Ongoing Post-Mining Deficiencies in Raw-Materials Policy and the Repurposing of Mining Infrastructure

The Research Center of Post-Mining (FZN) at the TH Georg Agricola University (THGA) in Bochum/Germany has significantly expanded the range of its research programme since 2019/2020. Its scope has now been broadened by the new research division “Reactivation and Transition”. Research in this division focuses on land development and regional policy, socio-economic aspects and governance of post-mining. Emphasis is less on natural science, geosciences and engineering and more on economics and geography, spatial planning and political issues related to post-mining, although the work in the research centre has interdisciplinary ties to the aforementioned disciplines. The following article provides an overview of the current work in this research division as well as the directions the research will take in the foreseeable future.

A sustainable raw-materials policy, the post-mining issue and the repurposing of mines

Raw-materials policy comprises all the political objectives, support groups and measures associated with regulating the extraction and use of raw materials. From a national economic viewpoint the term “raw materials” means all those resources that constitute the natural production factors (and represent the abiotic part of the fundamental “land factor” as distinct from the products of agriculture and forestry), whether this be minerals, metals or other natural materials, both for energy and non-energy use. These are commonly referred-to as “natural resources” and their extraction is termed “mining”.

While security and affordability have long been the political focus of raw-materials supply, sustainability has now come to dominate this area too as the main guiding principle of our raw-material policy. Here sustainability signifies, for one thing, that raw-materials policy not only has to take account of the economic aspects but must also reflect the ecological and social issues associated with the extraction and use of natural resources. For another, the related problems must as far as possible be resolved in a cross-generational way, which means finding permanent and globally viable solutions. This aspiration was embodied in a definition that was generally agreed at UN level in 1983 as a result of the work of the Brundtlandt Commission, whose text also included the raw-materials sector: “Sustainable development is a development that meets the needs of current generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. (1) This in turn ties in with some of the basic concepts of sustainability that originated from forestry activities connected with the mining industry, as laid down with great foresight more than 300 years ago by Hans Carl von Carlowitz, a mining administrator employed by the Elector of Saxony. In his book Sylvicultura Oeconomica, which was published in 1713, he described the principle of sustainability using the language of the time as follows: “The greatest art, science, diligence and institution of these countries will rely on the manner in which such conservation and growing of wood is to be undertaken in order to have a continuing, stable and sustained use, as this is an indispensable cause, without which the country in its essence cannot remain”. (3)

These principles lie at the heart of the 17 UN Sustainability Goals that were agreed by the United Nations member states in 2012 for the target period to 2030. Sustainability goal number 12 “Sustainable Production and Consumption” explicitly lays down the following sustainability requirement for the mining industry (Figure 1):

“… Mining: We acknowledge that minerals and metals make a major contribution to the world economy and modern societies. We note that mining industries are important to all countries with mineral resources, in particular developing countries. We also note that mining offers the opportunity to catalyse broad-based economic development, reduce poverty and assist countries in meeting internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals, when managed effectively and properly. We acknowledge that countries have the sovereign right to develop their mineral resources according to their national priorities and a responsibility regarding the exploitation of resources, as described in the Rio Principles. We further acknowledge that mining activities should maximize social and economic benefits, as well as effectively address negative environmental and social impacts. In this regard, we recognize that governments need strong capacities to develop, manage and regulate their mining industries, in the interest of sustainable development. … We recognize the importance of strong and effective legal and regulatory frameworks, policies and practices for the mining sector that deliver economic and social benefits and include effective safeguards that reduce social and environmental impacts, as well as conserve biodiversity and ecosystems, including during post-mining closure. We call upon governments and businesses to promote the continuous improvement of accountability and transparency, as well as the effectiveness of the relevant existing mechanisms to prevent illicit financial flows from mining activities.” (2)

In this the UN recognise that the governments of the world should operate a raw-materials policy that acknowledges the importance of the mining industry for the economic and social potential of their respective countries but at the same time minimises the negative impact on society and the environment and promotes sustainable development. The target requirement is linked quite explicitly, and for the first time on the global stage, to the mine closure phase and to the post-mining era. This suggests that a raw-materials policy can only really be sustainable when it also includes post-mining issues.

