Climate Change Resiliency and Adaptation 1

Climate Change Resiliency and Adaptation

Climate Change Resiliency and Adaptation

Climate change resiliency must include the capacity for adaptation. Adaptation put simply is to respond, to reassess and to restore. To differentiate climate adaptation as part of policy framing from adaptation that occurs in ecosystems, climate adaptation involves deliberate responses to climate change. A resilient framework involves a systems-based approach to adaptive processes to respond to environmental changes .

Managing Climate Change Risk in the Mining Industry

Mine operators and owners aspire to be industry leaders in sustainable mining, which includes a commitment to conducting activities ethically and transparently. Most climate change policy focuses on reducing future greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and net-zero targets. Achieving these commitments requires transparency to the site-specific activities, infrastructure, equipment, data, and information used in the analysis.

Too frequently, challenges arises when there isn’t sufficient ‘line-of-site’ from corporate climate change strategies to site-based performance. Achieving the outcomes driven by corporate strategic initiatives requires clear communication of purpose and action at all levels of a mine site’s operations, from the board room to a haul truck driver on shift.

To effectively manage climate risk, it is also critical that climate change policies consider the adaptive capacity of operating and legacy sites. This requires a deliberate approach to understanding, assessing, and responding to the potential impacts of climate change at a site-specific level.

Adaptation for Climate Change

When incorporating climate change scenarios into designs, Okane starts at the site level. Okane uses the Köppen-Geiger climate classification system to help create a deeper conceptualization of climate conditions on a site-specific basis. It is important to remember that the world, and climate do not function on the average. As we like to say at Okane “The average does not exist!”.

If we think about a weather forecast, we do not decide to wear a coat or not based on the average. We make these decisions based on what the highs and lows are. The Köppen-Geiger classification includes seasonality, whether that be precipitation or temperature, which automatically getting us to stop thinking about ‘the average’. This approach gets us into the right thought space, which can then be adjusted based on orographic, slope, and climate change effects. Applying the Köppen-Geiger climate classification system helps develop a clear conceptualization of what is possible and helps set up a robust numerical modelling program.

Which Climate Change Scenario?

The advice most often given with respect to managing risk is to ‘be conservative’. For modelling climate change, that is often interpreted as using RCP8.5 scenario . Interestingly, the RCP8.5 scenario is not always the conservative approach!

Okane takes the approach of understanding the probability for each RCP scenario at a given location and site. Modelling scenarios by applying numerical models to evaluate geomorphic, geotechnical, and geochemical stability, ensures Okane develops an understanding of the consequence effects of each scenario. Only when probability and consequence are brought together can you properly inform on risk.

For example, simulating the RCP8.5 scenario may seem conservative with respect to water quality risk, but this RCP scenario will generally add more water to the watershed than other scenarios. This changes the assimilative capacity of the watershed, not necessarily by volume but by changes in intensity and duration. In this scenario, designs based on RCP8.5 may not protect the surrounding environment.

‘Base Case’ Climate Database for Modelling

An all-too-common approach is to develop a climate database based on average climate conditions. Remember though, “The average does not exist!”.

At Okane, we encourage using as long a climate database as possible (ideally 100 years) and modelling each year within that database. With this approach, performance can be statistically evaluated based on the model output, rather than the average climate year. In this way, the influence of watershed storage capacity and antecedent conditions influence each subsequent season or year modelled.

Beyond the above, our approach is to include an RCP scenario representing the base case climate database (i.e., historical data adjusted for the RCP scenario), and to simulate alternate climate change scenarios as part of sensitivity analyses to comprehensively evaluate consequence effects and inform on risk.

What is Downscaling?

General circulation models, also known as global climate models, or GCMs, are mathematical models that predict future climate at a large scale. Large scale being defined as 80 to 300 km. While this does provide some insight into climate change on regional scales, it is too coarse for site-specific climate databases. Features that determine local climate phenomena, such as orographic effects, will not be accounted for by the large scale of GCMs.

GCM output must be downscaled, either through dynamic downscaling or statistical downscaling. Okane use the latter method, which is a two-step process consisting of:

i) The development of statistical relationships between local climate variables (e.g., surface air temperature and precipitation) and large scale predictors (e.g., pressure fields); and

ii) Application of statistical relationships to the output of GCM experiments to simulate local climate characteristics in the future.
This method allows for creation of site specific climate change databases that are based on local historical climate.

