Electrification and the Sustainability of Minerals
Decarbonisation of many of the world’s major economies is gathering pace, as governments and companies respond to the challenge of the “Race to Zero” emissions of greenhouse gases, and the compelling science of climate change. Much of the decarbonisation and electrification depends upon the availability of key minerals, for batteries and new electric technologies, including cobalt, lithium, manganese, copper, rare earths. In this article we argue that ‘clean’ energy must not be bought at the expense of the safety of adult or child labour in mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo, or anywhere else, or the destruction of the environment through seabed mining.
There needs to be transparency and real commitment to sustainability in the way that key minerals are produced, and there is an urgent need for this issue to be addressed now – not in ten years time when destructive mining methods have become more entrenched. We identify ways in which governments and legislators, mining companies, investors and consumers can contribute to make that happen.
The scale of change
With the blessing of national governments, vehicle manufacturers are phasing out internal combustion engines and ramping up production of electric vehicles. Renewable energy firms are investing in hydrogen production systems. Offshore wind, and turbine production is set for major expansion. Solar power and solar panel prices are falling as production increases. Investment at scale is shifting from fossil fuels to renewable energy. The largest renewable energy generating firm NextEra was recently reported to have a larger market capitalisation than Exxon Mobil. Governments are responding to the challenges in ways that may change the entire balance of geopolitics. The Economist (‘Power in the 21st century’, 19 September 2020) notes that Chinese firms produce 72% of the world’s solar modules, 69% of its lithium-ion batteries and 45% of its wind turbines, and that China may become an “electrostate”. Investors, insurance companies, banks and asset managers are signing up to a variety of initiatives to promote a “Green Recovery” from COVID-19 and a commitment to alignment with the greenhouse gas reduction commitments of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.
‘Clean’ energy?
Mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo
Yet much of this move to decarbonisation and electrification depends upon the availability of key minerals, and in some key areas, the methods of production of these minerals are not consistent with the idea of ‘clean’ energy. Henry Sanderson’s article in the Financial Times (‘Congo, child labour and your electric car’ FT 7 July 2019) sets out the issue clearly. About a third of Congo’s cobalt comes from “artisanal” mines – a thoroughly misleading term with connotations of rather precious artisanal bakeries – where the reality involves appallingly unsafe and unregulated working practices, frequent fatalities and large scale use of child labour.
While larger mining companies such as Glencore and China Molybdenum may use safer work practices, traders combine their output with that from the artisanal mines, and some two third’s of the world’s cobalt ends up being refined in China. And from there, no one can say for sure where the cobalt came from in their smart phone or electric car – out of sight, out of mind?
Deep seabed mining for minerals
A similarly important series of articles in Nature flags up the real risks of permanent damage to the environment from seabed mining.
An editorial in Nature (24 July 2019) urged “Write rules for deep-sea mining before it’s too late – International Seabed Authority must commit the mining industry to a sustainable future.” Other articles in Nature echo the warnings (“Challenges to the sustainability of deep-seabed mining” – Lisa A. Levin, Diva J. Amon, Hannah Lily, Nature 6 July 2020). They point out that mining companies are investigating operations to recover metallic nodules on the deep seabed’s abyssal plains, cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts on seamounts, and metallic sulphides at hydrothermal vents near ocean ridges. Extraction by modified dredging or cutting will produce wastes, slurry, wastewater and sediment being returned to the sea, while the damage to scarcely known seabed habitats could be profound and permanent. The International Seabed Authority established by the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea is not set up to be an effective regulator of the mining operations which could be undertaken by 168 states. The I.U.C.N. Issues Brief on Deep-sea Mining calls for baseline studies, environmental impact assessments, mitigation, enhanced regulation and a circular economy approach.
Actions for governments
As governments prepare for COP26 and negotiations on the implementation of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, and also for key meetings on the U.N. Biodiversity Convention and the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, they must recognise these twin threats to ‘clean’ energy, biodiversity, habitats and oceans, and resolve not to address one environmental issue by creating another. The sustainability of minerals and mining needs to be addressed in all three Conventions, and in national legislation, for example promoting a circular economy and thorough recycling and extraction of minerals from used batteries and phones.
Actions for mining companies
Mining companies might usefully reflect that their “Social Licence to Operate” may be more precarious that they might wish. The industry’s exceptionally poor safety and environmental record on mine tailings dams – the video of the Brumadinho mine tailings dam collapse in 2019 in which 270 people died is a reminder of the issues at stake - has left several firms facing multi-billion dollar class action law suits.
Unsustainable mining for the metals and minerals needed for electrification and decarbonisation, if handled wrongly, could be one issue too many for this industry’s relationship with governments regulators and the public. The industry and its representative bodies such as the International Council on Mining and Metals needs to take prompt action on self-regulation, or must expect much tougher regulation a short way down the track.
Professor Harvey Wood of the Clean Rivers Trust points out that there are also major opportunities for the mining industry to lead the way with new initiatives, for example re-mining tailings deposits to recover valuable minerals, while making the tailings safe.
Actions for investors
Ethical investment funds, led by the Church of England Pension board and the Swedish Council of Ethics of the AP Funds have already applied pressure on the mining industry to address the worst effects of mine tailings dams. Their scrutiny needs to be extended to the sustainability of minerals and mining for electrification.
All of the active investor groups presently calling for a Green Recovery, Net Zero and alignment of investment to the goals of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change need to be alive to this issue, asking questions and demanding answers.
These include –
And other groups with similar aims, together representing thousands of firms with a market capitalisation of trillions of dollars, and the capacity to demand that sustainable mining must be part of any plans to “build back better”.
Actions for consumers
Each of us, when buying a smartphone, or an electric car, when signing a contract for electricity, or installing solar panels, can undertake to ask questions of the salesperson about whether metals and minerals have been sourced form unsafe labour practices in the DRC or elsewhere, or seabed mining. Weary salespeople will report customer concerns to their production managers. It can make a difference.
There is also a legislative precedent that we as consumers can demand. Article 33 of the EU’s REACH chemicals Regulation gives consumers the right to request information, and to receive answers, about the chemical constituents of consumer products and substances of concern. With only minor adaptation, this could be used to apply to the key minerals whose production methods are at issue.