Sustainable Open Pit Mining and Technical Systems: Concept, Principles, and Indicators
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Structure, Functions, and Factors of Sustainable Development of the Open Pit Mining and Technical System
- The presence of a significant impact of the external environment on the MTS and its subsystems, characterized by many economic, environmental, social, organizational, and technological factors.
- Lack of systematic implementation of the principles of the concept of sustainable development in the MTS and its subsystems.
- The importance of the opening-up of an opencast system as the key to sustainable development and functioning of the MTS.
2.2. The Principles of Sustainable Functioning and Development of the Open Pit Mining and Technical System
- General system principles, which are typical for systems of all levels—from mining and metallurgical holding to subsystems of the MTS [25];
- Principles implemented in the development of mineral deposits in general: principles of development [29], principles of modern mining [30], principles of sustainable development of geotechnologies [7], methodological principles of work planning [31,32], and principles of environmental risk control [33];
- Principles of development of the MTS, implemented in the design and development of mineral deposits: the principle of reuse of open pit space and technogenic raw materials [34,35], the principles of system flow [36], the principles of geometallurgy [37], the principles of economic, environmental, social, and cultural sustainability [25,38,39,40,41,42,43], the principles of activity in the mining industry [22], and the principles of a methodological approach to solving the problems of subsoil development [44];
- Principles of development of an open pit or mine as an independent unit—the principles of a full cycle of development of a mineral deposit [7];
2.3. Indicators and Methods for Assessing the Functioning of the Open Pit Mining and Technical System and Its Subsystems
- There is no system of indicators for a comprehensive assessment of the functioning and development of the MTS and the OOS from the standpoint of the concept of sustainable development.
- Assessment criteria are focused on economic, technical, and technological factors and poorly consider the environmental and social aspects of the functioning of the MTS and the OOS.
- Different ways of grouping factors of the external and internal environment of the MTS are used in different studies. The number of factor groups varies from three to six. Moreover, different researchers assign the same factors to different groups.
- The number of parameters and indicators used for evaluating the MTS and the OOS can vary from 6 to 69. Furthermore, the assessment can both be carried out based on precise quantitative indicators, using approximate qualitative estimates.
- Geological, technical, technological, and economic factors are considered as factors of sustainability of MTS functioning, and economic, environmental, and social factors are considered as factors of sustainable development. Simultaneously, economic factors are considered as decisive for the sustainability of the functioning and development of the MTS and the OOS.
- Most of the parameters and indicators are focused on the assessment of large and complex systems such as ME or MTSs and cannot be used to assess the MTS subsystems, including OOS.
- At present, a methodological basis for assessing the functioning and sustainable development of the OOS as part of the MTS has not been formed.
- The objectives of the various stakeholders.
- Risks associated with geological data, mining methods, new technologies, land allocation, resource allocation, commodity prices, and market conditions, etc.
3. The Concept of the Mining and Technical System Sustainable Functioning and Development
3.1. Preliminary Considerations
- Compliance with the system of principles as the governing rules for each subsystem of the system.
- Identification of the OOS as a key subsystem that has the greatest importance on the sustainability of the functioning and development of the MTS.
- Application of methods for assessing the sustainability of the functioning and development of the MTS subsystems.
3.2. System of the Mining and Technical System Sustainable Functioning and Development Principles in Transition Periods
3.3. Opening-Up of an Opencast System Parameters and Indicators
4. Ranking of Parameters and Indicators of the Opening-Up of an Opencast System for Sustainable Functioning and Development
4.1. Fuzzy AHP
4.2. Results
5. Conclusions
- The most significant groups of parameters (rank more than 0.1) are established: economic efficiency (E), performance of mining transport (QT), and the volume of opening-up of an opencast (V). The most significant parameters and indicators of the OOS (rank more than 0.07): total income (E3), combined transport (N2), and performance of mining transport (QT2). The greatest divergence of opinions between academic and industrial experts is observed on groups of parameters: social efficiency (S) and environmental efficiency (EK).
- The least significant indicators of the opening system, according to experts, are mono transport in the quarry (N1), the level of automation and robotization of the transportation process (S3), and quantity of waste (EK2). The listed indicators are included in the groups of parameters that have a low rating rank.
