Consequences of mining. Modern problems of science and education

In the process of mining and processing minerals, humans influence the large geological cycle. First, humans convert mineral deposits into other forms of chemical compounds. For example, man gradually exhausts combustible minerals (oil, coal, gas, peat) and ultimately converts them into carbon dioxide and carbonates. Secondly, man distributes it over the surface of the earth, dispersing, as a rule, former geological accumulations.

Currently, for each inhabitant of the Earth, about 20 tons of raw materials are extracted annually, of which a few percent goes into the final product, and the rest turns into waste. There are significant losses of useful components (up to 50–60%) during mining, enrichment and processing.

With underground mining, coal losses are 30–40%, with open-pit mining – 10%. When mining iron ores in the open pit, losses amount to 3–5%; in underground mining of tungsten-molybdenum ores, losses reach 10–12%; in open mining – 3–5%. When developing mercury and gold deposits, losses can reach 30%.

Most mineral deposits are complex and contain several components that are economically viable to extract. In oil fields, associated components are gas, sulfur, iodine, bromine, boron, in gas fields - sulfur, nitrogen, helium. Non-ferrous metal ores are characterized by the greatest complexity. Deposits of potassium salts usually contain sylvite, carnallite and halite. Sylvite undergoes the most intensive further processing. The loss of sylvite is 25–40%, the loss of carnallite is 70–80%, and the loss of halite is 90%.

Currently, there is a constant and quite significant decrease in the metal content in mined ores. Thus, over the past 2–3 decades, the content of lead, zinc, and copper in ores has decreased annually by 2–2.3%, molybdenum by almost 3%, and the antimony content has decreased by almost 2 times in the last 10 years alone. The iron content in mined ores decreases by an average of 1% (absolute) per year. It is obvious that in 20–25 years, to obtain the same amount of non-ferrous and ferrous metals, it will be necessary to more than double the amount of mined and processed ore.

Mining impacts every area of ​​the Earth. The impact of mining on the lithosphere is manifested in the following:

1. Creation of anthropogenic forms of mesorelief: quarries, dumps (up to 100-150 m high), waste heaps (up to 300 m high), etc. On the territory of Donbass there are more than 2,000 waste rock dumps with a height of about 50–80 m. As a result of open-pit mining, quarries with a depth of more than 500 m are formed.

2. Activation of geological processes (karst, landslides, screes, subsidence and movement of rocks). During underground mining, subsidence troughs and failures are formed. In Kuzbass, a chain of sinkholes (up to 30 m deep) stretches for more than 50 km.

3. Changes in physical fields, especially in permafrost areas.

4. Mechanical disturbance of soils and their chemical pollution. On average in the Russian coal industry, the extraction of 1 million tons of fuel means the removal and disturbance of 8 hectares of land, with the open method – 20–30 hectares. Worldwide, the total area of ​​land disturbed by mining exceeds 6 million hectares. These lands should also include agricultural and forest lands that are negatively impacted by mining. Within a radius of 35–40 km from an active quarry, agricultural yields are reduced by 30% compared to the average level.

Mining affects the state of the atmosphere:

1. Air pollution occurs with emissions of CH4, sulfur, carbon oxides from mine workings, as a result of burning dumps and waste heaps (release of N, C, S oxides), gas and oil fires.

2. The dust content of the atmosphere increases as a result of the burning of dumps and waste heaps, during explosions in quarries, which affects the amount of solar radiation and temperature, and the amount of precipitation.

More than 70% of waste heaps in Kuzbass and 85% of dumps in Donbass are burning. At a distance of up to several kilometers from them, the concentrations of SO2, CO2, and CO in the air are significantly increased.

In the 80s in the Ruhr and Upper Silesian basins, 2–5 kg of dust fell daily for every 100 km2 of area, the intensity of sunshine in Germany decreased by 20%, in Poland by 50%. The soil in the fields adjacent to quarries and mines is buried under a layer of dust up to 0.5 m thick and loses its fertility for many years.

The impact of mining on the hydrosphere is manifested in the depletion of aquifers and the deterioration of the quality of ground and surface waters; in reducing the flow of small rivers, excessive drainage of swamps. Adverse changes in the water regime as a result of mining sometimes occur over an area almost 10 times larger than the area disturbed by mining.

When mining coal in the mines of the Rostov region, for each ton of mined coal, over 20 m3 of formation water has to be pumped out, when mining iron ores in the quarries of the Kursk Magnetic Anomaly - up to 8 m3

The extraction of minerals and fuel sometimes leads to serious consequences not only for humans, but also for the environment as a whole. The confrontation between people and nature has long been one of the most difficult issues discussed by scientists. Environmentalists say that the planet tolerates our presence and allows the “two-legged” inhabitants of the Earth a lot for a decent existence and earning money at their own expense. Note that the facts indicate the opposite. Not a single type of human activity passes without a trace, and everything has its own return.

War or rivalry?

The extraction of minerals and fuels, their transportation, processing and use bring undoubted benefits to people. This has serious environmental consequences. Moreover, according to experts, everything begins from the moment the site is prepared for mining operations.

“There are many problems. During exploration of deposits, forests are cut down, animals and birds leave their habitats, periodic pollution of hitherto untouched nature occurs with exhaust gases, gasoline is spilled when refueling equipment, and so on. During the operation of fields, problems increase as more complex equipment appears, and there is also the possibility of an oil release, a break in the slurry pit and other emergency situations. Oil releases are especially dangerous during offshore production, since in this case the oil spreads across the sea. Such pollution is very difficult to eliminate, and many marine life suffer. During the construction of oil and gas pipelines, pipe leaks or ruptures are also likely, which leads to fires and soil contamination. And of course, all pipelines can also block the usual migration routes of animals,” says ecologist Vadim Rukovitsyn.

Over the past 50 years, excesses have occurred more and more frequently. In April 2010, an explosion occurred on the Deepwater Horizon oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico due to technical malfunctions. It entailed irreparable consequences - for 152 days, rescuers from all over the world were unable to stop the oil leak. The platform itself sank. To this day, experts cannot determine the volume of fuel that spilled into the waters of the bay.

