Methodology, data sources & credibility

MineCheck produces a desktop EIA/ESG compliance draft for a Ghana mine. It is built to be transparent: every figure is screening-level, every requirement that cannot be resolved from a desk is flagged, and the science behind it is published and peer-reviewed. This page explains exactly how it works and what it does — and does not — do.

1 · The screening pipeline

• You select a demo mine or enter a concession (coordinates, commodity).
• MineCheck samples a grid of points across the concession (clipped to the lease boundary where supplied).
• Each point is screened on Ghana-resolution spatial data, then results are aggregated worst-case with coverage counts.
• Findings are mapped to the Ghanaian regulatory and international responsible-mining frameworks, producing a conformance matrix, a desktop-readiness score and an honest gap register.

2 · Data sources (screening-level)

• Land & water (via Resilicity SafeGround): OSM water/wetland/road layers, MERIT Hydro stream network, WDPA protected areas, JRC Global Surface Water, ISRIC SoilGrids/WoSIS, SRTM terrain, GHSL built-up, curated Ghana contamination & coastal-erosion datasets.
• Flood & runoff (via Resilicity FloodGuard): national flood-susceptibility grid and region-specific ambient air quality (NO₂/PM2.5).
• These are indicative screening data, not surveyed or monitored values. A live engagement ingests the operator's GIS lease polygon, WRC permits and monitoring records.

3 · Frameworks mapped

Ghana EPA Act 490 / Environmental Assessment Regulations LI 1652, Minerals & Mining Act 703, Water Resources Commission (Act 522) — mapped alongside GISTM, IRMA (2018), ICMM, IFC Performance Standards, ISSB IFRS S2, GRI 14 (2024) and TNFD, plus commodity-specific instruments (ICMI Cyanide Code and Minamata for gold; Forestry Commission entry and IFC PS6 for bauxite; WHO manganese guideline for manganese; etc.). Requirements that do not apply to a commodity (e.g. tailings/cyanide for dry-mined bauxite) are marked Not applicable rather than flagged as gaps.

4 · How readiness is scored

The desktop-readiness score is the share of applicable framework requirements with desktop/GIS evidence already in place (addressed 1.0, partial 0.5, needs-primary 0.15, gap 0; not-applicable excluded). It is a drafting-progress measure, not a compliance score — a deliberately modest number, because most of a real EIS depends on field work.

5 · What MineCheck deliberately does NOT do

• It does not fabricate primary baseline data (field ecology, hydrology, ambient air, social baseline).
• It does not produce stakeholder-consultation or free, prior & informed consent (FPIC) records.
• It does not replace a registered EIA practitioner's certification, nor the independent audits GISTM/IRMA require.
• It is not an Environmental Impact Statement and does not constitute regulatory clearance.

The gap register in every report lists exactly what remains and who must close it. MineCheck cuts the desktop drafting; the practitioner adds the field data and signs off.

6 · The reclamation & phytoremediation estimate

The air-quality co-benefit of a reclamation planting is estimated with the leaf-scale deposition-velocity (Vd) method developed and published by Dr. Aduse-Poku:

• Aduse-Poku, M. (2025). Quantifying pollutant absorption potential of façade climbing plants. Urban Ecosystems (Springer). link
• Aduse-Poku, M. (2024). Methodology for quantification of pollutant absorption by climbing plants. ScienceDirect. link

Figures are order-of-magnitude screening estimates with transparent, tunable assumptions, calibrated with site leaf-area and ambient data for a live engagement.

7 · Who builds it