EGL Ref: 9215 23 June 2022 Page 72 This report shall only be read in its entirety. File: WAI-985-000-REP-LC-0002_Rev0.docx 10.3. Assessment of Options Each option has been scored using the categories, indicators, and weightings in Table 5. Scoring criteria for each category (i.e., technical, environmental, socio-economic and project economics) are presented in Tables 6 to 9, respectively. A summary of the scoring for each option is provided in Table 12. Scoring for the main categories, the total score and the MCA ranking is provided. The detailed results, including subcategory scorings, are provide for Options 1 to 6 in Tables A1 to A6, respectively, in Appendix A. The project economic scoring is based on ranking each option for the subcategories of capital cost, operating cost, and closure cost. The rankings and scoring for these subcategories are presented in Table A7. Options 1, 2 and 4 with slurry tailings TSFs score the highest. The reason is primarily because of project economics. Option 1 scores highest and is the company preferred option. It scores higher than Options 2 and 4 for the socio economic and permitting category. This is because it does not include closure of GOP as a lake. Options 3, 5, and 6 score lowest primarily because of low scores for project economics. Option 3 uses dry stack tailings and tailings are disposed by paste backfill in Options 5 and 6. These technologies are comparatively expensive for this project.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjE2NDg3