- Three groups of indicators were identified as a result of ranking: with a weight from 0.195 to 0.048 (rank 1–5), with a weight from 0.046 to 0.029 (rank 6–16), and with a weight below 0.029 (rank 17–23). The first group includes one economic (E3), one technical (N2), and three technological (QT2, QT4, V1) indicators of the MCS. The second group consists of five technological (AT1, AT2, AT3, V2, V3), four economic (E1, E2, T1, T2), one social (S2), and one environmental (EK1) indicators. The third group is represented by two technological (QT1, QT3), two social (S1, S3), one technical (N1), one economic (T3), and one environmental (EK2) indicators.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Abbreviation | Full Form | Definition |
---|---|---|
AHP | The Analytic hierarchy process | AHP is a structured technique for organizing and analyzing complex decisions based on mathematics and psychology, developed by Thomas Saaty in the 1970s. |
ANP | The Analytic Network Process | ANP is a multi-criteria theory of measurement used to derive relative priority scales of absolute numbers from individual judgments (or from actual measurements normalized to a relative form) that also belong to a fundamental scale of absolute numbers. |
MCDM | Multiple-criteria decision-making | MCDM is a sub-discipline of operations research that explicitly evaluates multiple conflicting criteria in decision making. |
ME | The Mining Enterprise | ME is a mining enterprise that independently mines and processes minerals. |
MTS | The Mining and Technical System | MTS is a combination of mining structures, open and underground technical and technological subsystems, physicochemical and special mining methods in interaction with the enclosing subsoil areas. |
OOS | The Opening-Up of An Opencast System | OOS is defined by the authors as a complex technical and technological subsystem of the mining and technical system, designed for the formation and transportation of freight flows of minerals, overburden, equipment, and materials, consisting of opening workings, mining transport, and devices, as well as in-pit crasher (transshipment) points of rock mass. |
TOPSIS | The Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution | TOPSIS is a method of compensatory aggregation that compares a set of alternatives by identifying weights for each criterion, normalizing scores for each criterion and calculating the geometric distance between each alternative and the ideal alternative, which is the best score in each criterion. |
No. | Academic Degree | Number of Experts | Expert Science Interests | Work Experience in the Field of Research |
---|---|---|---|---|
Academic experts | ||||
1 | Professor, Doctor (Technical Science) | 2 | Geotechnology, design of mining systems | 41 |
2 | Industrial transport, logistics | 34 | ||
2 | Assistant Professor (PhD) | 4 | Geotechnology, design of mining systems | 16–17 |
2 | Industrial transport, logistics, geotechnology | 19 | ||
Mining industry representatives | ||||
3 | Senior leadership (PhD) | 1 | Iron ore mining | 15 |
4 | Top management | 3 | Copper ore mining | 5–9 |
5 | Top management, Senior leadership | 3 | Diamond and other minerals mining | 7–10 |
6 | Top management, Senior leadership | 2 | Mine design, automation of mining operations | 10–14 |
7 | Senior leadership (PhD) | 1 | Mine design, automation of mining operations | 35 |
References
- Abdollahisharif, J.; Bakhtavar, E.; Shahriar, K. Open-pit to underground mining—Where is the optimum transition depth? In New Challenges and Visions for Mining—21st World Mining Congress; Sobczyk, J., Kicki, J., Eds.; Taylor & Francis: London, UK, 2008; pp. 189–196. ISBN 978-0-415-48667-5. [Google Scholar]
- Phlevani, D.; Osanloo, M. Resumption of Deep Open-Pit Mining as a Future Challenge May. In Application of Computers and Operations Research in the Mineral Industry; Bandopadhyay, S., Ed.; Society for Mining Metallurgy and Exploration Inc.: Englewood, CO, USA, 2015; pp. 249–256. ISBN 0-8733-5417-6. [Google Scholar]
- Paricheh, M.; Osanloo, M. Determination of the optimum in-pit crusher location in open-pit mining under production and operating cost uncertainties. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computer Applications in the Mineral Industries (CAMI 2016), Istanbul, Turkey, 5–7 October 2016; p. 34. [Google Scholar]
- Czaplicki, J.M. Shovel-Truck Systems: Modelling, Analysis and Calculation; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2009; p. 172. ISBN 978-041-548-135-9. [Google Scholar]
- Burmistrov, K.V.; Osintsev, N.A.; Shakshakpaev, A.N. The Selection of Open-pit Dump Trucks at the Reconstruction of Quarry. Proc. Eng. 2017, 206, 1696–1702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shrivastava, P.; Vidhi, R. Pathway to Sustainability in the Mining Industry: A Case Study of Alcoa and Rio Tinto. Resources 2020, 9, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaplunov, D.R.; Ryl’nikova, M.V. Principles of projecting mining-and-engineering systems for integrated mineral mining with a combined geotechnology. J. Min. Sci. 2008, 44, 578–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burmistrov, K.V.; Osintsev, N.A. Principles of sustainable development of mining and technical systems in transitional periods. Bull. Tomsk. Polytec. Univ. Geo Assets Eng. 2020, 331, 179–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bascetin, A. A decision support system using analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for the optimal environmental reclamation of an open-pit mine. Environ. Geol. 2007, 52, 663–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samanta, B.; Sarkar, B.; Mukherjee, S.K. Selection of opencast mining equipment by a multi-criteria decision-making process. Min. Technol. 2013, 111, 136–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yutyaev, A.V. Comprehensive Substantiation of the Parameters of Mining Systems of High-Performance Coal Mines. PhD Thesis, MISiS, Moscow, Russia, 2017; p. 129. (In Russian). [Google Scholar]
