MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387261132 · doi:10.36487/acg_repo/2315_008

Lessons learned from 20+ years post-closure care of BHP’s legacy mine sites in North America

2023· article· en· W4387261132 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMine closure · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsBHP (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClosure (psychology)Computer sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past, mine closure across the industry was mostly about meeting regulatory compliance with a focus on physical stability of the reclaimed landscape and revegetation of disturbed areas, with a preference for the lowest cost option.Today, BHP is focused on achieving optimised closure outcomes on a fit-for-purpose, site by site basis in consideration of sometimes competing interests such as obligations, corporate values, stakeholder expectations, and cost.It is acknowledged that how some sites were developed and/or closed in the past was not necessarily the best in terms of post-operations life when we apply a modern set of optics.Using hindsight from experiences within BHP's Legacy Assets, this paper presents numerous lessons learned in support of achieving optimised closure outcomes and objectives for mine sites.Key lessons learned include:• Relinquishment is a great aspiration for closed mine sites, but sites should be developed, operated, and closed in the event long-term care and maintenance becomes a reality.• Closure-related decisions should be based on risks, not solely on regulatory compliance.It is acknowledged that most jurisdictions are moving to a risk-based as opposed to a prescriptiveapproach for final closure of sites.In some jurisdictions, however, mine closure regulations are not stringent enough to force owners into a risk-based approach, supported by robust science and thorough technical assessments to select an optimised closure strategy.• Selecting an optimised mine closure strategy should be based on the undiscounted value of estimated closure and post-closure costs.If closure strategies are selected based on present value of these costs, the industry tends to favour strategies that offer the least number of opportunities to build social value while at the same time, leaving the site/owner exposed to higher closure risk due to issues such as changing societal and regulatory demands, climate change, and emerging chemical species of concern.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.867

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it