Chapter 7
Let’s Start with Some Serious “Do Nots”!
7.1 Do Not Declare a Dam “Safe”
This chapter explains what not to do under the form of a list of DO NOTs.
As already shown earlier for companies, engineers, and regulators, to portray,
describe, or assess a tailings dam in terms of its being safe is misleading and incomplete, as the case histories in Chap. 2 have already shown. Furthermore, this can be
unethical and go against fostering SLO and CSR.
One of the main problems to be addressed is the complacency engendered by
the use of the terms “safe” or “safety” when referring to dam designs and operating
procedures. It may an excellent aspirational goal but, as discussed in Chap. 2, and
long-term history (Chap. 4) shows that tailings dams are not necessarily as safe
as some parties may claim. All dams are exposed to hazards posed by seismic and
meteorological events and all are exposed to design and operational hazards that may
be created by shortcomings, singly or in combination, with regard to the development
and application of geotechnical knowledge, the level of corporate commitment and
the strength of regulatory oversight.
A paradigm shift in the approach is necessary to alter the course of the events. A urban
legend attributes to Albert Einstein the following: “We cannot solve our problems with
the same thinking we used when we created them.” Even if the quote was not from
Einstein, we think it is wise enough to remember.
“Mine Tailings Storage: Safety Is No Accident” (Roche et al. 2017) follows the same
lines of thought: A Rapid Response Assessment also identifies a common practice
that has to stop. The developer or design-engineers self-risk assessment has to stop
as it is fraught by conflict of interest.
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
F. Oboni and C. Oboni, Tailings Dam Management for the Twenty-First Century,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19447-5_7
83
Let’s Start with Some Serious “Do Nots”!
7.1 Do Not Declare a Dam “Safe”
This chapter explains what not to do under the form of a list of DO NOTs.
As already shown earlier for companies, engineers, and regulators, to portray,
describe, or assess a tailings dam in terms of its being safe is misleading and incomplete, as the case histories in Chap. 2 have already shown. Furthermore, this can be
unethical and go against fostering SLO and CSR.
One of the main problems to be addressed is the complacency engendered by
the use of the terms “safe” or “safety” when referring to dam designs and operating
procedures. It may an excellent aspirational goal but, as discussed in Chap. 2, and
long-term history (Chap. 4) shows that tailings dams are not necessarily as safe
as some parties may claim. All dams are exposed to hazards posed by seismic and
meteorological events and all are exposed to design and operational hazards that may
be created by shortcomings, singly or in combination, with regard to the development
and application of geotechnical knowledge, the level of corporate commitment and
the strength of regulatory oversight.
A paradigm shift in the approach is necessary to alter the course of the events. A urban
legend attributes to Albert Einstein the following: “We cannot solve our problems with
the same thinking we used when we created them.” Even if the quote was not from
Einstein, we think it is wise enough to remember.
“Mine Tailings Storage: Safety Is No Accident” (Roche et al. 2017) follows the same
lines of thought: A Rapid Response Assessment also identifies a common practice
that has to stop. The developer or design-engineers self-risk assessment has to stop
as it is fraught by conflict of interest.
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
F. Oboni and C. Oboni, Tailings Dam Management for the Twenty-First Century,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19447-5_7
83