Sustainable Mining? Intervening in the Mining Process – Creating the Shift Towards a Sustainable System By Ben Farrell University of Oregon Oregon Leadership In Sustainability Terminal Report 2013 Abstract: The mining process is extremely demanding on resources such as water, land, and energy. Due to the ecological and social degradation that results from the mining process, the industry fails to comply with the “Four System Conditions for Sustainability” as per The Natural Step. The mining process needs innovative approaches for creating a sustainable cyclical system. Applying a holistic systematic approach to the mineral mining life cycle can identify gaps between current best practices and a desired vision of sustainability. Using systems thinking can increase and strengthen collaboration and interconnectedness, ultimately contributing to new thinking and new solutions to current unsustainable practices. Analysis of mining project phases, in terms of achieving environmental, social, and economic sustainability, can highlight opportunities for improvement throughout the system. Strategically intervening in the mining process can result in many benefits such as an increase in transparency, improving budgeting for the post-closure phase, mitigating acid mine drainage, and reducing waste. The intent of this report is to evaluate the mining life cycle process and apply The Natural Step and Systems Thinking model in effort to create sustainable practices within the mining industry. Keywords: resource development, mining, sustainability, systems thinking, the natural step, transparency, acid mine drainage, reclamation. 1
Transcript
Sustainable Mining?
Intervening in the Mining Process – Creating the Shift Towards a Sustainable System
ByBen Farrell
University of OregonOregon Leadership In Sustainability
Terminal Report2013
Abstract: The mining process is extremely demanding on resources such as water, land, and energy. Due to the ecological and social degradation that results from the mining process, the industry fails to comply with the “Four System Conditions for Sustainability” as per The Natural Step. The mining process needs innovative approaches for creating a sustainable cyclical system. Applying a holistic systematic approach to the mineral mining life cycle can identify gaps between current best practices and a desired vision of sustainability. Using systems thinking can increase and strengthen collaboration and interconnectedness, ultimately contributing to new thinking and new solutions to current unsustainable practices. Analysis of mining project phases, in terms of achieving environmental, social, and economic sustainability, can highlight opportunities for improvement throughout the system. Strategically intervening in the mining process can result in many benefits such as an increase in transparency, improving budgeting for the post-closure phase, mitigating acid mine drainage, and reducing waste. The intent of this report is to evaluate the mining life cycle process and apply The Natural Step and Systems Thinking model in effort to create sustainable practices within the mining industry.
Keywords: resource development, mining, sustainability, systems thinking, the natural step, transparency, acid mine drainage, reclamation.
1
Table of Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... 1Table of Contents …............................................................................................................................... 21 Introduction
2 Systems and TNS2.1 The Natural Step …......................................................................................................... 52.2 Systems Thinking …........................................................................................................ 62.3 Importance of Life Cycle …................................................................................................. 6
3 Sustainable Mining?3.1Mining Process vs. Sustainability …................................................................................... 73.2 Mining's Role in Sustainability …....................................................................................... 73.3 Current Life Cycle …........................................................................................................... 83.4 Social and Environmental Impacts …................................................................................ 93.5 Real and Perceived Barriers …......................................................................................... 103.6 The Current Systems Model …......................................................................................... 10
4 Systematic Approach 4.1 Shared Vision of Success …............................................................................................... 124.2 System Awareness ….......................................................................................................... 12
4.2.1. Environmental System …................................................................................. 124.2.2. Social System …................................................................................................. 134.2.3. Economic System ….......................................................................................... 13
4.3 Systems Diagram for Sustainable Mining Practices …................................................... 144.3.1. Information Flow ….......................................................................................... 15
4.4 Addressing Barriers …....................................................................................................... 154.4.1. Strategic Process …........................................................................................... 16
5 Conclusion …............................................................................................................................. 226 Recommendations for Best Practices ..................................................................................... 237 References …............................................................................................................................. 248 Appendices
Appendix A…............................................................................................................................ 26Appendix B…............................................................................................................................ 27Appendix C …........................................................................................................................... 29
2
Intervening in the Mining Process – Creating the Sh ift Towards a Sustainable System
1 Introduction
1.1 ProblemThe mining process is extremely demanding on resources such as water, land, and energy. The ecological and social degradation that results from the mining process prevents the industry from complying with the “Four System Conditions for Sustainability” as per The Natural Step. The current practices of minimizing impacts and enforcing regulations do not address the systemic sustainability challenges within the process.
1.2 GoalThe goal of this report is to evaluate the mining life cycle process and apply The Natural Step and systems thinking model to create sustainable practices within the mining industry.
1.3 Scope
Awareness of the environmental and social challenges is ever increasing. Significant opportunities for change already exist within the mining process. These changes can allow the industry to contribute to a sustainable society. The scope of this report will identify the current system in place, apply a systems thinking framework to analyze the barriers and challenges and provide strategic solutions to these challenges. The scope of the report is limited to the life cycle of the mineral mining process – exploration, evaluation, development, production, closure, and post-closure.