What Next?

Developing climate change resiliency requires more than corporate policy on GHG emissions. It requires a site level understanding of probability and consequence to inform on risk, and to achieve true adaptive management. Give us a call, shoot us an e-mail, or catch us on LinkedIn.

We would be happy connect with you and talk climate change resiliency and adaptation!

 

References

Nelson, Donald R.; Adger, W. Neil; Brown, Katrina (2007). "Adaptation to Environmental Change: Contributions of a Resilience Framework". Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 32: 395–419. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.energy.32.051807.090348

Schwalm, Christopher R.; Glendon, Spencer; Duffy, Philip B. (2020-08-18). "RCP8.5 tracks cumulative CO2 emissions". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 117 (33): 19656–19657. doi:10.1073/pnas.2007117117. ISSN 0027-8424. PMID 32747549. https://www.pnas.org/content/117/33/19656


5 Things You Need to Know About the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management 2

5 Things You Need to Know About the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management

5 Things You Need to Know About the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management

Tailings structures represent enormous liability for mining operations, evidenced by the destruction and tragedy that lies in the wake of tailings dam failures.  Despite the best efforts of operators, regulators, and industry experts, major tailings failures happen too frequently.  To combat this pattern of repeated failuresa review was undertaken by a co-convened panel including the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) to develop an international standard for tailings management aimed at preventing catastrophic failure. 

Here is what you need to know about the resulting Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM). 

1) The GISTM iWritten for Operators 

It includes an auditable list of requirements for tailings management. The goal of this list was to incite an industry-wide move towards safe tailings management by providing specified measures to prevent catastrophic failure of tailings facilities, and to implement best practices for the life of asset – from planning through to closure and post-closure. 

2) Consultation and Transparency is Critical 

Ongoing consultation with the public and relevant stakeholders, from planning through to closure and post-closure, is an important part of the GISTM. Meaningful engagement with affected parties is part of the human rights due diligence process for tailings facilities. Continued consultation and transparency improve perception of mining activities and shows that there is “nothing to hide”.  

Okane’s experienced facilitators and study directors can guide you and your stakeholder teams through the steps required to develop and implement integrated closure plans and associated closure study interdependency schedules. Mapping the closure vision to an integrated execution plan allows our clients to realize benefits and risk reduction associated with progressive reclamation throughout the operating Life of Mine.  

3) Integrated Knowledge Increases Safety 

Having an integrated knowledge base, developed across multiple disciplines, contributes vastly to safe tailings management. This knowledge base is intended to extend to the social, environmental, and local economic impact of facilities, in addition to the design criteria used to make the facility safe.  

Okane uses digital models to develop an integrated knowledge base for use as a single ‘source of truth’ for tailings facilities, where all personnel can come to the table and make informed decisions regardless of their technical background.   

4) Improvement Stems from a Learning Culture 

An organizational culture supportive of learning, communication, and early problem recognition is an important part of the GISTM. Fostering a culture that is accepting of experience-based knowledge from personnel on-site allows for integration of this hands-on knowledge into operations, planning, and closure. When personnel at every level of an organization feel that their contribution to the project is important and heard, they are willing to speak up and turn casual observations into real improvement. 

5) Integrated Closure Planning is Key  

The GISTM asks for operators to plan and design facilities to minimize risk for all phases of the project lifecycle. Integrated closure planning includes demonstrating the ability to upgrade tailings storage facilities to facilitate a higher consequence classification at a later date to address changing conditions that are encountered as sites move through their lifecycle. Integrating closure plans is a tenet of the GISTM, where elements of closure designs are implemented during construction and operations, and progressive closure and reclamation proceeds as applicable.   

Okane’s Approach 

Okane is a champion of integrated mine closure, with a team of multi-disciplinary engineers, scientists, and mine planners who fully understand closure requirements. Our team takes a comprehensive approach to tailings storage facility closure design and management and works with our Clients to effectively implement the GISTM in their organizations.  

 


Aligning_Value_to_Achieve_Project_Success

Aligning Value to Achieve Project Success

Aligning Value to Achieve Project Success

Two of the most used words up and down the hallways of project and engineering offices are Value and integration. But what does Value actually mean? How do project teams achieve true Value, and if they do - is it actually beneficial?

