CSIR on its involvement in mining technology

Meeting report

CSIR on its involvement in mining technology.

Prof May Hermanus, Executive Director: CSIR, said the essence of the presentation arose out of the fact that there were some serious issues that needed to be addressed in the areas where the CSIR was active.

South Africa had significant mineral reserves and was a mature industry, with easily mined deposits with high grade deposits already extracted. However, in mining operations and particularly in gold and platinum, one aspect of the legacy of the past was that mining was labour intensive long after changes were manifest elsewhere. Looking at global trends in the sector, the move was towards technology intensity. In developed countries, a lot of work had been done to ensure that the technology required was locally manufactured and that beneficiation had been upstream of the extraction process.

Another challenge was that the Research and Development (R&D) capacity in the country was reduced and fragmented. Thus, it was very hard for any institution to get a perspective on the whole value chain and how it was working together. There was no overarching strategy for the mineral value chain. This was being addressed by different departments -- Science and Technology, Mineral Resources, and Trade and Industry. The problems to be resolved by R&D had changed in focus and scope, and needed to be addressed as a system. There was also the problem of natural resource trade-offs. There was therefore a need to ask what was it that was required of the mineral system.

Prof Hermanus said that South Africa had an abundance of wealth in mineral reserves. The country was the first in most minerals -- chromium (72.4%), manganese (80%), titanium (65%) and gold (12.7%).

The mining sector had driven the development of the energy sector and both of those sectors pulled in and demanded services and products from a range of sectors. It was a key block sector. Its contribution to GDP was 7% direct and 10% indirect. Though the sector was very labour intensive, this was at odds with which the sector operated globally. It was estimated that one miner supported 12 to 15 dependents. Labour intensity went to the length in which one could extract minerals. The NDP had called for increasing employment and growth in the country. Mining, and moreover the minerals value chain, had a critical role to play in the development of the country.

Prof Hermanus identified the challenges in mineral extraction. Not all problems could be resolved by R & D. These problems included depth of mining and lower grade deposits. Therefore the country needed to think about the technology that went into mining which would ensure the work environment was safe and the ground was secure. Cost considerations and the risks associated with deep mining had increased. There were variable commodity prices, and low productivity due to mining methods and skill shortages. Natural resource trade-offs involving land use water, arable land, sterilization of land, and environmental impacts, as well as new coalfields, limited infrastructure and high quality resources, were some of the challenges in mineral resource extraction. She emphasised the nature of mining being a one-off project -- once the mining had started, the minerals were no longer there for future purposes.

Professor May Hermanus said there were a whole range of problems that needed to be continually worked on in the areas of the mining value chain. The role players were the Council for GeoScience, which was involved in exploration, the CSIR, which was involved in extraction, and Mintek, handled the processing. The National System of Innovation supported R&D along the value chain through the government Departments of Mineral Resources, Science and Technology, and Trade and Industry.

Looking at the R&D in South Africa, the big gap was in extraction and mining. There was no overarching minerals sector strategy, and no overarching R&D strategy involving the various government departments. Capacity and funding availability were inter-related. If there was no funding, there could be no R&D. However, funding alone could not jump-start R&D – human capital, in the form of experienced researchers, was required in addition to funding. She also remarked that long-term projects were being replaced by short-term projects. Although funding around the world was generally driven by governments, when the private sector had retreated from R&D, the state had not stepped in to improve the situation.

Capacity and funding availability were inter-related, and R&D capacity in South Africa had peaked in 1989 at approximate 800 full time researchers, with 660 at the Chamber of Mines Research Organisation (COMRO). Overall mining (extraction) R&D strategy was held by the COMRO. However, steady declines in all the major disciplines of mining had been recorded, and new focal points and issues had since emerged. There were now fewer than 50 people in full-time mining research, most at the CSIR, with a concomitant decline in membership of professional societies, such as the South African National Institute for Rock Engineering, and the Mine Ventilation Society, both of which were struggling to meet the demand for members’ expertise.

