Life Cycle Costing Analyses Of Non-Potable Water Supply Options To A Coal Mine Industry

Background of the Study

Background of the Study

The use of water as one of the elements in the coal mining industry is very fundamental and comes in features that are similar to the application of water in several other industrial uses. This use comes with distinctive features that make it worth and meaningful to take into consideration and further detail the use of water in the coal mining industry (Dhillon, 2013, p.128). Most of the water finds its uses in the arid and semi-arid areas where scarcity of water is a common phenomenon but also include a few regions in which the users of this resource face competition from agriculture and urban centers.

The coal mining sector has the capability to be the largest consumer of water as well as a key supplier of the same resource. Water supply to the coal mining industry is in most cases independent and does not rely on the regulations from the different authorities that are mandated with the supply of water utilities. A lot of the water is extracted for use in dewatering the mines or at other times used as a by-product from extraction (Gheisari, 2009, p.128). When in the form of a by-product, the water can be acid and be containing toxic quantities of metals or any other possible pollutant ants. Such waster is costly discharged to the environment during which controls are imposed on its quality to ensure the impact on the environment and the human as well as animal life is kept under check.

The demand for coal products is constantly on the increase as the population of the world grows and expands on a daily basis. The world’s population is rapidly increasing and more and more people are finding their ways into the cities in search of better and improved living towards leading to an increase in the demand for coal and other minerals in Australia. An exponential increase and growth in the rate of production of Australian coal and other products have been witnessed since the 1950s with the production of coal in the sector having been estimated as doubled between 1994 and 2008 (Jin, 2017, p.230). An increase in the production, as well as a decline in the quality of the ores of the mineral, result in continuing access to water a crucial business imperative to the coal mining industry in Australia.

The use of water by the coal mining industry has been recorded to be stable according to information from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, (ABS). ABS and other research further suggest that there has been efficiency in the use of water in the coal mining industry with quality improvements recorded since 1994. The recently experienced exponential growth in the product can be encountered by a subsequent dramatic improvement in the efficiency so as to maintain the steady flow.  Water has various uses in the as far as operations activities in the coal mining industry are concerned. Among the operational activities in which water is a fundamental aspect include:

• Dewatering mines
• Transportation of ore and wastes in suspension and slurries
• Separation of materials physically such as centrifugal separation
• Washing equipment
• Dust suppression in mineral processing as well as around roads and conveyors
• Separation of the mineral through the use of chemical processes
• Cooling the systems around power generation

Literature Review

Non-potable Water Supply Options to the Coal Mines

Non-potable water is water that has not undergone proper examination treated and hence not got the approval from the necessary authorities as being safe and usable for consumption. Accessibility to the reliable and sufficient source of water is a very important requirement for coal mines. This is as well applicable to those mines which do not wash their products as they need water in the management of dust, human consumption, drilling among other several uses. Research and findings establish that to the tune of 200L of water are consumed for every tonne of coal that is produced, and this value may be higher or lower depending on the prevailing circumstances of production of the mineral (Lavappa, 2017, p.266). The change of the clean and safe water to dirty which then calls for management from the mine systems and storages culminate into extra costs.

Types of non-potable water

• Recycled water
• Stormwater
• Greywater
• Groundwater
• Water from lakes and rivers

Recycled water

This is water that has been and then once again supplied for reuse in treated or untreated form. Recycled water may be extracted from sewage which includes wastewater treatment plants or process water streams (Singh, 2017, p.271). Recycled water is beneficial for such purposes as replenishing of groundwater basin, toilet flushing, landscape irrigation and most important industrial processes. To the tune of about 8% of the municipal wastewater is currently reclaimed by the United States which a highly insignificant amount is thereby leaving room for many improvements. Recycled water for industrial purposes comes along with numerous benefits to the coal mining industry. Recycling or reclaiming water on the site or from a region that is close to the site serves to reduce the energy that is required in moving water long distances or even pumping the water from an aquifer. Most of the application and operation activities that require water in coal mining don not require clean and safe water. The use of recycled water for such purposes lower the amount of energy that is needed to treat the water before it is used.

