Chemical Analyzation of Metal Ions That are Present in the Animas River

By Claire Larson
Abstract: The motivation for the lab that has been conducted would be the recent mining spill
that took place in in the Gold King Mine, located in Silverton, Colorado. This leak eventually led
into the Animas River, and into our hometown of Durango, where we could see the orange
sludge from the mining spill in the waters of our river. The question we are addressing is, what
specific metals like sulfate, copper, aluminum and lead are present in the river water? Our first
method that we used to investigate our leading question were to catch clean samples of the river
water at different locations. Second, we took the pH levels, and conductivity levels of the water,
and then took the samples to our lab to test for the specific metals. We used distilled water as our
reference, and reactants to the chemicals to notice what kind of reaction we were looking for.
Last, we added the chemicals to our river water and looked for a reaction or a precipitate being
formed. Since there were no reactions and no precipitate being formed after the chemical was
added to the river water, most of our results were negative, with a few being positive and semipositive. This means that the specific metals we were looking for in the river water were not
present at the time and in that location. These results tell us because we can interpret that there
are no harmful metals in the river of Durango, and that the river is safe to use. We could further
verify these results by taking different samples closer to the mine spill, or test for other specific
metals that may be present.
Methods: The safety precautions that took place during our experiment involved contact with
skin and eyes and the chemicals that were being used to test the water. Goggles were worn at all
times, and sinks were located before all experiments in case of chemical emergencies. Gloves
were also worn during the experiment in order to stop contact between skin and the chemicals.
Several of the chemicals that were being tested were toxic by ingestion, so chemicals were kept
away from mouth. The chemicals that were being used in the lab posed little of a threat.
The procedure that was conducted during the experiment consisted of replicating the process of
testing for the metals 5 times using different chemicals. To complete the experiment, a well plate,
pipette, dropper bottle with chemcials, dropper, testing water, distilled water, and chemicals that
resided as the reference solution were needed.
After thoroughly cleaning the well plate with distilled water, a number of drops of the reference
solution, using the pipette, was added to the well plate. For example, when testing for the
calcium ion, ten drops of CaCl, the reference solution, was added to the first well. Second, 10
drops of the distilled water was added to the second well. The purpose of the reference solution
is to show what a chemical reaction would look like, and to show a precipitate being formed. In
addition, the purpose of the distilled water is to display what a non-reaction would look like, or
show what to look for if the chemicals in the test water were not reacting. The reference water, as
well as the distilled water are very important to have in this experiment, as these two substances

show what would happen if a reaction were to take place, or if no reaction were to take place in
the testing water. The last step was to add 10 drops of the test water to the third and final well.
Finally, three drops of NaCO were added to all three wells. After observing, we then recorded
our conclusions to our data table, and our well plate was cleaned and dried. These steps were
repeated 4 more times using other chemicals and reference solutions, but the test water and
distilled water stayed the same. The other chemicals that were used in this fashion consisted of
(AgNO), (Fe(NO)), (KSCN), (FeSO), (BaCl),CuSO), (Pb(NO)), and last, (KI). After
testing, the chemicals were dumped and rinsed in the sink, unless we tested with lead, silver, or
barium. These chemicals are considered toxic, and were needed to be dumped in designated
waste containers.
Name of Chemical

Chemical Formula

Calcium

CaCl

Sodium Carbonate

NaCO

Silver Nitrate

(AgNO)

Iron

(Fe(NO))

Potassium Thiocyanate

(KSCN)

Sulfate

(FeSO)

Barium Chloride

(BaCl)

Copper

(CuSO)

Lead

(Pb(NO)),

Potassium Iodide

(KI)

Above is a table that includes the names of the chemical based on their formulas.
Results:
To determine the presence of specific metals in the Animas River and Cement Creek, data was
taken on whether or not the specific metal ion was present in the sample water. Different
locations of the sample water were tested, and the name of the location was simplified to the first
letters of the location. For example, A68 is the Animas River above 14th street, while SFCC is
South Fork of Cement Creek. Below is Table 1 showing the qualitative data results for locations
A68 and A72:

Table 2: Results of Location CC@14 (Cement Creek Above 14th Street):

Table 3: Results of Location CCAC and MC:

Table 4: Results of Location at SFCC:

These results were based off of color, the potential presence of a precipitate, and if the ion was
existent within the sample.
We found that most of the results within all of the called were negative, with a few positive
results in scattered locations. The positive results were found in CC@14 for the metal sulfate. In
addition, there was also a positive result for copper and calcium, at the location of CCAC. There
were a few more positive results for sulfate in this same location. There was one positive result
for calcium at location MC, and one positive sulfate and iron test at location SFCC.
Discussion:
This experiment was done in order to test what metals, if any, were present in the Animas River
near and farther from the Gold King Mine after the recent mining spill. The expected results
were for the river samples to test positive for the metal ions like calcium, chloride, iron, sulfate,
lead, and copper. Even though the expected results for the samples were to be positive, most of
the results were in fact negative. These results were in fact negative because no precipitate was
formed when tested. According to the tables above, the only metals to test positive were sulfate,
in location CC@14, calcium, sulfate, copper, and lead in location CCAC, calcium in location
MC, and sulfate and iron in location SFCC. These results denied are expected results, and proved
that what we were looking for is not actually in the river. These results could have turned out to
be negative because of the location of the sample water (closer to the mine would mean more
positive results), and also how far apart we completed the lab from when the actual spill
occurred. These results may be different from our expected results because the pH in our sample
water was too low to detect any metals, and to see these metals in the water we needed to raise
the pH before conducting the experiment. We have a reason to believe that there are metals in our
river based off of other experiments that have been conducted, and other methods that have been
used to detect specific metals in the river since the Gold King Mine Spill.

The results of our experiment are important for personal knowledge, and for the benefit of the
community in and around the Animas River. Knowing that these metal ions are not present in the
river can bring a sense of security to those who use the river. The health and safety concerns
about the river can be settled for the most part as well.
I am very confident in our results, as our class took precautions when collecting test samples, and
were very tentative when it came to contamination in our samples. In all of the negative
outcomes, no precipitate was formed, and we were very sure of this because we had a control
chemical that showed that a precipitate in that specific case would look like. The importance of
our results can tell us that are river may be safer then we have been thinking.
Although we were very careful when we collected the river water, some inevitable contamination
could have ended up in our water, making our samples potentially slightly contaminated.
Improvements that could have been made to our experiment in order to ensure that no
contamination is in our water samples would be to collect water using another sterile device that
secures the water in a guaranteed fashion. Another improvement that could be made to this
experiment was how long away from the spill the samples were taken. We took the river water
samples almost 1 and a half months later after the spill. In general, it is likely that more of the
results would have tested positive and shown what we were looking for if we collected the water
sooner.
An experiment that could be done to further investigate the metals that may or may not be in
Cement Creek could be to take water samples right next to the mine, and take the samples earlier
to spill.