MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6886089897 · doi:10.14288/1.0447235

Determining vulnerabilities and risks in water management through water balances and water accounting analysis

2024· article· en· W6886089897 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater balanceWater supplyWater resourcesPrecipitationNon-revenue waterWater useSurface waterResource (disambiguation)Water securityRisk management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study emphasizes the importance of site-wide water balances in mining operations, focusing on water accumulation, excess discharge, and deficits. Two mining sites in Indonesia and Canada are analyzed by their water balances to identify and mitigate water-related risks. Creating a water balance helps mine site water managers understand operational water needs, storage limitations, and potential risks, offering practical solutions for sustainable water resource management. This thesis examines vulnerabilities in site water management at two nickel sites by analyzing their site water balances and water accounts. The aim is to review water inputs and outputs, ensure accountability for water entering site boundaries, and explore mitigation options. A probabilistic GoldSim model was used to create a site water balance model, calibrated and validated using publicly available and site-specific data collected through field visits. These simulations incorporate historical data, establishing probability distributions for operational risk assessment, including high precipitation years as simulations for wet conditions and discrete variables like land use, infrastructure, and water management variations. Model refinement involves sensitivity analysis and calibration to enhance accuracy. The base case, high rainfall, and future scenarios were run, and the results were analyzed using event probability and risk analysis. The results reveal a water surplus for both sites in all scenarios. The water risks include flooding, infrastructure vulnerability, and storage capacities. The models suggest water risk mitigations such as reducing site surface area, increasing water flow of the bottlenecked areas, and increasing discharge rates. Climate change affects the site by changing the precipitation patterns, affecting high rainfall periods, and affecting the Sudbury site more due to changes to the periods of snowmelt. More infrastructure should be added for redundancies to prevent the risk of overtopping or inundation. Future work can look at risk strategies by creating hydro-economic analysis to determine the best course of action for companies to reduce their risk, contaminant analysis, or data improvement using remote sensing. In conclusion, this research highlights the pivotal role of water balances in managing water resources, with implications for areas such as stakeholder collaboration, sustainability, and risk mitigation in the mining 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicMine drainage and remediation techniquesFrench-language works237,207