1. Introduction
The mining industry plays a vital role in the supply of minerals necessary to achieve climate change goals. Numerous studies have emphasized the criticality of metals such as copper, lithium, cobalt, and rare earth elements in deploying technological energy solutions [
1,
2,
3,
4]. While there is an optimistic outlook that minerals can contribute to a more sustainable future, growing concerns surround the potential impacts of increased mining activities on regions and communities already burdened by long-standing environmental and social consequences associated with mining [
5,
6,
7,
8].
Criticality studies have been the predominant methodological approach for assessing the vulnerability of mineral supply chains. Typically, these studies evaluate vulnerability based on factors such as geographical concentration, institutional quality of producing nations, and the by-product nature of the minerals being assessed [
1,
9]. However, some researchers advocate for including environmental impacts associated with mining activities as variables that influence supply chain vulnerability [
6,
10,
11]. In practical terms, these studies highlight the influence of mining’s environmental implications, as increased extraction intensifies pressure on biodiversity, land use, waste disposal, and water consumption, thereby heightening vulnerability within the supply chain. Nevertheless, these analyses typically overlook environmental factors related to climate change, which can significantly impact the local environment and potentially increase the likelihood of supply disruptions unrelated to mining extraction.
This study proposes a methodological approach to assess climate risks in mining activities, specifically focusing on identifying the primary hazards that impact mine operations. Our approach utilizes geo-referenced data on vulnerabilities and mining facilities, aiming to address the current lack of a comprehensive methodological framework by incorporating climate change as a variable affecting the mineral supply chain. To demonstrate the application of this approach, we implement it in the Antofagasta region of Chile—a prominent mining cluster for key minerals, including copper, lithium, molybdenum, and rhenium, contributing significantly to the country’s mineral production. The region is indicated in
Figure 1. Additionally, Chile is particularly vulnerable to various climate hazards such as droughts, water scarcity, increasing extreme rainfall events, and heatwaves [
12,
13,
14].
The case study conducted in the Antofagasta region highlights three crucial aspects for future research on analyzing the vulnerability of mineral supply chains. First, it emphasizes the importance of localized consideration of climate change due to significant variations in climate impacts within the same country. Second, it underscores the need to define impact chains encompassing many mining facilities, as they are susceptible to different climate risks. The heterogeneity in risks creates the potential for alternative risk management strategies, resulting in varying vulnerabilities across different production stages. Third, the case study reveals that droughts pose the most significant climate risk to copper production, with only a few large-scale mine sites anticipated to rely on non-continental water resources.
The subsequent sections of this paper are organized as follows:
Section 2 summarizes the existing literature on the intrinsic relationship between mining and climate change.
Section 3 presents the methodological approach employed, including developing industry-specific impact chains. The application of the approach to the Antofagasta region in Chile is presented in
Section 4. Finally,
Section 5 outlines the conclusions.
2. Mining and Climate Change
Human-induced climate change is already impacting weather and climate extremes worldwide [
16], with further changes expected in the coming years. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), global surface temperatures will continue to rise until at least mid-century under all considered emissions scenarios. Consequently, the climate system will undergo more pronounced changes, including increased frequency and intensity of warm extremes, marine heatwaves, heavy precipitation events, a higher proportion of intense tropical cyclones, and reductions in sea ice, snow cover, and permafrost. Chile, in particular, is projected to face significant climate change impacts [
17,
18], encompassing issues such as air pollution, increased fire risks, drought, water stress, biodiversity loss, ecosystem damage, and human migration. These hazards profoundly affect various sectors reliant on natural resources in Chile, including the mining industry [
19]. Despite some progress, Chile’s policy, infrastructure, and climate readiness still rank in the middle of global indexes [
20].
The mining sector in Chile holds a strategic position within the country’s industrial landscape, accounting for 50% of the total export value and possessing a 28.5% global share in copper production. Throughout history, it has played a pivotal role in Chile’s economic growth and development, contributing significantly to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), tax revenues, export earnings, employment opportunities, and the attraction of investors. However, the sector’s continued contribution relies heavily on the operational profitability of the companies operating within it [
21]. According to copper projections provided by [
22], a 20.7% increase in copper production is anticipated by 2030, amounting to 7.04 million tons per year, with a growth rate of 1.6%.
