The expert in social performance and General Manager of SMI-ICE-Chile moderated the final panel at the seminar “International Standards Applied in Mine Closure in Chile,” organized by the PUCV Mining Center and the consulting firm Gestiona.
The seminar attracted more than 400 attendees—in person and online—and featured speakers from industry, academia, consulting firms and government agencies, demonstrating the importance and high interest in the topic.
Presenters included Marcelo Zepeda, Biodiversity and Closure Senior Lead at Teck Resources; Daniel González, Mine Closure Advisor at Anglo American; Jorge Campos, Associate Researcher at the PUCV Mining Center; Marcela Cubillos, Mine Closure Management Specialist at Gestiona; and Andrés León, Deputy Director of Mining at SERNAGEOMIN.
Representing the Teck mining company, Marcelo Zepeda referred to his company’s experience in mine closures and the lessons they have learned. “Teck has closed more than 35 mines in North America, and that leaves many lessons and a legacy team,” he explained. “From Chile, we are reviewing all Teck operations in the world, to best guide the closing processes in our country. The entire mining operation is committed to the closure process. We are working on a corporate closure that meets the norm and standards from ICMM, The Copper Mark and The Mining Association of Canada,” he said.
The Biodiversity and Closure Senior Lead at Teck Resources recounted the experience of rehabilitated tailings dams, the progressive closure of dumps by Highland Valley Cooper, and the case of the Sullivan mine in Kimberly, Canada, which he considers an exemplary closure, described as: “a site rehabilitated with vegetation in a process agreed upon with the community.”
Meanwhile, Daniel González, closure advisor for Anglo American, summarized his company’s objective for the mine closure process: “We seek to leave a positive social and licensing legacy, applying innovation in an integrated, harmonious manner with ecosystem.”
Jorge Campos, professor at the PUCV Mining Center, emphasized the risk of not seeing the closure as a progressive process. “If we leave it until the end, it will turn out badly,” he emphasized. “Progressive closure is essential to control risks and there are tools to do this job well. If we do not learn to close, there is a greater likelihood of incurring unplanned costs.”
Andrés León, from SERNAGEOMIN, referred to the challenges Chile faces: “We have to raise standards towards safer, more sustainable mining,” he explained. “We are working to standardize tailings and mine closure guidelines and we must improve audit systems, since closure plans require permanent updating.”
Lastly, Francisca Rivero, SMI-ICE-Chile’s General Manager and Senior Researcher in the Social Performance and Resource Governance area, moderated the final panel discussion with all the presenters.
Francisca Rivero has vast experience in public-sector and civic organizations in social policy, overcoming poverty and sustainable development, where she has consulted for international entities like the World Bank, the IADB, the UNDP, GIZ and the OAS. Rivero specializes in public-private social dialogue programs and energy, water access and climate change initiatives in Chile and Latin America and has designed and implemented dialogue and community engagement processes in the mining, energy and forestry sectors.
The SMI-ICE-Chile specialist led the dialogue towards topics such as governance, social and sustainability aspects of mine closures. “It was interesting to distinguish, around a common challenge, those nuances and differentiating perspectives and visions from mining companies, academia, consultants and the government,” says Rivero. “These are crucial distinctions when addressing collaborative processes and working with varied interests in the search for a shared vision for integrated management and a progressive closure process.”
The conversation also revealed the consensus surrounding progressive closure, seeing it as a strategy and not a permit. “This approach lays the foundations for designing closure processes that begin early in the mining life cycle, promoting a multi-disciplinary approach and the participation of different territorial actors,” she explains. “It is not only about informing and publicizing the closure of a site, but also explaining it by involving the entire community, agreeing on a post-mining vision and moving the territory into the future.”
The following topics were mentioned as the most notable challenges of mine closure: climate change, closure plan cost estimates that often exclude social aspects; the need to train expert technicians and professionals; adjustments to the regulations to have clear guidelines that fit the current context; governance systems that allow closure plans to be implemented with clarity about responsibilities; and the procedures, decision-making and scope of each stage of a progressive closure.