It was estimated that as a result of the monstrous disaster, 75,000 square kilometers of water surface was covered with a dense oil film. The most severe environmental damage was felt in the American states adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico - Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida. The coast was literally littered with the corpses of sea animals and birds. In total, at least 400 species of rare animals, birds and amphibians were on the verge of extinction. Experts have recorded outbreaks of mass deaths of marine mammals within the bay, in particular cetaceans.

In the same year, due to an accident on an Exxon Valdez tanker, a huge amount of oil entered the ocean in the Alaska region, which led to the pollution of 2092.15 kilometers of coastline. The ecosystem has suffered irreparable damage. And today she still has not recovered from that tragedy. Representatives of 32 species of wildlife died, of which only 13 were saved. They could not restore one of the subspecies of killer whales and Pacific herring. Let us note that such major tragedies occur not only abroad. Russian industry also has something to boast about.

According to Rostechnadzor, the following officially recorded accidents involving oil spills occurred at oil industry facilities in 2015 alone.

On January 11, 2015, LLC RN-Krasnodarneftegaz experienced a depressurization of the interfield pipeline 5 km from the Troitskaya UPPNIV towards the city of Krymsk on the right side of the Slavyansk-on-Kuban - Krymsk highway. As a result of an oil release of 2.3 m3, the total area of ​​contamination amounted to 0.04 hectares.

On January 17, 2015, at Gazprom Dobycha Krasnodar LLC, during scheduled work to clear the route passage of the Western Soplesk-Vuktyl condensate pipeline, a spot with a diameter of 3 m with a characteristic odor of condensate-containing liquid was discovered. As a result of the release of petroleum products in a volume of 10 m 3, the total area of ​​contamination amounted to 0.07 hectares.

On June 23, 2015, at RN-Yugansk-neftegaz LLC, as a result of depressurization of the pipeline “UP No. 8 - TsPPN-1”, oil-containing liquid leaked onto the water surface of the floodplain of the Cheuskin channel. The volume of oil spilled was 204.6 m3.

On December 29, 2015, at JSC RITEK, on ​​the oil pipeline “SPN Miroshniki - TsPPN” approximately 7 kilometers from the village of Miroshnikov, Kotovsky district, Volgograd region, a water-oil-gas mixture with a volume of 282.35 m3 was released with a total contamination area of ​​0.068 hectares.

On December 25, 2015, at JSC RITEK, on ​​the oil pipeline “SPN “Ovrazhny” - SPN-1”, 7 kilometers from the village of Miroshnikov, Volgograd Region, a release of water-oil-gas liquid with a volume of 270 m3 occurred with a total contamination area of ​​0.072 hectares.

Experts already have information about recent tragedies.

“A major accident occurred at the LUKOIL field named after Alabushin (North-Ipatskoye) in the Komi Republic in the spring of 2017, when the fire was extinguished only a month later. The amount of damage to the forest fund is close to 8 million rubles; the field requires repairs to three nearby wells. In July 2017, a gas release occurred at the Talakanskoye field in Yakutia. The cause was the destruction of wellhead equipment. There was no fire and the accident was eliminated in a fairly short time. The combustion of associated petroleum gas (APG) has a great impact on the environment. And, if in the whole country the level of APG utilization increased from 75% in 2011 to 86% in 2015, then in Eastern Siberia the problem of APG flaring is very acute. At the end of 2015, the total volume of gas production in the ESPO zone exceeded 13 billion m3, most of which was flared. As a result, not only millions of tons of combustion products are released into the atmosphere, but also the strategic gas - helium - is lost, and up to 10 million m 3 evaporates. This corresponds to 8% of the global helium consumption market,” recalls Alexander Klimentyev, scientific director of the Industrial Innovations project.

Where does the Motherland begin?

To put it bluntly, there is nothing to blame the miners for, they are simply doing their job. The question is different: how skillfully all operations are carried out and how closely the quality of work is monitored. Most environmental and man-made disasters occur precisely due to human negligence. Laziness is the engine of progress, but when damage can be caused not only to nature, but also to the workers of the enterprise, the question arises about its legality.

Nowadays, automation and modern security systems, of course, partially save us, but if even the largest companies with stable financial income are having problems, we need to think about it. To reduce the adverse impact of oil production on the environment, the industry adheres to high environmental requirements. To prevent accidents, companies are introducing new operating standards that take into account past negative experiences and promoting a culture of safe work practices. Develop technical and technological means to prevent the risk of emergency situations.

“The main method of dealing with emergencies is their prevention. Therefore, periodic environmental monitoring is carried out at the fields: samples of soil, water, air, plants are taken, noise is measured, and the species composition of animals is monitored. Also, an environmental supervisor is constantly present at the sites, who monitors all processes on site and makes sure that everything goes within the framework of environmental standards. When operating fields, a team from the Ministry of Emergency Situations is always on duty, equipped with spill response equipment. When producing on the shelf, they also use analysis of sea photographs from satellites to promptly record oil spills and, accordingly, timely liquidate the accident. When monitoring, helicopters, all-terrain vehicles, satellites are used to obtain photographs, and ships are used to monitor the sea. At the moment, exploration at the Khataganskoye field is being carried out using extremely gentle methods, since Arctic ecosystems are the most sensitive to environmental impacts. The field is located under a bay, but the well is on land and is drilled at a certain angle. Thus, the alienation of space is minimal and possible straits will be easier to eliminate. There are technologies for eliminating wastewater through maximum treatment and reuse, as well as waste minimization. If production is carried out correctly and proper reclamation of deposits is carried out after their development, then the consequences for nature include the release of a large amount of harmful substances into the atmosphere during operation and the injection of a large amount of liquid into the lithosphere instead of oil. If we consider the real situation, then production leads to changes in the habitats of animals, pollution of the natural environment with construction waste, and periodic oil spills that spoil water, soil and air,” assures Vadim Rukovitsyn.

