4.2 Article

The Use of Stable Isotopes (13C/12C and 15N/14N) to Trace Exposure to Oil Sands Processed Material in the Alberta Oil Sands Region

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15287390802647211

关键词

-

资金

  1. Syncrude Canada Ltd [E3166]
  2. Toxic Substances Research Initiative (TSRI)
  3. Canadian Water Network (CWN)
  4. NSERC Discovery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Various oil sands reclamation strategies incorporate oil sands processed material (OSPM) such as mature fine tailings (MFT), engineered tailings (consolidated tailings, CT), and tailings pond water (TPW) into reclamation components that need to develop into viable aquatic ecosystems. The OSPM will contain elevated salinity and organics such as naphthenic acids (NA) and polycyclic aromatic compounds (PAC) that can be chronically toxic to aquatic organisms depending upon levels and age. Due to the complexity of the chemical mixtures, analysis of these compounds in exposed organisms can be challenging. In this study, the stable carbon and nitrogen isotope signatures of selected invertebrates from various types of oil sands reclamation sites were analyzed to determine whether stable isotopes can be used to trace the exposure of aquatic organisms to organic constituents of OSPM. In a series of experimental reclamation ponds of similar age and size, there were trends of 13C depletion and 15N enrichment for benthic invertebrates along a gradient of increased levels of MFT and/or TPW. A survey of 16 sites revealed high 15N values for invertebrates in aquatic systems containing MFT and CT (gypsum-treated mixes of MFT and tailings sand), which was attributed to the presence of NH4+, a process by-product in OSPM. Findings of this study indicate a potential for the use of stable nitrogen isotopes to define exposure of biota to OSPM during environmental effects monitoring programs both in surface waters and in cases where groundwater seepage containing oil sands processed water enters surface receiving environments in the region.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据