The use of recycled water also comes with cost-saving befits which are influenced by the quality of the water that is required (Sompura, 2017, p.320). A need for high-quality water results in high treatment cost. Environmental sustainability is a well one of the benefits associated with recycled water. Through the use of recycled water, water is not extracted and hence removed from the ecosystem in which it is needed by the living organisms for the purposes of their survival. Still, the use of recycled water lowers discharges of waterways and water pollution.

Non-potable Water Supply Options to the Coal Mines

Recycled water is used in numerous ways in the industrial processes and operational activities including:

• Cooling processes for example cooling of the industrial towers in which the water is used in cooling down the towers and in the process evaporate. Attention should be given to the buildup of minerals as well as biological growth in the towers when recycled water is used as the cooling agent.
• Water boiler in where the water has to be pre-treated in the same way as conventional portable water. In this application, consideration is given to scale buildup which may result in corrosion of the water boilers. Upon proper and extensive analysis, recycled water is very effective for use in boilers.

Recycled water has numerous benefits ranging from financial to environmental. Depending on the industrial needs that require being met, it is not possible to manage all these needs instead a great number of them can be achieved. This notwithstanding, reclaiming as much water as is attainable is a tremendous step in conserving the environment as well as lowering the expenses in a company.

Advantages of Recycled Water

• Reduces water bills
• Lowers costs through industrial symbiosis i.e. reuse of by-products, sharing management of utilities and sharing ancillary services(Office, 2017, p.170)
• Reduces the volume of water being used
• Reduces the amount of wastewater generated as there are no wastes

Disadvantages

• Requires relatively high financial investment
• Requires high trust level between industries
• Requires in-depth and extensive knowledge and information on the quality of water for reuse
• Requires modifications of the existing operations so as to accommodate direct reuse as well as treat-and-reuse

Stormwater

This is runoff from the roofs, driveways, roads as well as other hard surfaces. Stormwater collection and treatment for the purposes of reuse is rapidly increasing making the water available for use in a variety of applications among them industrial purposes. Stormwater can be used in the coal mining industry for cooling of the tower feed water or process water.  Various systems are available that can be used in controlling, measuring capturing and delivering harvested stormwater that is treated in line with the intended uses (Galar, 2017, p.207). Similarly, there are automated controllers that make it possible to complete the system control to complex and sophisticated systems from simple ones. These controllers are also able to data log the parameters of the system as well as the quantity of water that has been processed. In so doing, it becomes possible to calculate the return-on-investment savings.

Reuse of stormwater in the coal mining industries also has an impact in reducing the load on wastewater treatment plants. Economic and environmental sense is made through the installation of a system for harvesting stormwater. This system offers to pay itself once installed in a period of not more than two years.

Benefits of Stormwater

Ease of maintenance: Harvesting of stormwater enables better utilization of the available energy resources. The cost of installation and operation of a stormwater harvesting system is less than that of setting up a system of pumping or purifying water. Maintenance of the harvesting system as well calls for little demand and energy which enables the use of the water in numerous substantial ways without necessarily being purified.

Reduction of water bills: Stormwater collected from the stormwater harvesting system can be used for numerous operational activities in the industries. For the coal mining industry, this leads to a significant reduction in the utility bill. Still, harvesting of stormwater in the industry ensures the provision of the required amount of water for numerous operations to move on smoothly without having the nearby water sources depleted (Rommerskirchen, 2009, p.190). Stormwater harvesting also serves to reduce the burden of soil erosion in the various geographical areas which gives the land an opportunity to once again thrive. This waster can also use kept in cisterns where it can be used when there is an acute shortage of the resource.

Recycled Water

Reduces floods and soil erosion: The collection of water during rainy seasons in large tanks helps in prevention of floods in low lying areas. Still, it is also vital in the reduction of soil erosion and pollution of surface water with fertilizers and other organic chemicals from rainwater run-off. The overall impact is cleaner ponds, lakes, and rivers.

Reduces demand for groundwater: The demand for water is ever on the increase following the rapid and exponential increase in the human population across the globe. This results in extraction of groundwater by residential colonies and industries for use in meeting their daily demands for water. In so doing, the groundwater reservoirs have been depleted leading to a tremendous reduction in the levels of groundwater in some areas leading to acute water scarcity (Tiwari, 2016, p.162).