Exact numbers

According to the latest data from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Ecology of the Russian Federation, even with the best technologies in the world, only 2-3% of the rock mass extracted from the bowels is used, and the rest of it turns either into industrial emissions, which is about 20%, or into waste - about 78%. Waste tailings formed during the production of commercial iron ores, copper, zinc and pyrite concentrates contain significant amounts of copper, zinc, sulfur, and rare elements. They themselves not only occupy vast areas, but are also a source of pollution that poisons water, soil, and air. Over the years of mining in the adjacent territories, a huge amount of solid mining waste accumulates, such as dumps, oxidized and off-balance ores, sludge in mine neutralization ponds. Well, according to the Ministry, mining operations in Russia have accumulated tens of billions of tons of waste, including dumps from processing plants.

For example, in the Urals the total amount of waste reaches 10 billion tons. The Sverdlovsk region accounts for up to 30% of waste from all of Russia. Every year, about 5 billion tons of waste are generated in our country, of which about 4.8 billion tons are obtained during mining. No more than 46% is recycled. For comparison: in Russia only about 25-30% of man-made waste is recycled, while in the world this figure reaches 85-90%.

Also, at coal industry enterprises, the volume of recorded accumulated dumps exceeds 10 billion m3, and half of them are subject to combustion. The dumps of rewashed sands formed as a result of the development of placer deposits in the Magadan region amount to 1.5 billion m 3 and are estimated to contain about 500 tons of gold. In the Murmansk region, more than 150 million tons of waste are stored annually, the total volume of which has now reached 8 billion tons. Understanding the danger of these substances to nature, since 1989, Tatneft specialists have processed 1.4 million tons of oil sludge, liquidated about 100 barns containing them and returned about 30 hectares of land to agricultural production. Tatneft, together with the Russian Academy of Sciences, began construction of a pilot plant for processing bitumen oil with a capacity of 50 thousand tons per year, based on the use of the hydroconversion method and domestic catalysts for processing heavy residues, such as tar, into light fractions.

Currently, preparations are underway for the development of technogenic deposits of copper and nickel that have accumulated over many years in the dumps of the Allarechenskoye deposit in the Murmansk region, the technogenic deposit of Barriernoye Lake in the Norilsk mining region, and the slag dump of the Sredneuralsk copper smelter. In Russia, according to experts, more than 8 million tons of copper, 9 million tons of zinc and other useful components are concentrated in the waste of the copper, lead-zinc, nickel-cobalt, tungsten-molybdenum, tin, and aluminum industries. At the same time, the Russian Ministry of Natural Resources estimates proven reserves of copper at 67 million tons with an annual production of 0.8 million tons, zinc - 42 million tons with an annual production of 0.4 million tons.

Provided that useful components of technogenic raw materials are fully involved in economic circulation, the increase in the volume of industrial products produced in Russia could amount to about 10 trillion rubles. This could give the budget about 300 billion rubles in taxes for the entire period of development of this category of man-made reserves, or about 20 billion rubles per year. Moreover, the indicated annual tax amount is comparable to the amount of taxes received from the entire non-ferrous metals mining sector. Technogenic deposits can fill the country's deficit in strategic metals: nickel, copper and cobalt, gold, molybdenum, silver. However, today there are objective reasons for the lack of interest among potential investors. This affects the development of technogenic deposits in Russia. The key reasons are considered to be the lower quality of ecological raw materials compared to natural deposits, which decreases even more over time, the complexity and high cost of extracting solid components due to the physical and chemical properties of the raw materials, the lack of demand for certain types of raw materials in the presence of significant volumes and, of course, environmental risks. To create motivation for the development of technogenic raw materials, state coordination of all Russian participants in the process of development of technogenic deposits is necessary.

Also acute are issues related to the release of mine gases in concentrations dangerous to humans on the earth's surface in the residential sector. Despite the fact that most of the liquidated mines are flooded, and the flood levels have settled at a static level, gas release processes continue in a number of mining areas of the mines. At hazardous and environmentally threatening sites, regular air, soil and water samples are taken. They also conduct preventive conversations with the local population. In 2015 alone, in 5 coal mining regions, more than 90,000 measurements and over 4,000 laboratory analyzes of the air environment were performed in 2,613 objects, including 1,866 residential objects. As practice shows, timely identified problems not only prevent the occurrence of emergency situations, but also stabilize the environmental situation in mining areas. In some cases, even save significant budget funds.

Letter of the law

Scientists are coming up with new methods to combat pollution. But when will there be a stable result? Saving on servicing industrial equipment and strict personnel selection does not give a positive result. “Perhaps it will do just like that!” won't work in this situation. There are large companies and corporations that are steadily working not only to improve the efficiency of their enterprises, but also to develop automation in them. But, as practice shows, this is not enough yet. Most environmentalists and civil activists demand the introduction of strict penalties for negligent treatment of nature during industrial work. Fine and close pest enterprises. However, this will not solve the main problem of our country - human laziness and, to some extent, the lack of self-preservation instinct among some employees. After all, if we don’t think about ourselves and our future, why spend our time on an area that is developing and help the state get out of a difficult situation?

“There are many normative acts, starting with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, then codes, individual laws, for example, “On Environmental Protection,” Government resolutions, regulations, orders of ministries, instructions. Also regional legislation. This branch of legislation has not been codified separately. There is administrative liability for environmental pollution, concealment, deliberate distortion or untimely reporting of complete and reliable information about the state of the environment and natural resources, sources of pollution of the environment and natural resources or other harmful effects on the environment and natural resources. Last year, the Ministry of Natural Resources proposed amendments to the Code of Administrative Offences, establishing administrative liability for failure to fulfill obligations to prevent and eliminate oil and petroleum product spills. As far as I know, they have not yet been adopted,” comments Vadim Krasnopolsky, project coordinator for the oil and gas sector of the Barents branch of the World Wildlife Fund.

It is outrageous that there is no obligation to save animals during environmental disasters. The maximum that the culprit faces is a fine. At the beginning of August, the World Wildlife Fund, together with environmental organizations and PJSC Lukoil, conducted specialized training in Naryan-Mar. The purpose of the event was to prevent the death of animals in the event of emergency oil spills.