Referring to funding, Prof Hermanus said the exploration sector (CGS) had received R290 million in 2014, with R270 million in the form of government grants. The amount of funding for the extraction sector was uncertain, possibly of the order of R60 million, with small contributions from the Mine Health and Safety Council (MHSC) of R25 million, R10 million from the CSIR, and private funding of university chairs and specific projects. Mintek’s funding for beneficiation was of the order of R487 million in 2014, of which R209 million was in the form of government grants.

In the extraction section (mining operations) there was virtually no collaborative research funding. Coaltech remained the only industry co-ordinated collaborative research funder, focusing on productivity and environmental issues. Sector level funding of occupational health and safety was made traditionally via the MHSC’s Safety in Mines Research Advisory Committee (SIMRAC), and was in the region of R25 million per annum. This was a reduction from R40 million per annum. The CSIR received around R10 million a year in grant funding from the DST, which was focused on human capital development (HCD) and the generation of new knowledge. With industry funding, the emphasis was on private funding of projects at universities, research chairs and collaborative programmes. MHSC funding was predominantly for occupational health and safety (OHS) research. Its research was informed by past incident statistics, and was focussed on preventing further losses. The MHSC had developed a Centre of Excellence, using selected services providers as preferred research providers. The operational model was not yet finalised. The annual reports indicated that in excess of R180 million of research funds had largely remained unspent.

Highlighting the way forward for mining, Prof Hermanus said the approach had to be strategic and coordinated. In the extraction sector, R&D should be informed by clear strategy. This could be achieved through a long term focus, informed by local conditions and global developments, building on capabilities and offerings of all role players, especially the country’s remaining experts, but co-ordination, collaboration and acomplementary effort was needed. Funding arrangements should be informed by strategy through skills levies (directed to HCD for research and development), NRF funding of high level R&D skills, rents and royalties on minerals, and tax incentives. A mining R&D hub would allow for consolidation of research laboratories and infrastructure, with national mining capabilities and offerings housed at the CSIR. Access to MHSC funding would be explored

The Mining Phakisa provided an opportunity to rebuild R&D. The aim of the Phakisa was to enhance mining activities in strategic areas aligned to National Growth plan. Mining had been identified as a key sector. The timing coincided with discussions between institutions and among stakeholders about developing a mining sector R&D strategy, with specific attention to mining /extraction.

Prof Hermanus said that the CSIR responded to national priorities in line with its mandate and in support of the NDP. To achieve this, the CSIR had identified research impact areas to focus its research and development, implemented flagship programmes that addressed significant challenges on a national scale through multi-disciplinary RDI interventions, and introduced integrated responses to national initiatives and strategic collaboration with government departments, state-owned enterprises and the private sector.

Through its multi-disciplinary research, development and innovation approach, the CSIR could address the many significant challenges across the value chain, and could also contribute to maximising efforts together with other institutions. The CSIR worked through research impact areas, and the Mining Research Impact Area under discussion would address:

• Efficient, safe and competitive production, to improve efficiencies while reducing 
• exposure to hazards;
• Natural resource trade-offs, to minimise the impact on the environment and surrounding communities, and to maximise land use opportunities post-mining,
• Value add post-mineral processing, by upgrading and value adding to South African minerals via local manufacturing and production;
• Research and innovation, through building an innovation culture.

Prof Hermanus concluded by highlighting some of the initiatives of the CSIR to date. These included:

• Competence and capability mapping across all of the CSIR Business Units of offerings to the mining sector. The focus was on CSIR integrated capabilities for the Mining sector rather than just dedicated mining capabilities.
• A business plan for Kloppersbos Flammable Gas and Coal Dust Explosion Facility.
• Coordinating a workshop on current SA mining strategies.
• The DST was engaging the CSIR to manage the Rock Innovation Programme.
• It was involved with the NRF in exploring an international collaborative programme between SA, Finland and Chile.
• The CSIR had engagements with China via the Beijing General Research Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (BGRIMM), exploring a collaborative mining research programmme.

