Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Page 1/16
Evaluation of the content of metals and contamination indices
generated by environmental liabilities, in Tacna, Peru
César Julio Cáceda Quiroz ( ccacedaq@unjbg.edu.pe )
Jorge Basadre Grohmann National University
Gisela July maraza choque
Jorge Basadre Grohmann National University
Milena Carpio Mamani
Jorge Basadre Grohmann National University
Gabriela de Lourdes Fora Quispe
Jorge Basadre Grohmann National University
Research Article
Keywords: Free cyanide, heavy metals; environmental liabilities; abandoned mines
Posted Date: October 31st, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2203478/v1
License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License
Page 2/16
Abstract
Abandoned mines are environmental liabilities with a high potential for contamination of rivers, soils, and entire ecosystems,
which constitutes a threat to wildlife, ora, and fauna, in addition to socio-environmental, economic, and human health risks.
The objective of this study was to determine the degree of contamination of 5 abandoned mines to evaluate their potential
environmental and social impact. The presence and concentration of arsenic, barium, cadmium, lead, chromium, mercury, and
free cyanide by mass spectrometry, and hexavalent chromium by ion chromatography. The environmental indices of
geoaccumulation, contamination factor, and contamination load were used to evaluate the level of contamination for each
area. The results showed high contamination with a high content of arsenic (2,046 mg Kg− 1), cadmium (650 mg Kg− 1), lead
(26,131 mg Kg− 1), free cyanide (92 mg Kg− 1), mercury (26.4 mg Kg− 1) above the established maximum limits, not detecting the
presence of hexavalent chromium (0.03 mg Kg− 1). In Peru, there are many abandoned mines, so it is a latent danger of an
environmental disaster. Therefore, it is essential to assess heavy metal contamination together with environmental risks, to
establish ecient mitigation measures.
Introduction
Mining is one of the world's oldest and most important activities and a vital economic sector for many countries. However, it is
also one of the most dangerous environmental activities (Covarrubias and Peña Cabriales 2017). Because during the process
of mineral extraction, serious environmental damage is inevitably caused, which can cause social conicts and health
problems (Gasparatos 2022). Environmental contamination by heavy metals (HM) is dicult to degrade and a constant
environmental concern due to its high toxicity, long persistence, and non-biodegradability (Cai et al. 2019; Jiang et al. 2020),
which can alter the biological and physicochemical properties of the soil by inducing harmful effects on several physiological
processes of plants (Shahid et al. 2015; Luo 2019), and its accumulation in the soil can result not only in soil degradation but
also in the possible contamination of surface and groundwater, which could eventually into the food chain and be harmful to
human health (Khalid et al. 2017; Zhang et al. 2018; Luo 2019; Shao et al. 2020). As, Pb, Cd, and Hg are hazardous metals,
according to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry and the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) (Khalid et al. 2017). In addition to these, Peruvian regulations categorize hazardous chromium, barium, free cyanide,
and hexavalent chromium (Cr+ 6). Various studies suggest that exposure to these metals could have a carcinogenic effect
(Hadzi et al. 2019; Soto-Benavente et al. 2020) as they enter the body via ingestion, inhalation, and skin contact (Castro-
González et al. 2017).
Mines that have lost their ability to regenerate themselves are classied as abandoned mines. Their rehabilitation is only
possible through anthropogenic intervention (Favas et al. 2018), and there is no responsibility for the ecological damage done
(Khalid et al. 2017). Tailings, land topography, and unused wells all contribute to the deterioration of the landscape and its
vegetation, the loss of nutrients from the soil due to erosion, low ambient air quality, toxic gas emissions, and other damage
(Issaka and Ashraf 2021). They are considered important and persistent sources of degradation (Mayes and Jarvis 2011),
which represent an environmental, geomorphological, and sanitary problem (Bini et al. 2017).
Mining environmental liabilities (MELs) are dened in Peru as facilities, euents, emissions, remains, or waste deposits
produced by abandoned or inactive mining operations that pose a permanent and potential risk to the health of the population,
the surrounding ecosystem, and property (ASGMI 2010; Chávez 2015; Minam 2017). To date, 7,956 MELs have been registered,
and they are distributed in different geographic regions (Castillo et al. 2021).
Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the degree of contamination of 5 abandoned mines classied as MELs
to assess their potential environmental and social impact. This will allow the development of various mitigation and/or
containment strategies for the potential danger that they represent, which can later be scaled to other national or international
MELs.
Materials And Methods
Page 3/16
Study area
The study was carried out in ve abandoned mining areas in Tacna, Peru, which, according to R. M. N° 200-2021-MINEM/DM
(Minem 2021), are considered mining environmental liabilities. Waste from environmental liabilities was sampled to nd out
how much metal it had and to calculate the contamination index.
The following criteria were taken into account to characterize the current state of the abandoned mines: Name of the
abandoned mine, geolocation, mining activity, type of waste, distance from bodies of water (between 0 and 100 meters),
presence of vegetation, signs of wildlife, and distance to the affected site (between 0 and 100 meters) (Jennings et al. 2002;
Chappuis 2019; Soto-Benavente et al. 2020)
Sample Collection
In each study area, ve points were collected to obtain a composite soil sample, which was randomly selected (Cai et al. 2019),
at a depth of 0–10 cm (Minam 2014), and stored in dense polyethylene bags, which were sealed and transported to the
laboratory for further analysis (Krishna et al. 2013). Sampling was carried out between the months of August and November
2021 according to the criteria established in Supreme Decree No. 002-2013-MINAM (Minam 2014). Also, samples of soil that
had not been changed by humans (called "native soil") (Alam et al. 2022), were taken from each sampling area, for a total of 20
samples.