3
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)(6)
(8)
(9)
(7)
1.4 Methods
Literature review to gain an understanding of: ◦ “The Natural Step” and “Systems Thinking” framework; ◦ The mining life cycle process and the associated ecological and human impacts; ◦ The current best practices for mineral mining.
Data collection:◦ The socioeconomic and environmental barriers ◦ The organizations involved in the process◦ The current solutions to the challenges within the mining process
Systems diagrams and suggested strategies
Present recommendations to address the current unsustainable practices.
1.5 ResultsThe analysis shows that there are a variety of solutions, strategies and actions that can be implemented within the process of mining to improve sustainability. Solutions include increasing transparency, budgeting for post-closure at the start of the process, mitigating acid mine drainage, and reducing waste. Strategies for these solutions include involving the community at the very start of the process, increasing environmental and financial monitoring, publishing monitoring data regularly on public online forums, increasing corporate oversight and regulatory enforcement, and communicating a shared vision of social sustainability.
4
2 Systems and TNS
2.1 The Natural Step (TNS) [1]Dr. Karl Henrik Robert developed the Natural Step (TNS) in 1989. TNS is often referred to the “compass for sustainability” as the framework establishes direction for sustainability actions. The framework consists of three integral parts:
1) Four System Conditions for Sustainability
2) The Funnel
The downward trend of life support systems and the upward trend of demands of human activity show that human demand is outpacing our supply of natural resources. In order to be sustainable, we must change the shape of this funnel. We need to decrease demand for resources and restore the life supporting resources together.
3) Four Strategies for Action (known as ABCD):Awareness - Developing a common understanding of the situation within an organization,Base-line mapping - Mapping current operations of an organization in terms of the four system conditions,Clear vision - Creating a vision and identifying measures that take an organization from where it is now to where it can be in a sustainable future,Down to Earth action - Prioritizing measures for achieving the organization's vision that move it toward sustainability.
5
1. Substances from the earth's crust-fossil fuels and mined minerals-must not systematically increase in nature.
2. Substances produced by society must not systematically increase in nature.3. The physical basis for the productivity and diversity of nature must not be
systematically deteriorated.4. Human society must be fair and efficient in meeting basic human needs.
(courtesy of sustainablesonoma.org)
2.2 Systems ThinkingA system is defined as an interconnected set of elements that is coherently organized in a way that achieves something; a system contains elements, interconnections, and a function or purpose [2]. Systems thinking is a process of applying an ordered, methodical approach to understanding a problem and identifying solutions to the problem. “Systems thinking encourages you to step back and see the whole picture, rather than focusing on just its parts. It is an attempt to see the "forest" as well as the "trees." Systems thinking explores the interdependencies among the elements of a system, looking for patterns rather than memorizing isolated facts. It focuses on the feedback loop structure of a system because that structure determines the system's behavior over time” [3].
Applying a systematic approach to mining projects means exploring and discovering the interconnectedness between the environmental, economic, social, technical, and performance elements within the mining system. Developing the systems feedback loop also requires that the inflows, stocks, feedbacks, barriers, delays and outflows be identified. This report will attempt to apply the systems thinking model to the mining process in order to create sustainable practices.
2.3 Importance of Life CycleIdentifying the life cycle process of a mining project provides the basis for which to build a sustainable system. It will facilitate the process of shifting from a linear mining model, based on reducing impacts, to a systems model, based on sustainability principles. When considering the life cycle of a mine one must consider the design, manufacture, and use of the minerals during their life. The mining life cycle includes extraction, refinement, production and the use, re-use, and recycling. Most minerals can be infinitely recycled. The US EPA states that “the use of a holistic life cycle perspective helps manufacturers and policy makers identify possible improvements across the industrial system and through all the product’s life cycle stages. It also applies to improving industrial processes and activities.” [4]. And that “Taking a life cycle perspective requires a policy developer, environmental manager, or product designer to look beyond their own system, knowledge, or in-house operations.” [4].
6
Stock and Flow Diagram (courtesy of Meadows 2008)
(courtesy of sdstate.edu/abe/wri/activities/ESDWC)
For these reasons, the mining industry will remain a part of society as long as there is growth and development. Therefore to create a sustainable society, a sustainable mining process that abides by the four natural-step-sustainable-principles must be considered. To help establish a sustainable future for current unsustainable mining practices the ABCD's of The Natural Step, Awareness, Base-line mapping, Clear vision, and Down to earth action need to be applied to the process. Each phase of the mining life cycle, from cradle to grave, must be systematically planned, designed, coordinated, and carried out in order to achieve a desired sustainable future.
3.3 Current Life CycleThe life cycle of a mine is generally described in five or six phases. This process involves Exploration, Evaluation, Development, Production, Closure, and Post Closure [7]. Understanding the many phases of the life cycle will help in making the decision of where to intervene in the process in order to make the most effective changes.
8
(courtesy of pwc.com/mining)
3.4 Social and Environmental ImpactsThe United States benefits greatly from mining, but these benefits have come at a high cost to the environment. According to the EPA metals have remained the number one source of toxic water pollution in the United States for over more than a decade. More than 40 percent of Western watersheds have mining contamination in their headwaters [8]. The total cost of cleaning up metal mining sites throughout the West is an estimated $50 billion. While modern mining practices have helped clean up the industry, major environmental risks remain high and the industry continues to operate under unsustainable practices. [8].