- Yakovlev, V.L.; Glebov, A.V.; Kulniyaz, S.S.; Karmaev, G.D. Comparative analysis of the application of steep conveyor lines on quarries. Ser. Geol. Tech. Sci. 2020, 3, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yazdani-Chamzini, A. An integrated fuzzy multi criteria group decision making model for handling equipment selection. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2014, 20, 660–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kursunoglu, N.; Onder, M. Selection of an appropriate fan for an underground coal mine using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2015, 48, 101–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lashgari, A.; Yazdani-Chamzini, A.; Fouladgar, M.M.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Shafiee, S.; Abbate, N. Equipment selection using fuzzy multi criteria decision making model: Key study of Gole Gohar Iron Min. Eng. Econ. 2012, 23, 125–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dey, P.K.; Ramcharan, E.K. Analytic hierarchy process helps select site for limestone quarry expansion in Barbados. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 88, 1384–1395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Soofastaei, A.; Aminossadati, S.M.; Kizil, M.; Knights, P. Reducing Fuel Consumption of Haul Trucks in Surface Mines Using Artificial Intelligence Models. In Proceedings of the 16th Coal Operators’ Conference, Mining Engineering, Wollongong, NSW, Australia, 10–12 February 2016; pp. 477–489. [Google Scholar]
- Vuyeykova, O.N.; Larin, O.N. The problem of enhancing the effectiveness of the career of motor transport. Vestnik Orenburg State Univ. 2011, 10, 20–25. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Adebimpe, R.A.; Akande, J.; Arum, C. Mine equipment selection for Ajabanoko Iron Ore Deposit, Kogi State, Nigeria. Sci. Res. 2013, 1, 25–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Golik, V.I.; Khasheva, Z.M.; Shulgatyi, L.P. Economical efficiency of utilization of allied mining enterprises waste. Soc. Sci. 2015, 10, 750–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Altushkin, I.A.; Cherepovitsyn, A.E.; Korol, Y.A. Practical Realization of Sustainable Development Mechanism in Foundation and Development of Mining and Metallurgical Holding of Russian Copper Industry; Ore and Metals: Moscow, Russia, 2016; 232p, ISBN 978-5-98191-082-1. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- EBRD Extractive Mining Industries Strategy 2018–2022. Available online: https://www.ebrd.com/documents/natural-resources/mining-operations-policy.pdf (accessed on 22 December 2020).
- Shen, L.; Muduli, K.; Barve, A. Developing a sustainable development framework in the context of mining industries: AHP approach. Resour. Policy 2015, 46, 15–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/publications/transforming-our-world-2030-agenda-sustainable-development-17981 (accessed on 10 December 2020).
- Rakhmangulov, A.; Sladkowski, A.; Osintsev, N.; Muravev, D. Green logistics: A system of methods and instruments. Part 2. Nase More 2018, 65, 49–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hustrulid, W.A.; Kuchta, M.; Martin, R. Open Pit Mine Planning and Design, 3rd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis Group: Milton, UK, 2013; ISBN 978-1-4822-2117-6. [Google Scholar]
- Khokhryakov, B.C. Open Pit Design; Nedra: Moscow, Russia, 1992; 383p, ISBN 5-247-01721-8. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Suprun, V.; Agafonov, J. Substantiation of Boundaries and Procedure for Mining of Large Coal Brachysynclines. In Mine Planning and Equipment Selection; Drebenstedt, C., Singhal, R., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 25–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeswiet, J. Including towards sustainable mining in evaluating mining impacts. Procedia CIRP 2017, 62, 494–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morteza, O.; Mahdi, R. Mine Design Selection Considering Sustainable Development. In Mine Planning and Equipment Selection; Drebenstedt, C., Singhal, R., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molotilov, S.G.; Cheskidov, V.I.; Norri, V.K. Methodical principles for planning the mining and loading equipment capacity for open cast mining with the use of dumpers. Part I. J. Min. Sci. 2008, 44, 376–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramani, R.V. Surface mining technology: Progress and prospects. Proc. Eng. 2012, 46, 9–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kalabin, G.V. Principles of macro-ecological risk mapping of mining industry areas. J. Min. Sci. 2012, 48, 1071–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, D.J. Applying geomechanics principles to mine waste management. In Proceedings of the 7th International Congress on Environmental Geotechnics (ICEG2014), Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 10–14 November 2014; Engineers Australia: Canberra, ACT, Australia; pp. 198–205. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, J.-H.; Gu, D.-S.; Li, J.-X. Optimization principle of combined surface and underground mining and its applications. J. Cent. South Univ. Technol. 2003, 10, 222–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Claassen, J.O. Application of systemic flow-based principles in mining. J. S. Afr. Inst. Min. Metall. 2015, 115, 747–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dominy, S.; O’Connor, L.; Parbhakar-Fox, A. Geometallurgy—A route to more resilient mine operations. Minerals 2018, 8, 560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mining Principles. Available online: https://www.icmm.com/mining-principles (accessed on 24 November 2020).
- Sinan Erzurumlu, S.; Erzurumlu, Y.O. Sustainable mining development with community using design thinking and multi-criteria decision analysis. Resour. Policy 2015, 46, 6–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fraser, J. Creating shared value as a business strategy for mining to advance the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Extr. Ind. Soc. 2019, 6, 788–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mills, T. Fully armed: Is the application of the arm’s length principle the best method to address transfer mispricing in the mining industry in developing countries? Extr. Ind. Soc. 2019, 6, 1075–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Makumbe, S.; Hattingh, T.; Plint, N.; Esterhuizen, D. Effectiveness of using Learning Factories to impart Lean principles in mining employees. Proc. Manuf. 2018, 23, 69–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mancini, L.; Sala, S. Social impact assessment in the mining sector: Review and comparison of indicators frameworks. Resour. Policy 2018, 57, 98–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yakovlev, V.L.; Sokolov, I.V.; Sakantsev, G.G.; Kravchuk, I.L. Transition processes in hybrid mineral mining. Gornyi Zhurnal 2017, 7, 46–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, Z.; Xiao, W.; Fu, Y. Introduction to Concurrent Mining and Reclamation for Coal Mines in China. In Mine Planning and Equipment Selection; Drebenstedt, C., Singhal, R., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 781–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lapaev, V.N.; Pikalov, V.A. Principles of designing high-performance mining and technical systems of quarries. Min. Inf. Anal. Bull. 2011, S11, 429–435. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Gavrishev, S.E.; Zoteev, O.V.; Zalyadnov, V.Y. Slope stability assessment, considering underground mining of ore reserves in open pit walls and floor at Sibay deposit. Gornyi Zhurnal 2016, 5, 53–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fleurisson, J.-A. Slope design and implementation in open pit mines: Geological and geomechanical approach. Proc. Eng. 2012, 46, 27–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baranov, E.G.; Tangaev, I.A. Energy principles for analysis and optimization of mining and ore preparation processes. Sov. Min. Sci. 1989, 25, 334–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, C.; Xu, W. Open-pit mine truck real-time dispatching principle under macroscopic control. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Innovative Computing, Information and Control—Volume I, ICICIC’06, Beijing, China, 30 August–1 September 2006; pp. 702–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bukeikhanova, S.; Kulniyaz, S.; Lysenko, S. Principles of cyclic-flow technology in the development of deep pits. In Mine Planning and Equipment Selection; Drebenstedt, C., Singhal, R., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 65–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rzhevsky, V.V. Part 2. Technology and Integrated Mechanization. In Open Pit Mining: Book for Universities; Nedra: Moscow, Russia, 1985; p. 549. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Yakovlev, V.L. Theory and Practice of Transport Choice of Deep Quarries; Science: Novosibirsk, Russia, 1989; p. 240. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Mahdi, R.; Morteza, O. Determining the Most Effective Factors on Open Pit Mine Plans and Their Interactions. In Mine Planning and Equipment Selection; Drebenstedt, C., Singhal, R., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 197–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khazin, M.L. Robotic Equipment for Mining Operations. Vestnik Nosov Magnitogorsk State Tech. Univ. 2020, 18, 4–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lel’, Y.I.; Stenin, Y.V. Evaluation and planning of development of networks of motor transport communications at open pits. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii Gornyi Zhurnal 2005, 3, 95–102. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Vasiliev, M.V. Principles of determining the moment of transition to a new type of transport in the development of deep quarries. Improvement of quarry transport: Works. IGDMCHM USSR 1970, 30, 14–17. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Kolga, A.; Moskovka, E. Environmental improving the utilization of dump trucks in the composition of supply truck train at open-pit mining. Modern Probl. Russ. Trans. Complex 2016, 6, 55–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Galiyev, S.Z.; Boyandinova, A.A.; Adilkhanova, A.Z. Information and Methodical Base of Simulation Modeling of Excavator-Truck-Conveyor Complex Operation. In Proceedings of the Mine Planning and Equipment Selection (MPES 2010), Carlton, VIC, Australia, 1–3 December 2010; pp. 567–575. [Google Scholar]
