Regional focus 37% BBC
Of the UK’s energy supplied through fossil fuels in 2020, a record low.
power generation – it’s an argument that rests on a single central pillar. It goes like this: the coal extracted from the mine would be used in steel production. At the moment, the UK imports about two million tonnes of coking coal a year from abroad. The Whitehaven mine would fill that need, WCM suggests, in the process cutting the emissions that come with long-distance supply chains. More to the point, says Starkie, there’s vast demand for this type of metallurgical coal.
As ongoing protests around Whitehaven imply, not everyone agrees with this sunny forecast. One of the main objections centres around the quality of the coal itself. Critics argue – and WCM apparently concedes – that much of the mine’s output couldn’t be used in the UK because its sulphur content is too high. In practice, says Mason, that would mean most of Whitehaven’s coal would need to be exported to countries like India, where restrictions are more lax. Naturally, this would damage WCM’s claim of cutting international supply chains from the equation, while British Steel at Scunthorpe has already warned it may be unable to use any Whitehaven coal. Another point of contention is what impact the mine might have on alternative forms of steel production. Though metallurgical coal is currently an essential part of the process – heated into coke, it’s mixed with iron ore before finally being turned into steel – scientists have been busy developing alternatives. Probably the most encouraging option involves using green hydrogen. But opponents of the Whitehaven project argue that opening a new coal mine could stymie investment in alternatives, while exports to India or China would only fuel unhelpful coal-burning habits. “There is a real prospect already that hydrogen will become dominant in the industry much sooner” than 2049, Ashton says, emphasising that governments should be pushing hard to end coal-based steel production even more quickly. Nor is this necessarily mere wishful thinking. In March 2021, for example, the European Steel Association suggested that clean steel technologies could be available by 2035. Whatever the precise environmental impact of the facility, at any rate, there’s also the question of what it could do to Britain’s green credentials. Put it like this: might leaders in Delhi or Beijing not laugh at Boris Johnson’s climate activism if his government unveils a new coal mine – something that was pointedly raised to the prime minister by journalists at the recent COP26 climate conference? Mike Starkie, for his part, gives this argument short shrift. Apart from the fact that Britain’s own carbon footprint is comparatively puny, he’s sceptical that giant emitters like China would listen to a middling power like the UK. As a former diplomat, Ashton disagrees. “It’s
10
nonsense,” he argues, nothing more than a “cheap debating point”. “You know, we don’t live in isolated boxes, one from the other,” he continues. “Societies influence each other’s choices all the time through diplomacy, including climate diplomacy. The recent announcement by the Chinese government that it will stop financing [overseas] coal-fired power stations – effectively turning off the tap of international public finance for coal power – was a product of diplomacy, including by the UK.” But as Ashton continues: “Diplomacy only works if you walk your talk. You can’t expect to persuade others to get out of coal while you are giving a green light to new coal mines.”
A shift in the ground The results of the public inquiry aren’t due out for a while – and even when they are, the final decision will rest with the government in London. But whatever happens with the Woodhouse Colliery, Ashton suggests the controversy is part of a broader shift in global mining. Whichever way you look at it, mining of any kind has a huge social and economic footprint. At a time of mounting social stresses and ecological emergency, what Ashton calls the “social licence” to mine is likely to become “more demanding” over the coming years. “If you’re a mining company looking at where to invest next,” he says, ”it’s going to be a good idea to think carefully about how your project will enhance the lives of those who feel its impacts, not only through the livelihoods it can provide but in wider social, cultural and environmental terms. Otherwise, you risk ending up with a stranded asset, a loss of shareholder value, and massive reputational damage – all of which you would deserve. We need a sustainable mining industry now as much as we ever did.” That’s doubly true given what mining organisations have done far beyond the rolling hills of Cumbria. To explain what he means, Ashton points to the recent destruction of the Juukan Gorge Caves. Occupied by Aboriginal Australians for 46,000 years, they were smashed by Rio Tinto in 2020. Ashton, for his part, calls the incident a “morality tale not only for Rio Tinto but for the entire industry”. Fair enough. Yet there are a few signs that operators are gradually changing their ways. Earlier this year, for instance, Anglo-American announced a plan to decarbonise the steelmaking industry. Rio Tinto, for its part, has developed a blockchain to track the sourcing of sustainable aluminium. These are both good beginnings. Yet as the Whitehaven project vividly shows, genuine sustainability involves far more than technical innovation, and the gap between theory and practice can sometimes be insurmountably large. ●
World Mining Frontiers /
www.nsenergybusiness.com
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