“Post-mining means everything that happens after the actual mining and extraction phase – a broad and complex field” (4), even though this all takes place on former mining territory. From this there derives “the complex body of tasks centred around the closure, restoration and after-use of mining sites” and connected to this the “future potential of the post-mining era”. (5) In short one might also say that post-mining is all about minimising the risks associated with the closure of the mining industry, especially as far as the environment and social stability are concerned, and maximising the opportunities arising for new forms of economic and social prosperity in the affected areas. It is self-evident that central to this effort are the possibilities and opportunities that can be developed for the after-use of mining sites and mining infrastructure that are no longer to be used for the extraction of raw materials.

In Germany these challenges have been brought to the fore in recent years as a result of the phasing-out of the active coal mining industry – initially in connection with problems associated with mine-water management and the hydrological impact of the mining industry and subsequently with other issues such as the geo-monitoring of ground movements and near-surface events involving disused mine sites and post-mining obligations, the preservation of the cultural heritage of the mining industry and the revival and transition of closed mining facilities and former coalfield regions. After all, as every mining operation is finite and will at some point come to an end either for economic or political reasons, or because of the natural depletion of the deposits, challenges of this kind will always arise wherever mining is practised around the world – and the outcome will always be a post-mining sector and region.

Any raw-materials policy that seeks to meet the requirement of sustainability must therefore also incorporate the post-mining ethos and duly take this into account. However that has only been applied on a rudimentary basis in raw-materials policy making, as practised, and in its guiding principles. This sustainability deficit will be examined below in greater detail before the second part of this paper presents the latest empirical insights that are specifically targeted at the redevelopment and after-use of former mining sites – for there is no doubt that measures of this kind can be regarded as one of the levers of a more sustainable raw-materials policy.

National raw-materials strategy and the EU Action Plan on Critical Raw Materials – a constructive new approach but sustainability gaps remain

The federal elections to be held on 21st September 2021 could well bring a shift in the focus of German raw-materials policy, this resulting not only from the new make-up of the German Government but also from the overall economic situation as it could then well be. Until then the new national raw-materials strategy that was first adopted in early 2020 will continue to apply, this having committed to ensuring a sustainable supply of raw materials. (6) Here too security of supply is very much in the foreground and as well as the extraction of raw materials both at home and abroad the focus is also on making more economical use of materials in terms of resource efficiency and recycling, along with other steps towards a circular economy leading to the increased use of secondary raw materials. At the same time, however, the guiding principle of sustainable development is emphasised repeatedly, it being pointed out, e. g., that mineral extraction zones are only ever exploited on a temporary basis and that in Germany at least such areas must be made available for subsequent use in accordance with the prevailing mining legislation, whereby a reconciliation of interests has to b reached involving all stakeholders so that an appropriate compromise can be found “between the attractive proposition of developing such areas for subsequent leisure and recreational purposes, using them for agricultural and forestry-related activities and making them available for all kinds of infrastructure projects or for environment and nature protection initiatives aimed at preserving and developing native biological diversity”. (7) There is also mention at one point of the post-mining issue, with the following statement being made under the heading “Sustainable mine closures”: “The environmentally friendly and socially acceptable aftercare measures to be introduced after the cessation of mining activities is a central theme of raw-materials production. … The Federal Government supports the federal states in the process of transforming the mining regions, this including, e. g., the transformation of former coal-producing areas. As well as providing protection for man and the environment measures to promote structural change at regional level is also very much the focus of these efforts”. However this central theme is not further explored, apart from the announcement that a research and development centre for post-mining remediation and landscape restoration is to be set up as part of the Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (BGR) in Lausitz, the aim being to pool all existing expertise for an environmentally compatible and sustainable mine closure strategy. (8)

Strangely enough, here the Federal Government neither uses the long-established and practical term “post-mining” nor mentions the research institutions that already exist in this area. It also fails to take account of the experience acquired by the German coal industry, which only closed fairly recently in 2018, nor does it address the implications for raw-material supplies that may be predicted as a result of the proposed total withdrawal from coal-fired electricity production and the closure of the lignite mining industry. (9)

The latest brochure from the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi) as published in early 2021 (Figure 2), which seeks both to promote a greater awareness for “raw materials as a basis for creating prosperity and employment” and to concisely summarize the new national resources strategy, appears to have almost completely lost sight of the “core theme of aftercare” and all the factors associated with post-mining issues (10).