- Read, J.; Stacey, P. Guidelines for Open Pit Slope Design; CSIRO Pub: Collingwood, VIC, Australia, 2009; ISBN 978-041-587-441-0. [Google Scholar]
- Paricheh, M.; Osanloo, M. How to Exit Conveyor from an Open-Pit Mine: A Theoretical Approach. In Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Mine Planning and Equipment Selection (MPES 2018); Widzyk-Capehart, E., Hekmat, A., Singhal, R., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 319–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bejari, H.; Daya, A.; Roudini, A. Selection of chromite processing plant site using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP). J. Min. Environ. 2017, 8, 155–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, X.-C.; Gu, X.-W.I.; Wang, Q.; Liu, J.-P.; Wang, J. Ultimate pit optimization with ecological cost for open pit metal mines. Trans. Nonferr. Met. Soc. Chin. 2014, 24, 1531–1537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Tu, S. Selection of an appropriate mechanized mining technical process for thin coal seam mining. Math. Probl. Eng. 2015, 2015, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Acaroglu, O.; Ergin, H.; Eskikaya, S. Analytical hierarchy process for selection of roadheaders. J. S. Afr. Inst. Min. Metall. 2006, 106, 569–575. [Google Scholar]
- Gupta, P.; Mehlawat, M.K.; Aggarwal, U.; Charles, V. An integrated AHP-DEA multi-objective optimization model for sustainable transportation in mining industry. Resour. Policy 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patyk, M.; Bodziony, P.; Przylibski, T.A.; Kasza, D. Analysis of multiple criteria selection and application of APEKS method in haul truck mining transport process. E3S Web Conf. 2018, 71, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bogdanovic, D.; Nikolic, D.; Ilic, I. Mining method selection by integrated AHP and PROMETHEE method. An. Acad. Bras. Cienc. 2012, 84, 219–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kasap, Y.; Subası, E. Risk assessment of occupational groups working in open pit mining: Analytic Hierarchy Process. J. Sustain. Min. 2017, 16, 38–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Golestanifar, M.; Aghajani Bazzazi, A. TISS: A decision framework for tailing impoundment site selection. Environ. Earth Sci. 2010, 61, 1505–1513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vashlaev, I.I.; Selivanov, A.V. Determination of the horizontal equivalent of the movement of the rock mass of vehicles by the energy criterion when driving on slopes. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii Gornyi Zhurnal 1997, 9–10, 78–80. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Bakhturin, Y.A.; Karmaev, G.D.; Bersenev, V.A. Issues of using cyclic-flow technology in open pit. Min. Inf. Anal. Bull. 2011, 3, 62–71. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Kuznetsov, D.V.; Kosolapov, A.I. Justification criteria for open pit mine depth and mining/haulage machinery parameters. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 262, 12038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Komljenovic, D.; Kecojevic, V. Multi-attribute selection method for mining trucks. Soc. Min. Metall. Explor. 2006, 320, 94–104. [Google Scholar]
- Guo, H.; Nguyen, H.; Vu, D.-A.; Bui, X.-N. Forecasting mining capital cost for open-pit mining projects based on artificial neural network approach. Resour. Policy 2019, 101474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohutsiwa, M.; Musingwini, M. Parametric estimation of capital costs for establishing a coal mine: South Africa case study. J. S. Afr. Inst. Min. Metall. 2015, 115, 789–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, X.; Chen, Y.; Feng, C. Green total factor productivity of China’s mining and quarrying industry: A global data envelopment analysis. Resour. Policy 2018, 57, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peralta, S.; Sasmito, A.P.; Kumral, M. Reliability effect on energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of mining hauling fleet towards sustainable mining. J. Sustain. Min. 2016, 15, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rodovalho, E.; Quaglio, O.; Felcsh, W.S., Jr.; Pascual, R.; de Tomi, G.; Tenório, J.A.S. Reducing GHG emissions through efficient tire consumption in open pit mines. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 255, 120185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Northey, S.A.; Mudd, G.M.; Saarivuori, E.; Wessman-Jaaskelainen, H.; Haque, N. Water footprinting and mining. Where are the limitations and opportunities? J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 135, 1098–1116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Awuah-Offei, K. Energy efficiency in mining. A review with emphasis on the role of operators in loading and hauling operations. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 117, 89–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rylnikova, M.V.; Strukov, K.I.; Olizarenko, V.V.; Turkin, I.S. Energy-efficient technologies in integrated mineral resources development: Prospects for application and estimate of parameters. Gornyi Zhurnal 2017, 11, 71–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Le Gouill, C.; Poupeau, F. A framework to assess mining within social-ecological systems. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2020, 44, 67–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joaquín Jara, J.; Pérez, P.; Villalobos, P. Good deposits are not enough. Mining labor productivity analysis in the copper industry in Chile and Peru 1992–2009. Resour. Policy 2010, 35, 247–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sitorus, F.; Cilliers, J.J.; Brito-Parada, P.R. Multi-criteria decision making for the choice problem in mining and mineral processing: Applications and trends. Exp. Syst. Appl. 2019, 121, 393–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kizil, M.S.; Abdalla, S.; Canbulat, I. Underground coal mine layout selection using analytical hierarchy process. Min. Technol. 2014, 123, 20–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saaty, T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process; McGraw Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1980; ISBN 978-007-054-371-3. [Google Scholar]
- Chang, D.Y. Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1996, 95, 649–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
No. | Factors/Elements | Parameters/Indicators | References |
---|---|---|---|
1. | Geological (Qualitative) [9,54,61,62] | ||
Mineral characteristic | Mineral quality and quantity | [9,61,62] | |
Quality of mined minerals | [9,61] | ||
Deposit characterization | Deposit geology | [9,10,54] | |
Weather condition | [13] | ||
Stripping ratio | [10,54,63] | ||
2. | Technical [10,13,14,15,16,54,61] | ||
Mining transport | Type of transport (trucks, railway, conveyer) | [13,17,64] | |
Technical feature | [9,19,65] | ||
Use of combined transport | [57,59,61] | ||
Compatibility with other equipment to match the production system | [10] | ||
Life-cycle of equipment | [15] | ||
Ergonomics | [10,64,66] | ||
Automation level | [64] | ||
In-pit crusher (transshipment) point | In-pit crusher location | [3] | |
Performance transshipment point in pit | [12] | ||
Number of transshipment point in pit | [67] | ||
3. | Technological [17,18] | ||
Production | Production performance | [9,10,68] | |
Risk | [13,69] | ||
Mine life | [10,54] | ||
Work scheduling | [68] | ||
Mine parameters | Bench height | [10,19] | |
Berm width | [19,70] | ||
Berm slope angle | [19] | ||
Size of opening-up of an opencast | High of opening-up | [3,57] | |
Width of opening-up | [5,56] | ||
Length of opening-up (road slope) | [68,71] | ||
Volume of opening-up of an opencast | [5] | ||
Ore and overburden flow | Performance of the ore and overburden | [72] | |
Transport work | [17,73] | ||
Parameters of mining transport | [74] | ||
Transportation route and transportation construction | Transportation route length | [71] | |
Transportation route form | [58,71] | ||
4. | Economic [21,23,54,61] | ||
Cost | Capital cost | [9,60,74,75,76] | |
Operating cost | [9,23,54,74] | ||
Profit | Distribution of revenues and wealth | [23] | |
Value added | [74] | ||
Investments | Shareholder value | [23] | |
Creation of new business opportunities | [23] | ||
5. | Environmental [19,21,22,63] | ||
Air pollution | Air emissions | [39,77,78] | |
Quantity of waste | Overburden from opening mining and waste from mining transport | [39,79] | |
Percentage of materials used that are recycled input materials | [39] | ||
Water contamination | Water use, effluents, and leachates | [23] | |
Sedimentation of river sand flooding in nearby villages | [23,80] | ||
Noise | Noise pollution | [23] | |
Negative impact on the ground | Lock-up of large areas of fertile land under waste dump | [23] | |
