Post on 25-Apr-2023
TECHNICAL ARTICLE
Uranium and Potentially Toxic Metals During the Mining,Beneficiation, and Processing of Phosphorite and their Effectson Ground Water in Jordan
Abdulkader M. Abed Æ Rushdi Sadaqah ÆMustafa Al Kuisi
Received: 17 December 2007 / Accepted: 20 March 2008 / Published online: 19 April 2008
� Springer-Verlag 2008
Abstract Representative samples were collected from
various stages of phosphorite mining and beneficiation
from the Al-Abiad and Al-Hasa mines in central Jordan
and the Eshidiyya mine in southern Jordan. After open pit
mining, the rock is crushed and dry-sieved to pass 12 mm
in order to concentrate the ore. The sieved material is then
agitated, washed with fresh water, and wet sieved to pass
4 mm. Samples were analyzed by ICP-MS for major ele-
ments and As, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Hg, Mo, Ni, Pb, Se, U, V,
and Zn. We found that throughout the above-mentioned
processes, potentially toxic metals are partially removed
from the ore. However, most of the contaminants are still
retained within the final phosphorite product. The slime
and slime water were analyzed; we found no effect of the
slime water on the nearby ground water regime. The
phosphorite is converted to fertilizer through reactions with
sulfuric acid and then ammonia to produce diammonium
phosphate (DAP). Gypsum is produced as a reject. The
potentially toxic metals follow the behavior of P and are
enriched by a factor of more than 1.5 in the DAP compared
with the input phosphorite. The trace metal content in the
phosphogypsum is very low.
Keywords Fertilizers � Field cells � Ground water �Jordan � Phosphorite � Toxic metals � Uranium
Introduction
Jordan started sedimentary phosphate mining in 1933 and
is now one of the world’s leaders, producing more than
6 9 106 metric tons (t) from its Upper Cretaceous phos-
phate deposits. Production now comes from three main
localities: Al-Abiad and Al-Hasa in central Jordan, and
Eshidiyya in the south (Fig. 1). The Ruseifa mines, situated
nearby the capital Amman, were closed in the late 1980s
due to exhaustion as well as to environmental issues related
to mining in a densely populated area.
The Jordanian phosphorites are near-surface deposits,
less than 40 m deep, and are mined by the open pit method.
Although the P2O5 exceeds 30% in most beds, the deposits
are upgraded by simple techniques. The mined material is
first crushed and sieved to pass 12 mm. They are then
agitated, washed with fresh water, and wet sieved. The final
product is less than 4 mm while the 4–12 mm fraction is
rejected. The very fine material is carried out with washing
water as slime and drained into nearby wadis. A small part
of the Eshidiyya phosphorite is floated to get rid of detrital
quartz.
The only environmental problem in the upgrading pro-
cess is the release of the wash water to the nearby
environment. Thus, the concentration of the trace metals in
the slime and slime water is of concern. The Al-Hasa and
Al-Abiad mines have been working since 1962 and 1979,
respectively. A major reason for this study was to deter-
mine whether these operations have elevated trace metal
concentrations in the local ground water.
The geochemistry of the Jordanian phosphorites has
been previously addressed by several workers (e.g., Abed
and Fakhouri 1996; Reeves and Saadi 1971; Sadaqah
2001). Generally, the elements are distributed between
three mineralogical phases: the francolite or carbonate
A. M. Abed (&) � R. Sadaqah � M. A. Kuisi
Department of Applied and Environmental Geology,
University of Jordan, Amman 11942, Jordan
e-mail: aabed@ju.edu.jo
123
Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182
DOI 10.1007/s10230-008-0039-3
fluorapatite; the detrital clay mineral phase; or the car-
bonate phase.
More than 90% of the produced phosphorite goes to the
fertilizer industry and consequently to the environment.
Phosphorites, worldwide, are commonly enriched in U and
other metals compared with shales, carbonates, and sand-
stones (e.g., Altschuler 1980; McArthur et al. 1987;
Sadaqah et al. 2005; Slansky 1986). This is due to pref-
erential substitution within the francolite structure (e.g.,
McClellan and Van Kauwenbergh 1990). Uranium in Jor-
danian phosphorites was studied by Abed and Khaled
(1985); Coppes et al. (1977); Khaled and Abed (1982); and
Sadaqah (2001). The trace metals Cd, Mo, U, and Zn are
usually associated with the francolite phase (e.g., Al-Agha
1985; Altschuler 1980; Khaled 1980; Lucas et al. 1980),
whereas the partial adsorption of these and some other
trace metals like Cu, Co, Cr, Ni, and V are associated with
the detrital clay (Abed and Fakhouri 1996; Reeves and
Saadi 1971). The overall aim of this study was to determine
the fate of these metals though mining and processing,
including, as mentioned above, potential ground water
contamination by slime water.
Geological Setting
Phosphorites are widespread in Jordan as part of the Al-
Hasa Phosphorite Formation (AHP). Proven reserves are in
excess of 1.5 billion tons. The AHP forms a belt extending
from the NW corner of Jordan to its SE (Fig. 1). The
phosphorites of Jordan are part of the Upper Cretaceous—
Eocene Tethys phosphorite belt, extending from the
Caribbean to Iran through North Africa and the Eastern
Mediterranean (Abed 1994; Follmi 1996; Notholt et al.