Soil And Heavy Metal Analysis
The presence and concentration of the following elements were determined: arsenic, barium, cadmium, free cyanide, lead,
chromium, mercury, and hexavalent chromium, by the EPA 6020A mass spectrometry method (EPA 1998), including free
cyanide by the EPA 9013A method (EPA 2014), and hexavalent chromium with the EPA 7199 ion chromatography method
(SUMMIT 1996). The pH of the samples was also determined by the EPA 9045D test method (SUMMIT 2004).
Calculations Of The Pollution Indices
The contamination levels of As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Hg, Pb, CN− and Cr+ 6 in the soil samples were evaluated using various indices, such
as the Geoaccumulation Index
(I-geo)
, the contamination factor index
(Cf)
and the Pollution Load Index
(PLI)
, all of which are
widely used to estimate heavy metal contamination levels in the world's soils (Mueller 1986; Li et al. 2016; Sun et al. 2018;
Adimalla et al. 2019; Heidari et al. 2019).
Geoaccumulation Index
The Geoaccumulation Index
(I-geo)
was used to recognize and describe metal pollution concentration levels contamination by
relating the concentration present to the reference values of uncontaminated sites using the following equation (Mueller 1986).
Where:
I-geo
: Geoaccumulation index, : heavy metal concentration in the soil sample of the research region, : The background
value, and 1.5: constant.
When
I-geo
≤ 0 - Unpolluted; 0 ≤
I-geo
≤ 1 - Unpolluted to moderately polluted; 1 ≤
I-geo
≤ 2 - Moderately polluted; 2 <
I-geo
≤ 3 –
Moderately to strongly polluted; 3 ≤
I-geo
≤ 4 - Strongly polluted; 4 ≤
I-geo
≤ 5 - Strongly to extremely polluted; and 5 <
I-geo
–
I
−
geo
=
log
2
[ ]
Cn
(1.5
xBn
)
CnBn
Page 4/16
Extremely high polluted (Förstner U. and Calmano 1994).
Contamination Factor
The Contamination Factor
(Cf)
was used to quantify contamination by hazardous compounds (Hakanson 1980), according to
the following formula:
Where:
C
f
: contamination factor, : heavy metal concentration, : The background value of the specic metal (native soil).
When < 1, low contamination factor; 1 ≤ < 3 moderately contaminated factor; 3 ≤ < 6 considerably cotaminated
factor, y ≥ 6 very high contaminated factor.
Pollution Load Index
The pollution load index
(PLI)
integrates multiple heavy metal factors to determine contamination potential, which is the
relationship between the level of production and the contaminant load of each element and the total number of parameters
analyzed (Tomlinson et al. 1980; Krishnakumar et al. 2021). Based on contamination factor values of individual elements.
Where:
PLI
: pollution load index, : number of metals evaluated, : Contamination factor of a given metal.
Statistic Analysis
Data normality was determined using a Shapiro-Wilks test and homoscedasticity using a Bartlett test. To compare the means
of each metal concentration with the study site, a one-way ANOVA was applied, taking p < 0.05 as a signicant value and a
Tukey test. For the data that did not meet the assumptions of normality, the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test was used.
Statistical tests were performed using the statistical software Rstudio version 4.2.1.
Results
Description of the actual situation of environmental liabilities
The 5 mining environmental liabilities correspond to abandoned mines that turn out to be dangerous for the environment and
the nearby peasant communities, particularly when there are surface water bodies near the study areas. Table1 shows the
current state of the ve environmental liabilities that the study looked at.
Cf
=
Cm
Cb
CmCb
CfCfCf
Cf
PLI
=
n
√
C
1
fxC
2
fx
…
xCn
f
n Cn
f
Page 5/16
Table 1
Characterization of environmental liabilities
Site Coordinates
(Altitude)
Residuos
type Water
bodies Vegetation Wildlife signs Livestock People's
access to
the
impacted
area
Chulluncane 19k
0408217
8033184
(3,941
m.s.n.m.)
Waste
rock and
tailings
Caplina
River at a
distance
of about
20 m.
At a distance
of 5 meters,
scrub-type
ora was
observed.
Yes (Rodent feces
were found inside
the mine openings)
Sheep
pens (300
m) and
feces were
observed.
No
Cercana 19k
0390208
8027180
(1,981
m.s.n.m)
Waste
rock and
tailings
Caplina
River at a
distance
of about
2 m.
At a distance
of 1 meter,
shrub-like
ora was
observed.
No No Yes
(Farmers
within 200
m)
Tutupaca 19k
0358602
8113940
(4,687
m.s.n.m)
Waste
rock Not
presented On the
residues,
there was
scrub-type
ora.
Yes (Camelid and
wild cat tracks were
seen at a distance
of 20 and 50 m,
respectively)
No No
Yucamane 19k
0362832
8103048
(4,033
m.s.n.m)
Waste
rocks Callazas
River at a
distance
of about
5 m.
At a distance
of 1 meter,
grassland-
like ora was
observed.
Yes (Traces of wild
cats were seen on
the waste)
Sheep
feces were
seen on
the waste.
No
Cano 19k
0388911
8090115
(4,231
m.s.n.m)
Waste
rocks Not
presented On the
residues,
there was
scrub-type
ora.
Yes (Camelid tracks
in the residue). Camelid
feces were
observed.
