Sei sulla pagina 1di 49

TAILING DAMS

RISK ANALYSIS AND MANAGMENT

Pavel Danihelka
Eva erveanov
UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS
, YEREVAN, November
CONTENT:

Examples of historical accidents


Introduction to risk theory
Risk analysis principles
Basics of application of risk analysis
to tailing dams safety
Conclusion

UNECE WORSHOP ON TD
S, YEREVAN, November
EXAMPLES OF HISTORICAL
ACCIDENTS
At least 221 serious tailing dams accidents
reported by UNEP*:

Mine name/ Incident Impact


Location Date
Baia Mare, 30.01.2000 100,000 m3 cyanide contaminated water with
Romania some tailings released

Baia Borsa, 10.03.2000 22,000 t of tailings contaminated by heavy


Romania metals released
Merriespruit, 22.02.1994 17 deaths, 500,000 m3 slurry flowed 2 km
South Africa

* http://www.mineralresourcesforum.org/docs/pdfs/Bulletin121.PDF

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
Major tailing dams review cont.

Mine name/ Incident Impact


Location Date
Buffalo Creek, 26.02.1972 125 deaths, 500 homes destroyed
USA
Mufilira, 25.09.1970 89 deaths, 68,000 m3 into mine workings
Zambia
Omai, Guyana 19.08.1995 4.2 million m3 cyanide slurry released
Placer, 02.09.1995 12 deaths, 50,000 m3 released
Philippines
Los Frailes, 24.04.1998 released 4-5 million cubic meters of toxic
Spain tailings slurries
Stava, Italy 19.07.1985 269 deaths, tailings flowed up to 8 km
Aitik mine, 09.08.2000 1.8 million m3 water released
Sweden

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
History of major tailing dams accidents

Source: ICOLD Bulletin 121


UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS
, YEREVAN, November
Case study:

BAIA MARE
January 30, 2000 in Baia Mare (Romania)
the biggest freshwater disaster in Central
and Eastern Europe.
Nearly 100,000 m3 of cyanide and heavy
metal-contamined liquid spilled into the
Lupus stream, reaching the Szamos,
Tisza, and finally Danube rivers and killing
hundreds of tones of fish and poisoning
the drinking water of more than 2 million
people in Hungary.

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
LOS FRAILES
April 25, 1998
tailings dam failure of the Los Frailes
lead-zinc mine at Aznalcllar near
Seville, Spain,
released 4-5 million cubic meters of
toxic tailings slurries and liquid into
nearby Ro Agrio, a tributary to Ro
Guadiamar.
The slurry wave covered several
thousand hectares of farmland, and it
threatens the Doana National Park, a
UN World Heritage Area.

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
STAVA
On July 19, 1985, a fluorite
tailings dam of Prealpi
Mineraia failed at Stava,
Trento, Italy. 200,000 m3 of
tailings flowed 4.2 km
downstream at a speed of
up to 90 km/h, killing 268
people and destroying 62
buildings. The total surface
area affected was 43.5
hectares.

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
AITIK
On September 8, 2000, the
tailings dam of Boliden's Aitik
copper mine near Gllivare in
northern Sweden failed over a
length of 120 meters. This
resulted in the spill of 2.5
million cubic meters of liquid
into an adjacent settling pond.
Boliden subsequently released
1.5 million cubic meters of
water from the settling pond
into the environment to secure
the stability of the settling pond.

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
VARIABILITY OF CAUSES OF
ACCIDENT
Inadequate management
Lack of control of hydrological system
Error in site selection and investigation
Unsatisfactory foundation, lack of stability of
downstream slope
Seepage
Overtoping
Earthquake

MAIN ROOT CAUSE:


RISK ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT NEGLECTED
UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS
, YEREVAN, November
Distribution of causes of tailing dams accidents

Source: ICOLD Bulletin 121

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
VARIABILITY OF CONSEQUENCES
Flooding, wave of slurry
Contamination of surface water, living organisms
(biota), intoxication
Drinking and irrigation water contamination
(surface)
Drinking and irrigation water (underground)
contamination
Soil contamination
As consequence of 2),3),4)ad.5 : Food chain
contamination
FREQUENTLY TRANSBOUNDARY EFFECT

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
Conclusion:
Tailing dam is a risky installation able to
cause major accident and so we have to
treat it as major risk

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
2. INTRODUCTION TO RISK THEORY

Definition of
Hazard
Risk
Risk and its quantification (measurement)
Principles of risk reduction/management

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
DEFINITION OF TERMS

SOURCE OF DANGER
=
POTENTIAL TO CAUSE
DAMAGE

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
RISK
=
PROBABILITY x GRAVITY
OF ACCIDENT (EVENT)