Fig. 1 Location map of the
central Jordan mines (Al-Abiad
and Al-Hisa), Eshidiyya area,
and other phosphorite deposits
in Jordan. The detailed inset
shows the location of the water
sample in central Jordan
172 Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182
123
1989; Sheldon 1987). The age of the AHP is lower Ma-
astrichtian of the Upper Cretaceous (Cappetta et al. 1996;
Hamam 1977; Quennell 1951).
The AHP in central Jordan (Al-Abiad and Al-Hasa)
consists, beside the phosphorite horizon, of various types
of limestones, marl, chert, and porcellanite (Fig. 2a). The
economic phosphorite horizon throughout central Jordan
is friable or slightly cemented with calcite. It consists of
sand-size phosphate particles; pellets, intraclasts and
vertebrate bones, teeth, and coprolites (Abed and Sadaqah
1998; Follmi 1996; Riggs 1979). Detrital quartz is almost
absent. The barren materials associated with phosphate
particles are mainly marl and clay. Therefore, the
phosphorite is subjected to treatment by crushing, wash-
ing, and desliming. For details on the genesis of the
central Jordan phosphorites, see Abed and Sadaqah
(1998).
The AHP in the Eshidiyya in the SE is slightly different
from that in central Jordan due to its proximity to the
Nubian sandstone facies further south. Detrital quartz
prevails at the base of the formation and decreases
upwards. The total thickness of the AHP is 10–15 m. Four
phosphate beds are present, designated from bottom to top
as A3, A2, A1, and A0, separated by non-phosphate
material such as marl, porcellanite, chert, and limestone
(Fig. 2b). The A0 and A2 consist of high-grade, calcareous
Fig. 2 Lithological columnar sections. a Generalized section of central Jordan phosphorites, for legend see (b). b Columnar section of the
Eshidiyya phosphorites
Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182 173
123
phosphorites, the A3 is sandy, and the A1 is rather variable
in composition. For details on the formation of the Es-
hidiyya phosphorites, see Abed et al. (2007).
Methodology
Thirty nine representative samples were collected from all
stages of production from:
• Al-Abiad, Ab series, eight samples: four solids, slime,
slime water, and two ground water samples.
• Al-Hasa, Ha series, eight samples: four solids, slime,
slime water, and three ground water samples.
• Eshidiyya, Sh series, 16 samples: 14 solids, a slime
sample, and slime water sample.
• Fertilizers, seven samples: three from the Indo-Jorda-
nian Company in Eshidiyya and four from the Aqaba
fertilizer complex.
Sampling was carried out in central Jordan between July 26
and August 2, 2006. The Eshidiyya and Aqaba samples
were collected September 12–13, 2006. Around 10 million
(m3per year) of fresh water are used to wash the final
product, becoming slime water. However, this water is
partially recycled.
There were five ground water samples, two from Al-
Abiad mines area, two from Al-Hasa mines area, and one
spring sample from Al-Hasa downstream area. No ground
water samples were collected from Eshidiyya because the
nearest water wells in the B2-A7 aquifers are too far north
([10 km) from the slime water disposal area. The Disi
sandstone aquifer (of Ordovician age) is too deep in the
desliming area and no boreholes are drilled there. For
details of sampling, see Appendix 1.
About 500 g of each solid sample was ground with a
Teema Mill to pass 200 mesh. For slime water and spring
water, a litre sample was collected, and allowed to settle
for several days; a portion of the clear water was taken for
analysis. The powder and the water samples were sent to
the Canadian ACME analytical laboratories where they
were analyzed using ICP and X-ray fluorescence tech-
niques. Seven water samples were analyzed for their
fluorine contents in the Water Research Centre at the
University of Jordan.
Results and Discussion
The chemical analysis for the samples of central Jordan,
Eshidiyya, and the fertilizer industry are displayed in
Tables 1 and 2. The samples of Al-Abiad and Al-Hasa
mines (central Jordan) were put together because they are
geologically one continuous area.
Central Jordan
Alumina (Al2O3), a component of the detrital phase, is
enriched by a factor of three in the slime (column Absl.2
slime) compared to the raw phosphorite (Ab.1 Raw), as
shown in Table 1. This is almost the same for the Al-Hasa
samples. In fact, all of the detrital elements are enriched by
roughly a factor of three at both Al-Abiad and Al-Hasa
mines. Figure 3 shows that most trace metals are also
enriched in the slime by varying degrees, but always by less
than a factor of two. Also, there is a highly significant
positive correlation between most trace metals and alumina.
Despite this, the authors agree with published literature,
which indicate that the trace metals are not fully associated
with the clay minerals and that much is still present within
the apatite (francolite) structure (Altschuler 1980).
The XRD analysis showed that a significant amount of
phosphorite is present in the slime. This is confirmed by the
presence of 17.39 and 20.45% P2O5 in the Al-Abiad and
Al-Hasa mines slime samples, respectively, which is
equivalent to about 50% francolite, as calculated from its
chemical formula. Furthermore, the final product (samples
Ab3 and Ha3) still retains 40–100% of the original con-
centration of the elements enriched in the slime.
The trace metals can be divided into three groups
according to their behavior through the upgrading process:
Group 1: elements that are enriched in the slime,
specifically, Cd, Cu, Pb, Se, and Th, which are enriched
by a factor of about 1.5; Hg and Zn, which are enriched a
factor of about 2; and Cr, V, and Ni, which are enriched
by a factor of more than 2.5, behaving very much like
the detrital material.
Group 2: elements that are practically unchanged: As,
Mo, and Co.