The same cannot quite be said of the Action Plan on Critical Raw Materials that was submitted in September 2020 by the European Commission, even though this too fails to mention the term “post-mining”, as highlighted by the UN, and other related issues. By -critical raw materials the EU Commission primarily means those resources that have special significance for the current and future economic development of the EU and at the same time present particularly high security of supply risks. The European Union, e. g., is now 75 to 100 % dependent on imports for most of its metal supplies, and this especially includes those materials that are needed for batteries and permanent magnets. An adequate supply of these key resources is considered “essential …if Europe is to assume a leading role in the green and digital transformation and remain the world’s foremost industrial continent. … The Action Plan for critical raw materials sets out to develop robust value-added chains for the EU’s industrial ecosystems, to reduce the dependence on critical raw materials by means of cycle-oriented resource usage, sustainable products and innovation, to strengthen domestic raw-materials procurement within the EU and to diversify the sources of supply from third countries, as well as to eliminate distortions to international trade while acting in full compliance with the EU’s international obligations”. This statement, which was part of the EU Commission’s official press release, shows the extent to which the subject of resource security has come to dominate European and media affairs. (11) However, as the accompanying communication from the Commission indicates (12), this Action Plan is all about strengthening the EU’s resilience in the face of raw-material problems by promoting access to resources and sustainability. These aims are said to be “of strategic importance for achieving the European Green Deal”. The EU Commission has put this into a global context as follows: “The huge hunger for resources (energy, foodstuffs and raw materials) has put the planet under enormous pressure and is responsible for half of all greenhouse-gas emissions and more than 90 % of the species decline and water shortages. The extension of the circular economy will be of vital importance for achieving climate neutrality by 2050, decoupling economic growth from resource usage and ensuring that the consumption of resources remains within the planet’s load limits.” The means for achieving this are seen to lie not only in the expansion of the circular economy and the circularity of resource usage but also in the application of measures that seek to diversify raw-materials supply both from primary and from secondary sources, along with greater resource efficiency through sustainable product design. The Commission has emphasised that “this applies to all raw materials … but especially to those rated as critical”. (13) In conjunction with the Action Plan it has produced a new “EU list of critical raw materials”. This was first drawn up in 2011 and then amended in 2017 before being updated for 2020. It now contains exactly 30 critical materials ranging from antimony to wolfram (tungsten), with bauxite, lithium, titanium and strontium having been newly adopted in 2020, while the remaining 26, including cobalt, coking coal, phosphorus and the rare earths, continue to feature on the list. (14)

With the setting of the climate targets the Commission now clearly anticipates that demand for an entire range of certain metals and minerals is set to increase rapidly around the world. Reference is made to a prognosis from the World Bank which indicates, e. g., that global demand for relevant metals for storage batteries, such as aluminium, lead, iron, cobalt, lithium and nickel, is set to rise by more than 1,000 % – when seen in comparison with a business-as-usual scenario – as part of the implementation of the Paris climate objectives to 2050. To this is added an OECD estimate which suggests that in spite of trend improvements in material intensity and resource efficiency, and the growing share of the services sector in overall economic output, total global material consumption is set to double in size to 79 bn t by the year 2060 compared with the figure for 2011. Here the Commission does not conceal the fact – while the German raw-materials strategy does not so much as mention it – that the pressure on the resource basis of the world’s national economies will simply increase if climate protection policies force a switch to low-carbon technologies. If the impact of this is not taken into account, as the European Commission sees it, there is a risk “that the relocation of the emissions containment process to other parts of the economic chain could simply create new ecological and social problems, such as pollution by heavy metals, the destruction of habitats and the depletion of resources”. (15) Decarbonisation does not simultaneously solve the problem of sustainable energy supply but simply transfers it somewhere else. The Commission is therefore advocating that the transition to a climate-neutral economy should continue to be linked to a circular economic system with the recycling of raw materials from low-carbon technologies.

