Pitfall: The race to mine the world's most vulnerable places By ChristopherPollon, Vancouver: Greystone Books. 2023. 304 pages. $39.95 (hardcover). ISBN: 9781771649124
Bibliographic record
Abstract
of endnotes, a 3-page selected bibliography, a 15-page index, and a 2-page world map showing all mentioned locations.The book begins by establishing how, to limit climate change's effects, a clean energy transition will be necessary, which will be a metals-intensive process.Accordingly, the problem this book confronts is that more metals are needed, yet mining is a polluting industry."How," asks Pollon (p.11), "do we secure the metals our civilization needs without destroying the environment and violating the rights of the planet's most vulnerable people?"After decades of mining being maligned by environmentalists, Pollon (p.131) writes, "a great vindication is afoot: mining is suddenly needed to expand its output to provide the raw materials to build batteries, wind turbines, solar installations, and more."This need for minerals can be called "the revenge of the miners" (p.148).For this long-maligned industry, "providing the metals needed to electrify the world promises staggering profits" (p.151).Mining companies have become "emboldened by their new role as climate saviors" (p.203).In a wide-ranging discussion of mining in Bolivia, Chile, Congo, Guatemala, Inner Mongolia, and New Guinea, Pollon makes several interesting points.Increasingly mines will be located on the lands of Indigenous peoples, who make up 5% of the world's population while preserving 80% of its remaining biodiversity.Pollon discusses how several countries have adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and its requirement that Indigenous peoples grant their free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) before mining commences on their lands.The prior informed consent portion of FPIC means "all the information, good and bad, must be presented " (p.194) to an Indigenous community before it makes its decision.However, Pollon points out UNDRIP's biggest problem is it is not legally binding upon its signatories; in practice, FPIC often becomes free, prior, and informed consultation."Giving Indigenous people a 'veto' over development," wrote Pollon (p.101), "remains anathema to the mining industry."Pollan discusses "social licence to mine," defined as "having the approval and broad acceptance of society to conduct an activity" (p.69)."The biggest bottleneck in metals supply over the coming decades," wrote Pollon (p.69), will be conflicts "around environmental, social, and governance issues."Pollen also discusses Canadian mining companies in Guatemala-a topic discussed in this journal by this reviewer (Holden & Jacobson, 2009).Because of the Toronto and Vancouver stock exchanges, Canada has become many junior mining companies' home and Canadians have obtained a dominant position over Latin American precious metals extraction (p.45).Pollon (p.223) writes, "the Canadian government supports resource companies in the global south through financing, grants, political risk insurance, access to diplomatic staff, and even development aid dollars."Pollon examines the problem mineral price volatility poses for relying on mining as an impetus for development.Wars, migration, climate disasters, pandemics, and changing technology will cause metal price volatility."The only thing we know for sure," wrote Pollon (p.113), "is the volatility of metals prices."Modern mining of low-grade ore deposits generates toxic wastes known as "tailings," which must be perpetually contained behind tailings dams."'Forever,'" wrote Pollon (p.162), is a time scale mining companies focused on maintaining short-term production amid volatile prices "cannot adequately navigate."Pollon discusses recycling, pointing out the electronics we use, and discard in municipal landfills, are a source of metals worth tens of billions of dollars each year.Nevertheless, given the volume of metals required for a clean energy transition, "forced degrowth" must be considered.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.022 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".