Discussion

Mr J Lorimer (DA) asked the CSIR to comment on the effectiveness of private versus state funding for R&D. What was the future of labour intensive mining in South Africa? How were local safety practices compared to those in other mining jurisdictions? As regards overarching R&D strategies, was there an example of a jurisdiction that had a government-organised overarching R&D strategy? Who else carried out significant R&D into deep level mining in the moment?

Mr I Pikinini (ANC) commented on the ageing of the laboratories. He remarked that during the visit of the Committee to the CSIR, they had noticed that the laboratories were aging. As a result, a process that could take two or three days took weeks to produce results. It was necessary for the state to promote development of equipment which could assist in the process of beneficiation. South Africa had to have a strong R & D capacity to be able to compete with its contemporaries in mineral extraction, and therefore should invest more in R & D. He asked what kind of investment the state could become involved in to change things around and save the country from a collapse of the mining sector.

Ms V Nyambi (ANC) asked for further details on the shortage of skills and the ageing of researchers. She asked whether the CSIR had a programme for interns as well as bursaries in order to equip the future generation in the mining sector.

Mr S Jafta (AIC) noted that in one of the Committee’s oversight visits, it had been revealed that the demand for exploration was increasing in South Africa, so given the R&D constraints that had been cited in the presentation, he asked the CSIR to comment on the future of the mining industry in South Africa. Where exactly would the intervention of the state be seen?

Mr Z Mandela (ANC) sought clarity on the challenges in regard to building capacity and training. He said the country was scoring low on the level of its researchers, as they were not as qualified as their counterparts in other regions on the African continent or the rest of the world, where researchers were holding PhD and Masters degrees. What could be done to ensure that South Africa was more competitive? What was the CSIR doing to ensure that South Africa produced highly skilled individuals that could compete and engage at a high level? What had led to the drastic decline in the number of full time researchers. What could the government do to ensure that the Department was able to grow and have a sufficient number of qualified full time researchers?

Mr M Matlala (ANC) said that the MHSC was not operating. There was a budget of R25 million per annum which had to be used for the services of these centres. He wanted to know the reasons for the inability of the centres to operate. He asked if the CSIR had a strategic plan in place to address the challenges mentioned before with regard to mineral extractions. For instance, he noted that 400 miners had been trained but there was no indication as to where those miners had been placed.

Response by CSIR

Prof Hermanus said that in terms of private versus state funding, the question of effectiveness was a misnomer in the sense that state funding was usually projected towards what needed to be addressed in the future. There were different roles for the two sectors. Private sector funding was usually focused on immediate problems that needed to be resolved. With funding for research, there were different interests for the state and the private sector, and their different efforts should be complementary. 

Referring to labour intensivity in mining, she said there was a real problem in one looked at what was happening in the country. It was not known if South African mines were slowly becoming mechanised or whether they had been closed without mechanised options and it was happening by default, because the global trend was towards open cast mining and technology intensivity. If there was no perspective as to how the industry was to operate and how to mechanise the whole value chain, it automatically meant that the industry would find itself marginalized. 

Safety practices in South Africa were comparable to those elsewhere. However, considering the type of mining done, there were many workers underground and the country’s mines were different to the open cast mines that were seen in many countries around the world.

On the overarching R&D strategy, she there had been a letter from Canada about the Mining Innovation Commercialization Accelerator (MICA) which was involved in mining innovation and whose technology was available not only in Canada, but around the world. This was an example of how the state supported the future of the sector. The few researchers left in South Africa were the ones the Canadians were often communicating with. This ensured collaborative efforts.

The mining sector should make sure the training required by mine workers included understanding the hazards of working in coal mines. The 400 miners referred to had been sourced from the mines, and after their training they would immediately go back to the mines as workers who were more aware of safety issues. 

Ageing infrastructure was a significant issue, and considerable investment was required. With ageing infrastructure, research which would normally be conducted inside the country would have to be handled outside the country. The mining companies would have to take their research questions elsewhere.

