Ben Glenn

Lab Report of Ions Present in the Animas

River Watershed?
Abstract:
The Event of the Gold King Mine spill into surrounding creeks was a very big impact on the
community. Heavy metals are supposedly in our watershed, but no one can be for sure what all of
them are. What types of ions (that we are specifically testing for) are in the Animas Rivers watershed
and its surrounding creeks? To find what types of ions were in the water, chemical reactions were
used. Test samples were taken from Mineral Creek, Animas River before confluence, Animas River
after confluence, Cement Creek at 14th street, South Fork of Cement Creek, and Cement Creek at
mines. Using small dishes, a positive control, and negative control was made to see what the
reacting chemicals would make. Then test samples were put in small amount, and tested for calcium,
chloride, sulfate, iron, copper, and lead. After testing with chemical reactions (only changes by site)
the results came back in varied amounts. Minimal ions were found in the river and creeks. The
amounts of ions were too small to see in small amounts for some. Most ions were found at Cement
Creek closest to the mines. Based on our results the ions in the creeks and Rivers are minimal
enough not to be show by visible chemical reactions. Although they are present in small amounts,
the ions are still positively there in the upper Cement creek areas.
Methods:
For my partner and I to be able to see what ions are present in the water shed we needed to
follow specific steps. The Ions we tested for in the water were: Ca+2, iron: Fe+3, copper: Cu+2, lead:
Pb+2, chloride: Cl- and sulfate: SO4-2. You will also need Sodium Carbonate, Silver Nitrate,
Potassium Thiocyanate, Barium Chloride, and Potassium Iodide. To know what color or reaction we
were looking for a negative and positive control had to be made. Where you should start is have a
test dish with multiple wells (well plate), one pipette for water, and one dropper/dropper bottle for
every metal, a place to record your data that you see, safety goggles, and gloves. Have only one test
conducted at a time. To begin, you will make four types of solutions for each and every test of water
and metal that you do. The first solution is your positive control. This solution is what you know
what will react with an indicator solution. The second solution you will have is the negative control.
This will be your distilled water that will not react with anything you put into it. This shows you what
no reaction looks like. The third solution is your test solution or in this case river or creek water. You
will predict the results from looking at this one and comparing the other to it. The fourth and final
solution is the indicator solution. It will react chemically to form a precipitate and show you what a
reaction will look like. All of these solutions will make you be able to see if there is no reaction or
ions in the river water or not. Before starting make sure you pour all of the heavy metals into a
waste bin. Also wear safety goggles at all times.
Starting the tests on the calcium ion test you will get CaCl2 and get ten drops with its pipette into
your first well. Then add ten drops of your distilled water into your second. Finally add ten drops of
the test water you have chosen into the third well. Add third drops of sodium carbonate into all the
wells. Record the results you see in your third well compared to the positive and negative control.
After the results are taken, clean your wells out properly so they are all clean again. Next up is
testing for Chloride ions. Drop 20 drops of CaCl2 into the first well. Add ten drops of your distilled
water into the second well and ten drops of the test water into the third well. Using the pipette for
silver nitrate add three drops to all of the wells. Look at your results and write them down, followed

by the cleaning of the plate once again. Testing for iron ions you want to add twenty drops of Sulfate
into the first well. Add ten drops of the distilled water to the second well and ten drops of test water
to the third well. Using potassium thiocyanates pipette add one or two drops to each well. Write
your results down and clean the plate again. Testing sulfate add twenty drops of SO4-2 to the first
well. Add ten drops of distilled water to the second and add ten drops of the test water to the third.
Using Barium Chlorides pipette add three drops to every well and record the data you see, then
clean the plate. The final test is for copper, and lead ion tests. Add twenty drops of Cu+2 to the first
well. Then add Pb+2 to the second well. Add ten drops of the distilled water to the third well and ten
+drops of your test water to the fourth. Using Potassium iodides pipette add one or two drops to all
the well and record what you see. Clean the plate and put it back to the spot you got it from, this
applies to all of the materials you used.
Results
The results that were collected came from many different locations and also had each
chemical tested for it. We did many different tests in-between each class to collect all the data
shown in Table 1. Starting with A68 or Animas River above confluence the results show that there
was no metal found. Next, Sample A72 or Animas River after the confluence show results of no
positive findings of metals. Test sample CC@14 or Cement Creek at 14th street shows only 4 positive
tests of sulfur found. In Test sample CCAC of Cement creek above confluence shows 3 positive tests
of calcium, 3 positive tests of Sulfate, 2 positive tests of copper, and 1 positive test of Lead. Test MC
or Mineral Creek only had shown 1 positive test for calcium. The final test SFCC or south fork of
Cement Creek we found 1postive test of sulfate and 1 positive test of Iron. The most metals that
where found are in CCAC. Some of the outliers may have been calcium in Mineral Creek and Sulfate
and Iron found in SFCC.