Disadvantages of stormwater

Initial high cost: Depending on the level of technology and the size of the system, stormwater harvesting may prove to be a costly investment for an industry. It also takes quite some time, approximately 12 years to recover the cost which is also a factor in the amount of rainfall and the complication of the systems installed.

Unpredictable rainfall: Prediction of rainfall is quite a challenge and at the time the region in which the mines are located may experience little if no rains at all which would, in turn, limit the supply of stormwater. Relying purely on rainfall for the water needs of an industry is not advisable especially in areas where the amount of rainfall experienced is limited. Stormwater harvesting is suitable in regions that experience heavy and plenty of rainfall (Tiwari, 2016, p.262).

Regular Maintenance: Stormwater harvesting systems are prone to algae growth, lizards, rodents, insects, and mosquitoes and thus require regular maintenance. Without proper maintenance, these harvesting systems may form breeding grounds for such animals among others.

Storage Limits: Collection and storage facilities may be to some extent a restriction on how much stormwater can be used. During long rains when a region experiences heavy downpours, the collection and storage systems may not be able to contain all the stormwater and this some of them might end up in rivers and drains.

Life Cycle Costing Analysis of the Supply Options

Two alternatives are availed for use in the supply of water to the coal mines: direct supply from a river and recycling of the wastewater generated from the industry. Life Cycle Costing is a tool for economic analysis that can be used to help with making of choice between the two available alternatives in order to select an alternative that is having an impact on the pending costs as well as the future costs (Ang, 2007, p.207). Through life-cycle costing, a comparison is made on the initial options of investments and then identification on the least cost alternatives is done for the stipulated period of time. For the case of this, a choice is to be made between the two available alternatives of supplying water to the coal mine. The decision is arrived at after analysis has been done on the economic implications of each of the alternatives and hence the least cost-effective alternative identified.

Advantages of Recycled Water

The supply of water to the coal mine from the river directly would involve such costs as the purchase of the supply pipes, labor costs, maintenance costs, electricity costs, costs of purchasing water storage tanks, electricity costs, equipment cost including a power generator, water pumps and supply motors among other equipment. Other costs will include life insurance cost, life risk cost.

The lowest cost of investment, in other words, the lowest price has always been the only priority in the process of coming up with the budget of any project in an industry. When taking into consideration the lifespan of the coal mine non-potable water supply for tens of years, focus on only the investment costs as the project alternatives sound insufficient and shortsighted. Running costs among them maintenance, operations, and renovation costs form an integral aspect of the investment during the life cycle of the coal mine (Sompura, 2017, p.189).

This calls for the need of life cycle costing as an inseparable aspect of decision making on investments that are perceived or are actually expensive of which supply of non-potable water to a coal mine can be classified. Calculations of the life cycle costing offers a totally new economic perspective on the supply of water to coal mines. The concept of life cycle costing was accepted and remained a British standard since 1992.

Life cycle costing provides a technique that is used in estimating the total cost of ownership and can be used in arriving at decisions for various projects. It is particularly used for the estimation of the total cost of a project in the early stages of the project. A number of steps are included in completing life cycle costing process among them planning of the life cycle costing analysis which involves defining the objectives, selection, and development of the model of the life cycle costs. The model could be in the form of the cost breakdown structure, identification of the various sources of data and contingencies (Alborzfard, 2011, p.112).

Other steps include the adoption of the life cycle costing model and finally review and documentation of the results of the life cycle costing which forms the basis of decision making. life cycle costing as a both a tool and a technique that allow assessment of comparative costs over a specified period of time while consideration is given to all the relevant factors f economics which come in terms of the initial capital cost, costs of replacement of assessment and future operational costs through the end of life of the project otherwise end of interest in the assets. Life cycle costing also takes into consideration any other costs that are not related to construction and income (Rommerskirchen, 2009, p.219).

Disadvantages

Application of Life Cycle Costing in the context of the life cycle of non-potable water supply

The alternative used in the supply of non-potable water to the coal mine goes through several phases during its life cycle. Among the basis phase of the life cycle of any alternative include pre-investment phase, investment phase and the operational phase not forgetting the end-of-life phase which is not mandatory and includes modernizations, liquidation or conversion among another process. The pre-investment phase involves opportunity studies, feasibility studies, and pre0feasibility studies. This phase also involves the analyses of the market as well as the cost-benefit analyses (Lotfalian, 2017, p.165). This phase should capture the preliminary calculation and the life cycle costing analyses besides risk analysis and life cycle analysis.

Preparation and execution of the project constitute the investment phase. This phase would include designing and planning as at the early stages and execution and commissioning at its later stages. As for the two available alternatives to the water supply to the coal mines, this phase will be more on the alternative of supply water directly from the river (Kumar, 2009, p.182). The supply pipes will be acquired and the map work on how they are to be laid will be figured out. The power supply machine, the power generator, as well as any other accompanying equipment that need to be installed to ensure water effective water supply to the mines, will be executed at this stage.

This means that it is at this stage that all the required equipment are acquired and installed. For the case of the recycling plant for stormwater as another alternative to non-portable water supply, the recycling plant will be acquired and installed in this phase. Following the planning documentation, this phase should involve the calculations and analysis of the costs of the life cycle. It should as well be flexible enough to capture as many details as more and more of the details would be undergoing further refining. Included in the refined updates are documents for project execution permission as well as the Risk Analysis and Life Cycle Analysis (Studies, 2014, p.140).

The documents of the project should be developed only as per the requirements of the owner up to the life cycle costing level. A review of all the costs generated in the process of operation of the supply option should be done as opposed to only focusing on the cost of installation. Such costs as operation costs, renovation costs, and maintenance costs will be used as the basis of information to the operation of the each of the supply alternatives. The life cycle costing is usable in the selection of the supply alternatives, selective alternative materials, making a choice of the technologies and services. Through life-cycle costing analysis, it is possible to estimate the lowest possible prices regardless of the future costs of use of the supply option (Martinez-Alonso, 2017, p.174).

Stormwater

Emphasis should be laid on the economic effects in the long term so as to ensure a reduction in the cost future maintenance and any other associated costs. Equipment whose failure may lead to recovery costs that are too high and abnormal should be subjected to detailed analysis at this stage. Possible variations in planning and design of the supply options must be examined with regard to their implications for the future life cycle costing. Any such variations in the equipment, design layout or the adoption of different technical equipment must as well be taken through a thorough life-cycle costing calculation (Venner, 2010, p.159). A variation in the planning that is likely to worsen the various parameters of the supply options in this respect should not be allowed to be carried forward.  

Maintenance management has a fundamental role to play in the operation phase will regard to the overall Life Cycle Costing. A comparison between the increase in the cost of operation and costs of replacements versus the related lower costs of operations forms the criterion for replacement of a structure or equipment at the operation phase. Updating the calculation of Life Cycle Costing in this phase is appropriate and the comparison is made of the actual values. The values, in this case, refer to costs that have been spent on such services as power (Venner, 2010, p.125).

The comparison is made between the actual costs included and the planned costs. The differences in the costs are used for the purposes of managing the facility. Still, the differences can be usable as a feedback for similar projects in the future. Liquidation forms the last phase of the whole life cycle of supply of non-potable water to a coal mine. The equipment that was used must be stored and the site is prepared for the subsequent project following the expiry of the 30 years of design of the Life Cycle Costing. This does not just end just at the last phase but also the whole life cycle of the project (Whyte, 2011, p.211).

Life Cycle Costing

Maximum benefit of the analyses of LCC is derived when the analysis is done at the [re-investment phase of the project.it is at the pre-investment phase that the peak of the overall Life Cycle Costing has its potential.

The structure of Life Cycle Cost in the Supply of Non-potable water

In this project, the construction and execution costs will take up quite a great share of Life Cycle Cost.  This is attributable to the fact that these costs relate to the longest phase of the life cycle-use period of the project. The maintenance and renovation costs will as well have a significant chunk of the Life Cycle Cost other than the execution and installation costs (Singh, 2017, p.126). These costs make up the costs that must be undergone to maintain the supply option in operable condition and remove if not eliminate defects and malfunction of equipment which may take place during the life cycle of the project.

