Mercury distribution and mobility at the abandoned Puhipuhi mercury mine, Northland, New Zealand

Figures & data

Figure 1 Location of the Puhipuhi Mine in Northland, New Zealand.

Figure 2 Historic map of the mercury mining operation and processing plant at Puhipuhi (Henderson 1944).

Figure 3 Map of the Puhipuhi Mine site with sampling locations. Arrow is pointing north.

Table 1 Water chemistry data from Waikiore Stream and dam at Puhipuhi Mine, including filtered (<0.45 μm) mercury (Hg_T, MeHg_T) concentrations.

Sample site	Area	Location/ GPS Coordinates	pH	Eh (mV)	Cl^− (mg L^−1)	SO4^2− (mg L^−1)	NO3^− (mg L^−1)	F^− (mg L^−1)	Filtered MeHgT (ng L^−1)	Filtered HgT (ng L^−1)	% HgT as MeHgT
PP1	Waikiore Stream	35°27′38″S, 174°15′8″E	5.1	364	6.54	7.45	<0.005	n.d.	1.41	240	0.6
PP4	Dam	35°27′38″S, 174°15′3″E	7.1	245	7.90	1.73	0.24	n.d.	1.95	118	1.6
PP5	Waikiore Stream	35°27′39″S, 174°15′10″E	5.1	271	7.80	9.08	<0.005	n.d.	0.637	219	0.3
PP6	Above dam	35°27′40″S, 174°15′3″E	7.2	320	9.19	20.8	<0.005	0.20	0.706	69.6	1.0
PP5T^1	Waikiore Stream	35°27′39″S, 174°15′10″E	5.1	271	8.03	10.2	<0.005	n.d.	0.823	–	–
PP6T^1	Above dam	35°27′40″S, 174°15′3″E	7.2	320	9.55	20.4	n.d.	0.20	0.823	–	–

¹ PP5T and PP6T are replicate samples for anion and methylmercury analyses, taken using Teflon bottles.

n.d., not detected.

Table 2 Total solid-phase mercury (Hg_T) content of soils and sediments, and gaseous elemental mercury (Hg⁰) from processing area, including pH of standing water when sediment samples were collected. Processing area is located at 35°27′43″S, 174°15′10″E.

Sample	Area	Description	pH	Hg^0(ng m^−3)	Solid HgT(µg g^−1)
PP003	Site A	Soil, 5 cm under pipe near exhaust fan	–	–	1486
PP009	Site A	Soil, 5 cm depth, adjacent to exhaust fan	–	–	37.8
PA1	Site A	Gas, 10 min sample time, soil adjacent to exhaust pipe	–	0.50	–
PA2	Site A	Gas, 30 min sample time, in exhaust fan	–	0.33	–
PA3	Site A	Gas, 64 min sample time, in exhaust tower	–	0.16	–
PB1	Site B	Gas, 49 min sample time, in tank on farthest right	–	0.20	–
PP005	Site C	Soil, 10 cm depth, in front of second condensing tower	–	–	35.3
PP006	Site C	Soil, 8–10 cm depth, between condensing towers and pipe battery	–	–	50.5
PP007	Site C	Sediment from second condensing tower	4.3–4.6	–	353
PC1	Site C	Gas, 77 min sample time, in third condensing tower	–	0.06	–
PP001	Site D	Ash-like sediment from inside concrete structure of the pipe exchange	2.8–3.1	–	774
PP002	Site D	Wet sediment from inside concrete structure of the pipe exchange	2.8–3.1	–	1748
PP023	Site D	Sediment from tiered pool of pipe exchange	2.8–3.1	–	529
PP008	Site E	Sediment from concrete cooling trough of pipe battery	5.2–6.4	–	39.4
PP011	Site E	Moss, sampled below spigot from concrete trough	–	–	9.1
PP004	Site F	Sediment from water holding tank	2.7	–	123

Table 3 Total mercury (Hg_T), methylmercury (MeHg_T) and gaseous elemental mercury (Hg⁰) of sediments, soils, water and vegetation of Puhipuhi Mine, published values for other Hg mine sites, regional baselines and regulatory values.

