Industry: Mining & Metals (Copper Ore Production)
Focus: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) | Carbon Footprint | Environmental Performance | Decarbonization
Tool and Platform: OpenLCA
Impact Category: Climate Change (kg CO₂e)

Project Overview: Conducted a prospective Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of an open-pit copper production system using OpenLCA to quantify climate-change impacts, identify emissions hotspots and evaluate potential decarbonization pathways. The assessment examined the contributions of electricity consumption, diesel use and explosives, translating environmental impact data into actionable sustainability insights.

Key Findings & Results: The baseline model reported a total climate-change impact of 663.43 kg CO₂e, with electricity accounting for 87.93% of the total impact, followed by diesel (8.06%) and explosives (4.01%).

Two improvement scenarios were modelled to assess the potential benefits of operational decarbonization:

• Scenario A – Electricity Decarbonization: Applying a lower-carbon electricity emission factor reduced the modelled impact to 124.20 kg CO₂e, representing an 81.28% reduction.

• Scenario B – Integrated Emissions Reduction: Combining cleaner electricity with a 15% reduction in diesel-related emissions further reduced the impact to 116.17 kg CO₂e, an 82.49% reduction against the baseline.

Strategic Implications: The assessment identified electricity decarbonization as the highest-impact intervention opportunity, while highlighting diesel efficiency and blasting-related improvements as complementary pathways. The findings were translated into prioritised environmental management recommendations, demonstrating how LCA modelling can support emissions reduction planning and data-driven sustainability decisions in resource-intensive industries.

Project Outcome: Demonstrated the application of LCA contribution analysis, emissions scenario modelling and sensitivity assessment to identify environmental hotspots and evaluate decarbonization opportunities in the mining sector.

Industry: Industrial Manufacturing & Processing
Focus: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) | Comparative Environmental Assessment | Resource Efficiency
Tool and Platform: OpenLCA
Impact Categories: 25 Environmental Indicators, including Climate Change, Ecotoxicity, Human Toxicity, Eutrophication, Resource Use, Acidification and Water Use.

Project Overview: Conducted a comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) using OpenLCA to evaluate the environmental performance of two alternative production scenarios (Case 1 and Case 2). The assessment applied a multi-impact evaluation framework to quantify and compare their potential environmental burdens across 25 indicators, covering greenhouse gas emissions, ecosystem impacts, human health-related impacts, natural resource consumption and environmental degradation.

The study aimed to identify differences in environmental performance between the two scenarios, assess the distribution of environmental burdens across impact categories and establish a quantitative basis for evaluating opportunities for process improvement and resource efficiency.

Key Findings & Results: The comparative assessment revealed consistently lower modelled environmental impacts for Case 1 across all 25 reported indicators compared with Case 2. Although the differences varied by impact category, the results indicate an overall environmental performance advantage for Case 1 within the modelled assessment.

Key findings included:

• Climate Change: Case 1 recorded 1.710 kg CO₂ eq, compared with 1.783 kg CO₂ eq for Case 2, representing approximately 4.08% lower global warming impact.

• Fossil Resource Use: Case 1 demonstrated approximately 3.95% lower fossil resource consumption, with results of 25.77 MJ compared with 26.83 MJ.

• Water Use: Case 1 recorded 0.1012 m³ world eq, approximately 3.27% lower than Case 2.

• Acidification: Case 1 demonstrated approximately 3.94% lower potential acidification impact.

• Freshwater Ecotoxicity: Case 1 recorded approximately 1.00% lower modelled impact than Case 2.

• Human Toxicity: Case 1 demonstrated lower modelled cancer and non-cancer toxicity indicators, with reductions varying across the respective subcategories.

• Photochemical Ozone Formation: Case 1 recorded approximately 7.05% lower potential impact, representing one of the more pronounced differences between the scenarios.

• Resource Use – Minerals and Metals: Case 1 demonstrated approximately 3.83% lower resource-related impact.

Strategic Implications: The results demonstrate the value of comparative LCA in identifying environmental performance differences across alternative production scenarios. Case 1 consistently exhibited lower modelled impacts, suggesting a comparatively favourable environmental profile across the assessed indicators. The assessment also highlights the importance of evaluating multiple environmental dimensions simultaneously rather than relying exclusively on carbon emissions. Integrating climate, resource consumption, toxicity and ecosystem-related indicators provides a broader evidence base for process optimization, environmental performance benchmarking and sustainability-oriented operational decisions.

Project Outcome: Demonstrated the application of comparative LCA modelling, multi-category impact assessment and environmental performance benchmarking to evaluate alternative production scenarios. The study translated quantitative OpenLCA results into comparative sustainability insights, supporting evidence-based process evaluation and environmental improvement planning.

Industry: Mining & Mineral Resources | Environmental & Social Governance (ESG)
Geographical Scope: Eight Limestone Mines, Thailand
Focus: Social Return on Investment (SROI) | Social Impact Valuation | Environmental Equity | Cost-Benefit Analysis | Sustainability Performance

Evaluation Overview: Developed an integrated Social Return on Investment (SROI) framework to evaluate how environmental interventions in mining translate into measurable social and economic value. The analysis examined four intervention domains across eight limestone mines in Thailand, connecting regulatory compliance, pollution reduction, investment efficiency and the distribution of benefits among surrounding communities. The analysis combined financial valuation, multi-criteria performance assessment, statistical analysis and Monte Carlo simulation to investigate the relationship between environmental effectiveness, investment efficiency and social equity.

Social Value & Key Findings

• ฿1.46 Billion in Aggregate Social Benefits: Quantified the social value generated through environmental interventions, with air quality and noise management accounting for approximately 98% of total benefits.

• Positive Social Returns Across All Mines: Recorded SROI ratios ranging from 26.61 to 123.59, demonstrating substantial modelled social value relative to intervention investments.

• Investment Efficiency: Identified an indicative diminishing-returns threshold beyond ฿4.39 million, highlighting the importance of strategic intervention allocation.

• Environmental Equity: Medium-scale mines achieved the strongest composite performance, reflecting better alignment between pollution-control measures, investment efficiency and surrounding population exposure.

• Performance Relationships: Spearman's rank correlation (ρ ≈ 0.52) revealed a moderately positive association between environmental performance and social equity rankings.

Business Relevance: The integration of social equity and investment efficiency also supports more informed capital allocation, stronger community relations and improved ESG performance. It enables decision-makers to assess not only the effectiveness of environmental controls, but also the distribution of benefits among surrounding communities. Sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo simulation further strengthen the framework's application in investment appraisal by testing the robustness of social returns under varying cost and benefit assumptions.

Industry: Mining & Mineral Resources | Environmental Management & ESG
Geographical Scope: Two Limestone Quarries, Thailand (Same Mining Company)
Focus: PM₁₀ Emission Reduction | Environmental Compliance | Cost-Benefit Analysis | Operational Benchmarking
Methodology: Emission Valuation Using Social Cost Proxies

Case Study Overview: Conducted a comparative assessment of two limestone mining operations belonging to the same company to evaluate differences in environmental compliance performance and the cost-effectiveness of particulate matter (PM₁₀) mitigation. The assessment compared emission reductions against regulatory thresholds and translated avoided pollution into economic value, providing insights into the relative effectiveness of environmental management across the company's operations.

Comparative Performance & Key Findings

• Mine L1: Achieved 280.13 tonnes of PM₁₀ reduction (85.3%), with a cost-benefit ratio of 11.4.

• Mine L2: Achieved 245.01 tonnes of PM₁₀ reduction (74.6%), with a cost-benefit ratio of 3.5.

• Performance Gap: Despite both mines meeting regulatory requirements, L1 demonstrated stronger pollution reduction and substantially higher economic returns relative to mitigation investment.

Business Relevance: The comparison enables mining companies to identify differences in environmental management effectiveness across their own assets, benchmark mitigation investments and identify opportunities to replicate better-performing practices. It also demonstrates why regulatory compliance alone is insufficient for evaluating operational environmental performance.

Business Outcome: Provided a comparative evidence base for environmental investment prioritisation, operational benchmarking and improved allocation of pollution-control resources across mining assets, supporting stronger ESG performance and more cost-effective environmental management.