 |
| Top image, Panantza (Morona Santiago) area that President Correa announces could be the 2nd largest copper mine in the world, and below the activities of the current 1st mine largest in the world in Chuiquicamata (Chile) |
We hear more and more frequently from the sectors sponsoring and interested in open-pit mega-mining in sensitive areas of Ecuador talking about how "these projects would be carried out by multinationals in the sector, experts in "sustainable mining", "good mining" and "responsible mining".
Some of the examples they give to try to win over public opinion in this regard are the cases of Australia, Canada (insisting on this case despite the fact that their mining companies have had conflicts in their country and throughout the world), Norway and Chile.
Some of the examples they give to try to win over public opinion in this regard are the cases of Australia, Canada (insisting on this case despite the fact that their mining companies have had conflicts in their country and throughout the world), Norway and Chile.
On this occasion we will carry out a brief analysis of the Australian case and we will see how true and complete the official information provided to us is:
Australia contributes 1.5 % of global greenhouse gas emissions, less than the US, China, Russia, India and Japan, but is one of the most polluting nations on the planet in per capita terms.
It turns out that the "engineering and technological solutions" (which are never explained) in Australia have obviously not been enough, since the southern country imposed a tax of 17.3 euros for each ton of carbon dioxide emitted on July 1, 2012 on the nearly 500 most polluting companies, which are mainly in the electrical, mining and energy sectors, since they emit over 25,000 tons of CO2 into the air per year.
We understand then that the Australian example does not stand up to a minimum of analysis, just like the Canadian example that the same pro-mining group tries to promote without the evidence being able to overcome the analysis.
We understand then that the Australian example does not stand up to a minimum of analysis, just like the Canadian example that the same pro-mining group tries to promote without the evidence being able to overcome the analysis.
Coal (which the Ecuadorian government mentions in its sponsoring campaign as one of Australia's pillars of "development") is indeed currently a point of dependency in Australia, since almost 80 % of that coal is used to generate electricity. What they "forgot" to mention is that Australia plans to close most of its coal-fired power plants by 2020, promote investments in the development of clean energy and the development of technologies that are less harmful to the environment. 1
“Australia’s mining sector is now facing additional costs that it doesn’t face elsewhere,” said David Peever, director of the mining company Rio Tinto Australia, months ago. (Rio Tinto is one of the companies that will have to pay for being included in the “select” group of the 500 most polluting in Australia. 2 However, we see that the same little speech about “sustainable mining” and referring to this “exemplary” Australian mining company is used in Chile to convince public opinion: “As a Regional Government we are supporting mining, but sustainably, with respect for the environment.” 3
The chapter on the "exemplary" Australian mining has its finishing touch (since we are talking about that mineral) with a small review of the problems that according to the Observatory of Mining Conflicts for Latin America, Australian mining companies have in our countries, among them are cited cases such as:
- Aymara people from Cancosa in Chile for the destruction of Andean moorland plains and wetlands to extract water by the Australian mining company 4
- Displacement of indigenous communities, flora and fauna, gas emissions, noise, and the use of water with its effects on the water cycle, in Cerrejón and La Guajira (Colombia) 5 In addition to nearly 200 Wayuu indigenous people who were killed 6
TOPIC: WATER
Although the video presented in link 251 7, it is confusing, since it says that at least 90% of the environmental impact will be recovered, as the environmental impact cannot be recovered, we assume that it refers to water, since that was the issue being discussed at the time. In this regard, specialized companies such as Siemens in fact, announce that it is possible to treat up to 85% of that water to be reused in mining.8 The "small detail" that the sponsors of the mining multinationals forget to announce, and that the CEPAL (the same one whose data the government used to announce with great fanfare the reduction of poverty in our country) tells us, is that this treated water is not suitable for agricultural uses (even worse for drinking). The other "small detail" is that not all the contaminated water is treated, because what is not mentioned is the infiltration produced and that can be absorbed in the soil. 9.
As for net water consumption, we can see cases such as the Cerro Vanguardia Mining Company in Argentina, which uses a daily volume of water three times greater than that consumed by all of Río Gallegos (110,000 inhabitants) every 24 hours, 10
CONCLUSIONS:
If we use the definition of the Commission on Development and Environment cited in Ramirez et al, 2004: 55). (Brundtland Commission): Our Common Future; for «sustainable» or «sustainable» which is «Meeting the needs of present generations without compromising the possibilities of future generations to meet their own needs» we see that the application of this term that is attempted to be given (not only in our country) in terms of mining or extractive industries, makes no sense because a barrel of oil that is extracted or an ounce of gold or copper that is extracted... simply does not exist anymore... it cannot be «sustainable» over time.
Paraphrasing the words of the narrator of the video where the example of Australia and "sustainable mining" is discussed: ENOUGH OF SO MUCH TALK.
Paraphrasing the words of the narrator of the video where the example of Australia and "sustainable mining" is discussed: ENOUGH OF SO MUCH TALK.
ES_ES 
EN