IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i6p5213-d1099550.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Development of Underground Coal Resources in Shallow Groundwater Areas for Environment and Socio-Economic Considerations: A Case Study of Zhangji Coal Mine in China

Author

Listed:
  • Ruiya Zhang

    (Key Laboratory of Roads and Railway Engineering Safety Control, Shijiazhuang Tiedao University, Ministry of Education, Shijiazhuang 050043, China
    Institute of Land Reclamation and Ecological Restoration, China University of Mining and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Yoginder P. Chugh

    (College of Engineering, Computing, Technology and Mathematics, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901, USA)

Abstract

Coal resources in China are developed in several regions with shallow groundwater, and large mining-related surface subsidence can have negative impacts on agriculture, land and water resources as well as existing and future socio-economic resources. All these are important for sustainable resource development. Dynamic subsidence reclamation (DSR) planning concepts are evaluated here for another case study with analyses over a 11-year period. In DSR topsoil, subsoil, farming, and water resources management are dynamically synergized concurrent with mining ahead of and behind the projected dynamic subsidence trough. The study area involved mining five longwall faces (and post-mining reclamation) to assess if DSR could have improved both the environment and socio-economic conditions for post-mining land use as compared to using traditional reclamation (TR) and TR-modified (TR(MOD)) approaches. The results show that: (1) Upon final reclamation, farmland area and water resources in DSR and TR (MOD) will have increased by 5.6% and 30.2% as compared to TR. Removing soils ahead of mining before they submerge into water is important for farmland reclamation and long-term economic development. (2) Due to topsoil and subsoil separation and storage in the DSR plan, reclaimed farmland productivity should recover quickly and agriculture production should be larger than TR and TR(MOD) plans. (3) For a simplified economic model, the total revenue in the DSR plan should be 2.8 times more than in TR and 1.2 times larger than in TR (MOD) plan. (4) The total net revenue of the TR(MOD) plan should be increased by 8.1% as compared with the TR plan. The benefits will be much greater for analyses over longer periods. Overall, the DSR plan will allow for an improved socio-economic environment for new businesses to support disrupted workforces during and after mining.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruiya Zhang & Yoginder P. Chugh, 2023. "Sustainable Development of Underground Coal Resources in Shallow Groundwater Areas for Environment and Socio-Economic Considerations: A Case Study of Zhangji Coal Mine in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-19, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:6:p:5213-:d:1099550
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/6/5213/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/6/5213/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hu, Zhenqi & Yang, Guanghua & Xiao, Wu & Li, Jing & Yang, Yaoqi & Yu, Yang, 2014. "Farmland damage and its impact on the overlapped areas of cropland and coal resources in the eastern plains of China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-8.
    2. Hendrychová, Markéta & Svobodova, Kamila & Kabrna, Martin, 2020. "Mine reclamation planning and management: Integrating natural habitats into post-mining land use," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    3. Li, Gensheng & Hu, Zhenqi & Li, Pengyu & Yuan, Dongzhu & Wang, Wenjuan & Yang, Kun, 2021. "The optimal framework and model to balance underground coal mining and cropland protection in Jining, eastern China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    4. Amirshenava, Sina & Osanloo, Morteza, 2022. "Strategic planning of post-mining land uses: A semi-quantitative approach based on the SWOT analysis and IE matrix," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    5. Zandariya, Bayanmunkh, 2022. "Improving the policy framework for financial assurance for mine closure in Mongolia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. Li, Gensheng & Hu, Zhenqi & Li, Pengyu & Yuan, Dongzhu & Wang, Wenjuan & Han, Jiazheng & Yang, Kun, 2022. "Optimal layout of underground coal mining with ground development or protection: A case study of Jining, China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bojan Dimitrijević & Tomislav Šubaranović & Željko Stević & Mohamed Kchaou & Faris Alqurashi & Marko Subotić, 2024. "A Novel Hybrid Fuzzy Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Model for the Selection of the Most Suitable Land Reclamation Variant at Open-Pit Coal Mines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-19, May.