The negative impacts that the mining process has on society and the environment are immense. The major impacts that this report will address include:
Deforestation & Biodiversity Reduction – The loss of oxygen producing plants and carbon sequestering trees, the destruction of vital habitats for wildlife and the extinction of indigenous animals, plants and organisms. [9].
Pollution – Leakage of poisonous chemicals (arsenic, cyanide, mercury, methyl mercury, and sulfuric acid) into water supplies, soils or that evaporate into the air. Pollution from the mining process destroys ecology and ecosystem services as well as decimates indigenous communities and cultures. Examples of mining pollution include acid rain, rock debris, mercury contamination, and soils contamination. [9].
The EPA states that “these impacts depend on a variety of factors, such as the sensitivity of local terrain, the composition of minerals being mined, the type of technology employed, the skill, knowledge and environmental commitment of the company, and finally, the ability to monitor and enforce compliance with environmental regulations.” [10].
As a result of these impacts, the services that the ecosystems provide, such as clean air and water, fisheries, agricultural productivity, forests, and climate regulation continue to be degraded to the point they are no longer sustainable. The earth's natural systems are losing their capacity to clean up the mess that the industrial society has created. The increasing rate of fossil fuel combustion climate change, soil deterioration, poverty, desertification, and freshwater depletion are all symptoms of deeper, more systemic problems within society.
The sustainability challenges that the mining process produces are many; and these challenges generate even bigger questions such as, is it possible to simultaneously both grow economically at the expense of natural resources while protecting the environment and society? This report will not answer these bigger questions, but will provide strategies for systemic change.
9
3.5 Real and Perceived BarriersThere are nearly an infinite number of environmental and socioeconomic barriers in the way of creating a sustainable society. The barriers listed below are only the tip of the iceberg and range from real physical barriers to perceived mental barriers [11] [20]. Just as the benefits of mining were identified, being aware of the problems will help in developing systematic solutions.
3.6 The Current Systems ModelThe Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development (MMSD) Workgroup [12] developed a diagram (below) of the current information flows process between the involved organizations during the mining life cycle. The dashed lines represent weak and responsive interactions and the solid straight lines represent a stronger and collaborative interaction. The lines weights indicate the strength of interaction and participation.
The diagram shows that the mining process is still very linear. There is little to no interaction and involvement between the organizations throughout the life cycle process. The proposed solution to the problem of lack of collaboration and the lack of interconnectedness is to develop of systems model of the mining process. The systems model is intended to identify the “forest” and the “trees” in order to find sustainable solutions to existing unsustainable problems.
10
(10)
(11) (12)
(13)
The mineral sector has made efforts over the last ten years to integrate sustainability into their development model. Countries and stakeholders are now demanding the mining industry use sustainable development practices. This graph (below) was developed by the MMSD Workgroup [12]. It shows that the proposed integration of sustainable development is a step-by-step (linear) process. This report challenges the current linear model and argues that sustainable development is cyclical and must be integrated throughout the process systematically.
11
(courtesy of MMSD North America, 2002. www.iisd.org)
(courtesy of MMSD North America, 2002. www.iisd.org)
4 Systematic Approach to Sustainability
4.1 Shared Vision of Success The shared vision of success must be one that contributes to a sustainable society. The mining industry needs to constantly be aware of its actions and how they are assisting in moving the process towards its vision of success as constrained by TNS Sustainability Principles [1].Is the action:• Eliminating its contribution to systematic increases in concentrations of substances from
the Earth’s crust?• Eliminate its contribution to systematic increases in concentrations of substances produced
by society?• Eliminating its contribution to systematic physical degradation of nature through over-
harvesting, introduction and other forms of modification?• Eliminating its contribution to conditions that systematically undermine people’s capacity
to meet their needs?
4.2 System AwarenessApplying a systematic approach to the mining process requires that the elements of each system of sustainability to be identified. Not only will this method bring to light the interconnectedness between the environmental, social, and economic elements in the system, it will also help create new opportunities for improvement and identify gaps between current best practices and a desired vision of sustainability.
4.2.1 Environmental System
12
4.2.2 Social System
4.2.3 Economic System
13
(14)
(15)
4.3 Systems Diagram for Sustainable Mining PracticesThe reinforcing feedback loop diagram (below) displays a cyclical system involved in creating change in the mining process in an effort to create sustainable practices. The mining process shown goes through three feedback loops-Mining Life Cycle, Environmental Quality, and Human Health. The process leads to four stocks-Minerals contained within Tailings, Recycling facilities, Landfill facilities, and In-use (products).
Only a few of the many features (indicators) within the Mining Life-Cycle are identified in the diagram; these features are the Rates of: Energy use, Product demand and Recycling. The Environmental Quality feedback loop uses features of: Air, Water, and Land. The Human Health feedback loop involves Physical, Mental, and Cultural features. These features allow for the application and measurement of change within the system [13].
