Environmental Aspects of Mine Planning (original) (raw)
Related papers
2024
Mining projects supposedly offer enormous economic benefits; however, they often involve serious environmental liabilities that extend far beyond the life of the mine, including perturbing the ecological balance and causing the loss of ecosystem services that are vital for sustaining human well-being. Understanding and assessing the environmental liabilities of mining is crucial for estimating the costs of restoring, replacing, or providing the equivalent of the damaged natural resources. This study estimates the market and non-market values of the mining impacts in the Northern Territory, Australia, particularly for the McArthur River Mine. We assess these costs by applying the Replacement Cost, Welfare Costs Savings, and Basic Value Transfer methods in terms of the loss of local Indigenous communities' well-being, loss of ecosystem services from native vegetation and freshwater, and the opportunity cost of the mine site none of which are not fully accounted for in the mining operator's environmental assessments and mitigation measures approved by the local governmental authorities. Our valuation analysis indicates that the market value of the environmental and social impacts of mining ascends to AUD 1.1 billion per year while the non-market value is AUD 20 million per year. Assessing mining-related environmental liabilities offers crucial insights for informed decision-making regarding mitigation and remediation efforts and strengthening environmental and mining legislation in the Northern Territory. In conclusion, our study contributes to developing a comprehensive understanding of the true economic impact of mining activities on ecosystems and local Indigenous communities.
Managing the cumulative impacts of coal mining on regional communities and environments in Australia
Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 2010
The expansion and contraction of the coal mining industry in Australia has placed pressure on regional communities and environments and multiplied the extent, magnitude and profile of cumulative impacts. While some mining communities have benefited from the expansion of the coal industry through the creation of jobs and the investment in economies, the compounding impacts of multiple mining operations have stretched environmental, social, human and economic systems and rendered conventional mine-by-mine governance approaches ineffective. In this paper we draw from examples in the Bowen Basin, Hunter Valley and Gunnedah Basin to traverse the range of cumulative impacts resulting from mining activities, and detail working examples of management and assessment practices that aim to enhance positive, and avoid and mitigate negative, cumulative impacts.
Journal of Hydrology, 2017
Understanding and managing impacts from mining on groundwater-dependent ecosystems (GDEs) and other groundwater users requires development of defensible science supported by adequate field data. This usually leads to the creation of predictive models and analysis of the likely impacts of mining and their accompanying uncertainties. The identification, monitoring and management of impacts on GDEs are often a key component of mine approvals, which need to consider and attempt to minimise the risks that negative impacts may arise. Here we examine a case study where approval for a large mining project in Australia (Carmichael Coal Mine) was challenged in court on the basis that it may result in more extensive impacts on a GDE (Doongmabulla Springs) of high ecological and cultural significance than predicted by the proponent. We show that throughout the environmental assessment and approval process, significant data gaps and scientific uncertainties remained unresolved. Evidence shows that the assumed conceptual hydrogeological model for the springs could be incorrect, and that at least one alternative conceptualisation (that the springs are dependent on a deep fault) is consistent with the available field data. Assumptions made about changes to spring flow as a consequence of mine-induced drawdown also appear problematic, with significant implications for the springfed wetlands. Despite the large scale of the project, it appears that critical scientific data required to resolve uncertainties and construct robust models of the springs' relationship to the groundwater system were lacking at the time of approval, contributing to uncertainty and conflict. For this reason, we recommend changes to the approval process that would require a higher standard of scientific information to be collected and reviewed, particularly in relation to key environmental assets during the environmental impact assessment process in future projects.
The form and evolution of stakeholder perceptions toward renewable energy (RE) developments continue to be investigated, but there has been little similar research regarding mines. Responses of community members and other stakeholders cannot be expected to evolve the same way between different resource and infrastructure projects. We ask what the various expectations of planned mines are among community members, and what factors impact these expectations. We perform a case study of a planned, large-scale, mineral sands mine in rural Victoria, Australia (2013–2015). Using a closed-question questionnaire (n ¼32) and semi-structured interviews (n ¼ 25), individual and community experiences of the planning process were examined. We explore stakeholder perceptions of the mining company and development process to date, as well as future expectations. Despite the recognition of mining as a nor-malised part of modern Australian economy and culture, the results revealed a community with low-trust in the mining company, and accompanying negative perceptions of their own involvement thus far. These perceptions translated into negative future expectations. Many factors influential in the formation of RE opinions were also significant here, these include: background factors; visual and environmental impacts; and, the actions of the company to date. Other factors are not so prevalent in RE literature and may be specific to mines, these include issues surrounding the rehabilitation of the land and the history of the mining company.