Nevertheless, the climate-centred energy transition and the withdrawal from coal in the EU have proved to be drivers of the post-mining future. The Commission has used this context to thematise and address this issue and has promised in its Action Plan that the Just Transition Mechanism that is now under way will help “alleviate the socio-economic effects of the transition to climate neutrality in coal- and carbon-intensive regions”. It is claimed that this will provide opportunities for supporting the economic diversification of these regions by way of investment in the circular economy. The development of territorial plans for a just transition would, at an early stage in the process, also offer member states “prospects for assessing the potential of critical raw materials as one of the alternative business models and sources of regional employment. Many of the skills associated with mining and mining technology are transferrable to the exploitation of metals and minerals, and often in the same regions as before”. (16) In concrete terms the Commission maintains that in the EU many of the resources needed for battery production are located in areas that are dependent on coal and on carbon-intensive industries and where plans are being laid for the construction of battery manufacturing plants (Figure 3).

What is more, “much of the mining waste is rich in critical raw materials and this potential can be re-assessed in order to create new economic activities in existing or former coalfield areas, while at the same time helping to improve and protect the environment”. (17) Finally, the Commission casts a light on the post-mining issue by proposing that innovative technological solutions, applied in conjunction with the exploration, extraction and processing of critical raw materials, may also prove to be suitable “for monitoring the environmental performance of mines during their operating life and after their closure”. This would particularly involve the use of remote sensing and geo-monitoring technology via the European Union’s Copernicus Earth observation programme. (18)

What is surprising, however, is how little effort the Commission has put into exploring the post-mining opportunities referred-to and the related problems, and why even it did not undertake any kind of investigation into such an important issue as the reuse and redevelopment of disused mines. This too can be considered as a form of recycling of mining resources for sustainable applications, as was suggested among other things by the Commission when referring to the recovery and recycling of raw materials from mining waste. It is also unclear as to what kind of specific conclusions can be drawn from the coincidental connection between battery raw materials and mine site locations and their remaining mining infrastructure.

Reuse of mine sites – an international overview

One of the key issues for post-mining research is the question of whether and how decommissioned and disused mines can be repurposed in a practical and meaningful way. There are many negative examples from around the world of abandoned and even decaying mining installations that not only constitute an environmental hazard but also represent a form of capital wastage, job losses and the squandering of alternative economic options along with the attendant adverse impact that this can have at local and even regional level. At the same time, however, there have been lots of positive examples internationally of how decommissioned mines can undergo a transition into an active post-mining phase and be put to use in different and (more) sustainable ways.

For reasons of clarity and general comprehensibility the term “reuse” will be applied in this context, even though in the technical jargon the word “reactivation” tends to be used synonymously, though this can also be (mis)understood as recommissioning. However, for the purpose of this paper we will be dealing exclusively with new forms of use. Unfortunately there is as yet no international “inventory” of mine reuse projects. Having said that, in early 2020 two Australian research scientists at the Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM), which is attached to the Sustainable Minerals Institute of the University of Queensland, namely Sarah Holcombe and Julia Keenan, completed a scoping project aimed at providing a global assessment of operations of this kind. This CSRM study was part of a broad-based study project undertaken with industry partners that set out to examine the “social aspects of mine closure”. This was the first work of its kind to produce a reasonably representative international survey of developments in this area and it should lead on to further and more intensive research in this field. Here the focus was explicitly on “industry-led and financed” reuse projects of the kind that tend to predominate in the English-speaking world (UK, USA, Canada, New Zealand and Australia). However it was to prove too difficult in practice to distinguish here between industry-funded and state-driven projects because of the many partnership-based joint ventures and state and industry tie-ups that were usually needed to deliver success and the study therefore also went on to include “state-managed and financed” transition projects with industry involvement, as tend to prevail, e. g., in Germany and in many parts of Europe. As has become clear, in each and every project of this kind mining only represents a temporary exploitation of the site and the post-mining land use can be seen as intrinsic to the mine lifecycle, which is why this factor has to be appropriately addressed during the mine planning and operating phases. For reasons of capacity and time the study restricted itself to compiling a total of 141 case studies from every part of the world (Australia, North and Latin America, China and Southeast Asia, South Africa and Europe), these comprising no more than 20 cases per region. Another limiting factor was that the survey confined itself to cases where the information available was in English. The data resource used was the Standard & Poors Global Market Intelligence Database (S&P Database) that records corporate information, operating data and also mine closure data from every economy in the world, in this case updated to 2018. (19)