Various barriers occur within each feedback system and include: governmental and community, operation and legislation, market and supply. These barriers increase the stocks of regulations; develop shared visions for a sustainable future; increase transparency, collaboration, and oversight; and increase financial awareness throughout the life cycle. A number of delays have been anticipated to occur after the increase of stocks. These delays include items such as lack of funding, enforcement, communication, and management; all of which create problems and challenges to the vision of creating sustainable mining practices.
14
The systemic changes intervene at various levels within the “12 Universal Leverage Points for changing any system” [13] (see Appendix A). The changes intervene during level 1, the parameters and numbers need to be used to support change; level 2, the buffer size will increase as well as the stocks; level 5, the negative feedback loops will increase against unsustainable behaviors; level 8, the incentives, rewards, and regulations will increase; levels 10 and 11, the system is trying to change the mining life cycle structure towards a sustainable process, therefore changing the goal of the mining industry from economic benefit to environmental and social sustainability.
4.3.1 Information FlowContinuing to question the sustainability of the mining process helps find solutions to the unsustainable behaviors that plague the industry. Questioning the system will feed the reinforcing feedback loop with an inflow of information. The MMSD created “The Seven Questions of Sustainability” [12].
How do the mining activities contribute to sustainability:1. Are engagement processes in place and working effectively?2. Will people's well being be maintained or improved?3. Is the integrity of the environment assured over the long term?4. Is the economic viability of the project or operation assured, and will the economy of
the community and beyond be better off as a result?5. Are traditional and non-market activities in the community and surrounding areas
accounted for in a way that is acceptable to the local people?6. Are rules, incentives, programs and capacities in place to address project or
operational consequences?7. Does a full synthesis show that the net result will be positive or negative in the long-
term, and will there be periodic re-assessment?
4.4 Addressing Barriers In order to create a sustainable system this report will address a number of the systemic barriers within the mining process that contribute to social and environmental impacts. These barriers include:• Lack of Transparency• Lack of Budgeting for Post-Closure Reclamation• Acid Mine Drainage (AMD)• Production and Accumulation of Waste
Addressing Mining Barriers
Intervening in the System
Current Unsustainable Practices
Lack of Transparency
Phase 1 Exploration Increases social challenges such as mismanagement, corruption, mistrust
Budgeting for Reclamation
Phase 2 Evaluation Public bears costs of environmental degradation
Acid Mine Drainage
Phase 2 Evaluation Damages ecosystem services and contaminates water
Waste Phase 2 Evaluation Mining processes increase mineral concentrations & contribute to landfills
15
4.4.1 Strategic ProcessThe strategy for systemic change involves planning, intervention, action, monitoring, and enforcement. Each strategy must identify the organization involved in the process, the elements that will be influenced from the strategy, the means of measuring the change, the approximate amount of time for which the strategy must be implemented, and the materials the organizations will need to implement the change.
4.4.1.1 Increasing Transparency
Transparency is defined as the openness of an organization with regard to sharing information about how it operates, as per the Global Environmental Management Initiative [14].
A lack of transparency in the mining process can create the follow problems [15]:
• Makes corruption less risky and more attractive.• Makes it difficult to provide incentives.• Makes reform or paradigm shifts difficult.• Makes cooperation more difficult to sustain.• Reduces accountability and public trust.• Makes reaching goals and setting performance standards more difficult.• Makes it difficult to solve systemic problems.• Increases financial risks.
16
Increasing transparency would therefore help reduce and reverse many of the problems associated with the lack of transparency. In addition, increased transparency helps identify information gaps, establish research priorities, develop new regulations, and set monitoring standards [16]. Transparency increases the knowledge and understanding of resource use and the impacts associated with the resource processing. It allows companies to compare information and learn from each other’s practices in effort to reduce social and environmental impacts. Community (corporations, governments, policy makes, stakeholders, general public, etc.) involvement, collaboration, and decisions can be developed to higher levels with a greater access to information.
Developing information sharing platforms, such as online forums and databases, which display life cycle information and allow for direct community interaction, can increase transparency. Environmental and financial data must be regularly monitored, collected and published for community analysis.
Another strategy for increasing transparency is by joining Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), a coalition of governments, companies, civil society groups, investors and international organizations, developed standards and requirements to ensure more transparency around mineral resources. Companies benefit from a level playing field in which all companies are required to disclose the same information. They also benefit from an improved and more stable investment climate in which they can better engage with citizens and civil society. Citizens and civil society benefit from receiving reliable information about the sector and a multi-stakeholder platform where they can better hold the government and companies to account. [16].
17
4.4.1.2 Increasing the Budget for Post-Closure Reclamation
The long-term impacts of mining lie within the Post-Closure phase. Detailed planning during the Exploration phase is critical. Prior to post-closure the mine site must complete waste detoxification, removal of stored fuels and chemicals, removal and capping of tailings, removal of roadways, and removal of erosion and sediment control measures [17]; these measures occur during the Closure phase. The Closure planning process begins during the Evaluation phase. The initial closure plans are based on projected market and environmental conditions. These conditions change during the life cycle of the mine, for example new ore discoveries or advances in technologies or new regulatory requirements change the Closure plans. The plans need to be re-evaluated regularly throughout the mine's life cycle. Proper Closure plans can eliminate the high costs of Post-Closure.
