pros and cons of mining essay

EducationalWave

20 Pros and Cons of Mining

The pros of mining are that it significantly contributes to economic growth by increasing GDP and offering numerous job opportunities. Additionally, it plays a crucial role in extracting vital resources needed for various industries and technological advancements.

The cons of mining include the severe environmental degradation it causes, such as soil contamination, water pollution, and deforestation, negatively affecting natural habitats. Furthermore, it exposes nearby communities to health hazards due to toxic chemical exposure and contributes to social issues like displacement.

Mining drives economic growth, creating jobs and generating government revenue.
Technological advancements in mining enhance safety and efficiency.
Environmental and social challenges include land degradation and displacement of communities.
Sustainable practices and collaboration are vital for mitigating mining’s negative impacts.

Pros of Mining	Cons of Mining
Economic Growth	Land Pollution
Job Opportunities	Use of Harmful Chemicals
Extraction of Essential Resources	Contamination of Natural Environment
Energy Provision	Destruction of Ecosystems
Above-Average Salary	Chemical Poisoning of Nearby Populations
Prestigious Work Environment	Erosion
Access to Adequate Facilities	Habitat Loss
Promising Career Growth	Clogging up Rivers
Technological Innovation	Acid Drainage
Global Supply Chain Contribution	Methane Gas Emissions

Table of Contents

Pros of Mining

Economic Growth: Mining significantly contributes to a country’s GDP and overall economic development. It attracts investments and can turn undeveloped areas into thriving communities. For example, regions rich in minerals often experience a boom in economic activities, leading to improved infrastructure and living standards.
Job Opportunities: The mining sector is a major employer, creating numerous direct and indirect jobs. It not only provides employment for local populations but also offers opportunities for specialized professionals. This sector’s demand for a diverse workforce helps reduce unemployment rates in mining regions.
Extraction of Essential Resources: Mining is crucial for extracting resources necessary for modern life, including metals for technology, coal for energy, and minerals for manufacturing. Without mining, industries such as electronics, energy, and construction would face resource shortages, affecting their productivity and innovation.
Energy Provision: Mining activities are vital for energy production, particularly through the extraction of coal and uranium. These resources are essential for generating electricity in many parts of the world, ensuring that both industries and households have the energy they need to function.
Above-Average Salary: Careers in mining are often associated with above-average salaries, reflecting the skill level required and the challenging conditions faced by workers. This can significantly improve the quality of life for employees and their families, offering financial security and benefits.
Prestigious Work Environment: The mining industry is known for its prestigious work environments, with state-of-the-art technology and significant investment in safety and operational efficiency. Employees are often provided with high-quality facilities and opportunities to work on groundbreaking projects.
Access to Adequate Facilities: Mining companies frequently invest in local infrastructure, providing communities with access to better roads, schools, and healthcare facilities. This not only benefits the employees but also improves the standard of living for the surrounding communities.
Promising Career Growth: The mining sector offers substantial opportunities for career advancement. Employees can gain experience in a variety of roles, participate in training programs, and move up the career ladder, contributing to their professional development and job satisfaction.
Technological Innovation: The mining industry is at the forefront of technological innovation, developing new methods for resource extraction and processing that are more efficient and environmentally friendly. This drives progress not only in mining but also in related fields like engineering and environmental science.
Global Supply Chain Contribution: Mining plays a crucial role in the global supply chain, providing raw materials needed for manufacturing and construction worldwide. This interconnectivity supports global trade and ensures that countries have access to essential resources for development.

Cons of Mining

Land Pollution: Mining operations can lead to significant land pollution, with vast areas stripped of vegetation and topsoil. This not only alters the landscape but also disrupts local ecosystems, leading to long-term environmental degradation.
Use of Harmful Chemicals: The mining process often involves the use of toxic chemicals, such as cyanide and mercury, for ore processing. These chemicals can contaminate soil and water bodies, posing serious health risks to wildlife and human populations nearby.
Contamination of Natural Environment: Mining can contaminate the natural environment, affecting air and water quality. Dust, heavy metals, and other pollutants released during mining operations can have detrimental effects on environmental health and biodiversity.
Destruction of Ecosystems: The extraction of resources can destroy ecosystems, leading to loss of biodiversity. Habitats for numerous plant and animal species are often irreversibly damaged, affecting ecological balance and the services these ecosystems provide.
Chemical Poisoning of Nearby Populations: Communities living near mining sites are at risk of chemical poisoning due to exposure to toxic substances. This can lead to health problems such as respiratory issues, waterborne diseases, and other serious conditions.
Erosion: Mining activities can exacerbate soil erosion, removing protective layers of soil and leading to sedimentation in rivers and streams. This not only affects land fertility but also water quality, impacting agriculture and water resources.
Habitat Loss: The displacement of soil and vegetation for mining operations results in significant habitat loss. This displacement can lead to the endangerment of species reliant on these habitats, disrupting local wildlife populations.
Clogging up Rivers: Sediment and debris from mining sites can clog up rivers, affecting water flow and aquatic life. This can lead to flooding, changes in river courses, and degradation of water habitats, impacting both human and ecological communities.
Acid Drainage: Mining can cause acid mine drainage, where sulfide minerals exposed to air and water create acidic conditions that leach into surrounding environments. This phenomenon can devastate aquatic ecosystems and render water sources unfit for consumption.
Methane Gas Emissions: Certain types of mining, particularly coal mining, release methane, a potent greenhouse gas. This contributes to climate change, exacerbating global warming and environmental instability, with far-reaching impacts on weather patterns and global ecosystems.

Economic Growth and Mining

Mining plays a pivotal role in bolstering economic growth, significantly enhancing GDP, creating job opportunities, and fostering infrastructure development. By extracting valuable minerals and resources, the mining industry becomes a cornerstone for economic stability and advancement. This sector not only generates substantial government revenue through taxes and royalties but also supports a wide array of public services and projects. These financial contributions are indispensable for the maintenance and expansion of critical infrastructure, healthcare, and education services.

Investments funneled into mining regions often lead to a remarkable improvement in infrastructure. Roads, bridges, and ports are developed or upgraded, facilitating not just the mining operations but also creating a ripple effect of economic development in surrounding areas. This improved infrastructure attracts further investments, creating a cycle of growth and prosperity.

However, the economic boon provided by mining comes with its challenges. The industry’s heavy reliance on global commodity prices means that fluctuations can have a significant impact on the economies of mining-dependent regions. Moreover, the closure of mines necessitates substantial investment in environmental remediation, posing challenges to the long-term economic sustainability of these areas. Despite these challenges, the mining sector remains a critical driver of economic growth and development.

Technological Advancement Contributions

In the realm of the mining industry, technological advancements have significantly revolutionized both operational efficiency and safety standards. The introduction of increased automation within mining operations has notably reduced the reliance on manual labor. This shift not only enhances efficiency but also lowers the probability of human error, leading to safer and more productive mining environments.

Innovation in mining technology has been pivotal in bolstering safety measures. Modern equipment and sophisticated software now allow for the precise extraction of minerals, thereby minimizing waste and optimizing the use of natural resources. This precision ensures that mining operations are not only more effective but also more environmentally considerate by reducing the ecological footprint of extraction processes.

Furthermore, the integration of digital tools and data analytics into mining operations has transformed production processes, enabling better decision-making and optimizing outcomes. The implementation of remote monitoring and control systems has been a game-changer, increasing productivity by allowing for real-time oversight of mining activities. These advancements underscore the critical role of technology in advancing the mining industry, setting new benchmarks for operational efficiency, safety, and environmental stewardship.

Employment Opportunities in Mining

The mining industry plays a pivotal role in job creation, particularly in areas struggling with high unemployment rates. It not only offers stable and well-compensated employment but also opens avenues for skill development and career advancement.

These factors collectively contribute to the economic upliftment of individuals and communities, highlighting the significant impact of mining on employment opportunities.

Job Creation Impact

Generating significant employment opportunities, the mining sector employs millions worldwide, spanning a range of professions from geologists and engineers to technicians and support staff. This industry not only offers a variety of job roles but also provides competitive salaries and benefits, making it an attractive option for a wide demographic.

Particularly in rural and remote areas, mining projects become a cornerstone for economic stability, offering employment that might otherwise be scarce. The continuous growth in demand for skilled workers within the industry ensures long-term career prospects, underscoring the significant role mining plays in job creation.

This impact extends beyond immediate employment, contributing to broader economic development and stability in regions where mining operations are established.

Skill Development Paths

Building on the foundation of job creation, mining also fosters extensive skill development paths that cater to a wide array of professional interests and expertise areas. The sector offers diverse opportunities in geology, engineering, safety management, and environmental compliance. Workers gain hands-on experience operating heavy machinery, conducting mineral exploration, and implementing safety protocols.

Training programs enhance skills in drilling, ore processing, and mine planning, offering specialization in mineral extraction, mine rehabilitation, and sustainable resource management. Moreover, mining careers encourage professional growth through certifications, on-the-job training, and exposure to innovative technologies. This holistic approach to skill development not only enriches employees’ careers but also propels the mining industry forward by cultivating a highly skilled and adaptable workforce.

Environmental Impact Concerns

The environmental implications of mining activities present significant challenges, notably habitat destruction and increased pollution and emissions. These activities not only disrupt ecosystems but also contribute substantially to climate change through the release of greenhouse gases.

Addressing these concerns is crucial for mitigating long-term environmental damage and ensuring sustainable mining practices.

Habitat Destruction Risks

Amidst the numerous environmental challenges posed by mining, habitat destruction stands out as a particularly severe issue, with activities such as vegetation removal and ecosystem disruption leading to significant ecological consequences.

Mining operations often necessitate deforestation, which directly impacts wildlife habitats and overall biodiversity. The displacement of various species due to habitat destruction can result in notable imbalances within ecosystems, further exacerbating environmental stresses.

Additionally, soil erosion and land degradation are direct outcomes of the extensive land alterations caused by mining. These effects not only diminish the immediate area’s ecological integrity but also have long-lasting negative impacts on the environment and wildlife, challenging the sustainability of local and global ecosystems alike.

Pollution and Emissions Increase

Mining operations significantly contribute to environmental pollution, releasing hazardous substances that degrade ecosystems and pose health risks to human and aquatic life. The extraction processes introduce toxic chemicals and heavy metals into water sources, severely endangering aquatic species and disrupting the balance of aquatic ecosystems.

Furthermore, the emissions from mining machinery and processing plants exacerbate air quality issues, contributing to respiratory problems in nearby populations and further degrading the environment. The associated deforestation and soil erosion not only diminish biodiversity by destroying habitats but also undermine land stability and agricultural productivity, leading to broader ecological consequences.

Additionally, the contamination of soil and groundwater with mining by-products poses severe health risks to communities living in proximity to mining sites, marking a dire aspect of its environmental footprint.

Social and Community Challenges

Numerous communities face significant challenges due to mining activities, including displacement and disruptions to their traditional ways of life. These social challenges often manifest in the form of conflicts over land rights and ownership of resources, leading to heightened social tensions in mining areas. As lands are appropriated for mining, indigenous populations and local communities may find themselves forcibly removed from their ancestral territories, thus losing access to their cultural and livelihood bases.

The redistribution of wealth generated from mining activities rarely benefits the local populations, exacerbating existing social inequalities. This uneven distribution can create a stark divide within communities, where a small segment may reap significant financial benefits, while the majority faces economic and social disenfranchisement. Consequently, this disparity often fuels protests and social unrest, as affected communities voice their opposition to the mining operations that threaten their way of life.

Addressing these social and community challenges requires a holistic approach that involves engaging with local populations, respecting land rights, and ensuring that the benefits of mining are equitably shared. Without such considerations, mining activities will continue to pose significant threats to the social fabric of affected communities.

Health and Safety Risks

In addition to the social and community challenges previously discussed, the mining industry also grapples with significant health and safety risks to its workforce. These challenges necessitate a comprehensive approach to ensure the well-being of miners, who are the backbone of this critical industry.

Miners are constantly exposed to a myriad of hazards that can have severe implications for their health and safety. Among these, three primary risks stand out:

Respiratory Problems : Miners are at a heightened risk of developing respiratory issues due to the inhalation of dust and other particulate matter prevalent in mining environments. This necessitates the use of specialized protective gear to mitigate the risk of lung diseases, including chronic conditions such as silicosis.
Cave-ins and Tunnels’ Instability : The structural instability of mining tunnels poses a significant risk of cave-ins, threatening the lives of miners. Ensuring the integrity of these structures is paramount for the safety of the workforce.
Physical Injuries : The physical nature of mining work, combined with the use of heavy machinery, increases the likelihood of injuries. Safety protocols and protective clothing are essential to prevent accidents and safeguard miners against potential harm.

Addressing these health and safety risks requires ongoing vigilance, adherence to strict safety standards, and the provision of appropriate safety equipment to protect miners from the inherent dangers of their profession.

Sustainability and Future Prospects

As the industry evolves, sustainable mining practices and future prospects are increasingly becoming focal points for stakeholders, highlighting the emphasis on minimizing environmental impact while ensuring economic viability. Sustainable mining practices are centered on reducing environmental degradation and fostering responsible stewardship of natural resources. These practices are not just about compliance with environmental regulations but also about integrating sustainability into the core business strategies of mining companies.