Yes
(Population
a 3 meters)
Only inside the Chulluncane mine entrances were inltrations of water observed in the area where the tailings and waste rock
are located. On the other hand, the presence of ora of the scrub, bush, and grassland types that are found near the mining
exploitation areas was demonstrated; rodent feces were also evidenced inside the mine openings; camelid and wild cat tracks;
cattle corrals sheep; people who are dedicated to grazing; and even the population living near the mining environmental
liabilities (PAM). In addition, they present different geologies; some are located on at surfaces, others in ravines, and in the
hills, each area covers approximately 10 hectares. The minerals extracted were copper (Chullancane and Cercana) and sulfur
(Tutupaca, Cano, and Yucamane).
Analysis Of Soil And Heavy Metals
Page 6/16
Contaminants were detected in each of the ve evaluated areas (Fig.1), which include arsenic (20,46 mg Kg− 1), cadmium (650
mg Kg− 1), lead (26,131 mg Kg− 1), and free cyanide (92 mg Kg− 1). The presence of hexavalent chromium above the permitted
limits (0.03 mg kg− 1) was not detected. The contaminant in each area is displayed in descending order, taking into account the
contaminant's mean: Chulluncane: As > Pb > Ba > Cd > Cr > Hg > CN−>Cr+ 6, Cercana: Pb > As > Cd > Ba > Hg > Cr > CN−>Cr+ 6,
Tutupaca: Ba > CN− > Pb > As > Cr > Hg > Cr+ 6>Cd, Yucamane: Ba > CN− > As > Pb > Hg > Cr > Cr+ 6>Cd, Cano: Ba > CN− > Pb > As >
Hg > Cr > Cr+ 6>Cd.
Comparing the metal concentration values with Peruvian regulations and native soil (Table2) with a statistically signicant
difference between the ve evaluated areas. It was determined that Cercana has a high content of arsenic, cadmium, and lead;
while Chulluncane presented high contents of arsenic and cadmium above the maximum permissible limits. However,
Tutupaca, Yucamane, and Cano only had a high content of free cyanide, as shown in Fig.2. The results for the native soil
indicate that they did not exceed the limits established in any of the 5 evaluated areas.
Table 2
Heavy metals and free cyanide (mg kg− 1) of environmental liabilities included in the study
SITE Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium Mercury Lead Free
Cyanide Chromium
Hexavalent
pH
Chulluncane 1,102.67
±
665.64**
111.08
± 94.04a
27.83 ±
29.35**
8.81 ±
0.68**
3.03 ±
3.58*
620.33 ±
282.05*
0.04 ±
0** 0.03 ± 0ns 4.98
Cercana 1,009.67
±
977.18**
71.47 ±
52.28 b
271.63 ±
337.67**
6.14 ±
2.09**
15.26 ±
13.40 *
15,961.87
±
13,953.11*
0.04 ±
0** 0.03 ± 0 ns 7.41
Tutupaca 5.15 ±
2.59**
220.33
± 066.98
ab
0.02 ± 0** 3.50 ±
1.72**
3.03 ±
4.42*
7.27 ±
2.01*
19.25 ±
16.73** 0.03 ± 0 ns 2.13
Yucamane 13.02 ±
9.90**
175.33
±
40.77ab
0.02 ± 0** 1.42 ±
0.63**
4.00 ±
1.33*
7.28 ±
1.55*
38.53 ±
13.82 ** 0.03 ± 0 ns < 1
Cano 1.21 ±
0.80**
154.00
± 14.11
ab
0.02 ± 0** 0.76 ±
0.54**
0.82 ±
0.14*
7.53 ±
7.64*
64.03 ±
24.64 ** 0.03 ± 0 ns < 1
Maximum
value 2046 276 650 9.36 26.4 26131 92 0.03 7.41
Minimum
value 0.6 6.24 0.02 0.27 0.14 2.29 0.04 0.03 < 1
Native soil 83.18 ±
77.7**
130.20
±
23.65ab
0.25 ±
0.21**
11.71 ±
3.03**
0.03 ±
0*
18.34 ±
15.63 0.05 ±
0** 0.04 ± 0 ns 6.40
PERÚx140.00 2,000.00 22.00 1,000.00 24.00 800.00 8.00 1.40 -
ns Not signicant; *p < 0.05: signicant; **p < 0.01: highly signicant. The different letters indicate signicant differences.
(Kruskal-Wallis: Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Mercury, Lead, and Free Cyanide; Tukey: Barium). XSupreme decret N° 011-
2017-MINAM
Low pH revealed that the samples came from acid soils. The results indicated that the pH values of the soil were as follows:
Cercana > Soil Native > Chuluncane > Tutupaca > Yuccamane > Cano.
Page 7/16
Calculation Of Environmental Indices
The following environmental indices were calculated: Geoaccumulation Index
(I-geo)
, Pollution Factor
(Cf)
, and Pollutant Load
Index
(PLI)
.
Geoaccumulation Index
Table3 shows the calculations of the Geoaccumulation Index. There is extreme contamination of the metals Cd > Hg (5.235;
5.229) and strongly contaminated for As > Pb (3.807; 3.122) in the environmental liability of Chulluncane. Also, extreme
contamination in Cercana for the metals Hg > Pb > Cd (7.011; 6.585, and 5.713, respectively), and a high to extreme
concentration for As (4.301). In Tutupaca, extreme contamination was obtained only for free CN (5.421) and high to extreme
contamination for Hg (4.445). In the environmental liability of Yucamane, extreme contamination was obtained for free CN > Hg
(8.94; 6.411). Finally, in Cano, there is extreme contamination for free CN (9.671) and high to extreme contamination for Hg
(4.174).
Table 3
The Geoaccumulation Index of environmental liabilities is included in the study.