“The training took place in two stages. The first, theoretical, was devoted to planning operations to respond to an oil spill. Participants learned about best practices in animal rescue, studied the specifics of working in the Arctic, and simulated the actions of rescue services in the event of an accident. During the practical course, which took place on the shore of a reservoir, participants mastered the search and collection of birds contaminated with oil, became familiar with the basics of veterinary care for injured animals, and, thanks to a special Roboduck robot, trained to catch birds at the site of an oil spill. The company’s employees can use the experience gained in the future - to develop corporate documentation, conduct internal trainings and prepare emergency rescue teams, as well as to create best practices for the oil and gas industry in Russia,” reports the WWF press service.

In 2015, the Gazprom Group commissioned 71 wastewater treatment plants and 15 recycling water supply systems. Many environmental measures have been taken to protect and reproduce fish stocks, clean up and improve areas, including coastal ones. Financial support is provided to specialized organizations. In recent years, enterprises of the Gazprom group have released several million fry into the sea. At sea, in areas where the company operates, for example, around the Prirazlomnaya platform, fish protection devices have been installed.

The Board of Directors of Rosneft also approved a number of environmental protection goals for all aspects of environmental activities until 2025 inclusive. The main areas of work are the elimination at the company's facilities of waste and pollution accumulated from the activities of third parties, the timely fulfillment of environmental obligations arising from the current activities of the company. The reduction of pollutant discharges into water bodies and into the atmosphere, conservation of biodiversity, energy and resource conservation are also monitored. All the company’s activities can be seen in the regular report on the sustainable development of PJSC NK Rosneft.

Let us note that experts are now working en masse to reduce the number of possible disasters. For example, the use of special dispersant reagents makes it possible to speed up the collection of spilled oil from the surface of the water. Artificially bred destructive bacteria sprayed onto an oil slick can quickly process oil, turning it into safer products. To prevent the spread of oil spills, so-called booms are widely used. Burning oil from the surface of the water is also practiced. To combat atmospheric pollution with greenhouse gases, various technologies are being developed to capture carbon dioxide and utilize it. Government agencies are introducing new environmental standards.

Text: Kira Generalskaya

E.I.Panfilov, prof., doctor of technical sciences, chief researcher at IPKON RAS

The steady growth of the population on the planet causes an increase in the consumption of natural resources, among which the leading role belongs to mineral resources. Russia has significant mineral reserves, the extraction of which generates more than half of the state budget revenue. Its planned reduction due to intensive innovative development of other industries in the next 10-15 years will not lead to a decrease in the scale and pace of development of the country's mineral resource base. At the same time, the extraction of solid minerals is accompanied by the extraction from the subsoil of millions of tons of rock mass, which is placed in the form of overburden and waste on the surface of the Earth, which entails extremely negative consequences not only for the environment and humans, but also for the subsoil itself.

The assessment of impacts on the subsoil is often identified or confused with the consequences of these impacts on the environment, including infrastructure and humans, especially when determining the damage that occurs and causes them. In reality, these processes have significant differences, although they are closely interrelated. For example, the subsidence of the surface at the potash deposit in Bereznyaki, which led to significant environmental, economic and social damage to the region and the country, was a consequence of the damage caused by technogenesis to the geological environment, i.e. We are dealing with essentially different phenomena. Since they can have, and are already having, a significant impact on all of our life activities, there is a need for a more in-depth and comprehensive study, definition and assessment of the processes taking place. The work does not consider impacts on the subsoil caused by natural phenomena, disasters and other negative natural phenomena, the involvement of human activity has not been proven.

The first concept concerns the consequences arising as a result of technogenic impacts on the geological environment, which, with some degree of convention, can be identified with the concept of “subsoil”. The resulting consequences themselves will be designated by the term “geological damage”, i.e. damage caused to the geological environment (GE) by human activity.

Another concept includes a set of consequences caused by the reaction of the geological system (subsoil) to the impacts of technogenesis, therefore they can be called “geotechnogenic consequences.” If they are of a negative nature, which, as a rule, is what happens in practice, then they can rightfully be considered “geotechnogenic damage.” Its components are environmental, economic, social and other consequences that have a negative impact on human life and their habitat, incl. natural.

The most popular area of ​​mining activity is the development of deposits, the main goal of which is to remove from the subsoil a part of the subsoil substance that is useful for society - mineral formations. In this case, geological damage (GI) is caused to the subsoil,
arising at various stages and phases of mineral deposit development.

At the same time, possible impacts on natural resources, using the main provisions of the EIA system, can be divided into 4 groups according to an objective classification criterion that reflects the nature (distinctive property, feature) of the impact on the subsoil:

Group I. Separation (removal) of subsoil substance, leading to a decrease in its quantity.

Group II. Transformation or disturbance of the geological environment. It can manifest itself in the form of the creation of underground cavities, quarries, pits, excavations, trenches, depressions; redistribution of stress fields in the mountain range in the mining area; disruption of aquifers, gases, fluids, energy and other flows circulating in the subsurface; changes in mining and geological, structural characteristics and properties of the geological environment containing mineral formations; changes in the landscape of the territory occupied by geological and mining allotments, etc.

III group. Pollution of the geological environment (geomechanical, hydrogeological, geochemical, radiation, geothermal, geobacteriological).

IV group. Complex (synenergetic) impact on the subsoil, manifested by various combinations of impacts from the three above groups.

In accordance with the existing practice of exploiting mineral deposits, we consider possible impacts on hydraulic structures in three main stages:

Stage 1 - Study of the geological environment, incl. their component parts are mineral formations (mineral deposits).

Stage 2 - Development (exploitation) of mineral deposits.

Stage 3 - Completion of development (development) of mineral deposits - liquidation (conservation) of mining facilities.

At the stage of studying the subsoil, carried out for the purpose of detecting (searching for) mineral formations, the impact on the geological environment, with some degree of convention, can be divided according to an objective criterion - the degree of physical integrity of the geological system - into two groups: impacts without significant violation of the integrity of the geological environment (1st group) and exposure to violation of the integrity and properties of the GS.

