Developments in remote and rural areas present their own challenges. A new mine, for example, brings more people into the area. More people means more houses. More houses means better infrastructure. Better infrastructure means greater start-up costs.
Infrastructure development is particularly expensive in regional and remote areas, and the standard model of “business as usual” with infrastructure expansion is not always the best option.
BHP Billiton and Landcorp were faced with exactly this situation when planning for the Ravensthorpe Nickel Operations project, in the south-west of Western Australia.
Favouring a residential workforce over the “fly in fly out” model, the small coastal community of Hopetoun emerged as the logical location to house many of the workers.
Working with leading environmental engineers Syrinx Environmental, Pracsys has produced a new approach to regional infrastructure demand modelling that proves the technical and cost advantages of sustainable alternatives.
It is also entirely transportable. This means it can be applied to regional and remote infrastructure development anywhere in the world.
Together with Syrinx, Pracsys compared bundles of technology options for key infrastructure – power, water and waste; all needed to support the influx of workers that would come to Hopetoun with the new mine. The evaluation took into account technical viability, capital and operating costs, net present values and the economic impacts of externalities.
Using a centralised system as the base case, we considered a range of alternative solutions to infrastructure expansion challenges.
We determined the performance of the alternatives against these criteria and asked whether or not they would be better from an economically sustainable standpoint. The process examined issues such as:
- The impact of demand management strategies on water consumption using household based rainwater tanks and water reuse systems;
- The use of decentralised modular wastewater treatment plants servicing groups of houses rather than the whole town;
- The provision of household based sustainable power technologies, such as photovoltaic cells, wind turbines and solar boilers;
- The need for, and timing of, larger centralised infrastructure such as diesel generators and large wind turbines as a result of power demand management at the household level.
The results consistently came down in favour of a more flexible and sustainable approach to infrastructure.
Apart from the demonstrable environmental and technical benefits, the sustainable model indicated a saving of more than $20 million over the standard centralised model. In addition, there was a $74 milllion advantage in net present values over 20 years.
What we have been able to demonstrate is that a sustainable model can be superior not only from a technical point of view, but from an economic standpoint.
And it’s not just us saying so. The peer review process for the model involved an Australia-wide panel, which included another national economic firm, as well as leading sustainability and technical experts and academics. After careful consideration of this approach, it was generally agreed that the depth of analysis and the level of rigour were a first for Australia.
The real value of our approach lies in the fact that because it is so flexible can be applied to any remote or regional community anywhere.
This is dynamic modelling, not a “black box” solution. We equip our clients with the tools to fully exercise the model’s capability and then drive it on to the next project.
Landcorp is now looking to apply the costing and economic model we have developed to other similar developments throughout Western Australia.