Recognising and Integrating Stakeholder Landform Expectations into Life-of-mine Planning
The current Queensland Government’s rehabilitation guidelines for post-mining landforms present a hierarchy of preferred outcomes for different areas within the mine site. Within all areas, restoration of a “natural” ecosystem is clearly prioritised as the preferred end land use, although it is not a mandatory practice. Beyond the official guidelines, there is also an implied preference for renaturalisation echoed in most environmental impact assessments and closure plans. In practice, however, ecosystem restoration does not extend to construction of a realistic topographic form, largely rejecting an aesthetic approach in favour of satisfying standard engineering criteria. This paper argues that the established disconnection between landform aesthetics and achieving the preferred end land use is indicative of a wider problem around end landform planning. It recognises the capacity of the post-mining landform to reflect dominant spatial narratives through the realisation of particular landforms and vegetation patterns, as in the case of ecosystem restoration. It also recognises the validity of broader community narratives around the land, and the capacity of end landform planning to benefit not only the local community through inclusion but also the mining company through an early acquisition of a social licence to operate. In an attempt to improve the post-mining outcomes by opening the planning process to less dominant narratives, the paper looks to investigate new ways of approaching end landform planning, integrating aesthetic values with land use planning, and responding to community expectations in an effort to create more innovative and responsive closure visions. Responsive landform planning, with ongoing and inclusive discussions, has the potential to extend throughout the life of the project and to engage the community in a positive vision for the post-mining land.
2006
2. The broad aim of this project was to assist coal mining companies develop effective processes for engaging with their communities and developing impact assessment and planning processes that can be agreed by their stakeholders. The focus of the project has been in three key areas: (a) demonstrating that assessment of social and economic impacts can occur at any stage during the life of mine operations, (b) developing new tools for the assessment of social and economic impacts, and (c) comparing the impacts from mining between mining-focus and ruralfocus towns. 3. Social and economic impact assessment is an important component of environmental planning and project approvals processes in Australia. While the EIS process remains important for the assessment of new projects, it does not cover all the economic and social impacts of mining on regional communities. Key deficiencies include the lack of assessment for: (a) Economic and social impacts that occur after the approvals stage, (b) The economic and social impacts of changes in the scale of operations, such as those influenced by commodity cycles, (c) The cumulative impacts of multiple operations on communities, and (d) The impacts of wind-down or closure of mines on communities.
2006
2. The broad aim of this project was to assist coal mining companies develop effective processes for engaging with their communities and developing impact assessment and planning processes that can be agreed by their stakeholders. The focus of the project has been in three key areas: (a) demonstrating that assessment of social and economic impacts can occur at any stage during the life of mine operations, (b) developing new tools for the assessment of social and economic impacts, and (c) comparing the impacts from mining between mining-focus and ruralfocus towns. 3. Social and economic impact assessment is an important component of environmental planning and project approvals processes in Australia. While the EIS process remains important for the assessment of new projects, it does not cover all the economic and social impacts of mining on regional communities. Key deficiencies include the lack of assessment for: (a) Economic and social impacts that occur after the approvals stage, (b) The economic and social impacts of changes in the scale of operations, such as those influenced by commodity cycles, (c) The cumulative impacts of multiple operations on communities, and (d) The impacts of wind-down or closure of mines on communities.
A Geospatial Database for Effective Mine Rehabilitation in Australia
Minerals, 2020
The Australian landscape is affected by abandoned mines that pose environmental, public health and safety risks. To promote the beneficial reuse, rehabilitation and/or remediation of these sites and understand their spatial arrangement, we compiled, classified and analysed a country-wide geospatial database of all known inactive hard rock mine sites. Following extensive review and classification of disparate records of such sites that have been terminated, neglected or classified as heritage, plus those under care and maintenance in Australia, we assessed state-by-state reporting and cross-border rehabilitation requirements. This was enabled by the development of the Mining Incidence Documentation & Assessment Scheme (MIDAS) that can be used to catalogue and compare active or inactive mine data regardless of reporting conventions. At a national level, and with four case studies, we performed GIS-based spatial analyses and environmental risk assessments to demonstrate potential uses of our database. Analyses considered the proximity of sites to factors such as infrastructure and sensitive environmental receptors. As Australia struggles to manage the ongoing technical, socioeconomic and environmental challenges of effective mine rehabilitation, the insights enabled by this national-level spatial database may be key to developing coordinated responses that extend beyond state boundaries. Our classification and methodology are easily transferable, thereby encouraging more formalized, systematic and widespread documentation of abandoned mines worldwide.