Risk management for mine closure: A cloud model and hybrid semi-quantitative decision method

Abstract

Mine closure is associated with many negative impacts on society and the environment. If these effects are not rationally addressed, they would pose risks of mine closure. Thus, a risk management method is needed to mitigate these adverse impacts and address mine-closure issues. An integral framework for mine-closure risk management that includes risk assessment and risk treatment was proposed. Given the fuzziness and randomness of the transformation between qualitative and quantitative knowledge in the risk assessment process, a novel risk assessment method based on the cloud model was presented, which fully considers the uncertainty in risks themselves and in the reasoning process. Closed mine reutilization is an effective risk treatment option in response to the identified high risks, but it requires selecting optimal reutilization strategies for the successful implementation of the reuse plan. To this end, a hybrid semi-quantitative decision method is proposed to optimize decision-making. The results of a case study showed that this risk management methodology can help budget planning for risk treatment and provide an instructional framework to effectively reduce the negative effects of closed mines.

Keywords

mine closure / risk assessment / risk treatment / cloud model / risk matrix

References

[1] Krzemień A, Sánchez AS, Fernández PR, Zimmermann K, Coto FG. Towards sustainability in underground coal mine closure contexts: A methodology proposal for environmental risk management. J. Cleaner Prod., 2016, 139, 1044.

[2] Haggerty JH, Haggerty M N, Roemer K, Rose J. Planning for the local impacts of coal facility closure: Emerging strategies in the U.S. West. Resour. Policy, 2018, 57, 69.

[3] Zvarivadza T. Large scale miners-Communities partnerships: A plausible option for communities survival beyond mine closure. Resour. Policy, 2018, 56, 87.

[4] Qi CC, Fourie A, Chen QS, Zhang QL. A strength prediction model using artificial intelligence for recycling waste tailings as cemented paste backfill. J. Cleaner Prod., 2018, 183, 566.

[5] Peck P, Sinding K. Financial assurance and mine closure: Stakeholder expectations and effects on operating decisions. Resour. Policy, 2009, 34(4): 227.

[6] Laurence D. Optimisation of the mine closure process. J. Cleaner Prod., 2006, 14(3–4): 285.

[7] Laurence D. Establishing a sustainable mining operation: An overview. J. Cleaner Prod., 2011, 19(2–3): 278.

[8] Unger CJ, Lechner AM, Kenway J, Glenn V, Walton A. A jurisdictional maturity model for risk management, accountability and continual improvement of abandoned mine remediation programs. Resour. Policy, 2015, 43, 1.

[9] Marais L. Resources policy and mine closure in South Africa: The case of the Free State Gold fields. Resour. Policy, 2013, 38(3): 363.

[10] Wang XF, Chen L, Liu CG, Zhang YQ, Li K. Optimal production efficiency of Chinese coal enterprises under the background of de-capacity—Investigation on the data of coal enterprises in Shandong Province. J. Cleaner Prod., 2019, 227, 355.

[11] Lin J, Fridley D, Lu HY, Price L, Zhou N. Has coal use peaked in China: Near-term trends in China’s coal consumption. Energy Policy, 2018, 123, 208.

[12] He XQ, Song L. Status and future tasks of coal mining safety in China. Saf. Sci., 2012, 50(4): 894.

[13] Cao X. Policy and regulatory responses to coalmine closure and coal resources consolidation for sustainability in Shanxi, China. J. Cleaner Prod., 2017, 145, 199.

[14] Kowalska IJ. Risk management in the hard coal mining industry: Social and environmental aspects of collieries’ liquidation. Resour. Policy, 2014, 41, 124.

[15] Shi XP, Rioux B, Galkin P. Unintended consequences of China’s coal capacity cut policy. Energy Policy, 2018, 113, 478.

[16] Amirshenava S, Osanloo M. Mine closure risk management: An integration of 3D risk model and MCDM techniques. J. Cleaner Prod., 2018, 184, 389.

[17] Galvin J. Critical role of risk management in ground engineering and opportunities for improvement. Int. J. Min. Sci. Technol., 2017, 27(5): 725.