	Filtered Water		Sediment/mine waste/ soil		Air
	HgT	MeHgT	HgT	MeHgT	Hg^0
Location	(ng L^−1)	(ng L^−1)	(µg g^−1)	(ng g^−1)	(ng m^−3)
Puhipuhi Mine
Waikiore Stream at mine	69.6–240	0.61–1.02	–	–	–
Downstream from mines, Wairua River^1	100–1000	–	<100	–	–
Soils and sediments (processing area)	–	–	35–1748	–	–
Puhipuhi mineralised rocks (Hg mine quarry)^2	–	–	1–100	–	–
Puhipuhi soils (C-horizon, >1 km from quarry)^2	–	–	0.01–100	–	–
Ambient air (processing area)	–	–	–	–	0.06–0.50
Hg mines, Humboldt River Basin, Nevada, USA^3
Downstream from mines	2.1–2000	<0.02–0.92	0.17–170	0.12–0.95	–
Mine waste calcine	–	–	14–14,000	<0.05–96	–
Coast Ranges Hg mines, California, USA^4,5,6
Downstream from mines (San Carlos Creek)	1.63–140	0.017–1.2	91.3–319	–	–
Mine waste calcine and soil	–	–	380–6530	–	–
Processing area	–	–	–	–	3000–188,000
Hg mines, Kuskokwin River, Alaska, USA^7
Downstream from mines	<50	<1.0	0.9–5500	0.05–31.0	–
Mine-waste calcine and soil	–	–	3.5–46,000	0.2–41	–
Hg mine, Palawan, Philippines^8
Downstream from mines	8–13	–	3.7–15	0.28–3.9	–
Mine waste calcine	100–30,000	–	28–660	0.13–3.2	–
Hg mines, Monte Amiata, Italy^9,10
Downstream from mines	–	–	0.26–14	0.2–8.7	–
Mine waste calcine and soil	–	–	0.64–1500	0.34–45	–
Buildings containing condensers and furnaces	–	–	–	–	5000–10000
Idrija Hg mine, Slovenia^11
Downstream from mines	0.25–143	0.12–0.27	0.77–4121	0.01–11	–
Mine waste calcine and soil	–	–	0.3–19900	6.5–14	–
Hg mines, Guizhou Province, China^12
Mine waste calcine and sediments	–	–	5.7–4400	0.17–20	–
Moss	–	–	1.0–95	0.21–20	–
Comparative Standards^13
NZ drinking water standard	7000	–	–	–	–
US EPA, acute aquatic life water standard	2400	–	–	–	–
US EPA, chronic aquatic life water standard	770	–	–	–	–
USEPA, regional screening level for soil	–	–	23	–	–
NZ MFE-ambient air quality guidelines, Hg (annual)	–	–	–	–	330
NZ occupational exposure limits for inorganic Hg (8 hr)	–	–	–	–	25,000
Background/baseline values
Freshwater lakes^14,15	0.04–74	0.003–6	–	–	–
Freshwater rivers and streams^14,15	1–7	0.078–0.55	–	–	–
Global background for uncultivated soils^16	–	–	0.045–0.16	–	–
Auckland soils^17	–	–	<0.03–0.45	–	–
Ngāwhā geothermal field (Northland) soils^18	–	–	0.017–0.35	–	–
South Island unweathered metagreywacke^2	–	–	0.1–0.25	–	–
South Island metamorphosed basalts^2	–	–	0.04–0.14	–	–
Typical Hg content in New Zealand ambient air^13	–	–	–	–	0.42–3.1

¹ Hoggins & Brooks (1973), ²Craw et al. (2002), ³Gray et al. (2002b), ⁴Rytuba (2000), ⁵Ganguli (2000), ⁶Degraff et al. (2007), ⁷Gray et al. (2000), ⁸Gray et al. (2003), ⁹Rimondi et al. (2012), ¹⁰Vaselli et al. (2012), ¹¹Kocman et al. (2010), ¹²Qiu et al. (2005), ¹³Chrystall & Rumsby (2009), ¹⁴USEPA (2001), ¹⁵Krabbenhoft et al. (2007), ¹⁶Siegel (2002), ¹⁷ARC (2001), ¹⁸Davey & van Moort (1986).

