I put it to you that mining, and indeed, the whole extractive industry, faces quite a challenge. In fact, in some jurisdictions, it faces a threat to its very survival. This is odd given that everything around us – if it is not from a plant – comes from mining of one sort or another. The challenge is about The Environment and our impacts. In my view, though, this is more a label, a discourse object, a currency of engagement.  It is really about what the world thinks about the industry and our relationship with it.  It is about perception – and communication is how perception is disseminated and transfigured.

Ironically, over the last few decades, we have solved many of the environmental problems facing the mining industry. Few industries have come further.  This is not surprising, as once parameters are set and something technical needs doing, the science and ingenuity of engineering, hydrology, metallurgy, and related disciplines get into action and get the job done.  Why, then, don’t those in the general public and media, government and similar circles, understand and love us?  Incongruously, investors flocked to the mining sector in 2020 raising stock values +21% YTD. Despite the massive increase in value creation over the last few years, the industry is facing an existential threat – death by perception perhaps?!

WHY DO WE STILL HAVE ENDLESS PROBLEMS WITH PERMITTING AND WITH OUR COMMUNITY IMAGE AND REPUTATION ?

WHY, IN THE LAST FEW DECADES, WERE AROUND A DOZEN MAJOR MINERAL DEVELOPMENTS WORTH MORE THAN $22B HALTED BY COMMUNITY ISSUES AND PROTESTS ?

WHY HAVE THERE BEEN SO FEW NEW HARD ROCK MINES IN THE UNITED STATES IN THE LAST THIRTY YEARS ?

I want to make a simple point here. Environment is not merely or only a technical issue; it is above all currently a communication and an engagement issue.  (The sorry saga of the Pebble Mine proposal in Alaska is a prime example.) Until we realize this and act on it, we won’t get very far in progressing our position, in making our lives easier with respect to access, capital, political and public pressure and simply getting on with our jobs. Better science does not necessarily work here. In fact, it inhibits us.

Once upon a time, mining was mining and you did what you did.  This generally meant doing as little as possible to mitigate any negative effects of our processes. Let’s be frank: governments generally made things pretty easy for us as an industry in those days.

Of the topics that were then considered non-core mining, safety was the first to really become an issue and (post-1950s) tackled in earnest through the initiation of new specialized processes such as safety officers and departments, rules and procedures, and technical improvements. Interestingly, the safety campaigns were generated internally. The audience was the workforce and their families versus a response to external pressures.

Later, within this same general trajectory, “environmentalism” became an industry and broader social trend in the early 1970s when notions such as “pollution” and “ecology” mainstreamed into the public lexicon and debate within the industrialized world. It was a decade later when this translated into concrete actions for the mining industry. (The agreements around cyanide management in the gold industry are a good example.)

As with safety, though, when we got into environmental issues, we went full bore.  This meant specialized people with new departments, systems, technical solutions, internal reporting, etc.  We now have environmental management as a major part of modern mining.

THE TRAJECTORY FROM RECOGNITION TO ACTION IS CLEAR BUT ARE WE HITTING OUR TARGET OF RESPONSIBLE OPERATIONS ?

ARE WE SEEN AS RESPONSIBLE GLOBAL CITIZENS ?

WHY IS MINING STILL PAINTED WITH THE SAME ENVIRONMENTAL BRUSH AS TOBACCO COMPANIES OR WEAPONS MANUFACTURERS ?

On environment alone we are attacked from every quarter by dozens of NGOs.  Media stories about mining almost universally tilt negative and governments tighten regulations and listen to us less. At the same time that we are proudly unveiling the great results of the application of our best science and engineering towards environmental problems in mining, it seems uncertain that anyone is listening.

BUT ARE WE TALKING IN A WAY THAT IS UNDERSTANDABLE ? AND IF NOT, WHY IS THIS ?

Environment is almost always the currency of criticism.  But anyone who has been around in the industry knows well that most large companies today have the highest environmental standards, are open and transparent, and have a lot of money and expertise in technical solutions to apply to most of the major environmental problems brought about by mining.

AGAIN, WHY THE CONTINUING PROBLEMS ? MY ANSWER IN PART TWO.