpose of our tests wasn’t to shine light on toxic chemicals in the river or to provide a solution for water treatment. It was to grasp the concepts of chemistry through the thorough analysis of real-world situation. Yes, the driving questions posed in class involved finding the content of the river and the implications of the content but that wasn’t the motivation to why we studied this incident in the first place. The method we used to study the water is the same process an independent lab would take to assess the problem for the public. Although, two of the only major issues with our tests was the timing of when the samples were taken and the equipment used to conduct our experiments. An example of this is our spectroscopy lab compared to using an ICP-AES to find metal concentrations. The results our class got as a whole, is accurate based on the experiments and the questions posed. I feel we did a great job identifying the content of the river and examining/treating of the water based on it’s content.
Introduction:
In 1873, Hurricane Peak was already producing acidic water with a pH as low as 3.5. When mining began along this Peak at Sunnyside, it only caused the discharge of toxic water to increase. This, the major spill of June 4th,1978, and the plugging of the American Tunnel in the mid 1990s have combined to make this a prime location for acid mine drainage. The Gold King Mine was a disaster just waiting to happen and when it did, one benefit arose from the issue. The biological, chemical, and geological understanding of acid mine spills. The goal of simulating water treatment was to wrap up the content we have covered throughout the first semester. The labs leading up to this one all incorporated scientific concepts, followed by calculations to back them up. The distribution of acid water from mine shafts has become an issue that has spread beyond the regions that have abandoned mines. A way to check the acidity of the water is to test the pH levels. The pH is a scale of acidity that goes from 1 to 14 with 7 as the equivalence point. Although, the more acidic it is, the lower the number and 1 being the most acidic. pH stands for potential Hydrogen (H+) and the more H+ ions that are present, the more acidic solutions are. To raise the pH of the water we added a base, and in these base’s chemical formula there is an OH-. Rarely is OH- not in bases (Ammonia NH3) but just simply is a hydrogen atom and oxygen atom combined with a covalent bond. Both the sodium hydroxide (NaOH - soluble) and the calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2 - low solubility) have this hydroxide ion. When this H+ is present in acids it is counteracted with OH- ions and these mix together to create H2O (water). Metals being dissolved in these acids are unavoidable in Silverton. There is a difference between the dissolved metals and the total metals however. Total metals refer to the metals that are both dissolved and are present in particulate form. Dissolved metals are far more complicated to clean up just because it has to be precipitated out. Particulates of metals in the water would easily be filtered out or settled out. Both are present in the water at Gold King, so the treatment process in Silverton is very similar to our simulation of treating water samples. Only in Silverton they add more base instead of precipitating the metals out.
Methods:
The only precautionary measure we took was to pour our final solution into a large waste beaker for properly dispose of it. To begin, 50 mL of acidic water was measure out and poured into a 250 mL beaker. When measuring out this sample we were careful to not pour sediment into the beaker. Using two reliable sources to measure the pH (pH Probe or pH paper), we determined the initial pH to be around 3.5-4. We were given the option between 4 indicator solutions that show the change in pH based on the color of the acid. An endpoint is determined based on the current pH and the pH we are trying to achieve through titration. We quickly and logically decided to use the Universal Indicator because it’s broad ranges of pH color indication. Adding 30 drops of this indicator solution to the acid will cause it to change color. Two separate bases were used in our experiment to have both a base (Ca(OH)2) and an alkaline (NaOH). We were supplied two burets, one for each base, which we filled to ~10ml. A magnetic stir was then placed in the beaker so that a stir plate can automatically mix the acid with the base. Letting the titrant release individual drops at a constant rate, we recorded that change in color until we came to our endpoint. Then we repeated this process for the other base yet using the same indicator solution and sample water.
Part 2 of this experiment was meant to simulate how to precipitate dissolved metals out of acidic water. First, 5 mL is of Na2CO3 with a concentration of .5M is measured using a graduated cylinder then added to the solution with the NaOH alkaline. We let the stir bar work for about 30 seconds to allow the base solution to completely react with the precipitate solution for maximum effect. Filter paper was weighed and folded to fit inside of a funnel. The funnel was then placed in an Erlenmeyer flask so that the final solution can slowly be poured into it. The filter paper caught the precipitate and then was set to dry. We weighed the paper a second time to record the mass of the precipitate formed. Finally, the pH of the solution is measure a second time.
Although, our group did not get around to doing this part 2 process for the Ca(OH)2 base.
All relevant pictures are on the last page of the report.
Part 1 Results:
To calculate the Molarity of a solution it is just a simple equation of moles/volume=Molarity. So it can be assumed to find the moles of a substance the equation it rearranged to volume✖Molarity=moles. Sodium hydroxide has a 1:1 molar ratio to the acid, yet Calcium carbonate has a ratio of 2:1. The pH is calculated by taking -log(H+) but to find the H+ ions we had to take the volume of the acid and the moles of the acid to divide them by each other.
.000172 mol/.080 L = .00215 Molarity.
So then we took this .00215 and took the negative log of it.