The Post-Closure phase involves the reclamation and long term rehabilitation and maintenance of the mine site. The greatest risk to sustainable Post-Closure is improper financial planning to cover associated expenses. Currently, cost estimates for reclamation do not cover the true expense of the Post-Closure phase. The strategies to budget for Post-Closure must consider a number of key objectives from the start: Mitigate and eliminate environmental damage; Protect public health and safety; Restore the land to a productive condition or to its original condition; Provide social/economic benefits for the community. Ensuring sufficient financial backing for closure costs from the start of the project will help mitigate social and economic risks and consequences to the impacted community, the mining company, and the financial stakeholders [18]. The organizations involved must be well informed of the financial risks from the start as well, projected costs may show that funding the life cycle of the mine is not financially viable.
18
4.4.1.3 Mitigating Acid Mine Drainage
Acid mine drainage (AMD) occurs when sulfides, mainly iron pyrite or iron disulfide (in the mined rock) are released into the environment and then interact with oxygen molecules in the air and water; this chemical reaction creates sulfuric acid [19]. When this acid makes its way into water systems it will kill all organisms that cannot tolerate highly acidic waters. In addition, the acids dissolve harmful metals (which do not break down in the environment) and are extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic life, as well as to humans [20]. One example of AMD is mercury contamination, which causes brain and kidney damage and behavioral disorders in humans.
The barriers preventing the proper mitigation of acid mine drainage are enormous. According to the Reclamation Research Group, LLC “The mining industry has spent large amounts of money to prevent, mitigate, control and otherwise stop the release of AMD using the best available technologies, yet AMD remains as one the greatest environmental liabilities associated with mining, especially in pristine environments with economically and ecologically valuable natural resources. Problematic to the long-term operation of large scale metal mines is recognition that no hard rock surface mines exist today that can demonstrate that AMD can be stopped once it occurs on a large scale.” [19].
Current best practices for mitigating AMD involve a thorough site analysis. The analysis includes: location, access, climate, ecology, history of previous mining, waste materials, geology, hydrology, mineralogy, descriptions of all materials that will be excavated or exposed, soils, reclamation objectives, end land uses, data tables, relevant figures, and other pertinent information [19]. The strategy for mitigating AMD must be one about prevention rather than remediation. The Prevention [24] diagram below identifies a number of methods for preventing acid mine drainage.
19
The best practices and strategies to mitigate acid mine drainage involve extensive geochemical, biological and hydrologic analysis that must occur during the Evaluation phase. The strategies include improving the knowledge and understanding of watersheds, water patterns, water conveyance systems, rainfall intensities and distributions, and the probabilities of natural disasters [21]. In addition, proper water treatment plant design and AMD storage sizing must reduce the risk of AMD discharges to the greatest extent possible. The goal and vision must remain on creating a sustainable society. If the consequences of failure during the mining process violate any one of the four sustainable conditions, the mining company must restart at phase one or completely abandon mining plans.
4.4.1.4 Reducing Waste
20
The greatest strategy to reduce waste from the mining process is to reduce the demand. Reducing the demand of minerals is a major challenge however, due to global population growth and economic growth in countries such as India and China. Historically, economic growth and mineral consumption run parallel with each other. [22].
Mineral resource conservation by the landowners also reduces waste by reducing extraction. Regulation and new mining laws can contribute to better conservation. In addition, substituting rare mineral resources with a more abundant mineral resource that has a longer manufactured lifespans helps. An example of this is substituting glass fiber optic cables for copper cables in telephone wires or substituting wood for aluminum in construction. [22].
Additional strategies to reduce demand include product stewardship, mineral/metal reuse, and mineral/metal recycling. For example, the camera industry has nearly eliminated the demand for silver thanks to the invention of digital processors. Consumer stewardship, such as buying used not new, can increase the reuse of products. Most metals can be infinitely recycled. Recycling is simplest for pure metals, such as copper pipes and aluminum cans. [22]. But, it is more difficult to recycle alloys and complex technological products, such as computers and phones. In addition to mitigating the negative impacts of increasing metals, recycling also contributes to stable economic growth. China, for example, has the largest municipal recycling park in the world. It is capable of recovering one million tons of copper per year, which is more than twice that of their copper mine [23]. Governments can help with mineral reduction strategies by incentivizing reuse and recycling as well as building more advanced recycling facilities.
According to UNEP International Resource Panel “The already existing anthropogenic metal stockpile is gigantic. Continuously growing metal prices in the commodity markets indicate a dynamic demand for metals. Urban in-use stocks possess a high relevance for potential metal supply. The shift of mining activities from natural towards anthropogenic resources has to move into focus, not only in the interest of national metal supply but also on the global level. Total metal losses have to be reduced and recycling infrastructure and technologies have to be fostered in industrialized, emerging, and less developed countries. Taking advantage of “anthropogenic mines” has a great potential to reduce dependency on virgin metal resources and mitigate the environmental degradation often caused by mining activities. The enhanced exploitation of already known urban stocks and the detection of hibernating stocks (metal not in active use but not yet recovered, as in unused railroad bridges) is a key strategy in moving toward sustainable metal supply.” [23].