Looking forward, the sector is poised for transformation through technological innovations that promise more efficient extraction methods and the integration of renewable energy sources. These advancements are key to reducing the mining industry’s carbon footprint, lowering water consumption, and minimizing land disturbance. Furthermore, sustainability initiatives are focusing on decreasing carbon emissions, which is critical for combating climate change and aligning with global sustainability goals.

The path to a sustainable future in mining necessitates a collaborative approach among all stakeholders, including mining companies, governments, and local communities. This collaboration is vital for developing and implementing strategies that balance economic growth with environmental stewardship. The adoption of green technologies and renewable energy sources stands out as a significant opportunity to enhance the sustainability of mining operations, signaling a positive trajectory towards a more sustainable and responsible mining industry.

In conclusion, mining plays a critical role in economic development, technological progress, and job creation, yet it poses significant environmental, social, and health challenges. Achieving a balance between the benefits and drawbacks of mining requires rigorous regulatory frameworks, technological innovations for reducing environmental impact, and enhanced safety measures for workers.

Sustainable mining practices are essential for ensuring the long-term viability of this sector, benefiting not only the economy but also the communities and ecosystems it interacts with.

Pros and Cons of Open Pit Mining
Pros and Cons of Surface Mining
Pros and Cons of Phosphate Mining

Educational Wave Team

Mining and Its Impact on the Environment Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Effects of mining on the environment, copper mining, reference list.

Mining is an economic activity capable of supporting the developmental goals of countries and societies. It also ensures that different metals, petroleum, and coal are available to different consumers or companies. Unfortunately, this practice entails excavation or substantial interference of the natural environment. The negative impacts of mining can be recorded at the global, regional, and local levels. A proper understanding of such implications can make it possible for policymakers and corporations to implement appropriate measures. The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss the effects of mining on the environment.

Ways Mining Impact on the Environment

Miners use different methods to extract various compounds depending on where they are found. The first common procedure is open cast, whereby people scrap away rocks and other materials on the earth’s surface to expose the targeted products. The second method is underground mining, and it allows workers to get deeper materials and deposits. Both procedures are subdivided further depending on the nature of the targeted minerals and the available resources (Minerals Council of Australia 2019). Despite their striking differences in procedures, the common denominator is that they both tend to have negative impacts on the natural environment.

Firstly, surface mining usually requires that machines and individuals clear forests and vegetation cover. This means that the integrity of the natural land will be obliterated within a short period. Permanent scars will always be left due to this kind of mining. Secondly, the affected land will be exposed to the problem of soil erosion because the topmost soil is loosened. This problem results in flooding, contamination of the following water in rivers, and sedimentation of dams. Thirdly, any form of mining is capable of causing both noise and air pollution (Minerals Council of Australia 2019). The use of heavy machines and blasts explains why this is the case.

Fourthly, other forms of mining result in increased volumes of rocks and soil that are brought to the earth’s surface. Some of them tend to be toxic and capable of polluting water and air. Fifthly, underground mines tend to result in subsidence after collapsing. This means that forests and other materials covering the earth’s surface will be affected. Sixthly, different firms of mining are known to reduce the natural water table. For example, around 500,000,000 cubic meters of water tend to be pumped out of underground mines in Germany annually (Mensah et al., 2015). This is also the same case in other countries across the globe. Seventhly, different mining activities have been observed to produce dangerous greenhouse gases that continue to trigger new problems, including climate change and global warming.

Remediating Mine Sites

The problem of mining by the fact that many people or companies will tend to abandon their sites after the existing minerals are depleted. This malpractice is usually common since it is costly to clean up such areas and minimize their negative impacts on the natural environment. The first strategy for remediating mine sites is that of reclamation. This method entails the removal of both environmental and physical hazards in the region (Motoori, McLellan & Tezuka 2018). This will then be followed by planting diverse plant species. The second approach is the installation of soil cover. When pursuing this method, participants and companies should mimic the original natural setting and consider the drainage patterns. They can also consider the possible or expected land reuse choices.

The third remediation strategy for mine sites entails the use of treatment systems. This method is essential when the identified area is contaminated with metals and acidic materials that pose significant health risks to human beings and aquatic life (Mensah et al., 2015). Those involved can consider the need to construct dams and contain such water. Finally, mining companies can implement powerful cleanup processes and reuse or restore the affected sites. The ultimate objective is to ensure that every ugly site is improved and designed in such a way that it reduces its potential implications on the natural environment. From this analysis, it is evident that the nature of the mining method, the topography of the site, and the anticipated future uses of the region can inform the most appropriate remediation approach. Additionally, the selected method should address the negative impacts on the environment and promote sustainability.

Lessening Impact

Mining is a common practice that continues to meet the demands of the current global economy. With its negative implications, companies and other key stakeholders can identify various initiatives that will minimize every anticipated negative impact. Motoori, McLellan, and Tezuka (2018) encourage mining corporations to diversify their models and consider the importance of recycling existing materials or metals. This approach is sustainable and capable of reducing the dangers of mining. Governments can also formulate and implement powerful policies that compel different companies to engage in desirable practices, minimize pollution, and reduce noise pollution. Such guidelines will make sure that every company remains responsible for remediating their sites. Mensah et al. 2015) also support the introduction of laws that compel organizations to conduct environmental impact assessment analyses before starting their activities. This model will encourage them to identify regions or sites that will have minimal effects on the surrounding population or aquatic life. The concept of green mining has emerged as a powerful technology that is capable of lessening the negative implications of mining. This means that all activities will be sustainable and eventually meet the diverse needs of all stakeholders, including community members. Finally, new laws are essential to compelling companies to shut down and reclaim sites that are no longer in use.

Extraction from the Ore Body

Copper mining is a complex process since it is found in more stable forms, such as oxide and sulfide ores. These elements are obtained after the overburden has been removed. Corporations complete a 3-step process or procedure before obtaining pure copper. This is usually called ore concentration, and it follows these stages: froth flotation, roasting, and leaching (Sikamo, Mwanza & Mweemba 201). During froth flotation, sulfide ores are crushed to form small particles and then mixed with large quantities of water. Ionic collectors are introduced to ensure that CuS becomes hydrophobic in nature. The introduction of frothing agent results in the agitation and aeration of the slurry (Sikamo, Mwanza & Mweemba 2016). This means that the ore containing copper will float to the surface. All tailings will sink to the bottom of the solution. The refined material can then be skimmed and removed.

The next stage is that of roasting, whereby the collected copper is baked. The purpose of this activity is to minimize the quantities of sulfur. Such a procedure results in sulfur dioxide, As, and Sb (Yaras & Arslanoglu 2017). This leaves a fine mixture of copper and other impurities. The next phase of the ore concentration method is that of leaching. Different Compounds are used to solubilize the compound, such as H2SO4 and HCI. The leachate will then be deposited at the bottom and purified.

Smelting is the second stage that experts use to remove copper from its original ore. This approach produces iron and copper sulfides. Exothermic processes are completed to remove SiO2 and FeSiO3 slag (Yaras & Arslanoglu 2017). According to this equation, oxygen is introduced to produce pure copper and sulfur dioxide:

CuO + CuS = Cu(s) + SO2

The final phase is called refinement. The collected Cu is used as anodes and cathodes, whereby they are immersed in H2SO4 and CuSO4. During this process, copper will be deposited on the cathode while the anode will dissolve in the compound. All impurities will settle at the bottom (Sikamo, Mwanza & Mweemba 2016). From this analysis, it is notable that a simple process is considered to collect pure copper from its ore body.

How Copper Mining Impacts the Environment

Copper mining is a complex procedure that requires the completion of several steps if a pure metallic compound is to be obtained. This means that it is capable of presenting complicated impacts on the natural environment. Copper mining can take different forms depending on the location of the identified ores and the policies put in place in the selected country (Yaras & Arslanoglu 2017). Nonetheless, the entire process will have detrimental effects on the surrounding environment. Due to the intensity of operations and involvement of heavy machinery, this process results in land degradation. The affected regions will have huge mine sites that disorient the original integrity of the environment.

Since copper is one of the most valuable metals in the world today due to its key uses, many companies continue to mine it in different countries. This practice has triggered the predicament of deforestation (Sikamo, Mwanza & Mweemba 2016). Additionally, rainwater collects in abandoned mine sites or existing ones, thereby leaking into nearby rivers, boreholes, or aquifers. This means that more people are at risk of being poisoned by this compound.

Air pollution is another common problem that individuals living near copper mines report frequently. This challenge is attributable to the use of heavy blasting materials and machinery. The dust usually contains hazardous chemicals that have negative health impacts on communities and animals. Some of the common ailments observed in most of the affected regions include asthma, silicosis, and tuberculosis (Mensah et al., 2015). This challenge arises from the toxic nature of high levels of copper. These problems explain why companies and stakeholders in the mining industry should implement superior appropriate measures and strategies to overcome them. Such a practice will ensure that they meet the needs of the affected individuals and make it easier for them to pursue their aims.

Copper processing can have significant negative implications on the integrity of the environment. For instance, the procedure is capable of producing tailings and overburden that have the potential to contaminate different surroundings. According to Mensah et al. (2015), some residual copper is left in the environment since around 85 percent of the compound is obtained through the refining process. This means that it will pose health problems to people and aquatic life. Other metals are present in the produced tailings, such as iron and molybdenum. During the separation process, hazardous chemicals and gases will be released, such as sulfur dioxide. This is a hazardous compound that is capable of resulting in acidic rain, thereby increasing the chances of environmental degradation.

There are several examples that explain why copper is capable of causing negative impacts on the natural environment. For example, Queenstown in Tasmania has been recording large volumes of acidic rain (Mensah et al., 2015). This is also the same case for El Teniente Mine in Chile. Recycling and reusing copper can be an evidence-based approach for minimizing these consequences and maintaining the integrity of the environment.

Farmlands that are polluted with this metal compound will have far-reaching impacts on both animals and human beings. This is the case since the absorption of copper in the body can have detrimental health outcomes. This form of poisoning can disorient the normal functions of body organs and put the individual at risk of various conditions. People living in areas that are known to produce copper continue to face these negative impacts (Yaras & Arslanoglu 2017). Such challenges explain why a superior model is needed to overcome this problem and ensure that more people lead high-quality lives and eventually achieve their potential.

The above discussion has identified mining as a major economic activity that supports the performance and integrity of many factories, countries, and companies. However, this practice continues to affect the natural environment and making it incapable of supporting future populations. Mining activities result in deforestation, land obliteration, air pollution, acidic rain, and health hazards. The separation of copper from its parent ore is a procedure that has been observed to result in numerous negative impacts on the environment and human beings. These insights should, therefore, become powerful ideas for encouraging governments and policymakers to implement superior guidelines that will ensure that miners minimize these negativities by remediating sites.

Mensah, AK, Mahiri, IO, Owusu, O, Mireku, OD, Wireko, I & Kissi, EA 2015, ‘Environmental impacts of mining: a study of mining communities in Ghana’, Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 81-94.

Minerals Council of Australia 2019, Australian minerals , Web.

Motoori, R, McLellan, BC & Tezuka, T 2018, ‘Environmental implications of resource security strategies for critical minerals: a case study of copper in Japan’, Minerals, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 558-586.

Sikamo, J, Mwanza, A & Mweemba, C 2016, ‘Copper mining in Zambia – history and future’, The Journal of the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, vol. 116, no. 1, pp. 491-496.

Yaras, A & Arslanoglu, H 2017, ‘Leaching behaviour of low-grade copper ore in the presence of organic acid’, Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 319-327.

The UAE’s Sustainable Energy Projects
Science, Technology, and the Environment
Fortescue Metals Group (FMG) and the Yindjibarndi Aboriginal Land
The Ballpoint Pen: Materials, Process and Issues
Hydrated Copper (II) Sulphate Experiment
Wind Power in West Texas and Its Effects
National Park Utah: Situation at Arches
Project Oxygen: Making Management Matter
The Ongoing Problem of Lead in Drinking Water in Newark, New Jersey
Marine Degradation and Solutions in the Pacific Region
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, July 9). Mining and Its Impact on the Environment. https://ivypanda.com/essays/mining-and-its-impact-on-the-environment/

"Mining and Its Impact on the Environment." IvyPanda , 9 July 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/mining-and-its-impact-on-the-environment/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Mining and Its Impact on the Environment'. 9 July.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Mining and Its Impact on the Environment." July 9, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/mining-and-its-impact-on-the-environment/.

1. IvyPanda . "Mining and Its Impact on the Environment." July 9, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/mining-and-its-impact-on-the-environment/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Mining and Its Impact on the Environment." July 9, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/mining-and-its-impact-on-the-environment/.

A favor o en Contra
Industry and Business
Examining the Pros and Cons of Mining: The Environmental and Economic Implications

examining the pros and cons of mining the environmental and economic implications

Mining is an industry that has been essential to human civilization for centuries, providing materials for construction, energy production, and manufacturing. However, the environmental and economic impact of mining has become a topic of increasing concern in recent years. This article will examine the pros and cons of mining , taking into account the potential benefits and drawbacks for both the environment and the economy.

In this article, we will explore the various environmental consequences of mining, such as deforestation , habitat destruction , and water pollution . We will also discuss the economic benefits of mining, including job creation , revenue generation , and resource extraction . Additionally, we will delve into the potential solutions and strategies that can be implemented to minimize the negative impacts of mining and promote sustainable practices. By analyzing the complex relationship between mining, the environment, and the economy, we aim to shed light on the challenges and opportunities associated with this industry.