Mining in Chile is facing a complex and unprecedented scenario due to the impacts of climate change. On one hand, the mining sector plays a crucial role in the energy transition [
23,
24], as the production of metals, such as lithium, cobalt, copper, and manganese (which are abundant in Chile), is required for the intensified use of electricity in comparison to fossil fuel consumption [
25]. On the other hand, the mining industry must confront the environmental challenges caused by climate change. Unlike other sectors, mining operations are often located in geographically complex areas that are exposed to climate risks. The changing climate can impact the mining sector, including physical effects on mine sites and neighboring communities, social impacts, and consequences for reputation and the economy [
26]. Physically, climate change can affect construction, slope stability, and tailings dams [
27] and disrupt access points or transportation routes, leading to operational interruptions and production losses. Examples of such impacts can be observed in the first quarter of 2019 when adverse weather conditions resulted in a 5.1% decrease in total copper production in Chile during that period [
28]. Additionally, the drought in central Chile significantly affected the operations of Minera Los Pelambres, leading to a 24% reduction in production during the first half of 2022 [
29].
The main climatic hazards that affect and could affect the mining sector in Chile include:
Precipitation and flooding: In the north and center of the country, precipitation will be infrequent but more intense and warmer [
30]. Heavy rain can generate floods and natural disasters such as landslides and alluviums [
31] that can cause damage to infrastructure and supply networks, causing work stoppages and risks to people’s health and safety [
32]. The Bolivian winter phenomenon occurs in northern Chile, causing intense rainfall in the Atacama Desert.
Droughts: Since 2010, rainfall has been deficient in much of the national territory [
33], especially in the central area of the country with decreases of 25 and 50%, compared to a typical year [
34], being one of the biggest problems in Chile in the short term. Even though the national mining sector represents 3% of water consumption [
35], a large number of operations accumulate in places that experience water stress, so the tension over water use with local communities is likely to intensify [
32]. In addition, productivity losses result from water supply shortages, as exemplified by Los Pelambres mine [
29].
Heatwaves: The increase in temperature in northern Chile and altiplano zones will be 1.5 °C. In contrast, in the central zone, the average temperature will increase at a rate of 0.14 °C per decade [
36]. Besides the effect on human health, this can cause water availability alterations, restricting summer water reserves and increasing evaporation of tailings [
27].
Sea level rises: Global sea level will rise between 0.39 m to 0.84 m for 2081–2100 according to different scenarios [
37]. However, Chile has the advantage of having a high elevation in most of the country, so this hazard would be a manageable risk in the face of climate change [
38]. In the mining sector, critical infrastructure can be affected, including desalination plants and ports (the latter of which are already affected by the more substantial swells). Damaged infrastructure will affect operations’ operational continuity due to seawater restrictions and copper exports through shipping.
Climate risk assessment in the mining industry necessitates adopting consistent and reproducible approaches, particularly when climate events lead to human and economic losses [
32]. Existing studies evaluating supply chain disruptions have primarily focused on economic, political, social, and, to some extent, environmental factors [
1,
9,
39,
40,
41,
42]. Within the environmental realm, variables such as environmental regulations and future restrictions have been included [
43]. Additional approaches involve the assessment of the Environmental Performance Index (EPI), substitution potential, and old scrap recycling [
40]. However, these methodologies do not explicitly consider climate change as a measurable factor influencing the vulnerability of the mining supply chain and the criticality of minerals.
3. Methodological Approach
In this section, we present a methodology for assessing climate risk in the mining sector, which is particularly crucial in Chile, where the vulnerability of the mining sector to climate change has not been thoroughly analyzed [
44].
Various methodologies exist for assessing climate risks. This project utilized the approach proposed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its fifth assessment report and supplemented it with the vulnerability sourcebook developed by GIZ and EURAC [
45], which has already been utilized by institutions and companies in different projects. Bloomberg Associates (BA), the philanthropic consulting arm of Bloomberg Philanthropies, has produced a series of citywide maps that overlay key metrics to identify areas in London that are most susceptible to climate impacts and have high concentrations of vulnerable populations [
46]. In Chile, the “Climate Risk Atlas” project (Atlas de Riesgo Climático, ARCLIM, in Spanish), supervised by the Ministry of Environment, has developed over 50 maps illustrating climate risk in different economic and social sectors across the country [
32]. Exposure, vulnerability, and hazards are determined based on available data for the specific sector of interest, with input from sector experts to define appropriate metrics.