[18] Liang XB, Liang W, Zhang LB, Guo XY. Risk assessment for long-distance gas pipelines in coal mine gobs based on structure entropy weight method and multi-step backward cloud transformation algorithm based on sampling with replacement. J. Cleaner Prod., 2019, 227, 218.

[19] Koulinas GK, Marhavilas PK, Demesouka OE, Vavatsikos AP, Koulouriotis DE. Risk analysis and assessment in the worksites using the fuzzy-analytical hierarchy process and a quantitative technique—A case study for the Greek construction sector. Saf. Sci., 2019, 112, 96.

[20] Chong T, Yi S, Heng C. Application of set pair analysis method on occupational hazard of coal mining. Saf. Sci, 2017, 92, 10.

[21] Akter M, Jahan M, Kabir R, Karim DS, Haque A, Rahman M, Salehin M. Risk assessment based on fuzzy synthetic evaluation method. Sci. Total Environ., 2019, 658, 818.

[22] Kaeeni S, Khalilian M, Mohammadzadeh J. Derailment accident risk assessment based on ensemble classification method. Saf. Sci., 2018, 110, 3.

[23] Yazdi M. Risk assessment based on novel intuitionistic fuzzyhybrid-modified TOPSIS approach. Saf. Sci., 2018, 110, 438.

[24] Hasheela I, Schneider GIC, Ellmies R, Haidula A, Leonard R, Ndalulilwa K, Shigwana O, Walmsley B. Risk assessment methodology for shut-down and abandoned mine sites in Namibia. J. Geochem. Explor., 2014, 144, 572.

[25] Guo YB, Meng XL, Meng T, Wang DG, Liu SH. A novel method of risk assessment based on cloud inference for natural gas pipelines. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng., 2016, 30, 421.

[26] Li DY, Liu CY, Gan WY. A new cognitive model: Cloud model. Int. J. Intell. Syst., 2009, 24(3): 357.

[27] C.G. Wu, L.Y. Zhou, L.B. Zhang, J.L. Jin, and Y.L. Zhou, Precondition cloud algorithm and Copula coupling model-based approach for drought hazard comprehensive assessment, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct., 38(2019), art. No. 101220.

[28] Zhang LM, Wu XG, Ding LY, Skibniewski MJ. A novel model for risk assessment of adjacent buildings in tunneling environments. Build. Environ., 2013, 65, 185.

[29] Mohandes SR, Zhang XQ. Towards the development of a comprehensive hybrid fuzzy-based occupational risk assessment model for construction workers. Saf. Sci., 2019, 115, 294.

[30] Mitchell CJA, O’Neill K. Mine site re-purposing in northern Ontario: An application of the ‘Transition Template’. Extr. Ind. Soc., 2016, 3(4): 1018.

[31] Azapagic A. Developing a framework for sustainable development indicators for the mining and minerals industry. J. Cleaner Prod., 2004, 12(6): 639.

[32] Matos PV, Cardadeiro E, da Silva JA, De Muylder CF. The use of multi-criteria analysis in the recovery of abandoned mines: a study of intervention in Portugal. RAUSP Manage. J., 2018, 53(2): 214.

[33] Yavuz M, Altay BL. Reclamation project selection using fuzzy decision-making methods. Environ. Earth Sci., 2015, 73(10): 6167.

[34] Bangian AH, Ataei M, Sayadi A, Gholinejad A. Optimizing post-mining land use for pit area in open-pit mining using fuzzy decision making method. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2012, 9(4): 613.

[35] Erzurumlu SS, Erzurumlu YO. Sustainable mining development with community using design thinking and multi-criteria decision analysis. Resour. Policy, 2015, 46, 6.

[36] Liang DC, Xu ZS. The new extension of TOPSIS method for multiple criteria decision making with hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy sets. Appl. Soft Comput., 2017, 60, 167.

[37] Tsolaki-fiaka S, Bathrellos GD, Skilodimou HD. Multicriteria decision analysis for an abandoned quarry in the Evros Region (NE Greece). Land, 2018, 7(2): 43.

[38] Sun HY, Wang SF, Hao XM. An Improved Analytic Hierarchy Process Method for the evaluation of agricultural water management in irrigation districts of north China. Agric. Water Manage., 2017, 179, 324.

