Here we will attend to the root causes of and reasons for past and

current mining practices in relation to its impacts on nature and how we

can mitigate that impact for mining in the future and this planet.
Finally, we hope to provide usable information on how mining
should coexist with nature. This will be a draft of the possibilities of what
can happen when we take our home (nature) seriously. See explanatory
graph about the cycle of mining Fig. 1.

OPERATIC-h

R!MfDLUION FII$Í STAGE Of MIMHG

Figure 1. Mining Cycle.

BACKGROUND

Mining developed back in the Stone Age and continues up to

modern civilization. The focus of this paper is to purposer interrupt the
evolution of mining with its disregard for nature. Traditionally. mining is
basically digging and shipping with economic, social, and environmental
effects that are highly controversial. When we compare a country
without mining like Switzerland or Finland with those that have mining
(Peru, Africa, et cetera) we see that we relegate countries with natural
resources to provide for countries without them. What happens is that
the countries sans resources are not polluted and have clean water,
those with mining produce environmental crises. Manufacturing of
resources to products occurs in the northern areas without resources;
the other countries provide the mined raw materials. Those raw
materials are shipped all over the world. Without question mining is
essential to human existence. However, without consideration to nature
and its resources, we will not have planet to exist on thus making mining
null and void. Is this model appropriate to the planet? Currently, mining
is linear and fragmented and therein lies its obsolescence. lt needs to be
integrated in accordance with the laws of nature. Our mission should be
to understand that we all share a common goal and all have the same
human needs and the materials produced by mining are essential to our
mutual existence and therefore oonstruct a way, in which mining can
continue without rescinding our only mutual home, our planet.
The majority of extractive mining technology was established over
200 years ago. Age does not necessarily entail wisdom; unfortunately,
that's a fact in mining. Even the old tried and true mining technology has
an expiration date by the simple fact of advances in new sciences and
engineering. Old technologies yield higher active and passive dilution, in
mineral reserves not extracted at any mine closure, low safety, high
pollution, high energy and water utilization, el cetera. ln many other
Copyright © 2016 by SME
 ABSTRACT

Mining makes civilization p o s s i b l e . It also creates socio-environmental liabilities forcing us to ask how much more of this mining Can our planet support. It is clear that
the future o f mining differs from mining in the future. The laws of nature a r e b eing compromised by mining- This paper studies the problems at the cone of the mining
business which need to be addressed. What kind of mining will serve our existence with n a t u r e on this planet? What k i n d of mining Perspectives
are we able to formulate without having negative effects for future generations? ls mining technologically sustainable? The values of predictions, imagination, and creativity
must be integrated to define what mining should be. Those values should be in the technologies necessary to restoring equilibriumof nature
(Geomimic) as well as in complete extraction of metals, better utilization of the mineral reserves. and design the usage of metals to recycle. The purpose ofthis
research is to examine many views and perspectives for future generations and to accelerate the pace of innovation of having mining without socio—environmental
liabilities by design and by understanding nature.

KEYWORDS: Geomimic, Sustainability. Waste mine Design.

Management by Los.

INTRODUCTION

The future of mining is being stifled by many antiquated and stagnant attitudes and policies by the industry and society as a whole. The time is now or
never for real action and education against these attitudes and to upgrade them to meet the current needs of this planet if we are to survive. Doing this will
prove that we understand and respect nature for us and our posterity. It will also show a positive assessment that the mining process can be reversed
before the point of no return. And that is to say, only if reversibility is still an option. It may not be anymore but it's worth a try. We need to use our
imagination and engineering know—how to come up with new proposals to change the core of mining. It would entail re-engineering. There is a
profound difference between the future of mining and mining in the future. The
future of mining is the continuation and persistence of past practices in the industry and expecting new results. Mining in the future requires a paradigm shift
for extraction through modem thinking about mining as it pertains nature. The new paradigm for mining in the future would restore equilibrium with nature. Always
keep in mind the connection of mining to nature. What is the future of nature?

To predict mining in the future we need to use past experiences in mining and our knowledge of modern science and engineering to formulate a
prototype that will enhance mining while maintaining equilibrium withnature. Mining and protecting nature are not mutually exclusive. This new prototype has
nothing to do with the level of bonding or insurance that the mining industry can legally provide.