The 1st group of impacts includes prospecting and seismic exploration work, which have virtually no effect on the state of the mountain range.

The 2nd group of impacts is caused by geological exploration work (GRR), carried out using wells, mine workings and other work leading to a change in the physical integrity of the geological structure. In this case, all 4 of the above types of impacts on the horizontal structure are possible - removal of subsoil substances (during the excavation of geological exploration workings and, to a lesser extent, when drilling wells); disruption of the geological environment (during excavation of mine workings using explosives); pollution (occurs only in individual cases - when drilling oil, gas and other exploratory wells, when crossing underground thermal, mineralized waters) and complex impact (occurs rarely - for example, when exploration work crosses mineralized water, gas-bearing horizons, fluid flows).

Thus, it can be stated that at the stage of studying the subsoil, the impact on hydrocarbons appears insignificantly, mainly during exploration and additional exploration of mineral deposits produced using mining workings and, partially, during drilling of exploratory wells for liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons.

At the stage of development of an explored mineral deposit, the decisive role in the impact on the geological resource is played by the method (technology) used for its development, or more precisely, the method (technical means) of removing part of it from the geological environment - a mineral formation, which is accepted as the main classification feature for systematizing possible impacts.

In accordance with this characteristic, impacts are divided into four groups:

Group 1 - Mechanical method. It is typical for the extraction of predominantly solid minerals and is carried out by well-known technical means (coal miners, dredges, jackhammers, saws, excavators, shovels and draglines, etc.).

Group 2 - Explosive method. It is most typical for the development of solid minerals in the presence of rocks that are not amenable to mechanical action.

Group 3 - Hydrodynamic method, when hydromonitors are used as a technical means of separating minerals from the massif.

Group 4 - Borehole geotechnology in its various modifications. This is the main method of extracting liquid, gaseous minerals and their mixtures from the depths. It also includes in-situ leaching methods, which are increasingly used.

In each of these groups, subgroups, classes, species, subspecies and other smaller divisions are distinguished.

Analyzing these methods for removing mineral formations from geological systems from the perspective of determining possible impacts, it should be noted that in addition to the main purpose for which they were created and are constantly being improved, i.e. extraction of mineral resources, these methods are characterized by all other types of impacts, manifested on different scales, power and intensity. They have their own specific characteristics, according to which it is advisable to differentiate groups.

At the final stage of field development, i.e. during the liquidation or conservation of a mining enterprise
acceptance, when the process of extraction (removal from the subsoil) of a mineral is completed, there are no direct, immediate impacts on the geological system, however, during this period, the consequences of the previous stages of development of the field may become more active and widespread, and not immediately, but sometimes after a period of time significant (months, years).

Quantitative determination and assessment of the impacts of technogenesis on the geological environment, and therefore geological damage, is a very complex, in most cases difficult and sometimes simply unsolvable task. One of the main reasons is that to date, no unified approach has been developed to the criteria for assessing technogenic impacts on geological systems, or more precisely to the criteria for the perception of our impacts by the geological environment.

For example, if a mineral formation is removed from the subsoil, then its quantity is easy to determine, but it is very difficult to quantify the consequences of such removal, because It is sometimes possible to reliably imagine how the GS will behave, but at the moment, in a given local area, with reliably established initial indicators. However, it is almost impossible to predict the response of the GS over a long period and on a spatial scale using the available methods and means.

The task becomes even more complex when we are dealing with disruption of natural processes occurring in the subsurface, for example, when mine workings cross aquifers or fluid flows. Thus, as a result of nuclear explosions carried out from 1974 to 1987 in the Leno-Tungus and Khatanga-Vilyui provinces at depths from 100 to 1560 m, plutonium, cesium, strontium were discovered in river bottom sediments, soil, plants and animals (in doses exceeding the standards by tens and hundreds of times (!)).

Or, as a result of the liquidation of mines in the Moscow region coal basin, some areas became waterlogged and swamped. One more example. According to various experts, today there have been about 70 earthquakes on the planet with a magnitude of more than 5 on the Richter scale, initiated by human activity in the depths. The above examples confirm our thesis that at present it is not only possible to evaluate, but also to quantify geological damage, i.e. Damage caused to the subsoil by human activity is almost impossible. This statement is explained not so much by the difficulty of identifying cause-and-effect relationships between technogenesis and the subsoil, but by the presence of enormous impacts on planet Earth from the surrounding space environment. However, the consequences of geological damage that are negative, i.e. “geotechnogenic damage” to foresee,
defining and assessing is a completely solvable task.

In this case, “geotechnogenic damage” can be divided into the following classes:

I. Natural and ecological.

II. Economic.

III. Social.

Natural and environmental damage

Dividing the group into types, etc. it is possible to carry out using a classification feature - a specific source (cause) of the damage. Among these reasons:

The mining and geological information submitted for licensing is insufficiently complete, authentic and reliable on mineral reserves, quantitative and qualitative characteristics and properties of subsoil areas and mineral formations. Late receipt and provision of it, incl. when recalculating inventories;

Lack of prompt (express) and constant (on stationary devices and installations) quantitative and qualitative accounting and control of extracted (including those sent to warehouses and dumps), as well as reserves left in the depths of the main and co-occurring minerals and the useful components they contain;

Exceeding (in comparison with established standards) the volume of recoverable mineral reserves from the best mining areas in terms of quality or operating conditions and the time of their extraction;

Violation of established schemes, procedures, operations and deadlines for the development of individual mining areas of deposits;

Unjustified changes in technologies and technological schemes for the development of deposits and their sections, providing for a decrease in the completeness and quality of extraction from the subsoil of the main and co-occurring minerals during mining and associated components during primary processing (enrichment);

Violation of the schemes, procedure and timeliness of conservation and liquidation of a mining enterprise and associated mining property established by the project or regulations;

Unauthorized development of areas where mineral deposits occur and/or failure to comply with the accepted procedure and terms for using these areas for other purposes;

Distribution and accumulation of industrial and other waste in catchment areas and in areas of groundwater used for drinking and industrial water supply;

Lack of legalized agreements or inconsistency in the actions of subsoil users operating deposits in the same or related licensed subsoil areas.