21
5 Conclusion
The goal of this report was to provide innovative, holistic, systematic approaches for creating sustainable practices within the bounds of the mining process. Using the “The Natural Step” framework I was able to analyze the current operating conditions under a sustainability lens using a “systems thinking” approach, identify areas where the current process failed to meet the four sustainability conditions, create a vision for a sustainable future that abides by the four sustainability conditions, and develop systematic strategies for reaching that future. With an understanding of the mining life cycle I could backcast from a hypothetical Sustainable-Post-Closure phase to the Exploration (starting) phase then determine the best place in the system in which to intervene. Developing mining activities and strategies in this manner can facilitate economic growth, transparency, collaboration, a shared vision, and oversight for all relevant organizations and stakeholders without systematically degrading the industry.
As mentioned throughout the report there are many broken areas within the mining process that need to be systemically fixed. As this is only an academic report, many barriers and challenges could not be addressed within the scope of this paper. One of these areas includes the regulation and law surrounding the mining sector. Legislation is possibly the greatest barrier to creating a sustainable mining process. “What most people in these communities do not know is that they are powerless to stop any one of these claims from turning into a mine because the antiquated 1872 Mining Law provides no practical legal authority to stop a mine once a valid claim is staked. The law elevates mining above all other uses of federal land and contains no modern environmental protections, putting local governments in a bind when they are threatened with unwanted mine proposals.” [24]. Federal laws are tightening up on mining pollution controls and prevention practices. However, these laws are still only treating the problem, such as the 1872 Mining Law, and not finding the real solutions to the systemic issues within the mining industry.
As mentioned, the good news is people are becoming more aware of the problems with mining and the laws surrounding environmental management and wildlife protection are becoming stricter as attitudes and technologies change. Unfortunately without proper funding, monitoring and enforcement of environmental laws and regulations are nearly impossible. Alan Young, of the Environmental Mining Council of BC stated, “Over the last year, we have seen an inability in regional government offices to monitor and enforce environmental standards at several mine sites. The agencies do not have the resources to do the job, and unfortunately, some companies don’t seem to respond unless penalized. Without enforceable standards we are faced with decreased corporate accountability, and increased ecological liability.” Young goes on to say, “we can pay now or pay later, and history has shown us that, especially with mining, clean up is always more expensive than prevention. Good companies understand this concept, but the laws are not there for the good guys.”
This report is for those “good companies” that understand the concept of sustainability and are aware that the mining process contributes to the degradation of life supporting resources such as air and water. This report can provide them a method in which to integrate sustainability into their life cycle. In my research I discovered that “systems thinking” approaches are greatly under utilized in the mining industry. The current process of mining still operates under a linear model. In an effort to contribute to a sustainable society, I encourage the involved communities, companies, and governments to take innovative holistic approaches described in this report.
22
6 Recommendations for Best Practices
1. Establish a vision for a sustainable life cycle and share this vision with everyone involved in the
process.
2. Use the “Four System Conditions for Sustainability” to guide plans and actions. Use EPA and
Berlin Guidelines 2000 for recommendations and best practices. (See Appendix B, C).
3. Use systematic approaches in the decision making process and ensure everyone involved in the
process is aware of the benefits and risks of every action.
4. Collect, record, and publish all financial and environmental information on a public database.
5. Develop virtual platforms for information sharing.
6. Involve the community at the very first stage of the process and keep them informed of plans,
actions, impacts, risks, and other important information.
7. The federal government must have more authority be able to deny mining proposals that could
damage life-supporting resources. Empower local governments and communities with more
authority in deciding the use public lands for mining.
8. Require financial assurance for post-closure reclamation costs up front in phase one.
9. In effort to provide greater accountability of the mining industries practices, materials produced
and exported from the mining operation should be available on demand. For example, a cell
phone contains over forty elements, if someone wants to compile a complete life cycle analysis of
a cell phone they will need to be able to trace back to what mine the minerals came from and what
type of practices that mining project used to create the product.
10.Establish environmental performance, monitoring, reporting, and reclamation standards and ensure
to the community that water quality will not be degraded.
23
7 References Cited
1. Cook, David. The Natural Step: Towards a Sustainable Society. Totnes, Devon: Green for the Schumacher Society, 2004. Print.
2. "What Is Systems Thinking." www.pegasuscom.com/. Pegasus Communications, n.d. Web. 4 June 2013.
3. Lyneis, Debra. "Systems Thinking "in 25 Words or Less" www.clexchange.org/ftp/documents/. Carlisle, Massachusetts, n.d. Web. 2 June 2013.
4. "National Hardrock Mining Framework." www.epa.gov/aml/policy/. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Sept. 1997. Web. 1 June 2013.
