1. Your Task A large mining company in Queensland produces iron, zinc, lead, copper, and a few byproducts from raw materials that are mined locally. In the past, the company has adopted a zero-discharge policy, i.e. managing its acidic (pH 2-4) process wastewater by storage in a series of open pits, to reduce volume by natural evaporation. However, in late 2016 the company was informed by the State Government that its practice of mass wastewater storage poses a potential contamination threat to nearby waterways. The company has been ordered to construct, within three years, an onsite treatment facility to treat no less 10k m3 wastewater per year to discharge level, which will be determined through several rounds of consultations with the EPA, based on Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, and Queensland Water Quality Guidelines. As a process engineer in the company, you have been asked by your CEO to carry out the first stage of feasibility study, to produce a report on the potential technologies to remove target pollutants from the wastewater. The main pollutants (specified by the EPA) and their mean concentration in the wastewater are: Fe (10.2 mg/L) Pb (11.0 mg/L) Zn (9.0 mg/L) Cu (11.5 mg/L) Mn (2.5 mg/L) As (1.1 mg/L) Write a preliminary investigation report (no less than 5 pages) to inform your CEO of: * The maximum concentrations of these target pollutants that are allowable in the nearby fresh waterways, and treatment targets; * Potential mechanisms for the removal of the pollutants from the wastewater; * Technological options that can potentially be used for onsite treatment, including brief descriptions of each option, its pros and cons, and its block flow diagram;( ONLY do this point) * Your recommendation of two technical processes that should be investigated further. * Some preliminary estimations of the cost (operation, maintenance, etc.) related to the two technical processes. 2. Marking Criteria Your report should be typed and bounded. It will be assessed based on: * Originality (your own effort in literature exploration and summarisation) * The breadth of knowledge coverage * Clarity and validity demonstrated in your report * Evidence of good scientific writing (spelling, grammar, logics, etc) .