Almost one third of the cases included in the study were former coal mines, though the spectrum covered many different (former) raw-material extraction sites ranging from gold to granite. The analysis identified some 313 various new types of reuse, in other words an average of more than two per case study. This means that there are several parallel possibilities for reusing a decommissioned mine and its associated infrastructure, a process that the authors call “co-purposing”. While co-purposing is typically recognised as an additional option that follows on from the new sphere of activity and develops as another potential use, the study distinguishes between three planned “transition categories” for the post closure phase, that is to say for projects to be launched immediately after closure:

• rehabilitation and remediation;
• regeneration and reclamation; and
• repurposing.

The study in question focused on the third category (repurposing), for which the two aforementioned categories and their orderly implementation can to some extent be regarded as a prerequisite. The database also registered, solely for information purposes, 1,804 decommissioned mines where no new activities, culminating in repurposing, had developed. This means that such developments only came about in approximately 7 % of the total recorded cases. Mine reuse therefore continues to remain the great exception around the world. The 313 cases of mine reuse that were assigned to the study are shown in Table 1.

What is immediately apparent is that new mine reuse projects practically never entail a return to heavy industry, which means that any new value and job creation will mainly be of a low order of magnitude (Figure 4). Indeed the reallocation of fossil energy extraction to “green” energy recovery, which has been much trumpeted in the context of the energy transition, has so far at least failed to play anything other than a minor role.

The figures also show that the second and third of the three transition categories combined, which can obviously be labelled as ecological in nature, make up a good third of all cases. If one adds to this agriculture and forestry applications, along with water management, it can be seen that almost half of all new uses represent nature-related categories.

About 40 % of the projects can be ascribed to cultural categories in the broader sense, with “Community & culture” by far the largest single category of all, thereby proving that abandoned mining infrastructure is regarded as an important cultural heritage in many countries. This applies, e. g., to most of the case studies from China, which are associated with the National Mine Park Program that has been set up in that country. However Europe can also boast a number of such examples and in the case of Germany the study singles out the International Architecture Exhibition (IBA) Emscher Park and the Zollverein World Heritage Site.

Whether nature or culture, fewer than half of the most important new-use projects at disused mine sites involve primary usage and tend instead to be devoted to secondary or even tertiary use in combination with other categories. The majority of new-use former mines have in fact become something that can obviously and justifiably be called “multi-purpose facilities”.

Influence factors for new-use mine projects and lessons learned

The study identifies a number of internal and external factors as being relevant for the engagement of companies in new-use projects based on disused mine sites.

The internal factors naturally comprise the current corporate strategies, management models and standards that will essentially determine whether business models for new-use projects would be contemplated in the first place. This will in particular include the decommissioning standards that from the outset are aimed at developing potential post-mining uses and the economic activities, nature conservation issues and community objectives that result from this. It is evident that positive examples of this kind, and the highest degree of continuity in site development, are mainly associated with larger companies that are engaged in, or have been engaged in, long-term mining operations and are well established in the area in question. In the case of smaller companies and family businesses – such as in the quarrying industry – this will depend on the extent of the existing local commitments and investments. On the other hand problems will also arise – and it is here that the longer-term volatility of the mining sector has to be borne in mind – when large mining groups sell their less productive mines to smaller companies that in times of crises do not have the financial resources and social capacity to handle the closure process in such a way that new uses can be created and their preconditions met.