Group 3: elements that are depleted in the slime relative
to the original phosphorite samples: Sr and U. These two
elements are known to be accommodated in the apatite
structure.
The net result is that the beneficiation process produces a
final product that has lower metal concentrations than the
original phosphorite and slime that is enriched in some
metals, where potential toxicity is a concern. Tables 1 and
2 show the composition of the slime water and ground
water in addition to the total dissolved solids (TDS) in the
Al-Abiad and Al-Hasa samples. The concentration of all
elements is in ppb except Cl and TDS, which are in ppm.
The slime water in both mines has higher concentrations of
almost all elements, while the concentrations are less in the
water from the wells representing the ground water regime.
Figure 3c shows this relationship for selected elements. It
should be mentioned that the TDS must be higher than
reported in Table 3, because CO3, HCO3, SO4, and NO3
174 Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182
123
Ta
ble
1C
hem
ical
anal
ysi
so
fth
esa
mp
les
fro
mA
l-A
bia
d(A
b)
and
Al-
His
a(H
a)in
cen
tral
Jord
an;
maj
or
elem
ents
are
in%
,o
ther
met
als
are
inp
pm
or
pp
b(i
nth
esl
ime
wat
eran
dg
rou
nd
wat
er)
Ab
.1R
awA
b.2
\1
2m
mA
b.3
12
–4
mm
Ab
.4fi
nal
pro
d.\
4m
m
Ab
.Sl.
2sl
ime
Ab
sl1
slim
e
H20
,p
pb
Ab
bh
1b
ore
ho
le
1,
pp
b
Ab
bh
5b
ore
ho
le
5,
pp
b
Ha.
1R
aw
SiO
2%
13
.81
3.6
13
.74
17
.73
8.1
37
,82
57
,42
77
,11
66
.35
%
Al 2
O3
0.8
0.7
0.1
70
.87
2.6
46
18
20
.54
Fe 2
O3
0.4
20
.37
0.1
50
.46
1.1
1\
10
\1
0\
10
0.4
5
Mg
O0
.31
0.2
80
.21
0.3
10
.57
54
,03
64
3,8
35
68
,04
10
.29
CaO
46
.24
6.7
15
2.8
94
4.1
29
.62
14
8,1
60
60
,34
29
9,2
92
50
.8
Na 2
O0
.62
0.5
70
.55
0.5
60
.33
23
5,7
28
69
,50
72
74
,66
70
.54
K2O
0.0
70
.06
0.0
40
.08
0.1
93
,81
42
,76
14
,90
00
.05
TiO
20
.04
0.0
40
.01
0.0
40
.12
\1
0\
10
\1
00
.03
P2O
52
9.8
62
9.0
43
3.5
42
6.7
71
7.3
9\
20
\2
0\
20
29
.74
Mn
O0
.01
0.0
10
.01
0.0
10
.01
\0
.05
\0
.05
\0
.05
0.0
1
LO
I7
.68
.38
.48
.89
.61
0.9
To
t/C
1.5
82
.69
1.7
91
.81
.73
2.4
8
To
t/S
0.4
40
.41
0.5
30
.63
0.3
0.4
8
As
11
pp
m1
1p
pm
17
pp
m9
pp
m1
1p
pm
2.5
0.7
2.8
15
pp
m
Cd
54
41
08
\0
.05
\0
.05
\0
.05
6
Co
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
\0
.02
\0
.02
\0
.02
0.5
Cr
13
81
32
79
13
83
82
11
10
.59
.11
51
Cu
17
12
91
52
41
.70
.50
.68
Hg
0.0
10
.01
0.0
20
.02
0.0
2\
0.1
\0
.1\
0.1
0.0
2
Mo
25
14
41
12
53
8.3
20
12
05
Ni
12
85
12
43
55
14
20
76
Pb
33
34
4\
1\
1\
13
Se
1.1
11
.41
.51
.96
.82
0.5
12
1.2
0.9
Sr
1,8
02
1,6
98
1,9
60
1,5
88
99
62
,58
8.3
21
,34
4.1
51
,60
7.5
61
,73
3
Th
3.9
3.7
3.2
3.2
4.5
\0
.5\
0.5
\0
.52
.7
U7
97
27
56
96
78
.06
2.8
79
.34
52
V9
69
26
51
14
24
95
3.5
12
60
78
Zn
16
01
25
13
11
63
30
60
.8\
0.5
\0
.51
49
Cl
pp
m4
23
11
15
91
Br
pp
b8
73
pp
b3
17
pp
b1
24
2p
pb
Fp
pm
1.4
1.5
0.8
5
Su
mp
pm
87
82
99
10
6
Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182 175
123
Ta
ble
1co
nti
nu
ed Ha.
2\
12
mm
Ha.
31
2–
4m
mH
a.4
fin
al
pro
d.\
4m
m
Ha.
Sl.
2sl
ime
Has
l1sl
ime
H20
,p
pb
Haa
g1
bo
reh
ole
1,
pp
b
Hab
h1
1b
ore
ho
le
11
,p
pb
Has
p1
spri
ng
H20
,p
pb
Ele
m.
