When I started out in tailings management in the 1980s, the mining world felt like a different planet. Field offices were barely wired, we were checking piezometers with clipboards, and frankly, our tailings designs were simple—maybe too simple. Stakes were high, but public scrutiny? Almost non-existent.
Fast-forward four decades, and it’s a whole new ball game. Technology, painful lessons, and society’s expectations have completely flipped the script. Here’s how I’ve watched it all go down.
1. From Stashing Waste to Managing Critical Risk
A tailings dam used to be the mine’s afterthought—a spot to dump industrial leftovers, treated almost like an unwanted but necessary sewer. The focus was on size and minimizing cost, not long-term environmental stewardship.
Now? Tailings Storage Facilities are officially viewed as critical infrastructure, on par with a major dam or even a power plant. That mindset shift alone is the single biggest change we’ve seen.
2. The Tech Leap is Massive (But Not a Silver Bullet)
In the ’80s, our slope stability analyses were done on chunky, early-stage software. Today, we’re deploying full 3D models, real-time data dashboards, digital twins, InSAR, and drones for constant monitoring.
Here’s the thing, though: fancy tech still can’t save you from garbage data. Solid data collection remains the foundation of good engineering.
3. Water: The Star Player (and Main Headache)
Water was always a pain, but we often didn’t treat it with the respect it deserved. TSFs frequently held massive supernatant ponds. Today, water management is front-and-center. Climate volatility makes it exponentially harder, and newer methods like thickened or filtered tailings and blended tailings and waste rock are essential to keep it in check. Water is the variable that forces our hand.
4. Tougher Rules, Global Reach
In the early days, regulations were localized and often light. A series of high-profile disasters changed all that—especially those over the last decade. Now, global standards like the GISTM (Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management) and much smarter, stricter national regulations hold everyone accountable: from the site engineer to the board member, and especially to investors and communities.
5. Planning for the Sunset, Not Just the Sunrise
Mine closure used to be a future problem we’d kick down the road. Now, we design for closure from day one. We’re building stability that won’t require constant, expensive babysitting a century from now.
6. It’s a Cultural Shift: Responsibility over Compliance
The most profound change isn’t technical—it’s cultural. We’ve moved past merely checking regulatory boxes and started genuinely owning our impact on people and the planet. A failure now hits the entire industry hard—professionally, financially, and emotionally.
7. The Cost of Doing It Right (And the Price of Failure)
The tough lessons of the past ten years, coupled with the arrival of the GISTM, have finally driven home the message that companies must commit the proper budget and energy to the safe, long-term management of tailings.
Responsible designers have known this forever, but it sadly took a few horrible and horrifying events to make it corporate gospel. The reality today is that a catastrophic failure carries an existential cost: we’re talking about billions in remediation, permanent reputational damage that tanks stock value, potential criminal charges, and complete loss of social license to operate.
The equation is simple: The cost of proper engineering, monitoring, and closure planning is now dwarfed by the financial, legal, and human price of doing it wrong.
Looking Forward
Some core truths never change: good data, tight water management, and careful construction/operation are still king. Tech and standards give us better tools, but experience and vigilance keep us honest.
After 40 years, the progress is amazing, but the ground still plays by its own timeless rules: physics, water, and time. That’s what keeps every tailings engineer humble.