In-Pit Disposal of Mine Tailings for a Sustainable Mine Closure: A Responsible Alternative to Develop Long-Term Green Mining Solutions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript presented a green mining solution for a sustainable mine closure through an in-pit disposal of mine tailings. The critical issues on research considerations, design and operation management have been discussed in details and its suitability to a mine closure is explored. Finally, four successful cases are analyzed. This is a good article on the green mining solutions. Generally, this article is well written and clearly expresses its contributions. I just have following minor comments:

 

1.     Page 10: The last two paragraphs are identical.

2.     Some English: a groundwater resources.

3.     Some discussions may be necessary on the input of meteorological data such as rainfall and others.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Technically the article is weak.   Substantive notes to the text: 1) The subject matter of the article is very ambitious, for which I would like to thank the Authors. 2) What is new in the article? – please write it in Abstract. 3) In the Introduction, please refer to the gas permeability of deposits.   Technical notes to the text 1) Literature citations max. 4-5 times, should be reduced for: [12], [14], [21], [31]. 2) even as for Review, you should definitely keep the proportions of the text to the Discussion - please change it. 3) Please provide the source of the citation for Table and Figure - own research? 4) Figure 2 should be Figure 2a, 2b. 5) Figure 6 should be Figure 6a, 6b. 6) Figure 7 should be Figure 7a, 7b. 7) Figure 12 should be Figure 12a, 12b. 8) Figure 13 should be Figure 13a, 13b. 9) Figure 17 should be Figure 17a, 17b, 17c. 10) Reference is missing from UNEP, 1996. 11) Abbreviations lacks LLCF, HDS, HDT. 12) Figure 2a, 2b before Table 1.   After following the above-mentioned tips, your article can be published.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors,

I have included my suggestions, recommendations and observation in the attached file. These can be grouped as follows:

Technical observation:

- even if the subject is very interesting and actual, the approach offers only descriptive data and very few economical elements. It is more an overview of the potential methodologies of tailing ponds disposal into open-pit (but with the correct argumentation);

- some figures have to be detailed / reprocessed (as the Figure 3), because is not easily understanding or correlated with the text (as Figure 8);

- it is not clear if the Figures 6-9 refer to an existing case or it has been chosen to explain the 1-5 years model of filling;

- for the 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 case-studies no references were included, and these are mandatory in that context;

- some affirmations +/- conclusions are not enough sustained by the facts/ references/examples; they need revision.

 

English language issues:

- most of the observation have been included in the revised file, but could be more; an extensive English review is recommended; 

- very often the possessive article is not used; please review the text and act where the situation induces misunderstandings.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors, 

It was an evident improvement of your paper and you paid more attention to recommended aspects. It is a very actual and necessary subject that needs to be deepened and any valuable information must be presented, and for this reason I have sustained your work.

The presented subject has a different method of approach in a scientific paper, and my review took this aspect into account. But your future work has to focus more on specific aspects, even if at smaller scale. More arguments are necessary to be included, and the "general aspects" presented only into introductory chapter. Some references to the global environmental regulations could be brought to sustain your subject and what are the recommended steps for a mining company to start this kind of feasibility evaluation.

There are still some small corrections to be made (see the attached revised file).

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf