IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v23y2003i4d10.1023_benvr.0000031359.70523.4a.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Analysis of the Vegetation and Topsoil Cover Nutrient Status between Two Similarly Rehabilitated Ash Disposal Sites

Author

Listed:
  • L. Van Rensburg

    (North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus)

  • T.L. Morgenthal

    (North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus)

  • H. van Hamburg

    (North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus)

  • M.D. Michael

    (ESKOM Enterprises TSI Division)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to compare the rehabilitation result between two ash disposal sites with regard to its vegetation establishment and soil nutrient status. The study areas were situated in close proximity, in the Mpumalanga coalfield, South Africa. Although both areas received a similar amelioration treatment and were seeded with similar seed mixture the vegetation composition were significantly different. Both areas were poor in essential nutrients, this probably being one of the most limiting factors for vegetation establishment. No serious phytotoxic conditions, as is frequently experience with coal ash, could be identified. A regular monitoring and low level maintenance program is therefore proposed to improve the sustainability of the vegetation. The study proposed that results form such evaluations be used to identify performance standards for rehabilitated derelict land.

Suggested Citation

  • L. Van Rensburg & T.L. Morgenthal & H. van Hamburg & M.D. Michael, 2003. "A Comparative Analysis of the Vegetation and Topsoil Cover Nutrient Status between Two Similarly Rehabilitated Ash Disposal Sites," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 285-295, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:23:y:2003:i:4:d:10.1023_b:envr.0000031359.70523.4a
    DOI: 10.1023/B:ENVR.0000031359.70523.4a
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1023/B:ENVR.0000031359.70523.4a
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/B:ENVR.0000031359.70523.4a?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:23:y:2003:i:4:d:10.1023_b:envr.0000031359.70523.4a. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.