Energy efficiency | Energy efficiency in mining | [39,78,81] | |
Renewable energy | [82] | ||
6. | Social [21,83] | ||
Company staff | Creation of employment | [23] | |
Role of operators | [10] | ||
Employee education and skills development | [23] | ||
Labor productivity | [84] |
Mining Enterprise Level | Characteristic | Hierarchical Structure | Number of Principles | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mining enterprise (ME) | Includes one or several open pits (mines), a processing complex, and personnel for each structural unit and general management | System-wide principles—4 | ME sustainability—14 | |||
The mining and technical system (MTS) | A separate open pit (mine) equipped with the necessary equipment and personnel for the work | MTS sustainability—8 | ||||
The opening-up of an opencast system (OOS) | MTS subsystem, designed for the formation and transportation of cargo flows of minerals, overburden, equipment, and materials | OOS sustainability—6 |
Group of Principles | Title of Principles | Aspects (Factors) of Sustainable Functioning | Aspects (Factors) of Sustainable Development | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Technical | Technological | Economic | Environmental | Social | ||
System-wide principles | Integrity | + | + | + | + | + |
Structurality | + | + | + | + | + | |
Hierarchy | + | + | + | + | + | |
Controllability | + | + | + | + | + | |
Mining enterprises development principles | Development principles | + | + | + | ||
Principles of modern mining | + | + | + | + | ||
Principles of sustainable development of geotechnology | + | + | + | + | ||
Methodological principles of mining planning | + | + | + | |||
Principles of macro-ecological risk mapping of mining industry areas | + | + | + | |||
Pit design principles | + | + | + | + | ||
Principles to mine waste management | + | + | + | |||
Systemic flow-based principles in mining | + | + | + | |||
Geometallurgy principles | + | + | + | |||
Principles of economic, environmental, and socio-cultural sustainability | + | + | + | + | ||
Mining operation principles | + | + | + | + | + | |
Principles of a methodological approach to solving mining problems | + | + | + | + | ||
Open pit mining and technical system development principles | Principle of concurrent mining and reclamation technology | + | + | + | ||
Principles of the full cycle of deposit development | + | + | + | + | ||
MTS organization principles | + | + | + | |||
MTS design principles | + | + | + | + | ||
Principle for setting contours for open-pit mining | + | + | ||||
Principles of ensuring the sustainability of mining objects | + | + | ||||
Control principle | + | + | + | + | ||
Opening-up of an opencast system and other subsystem’s development principles | Principles of cyclic-flow technology in the development of deep pits | + | + | + | ||
The principles of the formation of ore and overburden flows, the principle of the OOS scheme formation | + | + | + | |||
Transport operating principles | + | + | + | |||
Principles for determining the moment of transition to a new mode of transport in the development of deep quarries | + | + | + | |||
Principles of modeling of excavator-truck-conveyor complexes | + | + | + | |||
The principles of deep quarries transport systems formation | + | + | + | |||
Based principles of high angle conveyors | + | + |
Aspects (Factors) of Sustainable Functioning and Development | Parameters | Indicators |
---|---|---|
Technical | Mining transport (N) | Mono transport (N1) |
Combined transport (N2) | ||
Technological | Performance of mining transport (QT) | Number of transport vehicles (QT1) |
Performance of mining transport (QT2) | ||
Number of transshipment points in pit (QT3) | ||
Performance transshipment points in pit (QT4) | ||
Transport work (AT) | Transportation route length (AT1) | |
Height of rock mass transportation (AT2) | ||
Traffic volume (AT3) | ||
Volume of opening-up of an opencast (V) | Height of opening-up (V1) | |
Width of opening-up (V2) | ||
Length of opening-up (road slope) (V3) | ||
Economic | Useful life of opening-up of an opencast (T) | The duration of formation opening-up of an opencast (T1) |
Mine period (T2) | ||
Number of mine periods (T3) | ||
Economic efficiency (E) | Capital cost (E1) | |
Operating cost (E2) | ||
Total income (E3) | ||
Social | Social efficiency (S) | Working efficiency (S1) |
Staff working conditions (S2) | ||
Level of automation and robotization of the transportation process (S3) | ||
Environmental | Environmental efficiency (EK) | Air pollution (EK1) |