5. Miranda, Marta, David Chambers, and Catherine Coumans. "Framework for Responsible Mining: A Guide to Evolving Standards." www.sdsg.org/wp-content/uploads. Center for Science in Public Participation, Feb. 2012. Web. 1 June 2013.
6. Skaer, Laura. "Mining and Sustainable Development – Is It All Bad?" www.nwma.com. Northwest Mining Association / Sorptive Minerals Institute, 6 May 2002. Web. 1 June 2013.
7. Goldsmith, Tim. "Financial Reporting in the Mining Industry." Global Mining Leader 6th Ed. (2012). www.pwc.com/mining. International Financial Reporting Standards, Nov. 2012. Web. 1 June 2013.
8. United States. Environmental Protection Agency. Water. EPA Headwaters 2000 Liquid Assets 2000: Americans Pay for Dirty Water. Web. 1 June 2013.
9. "Harmful Effects of Mining and Viable Alternatives." www.metallixrefining.com/. Metallix Refining, 16 May 2011. Web. 01 June 2013.
10. "MINING AND WATER POLLUTION." www.safewater.org/. Safe Drinking Water Foundation, SDWF, Web. 1 June 2013.
11. United States. Environmental Protection Agency. Federal Activities. EIA Guidelines for Mining APPENDIX B POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF HARDROCK MINING. 1994.
12. "MMSD’s Seven Questions to Sustainability: How to Assess the Contribution of Mining and Minerals Activities."www.iisd.org. Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development North America, 2002.
13.Meadows, Donella H., and Diana Wright. Thinking in Systems: A Primer. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Pub., 2008. Print.
14. "Transparency: A Path to Public Trust." www.gemi.org/resources/. Global Environmental Management Initiative, 2004. Web. 1 June 2013.
15.Kolstad, Ivar, and Arne Wiig. "Is Transparency the Key to Reducing Corruption in Resource-Rich Countries?" World Development 37.3 (2009): 521-23. Chr. Michelsen Institute, Bergen, Norway, Mar. 2009. Web. 1 June 2013.
17.Robertson, A., and S. Shaw. "Mine Closure." www.infomine.com/library/publications. Infomine E-Book, 2002. Web. 1 June 2013.
18. "Overview of Best Practice Environmental Management in Mining." www.ret.gov.au/resources/Documents/. Commonwealth of Australia / Australian Mining Industry, 2002. Web. 01 June 2013.
19. “Acid Mine Drainage and Effects on Fish Health and Ecology: A Review”, Reclamation Research Group, LLC, Bozeman, Montana, June 2008
20. "Conservation Minnesota Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness."Frequently Asked Questions about Sulfide Mining in Minnesota: A Mining Truth Report (2012) www.miningtruth.org/. Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, May 2012. Web. 1 June 2013.
21.United States. Environmental Protection Agency. Solid Waste Special Waste Branch.TECHNICAL DOCUMENT ACID MINE DRAINAGE PREDICTION. EPA, Dec. 1994. Web. 1 June 2013. <www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/>.
23.Greadel, T.E. "Metals, Stocks and Recycling Rates." United Nations Environmental Programme 2011 / International Resource Panel, 2011. Web. 1 June 2013.
24.Johnson, D., and Kevin B. Hallberg. "Acid Mine Drainage Remediation Options: A Review." www.hsph.harvard.edu/mining/files/. University of Wales, Web. 1 June 2013.
Photos Cited 1. Sustainabledevelopment.un.org
2. Ken Morrish/Fly Water Travel
3. Adfg.alaska.gov
4. Boliden.com
5. Businessinsider.com
6. Tommytoy.typepad.com
7. Rene Casteran/USFS
8. Karen Phillips
9. Steve Henry
10. Thewe.cc
11. Renewablesblawg.com
12. Ecowatch.com
13. Academics.uww.edu
14. Occupyfranklincounty.org
15. Collectiveresponsibility.org
25
Appendix ADonella Meadows “The 12 universal Leverage Points For Changing Any System” (The higher the number in the list, the more effective):
1. Constants, parameters, numbers (such as subsidies, taxes, standards)
2. The sizes of buffers and other stabilizing stocks, relative to their flows (i.e.
3. The structure of material stocks and flows (such as transport networks, population age structures)
4. The lengths of delays, relative to the rate of system change
5. The strength of negative feedback loops, relative to the impacts they are trying to correct against
6. The gain around driving positive feedback loops
7. The structure of information flows (who does and does not have access to what kinds of information)
8. The rules of the system (such as incentives, punishments, rewards, constraints)
9. The power to add, change, evolve or self-organize system structure
10.The goals of the system
11. The mindset or paradigm out of which the system (its goals, structure, rules, delays, parameters)
1. EPA should promote improvement of scientifically based predictive tools used in evaluating the environmental impacts of mine sites. This includes collaborative research, participation in information exchanges and training opportunities, and technology development. Tools to better predict acid mine drainage and metals mobility would be a priority. Other subjects would include; site characterization and monitoring, fate and transport, treatment and remediation technology development and evaluation, and risk assessment (including both human health and ecological risk).
