Legislation preventing the recycling of mining waste

Mine waste is the single largest waste stream generated in South Africa, accounting for 87.7% of all waste generated in the country.

By Lorren Haywood, Benita de Wet, Willem de Lange & Suzan Oelofse*

The magnitude of environmental damage associated with acid mine drainage and leaching from mine waste dumps globally is rated by the European Environmental Bureau as “second only to global warming and stratospheric ozone depletion.”

Merely addressing the environmental damage is not enough to mitigate the impacts. A more proactive approach is required. Avoiding waste generation by using smarter mining techniques, as well as the reuse of mine waste in other applications, would bring about alignment with the waste management hierarchy and support South Africa’s transition to a circular economy.

Numerous uses of mine waste have been documented globally, including aggregate and fill material for construction, structural additives to concrete, topsoil for agricultural activities, backfill, landscaping material, and aggregate in roadbuilding. Mine water is often used for dust suppression and in mineral processing, industrial cooling, and – with proper treatment – even for irrigation and domestic use.

The mine water purification plant supplying water of drinking water quality to eMalahleni Municipality in Mpumalanga is an example; however, uptake of the reuse of mine waste in South Africa has been slow.

The CSIR investigated the main reasons for the slow uptake of the reuse of mine waste in the South African economy and discovered that legislative and governance issues are the primary reason. The

research findings were first published in the journal The Extractive Industries and Society in 2019, which highlighted the following key issues hampering mine waste reuse in South Africa:

The lack of a clear definition of mine waste

Mine waste is not defined in South African law. The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (No. 28 of 2002; MPRDA) defines ‘residue deposits’ and ‘residue stockpiles’. These definitions are carried forward into Category A: Hazardous Waste of schedule 3 in the amended National Environmental Management: Waste Act (No. 59 of 2008) in 2014.

In the MPRDA, residue deposits and residue stockpiles are considered to be resources with reuse potential, whereas the same residue deposits and stockpiles are defined as waste streams in the Waste Act, schedule 3. This contradiction creates confusion on the legal status of the material and consequently hampers the development of any business case for the reuse of mining waste, or associated markets.

Mine waste is classified as hazardous waste

Listing residue deposits and stockpiles as Category A: Hazardous Waste in schedule 3 significantly impedes the reuse and recycling of mine waste. Even though the reuse of hazardous waste is technically and legally possible, the bureaucratic processes and legal requirements for obtaining the required environmental authorisations for reuse are challenging.

Approach to environmental management

Another, perhaps less obvious, issue is that current legislation is aligned with a ‘cradle-tograve’ environmental management approach, despite the national government imperative towards creating a circular economy, which calls for a ‘cradle-to-cradle’ approach.

Consequently, all materials considered to be waste from the mining process are only addressed in terms of environmental management requirements and reuse is not a major consideration of that management process. The cradle-to-cradle approach not only focuses on reducing, minimising and mitigating environmental impacts, but also encourages the uptake and reuse of mine waste as inputs into other industries. It is, therefore, not enforced and, consequently, closing the loop on mine waste is not possible.

Conflicting mandates of authorities

The responsibility for the regulation of mining activities and their environmental impacts is split between two departments to avoid conflicts of interest in the regulatory mandates.

However, mine waste remains a contentious issue by virtue of the fact that one department views this material as a resource for future mining, while the other department is concerned about potential environmental damage from a waste management perspective.

Reusing mine waste as an input into the secondary resources economy, as envisaged from a waste management perspective, permanently locks all future opportunity for remining from a mineral extraction perspective.

Therefore, tension remains, and the conflict is not conducive to promoting the recovery and reuse of mine waste. In fact, it traps the residue between being a byproduct with economic value and being an environmental hazard.

In the study, the importance of suitable, well-aligned legislation, clear unambiguous definitions, and appropriate classification of waste streams were identified as necessary to enable and drive the development of a secondary resources economy – including industries supporting the repurposing of mine residue and waste. Failing to fulfil these requirements first will make it impossible for anyone to build a business in reusing mine waste.

Furthermore, the benefits to be realised if the largest waste stream in South Africa is reused or repurposed far outweighs the cost associated with the clean-up and mitigation of environmental damage caused by mining.

The environmental benefits will be complemented by socio-economic benefits, including increased employment and improved living conditions for those living in currently and formerly mined areas.

*Lorren Haywood, Benita de Wet, Willem de Lange and Suzan Oelofse form part of the Sustainability, Economics and Waste Research Group at the CSIR.