Table 1: Tested chemicals, test sample location, number of positive and negative results
Sample
Location
A68
A72
CC@14
CCAC
MC
SFCC

Calcium
Test
P: 0
N:10
P: 0
N:8
P: 0
N:15
P:3
N:5
P: 1
N:10
P: 0
N:10

Chloride
Test
P: 0 N:10
P: 0 N:8
P: 0 N:15
P: 0 N:8
P: 0 N:11
P: 0 N:10

Key
A68 = Animas river above confluence
A72= Animas river after confluence
CC@14= Cement creek at 14th street
CCAC= Cement Creek above confluence
MC= Mineral Creek
SFCC= South Fork of Cement Creek
P= Positive
N= Negative

Sulfate
Test
P: 0
N:10
P: 0
N:8
P:4
N:11
P:3
N:5
P: 0
N:11
P:1
N:9

Iron (III)
Test
P: 0 N:10
P: 0 N:8
P: 0 N:15
P: 0 N: 8
P: 0 N:11
P:1
N:9

Copper
Test
P: 0
N:10
P: 0
N:8
P: 0
N:15
P:2
N:6
P: 0
N:11
P: 0
N:10

Lead
Test
P: 0
P: 0
P: 0
P:1
P: 0
P: 0

N:10
N:8
N:15
N:7
N:11
N:10

Figure 1: Graphed data of A68 negative and positive test results for ions

LOCATION A68
Positive

Tested Number of Results

10

10

Calcium

10

Chloride

Negative
10

10

Sulfate

Iron

10

Copper

Lead

Ions tested

Figure 2: Graphed data of A72 negative and positive test results for ions

LOCATION A72
Tested Number of Results

Positive
8

Calcium

Chloride

Negative
8

Sulfate

Iron

Copper

Lead

Ions Tested

Figure 3: Graphed data of CC@14 negative and positive test results for ions

LOCATION CC@14
Positive

Tested Number of Results

15

Negative

15

15

15

15

11

4
0
Calcium

0
Chloride

0
Sulfate

Iron

Ions Tested

0
Copper

0
Lead

Figure 4: Graphed data of CCAC negative and positive test results for ions

LOCATION CCAC
Tested Number of Results

Positive

Negative

8
7
6

3
2
1
0

Calcium

Chloride

Sulfate

Iron

Copper

Lead

Ions Tested

Figure 5: Graphed data of MC negative and positive test results for ions

LOCATION MC
Tested Number of Results

Positive
11

10

Calcium

11

Chloride

Negative
11

11

Sulfate

Iron

11

Copper

Lead

Ions Tested

Figure 6: Graphed data of SFCC negative and positive test results for ions

LOCATION SFCC
Tested Number of Results

Positive
10

0
Calcium

10

0
Chloride

Negative

Sulfate

10

Iron

Ions tested

0
Copper

10

0
Lead

Discussion
Testing the metal and other ions was done to see what was leaked from the Gold King Mine.
We wanted to see what metals were present in our tests so we could confirm for ourselves there
actually was metal ions. The expected results definitely varied from the reality of the results. All of
the classes believe that the majority of the testes would come back positive. In reality almost every
test came back negative to our surprise.
Starting off with the testing of the Animas River before the confluence not to our surprise
there was minimal to no trace of the tested ions in the water (Figure 1). The reason that I think the
results all showed up negative in the upper Animas River is because there is no mines leaking
directly into the river. It is a completely clean river up until the point where the confluence is.
Moving to after the confluence with Mineral creek and Cement creek the Animas River surprisingly
still showed no positive results (Figure 2). Once all the creeks and rivers combined I think they
diluted the water so much that it was hard to see the ions. They are more spread apart in the water
because it is a larger body of water. Cement Creek at 14th street is the first test to have detected any
ions (Figure 3). It was found out of 15 tests 4 were positive for sulfate and only that. This could be
because sulfate was the most present in that section of creek or is overall the main ion. The closest
test Cement Creek above the confluence was found to have the most positive tests of ions (Figure 4).
This water was the most concentrated most likely because it was our closest samples to the mine.
The ions found out of 8 tests for every ion was 3 positive for calcium and sulfate, 2 positive for
copper, and 1 positive for lead. Mineral Creek did not contain any of the ions we looked for but one
(Figure 5). It had a positive result for calcium which could be an outlier in the data. Finally back up to