Group 2. Damage caused to the natural environment associated with the transformation (disturbance) of part of the earth's surface, mountain or geological allotment, landscape and natural resources located in this territory, which may be unsuitable for use, destroyed or disturbed. When identifying species in a group, it is advisable to use the ecosystems that are part of the licensed subsoil plot as the main feature. Group 3. Damage to the natural environment and humans caused by pollutants (pollution damage) generated during the development and use of mineral resources and entering the atmosphere, water bodies, soil, flora, fauna, i.e. affecting bio, phyto and zoocenosis. The identification of types (subtypes) of damage in this group depends on the climatic and geographical characteristics of individual regions and the nature of the impacts generated during subsoil use. In general, you can use the EIA criteria and indicators (currently IS019011).

Group 4. Cumulative (synergistic) damage to the natural environment and humans. It is a combination of the above three groups, based on the specific operating conditions of a single deposit or a set of deposit areas related in terms of mining, geological and technological development conditions.

As a possible and specific methodological approach for a comprehensive assessment of natural and environmental damage, as an integral part of geotechnogenic damage, it is advisable to use the methodology proposed by Dr. IN AND. Pa-pichev. In it, the author examines most types of natural resources that may be subject to technogenic impacts of mining production, based on the degree of direct (direct) and indirect (mediated) withdrawal of natural resources, and proposes to consider “... deviations of actual values ​​of the quantity of a resource from its original (natural) values, which can result from both direct and indirect consumption of the resource.”

Developed by V.I. Papichev’s method allows one to calculate the load on the main components of the natural environment for a given time interval of exposure, incl. load on the subsoil. In particular, an expression has been proposed for calculating the load on the main components of the natural environment:

By performing calculations using specific examples, the author proved the possibility and feasibility of using the methodology he proposed.

Economic damage

Types of losses can be:
- additional costs caused by insufficient or unreliable mining and geological information about the licensed deposit or its part (properties, characteristics, etc.);

Excessive losses of mineral reserves, incl. written off or transferred to the category of off-balance sheet (unprofitable) reserves formed due to irrational selective extraction of deposit areas that are best in quality or operating conditions;

Loss or damage to mining property;

Unforeseen expenses associated with the need to preserve the geological environment disturbed by mining operations in a condition suitable for further use;

Expenditures of funds and resources necessary to eliminate environmental damage in all its manifestations.

Group 2. Lost profits (lost income).

Lost profits are considered from 2 positions: the state, as the owner of the subsoil, and the user of the subsoil, and, as a rule, these positions do not coincide, i.e. the lost benefit by the state can be assessed as unjustified enrichment of subsoil users, which, for example, occurs in case of irrational selective extraction of reserves, as well as when the state provided the subsoil user with insufficiently complete and high-quality geological information about the deposit or part thereof put up for tender. Consequently, the group can be represented by two types of damage: the state and the subsoil user.

Social damage

It is advisable to consider the state of human health as the main sign of its differentiation, taking into account the moral component. The division of social damage into groups, types and smaller segments is a rather complex, multifactorial problem, the solution of which is the subject of special research. To a first approximation, differentiation of the “social damage” class can be made on the basis of the main factors influencing the physiological and mental state of a person, his groups, and communities. For example, we can distinguish groups characterized by: the quality of the natural environment (Kuzbass, Kursk magnetic anomaly, the Urals and other mountain provinces, regions and industrial hubs), infrastructure, meaning transport, communications (regions of the Far North, Far East, other sparsely populated areas ), social, national, cultural and other living conditions, population concentration, and other significant factors.

The difficulty of identifying social damage from subsoil use is explained by the fact that mining is not always and not everywhere the main activity in places where people live. The difficulty of assessments increases significantly in areas with developed industry, infrastructure, where mining does not play a leading role in socio-economic development, or when the socio-economic importance of the mineral resource complex is comparable to other industries operating in the territory or ecosystem under consideration. Therefore, the establishment and assessment of social damage from subsoil use must be carried out separately in each specific case on the basis of in-depth research. This provision is also true for the general (total) assessment of damages incurred, both for individual mining facilities, and for regions and various administrative entities.

As an example illustrating a specific approach to determining and assessing damages in the field of subsoil use, one can cite the Republic of Tatarstan, the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of which approved the “Procedure for calculating damages for violations in the field of subsoil use in the Republic of Tatarstan” (Order dated April 9, 2002 No. 322) .

According to this order, the total amount of damage to the state in case of violation of legislation in the field of subsoil use consists of the following components:

Damage caused to the subsoil by the irreparable loss of mineral reserves;

Loss to budgets of different levels due to failure to pay taxes (payments) for the use of subsoil;

Damage caused to land and plant resources as a result of destruction (degradation) of the soil layer and vegetation in the area of ​​unauthorized use of subsoil in the adjacent territory;

Costs of carrying out work to assess the extent of damage to the subsoil and the harmful impact on the environment (including calculation of losses and preparation of relevant documents).

The above-mentioned document provides a procedure for determining damage in case of violation of the law, provides an assessment of the total amount of damage with examples of calculating the specific amount of damage caused to the subsoil and budgets of different levels, in relation to the development of common mineral resources. So, for example, the damage caused to the subsoil (Un) by the irreparable loss of mineral reserves is determined by the product of the quantity of the extracted mineral resource (V) by the standard value of the mineral resource (Nn), by the cost of a unit of the extracted mineral resource (S) and by the reliability coefficient of the reserves categories (D).

The standards for the cost of minerals established in the Republic of Tatarstan are presented in the table.

The main provisions of the methodological approach used in the republic can be taken into account when developing other types of mineral resources.

The total geotechnogenic damage is assessed in each specific case for individual objects, in our case, mineral deposits, studied and developed by both individual entrepreneurs and legal entities (a group of them) depending on the zone of influence of the developed deposit (part of it) on the environment, including infrastructure and population. Determining the zone of influence represents an independent research problem. When performing it, it is important to take into account the degree of susceptibility of the geological and environmental environment to possible impacts.

