MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402451736 · doi:10.1080/17480930.2024.2394813

Sustainable open pit mining through GHG-conscious short-term production scheduling

2024· article· en· W4402451736 on OpenAlexaff
Milad Rahnema, Martin Grenon, Ali Moradi Afrapoli

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mining Reclamation and Environment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Greenhouse gasProduction (economics)Environmental scienceEngineeringOpen-pit miningTerm (time)BusinessNatural resource economicsMining engineeringOperations managementGeologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mining industry is a notable contributor to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, posing challenges to achieving the Paris Agreement’s goal of capping emissions at 30 Gt CO2-equivalent annually by 2030. This paper introduces a novel Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) model tailored for short-term open-pit mine planning that integrates environmental considerations, particularly GHG emissions, alongside economic objectives. The model handles complex operational challenges including block sequencing, multiple transport destinations, and stockpile management. Additionally, it provides the opportunity to examine the adoption of In-Pit Crushing and Conveying (IPCC) systems as the main transport method, an innovative approach aimed at reducing emissions from haulage – which accounts for over 35% of GHG emissions in open-pit mining. Applied to a case study in an iron ore mine, the model not only considers the environmental benefits of IPCC systems compared to traditional truck and shovel (TS) operations but also highlights significant reductions in haulage costs and carbon tax liabilities. The findings demonstrate that fixed IPCC (FIPCC) systems, in particular, offer substantial decreases in GHG emissions, presenting a compelling case for their broader adoption in the industry.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.521
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Mining Reclamation and EnvironmentSame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207