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
RISK

DANGEROUSITY
IDENTICAL

RISK
DIFFERENT

DIFFERENCE: MANAGEMENT OF RISK


UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS
, YEREVAN, November
FLUX OF DANGER
Initial Other
event conditions

Flux of danger
Source Target
system system

DOMINO EFFECT:
SYSTEM 2 SYSTEM 3
INITIAL SYSTEM 1
EVENT

Example: Stava accident


CATASTROPHE

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
Flux of danger: Targets system:
Movement of Population around tailings dam
material
Environment
Flux of energy
Flux of Surface water
information Underground water
Soil
Living organisms
Material and financial losses
(direct)
Functioning of enterprise
(including indirect losses)

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
Sources of danger:
Having potential (energy) to cause damage
Having potential to weaken structure, resistance,
resilience of our system (tailing dam and its
environment)
Direct to dam stability
Indirect including human error
To consequences

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
QUANTIFICATION OF RISK

RISK MATRIX B C
A banal case PROBABILITY

B frequent accident with low


consequences (minor injury,
small contamination, ...)
C disaster with high probability
(walking in minefield)
D disaster with low probability
(nuclear power plant, major A D
incident)
GRAVITY

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
Acceptability of risk
NON ACCEPTABLE

ACTION
PROBABILITY
NECESSARY

ACCEPTABLE RISK
MITIGATION

ACTION
VOLUNTARY CONDITIONALLY
ACCEPTABLE

GRAVITY

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
ACCEPTABILITY OF RISK

Decision is socio-politic, not scientific


Decision should include all stakeholders
All types of risk should be evaluation
together

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
How to decrease risk?

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
RISK ANALYSIS PROCESS
Selection of Feedback and
sources of control
danger

Scenarios
proposal

Risk assessment

Goals
setting

Barriers of
prevention

ETA Risk management


FTA
AMDEC
FMEA IMPACT
HAZOP
Residual risk
WHAT-IF PROBALITY
Etc.

TECHNICAL ORGANISATION BARIERS


BARRIERS

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
SOURCES OF DANGER
Direct to dam stability:
Active environment (rain, snow, freeze)
Earthquake
Geological conditions
Domino effect
Indirect to dam (including human error):
Wrong conception
Construction failure
Material failure
Bad maintenance
Lack of control
To consequence:
Water and sludge movement
Mechanical contamination by solid particles
Chemical toxicity / ecotoxicity
Radioactivity

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
SCENARIO PROPOSAL

All plausible scenario should be involved in


preliminary conspiration
All stages of life-time must be considered
Those having minor impact omitted
Similar combined to groups
Described as combination of events in time
Finally, we are able to compare limited number
of scenarios only

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
TOOLS HELPING TO DEFINE
SCENARIO
Examples of past accidents
Near-misses and accidents on site
Control list
WHAT-IF
ETA
FTA
AMDEC
FMEA
HAZOP
Etc.
UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS
, YEREVAN, November
Past accidents analysis
In site during all life of it
In similar places you operate, including
near-misses. Mind the necessity of
reporting.
In mine industry generally
TAILINGS DAMS, RISK OF DANGEROUS OCCURRENCES, Lessons
learnt from practical experiences, ICOLD- UNEP 2001, Bulletin 121,
ISSN 0534-8293
APELL for Mining: Guidance for the Mining Industry in Raising
Awareness and Preparedness for Emergencies at Local Level,
Technical report No. 41, UN Publications 2001, ISBN 92-807-2035

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
SCENARIO DESCRIPTION
CAUSES CONSEQUENCES
1

TOP
EVENT 3

(DAM
DESTRUCTION)
5

7
SCENARIO 1

SCENARIO 2

EACH SCENARIO NUMBERED


UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS
, YEREVAN, November
RISK ASSESMENT:

FREQUENCY x CONSEQUENCES (IMPACT)


FREQUENCY:
From past accidents (high degree of uncertainty)
From initial events frequency and FTA by boolean algebra
Avoid omitting of low frequency events (not to limit only to
100-year water or earthquake)
Human factor extremely important

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
Frequency of 100 year flooding

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
One mythus:
We operate it long time without accident, so safety is
prooved

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
CONSEQUENCES:

Consequences to human lives, health and well


being. Evaluation of consequences with stakeholders
necessary
Direct costs (remediation, compensation, ...)
Social disturbance
Consequence to environment short time and
long time impacts
Economical consequences and operability
Indirect costs

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
Costs of Failure
Physical failure: recent large failures $30 to $100 million
in direct costs
Environmental failure: some recent clean-up liabilities to
several $100s of millions
Closure liability: some recent examples in $ 500 milon to
$ 4 billion range
Industry/investor impacts: Shareholder value losses and
industry imposed constraints and costs amounting to
many billions of dollars

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
CONSEQUENCES II:

The scales of consequences should be defined


before analysis is done (4-6 grades)
All possible targets should have the same scales
of consequences (e.g. Grade X is comparable in all
target systems)
The most serious consequence is selected
Internal values of society/enterprise become to
be clarified

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
Severity of impact an example
(source: Robertson GeoConsultants Inc.)