-log(.00215) = a pH of 2.67
The initial pH of the sample we titrated with NaOH is 2.67
Part 2 Results:
To find the moles of precipitate we took the weight of the precipitated calcium carbonate and dividing it by one mole of calcium carbonate.
.73 g/100 g= .0073 moles of precipitate
Then to find the mass of dissolved metal before precipitation we multiplied the moles of precipitate by the atomic mass of calcium.
.0073 mol ✖ 40 g= .292 grams of initial metals
Discussion:
The efficiency of calcium hydroxide overweighs sodium hydroxide. Not only does calcium hydroxide take half the amount of acid to raise the pH. The calcium can be beneficial to plant and animal health downstream. The sodium hydroxide takes twice the amount that the lime takes to reach the equivalence point. Calcium is already present in high concentration in the river already so this also can decrease the amount that has to be added. Acid mine drainage can be treated through these same steps we took. This gave me a great understanding of not only acid mine drainage in Silverton but the treatment of toxic water in general. The only problem that makes this experiment far different from the treatment of the river is that the river constantly flowing compared to our lab that had sample just sitting there. This makes the treatment of the Gold King far more complex and in need of a more real-world solution than just simple adding a base and precipitating the metals out. A way to carry this experiment one step further is to use a running water source to try and treat it.
Honors:
We assumed during our precipitation calculation that the precipitate is all calcium carbonate and that the dissolved metals can be treated as calcium. Obviously, calcium isn’t the only content in the river but it was the only one with high enough concentrations to be considered relevant. We took the average weight of the metals as a carbonate and then weighed that based on the percentage of each metal in the total metals. The weight we found of 107 was then adjusted by adding the moles of each metal into the percents. We then found 102, which is far closer to calcium carbonate’s mass of 100. This is why naming the precipitate to be only calcium carbonate and the dissolved metals to only be calcium is a safe assumption. Calcium hydroxide was added as our base in part 1, which causes the total metals to be slightly off when taking the final moles of precipitate or the dissolved metal ion prior to precipitation. We first found the weight of calcium added as a base, then found the amount of precipitate made so that we could come up with a percent of calcium that the base added if the precipitate is treated as all calcium. We came up with 8% of the precipitate being the calcium hydroxide we added. Calcium hydroxide can have some major health effects when ingested but when added to water, give biological life calcium, which is beneficial. Sodium carbonate is commonly used to digest tusse from an animal carcass, which as you can imagine wouldn’t be good to ingest. It reacts violently with water and is extremely corrosive.
Garrett Hagen
Abstract:
When the Gold King plume rolled through the Animas River, I never thought of it as an opportunity to apply learning to my environment. Instead, we have spent up to 3 months studying the river. It was more of an opportunity in chemistry, than any other class, to sample and experiment on acid mine drainage. The purpose of our tests wasn’t to shine light on toxic chemicals in the river or to provide a solution for water treatment. It was to grasp the concepts of chemistry through the thorough analysis of real-world situation. Yes, the driving questions posed in class involved finding the content of the river and the implications of the content but that wasn’t the motivation to why we studied this incident in the first place. The method we used to study the water is the same process an independent lab would take to assess the problem for the public. Although, two of the only major issues with our tests was the timing of when the samples were taken and the equipment used to conduct our experiments. An example of this is our spectroscopy lab compared to using an ICP-AES to find metal concentrations. The results our class got as a whole, is accurate based on the experiments and the questions posed. I feel we did a great job identifying the content of the river and examining/treating of the water based on it’s content.
Introduction:
In 1873, Hurricane Peak was already producing acidic water with a pH as low as 3.5. When mining began along this Peak at Sunnyside, it only caused the discharge of toxic water to increase. This, the major spill of June 4th,1978, and the plugging of the American Tunnel in the mid 1990s have combined to make this a prime location for acid mine drainage. The Gold King Mine was a disaster just waiting to happen and when it did, one benefit arose from the issue. The biological, chemical, and geological understanding of acid mine spills. The goal of simulating water treatment was to wrap up the content we have covered throughout the first semester. The labs leading up to this one all incorporated scientific concepts, followed by calculations to back them up. The distribution of acid water from mine shafts has become an issue that has spread beyond the regions that have abandoned mines. A way to check the acidity of the water is to test the pH levels. The pH is a scale of acidity that goes from 1 to 14 with 7 as the equivalence point. Although, the more acidic it is, the lower the number and 1 being the most acidic. pH stands for potential Hydrogen (H+) and the more H+ ions that are present, the more acidic solutions are. To raise the pH of the water we added a base, and in these base’s chemical formula there is an OH-. Rarely is OH- not in bases (Ammonia NH3) but just simply is a hydrogen atom and oxygen atom combined with a covalent bond. Both the sodium hydroxide (NaOH - soluble) and the calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2 - low solubility) have this hydroxide ion. When this H+ is present in acids it is counteracted with OH- ions and these mix together to create H2O (water). Metals being dissolved in these acids are unavoidable in Silverton. There is a difference between the dissolved metals and the total metals however. Total metals refer to the metals that are both dissolved and are present in particulate form. Dissolved metals are far more complicated to clean up just because it has to be precipitated out. Particulates of metals in the water would easily be filtered out or settled out. Both are present in the water at Gold King, so the treatment process in Silverton is very similar to our simulation of treating water samples. Only in Silverton they add more base instead of precipitating the metals out.