Knowledge of the sources and causes of geological and geotechnogenic damage allows us to seek rational measures to prevent them or eliminate negative consequences, based on the thesis that any geological damage causes geotechnogenic damage, i.e. Technogenic impact on hydraulic structures simultaneously generates both geological and geotechnogenic damage. From this thesis it follows that before identifying, assessing and developing any measures aimed at eliminating geotechnogenic damage, it is necessary to study, identify the sources and take measures to prevent geological damage.

Organization of a special state body for control and supervision in the field of subsoil use;

Interconnectedness and interdependence of any projects, programs, regulations, plans and decisions;

Hierarchical ranking (vertically and horizontally) by levels of their implementation;

Logically structured and consistent implementation of planned activities with the introduction of personal responsibility, first of all, representatives of state executive authorities for the timely implementation of these activities;

Adoption of a unified methodological approach legalized at the Federation level to the development and implementation of methods, means and measures for control and supervision of rational subsoil use.

To a large extent, albeit in a declarative form, possible measures to prevent or minimize these damages are set out in the Federal Law “On Subsoil” (Chapter 23) and more specifically in the “Rules for the Protection of Subsoil” PB-07-601-03.M. However, the real and effective use of even these far from ideal regulatory documents is seriously and noticeably hampered by the current control and supervisory apparatus of government, the functions of which are “spread out” across various ministries, services and agencies related to the functioning of the country’s mineral-industrial complex.

We believe that the above considerations, which reveal the essence of technogenesis in the subsoil during the development of mineral deposits, will be useful to specialists dealing with the problems of rational development of georesources and conservation of subsoil.

LITERATURE:

1. Panfilov E.I. “Russian mining legislation: state and ways of its development.” M. Ed. IPKON RAS. 2004. p.35.

2. Papichev V.I. Methodology for a comprehensive assessment of the technogenic impact of mining on the environment (abstract of doctoral dissertation). M. Ed. IPKON RAS. 2004. p.41.

Khopyorsky Nature Reserve is located in the Voronezh region. The Russian desman, listed in the Red Book of the Russian Federation, is a specially protected inhabitant of the reserve. The muskrat is a typical inhabitant of river floodplains. The largest and most valuable rodent in the reserve is the river beaver. In the Novokhopyorsky district, in the immediate vicinity of the reserve, the development of copper-nickel deposits will soon begin: mining and primary enrichment of nickel ores. The processing plant will use a technology that will require a lot of water: 9 tons of water per 1 ton of rock. Environmentalists are concerned that mining and processing will have a negative impact on the habitat of animals protected in the reserve, including muskrats and beavers.

14 What are the possible negative consequences of mining? copper-nickel ores in the Novokhopyorsky district for the Khopyor River - habitat for protected animals? List two consequences.

Check out the map shown in the picture.

20 Schoolchildren choose a place to play football. Evaluate which of the areas marked on the map with numbers 1, 2 and 3 is most suitable for this. Give two reasons to support your answer.

Write down the answer on a separate sheet or form, first indicating the task number.

© 2013 Federal Service for Supervision in Education and Science of the Russian Federation

In October 2011, the first stage of a modern rice processing complex was put into operation in the Krasnodar Territory, including a rice plant, packaging production, a warehouse terminal, an administrative building and the entire complex of engineering structures. The plant's capacity is 40–45 thousand tons of raw rice per year.

23 What feature of agriculture in the Krasnodar Territory contributed to the choice of a site for the construction of a rice processing complex on its territory?

Write down the answer on a separate sheet or form, first indicating the task number.

The “shale revolution” is obviously seriously capturing the minds of politicians and businessmen around the world. The Americans hold the lead in this area, but it seems likely that the rest of the world will soon join them. Of course, there are states where shale gas production is practically not carried out - in Russia, for example, the majority of political and business elites are quite skeptical about this undertaking. At the same time, it is not so much a matter of economic profitability. The most important circumstance that can affect the prospects of an industry such as shale gas production is the environmental consequences. Today we will study this aspect.

What is shale gas?

But first, a short theoretical excursion. What is a shale mineral, which is extracted from a special type of minerals - The main method by which shale gas is extracted, the consequences of which we will study today, guided by the positions of experts, is fracking, or hydraulic fracturing. It's structured something like this. A pipe is inserted into the bowels of the earth in an almost horizontal position, and one of its branches is brought to the surface.

During the fracking process, pressure is built into the gas storage facility, which allows shale gas to escape to the top, where it is collected. The extraction of this mineral has become most popular in North America. According to estimates by a number of experts, revenue growth within this industry in the US market over the past few years has amounted to several hundred percent. However, unconditional economic success in terms of developing new methods of producing “blue fuel” may be accompanied by enormous problems associated with the production of shale gas. They are, as we have already said, environmental in nature.

Harm to the environment

What the United States and other energy powers should, according to experts, pay special attention to when working in such an area as shale gas production are the environmental consequences. The main threat to the environment lies in the main method of extracting minerals from the depths of the earth. We are talking about the same fracking. It, as we have already said, represents the supply of water to the earth's layer (under very high pressure). This kind of impact can have a significant negative impact on the environment.

Reagents in action

The technological features of fracking are not the only ones. Current methods of shale gas extraction involve the use of several hundred varieties of chemically active, and potentially toxic, substances. What could this mean? The fact is that the development of the corresponding deposits requires the use of large volumes of fresh water. Its density, as a rule, is less than that characteristic of groundwater. And therefore, light layers of liquid, one way or another, can eventually rise to the surface and reach the mixing zone with drinking sources. However, they are likely to contain toxic impurities.

Moreover, it is possible that light water will return to the surface contaminated not with chemicals, but with completely natural, but still harmful to human health and the environment, substances that may be contained in the depths of the earth’s interior. An indicative point: it is known that there are plans to extract shale gas in Ukraine, in the Carpathian region. However, experts from one of the scientific centers conducted a study, during which it turned out that the layers of the earth in those regions that are supposed to contain shale gas are characterized by a high content of metals - nickel, barium, uranium.