The goal of this paper is to contribute some new ideas to help transform the mining industry based on the laws of nature and its limitations. Using this
new prototype we will develop the following

1, Extraction of minerals Reserves-Dimensions-Technolog¡es

2. Usage of mineral resources-Manufacture's products designed to be reused and recycled
3. Nature— Equilibrium (physical. chemical and biological)

Here we will attend to the root causes of and reasons for past and current mining practices in relation to its impacts on nature and how we can mitigate that impact for mining in
the future and this planet.

Finally, we hope to provide usable information on how mining should coexist with nature. This will be a draft of the possibilities of what can happen when we take our home
(nature) seriously. See explanatory graph about the cycle of mining Fig. 1.

BACKGROUND

Mining developed back in the Stone Age and continues up to modern civilization. The focus of this paper is to purposely interrupt the evolution of mining with its disregard
for nature. Traditionally. mining is basically digging and shipping with economic, social, and environmental effects that are highly controversial. When we compare a country
without mining like Switzerland or Finland with those that have mining (Peru, Africa, et cetera) we see that we relegate countries with natural resources to provide for countries
without them. What happens is that the countries sans resources are not polluted and have clean water, those with mining produce environmental crises. Manufacturing of
resources to products occurs in the northern areas without resources; the other countries provide the mined raw materials. Those raw materials are shipped all over
the world. Without question mining is essential to human existence. However, without consideration to nature and its resources, we will not have planet to exist on thus making
mining null and void. Is this model appropriate to the planet? Currently, mining is linear and fragmented and therein lies its obsolescence. lt needs to be integrated in accordance
with the laws of nature. Our mission should be to understand that we all share a common goal and all have the same human needs and the materials produced by mining are
essential to our mutual existence and therefore construct a way, in which mining can continue without rescinding our only mutual home, our planet.

The majority of extractive mining technology was established over 200 years ago. Age does not necessarily entail wisdom; unfortunately, that's a fact in mining. Even the old tried
and true mining technology has an expiration date by the simple fact of advances in new sciences and engineering. Old technologies yield higher active and passive dilution, in
mineral reserves not extracted at any mine closure, low safety, high pollution, high energy and water utilization, el cetera. ln many other industries, obsolete technology has been
replaced by the modem. Not so in mining. Is it the duty of mining engineers and their companies to rid themselves of these antiquated technologies and usher in the new, considering
what mining does to the planet?

The newest extraction technology was established in 1903 with open pit extraction (Bingham Canyon Mine, Utah). The “fever of scale” to satisfy the big demand of minerals for 7
billion people does not justify what that 112 year—old technological marvel does to nature, especially with mineral resources that are finite, exhaustible, unsustainable, non—
renewable, and paying once and recycling eternally in a finite planet. The extraction of minerals presents a contradiction in the dimensions of production with mass of infinite range,
with the mega—mining without mega—remediation. What is next after mega-mining? And what will be ' the mine waste management in that range of production? Those
contradictions dimensionally are described from the micro presentation of metals, given by nature, to macro human interpretation of production, at this point are causes of conflicts
to the planet, which involves the generation of “useless materials” after mining, which accumulates in “monuments of imperfection” surrounding any mining area around the world.
How many technologies were eradicated due to its incompetence and expiration?

Finding larger and better ore deposits in the future will be almost impossible. Due to impractically. funding richer ore deposits is just about over. Have we reached the maximum
discovery of world class deposits? How many world class ore deposits are actually still left and “extractible” only with advanced technology? The reality of exploration for finding
richer grade ore deposits is being exhausted. There remains only the location of low grade deposits in deeper horizons with great impacts on the cost of new projects, which,
under the traditional model of mining in scale. demands new metallurgy as priority. Mining needs to extract not just the core element of its raison d'être but all the other elements
found in that same mine. In spite of having polymetallic ore deposits, we purposely constructed monometallic mines. It is a fact that decisions such as this one only
deplete the supply of minerals, stress nature, and create great natural imbalances. What is the future of mining exploration? How much risk represent for investment?