Methods:
The only precautionary measure we took was to pour our final solution into a large waste beaker for properly dispose of it. To begin, 50 mL of acidic water was measure out and poured into a 250 mL beaker. When measuring out this sample we were careful to not pour sediment into the beaker. Using two reliable sources to measure the pH (pH Probe or pH paper), we determined the initial pH to be around 3.5-4. We were given the option between 4 indicator solutions that show the change in pH based on the color of the acid. An endpoint is determined based on the current pH and the pH we are trying to achieve through titration. We quickly and logically decided to use the Universal Indicator because it’s broad ranges of pH color indication. Adding 30 drops of this indicator solution to the acid will cause it to change color. Two separate bases were used in our experiment to have both a base (Ca(OH)2) and an alkaline (NaOH). We were supplied two burets, one for each base, which we filled to ~10ml. A magnetic stir was then placed in the beaker so that a stir plate can automatically mix the acid with the base. Letting the titrant release individual drops at a constant rate, we recorded that change in color until we came to our endpoint. Then we repeated this process for the other base yet using the same indicator solution and sample water.
Part 2 of this experiment was meant to simulate how to precipitate dissolved metals out of acidic water. First, 5 mL is of Na2CO3 with a concentration of .5M is measured using a graduated cylinder then added to the solution with the NaOH alkaline. We let the stir bar work for about 30 seconds to allow the base solution to completely react with the precipitate solution for maximum effect. Filter paper was weighed and folded to fit inside of a funnel. The funnel was then placed in an Erlenmeyer flask so that the final solution can slowly be poured into it. The filter paper caught the precipitate and then was set to dry. We weighed the paper a second time to record the mass of the precipitate formed. Finally, the pH of the solution is measure a second time.
Although, our group did not get around to doing this part 2 process for the Ca(OH)2 base.
All relevant pictures are on the last page of the report.
Part 1 Results:
To calculate the Molarity of a solution it is just a simple equation of moles/volume=Molarity. So it can be assumed to find the moles of a substance the equation it rearranged to volume✖Molarity=moles. Sodium hydroxide has a 1:1 molar ratio to the acid, yet Calcium carbonate has a ratio of 2:1. The pH is calculated by taking -log(H+) but to find the H+ ions we had to take the volume of the acid and the moles of the acid to divide them by each other.
.000172 mol/.080 L = .00215 Molarity.
So then we took this .00215 and took the negative log of it.
-log(.00215) = a pH of 2.67
The initial pH of the sample we titrated with NaOH is 2.67
Part 2 Results:
To find the moles of precipitate we took the weight of the precipitated calcium carbonate and dividing it by one mole of calcium carbonate.
.73 g/100 g= .0073 moles of precipitate
Then to find the mass of dissolved metal before precipitation we multiplied the moles of precipitate by the atomic mass of calcium.
.0073 mol ✖ 40 g= .292 grams of initial metals
Discussion:
The efficiency of calcium hydroxide overweighs sodium hydroxide. Not only does calcium hydroxide take half the amount of acid to raise the pH. The calcium can be beneficial to plant and animal health downstream. The sodium hydroxide takes twice the amount that the lime takes to reach the equivalence point. Calcium is already present in high concentration in the river already so this also can decrease the amount that has to be added. Acid mine drainage can be treated through these same steps we took. This gave me a great understanding of not only acid mine drainage in Silverton but the treatment of toxic water in general. The only problem that makes this experiment far different from the treatment of the river is that the river constantly flowing compared to our lab that had sample just sitting there. This makes the treatment of the Gold King far more complex and in need of a more real-world solution than just simple adding a base and precipitating the metals out. A way to carry this experiment one step further is to use a running water source to try and treat it.
Honors:
We assumed during our precipitation calculation that the precipitate is all calcium carbonate and that the dissolved metals can be treated as calcium. Obviously, calcium isn’t the only content in the river but it was the only one with high enough concentrations to be considered relevant. We took the average weight of the metals as a carbonate and then weighed that based on the percentage of each metal in the total metals. The weight we found of 107 was then adjusted by adding the moles of each metal into the percents. We then found 102, which is far closer to calcium carbonate’s mass of 100. This is why naming the precipitate to be only calcium carbonate and the dissolved metals to only be calcium is a safe assumption. Calcium hydroxide was added as our base in part 1, which causes the total metals to be slightly off when taking the final moles of precipitate or the dissolved metal ion prior to precipitation. We first found the weight of calcium added as a base, then found the amount of precipitate made so that we could come up with a percent of calcium that the base added if the precipitate is treated as all calcium. We came up with 8% of the precipitate being the calcium hydroxide we added. Calcium hydroxide can have some major health effects when ingested but when added to water, give biological life calcium, which is beneficial. Sodium carbonate is commonly used to digest tusse from an animal carcass, which as you can imagine wouldn’t be good to ingest. It reacts violently with water and is extremely corrosive.