In an ideal world we would have access to the ultimate project ‘silver bullet’ that would interknit Value, integration, and other key project ingredients together into a tapestry that delivers project success for engineering teams, clients, management and stakeholder communities alike.

Defining Value

If we delve deeper into the Value dimension of this ‘mythical’ tapestry and its meaning, we find that it has been ‘the bane of existence’ for academic researchers exploring the phenomena. Interesting enough, what the research into Value has uncovered is likely what we all do, which is to apply the definition of Value in many different ways depending on the audience and subject matter being discussed.

The main challenge that arises in successful project execution is to align the interpretation of Value from different stakeholders and weave the integration thread into the project tapestry to bring it all together.

According to Standards Australia (2007), the definition of Value  is “an attribute of an entity determined by the entity’s perceived usefulness, benefit and importance”. Atkinson (1999) challenged the traditional notion that project management success is based on the iron triangle of: cost, quality and time; and shifted towards a square root model that considered the shared benefits for the organisation and stakeholder community as a measure of Value.

Allee (2000) expanded on this concept further, taking into consideration the potential to increase Value with the use of intellectual capital and intangibles. Allee (2000) perspective was to redefine Value at an enterprise level and extend it to intangible items and outcomes such as business relationships, human competence, internal structures, social citizenship, environmental health and corporate identity. In a sense, Value is the level of importance of ‘things’ in the wider context of what an organization is trying to achieve. Research by Martinsuo and Killen (2014) determined that the definition of value in strategic projects stretches beyond financial outcomes, and should consider the impact of ecological, social, health and safety, societal influences, and learning and knowledge development on project portfolios.

Interpreting Value

What we can see from research on the definition of Value is that there are two fundamental positions on its interpretation (Ang, Killen & Sankaran 2015; Thiry 2004; Zhai, Xin & Cheng 2009) described as tangible and intangible. The tangible has a financial focus, whereas the intangible contains non-commercial values.

Financial Value:

  • Economic
  • Monetary Assets and Measures
  • Alliances
  • Relational Capital
  • Intellectual, Human, and Structural Capital
  • Commercial
  • Tangible Assets
  • Marketing and Branding

Non-financial Value:

  • Social
  • Moral
  • Political
  • Environmental Health
  • Aesthetic
  • Religious
  • Non-commercial
  • Non-monetary Measures (Usefulness)
  • Intangible Assets
  • Relationship

Aligning Value

So, where do the project and client teams sit in terms of their interpretation of Value, and do they align? This is where the ongoing balancing act starts for both parties in the quest to determine the most optimal project outcome based on its cost and scope.

It’s well-known that this balancing act occurs when costs are reduced at the expense of scope. Unfortunately, scope reduction frequently runs the risk of reducing functionality or useability. This struggle is referred to as Exchange-Value vs Use-Value, with the research indicating the privileging of the values of management (Exchange-Value) over those of the client and end-users (Use-Value), which ultimately create an inherent risk of having reduced overall project success.

The Okane Vision

Armed with this knowledge of potential misalignment, the project teams at Okane implement a project framework that integrates Value into project execution through aligning project requirements to optimise the balance between the use and exchange of Value, and to better understand the actual impact of change of cost and functionality.

Let us work with you to align Value and support your Project Success.

 

 

References

Allee, V 2000, 'The value evolution: addressing larger implications of an intellectual capital and intangibles perspective', Journal of intellectual capital, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 17-32.

Ang, K, Killen, CP & Sankaran, S 2015, 'Value constructs in multi-stakeholder environments that influence project portfolio decision making', in Annual Conference of the European Academy of Management, European Academy of Management.

Atkinson, R 1999, 'Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 337-42.

Martinsuo, M & Killen, CP 2014, 'Value Management in Project Portfolios: Identifying and Assessing Strategic Value', Project Management Journal, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 56-70.

Standards Australia 2007, 'AS4183-2007 Value Management'.

Thiry, M 2004, '“For DAD”: a programme management life-cycle process', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 245-52.

Zhai, L, Xin, Y & Cheng, C 2009, 'Understanding the value of project management from a stakeholder's perspective: Case study of mega‐project management', Project Management Journal, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 99-109.