Benefits of Stormwater

Each of the equipment and design layouts has a specified lifespan which upon expiry the equipment would lose the quality, technical capacity, and reliability as a result of natural aging and use. It will call upon the attention of resources to maintain and renovate this equipment continuously (Rommerskirchen, 2009, p.365). Costs on maintenance and renovation may have to be spent once or in cycles throughout the lifespan of equipment depending on the type of the design layout and the nature of the piece of equipment. Regular maintenance of tie each of the supply options is a fundamental aspect that contributes to the success of the option and thus cannot be neglected at any costs. Further to this explanation is that costs that the management of the coal mines would have to undergo in removing the different emergencies that result from neglected maintenance are normally higher than what it would cost to conduct regular maintenance on the supply option (Pica, 2014, p.142).

Methods for Life Cycle Costing

Life Cycle Cost methods make use of costs that are spent currently and those that are anticipated to be spent in the future. The time value of money is taken into consideration in order to secure these values as those which comparison can be made (Office, 2017, p.177). The prognoses of future costs, rates of inflation, discounts and the length of the life cycles used to work together with Life Cycle Cost. The successful implementation of the Life Cycle Cost depends on such information in cases where good and reliable data is not available.

The Net Present Value is the most suitable approach that can be deployed in assessing the Life Cycle Cost of the two supply options. Still, Equivalent Annual Cost is yet another approach that can yield results of high reliability and accuracy as far as Life Cycle Cost analysis is concerned. Equivalent Annual Cost is most beneficial in cases where there are alternatives that have variable lifespans. Selection of the alternative that has the least net present value in cost is the standard approach that is used in deciding among alternatives in terms of Life Cycle Cost (Lotfalian, 2017, p.141). Life Cycle Cost is calculated in terms of the present value of the annual costs of the cumulated future across the analyzed period of time as shown in the equation below

 where NPV is the present value of Life Cycle Cost

 the sum of all the relative costs arrived at after deducting the yields produced using the period time t

r is the rate of the discount

t is the analyzed time (t=0…T) in years which is 30 years for this case

T is the life cycle of the equipment or layout design that is used in meeting the expectations of the project.

The Equivalent Annual Cost on the other hand in used in changing the whole costs of the alternative presumed across the lifespan into cost undergone during one year. This will then be used as the net present value of the Life Cycle Cost which is then divided by the present value factor of constant installments. The featuring a different lifespan may be used as the basis of comparison in the assessment of the alternative through the use of the annual equivalent of costs alternatives (Lavappa, 2017, p.312). The optimal alternative is the alternative with the minimal value in terms of the total Life Cycle Cost of the annual equivalent of cist EAC. The equation for this approach is as shown below:

where  is the annual equivalent of Life Cycle Cost per i alternative,  is the net present value of Life Cycle Cost per i alternative and  the convergence factor of annual sums.

Data used in the calculation and analysis of LCC

There are three groups in which the data that is required for calculation and analysis of Life Cycle Cost for the alternative options for supplying non-potable water to coal mines can be classified. These groups include:

• Data on the costs which include costs confined within the defined equipment, phases of the life cycles
• Data used for converting costs spent in the period of the life cycle to the present value and these include the rate of inflation, discount on rate as well as the length of the duration that has been analyzed(Studies, 2014, p.154)
• Other data which include the quality of the supply option, the extent of equipment and technology adopted as well as the technical parameters.

For the case of Life Cycle Cost analysis, a distinction exists between the lifespan of the equipment as the length of duration analyzed. The equipment used for each of the supply options are specified by their relatively long technical life which is in the most case beyond the moral or the economic life.

Investment or project execution costs which include design and formulation, surveying costs, auxiliary cost, operational units’ costs, and cost of equipment are among the costs that must be incurred for both alternatives. Such costs can easily be estimated at the preliminary phases of design (Kumar, 2009). The maintenance costs may be estimated using historical data obtained from the various documents and data sources whose accuracy and reliability not in doubt. Among the database that can be used to extract information on the costs of maintenance and renovation include BIM. Comparison with similar projects can be done in order to establish or estimate the renovation or modernization costs which are then used in the estimation of the cycle’s costs and duration.

