Ellis McNichol

Water Treatment Simulation and Analysis using Cement Creek Water Samples
Abstract:
The purpose of this experiment was to simulate and recreate the occurrence of water
treatment procedures using Cement Creek water samples. We conducted this lab in order to
develop a broader more in depth understanding of how and why water coming from the Gold
Mine Mine spill which occurred in the late summer of 2015 must be chemically treated as to
improve water quality. Another end goal was to learn the process of performing a titration to
measure the amount of potency of concentration of a specific substance in a solution. To create
and simulate a real life water treatment following the spill, we used samples from Cement Creek
and raised it to a balanced, neutral pH through the process of titration. It was then required to
use filter paper to get out the precipitates and weigh them in order to determine the exact levels
of dissolved metals.
This experiment was also created in order to use indicator solutions, witnessing how pH
probes and papers change the pH of a solution/chemical throughout the reaction. Also,
precipitates are measured by mass in order to calculate the amount of dissolved metals present
in solution. Finally, this experiment compares the effectiveness and overall efficiency of vast
water treatments. The results woven throughout the lab showed that raising the pH of the water
to a neutral level and filtering it could treat the water, but different methods resulted in different
masses thus meaning some results could be labeled as unreliable.

Introduction:
On August 5th, 2015 a plume encompassing toxic metals spilled straight through
Silvertons mines, through its valleys and to the heart of durango. This rush of toxicity ran 610
gallons per minute and turned our river an eerie orange yellow. Many labs have been following
this occurrence, trying to decipher what took place and this is one of them. This spill is also
called acid mine drainage. But what do those three words actually mean? Basically, it correlates
to the outflow of acidic contents directly from metal and or coal mines. When the metals are
exposed to elements such as wind and water they react. Any area that is prone to coal mining is
also at great risk for acid mine drainage.
Acid mine drainage also deeply shifts the surrounding ecosystem, which can spend
years trying to adapt and adjust to the new outflow of toxic chemicals. These discharges run
down rivers and leave heavy leftovers of sediment that can damage the aquatic life. pH
measures the amount of base or acidity in a liquid substance. There is also a scale that
measures how pH can be affected liquid. From 0 to 7 are the acidic levels, and 7 to 14 is base
levels.
The basic definition of an arrhenius of acids and bases is that when added to
water, an arrhenius acid increases the presence of H+ ions present. On the other hand an
arrhenius base produces OH- in a given solution. There are three classifications of substances;
acids, base and basics. An acidic solution means it ranges from 0 to 7, base from 7 to 14 and
the basic, stable level is directly in the middle at 7. These three different options for substances
to go down also have different equations. In our sample, we will be given a sample that is either

base or acidic and we have to neutralize it through titration. Total and dissolved metals also play
a role in water quality and the treatment of this lab. These two sections of metals create two
separate groups. Total metals include all metals that are in a river sample, this includes
dissolved and those found in sediments. Dissolved metals on the other hand, specifically center
upon metals that dissolve in the water. This lab explored at what levels were total and dissolved
metals at in our spill, and at what levels was it necessary to achieve neutralization?
The goals of the current water treatment methods is to balance the acidity and base of
the pH. Similarly, this lab, though on a much smaller scale is to try to neutralize the water
samples. These simple tests are being done on a larger picture to make the river safer and
lessen the impact of the Gold King Mine spill.

Methods:
Because we are working with potentially dangerous metals, it is in your best interest to
follow standard lab protocol, which includes protecting your eyes with safety goggles and hair
being tied back. This also entails being wary of chemicals coming in contact with skin. Lastly,
dispose of chemicals in a waste beaker instead of the sink.
In the first test you must titrate samples of the Cement Creek river water. This is done to
raise their pH level. The precipitates must be removed from the sample through the process of
filtering and dehydration. Measure out 10 mL of sample water and add the first chosen indicator
solution. This should turn to an endpoint color when neutralized at the end of the experiment.
This endpoint must be chosen beforehand. Turn on the beaker and ensure the drop rate stays
at a slow, consistent pace that can be easily stopped. Keep tediously adding a drop at a time
until the solution becomes and stays at the color of your chosen end point. Carefully read the
buret and record its volume in table 1, of course subtracting the initial volume. Also record the
final color and measure the pH level of the solutions endpoint titration using pH paper and a
calibrated probe. Record the values. Lastly, use the base to neutralize the solution. Set this
beaker aside as it will be used in part 2 of the experiment. Drain excess fluids into a specific
designated waste container as these metals can be very toxic. Repeat these steps with the
other base.
In the second part of the lab, measure 5 mL of Na2CO3 using a graduated cylinder, and
add this to the previously titrated water samples from part 1. Using the magnetic stir bar, agitate
the sample until it is mixed and a precipitate has formed. Stop stirring then allow the samples
precipitate to settle. Using a piece of filter paper, create the shape of a tunnel and place it in a
flask. Slowly pour the precipitate through the funnel. Measure the initial mass of an evaporating
glass, then place the completely dried funnell paper on the watch glass. Record the subtracted
value in table 3. If the final pH is between 5.5 and 9 it may be poured down the sink, but if it
exceeds this range it must be put into the waste container. Repeat all of these steps with the
second solution.

Results and Analysis

Part 1
Table 1: Volumes, Amounts and Concentrations of Base and Acid in Neutralization
Reaction
Trial 1 NaOH

Trial 2 Ca(OH)2

Indicator buret volume (mL)

10

25

Final buret volume (mL)

36.25

31

Volume of base (mL)

26.25

Volume of base (L)

.02625

0.0060

Concentration of base (M)

0.010

0.010

Moles of base (mol)

.002625

.000060

Acid to base mole ratio

1:1

2:1

Moles of acid (mol)

.002625

.00012

Volume of acid (water

sample) (mL)

.50

50

Volume of acid (water

sample) (mL)

.050

.050

Initial concentration of acid

(water sample) (M)

.0525

.0024

Calculated initial pH of water

sample

1.2798

2.619

Table 2: pH Measurements Before and After Neutralization Reaction

Trial 1 NaOH

Trial 2 Ca(OH)2

Indicator solution used

Phenol red

Bromo Blue

Expected color at end point

Orange

Green

Is end point also the

equivalence point (pH=7)?

No

Yes

Initial color of solution

Yellow

Yellow

Observed end color

Grapefruit

Green

Qualitative final pH of solution 5

using indicator solution

7-8

Initial pH of solutions as
measured by pH probe

3.2

4.35

Final pH of solutions as
measured by pH probe

7.08

6.9

Initial pH solution as
measured by pH paper

Final pH solution as
measured by pH paper

6-7

Calculated initial pH solution

1.2298

3.68

(Credits =: Trial 2 Results Geoffrey Steiner)

Table 3: Masses for Determining Amount of Precipitate Formed
Trial 1 NaOH

Trial 2 Ca(OH)2

Initial mass of filter paper(g)

.62

.6

Mass of
watch/glass/evaporating dish
(g)

37.26

36.42

Filter paper, watch, glass and

precipitate(g)

38.4

37.04

Mass of precipitate

.16

.02

Moles of precipitate (assume

all precipitate is CaCO2) (g)

.0016

.0002

Mass of dissolved metal ions

prior to precipitation

.004

.00008

Appearance of precipitate

Yellow orange

Yellow brown

(Credits, trial 2 Geoffrey Steiner)

Discussion:
Part 1 of the lab was completed first so there would be titrated, neutralized sampled from
Cement Creek.