Consequences Severity Biological Impacts Regulatory Impacts and Public Concern and Image Health and Safety
(Direct Costs) and Land Use Concerns
Extreme (>$10 M) Catastrophic impact Unable to meet regulatory Local, international and NGO Fatality or multiple fatalities
on habitat obligations or expectations; shut outcry and demonstrations, results expected
(irreversable and down or severe restriction of in large stock devaluation: severe
large) operations restrictions of 'licence to practice';
High ($1 - $10 M) Significant, Regularly (more than once per Local, international or NGO Severe injury or disability likely:
irreversible impact year) or severely fail regulatory activism resulting in political and or some potential for fatality
on habitat or large, obligations or expectations - financial impacts on company
reversable large increasing fines and loss of 'license to do business' and in
regulatory trust major proceedure or practice
changes,
Moderate ($0.1 - $1 M) Significant, Occasionally (less than one per Occasional local, international Lost time or injury likely: or
reversible impact on year) or moderately fail and NGO attention requiring some potential for serious
habitat regulatory obligations or minor proceedure changes and injuries; or small risk of fatality.
expectations - fined or censured additional public relations and
communications
Low ($0.01 - 0.1 M) Minor impact on Seldom or marginally exceed Infrequent local, international and First aid required; or small risk
habitat regulatory obligations or NGO attention addressed by of serious injury.
expectations. Some loss of normal public relations and
regulatory tolerance, increasing communications
reporting.
Negligible (<$0.01 M) No measurable Do not exceed regulatory No international/ NGO attention No concern
impact obligations or expectations

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
RISK ASSESSMENT
Following frequency and gravity, scenarios
are put to the risk matrix
1 5
PROBABILITY

3 7

GRAVITY

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
GOALS SETTING:
Non-axeptable (red zone) scenarios: immediate action
Conditionally acceptable (yellow zone) scenatios: action envisaged

1 5
PROBABILITY
1
5 2

3 2 7

6 7

GRAVITY

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
BARIERS OF PREVENTION / PROTECTION

Initial Other
event conditions

Flux of danger
Source Target
BARRIER BARRIER
system system

REMOTION OF SOURCE BARRIER PROTECTION OF TARGET

SYSTEM 2 SYSTEM 3
INITIAL SYSTEM 1
EVENT

BARRIER OF FLUX DOMINO EFFECT


CATASTROPHE

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
SAFETY MANAGEMENT
Prevention part (even three part of bow-tie
diagram)

Emergency preparedness

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
NEAR MISSES:
HUNTING FOR DEVIATIONS
ELIMINATED

CATASTROPHE

BIG ACCIDENTS / LOSSES

SMALL ACCIDENTS/ LOSSES

DEVIATIONS

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
Emergency preparedness
Preparedness to accident, even with low
probability
Training and not only desktop one
Information of all potentially involved
Crisis management including training
Open and honest communication with
municipalities, emergency response teams,
government bodies (inspection)
Communication with media
UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS
, YEREVAN, November
RECOMMENDATIONS
1) Detailed site investigation by experienced geologists and geotechnical
engineers to determine possible potential for failure, with in situ and
laboratory testing to determine the properties of the foundation
materials.
2) Application of state of the art procedures for design.
3) Expert construction supervision and inspection.
4) Laboratory testing for as built conditions.
5) Routine monitoring.
6) Safety evaluation for observed conditions including as built geometry,
materials and shearing resistance. Observations and effects of piezometric
conditions.
7) Dam break studies.
8) Contingency plans.
9) Periodic safety audits

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
And something for thinking

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
DO WE REALLY NEED ACCIDENT
PREVENTION?

You've carefully thought out all the angles.


You've done it a thousand times.
It comes naturally to you.
You know what you're doing, its what
you've been trained to do your whole life.
Nothing could possibly go wrong, right ?

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
THINK AGAIN!

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
THINK AGAIN!

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November
Thank you for your attention !

UNECE WORSHOP ON TDS


, YEREVAN, November

Potrebbero piacerti anche