Pros and Cons of Mining: A Comprehensive Analysis

Environmental implications of mining: benefits and drawbacks, economic impact of mining: examining the pros and cons, balancing environmental and economic factors in mining: exploring the trade-offs, frequently asked questions, the positive impacts of mining.

Mining plays a crucial role in driving economic growth and development in many regions around the world. Here are some key arguments in favor of mining:

Job Creation: The mining industry provides employment opportunities for thousands of people, both directly and indirectly. From miners to engineers, geologists to truck drivers, mining operations require a diverse range of skills, contributing to job growth and economic stability.
Economic Growth: Mining has the potential to stimulate economic growth by attracting investments, generating revenue through taxes and royalties, and promoting local businesses. In many resource-rich countries, mining is a significant contributor to GDP and export earnings.
Infrastructure Development: Mining projects often require the construction of infrastructure such as roads, railways, and ports. These infrastructure developments not only support mining operations but also improve connectivity and accessibility in remote areas, benefiting local communities.
Technological Advancements: The mining industry drives innovation and technological advancements. From exploring new extraction methods to developing sustainable practices, mining companies invest in research and development to optimize efficiency and minimize environmental impacts.
Resource Availability: Mining provides access to valuable resources such as minerals, metals, and energy sources that are essential for various industries. From copper for electrical wiring to lithium for batteries, mining ensures a steady supply of raw materials for manufacturing and technological advancements.

While there are undeniable benefits associated with mining, it is essential to consider the potential negative impacts as well.

The Negative Impacts of Mining

Mining operations can have adverse effects on the environment, local communities, and public health. Here are some arguments against mining:

Environmental Degradation: Mining activities often result in the destruction of natural habitats, deforestation, and the contamination of air, water, and soil. The extraction and processing of minerals can contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, water pollution, and soil erosion, leading to long-term environmental degradation.
Ecological Disruption: Mining can disrupt ecosystems and biodiversity, particularly in sensitive areas such as forests, wetlands, and marine ecosystems. The loss of habitat and disruption of ecosystems can have severe consequences for wildlife, including endangered species.
Water Scarcity: Mining operations require significant amounts of water for various processes, including extraction, processing, and dust suppression. In regions already facing water scarcity, mining can exacerbate the problem, leading to competition for limited water resources and potential conflicts with local communities.
Social and Cultural Impacts: Mining activities can result in the displacement of communities, loss of traditional livelihoods, and social conflicts. Additionally, mining can disrupt cultural heritage sites and sacred lands, leading to the erosion of cultural identity and social cohesion.
Health Risks: Depending on the mining methods and the substances being extracted, mining can pose health risks for both workers and nearby communities. Exposure to hazardous chemicals and dust can lead to respiratory diseases, skin conditions, and other health issues.

It is crucial to conduct thorough environmental assessments, implement responsible mining practices, and engage in transparent dialogue with local communities to mitigate the negative impacts associated with mining.

Mining plays a crucial role in the global economy, providing essential raw materials for various industries. However, it also has significant environmental implications that need to be carefully considered. Let's examine the benefits and drawbacks of mining from an environmental perspective.

The Benefits of Mining

Mining contributes to economic growth and development by creating job opportunities and generating revenue for governments. It provides essential raw materials for various industries, such as construction, manufacturing, and energy production. Additionally, mining operations often stimulate local economies and infrastructure development in mining communities.

Furthermore, mining can contribute to technological advancements and innovation. The exploration and extraction of minerals require the development of advanced technologies, leading to improvements in mining practices and equipment.

The Drawbacks of Mining

One of the main environmental concerns associated with mining is the destruction of natural habitats and ecosystems. Deforestation, soil erosion, and the loss of biodiversity are common consequences of mining activities. Additionally, the extraction and processing of minerals often result in the release of harmful pollutants and greenhouse gases, contributing to air and water pollution.

Another significant drawback of mining is the depletion of finite resources. Many minerals and metals are non-renewable, meaning that once they are extracted and used, they cannot be replaced. This raises concerns about the long-term sustainability of mining operations and the availability of essential resources for future generations.

Addressing the Environmental Concerns

To mitigate the environmental impacts of mining, various measures can be implemented. These include:

Implementing strict regulations and monitoring systems to minimize pollution and ensure compliance with environmental standards.
Adopting sustainable mining practices , such as reclamation and land rehabilitation, to restore mined areas to their natural state.
Investing in research and development to develop cleaner and more efficient mining technologies.
Encouraging transparency and accountability in the mining industry by promoting responsible mining practices and supporting initiatives such as certification programs.

The Importance of Balance

While the environmental implications of mining are significant, it is essential to strike a balance between the economic benefits and the need for environmental protection. Responsible mining practices, technology advancements, and strict regulations can help minimize the negative impacts and ensure sustainable resource extraction.

By addressing the environmental concerns associated with mining, we can promote a more sustainable and responsible mining industry that meets the needs of the present without compromising the needs of future generations.

When it comes to mining, there are strong arguments both for and against this industry. On one hand, mining provides valuable resources that fuel economic growth and development. On the other hand, mining has significant environmental impacts that cannot be ignored. In this article, we will examine the pros and cons of mining, focusing on the economic implications.

Pros of Mining

Mining plays a crucial role in the economy by providing jobs, stimulating economic growth, and generating revenue for governments. Here are some of the key economic benefits associated with mining:

Job Creation: The mining industry creates employment opportunities, often in regions where alternative job options are limited. This has a positive impact on local economies and reduces unemployment rates.
Economic Growth: Mining activities stimulate economic growth by attracting investment, fostering business development, and boosting the overall productivity of a country.
Export Revenue: Mining contributes to a nation's export earnings by extracting valuable minerals and resources that can be sold internationally. This helps to improve the balance of trade and strengthen the country's economy.
Tax Revenue: Mining operations generate significant tax revenue for governments, which can be used to fund public services, infrastructure projects, and social welfare programs.
Technological Advancements: The mining industry drives technological advancements by investing in research and development. This leads to innovation in areas such as automation, safety measures, and environmental sustainability.

These economic benefits of mining cannot be denied, as they have the potential to improve the standard of living for individuals and contribute to overall economic prosperity.

Cons of Mining

While mining brings economic benefits, it also has negative consequences, particularly for the environment. Here are some of the main environmental concerns associated with mining:

Deforestation and Habitat Destruction: Mining operations often require the clearing of vast areas of forests, leading to the loss of biodiversity and destruction of wildlife habitats.
Water Pollution: Mining activities can contaminate water sources through the release of toxic chemicals, heavy metals, and sedimentation. This poses a threat to aquatic ecosystems and the communities that rely on clean water for their livelihoods.
Air Pollution: Mining operations release pollutants into the air, such as dust, particulate matter, and greenhouse gases. These emissions contribute to air pollution, which can have adverse health effects on both humans and wildlife.
Land Degradation: Open-pit mining and other extraction methods can leave behind large craters and scars on the landscape, making the land unsuitable for agriculture or other productive uses.
Climate Change Impact: The extraction and burning of fossil fuels for mining contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, exacerbating climate change and its associated environmental and social impacts.

These environmental concerns highlight the need for responsible mining practices that minimize the negative impacts on ecosystems and communities.

It is essential to strike a balance between the economic benefits and environmental costs of mining. Governments, companies, and communities must work together to ensure that mining operations are conducted sustainably, with proper regulations and mitigation measures in place.

In conclusion, mining has undeniable economic benefits, including job creation, economic growth, and revenue generation. However, these benefits must be weighed against the environmental impacts, such as deforestation, water and air pollution, and land degradation. By addressing these concerns and implementing sustainable mining practices, we can aim for a future where mining contributes to economic development without compromising the health of our planet.

Mining has long been a controversial industry, with proponents arguing that it provides essential resources for economic development, while opponents highlight its negative environmental impacts. In this article, we will examine the arguments for and against mining, focusing on the environmental and economic implications.

On one hand, supporters of mining argue that it plays a crucial role in economic growth and development. The mining industry contributes significantly to the GDP of many countries, creating jobs and generating revenue. Additionally, mining provides essential raw materials for various industries, such as construction, manufacturing, and energy production.

However, opponents of mining raise concerns about the environmental consequences of extracting finite resources from the earth. Mining activities can lead to deforestation, habitat destruction, soil erosion, and water pollution. These negative impacts can harm ecosystems, biodiversity, and local communities who rely on natural resources for their livelihoods.

Furthermore, mining often requires the use of hazardous chemicals and produces large amounts of waste, including toxic tailings. Improper management of these byproducts can contaminate soil, water sources, and air, posing risks to human health and the environment. The long-term consequences of mining activities can be irreversible and have far-reaching effects.

While the economic benefits of mining are undeniable, it is crucial to consider the long-term sustainability and potential trade-offs. Balancing environmental protection and economic development is a key challenge for policymakers and stakeholders involved in the mining industry.

One approach to address these concerns is the implementation of responsible mining practices. This includes minimizing environmental impacts through the use of advanced technologies, adopting sustainable mining techniques, and ensuring proper waste management. Additionally, strict regulations and monitoring can help mitigate the negative effects of mining on the environment.

Another argument in favor of mining is the potential for technological advancements and innovation. As demand for resources increases, mining companies are driven to find more efficient and environmentally friendly methods of extraction. This can lead to the development of cleaner technologies, such as renewable energy sources and improved recycling processes.

However, it is important to acknowledge that technological solutions alone may not be sufficient to address the environmental challenges posed by mining. A comprehensive approach that combines responsible mining practices, stringent regulations, and public participation is necessary to achieve sustainable development.

In conclusion, the arguments for and against mining revolve around the balance between economic benefits and environmental impacts. While mining contributes to economic growth and provides essential resources, it also poses significant risks to the environment and human health. By promoting responsible mining practices and implementing stringent regulations, we can strive for a more sustainable and equitable mining industry.

What is mining?

Mining is the process of extracting valuable minerals or other geological materials from the earth through various methods.

What are the environmental implications of mining?

Mining can lead to deforestation, habitat destruction, soil erosion, and pollution of air and water resources.

What are the economic implications of mining?

Mining can contribute to economic growth and employment opportunities, but it can also lead to resource depletion and economic dependence on a single industry.

Are there alternative methods to minimize the environmental impact of mining?

Yes, there are sustainable mining practices such as responsible resource extraction, reclamation of mined areas, and use of renewable energy sources.

Pros and Cons of Facebook: Analyzing the Impact of Social Media

Si leer artículos parecidos a Examining the Pros and Cons of Mining: The Environmental and Economic Implications puedes ver la categoría Industry and Business .

Landing Leeway: How Aircraft Land Favorably or Against the Wind
The Pros and Cons Debate of Social Media: Analyzing the Impact

Exploring the Pros and Cons of Electronic Voting: Benefits and Drawbacks

The Pros and Cons of Robots: Examining the Future of Automation

Regulating Social Media: Balancing Control and Freedom - The Pros and Cons

The Pros and Cons of Cell Phones: A Comprehensive Guide

The Impact of Artificial Intelligence: Harnessing its Power or Controlling its Perils?

Pros and Cons of Technology: Examining the Arguments

Have a question?

How does the environmental impact of mining for clean energy metals compare to mining for coal, oil and gas, mining, whether for fossil fuels or metals used in clean energy technologies, has serious environmental impacts, and it’s hard to make apples-to-apples comparisons—except in terms of their impact on climate change, where clean energy mining is clearly better..

May 8, 2023

Building clean energy technologies, like wind turbines and electric vehicles (EV), is generally more mineral intensive than using fossil fuels. 1 An EV requires six times more minerals than a conventional car (not counting steel and aluminum), 2 while building a wind plant uses nine times more minerals than a gas-fired plant. 3 Certain materials are particularly critical for the clean energy transition. These include lithium used in the batteries that run EVs, rare earth minerals in the magnets that allow wind turbines to make electricity, and copper, which is used for electricity transmission . “The argument could be made that, with the clean energy transition, we’re exchanging a fossil fuel-based energy system with a metals-based energy system,” says Scott Odell, a visiting assistant professor of geography at George Washington University and visiting scientist at the MIT Environmental Solutions Initiative specializing in clean energy and mining. As the clean energy transition moves forward, the demand for these materials will grow. Projections from the International Energy Agency (IEA) suggest that by 2040 the demand for copper could more than double, while the demand for lithium could grow over 40 times—if, that is, the world builds enough clean energy to meet the international climate goals set by the 2015 Paris Agreement . 1 This growing demand will mean more and larger mines, which come with real risks to communities and to biodiversity. 4 So is the direct impact of all this mining for clean energy greater or smaller than the impact of mining for fossil fuels? That answer, unfortunately, isn’t straightforward. Odell explains that making an apples-to-apples comparison is challenging, because methods for extracting and processing oil and coal are different than those for metal mining. Even mining two different metals—or two different deposits of the same metal—can call for different techniques. “I think if someone were to tell you one or the other is better in terms of direct impacts pound for pound, you should ask a lot of questions about how they got to that answer,” says Odell. We shouldn’t discount the amount of resource extraction we already do to power our current, climate-warming energy system. The volume of fossil fuels we mine today dwarfs the amount of clean energy minerals the world will need in the future. In 2021, over 7.5 billion tons of coal were extracted from the ground, 5 while the IEA projects that the total amount of minerals needed for clean energy technology by 2040 will be under 30 million tons. 1 Yet even this becomes complicated when one factors in the percentage of material extracted from a mine that is actually the usable resource we want. For coal, this number can range from less than 40 to as high as 90 percent. 6 In contrast, Odell explains, this number for a copper deposit may be less than one percent, meaning that much more material needs to be extracted and processed for the same volume of output. But there is one area where clean energy definitely wins out: climate-warming carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions . The emissions created by extracting minerals from the ground are tiny compared to those created by burning fossil fuels: a 2020 report from the IEA found that for every gigawatt of a clean energy technology that’s installed, millions of tons of CO 2 emissions can be avoided. 7 Given the urgent threat of climate change, Odell says the clean energy transition is necessary. However, he cautions that we must be aware of the environmental and social impacts of mining for clean energy materials. “What I worry about is, if we don’t solve climate change with an eye towards environmental justice , we could create more social and environmental crises for ourselves down the road. So we have to do it carefully, contemplatively and intelligently.” Odell believes that the way forward for clean energy mining is through three main changes. The first is to reduce consumption so we need fewer materials in the first place, such as by investing in more public transportation and walkable cities , which would reduce the need for mineral-intensive EVs. The second is to advance the circular economy, reusing minerals instead of mining new ones. “There are a lot of metals already in the system and at the end of their lifespan, we send a lot of those to the dump,” he says. Reducing consumption and improving recycling, however, won’t fill all of the demand for clean energy minerals. “We’re still going to need to do some digging,” says Odell. So the third change we need is to raise industry standards and adopt regulations to make sure mining is done in a more environmentally and socially responsible way.