Geoaccumulation Index
Pollutant Chulluncane Cercana Tutupaca Yucamane Cano
As 3.807 4.301 -2.583 -4.632 -7.777
Ba -2.135 -1.414 0.341 -0.339 -0.367
Cd 5.235 5.713 -2.392 -2.755 -3.832
Cr -1.603 -1.701 -2.028 -3.601 -4.348
Hg 5.2289 7.011 4.445 6.411 4.174
Pb 3.122 6.585 -0.682 -1.055 -1.191
CN -0.907 -0.907 5.421 8.94 9.671
Cr+ 6 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
≤ 0 - Unpolluted; 0 ≤
I-geo
≤ 1 - Unpolluted to moderately polluted; 1 ≤
I-geo
≤ 2 - Moderately polluted; 2 <
I-geo
≤ 3 –
Moderately to strongly polluted; 3 ≤
I-geo
≤ 4 - Strongly polluted; 4 ≤
I-geo
≤ 5 - Strongly to extremely polluted; and 5 <
I-geo
– Extremely high polluted
Pollution Factor
Using the Pollution Factor Index
(Cf)
, it is necessary to quantify the pollution by hazardous compounds, which are shown in
Table4.
Page 8/16
Table 4
Pollution Factor Index of environmental liabilities included in the study.
Pollution Factor
Pollutant Chulluncane Cercana Tutupaca Yucamane Cano
As 25.367 52.057 0.271 0.072 0.008
Ba 0.694 0.701 1.967 1.209 1.167
Cd 84.333 468.328 0.286 0.222 0.105
Cr 0.495 0.480 0.397 0.13 0.090
Hg 100.856 508.778 101.156 133.444 27.333
Pb 14.003 732.196 0.957 0.734 0.932
CN−0.800 0.800 384.933 770.667 1280.667
Cr+ 6 0.750 0.750 0.750 0.750 0.750
Cf
< 1, low; 1 ≤
Cf
< 3 moderately; 3 ≤
Cf
< 6 considerably;
Cf
≥ 6 Very high
As can be seen in the environmental liabilities, the contaminants described exceeding the established value of
Cf
≥ 6, resulting
in an index of high contamination. In Chulluncane, we have Hg > Cd > As > Pb. In Cercana, Pb > Hg > Cd > As. Tutupaca CN−>Hg.
In Yucamane CN−>Hg>. Finally, in the environmental liability located in Cano, the CN−>Hg. The pollutants that prevail in each
environmental liability are Hg, Pb, and CN−, presenting themselves as one of the most alarming.
Higher
Cf
values show that anthropogenic contaminants play a more important role, while lower
Cf
values highlight the
geological distribution of components in the soil.
Contamination Load Index
The contamination load index indicates the degree of contamination for each evaluated area (Fig.2). The descending order of
the degree of contamination is as follows: Cercana (12.3) > Chullancane (4.3) > Yucamane (1.8) > Tutupaca (1.95) > Cano (1.02),
with an average of 4.3. All the sites evaluated have values greater than 1, indicating that the environmental liabilities are
contaminated. This contamination index relates to the concentration of metals and the total number of analyzed parameters of
contaminants present in a sample, which reects a state of severe contamination due to the presence of toxic compounds that
can be a source of contamination and that were possibly due to contamination. mineral extraction processes.
Discussion
The contamination product of environmental liabilities in Peru, represents an environmental concern, due to the risk associated
with the high toxicity, long persistence, and non-biodegradability of the toxic elements that may be present and cause
alterations in the biological and physicochemical properties of the ecosystem and induce harmful effects both for ora and
fauna, as well as for human health.
The environmental liabilities studied are located in high Andean areas close to peasant communities (associated with
economic activities of agriculture and livestock) where high concentrations of arsenic, lead, cadmium, and free cyanide have
been found that exceed the limits established by Peruvian regulations. This may be due to the extraction process of copper and
sulfur minerals, which are subjected to a grinding, smelting, and rening process, generating waste in each of these stages
(Issaka and Ashraf 2021). It can also be due to the incomplete closure of the mine or an inadequate recovery of the mineral, the
lack of compliance with environmental policies by the operators (Issaka and Ashraf 2021), in the development of the activities
Page 9/16
of the extractive process, which represents a risk for the ecosystem (Mayes and Jarvis 2011; Issaka and Ashraf 2021) and
human health (Bini et al. 2017). When evaluating the toxic elements and the contamination indexes in the 5 environmental
liabilities of mining origin, it was obtained that the areas of Chulluncane and Cercana present high and alarming contents of As,
Cd, and Pb. However, when evaluating environmental indexes, Hg is also included as a polluting agent, because these elements
are found with high and extreme contamination, resulting in both contaminated areas, which may be due to the development of
anthropogenic activities such as industrial mining, the accumulation, discharge of mining waste as reported by other authors
(Huang 2014; Zakir et al. 2015; YUAN et al. 2017; Chen et al. 2021; Akpambang et al. 2022) High concentrations of toxic metals,
such as As, can cause negative health effects with a possible carcinogenic risk (Gupta et al. 2014). As may be associated with
the copper extraction process (Valenzuela et al. 2000), as reported in other investigations that evaluated the concentration of
arsenic in abandoned mines and tailings impoundment areas (Garcia-Sanchez and Alvarez-Ayuso 2003); (Razo et al. 2004). On
the other hand, the high concentrations of Pb and Cd may be due to a large amount of slag from mining residues or from the
mining extraction process itself, similar to what has been reported in other studies (YUAN et al. 2017; Candeias et al. 2018;
Abouian Jahromi et al. 2020; Chen et al. 2021) Concerning this topic, the high availability of Hg in the environment is
associated with sulfur concentrations and pH, producing greater bioavailability, and being able to form soluble or solid
complexes (De Astudillo et al. 2008). In addition, there is the possibility that metals are mobilized due to biogeochemical
processes associated with them and come into contact with water bodies and soils (Asmoay et al. 2019; Oyewo et al. 2020;
Pabón et al. 2020). However, Hg tends to decrease when moving away from the contamination source, due to low mobility
(Camargo et al. 2013).
