- LATEST BLOG POST
- echo $post_date ?>
- Cadia tailings facility failure expert review and risk considerations allow us to discuss InSAR application and low seismicity considerations for…
- Read More
Comparing water treatment processes lifetime risks using ORE (© Riskope) offers unique advantages to owners, regulators and the public.
As a matter of fact:
At Riskope we have recognized the need to include water treatment in mining systems as witnessed by the more than twenty years old scheme in Fig. 1.
Lately BioteQ asked us to perform a comparative ORE preliminary risk assessment on two water treatment alternatives, namely Lime and ChemSulphide®.
We analyzed three time horizons, i.e. short, medium and long term for each alternative with “time-invariable” consequences.
We used four Success Criteria Definition for the competing processes, i.e.:
Finally, we considered the consequences for failing any of the above criteria (i.e. the consequences of failure) identical for the 4 criteria.
We performed a functional analysis and developed a scheme for both processes using 7 macro elements each as follows:
In total we described 26 hazards, potentially hitting one or more of the system’s macro-elements.
We based probabilities estimates on experience as well as using the ORE transparent process, for the short, medium and long term.
By using ORE (© Riskope) one can introduce uncertainties for existing and new facilities. In the result (Figures 2-5) displayed below we consider an “average” case for the sake of the example.
Figure 2 shows that not only are the risks of the two processes widely different, but their variation with time follows significantly different patters: whereas the ChemSulphide® risks slowly increase with time, those of Lime display a sharp increase, as shown in Figure 3.
Due to the drillable nature of ORE hazard and risk register it is possible to understand what causes, for example, the total risk in a given scenario, within a selected macro-element (Fig. 4).
Finally, still to illustrate what the ORE drillable hazard and risk register allows to perform, Fig. 5 shows the relative quantitative total risks for the two alternatives and three terms, after excluding control/monitoring.
Comparing lifetime risks of water treatment processes using ORE (© Riskope) offers unique advantages to owners, regulators and the public. In particular, thanks to ORE architecture it is possible to have orderly, rational, unbiased and transparent debates on innovative alternatives. Indeed, uncertainties can be openly discussed and included in the analyses. The scalability of ORE allows to follow any project from cradle to grave, no matter how many decades the service life, closure and post-closure will last.