    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. Hu, Zhenqi & Li, Gensheng & Xia, Jianan & Feng, Zhanjie & Han, Jiazheng & Chen, Zanxu & Wang, Wenjuan & Li, Guodong, 2023. "Coupling of underground coal mining and mine reclamation for farmland protection and sustainable mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    2. Li, Gensheng & Hu, Zhenqi & Li, Pengyu & Yuan, Dongzhu & Wang, Wenjuan & Han, Jiazheng & Yang, Kun, 2022. "Optimal layout of underground coal mining with ground development or protection: A case study of Jining, China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    3. Measham, Thomas & Walker, Jim & Haslam McKenzie, Fiona & Kirby, Jason & Williams, Caroline & D'Urso, Jillian & Littleboy, Anna & Samper, Agnes & Rey, Rebecca & Maybee, Bryan & Brereton, David & Boggs,, 2024. "Beyond closure: A literature review and research agenda for post-mining transitions," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    4. Worden, Sandy & Svobodova, Kamila & Côte, Claire & Bolz, Pascal, 2024. "Regional post-mining land use assessment: An interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder approach," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Zhanjie Feng & Zhenqi Hu & Xi Zhang & Yuhang Zhang & Ruihao Cui & Li Lu, 2023. "Integrated Mining and Reclamation Practices Enhance Sustainable Land Use: A Case Study in Huainan Coalfield, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-15, October.
    6. Christina G. Siontorou, 2023. "Fair Development Transition of Lignite Areas: Key Challenges and Sustainability Prospects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Ronyastra, I Made & Saw, Lip Huat & Low, Foon Siang, 2023. "A review of methods for integrating risk management and multicriteria decision analysis in financial feasibility for post-coal-mining land usage selection," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(PB).
    8. Lili Du & Yunbing Hou & Shuheng Zhong & Kai Qu, 2023. "Identification of Priority Areas for Ecological Restoration in Coal Mining Areas with a High Groundwater Table Based on Ecological Security Pattern and Ecological Vulnerability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Li, Gensheng & Hu, Zhenqi & Li, Pengyu & Yuan, Dongzhu & Wang, Wenjuan & Yang, Kun, 2021. "The optimal framework and model to balance underground coal mining and cropland protection in Jining, eastern China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    10. Xiaotong Wang & Jiazheng Han & Jian Lin, 2022. "Response of Land Use and Net Primary Productivity to Coal Mining: A Case Study of Huainan City and Its Mining Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-16, June.
    11. Jonek-Kowalska, Izabela, 2024. "Demonstrating the need for a just transition: Socioeconomic diagnosis of polish cities living on hard coal mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    12. Marc Bascompta & Lluís Sanmiquel & Carla Vintró & Mohammad Yousefian, 2022. "Corporate Social Responsibility Index for Mine Sites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-24, October.
    13. Marcela Burnog & Aleš Kučera, 2024. "The role of the water regime in a reclaimed limestone quarry," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 70(8), pages 391-406.
    14. Shuai Li & Lifeng Yu & Wanjun Jiang & Haoxuan Yu & Xinmin Wang, 2022. "The Recent Progress China Has Made in Green Mine Construction, Part I: Mining Groundwater Pollution and Sustainable Mining," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-19, May.
    15. Amirshenava, Sina & Osanloo, Morteza, 2022. "Strategic planning of post-mining land uses: A semi-quantitative approach based on the SWOT analysis and IE matrix," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    16. Aneta Kowalska & Bal Ram Singh & Anna Grobelak, 2022. "Carbon Footprint for Post-Mining Soils: The Dynamic of Net CO 2 Fluxes and SOC Sequestration at Different Soil Remediation Stages under Reforestation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-23, December.
    17. Kim, Ju-Hee & Kim, Kyung-Hag & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2022. "Evaluating and ranking the mining damage prevention programs in South Korea: An application of the fuzzy set theory," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    18. Xiaojun Zhu & Feng Zha & Hua Cheng & Liugen Zheng & Hui Liu & Wenshan Huang & Yu Yan & Liangjun Dai & Shenzhu Fang & Xiaoyu Yang, 2022. "Spatial Pattern Reconstruction of Water and Land Resources in Coal Mining Subsidence Areas within Urban Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-24, September.
    19. Jing, Zhaorui & Wang, Jinman & Tang, Qian & Liu, Biao & Niu, Hebin, 2021. "Evolution of land use in coal-based cities based on the ecological niche theory: A case study in Shuozhou City, China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    20. Alexandra D. Solomou & Panagiotis Michopoulos & George Mantakas, 2023. "Monitoring Reclamation of Plant Biodiversity and Soil Parameters in an Area of Bauxite Mine Spoils (A Case Study of Greece)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-16, October.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:6:p:5213-:d:1099550. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.