PM10 Concentration Emitted from Blasting and Crushing Processes of Limestone Mines in Saraburi Province, Thailand

This study aimed to investigate PM₁₀ emitted from different limestone mines in Saraburi province, Thailand. The blasting and crushing were the main processes selected for PM₁₀ sampling. PM₁₀ was collected in two mines including, a limestone mine for cement manufacturing (mine A) and a limestone mine for construction (mine B). The IMPACT samplers were used to collect PM₁₀. At blasting, the points aligning with the upwind and downwind direction were assigned for the sampling. The ranges of PM₁₀ concentrations at mine A and B were 0.267-5.592 and 0.130-0.325 mg/m³, respectively, and the concentration at blasting from mine A was significantly higher than mine B (p < 0.05). During crushing at mine A, the PM₁₀ concentration with the range of 1.153-3.716 and 0.085-1.724 mg/m³ at crusher and piles in respectively were observed whereas the PM₁₀ concentration measured at four sampling points in mine B, including secondary crusher, tertiary crusher, screening point, and piles, were ranged 1.032-16.529, 10.957-74.057, 0.655-4.956, and 0.169-1.699 mg/m³, respectively. The emission of PM₁₀ concentration at the crushing units was different in the ranges depending on types of machine, its operation, dust collection and control system, and environmental conditions.

• Kanokrat Makkwao
• Tassanee Prueksasit

• Blasting
• crushing
• limestone mines
• PM10 concentration.

[1] Department Primary Industries and Mines, The mineral situation of Thailand in 2018 and Trends for 2019. 2019.
[2] Department Primary Industries and Mines, Mineral Statistics of Thailand 2014 – 2018. Statistics Report, 2019: p. P.43-47.
[3] Sairanen, M. and M. Rinne, Dust emission from crushing of hard rock aggregates. Atmospheric Pollution Research, 2019. 10(2): p. 656-664.
[4] Degan, G., D. Lippiello, and M. Pinzari, Monitoring airborne dust in an Italian basalt quarry: Comparison between sampling methods. Vol. 174. 2013. 75-84.
[5] Chang, C.-T., et al., Fugitive Dust Emission Source Profiles and Assessment of Selected Control Strategies for Particulate Matter at Gravel Processing Sites in Taiwan. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 2010. 60(10): p. 1262-1268.
[6] Jayabalou, R., et al., Particulate Matter from Stone Crushing Industry: Size Distribution and Health Effects. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 2006. 132: p. 405.
[7] Roy, S., G.R. Adhikari, and T.N. Singh, Development of Emission Factors for Quantification of Blasting Dust at Surface %J Journal of Environmental Protection. 2010. Vol.01No.04: p. 16.
[8] US.EPA, AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I Chapter 11: Mineral Products Industry, in 11.19.2 Crushed Stone Processing and Pulverized Mineral Processing. 2004. p. 5-7.
[9] Morera de la Vall González, G., Dust production in mining supression measures in quarry blasting, in Ingeniería Geológica y Minera. 2018: E.T.S.I. de Minas y Energía (UPM).
[10] Chang, C.-T., Assessment of Influential Range and Characteristics of Fugitive Dust in Limestone Extraction Processes. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 2004. 54(2): p. 141-148.
[11] Oguntoke, O., A. Adeniyi, and G.T. Adeola, Impact of Granite Quarrying on the Health of Workers and Nearby Residents in Abeokuta Ogun State, Nigeria. Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management, 2009. 2.
[12] Richardson, C.M., Quantification and Characterisation of Particulates from Australian Coal Mines: Towards Improved Emissions Estimation, in School of Eng & Built Env. 2019, Griffith University.
[13] Sivacoumar, R., et al., Modeling of fugitive dust emission and control measures in stone crushing industry. Journal of environmental monitoring: JEM, 2009. 11: p. 987-97.