Fred H. Shrimer
WSP Golder, Vancouver, Canada

Part of the book: Pyrite and Pyrrhotite: Managing the Risks in Construction Materials and New Applications

Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.52305/APAN4442

Abstract

Testing of aggregate materials in connection with construction projects has traditionally involved evaluation of their engineering properties to determine whether they satisfy various specifications for durability, strength and resistance to in-service performance related to loading, abrasion, weathering and so on. This work is usually conducted as a pre[1]qualification of the material prior to acquisition of a new quarry site, for permitting and opening of a new aggregate source, or as ongoing, routine quality control testing. These testing regimes are intended to benefit both the aggregate producer and the eventual user of the material/Owner of the construction project, by ensuring that the aggregate products are ‘fit for purpose.’ Over the last few decades, however, it has become increasingly common that project Owners and specifying agencies may or will require evaluation of the potential for Acid Rock Drainage (ARD) and metals leaching (ML) of aggregates that contain sulfide minerals. Since most aggregate materials are composed of natural geologic products, the characterization of these materials typically follows a geologic assessment-based route. Geological characterization thus plays an important first step in ARD/ML assessment and forms the basis for further testing. In the case of ARD, an understanding of the likelihood of sulfide minerals in the rock and their relative proportions are centrally important. In this chapter, we present and discuss some cases of ARD prediction for aggregate materials that start from a geological perspective.

Keywords: sulfide, construction aggregate, geology, Acid Rock Drainage, ARD prediction

References

ASTM. (2020). Standard Practice for Shake Extraction of Solid Waste with Water. ASTM D3987-12, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA.
BC Ministry of Forests. (2018). Evaluating the Presence and Impact of Acid Drainage from Industrial Roads
in British Columbia. Prepared by Maloney, D. and Carson, B. Extension Note # 42, BC Ministry of Forests.
BC MoTI. (2013). Evaluating the Potential for Acid Rock Drainage and Metal Leaching at Quarries, Rock Cut
Sites and from Stockpiled Rock or Talus Materials used by MoTI. Technical Circular T04-13, BC Ministry
of Transportation and Infrastructure.
CSA. (2019). A23.2-15A – Petrographic Examination of Aggregates. In: Concrete materials and methods of
concrete construction/Test methods and standard practices for concrete, A23.1-09/A23.2-19, 2019,
Canadian Standards Association, Toronto.
Fey, David. (2003). Acid-Base Accounting. Presented at the Assessing the Toxicity Potential of Mine-Waste
Piles Workshop, Billings, Montana.
INAP. (2009). The Global Acid Rock Drainage Guide. International Network for Acid Prevention (INAP).
http://gardguide.com/index.php?title=Main_Page.
Morin, K. A. and Hutt, N. M. (2007). Highway 97C Road-Cut Environmental Prosecution Near Pennask Creek.
MDAG Internet Case Study #27, www.mdag.com/case_studies/cs27.html.
Price, W. A. (2009). Prediction Manual of Drainage Chemistry from Sulphidic Geologic Materials. MEND
Report 1.20.1, CANMET – Mining and Mineral Sciences Laboratories, Smithers, BC.
Smith, L. and Beckie, R. (2003). Hydrologic and Geochemical Transport Processes in Mine Waste Rocks. In:
Jambor, J. L., Blowes, D. W. and Ritchie, A. I. M. (Eds.), Environmental Aspects of Mine Wastes,
Mineralogical Association of Canada, Short Course Series Vol. 31: 51-72.