Furthermore, the influence exerted by other stakeholders, such as trade unions, and the level of practical involvement and cooperation with the local communities will also naturally play an important role, or to put it another way – how serious is the “beyond the gate” approach of the companies concerned when it comes to their local and regional community relations. If there is real cooperative engagement with and an inclusive approach to the communal environment during the operational phase of the mine, and more particularly if contaminated sites are dealt with well ahead of closure and mining land properly remedi-ated, there is a much greater likelihood of positive developments towards transition and new-use applications during the post-mining period. Experience has shown that innovative concepts of this kind often depend on the establishment of dedicated foundations or funds that can help those communities affected by closures to develop their own local projects and initiatives. Though it does not mention it by name, here the study clearly has in mind Germany’s RAG-Stiftung whose framework is unique throughout the world.

In addition to the abovementioned internal factors there are also external influences and circumstances that are relevant for new-use decision making. These of course include the economic aspects and competitiveness of the projects. In the case of commercial ventures the conditions of supply and demand will play a crucial role. Possible synergies with other ongoing business activities and network constellations with other new-use projects can also be pivotal in helping make a certain project economically effective. Typically this raises the question of the opportunities open to former mining companies for diversifying into alternative energy resource projects and other commercial activities, including real estate.

Another external factor of particular relevance is the location of the mine site concerned and here the study highlights the following aspects:

• the physical proximity to local communities and towns, as this may have completely changed in the case of mines that have had a long life span;
• the strength of the socio-economic and emotional ties between the local residents and the mine site, as this can determine whether new-use projects and the associated conversion and renovation measures will be backed or blocked;
• the connectivity to existing infrastructure (road and rail networks, power supply lines, etc.);
• the regional ecological value of the mine site and its potential for improving the local eco-system and the community values linked to it; and
• existing political and legal land-use concepts and regional plans.

Against the backdrop of the internal and external factors cited above a number of thematic motives for new-use projects have emerged as being particularly significant for the mining industry. The targeted economic diversification of company production beyond that of a certain commodity, e. g., or away from the narrow confines of a specific sector or industry, is now in the interest both of the mining companies and of the communities and governments, both specifically and generally on a global scale, as part of the process of an energy transition away from fossil resources and towards renewable and sustainable alternatives. When the local roots of the mining industry are deeply entrenched, especially in the case of those installations that have had a long operating life, responsibility is often taken on for the consequences of the closure and investments are made in new-use projects for the post-mining era.

This is even more the case when the cumulative impact of the mining sector or mining clusters is quite strong in a certain region and government measures are deployed in an attempt to compensate for the closures. In this context the socially responsible withdrawal from mining in the Ruhr coalfield, supported by regional measures, is singled out as a positive example of what is possible, while the often ruinous decline of many collieries in the American Appalachians, a process that was not cushioned by Government support, is cited as a specifically negative case in point. Another factor at play here is that there is now a substantial body of research findings and best practices in this area that can do much to stimulate new-use ventures. In this connection established partnerships with the local communities and ongoing remediation activities based around sustainability strategies can in some cases play a pioneering role. Finally, the motivation for a new-use project at a mine site may also result from a company’s research, development and innovation activities. Here the study cites by way of example the competition organised by a US mining company for the Colorado School of Mines (CSM) that was aimed at developing a new-use concept for a mine that was facing imminent closure. In this case the specification called for the creation of a new-use scheme that would be economically viable and at the same time of socio-economic benefit for the local communities. It also had to be socially acceptable and should leave behind a positive and permanent legacy for the State of Colorado. The five innovative concepts that made it through to the final round represented a broad technological spectrum, thus demonstrating the different possibilities that disused mining facilities have to offer – and this was of course not an exhaustive list. The final project selection included proposals for an underground pumped-storage power plant – a concept that has also attracted interest in Germany and has shown itself to be technically feasible, though is not economically viable within the present energy-policy framework. The proposals that made the final running also comprised a data centre with a technology campus, a large automotive testing facility, a biogas installation and combined composting plant and mushroom farm and a technical university specialising in environmental sciences and water management.