Approaches to the calculation of LCC

Deterministic and acrostic are the two main approaches that can be used in calculating the Life Cycle Cost of a project. The deterministic approach assumed that the entry value for each of the unit costs is a fixed discrete value for the calculation of Life Cycle Cost (Dhillon, 2013, p.120). Such a calculation adopts values that are most likely to turn up using information from historical evidence as well as professional assessment. Calculation of Life Cycle Cost using the deterministic approach is quite easy with reference to computation even though it involves some equivocation that has a close relationship with the estimation of the present values.

It could be a challenge to define the cost profile of the alternatives supply options as it involves a combination of the various methods of optimization and prognosis of the life cycle. The deterministic approach involves the development of the cost profile of the alternatives that are to be analyzed (Flannery, 2016, p.258). This cost profile includes various cost estimates for preliminaries, maintenance, operation as well as liquidation. Based on the cost profile, the Net Present Value is calculated using the Net Present Value equation or alternatively, the Equivalent Annual Cost is calculated using the formula. Reference is then made to the results obtained which are used to rank the supply options and the best option recommended for execution.

A sensibility analysis has to be used in complementing the deterministic approach in the calculation of Life Cycle Cost. The dependent variable in the calculation of the Life Cycle Cost is determined by the Net Present Value or the Equivalent Annual Cost of the Life Cycle Cost. In this calculation, the entry parameter is treated as an indeterminate quantity. A research is done on the sensitivity of the alternatives of NPV and EAC lifecycle across the analyzed time and the rate of discount (Ang, 2007, p.189). This is done to establish a break-even point which is defined as the value of the entry parameter which results into the cheapest alternative of Life Cycle Cost to be equivalent to the second cheapest one.

The stochastic approach, on the other hand, does not make use of entry calculation data as discrete values. Instead, it uses random variables that have probability density functions attached to them. As such, the stochastic approach builds on individual Life Cycle Costs items that are randomly dividing as well as the discount rate and the time as per one of the functions of theoretical distribution. The formula shown below is used in illustrating the stochastic approach of calculation Life Cycle Costs.

 where  is the function of distribution of probability of LCC at its present value,  is the distribution function of probability of costs of acquisition,  is the function of distribution at a rate of discount, in other words, the time value for money and  is the function of distribution of probability of each item of the relevant cost across the life cycle of the equipment after positive deduction of the cash flow (Bull, 2015, p.176).

Implementation of LCC in decision making

Procurement form a fundamental process in the execution any of the water supply options. This procurement process is a complex structure which provides a range of options. It is important that such issues as sustainability, standardization and life cycle costing are taken into consideration and integrated into the procurement process (Gheisari, 2009, p.222).  Life Cycle Costing should act as a tool for effective decision making and selection from the available supply options in each and every phase of the life cycle of a project. The effective use of this tool and technique is in mostly in the implementation stage.

Looking the at the LCC analysis of the two supply options as illustrated in the excel sheets, it is evident that supplying water using recycled stormwater plant is more cost effective than supplying water to the coal mines directly from the river (Galar, 2017, p.231). This is attributed to the cost of equipment that is relatively higher due to a high number of equipment used when the supply is made from the river. Each of the equipment comes with the initial capital cost, operational cost, as well as maintenance, cost all of which have a significant impact on the overall cost of the supply option. Important to note still with regard to direct supply from the river is the distance between the river and the coal mine. The greater the distance the increase in the cost of the option as a longer distance would be more supply pipes needed as well as more powerful power generators which will consume a lot of power to ensure the water reaches the destination which is the coal mine.

On the other hand, the recycling plant of stormwater option required a recycling plant and collection system for the water to be recycled. In this option, the water is generated from within the coal mine industry and hence very little distance is covered from the collection point to the recycling plant and back to the mines for use (Dhillon, 2011, p.127).  Depending on the size of the coal, the number and size of the recycling plants can be approximated. For this case, 4 recycling plants have been used to recycle the stormwater collected. The present cost for this option is, therefore, the initial capital for the acquisition of the recycling plants as well as the operational cost which include the cost of powering the plants and that of collecting stormwater to be recycled.

