Risk Management in the Extractive Industries: Environmental Analysis and Mitigation
| dc.contributor.author | Smith, Sean P. | en |
| dc.contributor.committeechair | Ripepi, Nino S. | en |
| dc.contributor.committeechair | Karmis, Michael E. | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Sarver, Emily A. | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Craynon, John Raymond | en |
| dc.contributor.department | Mining and Minerals Engineering | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2014-02-20T09:00:12Z | en |
| dc.date.available | 2014-02-20T09:00:12Z | en |
| dc.date.issued | 2014-02-19 | en |
| dc.description.abstract | Risk management has been used regularly in the mining industry over the last few decades. The majority of those instances have focused on health and safety issues. Health and safety has improved in the United States, Australia, and other major mining districts because of the successful use of risk management and mitigation practices. Risk management has been used to a lesser extent to reduce or avoid environmental issues as well. There are a number of factors that make utilization of risk management analysis more applicable to health and safety than to environmental issues. This thesis explores the use of risk management in the context of environmental issues associated with mining. Specifically, two case studies are developed in two self-contained manuscripts: the first focuses on sequestering CO2 while the second focuses on wild rice in Minnesota with regards to the sulfate standard. Through the lens of risk management, an attempt is made to align project goals and efforts with mitigation potential to reduce the likelihood or result of particular risks. The end result is a reduction in risks due to mitigation. The first manuscript shows how risks disappear over time because they have been categorized and addressed. The project goals are keep on track by eliminating or reducing these risks. The second manuscript can be used by stakeholders to review their potential risks and mitigate those risks if possible/necessary. In contrast to the first manuscript that contains risks that are known and measurable, the second manuscript examines different risks based on four potential outcomes. | en |
| dc.description.degree | Master of Science | en |
| dc.format.medium | ETD | en |
| dc.identifier.other | vt_gsexam:2191 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10919/25490 | en |
| dc.publisher | Virginia Tech | en |
| dc.rights | In Copyright | en |
| dc.rights.uri | http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ | en |
| dc.subject | Risk management | en |
| dc.subject | wild rice | en |
| dc.subject | sulfate | en |
| dc.subject | CCS | en |
| dc.title | Risk Management in the Extractive Industries: Environmental Analysis and Mitigation | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | en |
| thesis.degree.discipline | Mining Engineering | en |
| thesis.degree.grantor | Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University | en |
| thesis.degree.level | masters | en |
| thesis.degree.name | Master of Science | en |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1