Economy is the priority of mining. In order to maintain that priority, the industry must change its business practices and follow a different economic model. Recently, many
projects in world class mines have produced “obscene” profits without sharing any of that wealth in any manor, shape or form with its surrounding communities. Outside of the
United States conflicts arise because the mines are owned by the communities but private mining companies have the money and extractive instruments. The
communities do not benefit from their own mines hence conflicts. There needs to be some farness negotiations between the mining companies and the mine owners (the
communities) where extraction occurs. Some communities are in a “new mode" of relations with mining. They are choosing to be part of the entrepreneurship's
core as shareholders because of the proven social benefits derived from the “unlimited profits" of the industry. The inequality of benefits from mining is deep-rooted; it is
the manifestation of a model that has been corrupted. This is a wakeup call to the industry to redefine itself for a different future. Equator principles and other mechanisms for
the execution of mining projects are being developed with more of what is the trending result of non-mining? At this time we still allow unsafe mining that promotes slave labor,
including children, with many violent, social, and environmental infractions. it should be of major concern to mining that these conditions have not been eradicated.
How long this economic model should last?

Paying only once is a big issue in the interpretation of wealth that still exists based on the fallacy of cheap minerals. Minerals are not cheap; there are no cheap minerals on
planet Earth. The market still accepts minerals despite all major infractions committed (blood diamonds, dirty gold) for the curve of supply and demand. When the demand is
high it's as if people reproduced exponentially; and when the demand is low it's like those people were killed by the plague. Albeit absurd, that is the fundamental dictates of
the free market. To further illustrate, financial markets function under the notion that buying decisions are based on 80% emotions and 20% perception. Still, minerals
are not valued by society because the market considers them item of speculation with a minimum inclusion of externalized costs. What is the fair price of metals?

It is obvious that mining is working in the model of linear—fragmented production of minerals that presents a multiplier of inefficiency, ineffective, and inefficacy in both,
energy and water utilization equivalent. Minerals travel around this planet from comer t_0 comer without objections to the ecological footprints they leave in their wake.
Concentrated minerals don't have much of a benefit to society or to nature, Minerals are being reheated. retreated, and they W35tº energy and water in the manufacturing
process. Simply put we don’t think of this initial imbalance when considering the advantages of manufacturing. Nature offers the table of elements, and then ln extraction
we need to think in micro dimension and the recovery and seize of the table. Otherwise, this production of imbalance will haunt the next generation. Also, it is observable
productivity in minerals resources. The misinterpreted definition of productivity, which is not to have an obtained production by time (ton/time), they must measure in
energy and water consumed per ton of mineral in time, resource obtained to resources utilized (energy/ton and water/ton). By meaning this is mane than normal parameters to
be measured exactly at any extraction place (Productivity & Competitiveness in Mining, M. Javier 1998)… The relations on productivity must be expressed in energy &
water per unit of metal produced, it is considered as the definition able to remark and register the footprint of mining in nature. Mining in reality is trapped in its way of
thinking. [1] The new mind-set must be implemented as tools of new mentality by new formation from the academy. Academic mining must stand up in its role in society. The
new thinking from academic mining will make a mindful evolution of the mining industry.

The increasing population and its lifestyle are demanding more minerals than in the past. China is becoming the factory of the world for its cheap mass materials. These two
things create a scenario that mining is bad and ugly. The Chinese are mining aggressively in a world “hungry for minerals resources". They are mining under an austere
Chinese model which is of concern to mining professionals because they are mining without the demand for new technology, exploration or limited extraction rate, in short-
term projects (life mine); they are buying companies, and offering a lot of promises that legal frame of those rich minerals countries allowed for its infancy in mining globalized.
Jobs trade, as business attainment has found its limits. Actually, Chinese miners are thinking that to “save” exploration and discovery costs. it is promoting a fair and legal
mining business. in fact, it is a transference of costs from one generation to the next that soon will face serious consequences to the core of entrepreneurship. The
consequences short-term comfort will soon be suffered. Nowadays, knowing that those strategies are “killing" the future of mining and also creating liabilities to miners in the
future doesn't move them to change. it poses an assortment of questions on linking mining to the future. How can we stop this mining “madness”? Where are we going
with this type of mining business? Who will pay for the effects caused by those strategies? What will the planet expect in trade with the Chinese waves of “progress mining”?
When will this model of its development and expansion be stopped? What is the risk to nature after mining and how do we evaluate the management of resources for companies
and government? is extraction a lucrative or social benefit or both? It is a model of dying mining for scarcity soon without any respect to the next generation because they
will need minerals too. This scenario poses a question: what kind of mining will be left to the next generation? Specifically, how do we find meaning in this planet when the
natural “values" are destroyed by the unlimited extraction of its minerals and leaving ecosystems in disarray? More research is needed in mine technology that satisfies nature.

