[ad_1]
(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a Reuters columnist.)
By Clyde Russell
LAUNCESTON, Australia, April 16 (Reuters) – The gunfire at dawn is not over yet, but Rio Tinto's polite warning to mining lobbyists to recognize the threat of Climate change is probably a sign that the industry will inevitably split into two camps.
These factions could be described as "green" miners, who produce the essential minerals for the transition from the oil age to the electricity age, and "dirty" miners who remain trapped in coal and oil. other minerals deemed unnecessary for a coal. constrained future.
Rio Tinto's carefully worded statement on industry badociations, released last week, said it would only work with groups that conform to its own climate principles.
These include a commitment that "any advocacy on the use of coal in the long term will indicate that it will require advanced technology and that, in the medium and long term, it will have to be in line with the Paris objectives".
The second largest mining company in the world also said that mining lobbyists should oppose public subsidies to coal and advocate that energy supply be "technology-neutral"; way."
Rio Tinto has effectively warned mining industry lobbies that they must adapt to a world in which the challenge of climate change is recognized and that mining should be a positive force of change.
While other mining groups, including the BHP group, have also spoken out against the climate denial that still prevails in some sectors of the industry, Rio Tinto seems to be a step forward in insisting on meaningful change. .
The Minerals Council of Australia has now changed its view: "Sustained global action is needed to reduce the risks of human-induced climate change."
This contrasts with its July 2017 position that new generation coal plants would reduce Australia's emissions by replacing older, more polluting generators.
But even as industry groups soften their anti-climate change rhetoric, it will be increasingly difficult for them to represent the different ends of the mining ladder.
For example, why would a lithium, cobalt or copper miner in a well-regulated jurisdiction such as Australia, Canada or Chile want to be represented by the same people who also advocate for the interests? a thermal coal miner?
SPLIT TO COME?
Miners who want to be perceived as ethical, responsible for the environment and who provide the raw materials for batteries and solar panels can also crack up to be grouped with companies operating in different countries. where governance is questionable, respect for the rigorous environment or child labor and dangerous. mining practices can occur.
The mining industry is starting to be under increased pressure from investors who demand sustainable and ethical mining.
The collapse of a tailings dam in an iron mine in Brazil, operated by Vale, resulting in the death of about 300 people, prompted a coalition of ethical investors to write to 683 publicly traded resource companies to request that they make their facilities public within 45 days.
It will become increasingly common at corporate annual general meetings to ask investors to ask what actions mining companies take to offset carbon emissions.
The mining industry as a whole was slow in recognizing that it did not matter what every mining executive or board of directors thought, it mattered what the investing public believed and it was obvious that the Climate change was increasingly present in the investment decisions.
Rio Tinto, which concentrates its activities on iron ore and copper, could be able to become a green mine, given the key role of copper in electrical systems and the need for steel in many technologies renewable.
However, other big miners, such as BHP and Glencore, might have trouble holding important positions in coal, even though they are also mining the mineral resources needed for the battery revolution.
How they balance the pressure they will face against profits from coal will be a challenge for their leaders.
For coal miners, they will likely have a choice between accepting their industry badociations and not doing much lobbying on their behalf, or standing aside and forming dedicated bodies to defend their interests. . (Edited by Richard Pullin)
Source link