To resolve the problems surrounding the mining sector and see the country in the light of “Team South Africa,” companies needed to contribute more. Outside the mining sector were companies that were prepared to see it as part of their responsibility to contribute to the building of R&D. The R&D field was global, and people who worked in this sector had to publish their research, which was usually verified by others elsewhere. The way countries stayed in R&D was to patent the technologies that came into the system. There had to be a commitment from everybody to ensure that people working in R&D stayed in South Africa. 

The kind of investment required from government was the development of an overarching strategy for the mineral sector. Only the government could lead this initiative and bring all the parties to contribute to this idea. Such investment should be focused on replacing the ageing infrastructure. This would keep the young researchers in the institutions.

The fact that engineers were being underutilised showed that there was insufficient work for the researchers. Though the organisation equipped young people at the moment, young researchers in other countries had earned their PhDs by the age of 30. South African researchers achieved their doctorates very late. In many of the R&D careers, especially in the sciences, one could only start when one had obtained a PhD. The CSIR could assist by identifying people and fast-tracking their career path. NRF internship programmes had been used to address human capital development in mining, but there were few interns in the CSIR with a mining focus. 

Regarding the ideal age of the researchers, Prof Hermanus said that at the moment there were a few very senior people who were literally within two years of retirement, and there were also very young people. However, there was nobody in the middle ranks. A pipeline was needed that took researchers through from the lower to the top levels, and not the bi-polar situation there was now. The big danger was that if the senior people retired, there was no indication of what would happen to the juniors. 

On exploration and the future of the mining industry, the big issue was to understand where the mineral potential was, and to be careful where the mineral potential was realised over time. There must be planning for future generations. The mining sector was going to undergo very serious questioning about the way mining was being carried out. If mining costs increased -- and they were increasing because of all the externalities attached to mining, such as the cost of cleanup, etc – the recycling of metals and minerals would become a big issue. There was no idea as to how that would be done properly because at present there were materials that could not be separated effectively. This raised the problem of how to manufacture in such a way that when manufacturing was completed, it would be easy to separate the material into its constituent parts and re-use them.

Mining was no longer a labour-intensive activity around the globe. The mining industry had huge externalities, and the question was what kind of R&D intervention was needed to actually reduce the difficulties it faced.

On the Mine Health and Safety Council, there had been some discontent about research work that had been done and had not been applied in the sector. Thus funding had stopped while there was an attempt to get the sector to get new technology. For a long time, the research had not addressed the problems the MHSC was facing, and where investment in research was needed. The current issue with the Council was a cause for serious concern because it also spoke to a disconnect between the funding decision-makers and the people who actually conducted the research. Without the opportunity to work, researchers could not be developed. Furthermore, the MHSC spending was a drop in the ocean when one looked at the research that needed to be done. 

Mr Lorimer asked who the big players in the Waterberg were, and whether all mining there was going to be underground or open cast. What would be the pay-off if there were increased funding to the CSIR for mining-related research? Why had the CSIR ended up doing the titanium project, and not Mintek?

Prof Hermanus said the situation in the Waterberg was that mining licences were in the hands of small and medium scale operators. The problem with mining, and mining R&D, was that one needs deep pockets. When there were small players in the mining industry, there were fewer and fewer resources to invest in R&D. 

Aside from other issues, the Waterberg mines were looking at the possibility of extracting energy from the coal bed itself, without actually mining the coal. There were a number of questions over whether there were alternative ways of extracting energy from the resource.

Regarding investment in research, without clarity as to where the CSIR was headed and without the backing of both government and the private sector, there would not be a clear pay off. The successful R&D countries, Australia and Canada, worked very closely with their R&D institutions, the private sector and government, to look at what the next steps were. In the short term, the pay-off would be improved infrastructure for the laboratories.

There was no reason why the CSIR was working on the titanium project, although it might have to do with the special properties of titanium and the very special material needs. There were a number of CSIR capabilities around building completely new processes with completely new materials.

Consideration and adoption of Minutes

Mr Z Mandela moved the adoption of the minutes of 27 May 2015, and was seconded by Mr Jafta. The minutes were adopted.

Ms Nyambi moved the adoption of the minutes of 3 June 2015, and was seconded by Mr Pikinini. The minutes were adopted.

The meeting was adjourned.