where Cement Creek is there was a south fork tested (Figure 6). Even though it was incredibly close
to the mine it only tested positive for 2 of the 6 ions tested. One test of both Sulfate and Iron were
positive. It could be true that iron was there, but it can also be considered an outlier because that is
the only test iron was found in. All of the data referenced can be found in the figures and in table 1
above.
The significance of the results that were collected can vary depending on how they are being
used and by who. The answers we saw in our tests are significant to see if there was these ions in
the rivers and creeks or not. Even though most of the results showed negative they could have still
been present, just not on a visible level for the human eye. Saying this, you could notice that the
amounts of the ions could have been in smaller quantities within the watershed. If the community
was to look at our data it could give false hope that the river is all back to normal and no metal ions
are in the water. They could still be present just too small for our tests to prove.
In the data we collected I am very skeptical of our results not just because they came back
negative but in the way we tested. Using chemical reactions to see if there was ions in the water was
very intelligent. The only problem is there is not a simple answer such as yes or no. It would have to
be measured in PPB (parts per billion). This can accurately show how much of the ion was there. The
errors are unknown because they may be in all the same data. If a single person had worse vision
then another they may say negative when there is actually a precipitate that was formed. With the
outliers in the data it could be that there was actually that metal in the water it just wasnt all
aqueous. For example on tests in SFCC iron was found but thats the only place it was ever positively
found. This means that some of the ions may have not been dissolved in the water anymore.
Another way the data could have been affected is the precipitate or chemical reaction change could
have been mistaken for just the color of water. If we all had the same exact vision it could have
alliterated the results massively or not at all. It is unknown what would have happened because the
vision level of everyone is unknown. Although it does heavily rely on vision it could be a simple error

of just no reaction of the chemicals at all. The PH in a certain place could have been too high for any
precipitate to form.
In the future there are some improvements to be made for a more accurate representation
of the levels of metal and other ions in the waters. To begin, one improvement that could be made is
to use microscopes to look at the samples. This could show more people if it was just a smaller
reaction of the water and reactant. Another, way we could improve the experiment is to add
ammonia to every water sample tested. Since the acidity could have been too high for a reaction to
accrue. This ammonia would lower the acidity to a more reasonable testing ground. Finally, Instead
of only relying on yes or no results and site it could be processed with new equipment. For example
an Ion chromatograph which looks at the measure concentrations of major anions. The results that
come from this type of testing come in numbers so they can be better shown. All together there is
multiple things to improve this experiments accuracy in testing water for ions.
After completing this lab I feel like I can use this knowledge in many more labs. Being able to
visibly see ions in water can be put into other water or solution testing labs. I can now make a
positive and negative control to compare the results of my sample to. Which can be used in almost
every lab for a base line of data. Know that all of this knowledge is with me I would like to test other
waters to see what lies within them. Maybe for example, testing lakes with high amount of algae to
see how that would affect fish and wildlife.