Stop me if you’ve heard this one before – critical metals miners and producers walk into a bar and ask for premium pricing for their ore/refined products based on “green” attributes…
Anyone experienced in conflict minerals is saying “Yeah, I know this one.” Even so, Financial Times reports that
“Global mining companies have called for a green premium for sustainably produced nickel traded on the London Metal Exchange, as a flood of allegedly ‘dirty’ supplies from Indonesia squeezes profits for producers. BHP, the world’s largest mining group, and Australian billionaire Andrew Forrest, who owns miner Wyloo Metals, have been pushing the LME [London Metal Exchange] to distinguish between so-called dirty nickel and cleaner supplies. Nickel mining in Indonesia, the world’s largest producer of the electric car battery and steelmaking ingredient, has faced growing criticism from environmental groups for causing forestry loss, mining waste pollution and high carbon emissions because of its reliance on coal-fired power.”
More than 10 years ago, mining interests and processors of tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold (“conflict minerals”) pushed for price premiums on ore originating from sources that did not fund armed groups perpetrating human rights violations, mainly in sub-Saharan Africa. The market saw the metals as nothing more than commodities, with pricing and quality overriding ESG/sustainability attributes so the “ethical price premium” went nowhere. But who knows – times have changed. Maybe it will work this time and the joke is on me.
If you aren’t already subscribed to our complimentary ESG blog, sign up here: https://practicalesg.com/subscribe/ for daily updates delivered right to you.