2. In States where EPA retains NPDES responsibilities the Agency should integrate permitting and NEPA site evaluation functions. These cases provide an opportunity to streamline the regulatory process for mine site evaluation and planning, while assuring that permits include appropriate provisions requiring that the preferred alternative be implemented as presented in the EIS.
3. EPA should promote an adequate consideration of environmentally protective standards and preferred alternatives at proposed mine sites during the EIS development. An appropriate range of environmentally sound alternatives should be included in each mining EIS.
4. The Agency should evaluate the adequacy of current mine waste management practices and promote standards of practice that achieve appropriate risk based, long term, environmental protection goals. Using Our Resources More Efficiently Agency resources can be more effectively utilized in two ways. EPA can do a better job in direct program implementation, and the Agency can foster more effective partnerships with others.
5. The Agency should promote utilization of a geographic/risk-based approach to determining priorities for Inactive and Abandoned Mine (IAM) reclamation. Setting priorities and selecting appropriate cleanup strategies (including tools for implementation) should be conducted in cooperation with appropriate stakeholders.
6. EPA should use targeted enforcement and compliance approaches as a tool to better focus resources on the highest priority mining operations. These approaches should emphasize compliance assistance as a priority, but may also include traditional enforcement mechanisms.
7. EPA should work with the Corps of Engineers to develop a consistent approach to defining “fill material” (in the context of Section 404 permitting) and determining the applicability of the waste treatment exclusion to certain mining activities.
8. EPA should prepare guidance and provide training to State and Federal agencies on the use of CERCLA site assessment, investigation, and screening tools for mine sites.
9. EPA should a compile, and periodically update, information regarding grants available to fund mining remediation projects for distribution to mine site management partners. Promoting Fiscal Responsibility Promoting cost effective strategies for management of environmental concerns at mine sites, and assuring that mine planning includes consideration of mechanisms for implementation of necessary environmental controls (both during the operating life of the mine and through reclamation and closure) are included in the following recommendations.
10. EPA should encourage development of cost-effective environmental control technologies for both active
27
and inactive mine sites.
11. EPA should evaluate the adequacy of EISs for mining operations in predicting the long-term environmental impacts of mining operations. Assessment of financial assurance mechanisms that will be utilized to provide funding of required long term environmental management systems is critical to this analysis.
12. EPA should encourage reprocessing of historic mine wastes in conjunction with, or as a component of, site cleanup.
13. EPA should develop (or support) legal and administrative mechanisms to encourage implementation of environmentally beneficial response actions at mines sites, such as the Good Samaritan provisions being considered as an amendment to the CWA.
14. In the interest of reducing uncertainty for the regulated community, EPA should work with other mining stakeholders, to develop standardized methods for characterizing and analyzing environmental impacts at mine sites, predicting and verifying acid mine drainage and metals mobility, and establishing environmental performance standards.
28
Appendix C Fundamental Principles for the Mining Sector Governments (Berlin Guidelines 1991 revised 2000)
- Mining companies and the minerals industries should as a minimum:
1. Recognize environmental management as a high priority, notably during the licensing process and through the development and implementation of environmental management systems. These should include early and comprehensive environmental impact assessments, pollution control and other preventive and mitigative measures, monitoring and auditing activities, and emergency response procedures.
2. Recognize the importance of socio-economic impact assessments and social planning in mining operations. Social-economic impacts should be taken into account at the earliest stages of project development. Gender issues should also be considered at a policy and project level.
3. Establish environmental accountability in industry and government at the highest management and policy-making levels. 4. Encourage employees at all levels to recognize their responsibility for environmental management and ensure that adequate resources, staff and requisite training are available to implement environmental plans.
5. Ensure the participation of and dialogue with the affected community and other directly interested parties on the environmental and social aspects of all phases of mining activities and include the full participation of women and other marginalized groups.
6. Adopt best practices to minimize environmental degradation, notably in the absence of specific environmental regulations.
7. Adopt environmentally sound technologies in all phases of mining activities and increase the emphasis on the transfer of appropriate technologies that mitigate environmental impacts including those from small-scale mining operations.
8. Seek to provide additional funds and innovative financial arrangements to improve environmental performance of existing mining operations.
9. Adopt risk analysis and risk management in the development of regulation and in the design, operation, and decommissioning of mining activities, including the handling and disposal of hazardous mining and other wastes.
10. Reinforce the infrastructure, information systems service, training and skills in environmental management in relation to mining activities.
11. Avoid the use of such environmental regulations that act as unnecessary barriers to trade and investment.
12. Recognize the linkages between ecology, socio-cultural conditions and human health and safety, the local community and the natural environment. (Revised)
13. Evaluate and adopt, wherever appropriate, economic and administrative instruments such as tax incentive policies to encourage the reduction of pollutant emissions and the introduction of innovative technology.
14. Explore the feasibility of reciprocal agreements to reduce trans-boundary pollution.15.Encourage long-term mining investment by having clear environmental standards with stable and
predictable environmental criteria and procedures.