Conclusion and Recommendation

Recycling stormwater is thus recommended for the realization of the two supply options. This is based on not only the current economic benefits but also the future cost implications as well as considerations into the modern initiatives among them sustainability (Aryal, 2017, p.88).  Recycling of the stormwater is associated with generally little cost implications of the present costs as well as future costs. The company will only need to set in place a financial management plan for the recycling plants as the main maintenance cost. On the part of sustainability, recycling of stormwater is an environmentally friendly way option of supplying water to a coal mine. This is due to the fact that it ensures the natural environment is not deprived of its water that is required for the existence and prosperity of the ecosystem (Jin, 2017, p.111). Still, recycling of stormwater aids in putting into use excess water that would other cause destruction of property as well as lead to erosion of the ecosystem if left to flow freely on the surface of the earth. By tapping stormwater, erosion is reduced and flooding in low levels areas is significantly managed.  It is thus advisable in the interest of financial benefits and environmental conservation that the company adopts recycle of stormwater as the option of supplying non-potable water to the coal mines.

References

Alborzfard, N., 2011. Life Cycle Cost Analysis Framework of Green Features in Buildings. 3rd ed. Liverpool: Worcester Polytechnic Institute.

Ang, A.H.-S., 2007. Life-Cycle Cost and Performance of Civil Infrastructure Systems. 5th ed. Sydney: CRC Press.

Aryal, N., 2017. Environmental, Performance and Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Three Maintenance Techniques of Asphalt Pavements. 2nd ed. Manchester: Routledge.

Bull, J.W., 2015. Life Cycle Costing: For the Analysis, Management and Maintenance of Civil Engineering Infrastructure. 3rd ed. London: Whittles Publishing.

Dhillon, B.S., 2011. Life Cycle Costing for Engineers. 4th ed. New York: CRC Press.

Dhillon, B., 2013. Life Cycle Costing: Techniques, Models, and Applications. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.

Flannery, A., 2016. Life-cycle Cost Analysis for Management of Highway Assets. New York: United States. Department of Energy.

Galar, D., 2017. Maintenance Costs and Life Cycle Cost Analysis. 6th ed. London: Taylor & Francis Group.

Gheisari, M., 2009. A Web-Based Environment for Buildings’ Life Cycle Cost Analysis. 7th ed. London: Faculty Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

Jin, X., 2017. Climate-specific Life-cycle Cost Analysis of Different HVAC Systems. 15th ed. Beijing: University of Washington Libraries.

Kumar, U., 2009. A Life Cycle Cost Analysis Framework for Geologic Storage of Hydrogen. 3rd ed. New York: United States. National Nuclear Security Administration.

Lavappa, P.D., 2017. Energy Price Indices and Discount Factors for Life-cycle Cost Analysis – 2017: Annual Supplement to NIST Handbook 135. 4th ed. New York: U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Lotfalian, R., 2017. Reliability-Based Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Engineering Elements and Systems. 5th ed. London: McGill University Libraries.

Martinez-Alonso, W., 2017. Life-cycle Cost Analysis of Pavement Preservation Techniques in Te. 3rd ed. Texas: University of Texas.

Office, U.S.G.A., 2017. Doe Facilities: Better Prioritization and Life Cycle Cost Analysis Would Improve Disposition Planning. 4th ed. New York: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

Pica, M.M., 2014. Systems Lifecycle Cost-Effectiveness: The Commercial, Design and Human Factors of Systems Engineering. 5th ed. London: Gower Publishing, Ltd.

Rommerskirchen, S., 2009. Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Infrastructure Networks: The Case of the German Federal Trunk Roads. 6th ed. Oxford: Nomos.

Singh, A., 2017. Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Occupant Well-being and Productivity Impacts in LEED Offices. 5th ed. Michigan: Michigan State University. Department of Construction Management.

Sompura, S.J., 2017. Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Precast Concrete Pavemen. 3rd ed. Salt Lake: ProQuest.

Studies, C.f.E.a.S., 2014. Sustainable Water and Sanitation Services: The Life-Cycle Cost Approach to Planning and Management. 8th ed. Routledge.

Tiwari, G.N., 2016. Handbook of Solar Energy: Theory, Analysis, and Applications. 9th ed. Beijing: Springer.

Venner, M., 2010. Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Highlights Hydrogen’s Potential for Electrical Energy Storage (Fact Sheet). 4th ed. New York: United States. Department of Energy.

Whyte, A., 2011. Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Built Assets: Lucca Framework. 5th ed. Kansas: VDM Publishing