The high rates of free CN in Tutupaca, Yucamane, and Cano are alarming since they indicate that the free cyanide present is
extremely polluting. Therefore, when cyanide ions are transferred from sediments to water or aquatic systems through mutual
interaction, they can affect the health of local people as well as natural ecosystems, with natural weathering being a factor that
has been related to the release. to the environment and increased concentration in the soil of toxic contaminants present in
tailings and mining waste (Abdulnabi et al. 2020; Chen et al. 2021). In addition, the presence of complexes (metal-cyanide)
makes essential metals unavailable to soil organisms, thus altering the ecosystem due to the persistence of heavy metals and
their non-biodegradability (Demková et al. 2017). This is worrying in the areas surrounding Cano and Yucamane due to the
presence of nearby populations, as well as rivers, wetlands, and agricultural and grazing activities.
Likewise, the
I-geo
,
Cf
, and
PLI
contamination indexes showed the 05 high Andean zones present some level of contamination
by one or more contaminants, which are directly related to the availability and extractive activity of copper, sulfur and acidic pH
of the study areas, which suggests a deterioration of the soil. However, the effect of runoff through the rains and nearby rivers
can cause the mobilization of contamination towards the environment of the surrounding communities such as the Cano and
Yucamane peasant communities, constituting a potential risk for the inltration and reaction of mining waste with the
surrounding natural watercourses (Oyarzún et al. 2011).
It is important to consider the evaluation and characterization of mining environmental liabilities that will allow the
development of approaches, ecological techniques, and scenarios to formulate policies that promote their mitigation,
containment, and elimination in an economically viable way (Kumar et al. 2020). Among the conventional techniques that
could be used for the treatment of heavy metals are adsorption, electrodialysis, precipitation, and ion exchange, but they have
disadvantages because they cannot eliminate heavy metals that are in low concentrations, they are sensitive to pH, have a high
cost, are usually slow and inecient, and generate contaminated sludge that requires careful disposal, among other aspects
(Kapahi and Sachdeva 2019).
In this sense, the use of technologies based on bioremediation, nanotechnology, bioventilation, biospray, biostimulation,
bioaugmentation, and phytoremediation, could be ecient in mitigating contamination in the mining environmental liabilities
studied (Kapahi and Sachdeva 2019; Roychowdhury et al. 2019; Subramaniam et al. 2019; Alharbi et al. 2020; Tahir et al. 2020;
Sayqal and Ahmed 2021). Bioremediation requires less labor, is economical, ecological, sustainable, and relatively easy to
implement, although it has the disadvantage of being slow, and time-consuming. In some cases, is required the treatment of
toxic elements generated in the biodegradation process (Sayqal and Ahmed 2021). In addition, soil replacement, surface layer
improvements, compatible land covers (surface coating), soil washing, use of organic matter, and planting of native or exotic
Page 10/16
species, among others, (Prieto Méndez et al. 2018; Sen Gupta et al. 2020; Peco et al. 2021; Adnan et al. 2022; Durante-Yánez et
al. 2022; Lin et al. 2022) can be integrated perfectly with before mentioned techniques and accelerate the recovery processes of
contaminated soils.
There is no recipe to solve this problem, however, it is possible to use different integrated technologies that allow accomplishing
solutions in the short, medium, and long term to ensure that the ecosystem sustainably recovers its ecological integrity (Lin et
al. 2017). The strategies to be used depending on the characteristics of the area, and the level and type of contamination of the
site.
Conclusions
Of the 05 environmental liabilities analyzed, Cercana and Chulluncane have high levels of arsenic, cadmium, and lead, which
exceeded the permissible limits, with a very high and extreme degree of contamination, while Tutupaca, Yucamane, and Cano
have high levels of free cyanide and mercury. In Peru, there are many environmental liabilities of mining origin with a high
potential for contamination of rivers, soils, and entire ecosystems, which constitutes a threat to wildlife, ora, and fauna, in
addition to the socio-environmental, economic, and human health risks that this entails. This, together with its availability and
free accessibility of abandoned land, and the lack of effective Government programs that contain, mitigate, or eliminate said
impacts, there is a latent danger of an environmental disaster that can cause enormous human and economic losses, in
addition to the associated cost to the solution or attention of the same.
Declarations
Acknowledgments We would like to thank Jorge Basadre Grohmann National University, which allowed us to nance and carry
out this study, and the Tacna Regional Directorate of Energy and Mines for the orientation on the eld trip in the initial stage of
the project.
Funding
This research was nanced by Canon Funds for Scientic and Technological Research Projects at the Jorge Basadre
Grohmann National University [Resolución Rectoral No. 4723-2015-UN/JBG].
Conicts of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conicts of interest.
Author Contributions
All authors contributed to the investigation. Study conception and design, methodology were performed by César Julio Cáceda
Quiroz and Milena Carpio Mamani. The formal analysis by Milena Carpio. The data curation by Milena Carpio and Gisela July
Maraza Choque. The rst draft of the manuscript was written by Milena Carpio Mamani and all authors commented on
previous versions of the manuscript. The supervision, project management and the acquisition of funds by César Julio Cáceda
Quiroz.
