Elephant in the room: How to close the reality gap

There is no denying the enormity of the net-zero challenge, but we must be warned against being overwhelmed

Tackling the enormity of the task required to reach net-zero by 2050 gives rise to the question: How do you eat an elephant? The answer is one bite at a time.

Similarly, reaching net-zero will require a multitude of actions — large and small — incorporating government policies and support, innovation, technology, some of which is yet to be developed, and collaboration across every sector.

Mining — which accounts for 4% to 7% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions globally — faces the challenge of reducing its emissions while at the same time finding and mining an increasing volume of the metals and minerals needed to reach the world’s net-zero targets.

We are facing a “reality gap:” The shortfall between the desire for decarbonization and the reality of achieving such an outcome. The reality is that to decarbonize we need to produce more of the commodities needed in the next 10 to 20 years than we ever have. Faced with such a task, it is important that we do not give up. One of the dangers is that if some targets are unrealistic, we end up with a theme of catastrophism; people throw their hands up and say we cannot do anything.

That would be a disaster. Catastrophism is not helpful. What is helpful is engaging the wider community in what we can do, and it may not be exactly what governments have set out, but we can do some things. There will be no one silver bullet that can solve this decarbonization problem. The world will need every bit of technology just to get our carbon emissions down.

Every molecule of CO₂ that goes into the atmosphere does not have a tag that shows where it came from, but they all count. We will feel the ramifications for decades of what we have emitted now, so anything we can do to ameliorate the CO₂ that is going into the atmosphere is important, not necessarily for us but certainly for our children and grandchildren.

Decarbonization may be the “light on the hill” but only a small proportion of activity globally is likely to get there within the established deadlines. If we can move the vast bulk of things along the technology path, then that starts to eat away at the problem earlier, and ultimately that will be a better outcome.

Take electric vehicles (EVs) as an example. The initial blush of enthusiasm has waned because of cost, perceived issues on range, battery life and safety, and the energy intensive nature of EV construction. By some estimates, a large EV, given the energy required for construction and the mining of critical minerals and with typical energy grids yet to be solely powered by renewables, will never deliver a carbon benefit over an internal combustion engine (ICE). But a hybrid vehicle would bring quite a few of the benefits and remove some of the issues that block people from buying EVs — and they are a lot more efficient than ICE vehicles.

Moving the mining sector along the road to net-zero will require a wider and faster adoption of technology to find, define, and mine the minerals and metals needed with confidence, precision, and at speed. Technology has a role to play. Early risk mitigation in mining projects means collecting information early to accelerate decision-making processes without taking on too much risk. It is just as important to know when to stop drilling as it is where to drill and for how long.

The value of geological information should not be underestimated, but it is often seen through the prism of the cost of further investigation versus the value of the additional data.

The mining industry has been slow to adopt innovative ore body knowledge (OBK) approaches and data collection, despite the increasing improvement and sophistication of the technology.

One of the reasons for this reluctance is that mining companies, researchers, and technology providers find it difficult to articulate the financial value of OBK; i.e, to explain in dollar terms the financial gain of being able to make better decisions earlier and reduce risk from greenfield exploration through to mining production.

This is the “value of information” proposition. Revelations around Australia’s pumped-hydro renewable energy project, Snowy 2, provide a textbook example of the perils of ignoring geological data and could provide lessons for the mining sector of the value of information.

After drilling just 150 m, a tunnel boring machine was stuck for around 19 months, falling victim to water and mud in the machine’s path. Why did it stop? No one knew what rocks were in front of it. There was a lack of internet of geosensing data. Maybe $5 million of drilling and data acquisition could have prevented a 19-month delay and a multi-million cost blowout.

IMDEX is partnering with the Mineral Deposit Research Unit (MDRU) and the Bradshaw Research Institute for Minerals and Mining (BRIMM) at the University of British Columbia, and Ideon Technologies, the global leader in applying muon tomography for ore body imaging, in a two-year study to determine the real value of OBK and develop a method to quantify it.

Clearly articulating the dollar value of OBK assists in the adoption of technology where the cost is born in one part of an operation or organization, but the dollar benefit is accrued in a different department or during a separate phase of development.

It helps address the question: Who will pay for what does not happen? where operational risk reduction is the key driver. Without quality OBK, companies are taking unnecessary mine development risks. This all aids in closing the reality gap, with technology, innovation, and collaboration all taking one bite at a time.

Dr. Dave Lawie is chief geoscientist with mining-tech company IMDEX.

---