Mining our way to net zero
Geoscientists are on the frontline of resource discovery, but also the responsible recovery of these resources and the design of a sustainable post-mining legacy, argues Richard Herrington
Mining projects should be designed with re-use of the site in mind
Richard Herrington, Head of Earth Sciences at the Natural History Museum, London, is optimistic that we can achieve the UK’s decarbonisation goals, but we must secure the materials we need for the mitigating technologies in a timely fashion. The rapidity of the energy transition means that mining new resources of commodities like lithium, graphite and cobalt, as well as traditional metals like copper, aluminium and iron for infrastructure, is inevitable.
“Any delay in their supply could mean that we won’t be able to build the electric vehicles, wind turbines and solar panels fast enough to hit the net-zero target in 2050. What the COVID pandemic has taught us is that supply chains for the things that we deem to be essential must be secured in advance. For the energy transition, metals and minerals are essential and geoscientists are key players to give us the expanded choice of supply that we need, thus securing sources for our industries.”
Very often the geoscientist is the first person on the ground representing the company investigating the mineral potential, so there is a great responsibility on the shoulders of that scientist
Effective communication
Effective communication of the essential role for mining in our greener future is critical.
“I think the public knows that science and technology are providing the answers to the net-zero challenges, but only a minority recognise that mining is part of the answer, too. There is the further challenge of where mining should take place. Done in the wrong places and by the wrong methods, mining could cause more problems than it is seeking to solve. We should develop mines where there is a positive impact to both the planet and its ecosystem, as well as the people involved. In some cases that might mean bringing mining ‘back home’ to old mining camps – Cornwall is a good example where mining could be an agent for good, but there are areas of potential in the UK and Europe where the mineral potential has not yet fully been evaluated.
“Very often, the geoscientist is the first person on the ground representing the company investigating the mineral potential, so there is a great responsibility on the shoulders of that scientist. We must make sure they are equipped to do things properly from the beginning of the project and broker a positive relationship between all the stakeholders from day one.”
Revised approach
Richard believes a new approach to mining is needed.
“A powerful book by Michael Braungart and William McDonough, entitled Cradle to Cradle: Re-making the way we make things, explores the idea that all things should be manufactured with the end-of-life re-use and re-purposing in mind from the start. I firmly believe that we should apply this philosophy to mining, which is a part of the manufacturing supply chain. Historically mining was viewed as a ‘cradle-to-grave’ business, often with a devastated site left as a legacy. Mining is a necessary ‘intervention’ to recover the minerals we need for a sustainable future, but we should design a mine in a ‘cradle-to-cradle’ fashion, so that the old mine site is left as a positive asset – maybe a solar or wind farm, a geo-park, a biodiversity oasis – in addition to delivering an economic and social benefit.
“Researchers at the Natural History Museum are developing methods and metrics that objectively measure biodiversity change due to human impacts, as well as investigating lower-impact mining techniques. I would love to see this tool applied to mining projects so that regulators can decide which projects have better eco-credentials. This may help when comparing the merits of mining in new frontiers, such as when considering deep-ocean mining, where we need to be able to quantify biodiversity impacts and compare those to the impact of comparable terrestrial mining operations for the critical metals we need.”
Richard Herrington
Professor Richard Herrington is Head of the Earth Sciences Department at the Natural History Museum, London, UK. He is also part of the NERC-funded LiFT project, which aims to understand how we can best source lithium resources for energy storage solutions, as well as the EU consortium project, CROCODILE, that looks at sourcing cobalt from European secondary supply.
Further reading
- Herrington, R. (2021) Mining our green future. Nat. Rev. Mat. 6, 456-458; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-021-00325-9
- Braungart, M. & McDonough, W. (2002) Cradle to Cradle: Re-making the way we make things. North Point Press, 193 pp. ISBN-13: 978-0865475878
The full interview with Richard Herrington appears below
What are you currently working on?
