SUSTAINABLE MINERAL PRODUCTION
Introduction The Geoethics concept arose from an idea conceived in April
2012 at the European Geosciences Union and developed at the 34th and 35th International Geological Congresses. The Cape Town Statement on Geoethics (Di Capua, et al., 2017) included a list of ten fundamental geoethical values (see side bar).1 The ninth fundamental value states, “Ensuring sustain- ability of economic and social activities in order to assure future generations’ supply of energy and other natural resources.” Unfortunately, this statement fails to transparently and forthrightly acknowledge the depletability of natural resource deposits thus inhibiting a fully integral and transparent dis- cussion of this geoethics value statement’s goal of providing a sustainable supply of natural resources. The depletability of natural resource deposits is a fact of nature. Deposits are size limited. This same failure to forthrightly acknowledge and address the depletability of natural resource deposits is a major failing of International Association for the Promotion of Geoethics’ (IAPG’s) White Paper on Responsible Mining (Arvanitidis, et al., 2017). As Schendler (2009, p. 9) empha- sizes, “The great flaw in the sustainable-business movement today is that few are willing to admit that achieving sustain- ability is difficult, and maybe impossible, without big changes in the way the world currently operates.”
A significant problem in discussing the sustainable devel-
opment of natural resource deposits is a clear understanding of what “sustainable development” means. The widely cited UN Brundtland Commission 1987 report’s definition states, “Sustainable development is the kind of development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Thus, there are no limits on the life of a “sustainable development” as commonly used and understood. The problem is that individual natural resource deposits are finite in size, are depletable, and any extraction of a particular deposit will eventually lead to its exhaustion. This paper examines how the finite size of natural resource deposits and other factors can be realistically approached from a geoethical perspective.
This paper will focus on solid mineral deposits that are extracted using mining methods. But other types of natural resource occurrences such as oil and gas reservoirs, geothermal energy systems, mineral extraction from brines (lithium for example), and the increasing number of “mined” water aqui- fers are depletable and the general concepts discussed apply to these other types of natural resource occurrences as well.
The development of geoethics
“Geoethics” was defined in 2012 at the 34th International Geological Congress in Brisbane, Australia from an idea conceived during the European Geosciences Union in the preceding April. The Cape Town Statement on Geoethics was published following the 35th International Geological
1. The International Association for Promotion of Geoethics (IAPG) is supported by over 20 associated geoscience organizations, many of which are internationally recognized. Conspicuously absent from this list of associates are major, internation- ally recognized mining and petroleum organizations includ- ing the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM), the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy, and Petroleum (CIM), the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, the Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration (SME), and the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. These mining organizations are very interested in the social licensing aspects of mining.
20 TPG •
Oct.Nov.Dec 2020 The Fundamental Values of Geoethics
1. Honesty, integrity, transparency and reliability of the geoscientist, including strict adherence to scientific methods.
2. Competence, including regular training and life- long learning.
3. Sharing knowledge at all levels as a valuable ac- tivity, which implies communicating science and results, while taking into account intrinsic limita- tions such as probabilities and uncertainties.
4. Verifying the sources of information and data, and applying objective, unbiased peer-review pro- cesses to technical and scientific publications.
5. Working with a spirit of cooperation and reci- procity, which involves understanding and respect for different ideas and hypotheses.
6. Respecting natural processes and phenomena, where possible, when planning and implementing interventions in the environment.
7. Protecting geodiversity as an essential aspect of the development of life and biodiversity, cultural and social diversity, and the sustainable develop- ment of communi-ties.
8. Enhancing geoheritage, which brings together scientific and cultural factors that have intrinsic social and economic value, to strengthen the sense of belonging of people for their environment.
9. Ensuring sustainability of economic and social activities in order to assure future generations’ supply of energy and other natural resources.
10. Promoting geo-education and outreach for all, to further sustainable economic development, geohazard prevention and mitigation, environmen- tal protection, and increased societal resilience and well-being.
www.aipg.org
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64