More Resources for Learning

Want to learn more.

Listen to this episode of MIT's "Today I Learned: Climate" podcast on the environmental and social impacts of clean tech.

Keep exploring

Check out these related Explainers, written by scientists and experts from MIT and beyond.

Mining and Metals

Renewable Energy

Energy Storage

Related pieces, can solar panels be recycled, can we do anything useful with excess solar and wind energy, besides store it, can wind turbines be recycled, why are lithium-ion batteries, and not some other kind of battery, used in electric cars and grid-scale energy storage, mit climate news in your inbox.

The Economy
Vantage Points

ENVIRONMENT: THE PROS AND CONS OF MINING

In his third State of the Nation Address (SONA), President Rodrigo R. Duterte reiterated that environmental protection remains the government’s priority. He even warned the mining industry to stop destroying the environment.

“Stop destroying watersheds, the forest and water resources. You can no longer filth our rivers,” Duterte pointed out in his third SONA. “Expect reforms, radical ones. I do not intend to quarrel with anybody but for as long as I have said you will just have to contend with me. I expect you to do your part for national development starting now.”

Why so much ado about mining? Just to give you an idea, an average cellphone contains about 24 milligrams of gold, 250 milligrams of silver, 3,800 milligrams of cobalt, and 9 milligrams of palladium.

That’s just one product that comes from mining or mineral extraction. There are more: computers, television sets, radios, spectacles, cameras, cars, planes and ships. Most of the things you find in your kitchens are included: spoons, forks, plates, cups, knives, kettles, microwave ovens, burners, refrigerators and a lot more.

“If we didn’t have mining, I’d miss all the golden crucifixes and golden domes of churches that we ogle at, and the TV and radio broadcasts and commentaries that can be informative too,” wrote Jose Bayani Baylon in his column in Pahayagang Malaya.

“Mining has been a driver of economic development,” said Manuel V. Pangilinan in a speech delivered during a mining forum held in 2012. “Mining in Australia contributes US$142 billion each year; in Canada, $37.5 billion; in the US, $1.9 trillion, and in Brazil, $24 billion.”

According to Pangilinan, “The challenge is precisely to grow mining so that it creates more value-added for all of us. Only a larger and healthier industry can enable us to achieve forward linkages in downstream processing plants.”

“The Philippines is among the world’s richly endowed countries in terms of mineral resources,” said Dr. Antonio M. Daño in a briefing made in Kidapawan City some years back.

It has been stated that the country’s mineral wealth is estimated to be about $840 billion. “The real question before us today is: Should mining be allowed in the Philippines?” asked Christian Monsod during the “Conference on Mining’s Impact on Philippine Economy and Ecology.”

Mining: Legal Notes and Materials , published by the Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center, Inc. and Kasama sa Kalikasan, defines mining as “the process of extracting minerals from the earth.”

“In Mining Engineering practice, mining is usually taken to mean the extraction of ores, coal or stone from the earth,” the book explains. “Ores are mineral deposits that can be worked at a profit under existing economic conditions. Stone includes industrial (usually non-metallic) minerals such as calcite (limestone), quartz and other similar products.”

Mining can be undertaken from the surface or underground. “In surface mining, the rock-breakage-materials handling cycle is usually done first to remove (or strip) the overburden (expose the ore body), and then actual physical extraction,” the book says.

Surface mining can be done either through mechanical extraction or the use of aqueous methods, which makes use of hydraulic action or solution attack. “The most common methods of surface (mechanical extraction) mining are open-pit, quarrying, open-cast and auger mining,” the book states.

Underground mining, on the other hand, can be undertaken through various methods including room-and-pillar, stoping and caving. “Caving methods are particularly distinct in that ‘caving,’ or the collapse of the ore body or the overlying rock is actually induced and controlled during operations,” the book says.

Wikipedia defines stoping as “the process of extracting the desired ore or other mineral from an underground mine, leaving behind an open space known as a stope.” Stoping is used when the country rock is sufficiently strong not to collapse into the stope, although in most cases artificial support is also provided.

Among the most common mining method practiced in the Philippines is open-pit because of relatively low cost. “Open-pit mining entails the removal of any overburden in order to expose the mineral deposit,” the book says. “This operation is dependent on the type of overburden. In cases where the overburden consists of highly consolidated rock, blasting is used.”

Open-pit mining may cheaper when compared to other methods, but it is not environmentally-sound. “Open-pit mining clears the vegetation covering the deposits, exposing the soil and permanently changing the landscape and land use,” said Dr. Daño, who was then the assistant director of the Ecosystems Research and Development Bureau (ERDB) of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).

In his recent SONA speech, Duterte urged: “Do not destroy the environment or compromise our resources. Repair what you have mismanaged. Try to change management radically because this time, you will have restrictive policies—a prohibition of open-pit mining is one.”

In the Philippines, mining operations are oftentimes located in ancestral land, forest land, agricultural land and even fishing areas. “All areas of the Philippines are technically ‘available’ for mining,” said Dave de Vera, executive director of the Philippines Association for Intercultural Development (PAFID).

Speaking before a group of journalists attending the learning sessions on land use planning some years back, which this author attended, De Vera cited the case of Sibuyan Island, touted to be the Galapagos of Asia and home to Mount Guiting-guiting.

In February 1996, then President Fidel V. Ramos declared Mount Guiting-guiting as a national park. For their part, the indigenous Mangyan Taga-Bukid – the traditional caretakers of the mountain – secured Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title over their territories.

Despite these efforts, some 21 mining companies reportedly applied to mine the area. “The applications cover 42% of the island and overlap with 32% of the management area of the national park,” De Vera deplored.

The Catholic Church, some cause-oriented groups and environmentalists are against mining. All of them have valid reasons. Fr. Emeterio Barcelon, SJ, in his column, wrote a very thought-provoking piece. “A valid objection is that mining operations sometimes leave the local population with little residual benefit after the mining operation,” he wrote.

“This is not true in most cases as, for example, the Baguio mining. If not for the mines, tourism could not have developed Baguio as it is now. But many of the local people are still poor. This not because of mining but because of the sharing system. Why let the mining companies take away all the gravy and leave the community in poverty?”

Primo Morillo of social development network Philippine Miserior Partnership was quoted as saying by the Rappler that whatever benefits mining provides is only temporary. “They say the resources are finite so when they are gone, they will leave. Whatever development will happen is temporary but the effect of mining is permanent.”

Now, let’s talk about mining wastes. According to Dr. Daño, “mining waste materials drains into major water systems causing pollution.” Take the case of the Tapian Open Pit copper mine in central Marinduque.

Raul Alibutud, in an article published by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, reported: “What used to be rich fishing ground is now nearly barren of marine life. Corals and seagrasses, the homes of nesting places of fish, have been choked by sediment. Near the mine’s waste discharge pipes, the once-clear water has become murky and turbid.”

In 2007, the MGB reported there were 24 non-performing mining tenements -abandoned and need immediate rehabilitation. “These areas were left out after several years of mining operations leaving behind toxic waste materials and overburdened areas that are stony, rocky and acidic,” Dr. Daño said. “These areas have open pits and mine tailings.”

Dr. Daño said mining areas are characterized by acidic and saline due to oxidation of pyretic materials. He considered them as “the most difficult site to rehabilitate” because the soil acidity (pH) falls below 4.0.

Generally, mining areas are “untouched for rehabilitation unless bulks of soil are brought back to the site.” In gold mine areas, heavy metals on-site are way above normal levels (i.e. copper, arsenic, chromium, lead, zinc and strontium) carried away by running water to low lying areas.

After mining finishes, the mine area must undergo rehabilitation. Wikipedia cites the following options to be done:

Waste dumps are contoured to flatten them out, to further stabilize them against erosion.
If the ore contains sulfides it is usually covered with a layer of clay to prevent access of rain and oxygen from the air, which can oxidize the sulfides to produce sulfuric acid.
Landfills are covered with topsoil, and vegetation is planted to help consolidate the material.
Dumps are usually fenced off to prevent livestock denuding them of vegetation.
The open pit is then surrounded with a fence, to prevent access, and it generally eventually fills up with groundwater.
Tailings dams are left to evaporate, then covered with waste rock, clay if need be, and soil, which is planted to stabilize it.

For underground mines, rehabilitation is not always a significant problem or cost. This is because of the higher grade of the ore and lower volumes of waste rock and tailings. In some situations, stopes are backfilled with concrete slurry using waste, so that minimal waste is left at surface.

Evidence of the impacts of metal mining and the effectiveness of mining mitigation measures on social–ecological systems in Arctic and boreal regions: a systematic map protocol

Neal R. Haddaway ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3902-2234 1 , 2 ,
Steven J. Cooke 3 ,
Pamela Lesser 4 ,
Biljana Macura 1 ,
Annika E. Nilsson 1 ,
Jessica J. Taylor 3 &
Kaisa Raito 5

Environmental Evidence volume 8 , Article number: 9 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

422k Accesses

50 Citations

54 Altmetric

Metrics details

A Systematic Map to this article was published on 08 September 2022

Mining activities, including prospecting, exploration, construction, operation, maintenance, expansion, abandonment, decommissioning and repurposing of a mine can impact social and environmental systems in a range of positive and negative, and direct and indirect ways. Mining can yield a range of benefits to societies, but it may also cause conflict, not least in relation to above-ground and sub-surface land use. Similarly, mining can alter environments, but remediation and mitigation can restore systems. Boreal and Arctic regions are sensitive to impacts from development, both on social and environmental systems. Native ecosystems and aboriginal human communities are typically affected by multiple stressors, including climate change and pollution, for example.

We will search a suite of bibliographic databases, online search engines and organisational websites for relevant research literature using a tested search strategy. We will also make a call for evidence to stakeholders that have been identified in the wider 3MK project ( https://osf.io/cvh3u/ ). We will screen identified and retrieved articles at two distinct stages (title and abstract, and full text) according to a predetermined set of inclusion criteria, with consistency checks at each level to ensure criteria can be made operational. We will then extract detailed information relating to causal linkages between actions or impacts and measured outcomes, along with descriptive information about the articles and studies and enter data into an interactive systematic map database. We will visualise this database on an Evidence Atlas (an interactive, cartographic map) and identify knowledge gaps and clusters using Heat Maps (cross-tabulations of important variables, such as mineral type and studied impacts). We will identify good research practices that may support researchers in selecting the best study designs where these are clear in the evidence base.

On the impacts of mining

Mining activities, including prospecting, exploration, construction, operation, maintenance, expansion, abandonment, decommissioning and repurposing of a mine can impact social and environmental systems in a range of positive and negative, and direct and indirect ways. Mine exploration, construction, operation, and maintenance may result in land-use change, and may have associated negative impacts on environments, including deforestation, erosion, contamination and alteration of soil profiles, contamination of local streams and wetlands, and an increase in noise level, dust and emissions (e.g. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]). Mine abandonment, decommissioning and repurposing may also result in similar significant environmental impacts, such as soil and water contamination [ 6 , 7 , 8 ]. Beyond the mines themselves, infrastructure built to support mining activities, such as roads, ports, railway tracks, and power lines, can affect migratory routes of animals and increase habitat fragmentation [ 9 , 10 ].

Mining can also have positive and negative impacts on humans and societies. Negative impacts include those on human health (e.g. [ 11 ]) and living standards [ 12 ], for example. Mining is also known to affect traditional practices of Indigenous peoples living in nearby communities [ 13 ], and conflicts in land use are also often present, as are other social impacts including those related to public health and human wellbeing (e.g. [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. In terms of positive impacts, mining is often a source of local employment and may contribute to local and regional economies [ 18 , 19 ]. Remediation of the potential environmental impacts, for example through water treatment and ecological restoration, can have positive net effects on environmental systems [ 20 ]. Mine abandonment, decommissioning and repurposing can also have both positive and negative social impacts. Examples of negative impacts include loss of jobs and local identities [ 21 ], while positive impact can include opportunities for new economic activities [ 22 ], e.g. in the repurposing of mines to become tourist attractions.

