Miguel Cardozo: There will be 30 years of good copper prices; Not taking advantage of them would be collective suicide

Perumin 36 culminated in Arequipa. This meeting brought together the main Mining companies that extract metals in Peruvian territory. In this interview, Miguel Cardozo confirms that the world will demand a lot copper, mineral declared critical and whose important reserves are only in Peru and Chile. However, he affirms that there are several projects that have not prospered due to social conflicts and the State’s delay in promoting these investments.

—In this edition of Perumin, the theme once again revolved around the same thing, the enormous possibilities that Peru has to develop based on copper… However, there is always a “but” to achieve it.

—I think you are having the wrong perception. As a country we have a dynamic, a policy, that since 2016 is uncertain and complicated. It takes away our competitiveness. We have problems with regulation, with the speed of permits.

—Are there many procedures to get a project done?

—Apart from that, we have other things, problems related to the water, energy, diversity of inclusion. On the energy issue, all climate change. We know now that this is a unique opportunity. Here it is not that the prices of metals have risen and then they are going to fall, but rather that they will remain at these high levels for 20, 30 years because the demand for copper It will last all that time. All forecasts are going in that direction. However, we are not moving at the speed to take advantage of that.

—Are there no adequate policies to unblock mining projects?

—There is no solution, but there is progress in understanding. This event will not end in a greeting speech, but in concrete proposals.

—Do you feel that things have not yet been done seriously by the Executive? We have had a transition due to the change of government.

-Totally true. We don’t want to change the government. It doesn’t matter who governs if he does it well. Our problem is the State, the apparatus. Ministers are representatives of a Government that has positions that do not necessarily coincide with those held by all government officials. State.

—In Peru, are there policies, roadmaps, plans for what you want to do?

—Yes, and we have said that, the knowledge is there, the experience and the quality of knowledge has increased, and, in addition to that, the will to do things is also growing. Now him Minister of Energy and Mines He already talked about the single window. A few weeks ago they made a scandal because Víctor Gobitz (president of the National Mining Society) He talked about the single window. The Minister of the Environment He came out and said “that’s not in our plans.” And this time they are publishing it, it is concrete. It is progress, we have to analyze and give our proposals, but a door is opening.

—Some critics will say that environmental standards will be lowered with the single window.

—I’m not worried about what the anti-miners say. They have well-defined ideological positions and they will continue saying the same thing. We have to work on the real facts. That means what attitude or actions the Government so that our projects can advance and the country can grow.

—You have mentioned the term ‘anti-miners’, can we talk about that adjective?

—When people have a fixed, invariable, radical position, for decades saying the same thing, what do I call it? (…) Tell me another way that is gentler and I will use it. He is a person who is opposing without arguments. Don’t tell me that mining and all the Extractive industries They understand each other in the same way as 20 years ago. No, then.

—The Minister of the Environment said that the commitment of mining companies must be to lower their emissions by at least 20%, and to desalinate the sea for their operations.

—If necessary, use saltwaterwhy not use fresh water that is available next to the mine?

—Did you say that the priority was the population?

—Then stop throwing away 60% of the water assigned to peasants, to agriculture. They use 20% and 60% goes to the sea. In other words, I let it go to the sea, and then they tell me to take it out again. How much does mining cost? 1.5% water and recycle.

—And then why does the State have this position?

—Because there are many myths and the State officials themselves say things that are not true. It is 1.5%, they are official figures, I’m not lying. You can’t ask me why the minister says that, ask her.

—But did you say it in Perumin?

—Yes, we criticize her for that too. There are things in people’s minds that stay fixed. Those little phrases antiminers Everyone repeats them, officials who don’t know. It must be denied. We spend 1.5% and we would spend less if there were no opposition to the construction of dams. The case of the Tambo River is classic (area of ​​influence of the Tía María project), where everyone loses. The Tambo valley is an agricultural valley, but it has pollution, but it is not from mines. There must be contamination from some small mines.

—They say that this contamination comes from Aruntani, a formal mine.

—That is much further back and comes a little, but not the pollution that violently harms agriculture in the Tambo valley. What is harmful is boron of volcanic origin. When you are in places where there is mineralization, arsenic appears, but borax is something else, it comes with the volcanic waters. Farmers cannot export their products, they have to sell them locally, which means that the prices of their products are half of what they could be. They do not have enough water because they do not have it technical. It is a disaster. If you put a dam on top, neither the arsenic nor the boron are going to get in. They are going to go through a plant and they are going to be processed, clean water, and the pollution is over.

