In the long time frame imposed by the uncertain pace of pre-production work - it can take decades to find and commission a major orebody - there is no way of knowing how much licence can be expected from society's demand for specific products. No mineral commodity is invulnerable in the market place, or permanently cast as a nonentity.

Society speaks with many voices, but its ongoing debate with the mining industry through the Global Mining Initiative and other consultative exercises is starting to produce a consensual wish list for the mines of the future. In one version, it says that future mines should:

• Have the smallest possible footprint.
• Minimize harmful emissions and environmental impacts generally.
• Have the highest possible yield for the least possible use of natural resources.
• Involve the least possible risk to human health and safety.
• Be open to continuous improvement through taking advantage of emerging science and technology.

If you asked "society" where mining should be done, many people might reply simply "out of sight". Another reply would be "where it can do the least damage to the landscape and other things we value". Both replies seem to advocate underground mining as a way in which the industry can make part of its production process less visible (no-one yet envisages that the whole process can be hidden underground).

However, society makes other demands on the mining industry. One is for huge supplies of its products at competitive prices. Another is for maximum efficiency (which includes safety) in exploiting mineral resources. Open pit mining can make a strong case for itself on both counts. It is an efficient user of resources (natural, human and financial), and a mass producer of many of the metals and minerals society needs.

PAGE 2 OF 8

 

Review is published by Rio Tinto,
6 St James' Square, London
SW1Y 4LD, England
Telephone +44 (0)20 7930 2399
Editor: Cherry DeGeer