Fair negotiations are under scrutiny. We are looking for the social formula of equality in order to equate the benefits. justification of the companies, and the acquisition of lands.
This not only reflects in the exchange for “vaporizing” money—trade of tangible for intangible print paper, where ethically is the limit to justify that communities will lose
their ancestral rights on the lands but the social epic of changing a social—economic system in the short term for a new invasive system with uncertainties known in the
idiosyncrasy of people. If people do not understand mining, then they cannot understand their own future after mining. That many treaties and legal documents were so easily
broken is an irony of history. Truer words were never spoken than those by George Santayana when he said "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." In fact,
the consequences of mining need to be in the thinking process before digging commences not after the damage is done. Prevention is more cost effective in many ways than is
mitigation and remediation. This should be the goal of mine design today. We can no longer negotiate socially and environmentally but technologically. Our technological level is
generating liabilities that cause social—environmental conflicts. Our mining legacy is derived from rejecting any opposition to mining, at that time, what kind of technology do we
have in place that is able to give a different result from the past? Currently, fairness in mining business is purposely limited; if we are able to pursue the value of money in time, so,
we must do the calculation of value of the resources in time, in order to achieve an “optimal NPV", too. What is the level of fairness in the mining business?
The definition of sustainability in mining is vague and complex. Let us build upon the premise and considerations to sustain this proposition presented, mining is in the mind of
being by nature unsustainable and ¡national to produce in infinite scale, it was and will be illogical to think in an infinite resources frame on this planet, and worst to talk about
“creation of values" is amoral, because value nature is controversial and unreasonable beside being a provider of life. Utilizing the fashionable word sustainability, let us propose a
framework for a definition: What in mining deserves to be sustained for posterity? We, as miners, know that the extraction—zero waste is not designed yet, we live in a limited
resources planet where by mining is depleted. Suggesting, what will be in mining after minerals resources are depleted? What kind of design will be able to support the stage? It is
known that technology drives economic, social and environmental implications. Mining technology does not satisfy nature, yet. Is the actual mining technology sustainable? The
balance will be efficiently social accepted and natures beneficial between extractions zero waste with the consumption of zero disposable by design, it could be a better future of
mankind. These concepts must be inclusive to the mining in the future. In the other condition, mining has worked under the VACUUM THEORY during the extraction, in other
words, after extracted those minerals we create a deficiencies of materials, where the swelling factor of materials is unable to fill it, by facts, it always symbolized the deficiency of
materials. Sustainability expresses mankind's extinction in time, obviously it depends on how well we develop a relation with nature, what kind of host can we be in nature in time?
At present, it is necessary to have proven technology integrated that will be able to satisfy nature's needs. Geomimic is an alternative to have future, as model in mining and any
other anthropogenic activity. [2] (Source: Definition of Nature Friendly Sustainability, NFS. It sees in Fig. 2.).

PRESENT MINING
The main achievement of mining is for mankind to enjoy a civilized life but not to educate society about mining. We achieved multiple aspects to “provide" and show the highest
civilization in time of this planet and at the same time we created an extreme disturbance in nature by exploiting minerals with no manageable dimension. It is 'equivalent to
abandoning our planet because we have another one to live in!

Mining's main core is economic; hence. we reach the highest point of profitability because we made an industry of extraction as a proven profitable business for generations. Mining
has not lost or changed its core in economics. It is still the obsession of cost optimization and the increase of values from the zero initial cost from nature. Dominance of doctrine in
the entrepreneurship is having the highest production at minimum cost of investment. There are many cases from the experience where mining was saving cost at the expense of
safety; it was legal up to a certain time but due to repetition and high frequency we were able to change and set up regulations in safety matters. Regulations were installed that were
never intended to suspend or interrupt mining but improve its responsibility. Through history. the wealth from mining continued providing better profits mainly to shareholders. it
does make Sense. because no investor will invest money to lose. At least in the mind of investment would be irrationality in exercise, which nobody could be accepting. The
binomial of winner and loser established in standard business calls the attention to why do we have nature on the losing side after mining?