In addition to the identified determinants for entrepreneurial decisions relating to new-use projects of this kind the study also summarises the “lessons learned” for policy makers and the public at large. However, in view of the diverse nature of the cases and experiences included in the study these lessons can only be fairly sweeping in character. It was found, therefore, that there could be no sure-fire environmental or economic formulas for the ecological and socio-economic transition of former mining sites but rather that a regional-specific approach was needed instead. When proper remediation and renaturation measures are being applied to effect the repair of ecologically damaged former mining sites all additional scientific data and relevant social dimensions have to be considered and assimilated if the new post-mining project is to become a success model. Once a group or mines or even an entire coalfield region has been abandoned – in Germany the term “Altbergbau” is now used when referring to old mine workings and disused mining installations – state intervention and government backed interventions become an unavoidable necessity.

In this context the study also cites five “key ingredients” for a successful state and social engagement in the post-mining environment, as formulated in 2009 by the Australian expert Georgina Pearman in an earlier and somewhat more discriminating collective study of successful repurposing projects for decommissioned mines. (20) Pearman refers among other things to the considerable experience that has been acquired with the Eden Biosphere project in Cornwall/GB, a highly successful scientific and visitor attraction located in a former china clay pit (Figure 5).

The author of the study holds that this body of experience has remained virtually unchanged as a guiding principle and can even serve as a maxim for new-use projects:

• need for leadership, vision and commitment;
• local solutions that are in keeping with local conditions and therefore have to be discussed at local level;
• creative partnerships for funding, project development and implementation (formation of coalitions with community interest groups and NGOs);
• collaboration with various interested parties leading to the development of common interests;
• inclusion of local communities and consultation with them at all levels, this helping to develop shared responsibility and ownership.

From the perspective of German post-mining research it is possible to conclude from this study, and from its international review of new-use projects based on decommissioned mines, that for repurposing (reactivation in the sense of new use) and transition (structural change in the sense of restructuring, conversion and development) there now exists a considerable and increasingly extensive body of knowledge and experience that in many parts of the world has often not been exploited to any degree, and yet it is one that in some cases has yielded innovative and quite astonishing solutions – though there are still quite a few gaps to be closed, these usually being case-specific and difficult to generalise.

The situation is fairly similar when it comes to the repurposing of former mining infrastructure and installations, though here the options available are more varied. The creative opportunities that present themselves for the mobile equipment at least are certainly greater, such as using worn-out mining vehicles to build artificial reefs. Here the spectrum of applications extends from using discarded conveyor belts and other mining equipment referred to as “materials of opportunity” (MOOs) and the exploitation of other remaining infrastructure units by new users, e. g., adapting mine power stations and railway systems for municipal use, through to all kinds of new re-use schemes that mainly involve properties and real estate that are no longer used by the mining industry. However, whether or not a repurposing project will actually pay off will always depend on the individual case and on the set of circumstances involved. When it does, the long recognised and seemingly paradoxical phenomenon of the “Pleasure of Ruins” can then become a reality. (21)

In view of the growing importance of issues and challenges arising from the transition to a post-mining future, especially in Europe, this treasure trove of knowledge and experience needs to be systematically enhanced and enriched. At the same time it can be concluded that in Germany in particular the agenda that has been set for the post-mining era – and this applies especially, though not exclusively, to the decisions taken for the post-mining future of the German coal industry and the repurposing of abandoned coal mines and colliery land – has developed largely in line with the current scientific findings and the conceptual conclusions that can be drawn from them. However, it is still too early to say exactly how the post-mining future will develop and on what basis this will take place. While the German public has so far paid relatively little attention to post-mining issues in general, and the repurposing of mines in particular, this does not reflect the country’s national and – as the CSRM study shows – international status. This applies particularly to the sustainability criteria enshrined in current raw-materials policy, which as well as securing raw-material supplies also calls for a proactive approach to the end of mining-based resource extraction and to the provisions for the period thereafter – the post-mining era.

Interview with post-mining expert Prof. Kai van de Loo: “We haven’t dealt with the structural change by a long stretch”

By 2038, there will be no more coal mining in Germany – according to the government’s Coal Phase-out Act (Kohleausstiegsgesetz). Extensive work is needed now to address the future job prospects of thousands of employees in the coal and lignite industry and the affected regions, as well as support in the form of structural policy measures, says Prof. Kai van de Loo (Figure 1) of the Research Center of Post-Mining (FZN) at TH Georg Agricola University (THGA) in Bochum/Germany. In his opinion, “We haven’t dealt with the structural change by a long stretch.”