References
1. Abdulnabi ZA, Saleh SM, Hassan WF (2020) Temporal and spatial variation of total cyanide levels and using the pollution
indices in Sediment of Shatt Al-Arab River and Marine environment of Iraq. Solid State Technol 63:5288–5297
2. Abouian Jahromi M, Jamshidi-Zanjani A, Khodadadi Darban A (2020) Heavy metal pollution and human health risk
assessment for exposure to surface soil of mining area: a comprehensive study. Environ Earth Sci 79:1–18.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-020-09110-3
Page 11/16
3. Adimalla N, Qian H, Wang H (2019) Assessment of heavy metal (HM) contamination in agricultural soil lands in northern
Telangana, India: an approach of spatial distribution and multivariate statistical analysis. Environ Monit Assess 191:1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-019-7408-1
4. Adnan M, Xiao B, Xiao P, et al (2022) Research Progress on Heavy Metals Pollution in the Soil of Smelting Sites in China.
Toxics 10:1–30. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10050231
5. Akpambang VOE, Ebuzeme GC, Akinola JO (2022) Heavy metal contamination of topsoil around a cement factory–A case
study of Obajana Cement Plc. Environ Pollut Bioavailab 34:12–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395940.2021.2024090
. Alam MS, Akter S, Shemul S, et al (2022) Assessing the quality and heavy metal contamination of soil in tea gardens
around Magurchara gas blowout in Bangladesh using multivariate and soil quality index methods. J Hazard Mater Adv
7:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hazadv.2022.100127
7. Alharbi NS, Hu B, Hayat T, et al (2020) Ecient elimination of environmental pollutants through sorption-reduction and
photocatalytic degradation using nanomaterials. Front Chem Sci Eng 14:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11705-020-1923-
z
. ASGMI (2010) Manual para el inventario de minas abandonadas o paralizadas. In: Asoc. Serv. Geol. y Minería Iberoam.
https://asgmi.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Manual_Inventario_PAM_Completo.pdf. Accessed 22 Jan 2022
9. Asmoay ASA, Salman SA, El-Gohary AM, Sabet HS (2019) Evaluation of heavy metal mobility in contaminated soils
between Abu Qurqas and Dyer Mawas Area, El Minya Governorate, Upper Egypt. Bull Natl Res Cent 43:1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s42269-019-0133-7
10. Bini C, Maleci L, Wahsha M (2017) Mine Waste: Assessment of Environmental Contamination and Restoration. In:
Assessment, Restoration and Reclamation of Mining Inuenced Soils. pp 89–134
11. Cai LM, Wang QS, Wen HH, et al (2019) Heavy metals in agricultural soils from a typical township in Guangdong Province,
China: Occurrences and spatial distribution. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 168:184–191.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.10.092
12. Camargo JC, Arias JP, Muñoz D (2013) Mercury content assessment is soils and stream-be in Miraores one Quinchía
Colombia. Acta Agronómica 64:165–177. https://doi.org/10.15446/acag.v64n2.40639
13. Candeias C, Ávila P, Coelho P, Teixeira JP (2018) Mining activities: Health impacts. In: O. N (ed) Encyclopedia of
Environmental Health, 2nd edn. Elsevier Inc., Michigan, pp 1–21
14. Castillo L, Satalaya C, Paredes U, et al (2021) Pasivos ambientales mineros en el Perú: Resultados de la auditoría de
desempeño sobre gobernanza para el manejo integral de los PAM. Doc. Política en Control Gub. 1:1–52
15. Castro-González NP, Calderón-Sánchez F, Moreno-Rojas R, et al (2017) Health risks in rural populations due to heavy metals
found in agricultural soils irrigated with wastewater in the Alto Balsas sub-basin in Tlaxcala and Puebla, Mexico. Int J
Environ Health Res 27:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/09603123.2017.1386767
1. Chappuis M (2019) Remediación y activación de pasivos ambientales mineros (PAM) en el Perú. Medio Ambient y Desarro
1–47
17. Chávez M (2015) Los Pasivos Ambientales Mineros: Diagnóstico Y Propuestas. Red Propues. y Acción Minería Ambient.
Comunidad 1–82
1. Chen MH, Yu XZ, Feng YX (2021) Tracing the pollution and human risks of potentially toxic elements in agricultural area
nearby the cyanide baths from an active private gold mine in Hainan Province, China. Environ Geochem Health 2:1–18.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-021-01038-2
19. Covarrubias SA, Peña Cabriales JJ (2017) Contaminación ambiental por metales pesados en México: Problemática y
estrategias de torremediación. Rev Int Contam Ambient 33:7–21. https://doi.org/10.20937/RICA.2017.33.esp01.01
20. De Astudillo LR, Prin JL, Noriega J, et al (2008) Determinación de Mercurio en suelos del sector minero las claritas, estado
Bolívar, mediante procesos analiticos de Especiación y Microscopía electrónica de barrido (meb). Univ Oriente Venez
20:343–352
Page 12/16
21. Demková L, Jezný T, Bobulská L (2017) Assessment of soil heavy metal pollution in a former mining area-before and after
the end of mining activities. Soil Water Res 12:1–8. https://doi.org/10.17221/107/2016-SWR
22. Durante-Yánez EV, Martínez-Macea MA, Combatt Caballero E, et al (2022) Phytoremediation of soils contaminated with
heavy metals: Techniques and strategies. Plants 11:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10395-2_10
23. EPA (1998) Method 6020A (SW-846). Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometromtry. In: United States Environ. Prot.