Quantity of waste (EK2) |
Fuzzy Number | Linguistic Term | Scale of Fuzzy Number |
---|---|---|
1 | Equal importance | (1,1,3) |
2 | Moderate superiority | (1,3,5) |
3 | Significant superiority | (3,5,7) |
4 | Strong superiority | (5,7,9) |
5 | Absolute superiority | (7,9,10) |
Parameters | Weight/Rank | ||
---|---|---|---|
Academic Experts | Mining Company Experts | Total | |
Mining transport (N) | 0.0603/(8) | 0.1316/(5) | 0.0915/(6) |
Performance of mining transport (QT) | 0.1594/(2) | 0.1851/(2) | 0.1709/(2) |
Transport work (AT) | 0.1109/(5) | 0.1357/(4) | 0.1217/(4) |
Volume of opening-up of an opencast (V) | 0.0821/(6) | 0.1623/(3) | 0.1233/(3) |
Useful life of opening-up of an opencast (T) | 0.0713/(7) | 0.1306/(6) | 0.0993/(5) |
Economic efficiency (E) | 0.2481/(1) | 0.2487/(1) | 0.2668/(1) |
Social efficiency (S) | 0.1527/(3) | 0.0047/(7) | 0.0738/(7) |
Environmental efficiency (EK) | 0.1153/(4) | 0.0013/(8) | 0.0527/(8) |
Indicators | Weight/Rank | Global Weight/Global Rank | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Academic Experts | Mining Company Experts | Total | Academic Experts | Mining Company Experts | Total | |
Mono transport (N1) | 0.0789/(2) | 0.1046/(2) | 0.0934/(2) | 0.0047/(23) | 0.0137/(16) | 0.0085/(23) |
Combined transport (N2) | 0.9211/(1) | 0.8954/(1) | 0.9066/(1) | 0.0555/(4) | 0.1178/(2) | 0.0829/(2) |
Number of transport vehicles (QT1) | 0.1709/(4) | 0.1451/(3) | 0.1484/(4) | 0.0273/(16) | 0.0268/(14) | 0.0254/(19) |
Performance of mining transport (QT2) | 0.3120/(1) | 0.5031/(1) | 0.4145/(1) | 0.0497/(6) | 0.0931/(3) | 0.07086/(3) |
Number of transhipment points in pit (QT3) | 0.2833/(2) | 0.0021/(4) | 0.1520/(3) | 0.0452/(9) | 0.0004/(23) | 0.0259/(18) |
Performance transshipment points in pit (QT4) | 0.2337/(3) | 0.3497/(2) | 0.2852/(2) | 0.0372/(12) | 0.0647/(5) | 0.0488/(5) |
Transportation route length (AT1) | 0.2577/(3) | 0.3632/(2) | 0.3012/(3) | 0.0286/(17) | 0.0493/(8) | 0.0367/(9) |
Height of rock mass transportation (AT2) | 0.4301/(1) | 0.2385/(3) | 0.3158/(2) | 0.0477/(7) | 0.0324/(13) | 0.0385/(7) |
Traffic volume (AT3) | 0.3121/(2) | 0.3983/(1) | 0.3830/(1) | 0.0346/(14) | 0.0540/(7) | 0.0466/(6) |
Height of opening-up (V1) | 0.5073/(1) | 0.4636/(1) | 0.5030/(1) | 0.0416/(10) | 0.0753/(4) | 0.0620/(4) |
Width of opening-up (V2) | 0.1523/(3) | 0.3746/(2) | 0.2559/(2) | 0.0125/(22) | 0.0608/(6) | 0.0315/(15) |
Length of opening-up (road slope) (V3) | 0.3404/(2) | 0.1617/(3) | 0.2411/(3) | 0.0279/(18) | 0.0263/(15) | 0.0297/(16) |
The duration of formation opening-up of an opencast (T1) | 0.4502/(1) | 0.2946/(3) | 0.3596/(2) | 0.0321/(15) | 0.0385/(11) | 0.0357/(11) |
Mine period (T2) | 0.3570/(2) | 0.3726/(1) | 0.3619/(1) | 0.0254/(19) | 0.0487/(9) | 0.0359/(10) |
Number of mine periods (T3) | 0.1928/(3) | 0.3327/(2) | 0.2785/(3) | 0.0137/(21) | 0.0435/(10) | 0.0277/(17) |
Capital cost (E1) | 0.1835/(2) | 0.0499/(3) | 0.1256/(3) | 0.0455/(8) | 0.0124/(17) | 0.0335/(14) |
Operating cost (E2) | 0.1412/(3) | 0.1384/(2) | 0.1403/(2) | 0.0350/(13) | 0.0344/(12) | 0.0374/(8) |
Total income (E3) | 0.6753/(1) | 0.8117/(1) | 0.7340/(1) | 0.1676/(1) | 0.2019/(1) | 0.1958/(1) |
Working efficiency (S1) | 0.3551/(2) | 0.3246/(2) | 0.3347/(2) | 0.0542/(5) | 0.0015/(19) | 0.0247/(20) |
Staff working conditions (S2) | 0.4986/(1) | 0.4194/(1) | 0.4688/(1) | 0.0761/(3) | 0.0019/(18) | 0.0346/(12) |
Level of automation and robotization of the transportation process (S3) | 0.1463/(3) | 0.2560/(3) | 0.1965/(3) | 0.0223/(20) | 0.0012/(20) | 0.0145/(22) |
Air pollution (EK1) | 0.6762/(1) | 0.5988/(1) | 0.6413/(1) | 0.0779/(2) | 0.0008/(21) | 0.0338/(13) |
Quantity of waste (EK2) | 0.3238/(2) | 0.4012/(2) | 0.3587/(2) | 0.0373/(11) | 0.0005/(22) | 0.0189/(21) |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Rakhmangulov, A.; Burmistrov, K.; Osintsev, N. Sustainable Open Pit Mining and Technical Systems: Concept, Principles, and Indicators. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1101. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031101
Rakhmangulov A, Burmistrov K, Osintsev N. Sustainable Open Pit Mining and Technical Systems: Concept, Principles, and Indicators. Sustainability. 2021; 13(3):1101. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031101
Chicago/Turabian StyleRakhmangulov, Aleksandr, Konstantin Burmistrov, and Nikita Osintsev. 2021. "Sustainable Open Pit Mining and Technical Systems: Concept, Principles, and Indicators" Sustainability 13, no. 3: 1101. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031101