[39] Wang DL, Zheng JP, Song XF, Ma G, Liu Y. Assessing industrial ecosystem vulnerability in the coal mining area under economic fluctuations. J. Cleaner Prod, 2017, 142, 4019.

[40] Caputo AC, Pelagagge PM, Salini P. AHP-based methodology for selecting safety devices of industrial machinery. Saf. Sci, 2013, 53, 202.

[41] Soltanmohammadi H, Osanloo M, Bazzazi AA. An analytical approach with a reliable logic and a ranking policy for post-mining land-use determination. Land Use Policy, 2010, 27(2): 364.

[42] Garvey PR, Lansdowne ZF. Risk matrix: An approach for identifying, assessing, and ranking program risks. Air Force J. Logist., 1998, 22(1): 16.

[43] Domínguez CR, Martínez IV, Peña PMP, Ochoa AR. Analysis and evaluation of risks in underground mining using the decision matrix risk-assessment (DMRA) technique in Guanajuato, Mexico. J. Sustainable Min, 2019, 18(1): 52.

[44] Cui CQ, Wang B, Zhao YX, Wang Q, Sun ZM. China’s regional sustainability assessment on mineral resources: Results from an improved analytic hierarchy process-based normal cloud model. J. Cleaner Prod., 2019, 210, 105.

[45] Nehring M, Cheng X. An investigation into the impact of mine closure and its associated cost on life of mine planning and resource recovery. J. Cleaner Prod., 2016, 127, 228.

[46] Soltanmohammadi H, Osanloo M, Bazzazi AA. Deriving preference order of post-mining land-uses through MLSA framework: Application of an outranking technique. Environ. Geol., 2009, 58(4): 877.

[47] C.C. Qi and A. Fourie, Cemented paste backfill for mineral tailings management: Review and future perspectives, Miner. Eng., 144(2019), art. No. 106025.

[48] Gorman MR, Dzombak DA. A review of sustainable mining and resource management: Transitioning from the life cycle of the mine to the life cycle of the mineral. Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 2018, 137, 281.

[49] Novas N, Gázquez JA, MacLennan J, García RM, Fernández-Ros M, Manzano-Agugliaro F. A real-time underground environment monitoring system for sustainable tourism of caves. J. Cleaner Prod., 2017, 142, 2707.

[50] Matos CR, Carneiro JF, Silva PP. Overview of large-scale underground energy storage technologies for integration of renewable energies and criteria for reservoir identification. J. Energy Storage, 2019, 21, 241.

[51] Shi JQ, Rubio RM, Durucan S. An improved void-resistance model for abandoned coal mine gas reservoirs. Int. J. Coal Geol., 2016, 165, 257.

[52] Guo PY, Zheng L, Sun XM, He MC, Wang YW, Shi JS. Sustainability evaluation model of geothermal resources in abandoned coal mine. Appl. Therm. Eng., 2018, 144, 804.

[53] Wang B, Wang Q, Wei YM, Li ZP. Role of renewable energy in China’s energy security and climate change mitigation: An index decomposition analysis. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., 2018, 90, 187.

[54] Lu HJ, Qi CC, Chen QS, Gan DQ, Xue ZL, Hu YJ. A new procedure for recycling waste tailings as cemented paste back fill to underground stopes and open pits. J. Cleaner Prod., 2018, 188, 601.

[55] Zhao X, Fourie A, Qi CC. An analytical solution for evaluating the safety of an exposed face in a paste backfill stope incorporating the arching phenomenon. Int. J. Miner. Metall. Mater., 2019, 26(10): 1206.

[56] Palogos I, Galetakis M, Roumpos C, Pavloudakis F. Selection of optimal land uses for the reclamation of surface mines by using evolutionary algorithms. Int. J. Min. Sci. Technol, 2017, 27(3): 491.

[57] Saaty TL, Tran LT. On the invalidity of fuzzifying numerical judgments in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Math. Comput. Modell., 2007, 46(7–8): 962.

[58] C.Q. Cui, B. Wang, Y.X. Zhao, and L.M. Xue, Waste mine to emerging wealth: Innovative solutions for abandoned undeground coal mine reutilization on a waste management level, J. Cleaner Prod., 252(2020), art. No. 119748.