Agency. https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/homeland-security-research/epa-method-6020a-sw-846-inductively-
coupled-plasma-mass-spectrometry_.html. Accessed 22 Jun 2022
24. EPA (2014) SW-846 Test Method 9013A. Cyanide Extraction Procedure for Solids and Oils. In: United States Environ. Prot.
Agency. https://www.epa.gov/hw-sw846/sw-846-test-method-9013a-cyanide-extraction-procedure-solids-and-oils.
Accessed 22 Jun 2022
25. Favas PJ de C, Martino LE, Prasad MNV (2018) Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation-Challenges and Opportunities (Holistic
Approach). In: Bio-Geotechnologies for Mine Site Rehabilitation. Elsevier Inc., pp 3–31
2. Förstner U. WA, Calmano W (1994) Sediment Quality Objectives and Criteria Development in Germany. Water Sci Technol
28:307–316. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.1993.0629
27. Garcia-Sanchez A, Alvarez-Ayuso E (2003) Arsenic in soils and waters and its relation to geology and mining activities
(Salamanca Province, Spain). J Geochemical Explor 80:69–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-6742(03)00183-3
2. Gasparatos D (2022) Soil Contamination by Heavy Metals and Metalloids. Environments 9:10–13.
https://doi.org/10.3390/environments9030032
29. Gupta S, Jena V, Matic N, et al (2014) Assessment of Geo-Accumulation Index of Heavy Metal and Source of
Contamination By Multivariate Factor Analysis. Int J Hazard Mater 2:18–22
30. Hadzi GY, Ayoko GA, Essumang DK, Osae SKD (2019) Contamination impact and human health risk assessment of heavy
metals in surface soils from selected major mining areas in Ghana. Environ Geochem Health 41:2821–2843.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-019-00332-4
31. Hakanson L (1980) An ecological risk index for aquatic pollution control.a sedimentological approach. Water Res 14:975–
1001. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(80)90143-8
32. Heidari A, Kumar V, Keshavarzi A (2019) Appraisal of metallic pollution and ecological risks in agricultural soils of Alborz
province, Iran, employing contamination indices and multivariate statistical analyses. Int J Environ Health Res 31:1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09603123.2019.1677864
33. Huang SH (2014) Fractional distribution and risk assessment of heavy metal contaminated soil in vicinity of a lead/zinc
mine. Trans Nonferrous Met Soc China 24:3324–3331. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-6326(14)63473-7
34. Issaka S, Ashraf MA (2021) Chapter 9 - Phytorestoration of mine spoiled: “Evaluation of natural phytoremediation process
occurring at ex‐tin mining catchment.” In: Bauddh K, Korstad J, Sharma P (eds) Phytorestoration of Abandoned Mining and
Oil Drilling Sites. Elsevier B.V., Estados Unidos, pp 219–248
35. Jennings AA, Cox AN, Hise SJ, Petersen EJ (2002) Heavy metal contamination in the browneld soils of Cleveland. Soil
Sediment Contam 11:719–750. https://doi.org/10.1080/20025891107069
3. Jiang HH, Cai LM, Wen HH, et al (2020) An integrated approach to quantifying ecological and human health risks from
different sources of soil heavy metals. Sci Total Environ 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134466
37. Kapahi M, Sachdeva S (2019) Bioremediation options for heavy metal pollution. J Heal Pollut 9:1–20.
https://doi.org/10.5696/2156-9614-9.24.191203
3. Khalid S, Shahid M, Niazi NK, et al (2017) A comparison of technologies for remediation of heavy metal contaminated
soils. J Geochemical Explor 182:247–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gexplo.2016.11.021
39. Krishna AK, Mohan KR, Murthy NN, et al (2013) Assessment of heavy metal contamination in soils around chromite mining
areas, Nuggihalli, Karnataka, India. Environ Earth Sci 70:699–708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-012-2153-6
40. Krishnakumar A, Aditya SK, Seenipandi K, et al (2021) Evaluation of suspended sediment concentration and heavy metal
distribution in Ashtamudi Lake, a Ramsar site in the southwest coast of India using remote sensing and GIS techniques. In:
Page 13/16
Rani M, Seenipandi K, Rehman S, et al. (eds) Remote Sensing of Ocean and Coastal Environments, First Edit. Elsevier Ltd,
India, pp 251–275
41. Kumar V, Cerda A, Sharma A (2020) Heavy Metals in the Environment. In: Elsevier.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780128216569/heavy-metals-in-the-environment#book-description. Accessed 6 Oct
2022
42. Li P, Wu J, Qian H, Zhou W (2016) Distribution, enrichment and sources of trace metals in the topsoil in the vicinity of a
steel wire plant along the Silk Road economic belt, northwest China. Environ Earth Sci 75:1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5719-x
43. Lin C, Cheruiyot NK, Bui XT, Ngo HH (2022) Composting and its application in bioremediation of organic contaminants.
Bioengineered 13:1073–1089. https://doi.org/10.1080/21655979.2021.2017624
44. Lin Z, Huimin Y, Yunfeng H, et al (2017) Overview of Ecological Restoration Technologies and Evaluation Systems. J
Resour Ecol 8:315–324. https://doi.org/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2017.04.002
45. Luo Y (2019) Environmental problems in the mining of metal minerals. In: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental
Science. pp 1–4
4. Mayes WM, Jarvis AP (2011) Remediation of Aquatic Post-Industrial Inorganic Pollutants. Encycl Environ Heal 789–800.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-52272-6.00047-7