SiO
2%
6.6
3%
2.5
6%
12
.13
%2
8.9
%9
,02
69
,71
18
,30
67
,89
6S
i
Al 2
O3
0.6
50
.16
0.5
52
.28
19
61
94
9A
l
Fe 2
O3
0.3
30
.17
0.2
81
.11
2\
10
\1
0\
10
Fe
Mg
O0
.32
0.2
40
.30
.73
80
,38
97
5,8
95
38
,60
43
3,6
16
Mg
CaO
50
.43
53
.92
48
.23
34
.53
31
5,9
88
12
8,1
78
60
,16
46
3,5
61
Ca
Na 2
O0
.66
0.5
80
.42
0.8
33
71
,14
31
15
,20
05
6,9
43
40
,42
3N
a
K2O
0.0
40
.04
0.0
50
.17
4,0
34
2,1
23
3,1
09
1,0
87
K
TiO
20
.03
0.0
20
.03
0.1
1\
10
0\
10
\1
0\
10
Ti
P2O
53
1.7
53
2.7
92
1.8
92
0.4
9\
20
0\
20
\2
0\
20
P
Mn
O0
.01
0.0
10
.01
0.0
1\
0.0
5\
0.0
5\
0.0
5\
0.0
5M
n
LO
I8
.89
.21
5.8
10
.5
To
t/C
1.5
91
.98
4.0
91
.8
To
t/S
0.6
80
.93
2.0
40
.4
As
12
pp
m1
8p
pm
8p
pm
15
pp
m\
54
.10
.51
As
Cd
45
14
10
\0
.5\
0.0
5\
0.0
5\
0.0
5C
d
Co
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.1
\0
.2\
0.0
2\
0.0
2\
0.0
2C
o
Cr
13
86
61
12
58
61
5.4
17
.71
2.7
20
.4C
r
Cu
12
87
17
2.5
0.6
0.5
0.3
Cu
Hg
0.0
10
.01
0.0
10
.04
\1
\0
.1H
g
Mo
53
51
53
7.1
12
.32
.95
Mo
Ni
13
61
33
68
.17
.5\
0.2
0.3
Ni
Pb
22
23
\1
2.4
\0
.10
.2P
b
Se
0.9
1.3
11
.8\
52
8.7
1.9
5.3
Se
Sr
2,1
21
2,0
89
1,7
65
1,2
39
4,5
77
.05
1,5
26
.48
1,1
99
.52
45
9.0
7S
r
Th
2.7
3.1
1.8
3\
0.5
\0
.05
\0
.05
\0
.05
Th
U9
06
64
83
82
7.0
64
.03
0.1
32
.87
U
V1
52
67
91
21
91
09
23
1.1
16
.2V
Zn
14
11
11
10
02
74
\5
21
5\
0.5
2.3
Zn
Cl
pp
m6
31
38
39
77
2
Br
pp
b9
30
pp
b8
78
pp
b3
14
pp
b3
05
pp
b
Fp
pm
2.9
1.5
7.9
0.7
8
Su
mp
pm
1,4
20
71
92
74
22
1
176 Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182
123
were not analyzed. However, this was not among the aims
of this study.
The concentrations of the potentially toxic metals,
including U, is actually very low in the slime water, on the
order of 10-4–10-5 of their concentration in the raw
phosphorites. The very low concentrations of the trace
metals in the slime indicate that these elements are not
readily dissolved in fresh water, and are either strongly
held in the apatite structure (substituting for Ca like U, Cd,
Sr, Zn, …etc.) or strongly adsorbed on the clay minerals,
like Cr, Ni, ...etc. They are still much lower (3–4 fold) in
the ground water regime, presumably due to adsorption of
these elements on the clays of the soil and stream sediment
and dilution. Thus, the phosphorite mining and upgrading
activities in central Jordan do not appear to be adversely
affecting the region’s ground water; it can be freely used
for domestic purposes as its trace metal content is well
below the Jordanian domestic water standards. It should be
mentioned though that Ra and Ra isotopes were not ana-
lyzed in this work.
Eshidiyya Area
Table 2 shows the chemical analysis of selected samples
from the Eshidiyya area in southern Jordan. The phos-
phorite deposits in the Eshidiyya area are more complex
than those of central Jordan. As previously mentioned, the
deposits in central Jordan consist of one phosphorite
horizon varying in thickness but essentially of rather a
similar composition; i.e. calcareous phosphorites. In Es-
hidiyya, there are four phosphorite horizons separated by
non-phosphorite materials. The A2 and A0 strata are
Table 2 Chemical analysis of the samples from Eshidiyya mine in southern Jordan; major elements are in %, other metals are in ppm or ppb (in
the slime water and ground water)
Sh A1-1 Sh A1-2 Sh A1-3 Sh A1-4 Sh A3-1 Sh A3-2 Sh A3-3 Sh A3-4 Sh A3-5 Sh A3-6 Sh A3-7 Sh A3-8
% ppb
SiO2 22.23 22.21 40.59 14.37 33.73 27.8 39.43 2.18 59.8 17.65 48.01 Si 28,707
Al2O3 1.56 1.86 1.03 1.02 0.67 0.62 0.27 0.11 0.09 0.34 0.2 Al 3
Fe2O3 0.72 0.79 0.43 0.48 0.4 1.02 1.1 0.54 0.33 0.96 0.31 Fe \10
MgO 0.57 0.65 0.42 0.41 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.11 0.06 0.12 0.11 Mg 54,970
CaO 40.84 40.58 30.84 46.35 36.28 38.95 32.46 54.52 22.39 45.85 28.8 Ca 71,216
Na2O 0.28 0.29 0.21 0.31 0.33 0.26 0.19 0.33 0.12 0.26 0.18 Na 208,175
K2O 0.07 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 K 7,929
TiO2 0.08 0.1 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 Ti \10
P2O5 23 24.49 17.47 29.13 23.94 26.42 22.32 36.93 15.12 30.73 19.25 P 133
MnO 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.12 0.06 0.03 0.07 0.04 Mn 465.55
LOI 10.4 8.7 8.7 7.5 4 4.4 3.8 5 1.9 3.8 2.9
TOT/C 2.2 1.52 1.83 1.59 0.7 0.79 0.73 1.25 0.39 0.73 0.59
TOT/S 0.16 0.18 0.13 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.21 0.3 0.12 0.25 0.15
ppm ppb
As 7 8 6 11 11 11 14 25 9 17 11 As 12.1