In addition to my role as Head of Earth Sciences at the Natural History Museum in London, I am actively involved with the LiFT project, a Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Highlight Topic that aims to understand how we can best source lithium resources for energy storage solutions, as well as another EU consortium project, CROCODILE that looks at sourcing cobalt from European secondary supply, which in our case is focused on mineralized material currently treated as waste.
How important are geoscientists to achieving net zero and the energy transition?
Geoscientists are essential. It is clear that the rapidity of the energy transition means than mining new resources of commodities like lithium, graphite and cobalt is inevitable. Geoscientists are in the front line of resource discovery, but also the responsible recovery of these resources and the design of a sustainable post-mining legacy. The energy transition even means an increase in demand for traditional metals like copper, aluminium and iron, because these are all implicated in the expanded infrastructure for our green future.
How optimistic do you feel about the UK’s decarbonisation goals and the role geoscience can play in getting us there?
I am optimistic that we can achieve the goals, but to do that we need to secure the materials we need for the mitigating technologies in a timely fashion. Any delay in their supply could mean that we won’t be able to build the electric vehicles, wind turbines and solar panels fast enough to hit the net-zero target in 2050. What the COVID pandemic has taught us is that supply chains for the things that we deem to be essential must be secured in advance. For the energy transition, metals and minerals are essential and geoscientists are key players to give us the expanded choice of supply that we need, therefore securing sources to supply the metals we need in our industries.
What are some of the biggest challenges we face in getting there?
I think the public know that science and technology are providing the answers to the net-zero challenges, but only a minority recognize that mining is part of the answer, too. Given this, there is the further challenge of where that mining should take place. Done in the wrong places and by the wrong methods, mining could cause more problems than it is seeking to solve. As I pointed out in a recent commentary in Nature Reviews Materials, we should seek to develop mines where there is a positive impact to both the planet and its ecosystem, as well as the people involved. In some cases that might mean bringing mining ‘back home’ to old mining camps – Cornwall is a good example where mining could be an agent for good, but there are areas of potential in the UK and Europe where the mineral potential has not yet fully been evaluated.
Do you think we are doing enough to effectively communicate the essential role for mining in our greener future?
There have been some efforts to do that, but of course we can do much better. Very often the geoscientist is the first person on the ground representing the company investigating the mineral potential, so there is a great responsibility on the shoulders of that scientist. We must make sure they are equipped to do things right from the beginning of the project and make sure they broker a positive relationship between all the stakeholders from day one.
Do you have any recommendations for what more can be done?
A while ago I read a very powerful book by Michael Braungart and William McDonough entitled ‘Cradle to Cradle: Re-making the way we make things’. The driving idea behind this is that all things should be manufactured with the end-of-life re-use and re-purposing in mind from the very start. I firmly believe that we should not only apply this philosophy to manufacturing, but also to the process of mining itself, which is a part of the manufacturing supply chain story. Historically mining was always viewed as a ‘cradle-to-grave’ business, often with a devastated site left as a legacy. Mining is a necessary ‘intervention’ to recover the minerals we need for a sustainable future, but we should design a mine in a ‘cradle-to-cradle’ fashion, so that the old mine site itself is left as a positive asset for its next use – maybe a solar or wind farm, a geo-park, a biodiversity oasis – something that leaves a net-positive impact, in addition to delivering an economic and social benefit.
Are there any upcoming projects or developments you’re particularly excited about?
Researchers at the Natural History Museum are developing metrics that objectively measure biodiversity change due to human impacts. I would love to see this developed as a tool applied to mining projects that regulators could use in addition to all the other ways of assessing mining projects. This would help us then to decide which projects have better eco-credentials than others. It may help us as we seek to compare the merits of mining in new frontiers, such as when considering deep-ocean mining, where we need to be able to quantify biodiversity impacts and compare those to the impact of comparable terrestrial mining operations for the critical metals we need.
