**1. Introduction**

Pollution caused by nonferrous metal mining has attracted increasing attention from the public in China. With the issue of *The 12th Five-Year Plan for Comprehensive Prevention and Control of Heavy Metal Pollution,* the pollution caused by nonferrous metal mining, processing, and metallurgy has been again highlighted. As the country hosting the world's largest reserves of Sb resources and production, the mining and processing industry has generated significant pollution loads on the local environment. Antimony ores are of various types, with many associated minerals and element associations [1,2]. Because of this, Sb ore processing is complex, during which PTEs associated with ore minerals can enter the environment, dispersing in air, soil, and groundwater and leading to migration in the food chain, accumulating in animals, plants, or the human body, and increasing risk to human health [3–6].

The characteristics of potentially toxic elements (PTEs) pollution in Xikuangshan (XKS) Antimony Mine in Lengshuijiang, Hunan Province, has recently been the focus of independent researches. It has been observed that the water, vegetable fields, farmland, and soil in the tailings zone around XKS Antimony Mine are all seriously polluted [7–13]. PTEs released to water and soil have directly polluted

crops, with PTEs in edible parts of foliage vegetables, fruits, and rhizomes grown in the affected areas of XKS mining area found to be several times higher than those in non-affected areas, among which, Sb and As are the two PTEs dominating this contamination [11,14–16]. When an excessive amount of PTEs enter the human body, it will cause tumors and diseases to the liver, skin, and respiratory and cardiovascular systems, and even cancer [17–21]. Sb, As, Hg, and their compounds are listed as pollutants of priority interest by the United States Environmental Protection Agency [22] and the European Union [23]. However, while spatial assessment across the mine-affected region has identified indicative source–pathway–receptor links [24] a more detailed assessment of release from the antimony beneficiation process is missing.

We report here on an assessment of the release of PTEs in wastewater, dust, and solid waste derived from the beneficiation process. The results provide input to process review for environmental protection and occupational exposure routes for longer-term management of site operations.

### **2. Material and Methods**

#### *2.1. Description of Antimony Processing*

The antimony processing plant is located in the north of XKS Antimony Mine, Hunan Province. It covers an area of about 18,000 m2 and has a beneficiation scale of 1500 t/d (ton/day). The beneficiation ore is of single antimony sulfide ore, a kind of low temperature hydrothermal filling deposit. It mainly consists of metal minerals (mainly stibnite (Sb2S3) and a small amount of antimony oxide (Sb2O3), pyrite (FeS2), pyrrhotite (Fe(1-x)S), etc.) and gangue minerals (mainly quartz (SiO2)), followed by calcite (CaCO3), barite (BaSO4), kaolin (Al2O3·SiO2·2H2O, gypsum (CaSO4·2H2O), etc.).

The antimony ore beneficiation process was carried out with the combined methods of manual separation, heavy medium separation, and flotation separation. In manual separation, the waste rock accounts for 40%~45%, and the recovery rate of antimony ores after manual separation is 92%~96%; in a heavy-medium separation, with ferrosilicon used as the weighting agent, the ores at the density of 2.62~2.64 t/m3 are picked out, with the discard and the recovery rate at this point being 40%~43% and 93%~95%, respectively. After the two separation steps, the enriched antimony ores are ground to the size of less than 0.074 mm for separation by flotation. During the flotation process, each ton of ore consumes 3.5 m<sup>3</sup> water and produces 0.2 kg dust and 920 kg tailings.

Management of wastes and longer-term operation has been outlined in our previous studies [25]. The 120 years of operation at the site have resulted in widespread and sporadic deposition to fill voids generated during mining, covering an area of over 70 km2. Currently tailings are stored behind a reservoir after transport from separation and flotation processes by wastewater. The wastewater is discharged to the local river after minimal treatment.

### *2.2. Sampling Point Layout and Sample Collection*

Sampling carried out for this study identified locations where the predominant discharge/generation of PTEs emissions occurs. Namely: (1) Wastewater generated at ore concentration, tailings accumulation, ore filtration, and tailings reservoir; (2) the production of dust is at the crushing and screening workshop, the fine ore bin, and from the concentrate transportation; and (3) the solid wastes are dominated by the tailings reservoir. Consequently, 24 samples were collected: 12 Wastewater samples were collected from the ore concentrate tank, ore concentrate filter tank, tailings concentration tank, and tailings reservoir. Three separate samples were collected at random from each of the 4 locations (W1~W3, W4~W6, W7~W9, and W10~W12, respectively). Six dust samples with duplicates were collected from the 3 locations (crushing and screening workshop, fine ore bin, and concentrate transportation, numbered D1–D2, D3–D4, and D5–D6, respectively). Three samples were collected from the surface of the tailings reservoir (S1–S3) and three samples of surface soil (0–20 cm in depth) were collected from around the tailings reservoir (S4–S6). Each solid sample was a composite from 3 subsamples mixed together in the field to make total bulk of 1 kg.

The water samples were immediately packed into rinsed pollution-free polyethylene plastic bottles, acidified with HNO3, sealed, and stored in a portable thermostated cooler at <4 ◦C. The dust, tailings, and soil samples collected were sealed in pollution-free polyethylene plastic bags and transported to the laboratory.

### *2.3. Sample Preparation and Testing*

The solid samples (dust, tailings, and soil) were naturally air dried in the laboratory and ground to particle size less than 0.074 mm for later study. The PTEs were determined by hydride generation-atomic fluorescence (AFS-9700, Beijing Haiguang, China) after the digestion of solid samples (dust, tailings, and soil), and conditioning of water samples. Solid materials (0.10 g) were digested in triplicate as follows: 5 mL of concentrated HNO3 and 0.5 mL of HF in Teflon beakers for 12 h at 170 ◦C followed by cooling and addition of 1 mL of 30% H2O2 and 30 min later 10 mL of 5% *v*/*v* HNO3 before sample filtration with a 0.2 μm polyethylene film injection filter. Finally, ultrapure water was added to the samples to a volume of 50 mL and stored at 4 ◦C before analysis. The acidified water samples were filtered through a 0.2 μm polyethylene film injection filter before analysis.

### *2.4. Quality Control*

In order to ensure data accuracy in the analysis process and stability of test equipment, the standard reference soil (GBW07406) from China's National Institute of Metrology was treated in the same way as the dust (tailings, soil) samples, and the recovery rates of Sb, As, Hg, Pb, Cd, and Zn in standard reference materials were 95%–106%, 94%–107%, 94%–104%, 97%–105%, and 91%–105%, respectively. Calibration standards were produced after dilution of stock multi-element solution (reference) At the same time, reagent blanks were included in each batch of analysis samples, and 20% of the samples were remeasured, with RSD (relative standard deviation) remeasurement less than 10%.