Mitigation measures

‘Mitigation measures’ (as described in the impact assessment literature) are implemented to avoid, eliminate, reduce, control or compensate for negative impacts and ameliorate impacted systems [ 23 ]. Such measures must be considered and outlined in environmental and social impact assessments (EIAs and SIAs) that are conducted prior to major activities such as resource extraction [ 24 , 25 ]. Mitigation of negative environmental impacts in one system (e.g. water or soil) can influence other systems such as wellbeing of local communities and biodiversity in a positive or negative manner [ 23 ]. A wide range of technological engineering solutions have been implemented to treat contaminated waters (e.g. constructed wetlands [ 26 ], reactive barriers treating groundwater [ 27 ], conventional wastewater treatment plants). Phytoremediation of contaminated land is also an area of active research [ 28 ].

Mitigation measures designed to alleviate the negative impacts of mining on social and environmental systems may not always be effective, particularly in the long-term and across systems, e.g. a mitigation designed to affect an environmental change may have knock on changes in a social system. Indeed, the measures may have unintentional adverse impacts on environments and societies. To date, little research appears to have been conducted into mitigation measure effectiveness, and we were unable to find any synthesis or overview of the systems-level effectiveness of metal mining mitigation measures.

Mining in the Arctic

Boreal and Arctic regions are sensitive to impacts from mining and mining-related activities [ 29 , 30 ], both on social and environmental systems: these northern latitudes are often considered harsh and thus challenging for human activities and industrial development. However, the Arctic is home to substantial mineral resources [ 31 , 32 ] and has been in focus for mining activities for several 100 years, with a marked increase in the early 20th century and intensifying interest in exploration and exploitation in recent years to meet a growing global demand for metals (Fig. 1 ). Given the region’s geological features and society’s need for metals, resource extraction is likely to dominate discourse on development of northern latitudes in the near future. As of 2015, there were some 373 mineral mines across Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Iceland, The Faroes, Norway (including Svalbard), Sweden, Finland and Russia (see Table 1 ), with the top five minerals being gold, iron, copper, nickel and zinc [ 33 ].

Map of mines in the Arctic region active as of 2011

Many topics relating to mining and its impacts on environmental and social systems are underrepresented in the literature as illustrated by the following example. The Sami people are a group of traditional people inhabiting a region spanning northern Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia. Sami people are affected by a range of external pressures, one of which pertains to resource extraction and land rights, particularly in relation to nomadic reindeer herding. However, there is almost no published research on the topic [ 34 ].

The literature on the environmental and social impacts of mining has grown in recent years, but despite its clear importance, there has been little synthesis of research knowledge pertaining to the social and environmental impacts of metal mining in Arctic and boreal regions. The absence of a consolidated knowledge base on the impacts of mining and the effectiveness of mitigation measures in Arctic and boreal regions is a significant knowledge gap in the face of the continued promotion of extractive industries. There is thus an urgent need for approaches that can transparently and legitimately gather research evidence on the potential environmental and social impacts of mining and the impacts of associated mitigation measures in a rigorous manner.

Stakeholder engagement

This systematic map forms a key task within a broader knowledge synthesis project called 3MK (Mapping the impacts of Mining using Multiple Knowledges, https://osf.io/cvh3u/ ). The stakeholder group for this map includes representatives of organisations affected by the broader 3MK project knowledge mapping project or who have special interests in the project outcome. We define stakeholders here as all individuals or organisations that might be affected by the systematic map work or its findings [ 35 , 36 ], and thus broadly includes researchers and the Working and Advisory Group for this project.

Invitations to be included in this group were based on an initial stakeholder mapping process and soliciting expressions of interest (see Stakeholder Engagement Methodology Document, https://osf.io/cvh3u/ ). This group included government ministries and agencies such as the Ministry of Enterprise and Innovation, the Mineral Inspectorate (Bergstaten) and County Administrative Boards, the mining industries’ branch organisation (Svemin) and individual companies such as LKAB Minerals and Boliden AB, Sami organisations, including the Sami Parliament, related research projects, and representatives of international assessment processes, such as activities within the Arctic Council. Stakeholders were invited to a specific meeting (held at Stockholm Environment Institute in September 2018) to help refine the scope, define the key elements of the review question, finalise a search strategy, and suggest sources of evidence, and also to subsequently provide comments on the structure of the protocol .

Objective of the review

The broader 3MK project aims to develop a multiple evidence base methodology [ 37 ] combining systematic review approaches with documentation of Indigenous and local knowledge and to apply this approach in a study of the impacts of metal mining and impacts of mitigation measures. This systematic map aims to answer the question:

What research evidence exists on the impacts of metal mining and its mitigation measures on social and environmental systems in Arctic and boreal regions?

The review question has the following key elements:

Social, technological (i.e. industrial contexts, heavily altered environments, etc.) and environmental systems in circumpolar Arctic and boreal regions.

Impacts (direct and indirect, positive and negative) associated with metal mining (for gold, iron, copper, nickel, zinc, silver, molybdenum and lead) or its mitigation measures. We focus on these metals as they represent approximately 88% of Arctic and boreal mines (according to relevant country operating mine data from 2015, [ 33 ]), and contains the top 5 minerals extracted in the region (gold, iron, copper, nickel and zinc). Furthermore, these minerals include all metals mined within Sweden, the scope of a related workstream within the broader 3MK project ( https://osf.io/cvh3u/ ).

For quantitative research; the absence of metal mining or metal mining mitigation measures—either prior to an activity or in an independent, controlled location lacking such impacts. Additionally, alternative mining systems is a suitable comparator. For qualitative research; comparators are typically implicit, if present and will thus not be required.

Any and all outcomes observed in social and environmental systems described in the literature will be iteratively identified and catalogued.

Both quantitative and qualitative research will be included.

The review will follow the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence Guidelines and Standards for Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management [ 38 ] and it conforms to ROSES reporting standards [ 39 ] (see Additional file 1 ).

Searching for articles

Bibliographic database searches.

We will search bibliographic databases using a tested search string adapted to each database according to the necessary input syntax of each resource. The Boolean version of the search string that will be used in Web of Science Core Collections can be found in Additional file 2 .

We will search across 17 bibliographic databases as show in Table 2 . Bibliographic database searches will be performed in English only, since these databases catalogue research using English titles and abstracts.

Web-based search engines

Searches for academic (i.e. file-drawer) and organisational grey literature (as defined by [ 40 ]) will be performed in Google Scholar, which has been shown to be effective in retrieving these types of grey literature [ 41 ]. The search strings used to search for literature in Google Scholar are described in detail in Additional file 3 .

Search results will be exported from Google Scholar using Publish or Perish [ 42 ], which allows the first 1000 results to be exported. These records will be added to the bibliographic database search results prior to duplicate removal.

Organisational websites

In order to identify organisational grey literature, we will search for relevant evidence across the suite of organisational websites listed in Table 3 . For each website, we will save the first 100 search results from each search string as PDF/HTML files and screening the results in situ, recording all relevant full texts for inclusion in the systematic map database. The search terms used will be based on the same terms used in the Google Scholar searches described above but will be adapted iteratively for each website depending on the relevance of the results obtained. In addition, we will hand search each website to locate and screen any articles found in publications or bibliography sections of the sites. All search activities will be recorded and described in the systematic map report.

Bibliographic searches

Relevant reviews that are identified during screening will be reserved for assessment of potentially missed records. Once screening is complete (see below), we will screen the reference lists of these reviews and include relevant full texts in the systematic map database. We will also retain these relevant reviews in an additional systematic map database of review articles.

Estimating the comprehensiveness of the search

A set of 41 studies known to be relevant have been provided by the Advisory Team and Working Group (review team); the benchmark list (see Additional file 4 ). During scoping and development of the search string, the bibliographic database search results will be checked to ascertain whether any of these studies were not found. For any cases where articles on the benchmark list are missed by the draft search string, we will examine why these studies may have been missed and adapt the search string accordingly.

Search update

We will perform a search update immediately prior to completion of the systematic map database (i.e. once coding and meta-data is completed). The search strategy for bibliographic databases will be repeated using the same search string, restricting searches to the time period after the original searches were performed. New search results will be processed in the same way as original search results.

Assembling a library of search results

Following searching, we will combine results in a review management platform (e.g. EPPI-Reviewer) and duplicates will be removed using a combination of automated removal and manual screening.

Article screening and study eligibility criteria

Screening process.

We will screen records at three levels: title, abstract and full text. Screening will be performed using a review management platform (e.g. Rayyan, EPPI Reviewer, Colandr).

Consistency checking

A subset of 10% of all titles and abstracts will be screened by two reviewers, with all disagreements discussed in detail. Refinements of the inclusion criteria will be made in liaison with the entire review team where necessary. A kappa test will be performed on the outputs of screening of this subset and where agreement is below k = 0.6, a further 10% of records will be screened and tested. Only when a kappa score of greater than 0.6 is obtained will a single reviewer screen the remaining records. Consistency checking on a subset of 10% will be undertaken at full text screening in a similar manner, followed by discussion of all disagreements. A kappa test will be performed and consistency checking repeated on a second subset of 10% where agreements is below k = 0.6. Consistency checking will be repeated until a score of greater than 0.6 is obtained.

Eligibility criteria

The following inclusion criteria will be used to assess relevance of studies identified through searching. All inclusion criteria will be used at full text screening, but we believe that data type and comparator are unlikely to be useful at title and abstract screening, since this information is often not well-reported in titles or abstracts.

We will include social, technological and environmental systems in Arctic and boreal regions based on political boundaries as follows (this encompasses various definitions of boreal zones, rather than any one specific definition for comprehensiveness and ease of understanding): Canada, USA (Alaska), Greenland, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, Norway (including Svalbard), Sweden, Finland, and Russia.

We will include all impacts (positive, negative, direct and indirect) associated with any aspect of metal mining and its mitigation measures. We will include research pertaining to all stages of mining, from prospecting onwards as follows: prospecting, exploration, construction, operation, maintenance, expansion, abandonment, decommissioning, reopening and repurposing. Eligible mines will include those of gold, iron, copper, nickel, zinc, silver, molybdenum and lead.

For quantitative research; the absence of metal mining or metal mining mitigation measures—either prior to an activity or in an independent, controlled location lacking such impacts. For qualitative research; comparators are typically implicit, if present and will thus not be required.

Any and all outcomes (i.e. measured impacts) observed in social, technological and environmental systems will be included.

We will include both quantitative and qualitative research.

We will include both primary empirical research and secondary research (reviews will be catalogued in a separate database). Modelling studies and commentaries will not be included.

For all articles excluded at title and abstract or full text levels, reasons for exclusion will be provided in the form of one or more a priori exclusion criteria as follows:

Exclude, not Arctic or boreal (population).

Exclude, no primary data (i.e. commentary, modelling article or similar) (study type).

Exclude, no comparator [for quantitative studies only].

Exclude, not mining or mining mitigation measures (intervention/exposure).

Exclude, not relevant metal mining (intervention/exposure) [this category is related to the above intervention/exposure exclusion criteria but will only be selected where all other criteria are met, facilitating expansion of the map in the future].

Exclude, not an existing mine (planned or unrealised mining activity).

Full text retrieval

We will attempt to retrieve full texts of relevant abstracts using Stockholm University and Carleton University library subscriptions. Where full texts cannot be readily retrieved this way (or via associated library inter-loan networks), we will make use of institutional access provided to our Advisory Team members, including: University College London, KTH, University of Lapland, and SLU. Where records still cannot be obtained, requests for articles will be sent to corresponding authors where email addresses are provided and/or requests for full texts will be made through ResearchGate.

Study validity assessment

This systematic map will not involve an assessment of study validity (an optional part of systematic maps), although some extracted meta-data and coding will relate to internal validity.

Demonstrating procedural objectivity

None of the review team has authored or worked on research within this field prior to starting this project, but members of the Advisory Team and project Working Group will be prevented from providing advice or comments relating specifically to research papers to which they may have contributed.

Data coding strategy

We will extract and code a range of variables, outlined in Table 4 . All meta-data and coding will be included in a detailed systematic map database, with each line representing one study-location (i.e. each independent study conducted in each independent location).

Meta-data extraction and coding will be performed by multiple reviewers following consistency checking on an initial coding of subset of between 10 and 15 full texts, discussing all disagreements. The remaining full texts will then be coded. If resources allow we may contact authors by email with requests for missing information.

Study mapping and presentation

We will display the results of the systematic mapping using a ROSES flow diagram [ 44 ]. We will narratively synthesise the relevant evidence base in our systematic map using descriptive plots and tables showing the number of studies identified across the variables described above. For more complex data, we will use heat maps to display the volume of evidence across multiple variables (see “ Knowledge gap and cluster identification strategy ”, below).

We will display the contents of our systematic map database in an Evidence Atlas; an interactive, web-based geographical information system showing all meta-data and coding on a cartographic map.

Knowledge gap and cluster identification strategy

We will use interactive heat maps (pivot charts) to display the volume of evidence across multiple dimensions of meta-data in order to identify knowledge gaps (sub-topics un- or under-represented by evidence) and knowledge clusters (sub-topics with sufficient evidence to allow full synthesis). Examples of meta-data variables that will be used together include (this is an indicative rather than exhaustive list):

Study location (country or broad region) versus outcome.

Study location (country or broad region) versus mine type.

Study location (country or broad region) versus data/study type.

Outcome versus mine type.

Outcome versus data/study type.