—If things are so easy, why do we finally end up dividing?

—Because we have a story of that type. When have we really agreed in the last 200 years that we are a republic? Everything has been fights, before of another kind. Then others came in ideologies and we have all had access to international ideologies that have polarized us and we are ‘happy’ on that path. We are wasting time and making no progress. But, this time, missing this opportunity would be almost collective suicide.

—Did mining before the 90s have no responsibility for pollution issues?

—But that has been done since pre-Inca times. There are environmental liabilities that are pre-Inca. Did they know what things they were doing or not? Yanacocha had mercury mines. The mercury was lying around, and that is pre-Inca, and then the Incas, the Spanish, and everyone did that. And in the 90s, awareness regarding the environment was awakened on a global level. We made a lot of mistakes previously, but those who made them are gone. Those who today do the mining exploitation They are not the same as in the 60s. Are there environmental liabilities? Yes. Do they need to be fixed? Yeah.

—Many people think that the Tía María project is not going to work because of the environmental problems that Southern caused due to the Ilo smelter and that the fumes reached there.

—When is that foundry from?

—Fifty years ago.

—Have they already corrected it or not?

—Of course, they had to correct it.

—Why don’t you say: They wanted to correct it or they have corrected it. We get used to talking like that. That’s what we have to change. Our language is always disqualifying, no matter if we are informed or not.

—This position of the Government regarding the Tía María project leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

-No. A month and a half ago, more or less, the Minister of Energy and Mines declared that the southern company had informed him that they were in a process of dialogue with the population of the Tambo Valley and that they were making positive progress, and that the company thought they could reach an agreement. The Government has been informed by the company. The Government was not intervening in that dialogue. Was Tía María on the Government’s agenda? No. Today, has the Government entered into that dialogue?

—Not that I know, but the State must be a mediator.

—But the dialogue continues. Perhaps the minister said something that has been misinterpreted, I don’t know if that was his intention, honestly. The minister has said we want this to happen, that the project go ahead. And it’s not like she’s fighting with the Prime Minister, they’ve been together. It’s just the use of an unhappy phrase and that’s it.

—Do you think that project is going to come out?

—I hope so too and, if the dialogue that is taking place, as it says Southern, It is moving forward and it is real, I don’t think they are lying, because this has failed them so many times that I don’t think they dare say something that is not. If so, yes. And it seems that the issue is that the residents are beginning to realize the importance of having that mine and water.

—Today there has been a concrete offer from González Rocha to build the dam.

—That was part of the initial project of Southern. The anti-miners took it out, excuse me.

—You accused me of not qualifying and you do it.

—It’s just that there has been political influenceWe cannot be naive either. I am not going to say that they did not agree with the community. At that time when the Aunt Maria project He was practically expelled, associations of agricultural producers from the Tambo River have been with us defending the project, but the population that had nothing to do with the valley was the one that opposed it, with radical positions, violence and everything else.

—The mining sector does not have a political representation that defends its interests, it is like a ghetto, does that worry you?

—It’s not a ghetto. We are not isolated. Now we are even talking with the Government. In this Perumin We have been talking with ministerswith the governors.

—And why so much resistance?

—Because it’s already a custom. There is clearly an opposition attitude. We have to break that opposition convincing people. That’s what we’re trying to do.

The one stop shop

—The premier admitted that the procedures for a mining project are cumbersome. There are more than 43.

—They are talking about a single window and have explained that, if there is a project (National Environmental Certification Service for Sustainable Investments). That is done now. This request must be evaluated by all the specialists from the different institutions that must review the project. How has it been so far? Each one did the work on their own, they duplicated each other, they contradicted each other, they delayed each other. Today they are going to physically work at Senace and the response to our request will be only one. Is it going to be a time reduction mechanism? Definitely. Unless in the process the officials end up disagreeing and do not reach an agreement.

—Do we have prior consultation in exploration?

-For any indigenous community that they are going to explore (they are going to do five drillings), they have to do a prior consultation It’s going to take a year. Has no sense.