Approach
Closure Economics
Reducing costs is important. Society gets much more from operating mines than closed mines and the operational phase is more likely to understand expend and provision the funds to advance and complete mine closure. Closure Planning should be about supporting mine economics to the degree that high quality outcomes can be achieved for the environment and stakeholders. However full closure should be as far away as possible while progressive rehabilitation is maximised. Through examining alternative approaches collaboratively millions, and sometimes occasions tens of millions of dollars in savings have been realised via Trajectory’s collaborative involvement with mining companies.
This may be achieved via revisiting the science developed to underpin existing Closure Plan, of assumptions, design or implementation approaches. And it’s not unusual that high-cost examining the approaches carry high technical and cost risk, and closure approaches and measures which may be well beyond the requirements to manage that risk. In some cases the prevailing measures can cause negative impacts to the situation being managed or have environmental or social costs incurred elsewhere in the project execute and approach. Some measure specified in Closure Plans are simply unfeasible or constructable. These may end up as regulatory conditions putting the project out of Compliance at the outset of the Progressive Rehabilitation or full Closure Phase.
Often it’s important to go right back to the Conceptual Design or model and see if it is technically robust and will deliver on the objectives. A review of this Phase may identify some of this issues discussed above. Those tasked with implementing a closure project or an aspect of closure need a plan that is constructable and executable with an appropriate budget delivered at reasonable cost without impacting other values.
Affordability
Reducing costs is important. Society gets much more from operating mines than closed mines and the operational phase is more likely to understand expend and provision the funds to advance and complete mine closure. Closure Planning should be about supporting mine economics to the degree that high quality outcomes can be achieved for the environment and stakeholders. However full closure should be as far away as possible while progressive rehabilitation is maximised. Through examining alternative approaches collaboratively millions, and sometimes occasions tens of millions of dollars in savings have been realised via Trajectory’s collaborative involvement with mining companies.
This may be achieved via revisiting the science developed to underpin existing Closure Plan, of assumptions, design or implementation approaches. And it’s not unusual that high-cost examining the approaches carry high technical and cost risk, and closure approaches and measures which may be well beyond the requirements to manage that risk. In some cases the prevailing measures can cause negative impacts to the situation being managed or have environmental or social costs incurred elsewhere in the project execute and approach. Some measure specified in Closure Plans are simply unfeasible or constructable. These may end up as regulatory conditions putting the project out of Compliance at the outset of the Progressive Rehabilitation or full Closure Phase.
Often it’s important to go right back to the Conceptual Design or model and see if it is technically robust and will deliver on the objectives. A review of this Phase may identify some of this issues discussed above. Those tasked with implementing a closure project or an aspect of closure need a plan that is constructable and executable with an appropriate budget delivered at reasonable cost without impacting other values.
Relationship Approach
It’s remarkable the changes that can be identified by asking questions in a project. Some people have never been asked. Some have not put in a problem-solving frame of mind.
Often I’ll work with a professional, for instance a mining engineer who’ll say. ‘We’re not allowed to do that.’ The answer may be. ‘Why not?’ It might be an environmental procedure, an outdated plan or a regulatory condition which is appropriate to challenge.
Such adjustment might improve both the bottom line and improve or maintain environmental performance. A few questions and a willingness to check if the barriers to improvements are real.
On one occasion myself and a team saved a five hundred hectares of beautiful Mulga foreshore because the engineers didn’t they were allowed to build a waste rock dump on a salt late thousands of hectares in size. That dump is there now. Not causing any environmental harm and with a higher biodiversity than the salt lake around it. And a beautiful ecology was saved because a few people asked a few questions.
With the last year a large and destructive creek diversion was avoided in a beautiful New Guinea rainforest. Because a question was asked, a check made and a change of course, with no new impacts was adopted.
Critique
I provide Peer Reviews and reviewed hundreds of closure related documents and managed studies that cross all disciplines. And there are a lot of disciplines involved with closure. That’s what makes it so interesting.
Unaffiliated critique can reveal major unidentified risks, unlock opportunities, and give praise and support where it’s due so people who are doing a great job, which are is common, get that feedback from an outside reviewer.
However, it a leadership group or internal team or incumbent consultants don’t want to be challenged or made uncomfortable, it would be better to select another professional to critique a project.
Start Small
When I form a relationship with a client, I often like to do two things early in the piece. Firstly, review the issues from a high level in a very low-cost preliminary review. I might complete my input at that stage. Maybe I can’t see a way I can add value. I’ve come across projects that are well managed in every respect. I have nothing to contribute, Secondly, I suggest I complete a small project. Maybe part of the larger project. The client can see what I produce and decide if it adds value.
Mining and Civilisation
I’ve probably visited more high impact mine sites and off-site impacts throughout world where environmental damage and degradations is very serious, extensive and hard to resolve than most people. I’ve managed, investigated, and worked to develop sound mitigations to the degree possible associated with very serious environmental incidents. I’ve observed instances where stakeholders were experiencing very serious impacts to their lifestyle and capacity to earn an income and were not adequately engaged such that they could be appropriately informed to have the capacity to express their concerns accurately and exercise the influence they deserve.
And yet I’m proud to be associated with mining. There is virtually nothing we have in our modern life that has not been touched by metal in some way. Made of it, cut by it, moved by it. All jewellery, art, literature everything we’ve achieved as a civilisation are there because of minerals, including fossil fuels. Our civilisation is based on metals and energy sources. When you enjoy travel, visit friends and family, by anything, own anything and do anything it’s happening because of mining. Mining has negative impacts which are sometimes unavoidable and other times avoidable and unacceptable. But the positive impacts are overwhelming. If you don’t believe me. Strip yourself of everything ever touched by metal or moved around or crafted with fossil fuel energy. You’ll be naked. Completely naked and have virtually nothing. You may wish to join tribes who have lived without metallurgy or fossil fuels for centuries and are satisfied with their lot. I’m not suggesting we don’t need to transition away from carbon-based fuels quickly, which can be achieved only via minerals and fossil fuels, nor that mining should not be accountable, responsible, and minimise negative impacts on people and the biosphere. However, if you think these things which make your life as you know it and the civilisation which we enjoy are inherently bad, don’t engage Trajectory. I’m proud to be in mining and believe that miners deliver products without which our civilisation would collapse. Tomorrow.