Cd 18 8 10 10 9 7 9 15 6 11 8 Cd \0.05
Co 1.4 2.1 1.2 1.6 1.1 1.5 1.8 0.9 0.6 1.6 0.6 Co \0.02
Cr 99 86 59 53 59 46 32 32 20 32 32 Cr 16.3
Cu 10 11 7 9 11 8 7 6 3 8 5 Cu 0.7
Mo 1.7 1.8 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.5 0.6 1.3 0.9 Mo 4.5
Ni 19 17 27 12 23 13 12 7 19 13 19 Ni 0.9
Hg 0.01 0.01 0.1 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.1 0.01 0.01 Hg 0.1
Pb 2.2 2.2 1.3 1.7 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.1 0.8 1.5 1.1 Pb \0.1
Se 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.9 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.5 Se 2.4
Sr 834 907 699 1,113 566 562 420 737 289 539 536 Sr 1,377.55
Th 1 1.1 0.8 1 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.9 Th \0.05
U 34 38 27 44 34 37 32 57 24 46 32 U 6.13
V 65 72 58 56 50 67 65 56 28 66 36 V 3.8
Zn 116 117 98 98 105 80 74 97 42 93 63 Zn 33.6
Cl ppm 278
Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182 177
123
similar to the deposits of central Jordan in that they are
calcareous and high grade. These two beds are sieved only
to select the right size and to slightly upgrade the final
product. The A3 and to some extent A1 have a high content
(Table 3) of silica sand or detrital quartz. Table 2 shows
that detrital quartz reaches more than 30%. Consequently, a
different method of upgrading, flotation is applied. The
relatively high levels of detrital sand in the Eshidiyya
deposits are explained by its proximity to the shorelines of
the southern Tethys continental shelf (Abed et al. 2007;
Bender 1974; Powell 1989).
Most of the analyzed metals are less abundant in
Eshidiyya compared with the central Jordan phosphorite
(Al-Hwaiti et al. 2005). Simple calculations show that the
As, Cr, Cu, Pb, Se, U, V, and Zn would all approach their
concentrations in the deposits of central Jordan, based on
the same percent of silica; i.e., after the removal of the
dilution by silica sand.
Uranium in the A0 horizon is 175 ppm, which is about
twice that of central Jordan and five times the U content in
A1 and A3. The A0 is at or only few metres below the
ground surface in Eshidiyya. Meteoric water diagenesis,
including partial dissolution, may be responsible for the
higher concentration of U in the A0 horizon and the
adsorption on fine materials, mainly clay. Abed and Ab-
dalla (1999) have previously addressed this aspect. Again,
Ra was not analyzed in this work.
Figure 4a and b shows the behavior of some of the
discussed elements during the upgrading of both A1 and
A3. It is clear from the figure as well as from Table 2 that
the slime is much lower in trace metals than the raw
phosphorite. The metal concentrations in the slime and
Fig. 3 Potentially toxic metals behavior through the upgrading
process in central Jordan: a elements associated with clay minerals,
b elements associated with apatite, and c in nearby ground water
Table 3 Average composition of the raw phosphorite samples
C. Jord A0 Sh A1-1 Sh A2-1 Sh A3-1
%
SiO2 10.05 4.29 22.23 9.13 33.73
Al2O3 0.67 0.46 1.56 0.26 0.67
Fe2O3 0.435 0.24 0.72 0.15 0.4
MgO 0.3 0.34 0.57 0.18 0.3
CaO 48.5 52.24 40.84 50.55 36.28
Na2O 0.58 0.43 0.28 0.53 0.33
K2O 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.04 0.04
TiO2 0.035 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.04
P2O5 29.8 27.32 23 33.01 23.94
MnO 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.07
LOI 9.25 14.35 10.4 5.9 4
Tot/C 2.03 3.39 2.2 1.14 0.7
Tot/S 0.46 0.22 0.16 0.44 0.25
ppm
As 13 15 7 20 11
Cd 5.5 35 18 5 9
Co 0.6 0.7 1.4 0.5 1.1
Cr 144.5 138.5 99 59 59
Cu 12.5 15.5 10 10 11
Hg 0.015 1.15 1.7 1 1.5
Mo 15 27.5 19 7 23
Ni 9 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.01
Pb 3 3 2.2 1.1 1.4
Se 1 0.7 0.5 0.8 0.5
Sr 1,767.5 1,263 834 1,052 566
Th 3.3 1.05 1 0.5 0.5
U 65.5 175 34 46 34
V 87 188 65 55 50
Zn 154.5 159.5 116 93 105
178 Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182
123
slime water are also much lower than observed in central
Jordan. Thus, as we concluded for the deposits of central
Jordan, the slime water appears to pose no environmental
hazard to the ground water. This last conclusion is also
supported by the remoteness of the ground water field
([10 km to the north), and the presence of more than
1,000 m of shale, siltstone, and sandstone of the Paleozoic
Khreim Group separating the slime water disposal site
from the Disi Aquifer below.
