performance record and the ability to avoid failure modes associated with large wet impoundments. The paper also notes that even though geotextile or novel dam-less technologies have been proposed, they lack sufficient data for regulatory or operational confidence at this stage. Meanwhile, How to Make Filtered Tailings Feasible underscores how regulatory tightening and water scarcity are accelerating investment in high-throughput filtration solutions. Mines that previously relied on conventional slurry are now reassessing the feasibility of partial or full filtration, driven by permitting challenges, ESG expectations, and water cost escalation. Together, these perspectives illustrate a broad industry movement where regulators increasingly expect: • Lower water content in deposited tailings • Reduced reliance on large dams • Improved long-term stability and closure performance • Integrated ESG and transparency practices Regulatory Influence on Co-Disposal Approaches Beyond dewatering, regulators are also encouraging more integrated waste solutions. Co-disposal and co-mixing technologies are gaining attention as a way to simultaneously address tailings storage, waste rock management, and geochemical stability. The co-disposal studies (Palmer et al.) demonstrate that engineered blends of tailings and waste rock can reduce oxidation potential and improve material stability—factors directly relevant to permitting and closure approvals. Regulators favour solutions that reduce ARD risk and minimize long-term monitoring burdens, making co-disposal a potentially attractive option when supported by robust geotechnical and hydraulic characterizations. However, these approaches often require more detailed characterization and QA/QC during operations, and thus must be supported by rigorous demonstration testing to meet regulatory expectations. Implications for Tailings Technology Selection Across all reviewed documents, a consistent conclusion emerges, regulatory frameworks are increasingly prioritizing safety, water efficiency, stability, and long-term stewardship, and are gradually disfavouring tailings technologies that rely heavily on water retention and large embankments. At the feasibility stage, operators are expected to demonstrate that they have: • evaluated multiple tailings options, • compared them using transparent and robust criteria, and • selected the method that best reduces risk and aligns with GISTM principles. This does not mandate adoption of filtered tailings; rather, it mandates a rational, defendable process. For many sites—particularly those in water-scarce, seismically active, or socially sensitive regions—filtered tailings frequently emerge as the most aligned solution. But the decision is ultimately grounded in site-specific governance expectations, risk appetite, and closure objectives.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2