Appleton J, Weeks J, Calvez J, Beinhoff C. Impacts of mercury contaminated mining waste on soil quality, crops, bivalves, and fish in the Naboc River area, Mindanao, Philippines. Sci Total Environ. 2006;354:198–211.

Article CAS Google Scholar

Dudka S, Adriano DC. Environmental impacts of metal ore mining and processing: a review. J Environ Qual. 1997;26:590–602.

Sonter LJ, Moran CJ, Barrett DJ, Soares-Filho BS. Processes of land use change in mining regions. J Clean Prod. 2014;84:494–501.

Article Google Scholar

Swenson JJ, Carter CE, Domec J-C, Delgado CI. Gold mining in the Peruvian Amazon: global prices, deforestation, and mercury imports. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e18875.

Warhate S, Yenkie M, Chaudhari M, Pokale W. Impacts of mining activities on water and soil. J Environ Sci Eng. 2006;48:81–90.

CAS Google Scholar

Mchaina D. Environmental planning considerations for the decommissioning, closure and reclamation of a mine site. Int J Surf Min Reclam Environ. 2001;15:163–76.

Navarro M, Pérez-Sirvent C, Martínez-Sánchez M, Vidal J, Tovar P, Bech J. Abandoned mine sites as a source of contamination by heavy metals: a case study in a semi-arid zone. J Geochem Explor. 2008;96:183–93.

Veiga MM, Hinton JJ. Abandoned artisanal gold mines in the Brazilian Amazon: a legacy of mercury pollution. In: Natural resources forum. Wiley Online Library. 2002. p. 15–26.

Anttonen M, Kumpula J, Colpaert A. Range selection by semi-domesticated reindeer ( Rangifer tarandus tarandus ) in relation to infrastructure and human activity in the boreal forest environment, northern Finland. Arctic. 2011:1–14.

Johnson CJ, Boyce MS, Case RL, Cluff HD, Gau RJ, Gunn A, Mulders R. Cumulative effects of human developments on arctic wildlife. Wildl Monogr. 2005;160:1–36.

Stephens C, Ahern M. Worker and community health impacts related to mining internationally: a rapid review of the literature. 2001.

Loayza N, Rigolini J. The local impact of mining on poverty and inequality: evidence from the commodity boom in Peru. World Dev. 2016;84:219–34.

Gibson G, Klinck J. Canada’s resilient north: the impact of mining on aboriginal communities. Pimatisiwin. 2005;3:116–39.

Google Scholar

Hilson G. An overview of land use conflicts in mining communities. Land Use Policy. 2002;19:65–73.

Hossain D, Gorman D, Chapelle B, Mann W, Saal R, Penton G. Impact of the mining industry on the mental health of landholders and rural communities in southwest Queensland. Aust Psychiatry. 2013;21:32–7.

Nakazawa K, Nagafuchi O, Kawakami T, Inoue T, Yokota K, Serikawa Y, Cyio B, Elvince R. Human health risk assessment of mercury vapor around artisanal small-scale gold mining area, Palu city, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2016;124:155–62.

Zhang X, Yang L, Li Y, Li H, Wang W, Ye B. Impacts of lead/zinc mining and smelting on the environment and human health in China. Environ Monit Assess. 2012;184:2261–73.

Fleming DA, Measham TG. Local job multipliers of mining. Resour Policy. 2014;41:9–15.

Knobblock EA, Pettersson Ö. Restructuring and risk-reduction in mining: employment implications for northern Sweden. Fenn Int J Geogr. 2010;188:61–75.

Jain R, Cui Z, Domen J. Environmental impacts of mining. In: Jain R, Cui Z, Domen J, editors. Environmental impact of mining and mineral processing: management, monitoring, and auditing strategies. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2016. p. 53–157.

Chapter Google Scholar

Keeling A, Sandlos J. Ghost towns and zombie mines: the historical dimensions of mine abandonment, reclamation, and redevelopment in the Canadian North. In: Bocking S, Martin B, editors. Ice Blink: Navigating Northern Environmental History; 2011. p. 377–420.

Mitchell CJ, O’Neill K. The Sherriff Creek Wildlife Sanctuary: further evidence of mine-site repurposing and economic transition in northern Ontario. Extr Ind Soc. 2017;4:24–35.

Jain R, Cui Z, Domen J. Environmental impact of mining and mineral processing: management, monitoring, and auditing strategies. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2016.

The Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG) of the Arctic Council. Circumpolar Information Guide on Mining for Indigenous Peoples and Northern Communities. 2011.

Worldwide Environmental Law Alliance. Guidebook for evaluating mining project EIAs. Eugene: Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide; 2010.

Gandy CJ, Davis JE, Orme PHA, Potter HAB, Jarvis AP. Metal removal mechanisms in a short hydraulic residence time subsurface flow compost wetland for mine drainage treatment. Ecol Eng. 2016;97:179–85.

Obiri-Nyarko F, Grajales-Mesa SJ, Malina G. An overview of permeable reactive barriers for in situ sustainable groundwater remediation. Chemosphere. 2014;111:243–59.

Mahar A, Wang P, Ali A, Awasthi MK, Lahori AH, Wang Q, Li RH, Zhang ZQ. Challenges and opportunities in the phytoremediation of heavy metals contaminated soils: a review. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2016;126:111–21.

Bennett JR, Shaw JD, Terauds A, Smol JP, Aerts R, Bergstrom DM, Blais JM, Cheung WW, Chown SL, Lea M-A. Polar lessons learned: long-term management based on shared threats in Arctic and Antarctic environments. Front Ecol Environ. 2015;13:316–24.

Larsen JA. The boreal ecosystem. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2013.

Buixadé Farré A, Stephenson SR, Chen L, Czub M, Dai Y, Demchev D, Efimov Y, Graczyk P, Grythe H, Keil K. Commercial Arctic shipping through the Northeast Passage: routes, resources, governance, technology, and infrastructure. Polar Geogr. 2014;37:298–324.

Haley S, Klick M, Szymoniak N, Crow A. Observing trends and assessing data for Arctic mining. Polar Geogr. 2011;34:37–61.

SNL Financial. (2014). SNL metals & mining. http://www.snl.com/Sectors/MetalsMining/Default.aspx . Accessed 06 June 2018.

Lawrence R, Larsen RK. The politics of planning: assessing the impacts of mining on Sami lands. Third World Q. 2017:1–17.

Freeman RE. Strategic management: a stakeholder perspective, vol. 13. Boston: Pitman; 1984.

Haddaway NR, Kohl C, da Silva NR, Schiemann J, Spök A, Stewart R, Sweet JB, Wilhelm R. A framework for stakeholder engagement during systematic reviews and maps in environmental management. Environ Evid. 2017;6:11.

Tengö M, Brondizio E, Malmer P, Elmqvist T, Spierenburg M. A multiple evidence base approach to connecting diverse knowledge systems for ecosystem governance. AMBIO. 2014;10:1007.

Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. 2018. Guidelines and Standards for Evidence synthesis in Environmental Management. Version 5.0 (AS Pullin, GK Frampton, B Livoreil & G Petrokofsky, Eds). http://www.environmentalevidence.org/information-for-authors . Accessed 6 June 2018.

Haddaway NR, Macura B, Whaley P, Pullin AS. ROSES RepOrting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses: pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps. Environ Evid. 2018;7:7.

Haddaway NR, Bayliss HR. Shades of grey: two forms of grey literature important for reviews in conservation. Biol Conserv. 2015;191:827–9.

Haddaway NR, Collins AM, Coughlin D, Kirk S. The role of Google Scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0138237.

Harzing AW. Publish or perish. 2007.

Kottek M, Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B, Rubel F. World Map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorologische Zeitschrift 2006;15:259–63. https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2006/0130 .

Haddaway NR, Macura B, Whaley P, Pullin AS. ROSES flow diagram for systematic maps. Version 1.0. 2017.

Download references

Authors’ contributions

NRH drafted the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We thank the project Advisory Team for comments on the project and the draft: the team consisted of Dag Avango, Steven Cooke, Sif Johansson, Rebecca Lawrence, Pamela Lesser, Björn Öhlander, Kaisa Raito, Rebecca Rees, and Maria Tengö. We also thank the 3MK stakeholder group for valuable input. We also thank Mistra EviEM for co-funding the first Advisory Group meeting and publication fees for the systematic map.

Competing interests

The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This manuscript is part of a project (3MK: Mapping the impacts of Mining using Multiple Knowledges) funded by a Formas Open Call Grant (2017-00683).

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden

Neal R. Haddaway, Biljana Macura & Annika E. Nilsson

Africa Centre for Evidence, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Neal R. Haddaway

Canadian Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation and Environmental Management, Ottawa, Canada

Steven J. Cooke & Jessica J. Taylor

Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland

Pamela Lesser

Division of Environmental Communication, Department of Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden

Kaisa Raito

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Neal R. Haddaway .

Additional files

Additional file 1..

ROSES form for systematic map protocols.

Additional file 2.

Boolean format search string for database searches.

Additional file 3.

Google Scholar search strategy.

Additional file 4.

Benchmark list of relevant articles for comprehensiveness checking of search strategy.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Haddaway, N.R., Cooke, S.J., Lesser, P. et al. Evidence of the impacts of metal mining and the effectiveness of mining mitigation measures on social–ecological systems in Arctic and boreal regions: a systematic map protocol. Environ Evid 8 , 9 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-019-0152-8

Download citation

Received : 13 November 2018

Accepted : 06 February 2019

Published : 21 February 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-019-0152-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Evidence synthesis
Extractive industries
Knowledge systems
Local knowledge
Resource extraction
Metal mines

Environmental Evidence

ISSN: 2047-2382

General enquiries: [email protected]

Year 8 Geology: Mining - pros and cons

Mining - pros and cons
Environmental impact
Political Factors
Note taking
Essay Writing
Bibliography

Benefits of Mining

VIDEO: New report highlights mining's positive effect on the economy The Minerals Council has this morning released a report highlighting the role of minerals and resources in Australian communities.
Australian Minerals Council The leading advocate for Australia’s minerals industry, promoting and enhancing sustainability, profitability and competitiveness.
The Positive Effects of Mining on the Economy Website of Bravus Mining - a mining company - detailing the ways that mining supports the economy in Australia. This article is published by a mining company - might it be biased?
With billions of tonnes of phosphate for fertiliser, can Australia 'seize the moment'? Article exploring some the potential economic and agricultural benefits of a proposed new phosphate mine.

Promotional video for the Australian Minerals Council.

Promotional video from iron ore mining company BHP, about the fly-in fly-out (FIFO) lifestyle.

Negative impacts of Mining

Wimmera farmers fear losing homes, livelihoods if mineral sands mine near Horsham proceeds A sixth-generation farmer in Victoria fears his family could be "kicked off" the land they have shared for nearly 140 years to make way for mineral sands mining.
Heads of Cadia Newcrest gold mine front inquiry, apologise over 'breakdown' in community relations A New South Wales mine operator has apologised to residents near Australia's biggest gold mine after they raised health concerns about dust coming from its site. The mine operator is facing criminal charges over pollution and its negative health effects.
Pilbara feels the impact of FIFO A 2013 report found that the large number of Fly-In, Fly-Out (FIFO) workers in mining communities in WA is creating housing shortages, driving up prices, and straining public services.
<< Previous: Overview
Next: Environmental impact >>
Last Updated: Oct 25, 2023 8:51 AM
URL: https://materchristi.libguides.com/year_8_geology

Fracking – Top 3 Pros and Cons

Fracking , short for hydraulic fracturing, is a method of extracting natural gas from deep underground via a drilling technique. First, a vertical well is drilled and encased in steel or cement . Then, a horizontal well is drilled in the layer of rock that contains natural gas. After that, fracking fluid is pumped into the well at an extremely high pressure so that it fractures the rock in a way that allows oil and gas to flow through the cracks to the surface. [ 1 ]

Colonel Edward A. L. Roberts first developed a version of fracking in 1862. During the Civil War at the Battle of Fredericksburg , Roberts noticed how artillery blasts affected channels of water. The idea of “shooting the well” was further developed by lowering a sort of torpedo into an oil well. The torpedo was then detonated, which increased oil flow. [ 2 ]

In the 1940s, explosives were replaced by high-pressure liquids, beginning the era of hydraulic fracturing. The 21st century brought two further innovations: horizontal drilling and slick water (a mix of water, sand, and chemicals) to increase fluid flow. Spurred by increased financial investment and global oil prices, fracking picked up speed and favor. [ 2 ] [ 3 ]

Most U.S. states allow fracking, though four states have banned the practice as of Apr. 2024: Vermont (2012), New York (temporarily in 2014; permanently in 2020), Maryland (2017), and Washington (2019). In 2019, Oregon placed a moratorium on the practice; the temporary ban is set to expire on Jan. 2, 2025. In Apr. 2021, California banned new fracking projects as of 2024 with the intent to phase out fracking altogether. [ 4 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] [ 32 ] [ 33 ]

Should the United States Continue Fracking?