The Fertilizers
Phosphorites from central Jordan and/or Eshidiyya are
transported to Aqaba, where the phosphorites are blended
to obtain the composition shown in Table 4. The blended
material is reacted with concentrated sulfuric acid to pro-
duce phosphoric acid (H3PO4) and the reject gypsum
known as phosphogypsum. Phosphoric acid is then reacted
with ammonia to produce the fertilizer, diammonium
phosphate H(NH4)2PO4 or (DAP). Production of DAP
exceeds 1 9 106 t annually.
Columns 1 and 2 in Table 4 show that the P2O5
increased (was concentrated) from 30.76 to 47.79% (by a
factor of about 1.5) when the input phosphorite was
transformed into DAP. Most of the analyzed contaminants
followed the same trend (as shown in Fig. 5 for some of the
elements). This aligns with the chemical analysis of the
gypsum (column 3 in Table 4). P2O5% in the gypsum is
1.41, meaning that 4.5% of the P2O5% is lost with the
gypsum while around 95% of it is incorporated in the DAP.
The gypsum contains relatively low concentrations of
P2O5, U, and trace metals compared with the original
phosphorite (Fig. 5). This means that using the gypsum in
cement production is safe since the contaminants will be
diluted by an additional factor of 20 by the other cement
components, thus reducing the contaminant levels to those
of other building stones or aggregate materials. For
example, U has a concentration of 2.5 ppm in the gypsum
and 0.125 ppm in the final cement product, while the U
content in average shales, sandstones, and carbonates is
3.7, 0.45, and 2.2 ppm, respectively (Krauskopf 1967).
However, the phosphogypsum cannot be considered safe
without knowing its content of Ra. The latter element is the
parent of radon, which decays into five radioactive isotopes
responsible for lung cancer.
Environmental Impact on Ground Water Resources
Five ground water samples were collected from a shallow
aquifer (Wadi Es Sir-Amman Formations, Turonian-Se-
nonian) and analyzed for their chemical constituents. The
analytical results varied widely and are believed to be
related to leaching that is occurring in the unsaturated zone.
Generally, the concentrations were very low, below the
permissible limits from the Jordanian Institute of Standards
and Metrology (JISM) (2001) guidelines for drinking
water. Table 5 shows the concentration of some of the
metals in five ground water samples, compared to the JISM
guidelines. The relatively low concentrations of contami-
nants may be due to the fact that the soil profile serves as
an efficient purifying filter through adsorption onto clay
and the soil’s organic matter content.
On the other hand, F was analyzed in seven water
samples (two slime water and five ground water samples)
in central Jordan (Table 1). The contents of F varied widely
from 7.9 ppm in borehole 11 at Al-Hasa to 0.78 ppm in the
spring water downstream Al-Hasa mines (inset Fig. 1).
Borehole 11 and the Al-Hasa slime water are both higher
than the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines of
1.5 ppm for F. The rest of the samples are either at this
level or below it (Table 1). Interestingly, the slime water at
Al-Hasa (2.9 ppm) is much lower than borehole 11
(7.9 ppm). Thus, it seems valid to say that the borehole 11
reflects the local conditions of the aquifer. The source of F
is the phosphorite horizon where F ranges between 2 and
4.5% (Abed and Fakhouri 1996).Fig. 4 Potentially toxic metals behavior through the upgrading
process in: a the A1 horizon in Eshidiyya, and b the A3 horizon
Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182 179
123
Conclusions
1. During the upgrading of the phosphorites, most of the
more toxic components are retained with the final
phosphate product.
2. Slime and slime water are not having an adverse effect
on the nearby ground water in central Jordan and
Eshidiyya. Radium content should be measured to
ensure that the slime water is safe.
3. Potentially toxic metals in the fertilizer industry
behave like P and are enriched by a factor of more
than 1.5 in the DAP relative to the input phosphorite.
The uptake of the relatively high levels of potentially
toxic metals in the DAP by soils or plants requires
further research.
Fig. 5 A histogram showing the behavior of the potentially toxic
metals in the fertilizers industry at Aqaba from the input phosphorite,
DAP and phosphogypsum
Table 4 Chemical analysis of
the samples from the fertilizer
industry in Aqaba
Aqaba 1 Aqaba 3 Aqaba 4 % Aqaba2
Input phosphrite DAP Phospho-gupsum Phosphoric acid
%
SiO2 9.51 1.48 7.59 Si \0.004
Al2O3 0.64 0.95 0.07 Al 0.4
Fe2O3 0.44 0.59 0.04 Fe 1.06
MgO 0.29 0.46 0.01 Mg 0.65
CaO 49.07 1.16 33.55 Ca 0.016
Na2O 0.5 0.26 0.15 Na 0.068
K2O 0.04 0.08 0.04 K 0.02
TiO2 0.03 0.01 0.02 Ti 0.11
P2O5 30.76 47.79 1.41 P 10
MnO 0.01 0.02 0.01 Mn 0.16
LOI 8.4 – 16.3
Tot/C 2.17 2.14 0.11
Tot/S 0.54 1.45 16.94 0.86
SUM 99.71 52.84 59.13
ppm
As 12 11.6 0.5 27.6
Cd 8.6 10.4 1.8 21.6
Co 0.5 1.3 \0.5 4.8
Cr 138 199 77 188
Cu 12.2 17.5 0.7 33.8
Hg \0.01 \0.01 0.01 \0.01
Mo 6.7 7.1 0.4 5.3
Ni 16.6 23.6 1.1 53.7
Pb 2.6 0.9 1.5 \0.01
Se 1.6 \0.5 0.7 \0.5
Sr 1,569.6 139.1 906.5 0.06
Th 2.4 2.8 0.5 0.31
U 65 106.7 2.3 187.2
V 80 127 \5 245.6
Zn 162 281 5 438.1
Br \0.5
Cl 1,636
180 Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182
123
4. The phosphogypsum has very low levels of potentially
toxic components and can be used in the cement
industry without harming the environment. To fully
justify this conclusion, radium must be analyzed.