FZN: Professor van de Loo, in the Ruhr region and Saarland in particular, the structural change is portrayed as a success and virtually complete. Why do you see it differently?

Prof. van de Loo: A few years ago, politicians believed that when subsidised, domestic coal mining had been phased out, the structural change in the Ruhr and in Saarland would be complete. Today, we can see just how much of the structural change is yet to be fully processed in the coal regions – even after coal mining has ended. Just take a look at the above-average level of unemployment: In the Ruhr region, it is now back above 10 % again and has been around four percentage points above the national rate for some time. That is why the North Rhine-Westphalian regional government chose the phase-out year of 2018 as the starting point for the Ruhr Conference. It is also important to remember that structural change is an evolutionary process that never stops, as long as there is still a reasonably lively and dynamic economy.

FZN: You have spent some time examining the employment situation in former German coal regions. What is your conclusion?

Prof. van de Loo: Unemployment rates in coal regions have been much higher than the national average for many years in most cases. The only exceptions, due to more favourable regional circumstances, are the two smallest regions, Ibbenbüren (coal; stopped in 2018) and Helmstedt (lignite; stopped in 2016), and for a time Lusatia, where lignite is still particularly important for the regional employment market and closures brought about by the fossil-fuel phase-out are only just beginning but will also have a real impact in the foreseeable future. In all regions, whether they are shaped by lignite or coal mining, the primary use of coal, coal-fired power generation, and the extraction of coal will end or has ended. For the regional economy, this means that all coal regions have completely lost or will soon lose their coal-based industrial core.

FZN: What is the German government doing to counteract the negative effects and create new opportunities in the post-mining regions?

Prof. van de Loo: The government has committed 40 bn € between now and 2038, which is intended primarily to support comprehensive infrastructural measures in the broader sense. In my view, this is right and important and will lay the foundation for successful structural change in the long term, even if there is a lot of catching up to do first. But we also need incentives for private investment from outside and within the coal regions in order to generate new value creation and create new job opportunities there. The new jobs must be created primarily in companies, not just in authorities or scientific institutions, and must be an attractive proposition for these companies. The funding instrument, which is rather conservative in design, seems to have scope for further development in this respect.

FZN: How can effective and appropriate employment incentives be created for the affected regions? Will we see coal mines transformed into technology parks?

Prof. van de Loo: Structural change usually generates productive new jobs not only in other sectors, but also in other regions, i.e. not necessarily on the former mining sites. Previous experience in the mining industry around the world shows that closed mines and their infrastructure, if actually put to new use at all, tend to be used for cultural or nature-related applications. This does not generally create much added value or generate many new jobs. Former mining sites therefore need targeted, long-term support. Although it does always depend on the local circumstances, there is often potential for new commercial, energy-related or other applications. As previously used industrial areas, former mining sites are usually relatively well-equipped in terms of infrastructure, i. e., and are less likely to have issues with acceptance.

FZN: How can the coal industry heal itself?

Prof. van de Loo: It is perhaps a bit too ambitious to talk about “self-healing,” as the coal industry is completely losing its original business model due to climate policy after all. However, the coal mining industry and coal users – whether in power and heat generation, steel production or other segments – could and should be given opportunities to contribute their expertise and their sustainable economic potential to the structural change process. Value chains should be maintained wherever possible – particularly in the interests of the regions and in order to preserve jobs. There are various strategies and levers to facilitate this. Thanks to the coal mining industry, we have expertise in perpetual tasks, e. g., in water management, geomonitoring, mining-related cultural assets and land development. From an economic perspective, this can give rise to new processes and products, and in the future potentially even entirely new markets. During the energy transition, there are a lot of ways in which the coal industry can support the switch to other energy sources, particularly renewable energies, including geothermal energy, the use of mine gas, and energy and heat storage (Figure 2). The industry also has strong links to areas such as hydrogen production, CO₂ recycling, e-fuels, waste processing, the circular economy and various other environmental technologies. All of this can develop if given the time and means.