Miscalculation of technology

By the way, a number of experts from Ukraine call for attention not so much to the problems of shale gas production in terms of the use of harmful substances, but to the shortcomings in the technologies used by gas workers. Representatives of the Ukrainian scientific community put forward relevant theses in one of their reports on environmental topics. What is their essence? The conclusions of scientists, in general, boil down to the fact that shale gas production in Ukraine can cause significant damage to soil fertility. The fact is that with the technologies that are used to isolate harmful substances, some materials will be located under arable soil. Accordingly, it will be problematic to grow something above them, in the upper layers of the soil.

Ukrainian mineral resources

There are also concerns among Ukrainian experts about the possible consumption of drinking water reserves, which may be a strategically significant resource. At the same time, already in 2010, when the shale revolution was just gaining momentum, the Ukrainian authorities issued licenses to conduct exploration work for shale gas to companies like ExxonMobil and Shell. In 2012, exploratory wells were drilled in the Kharkov region.

This could indicate, experts believe, the interest of the Ukrainian authorities in developing “shale” prospects, probably in order to reduce dependence on blue fuel supplies from the Russian Federation. But now it is unknown, analysts say, what the future prospects for work in this direction are (due to well-known political events).

Problematic fracking

Continuing our discussion about the shortcomings of shale gas production technologies, we can also pay attention to other noteworthy theses. In particular, certain substances can be used in fracking. They are used as fracturing fluids. Moreover, their frequent use can lead to a significant deterioration in the degree of permeability of rocks for water flows. In order to avoid this, gas workers can use water that contains soluble chemical derivatives of substances similar in composition to cellulose. And they pose a serious threat to human health.

Salts and radiation

There have been precedents when the presence of chemicals in waters in the area of ​​shale wells was recorded by scientists not only in the calculation aspect, but also in practice. After analyzing the water flowing into treatment plants in Pennsylvania, experts found much higher than normal levels of salts - chlorides, bromides. Some of the substances found in water can react with atmospheric gases such as ozone, resulting in the formation of toxic products. Also, in some subsoil layers located in areas where shale gas is extracted, the Americans discovered radium. Which, accordingly, is radioactive. In addition to salts and radium, in the waters that concentrate in areas where the main method of shale gas production (fracking) is used, scientists have discovered various types of benzenes and toluene.

Legal loophole

Some lawyers note that the environmental damage caused by American shale gas companies is almost of a legal nature. The fact is that in 2005, a legal act was adopted in the United States, according to which the fracking method, or hydraulic fracturing, was removed from the monitoring of the Environmental Protection Agency. This agency, in particular, ensured that American businessmen acted in accordance with the requirements of the Drinking Water Protection Act.

However, with the adoption of a new legal act, US enterprises were able to operate outside the Agency's control. Experts note that it has become possible to extract shale oil and gas in close proximity to underground sources of drinking water. This is despite the fact that the Agency, in one of its studies, concluded that the sources continue to be polluted, and not so much during the fracking process, but some time after the completion of the work. Analysts believe that the law was passed not without political pressure.

Freedom the European way

A number of experts focus on the fact that not only Americans, but also Europeans do not want to understand the potential dangers of shale gas production. In particular, the European Commission, which develops sources of law in various spheres of the EU economy, did not even create a separate law regulating environmental issues in this industry. The agency has limited itself, analysts emphasize, to simply issuing a recommendation that actually does not oblige energy companies to anything.

At the same time, according to experts, Europeans are not yet too eager to begin work on the extraction of blue fuel in practice as soon as possible. It is possible that all those discussions in the EU related to the “shale” topic are just political speculation. And in fact, the Europeans, in principle, are not going to master gas production using unconventional methods. At least in the near future.

Complaints without satisfaction

There is evidence that in those areas of the United States where shale gas is being extracted, environmental consequences have already made themselves felt - and not only at the level of industrial research, but also among ordinary citizens. Americans living next to wells where fracking is used began to notice that their tap water had lost a lot of quality. They are trying to protest against shale gas production in their area. However, their capabilities, as experts believe, are not comparable with the resources of energy corporations. The scheme businesses implement is quite simple. When complaints arise from citizens, they hire environmentalists. In accordance with these documents, drinking water must be in perfect order. If residents are not satisfied with these papers, then gas workers, as reported in a number of sources, pay them pre-trial compensation in exchange for signing non-disclosure agreements about such transactions. As a result, the citizen loses the right to report something to the press.

The verdict will not burden

If legal proceedings are nevertheless initiated, then decisions made not in favor of energy companies are, in fact, not very burdensome for gas workers. In particular, according to some of them, corporations undertake to supply citizens with drinking water from environmentally friendly sources at their own expense or to install treatment equipment for them. But if in the first case the affected residents can, in principle, be satisfied, then in the second - as experts believe - there may not be much reason for optimism, since some may still leak through the filters.

The authorities decide

There is an opinion among experts that interest in shale in the United States, as well as in many other countries of the world, is largely political. This, in particular, can be evidenced by the fact that many gas corporations are supported by the government - especially in such aspects as tax breaks. Experts assess the economic viability of the “shale revolution” ambiguously.

Drinking water factor

Above, we talked about how Ukrainian experts question the prospects for shale gas production in their country, largely due to the fact that fracking technology may require the consumption of large amounts of drinking water. It must be said that specialists from other countries also express similar concerns. The fact is that even without shale gas, this is already observed in many regions of the planet. And it is likely that a similar situation may soon be observed in developed countries. And the “shale revolution,” of course, will only help accelerate this process.

Ambiguous slate

There is an opinion that shale gas production in Russia and other countries is not being developed at all, or at least not at the same pace as in America, precisely because of the factors we have considered. These are, first of all, the risks of environmental pollution with toxic and sometimes radioactive compounds that occur during fracking. There is also a possibility of depletion of drinking water reserves, which may soon, even in developed countries, become a resource not inferior in importance to blue fuel. Of course, the economic component is also taken into account - there is no consensus among scientists on the profitability of shale deposits.