Acknowledgments We thank the three mine managers, Eng. Zuhair
Rabba (Al-Abiad), Eng. Jihad Hjazin (Al-Hasa), and Eng. Mamdoh
Al-Jazi (Eshidiyya) for their cooperation and Dr. Pier Pufahl from
Acadia University, Canada, for facilitating the analysis of the sam-
ples. This work was partially supported by the Deanship of Scientific
Research at the University of Jordan.
Appendix 1
Eight samples were collected from Al-Abiad mines
(Ab series):
Ab1: raw phosphate represents a blinding from three
working ore bodies: 3, 8, and 33.
Ab2: is a screened sample of Ab1 less than 12 mm.
Ab3: final product less than 4 mm.
Ab4: a reject between 4 and 12 mm.
Ab.Sl.2: deslimed fine material \4 lm.
Ab.Sl.1: slime water.
Ab.BH1 and Ab.BH5: ground water from boreholes one
and five, located in the area.
Eight samples were collected from Al-Hasa mines
(Ha series):
Ha1: a raw phosphate sample, represents a blending
from working ore bodies 2 and 13 south.
Ha2: is a screened sample of Ha1 less than 12 mm.
Ha3: final product less than 4 mm.
Ha4: a reject between 4 and 12 mm.
Ha.Sl.2: deslimed fine material \4 lm.
Ha.Sl.1: slime water.
Ha. BH11: ground water from borehole 11.
Ha.Ag1: ground water from a borehole of agriculture
station that belongs to the ministry of agriculture; both
Ha. BH11 and Ha.Ag1 are located few hundred meters
from the slime draining system.
Ha.Sp1: ground water from a spring about 4 km down-
gradient of the wadi where the slime is drained. The
spring drains from a shallow Turonian to the Maastrich-
tian aquifer.
Sixteen samples were collected from the Eshidiyya
mines (Sh series):
Sh.A0.1: a raw phosphate sample from the lower part of
the A0 horizon.
Sh.A0.2: a raw phosphate sample from the upper part of
the A0 horizon.
Sh.A1.1: a raw phosphate sample from A1 horizon.
Sh.A1.2: a screened sample of Sh.A1.1 less than
12.5 mm.
Sh.A1.3: screened between 1 and 12.5 mm.
Sh.A1.4: final product less than 1 mm.
Sh.A2.1: a raw phosphate sample from A2 horizon.
Sh.A2.2: screened less than 4 mm.
Sh.A3.1: raw phosphate sample from A3.
Sh.A3.2: screened less than 12.5 mm.
Sh.A3.3: screened between 5 and 12.5 mm.
Sh.A3.4: less than 5 mm after flotation (final product).
Sh.A3.5: floated silica less than 5 mm. (reject).
Sh.A3.6: subcommertial product between -5 mm and
+2 mm after flotation.
Sh.A3.7: fine, clay size phosphate deslimed from A1 and
A3.
Sh.A3.8: deslimed water.
Table 5 Concentration (ppb) of
contaminants in ground water
from the shallow aquifer in
central Jordan compared with
the Jordanian Standards (286/
2001) for drinking water (JISM
2001)
Parameters Maximum permissible
limit
Ab.Bh1 Ab.Bh
5
Ha.Bh11 Ha.Ag.
1
Ha.Sp1
Al 100 18 2 19 6 49
Mn 100 \0.05 \0.05 \0.5 \0.05 \0.5
Fe 300 \10 \10 \10 \10 \10
Cu 1,000 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.3
Zn 3,000 \0.5 \0.5 \0.5 215 2.3
As 10 0.7 2.8 0.5 4.1 1
Pb 10 \1 \1 \0.1 2.4 0.2
Cd 3 \0.05 \0.05 \0.05 \0.05 \0.05
Cr 50 10.5 9.1 12.7 17.7 20.4
Se 50 20.5 121.2 1.9 28.7 5.3
Hg 2 \0.1 \0.1 \0.1 \0.1
Ni 70 1.4 20.7 \0.2 7.5 0.3
V 100 12 60 1.1 23 16.2
Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182 181
123
Three samples were collected from the Indo-Jordan
Chemical company, where phosphoric acid is produced
for export to India:
Indo-Jo1: phosphoric acid.
Indo-Jo2: raw input phosphate.
Indo-Jo3: phosphogypsum.
Four samples were collected from the fertilizer complex
at Aqaba:
Aqaba 1: raw phosphate input.
Aqaba 2: phosphoric acid.
Aqaba 3: diammonium phosphate.
Aqaba 4: phosphogypsum.