Pro 1 Natural gas is a necessary bridge fuel to get to 100% clean energy and eliminate coal and petroleum, and fracking is the best way to extract natural gas. “The choice is not between fossil fuels and renewable energy, but rather, how do we accelerate the growth of renewables while reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the use of fossil fuels,” explains Mark Little, President and Chief Executive for Suncor. [ 9 ] Replacing coal and petroleum with natural gas obtained by fracking now allows the U.S. to achieve short-term and immediate reductions in greenhouse gases that cause climate change while alternative energies such as solar and wind are built into viable industries. [ 10 ] In the 2014 State of the Union address, President Barack Obama stated, “natural gas – if extracted safely, it’s the bridge fuel that can power our economy with less of the carbon pollution that causes climate change.” [ 11 ] Oil and gas company BP says, “[A]s the world works towards net zero emissions, we think natural gas will play an important role in getting us all there… Natural gas has far lower emissions than coal when burnt for power and is a much cleaner way of generating electricity. Switching from coal to gas has cut more than 500 million tonnes of CO2 from the power sector this decade alone.” [ 12 ] Read More

Pro 2 Fracking is a safe method of extracting natural gas. “Hydraulic fracturing has been a key technology in making shale gas an affordable addition to the Nation’s energy supply, and the technology has proven to be a safe and effective stimulation technique. Ground water is protected during the shale gas fracturing process by a combination of the casing and cement that is installed when the well is drilled and the thousands of feet of rock between the fracture zone and any fresh or treatable aquifers,” according to the Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC). [ 13 ] Studies completed by researchers at Pennsylvania State University and Yale University found fracking was not contaminating groundwater in the Marcellus Shale region of Pennsylvania. [ 14 ] [ 15 ] [ 16 ] Mark Zoback, professor emeritus of geophysics at Stanford University, states, “The assertion that this [fracking] caused or will soon cause severe environmental damage is simply not true and needlessly alarmist. Through emphasizing best practice, appropriate regulation, and enforcement of those regulations, I have every confidence that horizontal drilling and multi-stage fracturing can be done with minimal environmental impact.” [ 17 ] Earthquakes caused by fracking, another focus of environmental and safety concern, are extremely rare and the U.S. Geological Survey maintains that there are no more earthquakes now than in prior years, only more equipment to detect the quakes. [ 18 ] [ 19 ] Read More

Pro 3 Fracking has allowed the U.S to produce and export more natural gas, which has increased national security and moved the country toward energy independence. Fracking accounts for 95% of new American natural gas wells. Eliminating fracking would severely hamper the country’s ability to be energy independent. [ 21 ] “America’s energy independence has made our country more secure, put more money back in our pockets, and in rural areas—like those across central and northeast Pennsylvania—led to an economic explosion not seen in generations. The United States is now the world leader in oil and natural gas production and a net exporter of natural gas… The less reliant the United States and our allies are on energy resources produced by countries that hate us, the less influence they have over us,” says U.S. Representative Fred Keller (R-PA). [ 20 ] An American Petroleum Institute study found that banning fracking could be disastrous, resulting in, among other consequences, a $1.2 trillion reduction in GDP that would trigger a recession ; 7.5 million lost jobs; a $3.1 million trade deficit increase through 2030; an annual household income loss of $5,040 per year; an increase in household energy spending of $618 per year; and a return of American dependence on imported energy sources. [ 21 ] [ 22 ] Read More

Con 1 The U.S. needs to immediately transition away from all fossil fuels, including natural gas. “Transitioning to renewable energy is not only necessary to fight the climate crisis, it is also the only way we can quickly and effectively meet rising energy demands… Over a billion people around the world lack access to electricity, and increasing fossil fuel-based generation will not fix this… Renewables, particularly small-scale renewables, are cheaper and faster to install. Small-scale renewables also tend to generate and keep power locally. This becomes a more effective way to fight energy poverty,” says Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth [ 23 ] According to many climate activists and scientists, there is no scenario in which the U.S. can continue to rely on fossil fuels, including natural gas obtained via fracking, while preventing imminent and irreversible climate disaster. [ 24 ] Green America explains, “investing in a transition fuel is a dead end. The money spent on natural gas power facilities and infrastructure takes decades to recuperate. Companies would need to use these facilities for their full lifetimes, delaying the switch to renewables for far too long. Investment in natural gas does not incentivize a move to renewable energy. Stakeholders will be actively opposed to laws and regulations that promote clean power at the expense of natural gas companies.” [ 25 ] Read More

Con 2 Fracking pollutes groundwater, increases greenhouse gases, and causes earthquakes. “Fracking uses vast quantities of chemicals known to harm human health… [including at least] 5 billion pounds of hydrochloric acid, a caustic acid; 1.2 billion pounds of petroleum distillates, which can irritate the throat, lungs and eyes; cause dizziness and nausea; and can include toxic and cancer-causing agents; and 445 million pounds of methanol, which is suspected of causing birth defects… People living or working nearby can be exposed to these chemicals if they enter drinking water after a spill or if they become airborne,” according to Environment America Research and Policy Center, [ 26 ] A study from Cornell University found that the fracking process releases large quantities of greenhouse gases, including methane, that ultimately results in 20% more global warming per unit than coal. While the fracking process itself is unlikely to cause earthquakes, the USGS has found that disposal wells for wastewater from fracking are associated with an “unprecedented increase” in earthquakes. [ 2 ] [ 27 ] [ 28 ] “Fracking is a danger to our water supply. It’s a danger to the air we breathe, it has resulted in more earthquakes, and it’s highly explosive. To top it all off, it’s contributing to climate change. If we are serious about clean air and drinking water, if we are serious about combating climate change, the only safe and sane way to move forward is to ban fracking nationwide,” summarizes Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT). [ 29 ] Read More

Con 3 The U.S. should not stake national security and energy independence on a finite, market-dependent resource. “It’s easy to see why we should produce our own energy — relying on other countries for oil, natural gas, and coal (the biggest sources used today) can get complicated. It can lead to wars, or compromise our relationships with foreign powers…. Fossil fuels will eventually run out around the world, however. Experts estimate that the U.S. only has enough natural gas reserves to last 93 more years, and enough coal to last about 283 years. Putting politics aside, there is only one surefire way to be completely and indefinitely energy independent: adopt 100% renewable energy,” explains Rebecca Harrington, deputy editor of Business Insider . [ 30 ] As the COVID-19 pandemic has starkly illustrated, demand for natural gas can decrease dramatically. According to the International Energy Agency, global fossil fuel energy demand decreased by 6% in 2020, the largest drop on record: “In absolute terms, the decline is unprecedented — the equivalent of losing the entire energy demand of India, the world’s third largest energy consumer.” [ 31 ] Renewable energies are the only energy source with growth in 2020, directly reflecting the value they hold for U.S. energy independence. [ 31 ] Read More

Discussion Questions

1. Should the United States continue fracking? Why or why not?

2. Should the United States use natural gas as a bridge fuel to get to 100% clean energy? Why or why not?

3. What is the best way for the United States to establish energy independence? Explain your answer(s).

Take Action

1. Evaluate the information on fracking from the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA) .

2. Discover how fracking works with a Ted-Ed video .

3. Consider the dangers fracking may pose to the water supply as explained by Greenpeace .

4. Consider how you felt about the issue before reading this article. After reading the pros and cons on this topic, has your thinking changed? If so, how? List two to three ways. If your thoughts have not changed, list two to three ways your better understanding of the “other side of the issue” now helps you better argue your position.

5. Push for the position and policies you support by writing U.S. national senators and representatives .

	1.	Marc Lallanilla, “Facts about Fracking,” livescience.com, Feb. 10, 2018
	2.	Melissa Denchak, “Fracking 101,” nrdc.org, Apr. 19, 2019
	3.	EPA, “Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas: Impacts from the Hydraulic Fracturing Water Cycle on Drinking Water Resources in the United States,” cfpub.epa.gov, Dec. 2016
	4.	CNN Wire Staff, “Vermont First State to Ban Fracking,” cnn.com, May 17, 2012
	5.	Thomas Kaplan, “Citing Health Risks, Cuomo Bans Fracking in New York State,” nytimes.com, Dec. 17, 2014
	6.	New York State, “Governor Cuomo Announces Legislation to Make the Fracking Ban Permanent Included in FY 2021 Executive Budget,” governor.ny.gov, Jan. 22, 2020
	7.	Pamela Wood, “As Hogan Signs Fracking Ban, Environmentalists Question His Record,” baltimoresun.com, Apr. 5, 2017
	8.	Jay Inslee, “Inslee Announces Opposition to Two Gas Projects in Washington,” governor.wa.gov, May 8, 2019
	9.	Mark Little, “Climate and Energy Experts Debate How to Respond to a Warming World,” nytimes.com, Oct. 7, 2019
	10.	Steve Weissman, “Natural Gas as a Bridge Fuel,” energycenter.org, Mar. 2016
	11.	Barack Obama, “President Barack Obama's State of the Union Address,” obamawhitehouse.archives.gov, Jan. 28, 2014
	12.	BP, “Reimagining Energy,” bp.com (accessed Oct. 2, 2020)
	13.	Groundwater Protection Council, “Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: A Primer,” gwpc.org. Apr. 2009
	14.	Tim Benson, “Research & Commentary: New Studies Confirm the Safety of Fracking in Pennsylvania,” heartland.org, June 20, 2018
	15.	E. Barth-Naftilan, J. Sohng, and J. E. Saiers, “Methane in Groundwater before, during, and after, Hydraulic Fracturing of the Marcellus Shale,” pnas.org, July 3, 2018
	16.	Tao Wen, et al., “Big Groundwater Data Sets Reveal Possible Rare Contamination Amid Otherwise Improved Water Quality for Some Analytes in a Region of Marcellus Shale Development,” pubs.acs.org, 2018
	17.	Jeff McMahon, “Of Course Fracking Is Safe, Stanford Prof Says,” forbes.com, June 26, 2017
	18.	USGS, “How Is Hydraulic Fracturing Related to Earthquakes and Tremors?,” usgs.gov (accessed Nov. 12, 2020)
	19.	USGS, “Why Are We Having So Many Earthquakes? Has Naturally Occurring Earthquake Activity Been Increasing? Does This Mean a Big One Is Going to Hit? OR We Haven’t Had Any Earthquakes in a Long Time; Does This Mean That the Pressure Is Building up for a Big One?,” usgs.gov (accessed Nov. 12, 2020)
	20.	Fred Keller, “America’s Energy Independence Has Contributed to the Great American Comeback,” thehill.com, Feb. 5, 2020
	21.	Mark Green, “Fracking Ban Could Cripple U.S., New Study Finds,” api.org, Feb, 27, 2020
	22.	America’s Progress at Risk: An Economic Analysis of a Ban on Fracking and Federal Leasing for Natural Gas and Oil Development,” api.org, 2020
	23.	Erich Pica, “Climate and Energy Experts Debate How to Respond to a Warming World,” nytimes.com, Oct. 7, 2019
	24.	May Boeve, ”Climate and Energy Experts Debate How to Respond to a Warming World,” nytimes.com, Oct. 7, 2019
	25.	Green America Natural Gas: Transition Fuel Myth,” greenamerica.org, Oct. 2, 2020
	26.	Environment America Research and Policy Center, “Fracking by the Numbers: The Damage to Our Water, Land and Climate from a Decade of Dirty Drilling,” environmentamerica.org, Apr. 14, 2016
	27.	The Climate Center, “Study Shows Natural Gas Fracking More Harmful Than Coal,” theclimatecenter.org, Apr. 14, 2011
	28.	USGS, “High-Rate Injection Is Associated with the Increase in U.S. Mid-Continent Seismicity,” pubs.er.usgs.gov, 2015
	29.	Bernie Sanders, “Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez Lead First-Ever Bill to Ban Fracking Nationwide,” sanders.senate.gov, Jan. 21, 2020
	30.	Rebecca Harrington, “There’s Only One Way for the US to Reach Energy Independence,” businessinsider.com, July 15, 2017
	31.	Pippa Stevens, “Energy Demand, Hit by Coronavirus Crisis, Is Set to See Record Drop This Year, IEA Says,” cnbc.com, Apr. 30, 2020
	32.	Rachel Becker and Laurel Rosenhall, "Newsom Orders Ban on New Oil Fracking by 2024," capradio.org, Apr. 23, 2021
	33.	Chloe Marie, "Oregon and Washington Enact Hydraulic Fracturing Bans," aglaw.psu.edu, June 19, 2019

ProCon/Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. 325 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 200 Chicago, Illinois 60654 USA

Natalie Leppard Managing Editor [email protected]

Social Media
Death Penalty
School Uniforms
Video Games
Animal Testing
Gun Control
Banned Books
Teachers’ Corner

Cite This Page

ProCon.org is the institutional or organization author for all ProCon.org pages. Proper citation depends on your preferred or required style manual. Below are the proper citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order): the Modern Language Association Style Manual (MLA), the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago), the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), and Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (Turabian). Here are the proper bibliographic citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order):

[Editor's Note: The APA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

[Editor’s Note: The MLA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

Share full article

Supported by

What School Nurses Want Parents to Know

The stalwarts of children’s health shared their tips and gripes.

An illustration of a nurses office at an elementary school. The nurse puts a bandaid on a child. A child enters a door coughing. Another child is lying down and under a blanket.

By Katie Mogg

Carren Teitelbaum, a school nurse in Ramapo, N.Y., once had a student stumble into her office with a 102 degree fever. Mrs. Teitelbaum called his mother, who said she’d given her son Tylenol that had likely worn off and that she could come give him more.

“That kind of thing is extremely frustrating,” Mrs. Teitelbaum said. “And it’s not an isolated incident.”

Most parents are aware that fevers are a symptom of communicable viruses, and it’s best to keep their children home when they have one . But on short notice, many parents can’t stay home from work, leaving school nurses to care for sick and contagious children.