The approach is based on four fundamental concepts: risk, hazards, vulnerability, and exposure. According to the definitions provided by [
45], climate risk is the potential for specific climate-related consequences (climate impacts) on valuable entities, including people, ecosystems, and culture. Hazard refers to the potential occurrence of a natural physical event or physical impact that can result in loss of life, injury, or health impacts, as well as damage and loss to property, infrastructure, livelihoods, service provision, ecosystems, and environmental resources. Vulnerability is defined as the inclination or predisposition to be adversely affected, encompassing sensitivity or susceptibility to harm and a lack of capacity to cope and adapt. Exposure denotes the presence of people, livelihoods, species or ecosystems, environmental functions, services, resources, infrastructure, or economic, social, or cultural assets in areas and settings that could be adversely affected. The climate risk is determined by combining hazard, vulnerability, and exposure, employing an impact chain. Consequently, the risk of potential consequences is defined through the interplay of these three concepts. This methodological approach places emphasis on utilizing publicly available data [
47]. For the present analysis, a total of seven databases were employed (see
Table 1 for details).
Six steps are followed to determine climate risk in the mining system. The first step involves establishing the mining system susceptible to climate hazards. The second step entails studying the potential hazards in the system’s location, specifically Antofagasta, and assessing the risks that the mining system in northern Chile may face. The third step focuses on identifying the system’s vulnerabilities based on the hazards identified in the previous step and the specific links between mining facilities and hazards. The fourth step involves determining the system’s exposure, quantified as the number of mining facilities within a specific area. In the fifth step, each component’s numerical index is determined as the average of indicators involved. This is done using a min-max normalization for each variable at each pixel in the database. The normalization process should represent when an indicator reaches optimal (zero) or critical (one) states; therefore, there is also room for expert judgment defining thresholds [
45]. Lastly, the climate risk (
R) is calculated as the average interaction of the components: hazards (
H), vulnerabilities (
V), and exposure (
E), where each component ranges from 0 to 1.
Climate risk is calculated by assigning equal importance and equal weighting to the three components. The resulting index falls within the range of 0 to 1, allowing for determining the corresponding risk representation based on this index. Refer to
Table 2 for the representation of risk levels.
The creation of maps involves the calculation of indexes for each geographical zone. Raster maps are utilized, where each pixel represents the area for which climate risk is calculated. As a result of this methodology, five maps are generated, illustrating climate risk for each impact chain. These maps are produced at a territorial scale of 25 km.
5. Conclusions
The interconnection between the energy transition and the mining industry is undeniable, as minerals are the foundation for developing green technologies. However, this relationship is bidirectional, as climate change poses significant threats to mine operations for critical minerals. Although the inverse relationship has gained attention, a comprehensive assessment requires detailed local-level data, which is often lacking. Climate risk assessment necessitates the analysis of three key variables: hazards, exposure, and vulnerability. The combination of these factors enables the identification of zones that are more susceptible to supply disruptions.
In this study, we have developed and implemented a methodological approach to assess climate risk in mining facilities, considering various factors that encompass hazards, exposure, and vulnerability. To exemplify the climate risk assessment, we focused on the Antofagasta region in Chile, a crucial hub for copper production, a critical mineral for the advancement of electrification. The identified key hazards in the region include heavy rains, droughts, and heatwaves, which affect different mining facilities in distinct ways. The response of exposed facilities to these hazards depends on their vulnerability factors. We incorporated five vulnerability factors in our assessment: topography, mine size, distance to health centers, access to water resources, and coordination of nearby companies. Our findings indicate that droughts pose the most significant climate risk to large-scale copper production processing plants, with limited operations implementing adaptation measures.
The presented methodology represents a significant step toward climate risk assessment in the mining industry. However, some areas require further development. First, the lack of scientific data on local-level variability hinders the comprehensive assessment of hazards such as sea-level rise. This limitation affects the determination of suitable port locations for mineral transportation and the identification of areas suitable for desalination plants. Second, data availability is unavailable to generate an analysis for specific mining operations, which hinders the possibility of preparing detailed recommendations based on the risk assessment for individual cases. Third, there is a need to further study vulnerability factors beyond those considered in this study. Social and institutional elements are crucial in adapting to changing climate conditions and including local communities in decision-making. Incorporating these variables into the methodology can be part of a more participatory approach to generate specific social measures that further enhance its effectiveness and ability to pinpoint adaptation measures. Fourth, it should be noticed that forecasting weather events contains uncertainty about how unknown events will unravel. Changing models and data availability implies that risk assessments should be revised periodically to better incorporate new knowledge. All previous aspects are potential avenues for future research on the climate risk assessment of mining operations.