Henderson J 1944. Cinnabar at Puhipuhi and Ngawha, North Auckland. NZ Journal of Science and Technology 26: 47–60.

 Google Scholar

Hoggins FE, Brooks RR 1973. Natural dispersion of mercury from Puhipuhi, Northland, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 7: 125–132. 10.1080/00288330.1973.9515459

 Google Scholar

Craw D, Chappell D, Black A 2002. Surface run‐off from mineralised road aggregate, Puhipuhi, Northland, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 36: 105–116. 10.1080/00288330.2002.9517074

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gray JE, Crock JG, Lasorsa BK 2002b. Mercury methylation at mercury mines in the Humboldt River Basin, Nevada, USA. Geochemistry: Exploration, Environment, Analysis 2: 143–149. 10.1016/S0883-2927(02)00004-5

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rytuba JJ 2000. Mercury mine drainage and processes that control its environmental impact. The Science of the Total Environment 260: 57–71. 10.1016/S0048-9697(00)00541-6

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ganguli PM 2000. Mercury speciation in drainage from the New Idria mercury mine, California. Environmental Science and Technology 34: 47–73. 10.1021/es991364y

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

DeGraff JV, Rogow M, Trainor P 2007. Approaches to contamination at mercury mill sites: Examples from California and Idaho. Reviews in Engineering Geology 17: 115–134.

 Google Scholar

Gray JE, Theodorakos PM, Bailey EA, Turner RR 2000. Distribution, speciation, and transport of mercury in stream-sediment, stream-water, and fish collected near abandoned mercury mines in southwestern Alaska, USA. The Science of the Total Environment 260(1–3): 21–33.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gray JE, Greaves IA, Bustos DM, Krabbenhoft DP 2003. Mercury and methylmercury contents in mine-waste calcine, water, and sediment collected from the Palawan Quicksilver Mine, Philippines. Environmental Geology 43(3): 298–307.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rimondi V, Gray JE, Costagliola P, Vaselli O, Lattanzi P 2012. Concentration, distribution, and translocation of mercury and methylmercury in mine-waste, sediment, soil, water, and fish collected near the Abbadia San Salvatore mercury mine, Monte Amiata district, Italy. The Science of the Total Environment 414: 318–327. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.10.065

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kocman D, Kanduč T, Ogrinc N, Horvat M 2010. Distribution and partitioning of mercury in a river catchment impacted by former mercury mining activity. Biogeochemistry 104: 183–201. 10.1007/s10533-010-9495-5

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Qiu G, Feng X, Wang S, Shang L 2005. Mercury and methylmercury in riparian soil, sediments, mine-waste calcines, and moss from abandoned Hg mines in east Guizhou province, southwestern China. Applied Geochemistry 20: 627–638.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chrystall L, Rumsby A 2009. Mercury inventory for New Zealand 2008. Technical Report to the New Zealand Ministry of Environment. Auckland, Pattle Demalore Partners Ltd. 136 p.

 Google Scholar

USEPA 2001. Mercury update: impact on fish advisories. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Fact Sheet. Pp. 1–10.

 Google Scholar

Krabbenhoft DP, Engstrom D, Gilmour C, Harris R, Hurley JP and Mason RP 2007. Monitoring and evaluating trends in sediment and water indicators. In: Harris R, Krabbenhoft DP, Mason R, Murray MW, Reash R, and Saltman T eds. Ecosystem responses to mercury contamination: indicators of change. Webster, NY: SETAC. Pp. 47–86.

 Google Scholar

Siegel FR ed. 2002. Environmental geochemistry of potentially toxic metals. Berlin, Springer. 218 p.

 Google Scholar

ARC 2001. Background concentrations of inorganic elements in soils from the Auckland region. ARC Technical Publication. http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz/council/documents/ ( accessed 29 July 2013).

 Google Scholar

Davey HA, van Moort JC 1986. Current mercury deposition at Ngawha Springs, New Zealand. Applied Geochemistry 1: 75–93. 10.1016/0883-2927(86)90039-9

 Google Scholar