Sending feverish kids to school is just one miscalculation school nurses say parents make. The New York Times spoke with 14 school nurses across the United States who shared other common mistakes. “Some of these things are common sense,” said Mrs. Teitelbaum, “but I find that what makes sense for me may not make sense for somebody else.”

They leave the school nurse in the dark.

Parents might inform a new teacher about their child’s health but many forget to tell the school nurse, Mrs. Teitelbaum said.

Last year, a student with a bad headache visited Anna Etlinger, a school nurse in Cook County, Ill. After calling the boy’s mother, Mrs. Etlinger learned he experiences migraines that cause vomiting without medicine. But public school nurses generally can’t administer most medications without parental consent and permission from a licensed health care provider.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

Want all of The Times? Subscribe .

Front Page News
Superiorland Yesterdays
Michigan News
National News
International News
Today in history
Superior people
Superior History
Bus schedules
Local Sports
Sports Columns
Prep Sports
Michigan Sports
National Sports
Letters To The Editor
Monday: In Business
Tuesday: Health
Wednesday: Learning
Thursday: Boomers & Beyond
Friday: Outdoors
Saturday: Weekend
Sunday: Our Youth
House To Home
Healthy Living
Gas tank getaways
Classifieds
Garage Sales
Special Sections
Distribution
Statement of Values
Terms of Service
Submit News
Browse Notices
Place Notice

Today's Paper

Subscribe Today

Car talk: econ mode is all pros, no cons.

Ray Magliozzi, syndicated columnist

Dear Car Talk: I have a 2019 Honda CR-V that I love. It has something called an ECON mode, and I tend to just leave it in ECON. Is there any reason not to? I mostly drive around town but take several long trips a year, mostly on interstates.

Does ECON mode really help with gas mileage? — Amy

Yes, ECON mode can boost your gas mileage slightly. But it’s not a magic button. Its greatest effect may be that it helps you to drive more gently. And that can save you fuel and prolong the life of your car.

And there’s no reason you can’t use it all the time.

Basically, ECON mode adjusts your car’s power delivery to make it a little less “sporty.”

It modifies the throttle response. So, when you step on the accelerator, the engine doesn’t respond quite as quickly. It’s probably unnoticeable to you most of the time. But by accelerating more slowly and gently, you’ll use less fuel. And at high speeds, when you’re just cruising along on the highway, it means that every little twitch of your big toe no longer sends a spray of gasoline into the cylinders varying your speed for no reason or causing a downshift, which is wasteful.

ECON mode also lowers the transmission shift points. In normal mode, your transmission may shift at say, 2,300 rpm. In ECON mode, shifts may happen at 2,000 rpm. Not allowing the engine to rev higher, where it burns more fuel, increases your mileage.

The tradeoff is that your engines produce more power at higher rpm (up to a point). But if you don’t feel like you need more power, why not save the fuel? And if you suddenly need power and floor the gas pedal, you’ll override ECON mode and the car will respond.

Finally, on some cars, ECON mode also puts the air conditioning system in a more efficient mode. Again, if it’s not a heat wave, you probably won’t notice it.

And there’s no downside to any of this, in terms of the longevity of the car. In fact, it’ll probably help your car last longer, because you’ll drive more gently, Amy. So feel free to keep that ECON button fired up.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Got a question about cars? Email to Car Talk by visiting the Car Talk website at www.cartalk.com.

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

Daily Newsletter
Breaking News

Starting at $4.62/week.

IMAGES

What are advantages and disadvantages of mining?
pros and cons of mining by Bradley Manker on Prezi
Mining Pros & Cons by Gunnar Carter
Mining Pros And Cons by Diego Garcea
Mining Pros & Cons by Gunnar Carter
pros and cons of mining metals ores by charlotte hendry on Prezi

COMMENTS

20 Pros and Cons of Mining
Technological advancements in mining enhance safety and efficiency. Environmental and social challenges include land degradation and displacement of communities. Sustainable practices and collaboration are vital for mitigating mining's negative impacts. Pros of Mining. Cons of Mining. Economic Growth. Land Pollution. Job Opportunities.
Mining and Its Impact on the Environment Essay
Introduction. Mining is an economic activity capable of supporting the developmental goals of countries and societies. It also ensures that different metals, petroleum, and coal are available to different consumers or companies. Unfortunately, this practice entails excavation or substantial interference of the natural environment.
Examining the Pros and Cons of Mining: The Environmental and Economic
In this article, we will examine the pros and cons of mining, focusing on the economic implications. Pros of Mining. Mining plays a crucial role in the economy by providing jobs, stimulating economic growth, and generating revenue for governments. Here are some of the key economic benefits associated with mining:
Pros and Cons of AI in Higher Education
Discover the pros and cons of AI in higher education, and learn how advancements in AI will likely continue to change the educational landscape. Pro: AI Increases Accessibility to Knowledge and Skills
How does the environmental impact of mining for clean energy metals
That answer, unfortunately, isn't straightforward. Odell explains that making an apples-to-apples comparison is challenging, because methods for extracting and processing oil and coal are different than those for metal mining. Even mining two different metals—or two different deposits of the same metal—can call for different techniques.
The Pros And Cons Of Coal Mining
More about . The Pros And Cons Of Coal MiningCutting Back On Coal In America An Article By George Will 254 Words | 2 Pages; Ap World History Dbq Industrial Revolution 1402 Words | 6 Pages; The Pros And Cons Of Coal Rolling 754 Words | 4 Pages; Pros And Cons Of Coalhouse 1552 Words | 7 Pages; Teddy Roosevelt's Speech On 1908 At The White House ...
ENVIRONMENT: THE PROS AND CONS OF MINING
Despite these efforts, some 21 mining companies reportedly applied to mine the area. "The applications cover 42% of the island and overlap with 32% of the management area of the national park," De Vera deplored. The Catholic Church, some cause-oriented groups and environmentalists are against mining. All of them have valid reasons. Fr.
Evidence of the impacts of metal mining and the effectiveness of mining
Background Mining activities, including prospecting, exploration, construction, operation, maintenance, expansion, abandonment, decommissioning and repurposing of a mine can impact social and environmental systems in a range of positive and negative, and direct and indirect ways. Mining can yield a range of benefits to societies, but it may also cause conflict, not least in relation to above ...
Coal Mining Pros And Cons
Coal Mining Pros And Cons. Polymet Mining is a mining industry that is proposing to create Minnesota's first sulfide mine. The company is wanting to create an open pit copper and nickel mine that is located north of Hoyt Lakes in the Superior National Forest (BC Hydro). They plan to call this project the NorthMet Mining Project.
LibGuides: Year 8 Geology: Mining
Year 8 Geology: Mining - pros and cons. Overview; Mining - pros and cons ... Note taking; Essay Writing; Bibliography; Benefits of Mining. VIDEO: New report highlights mining's positive effect on the economy. The Minerals Council has this morning released a report highlighting the role of minerals and resources in Australian communities.
Pros And Cons Of Coal Mining
PolyMet, a new mining company would like to bring sulfide mining, also known as copper-nickel mining to Minnesota. This would involve the extraction of copper and various other metals from sulfide, hence the name. The sulfide that comes out of this type of mining can have serious consequences on the environment.
The Pros And Cons Of Mining
The Pros And Cons Of Mining. Mining is a hazardous industry because it affects both people and the environment. Laterites cause an imbalance in the ecosystem, which displaces numerous people- indigenous and innocent civilians who live off these areas. Media taints the public's mindset by blindlessly reporting that mining is a negative and ...
The Pros And Cons Of Coal Mining
The Pros And Cons Of Coal Mining. The Industrial Revolution pioneered a new age of technology, making coal the primary source of power for the developing world. Coal is a combustible fossil fuel that is extracted by surface and underground mining mainly located in the United States, China, and Australia. The coal mining industry is thought of ...
Fracking Pros and Cons
Fracking has allowed the U.S to produce and export more natural gas, which has increased national security and moved the country toward energy independence. Fracking accounts for 95% of new American natural gas wells. Eliminating fracking would severely hamper the country's ability to be energy independent.
The Pros And Cons Of Coal Mining
Cons Of Fracking Essay 329 Words | 2 Pages. The main way that oil and natural gas reserves are acquired are through the means of Fracking. Also known as hydrofracking, this method utilizes a drill that drills down thousands of feet underground, which is then flushed with millions of gallons of water along with additive chemicals at high pressures to break the rocks sheltering the reserves.
Pros And Cons Of Gold Mining
Pros And Cons Of Gold Mining. Decent Essays. 1071 Words. 5 Pages. Open Document. 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 5.1 Conclusions. From this study, we realize that Ghana has had a long standing history of gold production, dating back to the colonial era: The economy continues to be a dominant gold producer in Africa and the world.
5 Things School Nurses Say Parents Are Doing Wrong
Here are the pros and cons to that approach. Many parents feel the need to stuff their children's days full of activities to keep them entertained and engaged. But boredom has its virtues .
Car Talk: ECON mode is all pros, no cons
ECON mode also lowers the transmission shift points. In normal mode, your transmission may shift at say, 2,300 rpm. In ECON mode, shifts may happen at 2,000 rpm.
The Pros and Cons of Uranium Mining
The Pros and Cons of Uranium Mining. This essay discusses the dangers of mining radioactive materials. The student comes to the conclusion that the risks outweigh the benefits. This essay received a C by one of Kibin's paper graders. Click here to see what was done well and what needs improvement.
Moon Mining: Pros And Cons
Moon Mining: Pros And Cons. 1393 Words6 Pages. The moon offers a lot of resources that could determine the development of a near-Earth/moon industrial infrastructure. It is difficult to identify a singular lunar resource that will be sufficiently valuable to drive the lunar mining on its own but the moon possess abundant raw materials that do ...
Pros And Cons Of Mining Coal Seam Water
Pros And Cons Of Mining Coal Seam Water; Pros And Cons Of Mining Coal Seam Water. Satisfactory Essays. 146 Words; 1 Page; Open Document. Mining Coal Seam gas includes of drilling far into the earth to remove any methane stored in a coal seam. To remove the gas, great amounts of salty water compacted in the coal seam must be lifted to the ...
The Pros And Cons Of Uranium Mining
To obtain Uranium for nuclear power, it is generally mined in large open pit and underground mines. Like most other mines, mining Uranium destroys the ecosystem and landscape, produces lots of noise pollution, demolishes habitats and are very dangerous. More specifically, Uranium mines have an enormous occupational health and safety risks.
Pros And Cons Of Mining The Moon
More about . Pros And Cons Of Mining The MoonSea Stars Research Paper 1087 Words | 5 Pages; Pros And Cons Of Frarc Sand Mining In Trempealeau County 2016 Words | 9 Pages; The Pros And Cons Of Apollo 11's Moon Exploration 143 Words | 1 Pages; How Did The Apollo 11 Impact The World 383 Words | 2 Pages; Pros And Cons Of Mars Pathfinder's Sojourner ...
Pros And Cons Of Sulfide Mining
Pros And Cons Of Sulfide Mining. Sulfide mining has a bad effect on both the economy and the environment. Sulfide mining is the process of removing copper, nickel, and other metals from sulfide ores. Minnesota 's traditional iron ore mining and sulfide mining are two very different types of mining. Sulfide mining has more environmental risks ...
Pros And Cons Of Data Mining
Pros And Cons Of Data Mining. 5709 Words23 Pages. Data mining can be viewed as a result of the normal development of information technology Since 1960, database and information technology has been growing methodically from primitive file processing systems to complicated and prevailing database systems [11] [13].

20 Pros and Cons of Mining

Pros of Mining

Cons of Mining

Economic Growth and Mining

Technological Advancement Contributions

Employment Opportunities in Mining

Job Creation Impact

Skill Development Paths

Environmental Impact Concerns

Habitat Destruction Risks

Pollution and Emissions Increase

Social and Community Challenges

Health and Safety Risks

Sustainability and Future Prospects

Related Posts:

Related posts:

Mining and Its Impact on the Environment Essay

Introduction

Ways Mining Impact on the Environment

Remediating Mine Sites

Lessening Impact

Extraction from the Ore Body

How Copper Mining Impacts the Environment

Pros and Cons of Mining: A Comprehensive Analysis

The Negative Impacts of Mining

The Benefits of Mining

The Drawbacks of Mining

Addressing the Environmental Concerns

The Importance of Balance

Pros of Mining

Cons of Mining

Have a question?

More Resources for Learning

Keep exploring

Mining and Metals

Renewable Energy

Energy Storage

ENVIRONMENT: THE PROS AND CONS OF MINING

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Evidence of the impacts of metal mining and the effectiveness of mining mitigation measures on social–ecological systems in Arctic and boreal regions: a systematic map protocol

On the impacts of mining

Mitigation measures

Mining in the Arctic

Stakeholder engagement

Objective of the review

Searching for articles

Web-based search engines

Organisational websites

Bibliographic searches

Estimating the comprehensiveness of the search

Search update

Assembling a library of search results

Article screening and study eligibility criteria

Consistency checking

Eligibility criteria

Full text retrieval

Study validity assessment

Demonstrating procedural objectivity

Data coding strategy

Study mapping and presentation

Knowledge gap and cluster identification strategy

Authors’ contributions

Acknowledgements

Competing interests

Availability of data and materials

Consent for publication

Publisher’s Note

Author information

Corresponding author

Additional files

Additional file 2.

Additional file 3.

Additional file 4.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

Environmental Evidence

Year 8 Geology: Mining - pros and cons

Benefits of Mining

Negative impacts of Mining