IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v86y2023ipas0301420723008735.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Embedding extreme events to mine project planning: Implications on cost, time, and disclosure standards

Author

Listed:
  • Senses, Sena
  • Kumral, Mustafa

Abstract

Extreme events, characterized as infrequent and catastrophic occurrences, can present significant challenges in various industries. These events can be associated with earthquakes, landslides, hurricanes, floods, rainfalls, and wildfires. The mining industry is also highly vulnerable to extreme events because it threats operation sustainability, employees' safety, and environmental compliance. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of earthquakes in a mining area and evaluates their impacts on a mining operation through a case study based on a mine construction project. To this end, Extreme Value Theory (EVT) using both the Block Maxima (BM) and Peaks Over Threshold (POT) methods was employed to analyze the historical earthquake data and estimate the return levels corresponding to the planned mine project completion time. Furthermore, a Discrete Event Simulation (DES) model was developed to perform a comprehensive risk assessment, allowing for a detailed examination of the potential consequences that a specified magnitude earthquake could have on the project's cost and duration. 1000 earthquake scenarios for the period covering the project life were generated for a thorough risk assessment. The case study focused on a hypothetical open pit mine construction project located in the province of British Columbia, Canada. Historical earthquake data specific to the selected region were analyzed, and the potential consequences of earthquakes on the project were evaluated. According to the results, the return level of 4.7 ML earthquake was obtained corresponding to the return period defined as the planned project completion time. In the event of an earthquake with this specified magnitude, simulation results revealed that there is a 95% probability that the project will experience a delay of at least 6.28% of the project completion time, ultimately leading to project costs exceeding the normal project cost by a minimum of 4.85%. The study highlights the importance of considering extreme natural events, such as earthquakes, in mining project planning and risk mitigation. The results provide valuable insights into the likelihood and potential consequences of earthquakes, contributing to better risk assessment, strategic planning, informed decision-making, and improved project management practices in the mining industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Senses, Sena & Kumral, Mustafa, 2023. "Embedding extreme events to mine project planning: Implications on cost, time, and disclosure standards," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(PA).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:86:y:2023:i:pa:s0301420723008735
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104162
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420723008735
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104162?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Franck Marle & Thierry Gidel, 2012. "A multi-criteria decision-making process for project risk management method selection," International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(2), pages 189-223.
    2. Kowalska, Izabela Jonek, 2014. "Risk management in the hard coal mining industry: Social and environmental aspects of collieries’ liquidation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 124-134.
    3. Yuanzhe Liu & Wei Song, 2019. "Influences of Extreme Precipitation on China’s Mining Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-15, November.
    4. Mostafaei, Kamran & maleki, Shaho & Zamani Ahmad Mahmoudi, Mohammad & Knez, Dariusz, 2022. "Risk management prediction of mining and industrial projects by support vector machine," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    5. Schnebele, Emily & Jaiswal, Kishor & Luco, Nicolas & Nassar, Nedal T., 2019. "Natural hazards and mineral commodity supply: Quantifying risk of earthquake disruption to South American copper supply," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Aldin Ardian & Mustafa Kumral, 2021. "Enhancing mine risk assessment through more accurate reproduction of correlations and interactions between uncertain variables," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 34(3), pages 411-425, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dariusz Knez & Omid Ahmad Mahmoudi Zamani, 2023. "Up-to-Date Status of Geoscience in the Field of Natural Hydrogen with Consideration of Petroleum Issues," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-17, September.
    2. Fernandez, Viviana & Pastén-Henríquez, Boris & Tapia-Griñen, Pablo & Wagner, Rodrigo, 2023. "Commodity prices under the threat of operational disruptions: Labor strikes at copper mines," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    3. Mitra Khalilidermani & Dariusz Knez, 2023. "A Survey on the Shortcomings of the Current Rate of Penetration Predictive Models in Petroleum Engineering," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-23, May.
    4. Ronyastra, I Made & Saw, Lip Huat & Low, Foon Siang, 2024. "Monte Carlo simulation-based financial risk identification for industrial estate as post-mining land usage in Indonesia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Fulei Shi & Haiqing Cao & Chuansheng Wang & Cuiyou Yao, 2020. "A System Dynamics Model for Ecological Environmental Management in Coal Mining Areas in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-17, March.
    6. Yongliang Deng & Liangliang Song & Zhipeng Zhou & Ping Liu, 2017. "An Approach for Understanding and Promoting Coal Mine Safety by Exploring Coal Mine Risk Network," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-17, October.
    7. Zeng, Lanyan & Liu, Shi Qiang & Kozan, Erhan & Corry, Paul & Masoud, Mahmoud, 2021. "A comprehensive interdisciplinary review of mine supply chain management," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    8. Dvořáček, Jaroslav & Bauer, Viliam & Sousedíková, Radmila & Matušková, Simona & Csikósová, Adriana, 2021. "Mine closure and resuming production options," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    9. Jair Santillán‐Saldivar & Tobias Gaugler & Christoph Helbig & Andreas Rathgeber & Guido Sonnemann & Andrea Thorenz & Axel Tuma, 2021. "Design of an endpoint indicator for mineral resource supply risks in life cycle sustainability assessment: The case of Li‐ion batteries," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(4), pages 1051-1062, August.
    10. Mohammad Ahmad Mahmoudi Zamani & Dariusz Knez, 2023. "Experimental Investigation on the Relationship between Biot’s Coefficient and Hydrostatic Stress for Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-13, June.
    11. Pouresmaieli, Mahdi & Ataei, Mohammad & Nouri Qarahasanlou, Ali & Barabadi, Abbas, 2024. "Corporate social responsibility in complex systems based on sustainable development," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    12. Song, Yi & Bai, Wenbo & Zhang, Yijun, 2024. "Resilience assessment of trade network in copper industry chain and the risk resistance capacity of core countries: Based on complex network," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    13. Li, Baihua & Li, Huajiao & Ren, Shuai & Liu, Haiping & Wang, Gang, 2023. "Commodity supply risk assessment of China's copper industrial chain: The perspective of trade network," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:86:y:2023:i:pa:s0301420723008735. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.