References
Abed AM (1994) Shallow marine phosphorite-chert-palygorskite
association, Upper Cretaceous Amman formation, Jordan. In:
Iijima A, Abed AM, Garrison R (eds) Siliceous, phosphatic and
glauconitic sediments in the tertiary and Mesozoic. Proceedings
of the 29th international geology congress, Part C, VSP, The
Netherlands, pp 205–224
Abed AM, Fakhouri K (1996) On the chemical variability of
phosphatic particles from the Jordanian phosphorites. Chem
Geol 131:1–13
Abed AM, Khaled H (1985) Uranium distribution in the Jordanian
phosphorite. Dirasat 12:91–103
Abed AM, Sadaqah R (1998) Role of Upper Cretaceous oyster
buildups in the deposition and accumulation of high-grade
phosphorites in central Jordan. J Sediment Res B 68:1009–1020
Abed AM, Abdalla RS (1999) On the state of weathering of the Upper
Cretaceous red phosphorites of Eshidiyya, southern Jordan. J Afr
Earth Sci 27:39–54
Abed AM, Sadaqah R, Al-Jazi M (2007) Sequence stratigraphy and
evolution of Eshidiyya phosphorite platform, southern Jordan.
Sediment Geol 198:209–219
Al-Agha MR (1985) Petrography, geochemistry and origin of the NW
Jordan phosphorites. Thesis, University of Jordan (unpublished)
Al-Hwaiti M, Matheis G, Saffarini G (2005) Mobilization, redistri-
bution and bioavailability of potentially toxic elements in
Shidiya phosphorites, southern Jordan. Environ Geol 47:431–
444
Altschuler ZS (1980) The geochemistry of trace elements in marine
phosphorites. Part 2: characteristics, abundances and enrichment.
SEPM Spec Publ 29:19–30
Bender F (1974) Geology of Jordan. Borntraeger, Berlin, p 196
Capetta H, Pfeil F, Schmidt-Kittler N, Martini E (1996) New
biostratigraphic data on the marine Upper Cretaceous and
paleogene of Jordan. Jordan Phosphate Mining Co, Amman
(unpublished)
Coppes R, Bashir S, Ritchard P (1977) Radioactivity of El-Hasa
phosphates, a preliminary study. Miner Depos 12:189–196
Follmi KB (1996) The phosphorus cycle, phosphogenesis and marine
phosphate-rich deposits. Earth Sci Rev 40:55–124
Hamam KA (1977) Forminifera from the Maastrichtian bearing strata
of Al-Hasa, Jordan. J Foram Res 7:34–43
JISM-Jordanian Institute of Standards and Metrology (2001) Drinking
water standards No. 286/2001, Amman, p 13
Khaled H (1980) Petrography, Mineralogy and Geochemistry of Esh-
Shidyia Phosphorites. M.Sc Thesis, University of Jordan,
Amman
Khaled H, Abed AM (1982) Petrography and geochemistry of
Eshidiyya phosphates. Dirasat 9:81–102
Krauskopf KB (1967) Introduction to geochemistry. McGraw Hill,
New York, p 721
Lucas J, Flicoteaux R, Nathan Y, Prevot L, Shahar Y (1980)
Differential aspects of francolite weathering. In: Bentor YK
(eds). Marine Phosphorites, SEPM Spec Publ 29:79–101
McArthur JM, Hamilton PJ, Greensmith JT, Walsh JN, Boyce AB,
Fallick AE, Birch G, Benmore RA, Coleman ML (1987)
Francolite geochemistry—meteoric alteration on a local scale.
Chem Geol 65:415–425
McClellan GH, Van Kauwenbergh SJV (1990) Mineralogy of
sedimentary apatite. In: Notholt AJG, Jarvis I (eds) Phosphorite
research and development, Geol Soc Lond Special Publ 52:23–
31
Notholt AJG, Sheldon RP, Davidson DF (eds) (1989) Phosphate
deposits of the world Phosphate Rock Resources, vol 2.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 600
Powell J (1989) Stratigraphy and sedimentation of the Phanerozoic
rocks in central and south Jordan. Part B: Kurnub, Ajlun and
Belqa Groups. Geology Directorate, Natural Resources Author-
ity, Amman, Bull 11, p 130
Quennell AM (1951) The geology and mineral resources of Trans-
jordan. Colonial Geol Niner Res 2:85–115
Reeves MJ, Saadi TA (1971) Factors controlling the deposition of
some phosphate-bearing strata from Jordan. Econ Geol 66:45–65
Riggs SR (1979) Petrology of the tertiary phosphorite system of
Florida. Econ Geol 74:194–220
Sadaqah RM (2001) Phosphogenesis, geochemistry, stable isotopes
and depositional sequence of the Upper Cretaceous phosphorite
formation in Jordan. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of
Jordan, p 257
Sadaqah RM, Abed AM, Grimm KA, Pufahl PK (2005) The
geochemistry of REE, Yttrium and Scandium in some Upper
Cretaceous Jordanian phosphorites. Dirasat 32:32–47
Sheldon RP (1987) Association of phosphatic and siliceous marine
sedimentary deposits. In: Hein JR (ed) Siliceous sedimentary
rock-hosted ores and petroleum. Nostrand Reinhold, New York
City, pp 56–79
Slansky M (1986) Geology of sedimentary phosphates. Elsevier,
Amsterdam, p 210
182 Mine Water Environ (2008) 27:171–182
123