47. Minam (2017) Ley N° 28271. In: Gob.pe. https://www.gob.pe/institucion/minam/normas-legales/3588-28271
4. Minam (2014) Guía para el muestreo de suelos. Minist. del Ambient. 1–72
49. Minem (2021) R. M. No 200-2021-MINEM/DM. In: El Peru. https://www.minem.gob.pe/_legislacionM.php?
idSector=1&idLegislacion=13423. Accessed 22 Feb 2022
50. Mueller VG (1986) Schadstoffe in Sedimenten - Sedimente als Schadstoffe. Mitt, österr geol Ges 79:107–126
51. Oyarzún R, Higueras P, Lillo J (2011) Minería Ambiental. Una introducción a los Impactos y su Remediación. GEMM -
Aula2puntonet 1–337
52. Oyewo OA, Adeniyi A, Bopape MF, Onyango MS (2020) Heavy metal mobility in surface water and soil, climate change, and
soil interactions. In: Vara MN, Pietrzykowski M (eds) Climate Change and Soil Interactions, Primera. Elsevier, United States,
pp 51–88
53. Pabón S, Benítez R, Sarria R, Gallo J (2020) Water contamination by heavy metals, analysis methods and removal
technologies. A review. Entre Cienc e Ing 14:9–18
54. Peco JD, Higueras P, Campos JA, et al (2021) Abandoned mine lands reclamation by plant remediation technologies.
Sustain 13:1–27. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126555
55. Prieto Méndez J, García Prieto F, Acevedo Sandoval OA, Trejo González N (2018) Phytoremediation of soils contaminated
with heavy metals. Biodivers Int J 2:362–376. https://doi.org/10.15406/bij.2018.02.00088
5. Razo I, Carrizales L, Castro J, et al (2004) Arsenic and heavy metal pollution of soil, water and sediments in a semi-arid
climate mining area in Mexico. Water Air Soil Pollut 152:129–152. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:WATE.0000015350.14520.c1
57. Roychowdhury R, Roy M, Mitra A (2019) Bioremediation Potential of Microbes Towards Heavy Metal Contamination. Int J
Res Anal Rev 6:1088–1094
5. Sayqal A, Ahmed OB (2021) Advances in Heavy Metal Bioremediation: An Overview. Appl Bionics Biomech 2021:1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/1609149
59. Sen Gupta G, Yadav G, Tiwari S (2020) Bioremediation of Heavy Metals: A New Approach to Sustainable Agriculture. In:
Upadhyay AK, Singh R, Singh D (eds) Restoration of Wetland Ecosystem: A Trajectory Towards a Sustainable Environment.
Springer Nature Singapure Pte Ltd., Singapore, pp 195–226
0. Shahid M, Khalid S, Abbas G, Shahid N (2015) Heavy metal stress and crop productivity. In: Hakeem KR (ed) Crop
Production and Global Environmental Issues. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, Vehari-Pakistán, pp 1–25
1. Shao Y, Yan T, Wang K, et al (2020) Soil heavy metal lead pollution and its stabilization remediation technology. Energy
Reports 6:122–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2020.11.074
Page 14/16
2. Soto-Benavente M, Rodriguez-Achata L, Olivera M, et al (2020) Riesgos para la salud por metales pesados en productos
agrícolas cultivados en áreas abandonadas por la minería aurífera en la Amazonía peruana. Sci Agropecu 11:49–59.
https://doi.org/10.17268/sci.agropecu.2020.01.06
3. Subramaniam MN, Goh PS, Lau WJ, Ismail AF (2019) The roles of nanomaterials in conventional and emerging
technologies for heavy metal removal: A state-of-the-art review. Nanomaterials 9:1–32.
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano9040625
4. SUMMIT (1996) Method 7199. Determination of hexavalent chromium in drinking water, groundwater and industrial
wastewater euents by ion chromatography. In: Summit Environ. Technol. https://settek.com/EPA-Method-7199/.
Accessed 23 Jun 2022
5. SUMMIT (2004) Method 9045D. Soil and Waste pH. In: Summit Environ. Technol. https://settek.com/EPA-Method-9045D/.
Accessed 22 Jun 2022
. Sun Z, Xie X, Wang P, et al (2018) Heavy metal pollution caused by small-scale metal ore mining activities: A case study
from a polymetallic mine in South China. Sci Total Environ 639:217–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.05.176
7. Tahir MB, Raque M, Raque MS, et al (2020) Photocatalytic nanomaterials for degradation of organic pollutants and
heavy metals. In: Tahir MB, Raque MS, Raque M (eds) Nanotechnology and Photocatalysis for Environmental
Applications. Elsevier Inc., United States, pp 119–138
. Tomlinson DL, Wilson JG, Harris CR, Jeffrey DW (1980) Problems in the assessment of heavy-metal levels in estuaries and
the formation of a pollution index. Helgolander Meeresunters 33:566–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02414780
9. Valenzuela A, Fytai K, Sánchez M (2000) Manejo de arsenico en la industria metalúrgica del cobre en chile. Dep Metal
366–370
70. YUAN Y ning, CHAI L yuan, YANG Z hui, et al (2017) Immobilization of Cd and Pb in soils by polymeric hydroxyl ferric
phosphate. Trans Nonferrous Met Soc China 27:1165–1171. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-6326(17)60136-5
71. Zakir HM, Sumi SA, Sharmin S, et al (2015) Heavy metal contamination in surface soils of some industrial areas of
Gazipur, Bangladesh. J Chem Bio Phy Sci Sec D 5:2191–2206
72. Zhang P, Qin C, Hong X, et al (2018) Risk assessment and source analysis of soil heavy metal pollution from lower reaches
of Yellow River irrigation in China. Sci Total Environ 633:1136–1147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.228
Figures
Page 15/16
Figure 1
The concentration of analyzed elements
Page 16/16
Figure 2
Contamination Load Index.