In the technical and technological aspects mining has reached its level of repetitive liabilities in any comer of the planet. One of the most energy—consuming parts of the mining
industry is comminution, which is to reduce the size of mined material in preparation for further processing. It is framed in energy and water utilization distribution. Mining still is
battering in many ways that nature challenges without finding an understanding of nature. in order to satisfy nature fordoing mining, they are having a miscommunication, which is
asks what is the extraction technique necessary to optimize particle size and crushability? How long can we be in drilling and blasting? What is the compromise to the next generation
on mineral resources? Measuring performance in mining industry is the results in energy and water equivalent per unit of production. It is also measured by the quantity of waste
generated and emissions. Mining has extremely dependent on internal combustion of fuel fossils. How long can we be a “slave” to the world engine? Pollution here is pollution
anywhere. Mining technologies are delivering a higher rate of active and inactive dilution and the scale of production is manifesting its effects in the mineral reserves for the next
generation. Attending to technology that it has an expiration date, and also, it is part of its design to questioning: Can we the next generation continues this model of mining? It
would be a repetition of socio—environmental liabilities and to deny the capacity to create a new mining for the next generation. It would be necessary to know what level of
industrialization in mining is acceptable in the future and, also, how much the mining industry is investing in “new” technologies? How many technologies were discarded for being
indefinable to nature? Two trends are observable in mining; first, the irony of automation (not people) to get an Intelligent mine, a safer miner, decreasing operating costs for higher
profitability and maintaining the indicator of performance in measuring ton/hour—man. This trend is aggressively vane and perverse to have unmanned mine operation and to
declare that safety and productivity are improved. These are contradicting the socially responsible statements of mining companies so what are those statements interpreted to mean?
And second, the administration of data to find less investment due to the domain of data, which will not necessarily improve business by, for example, the replacement of equipment
or application of cost opportunity. Both trends are oriented toward pure economical goals and not to wards satisfying nature's demand.

The inventory of mineral reserves is resolves that every year there would be fewer and fewer minerals for the next generation. This trend is revealing the limit of exploration,
practiced as strategy by many companies. which is a sign of not much future. How much money is investing in exploration per Companies? ls increasing or decreasing investment
in exploration? Lately. people are investing in and buying companies with at least balance in the social aspect from governments and communities. Simply, it is a hunting season to
“eliminate” the smallest (“the shark business"). This social license is getting more strict every year all around the world. This is another sign that doing the same thing cannot yield
different results. Those re5ults are only becoming important financial indicators which, in the bottom line of business, are not clear and fair for the future.

It is demonstrated that mining could improve social conditions as well as improve economic status until it creates inequality at the most, except MINING CAN NOT IMPROVE
the environment or NATURE. Who is the has-been in this “game”? Of course, nature that later nature in distress always reaches its level of balance, to wait for this to happen is
irresponsible. Here, prevention is in por interest. In the end of these achievements of mining to humanity are still trapped in a doctrine for the highest production at minimum cost
for the infinite profits with matters that have the characteristics of being unsustainable on a finite planet. This idea of limitless is absurd.

FUTURE: VIEWS AND PERSPECTIVES

In order to write the future we must make the journey to use our imaginations intensely to try and grasp a reality that must be created. and to. release facts that will be done without
having a direct generational communication to assert for the good prediction, of course. the references to those topics are subjected to manage of uncertainties that are a difficult
and complex matters, as well as, the lacking of direct communication with next generation to satisfy their needs harmoniously in nature. Those situations are confirmed by assessment
of what is expected to happen in every mine around the world. From those issues we draw on all those decisions made in mining, which are still a dilemma for nature. Also, when
we analyze mining in history, we only see recorded facts rather than looking for solutions to some "cover" at this instance, we only assist to register as such. As we see, those that
defied nature are spotted; therefore, through this paper we will provide different Views and perspectives into our relationship with nature as a closed system that sustains life.

Now, in order to make an impact in mining we must think of nature, otherwise, we suffer the complications of unpredictability sustained by those experts. Of course, many other
experts will ask “mining in the future at what cost?” Knowing that experts are people of arrangement with the past rather than future. experts in what was similar to geologists, that
they are more deeply concerned with the past and not the future. The unattended consequences of mining are pervasive and static that we need “experts in future" or tomorrow today
that requires many other qualities to design mining in the future. At this point the views and perspectives of mining in the future are:

Extraction
Reserves of minerals on this planet must be understood as limited and consequently in the future we cannot proclaim to growing infinitely. It is a fallacy to claim the infinite
extraction of minerals. We also need to learn about deproduction and rationalization over mineral needs. Extraction cannot be exclusively in monometallic mines because that is
contradictory to the polymetallic presentation of nature. From this interpretation, it a new classification of mineral reserves will be required where geological reserves should be
equal to mining reserves; it would be a simple condition to formulate mining. Clarifying that nature gave us the table of elements and our understanding must be a complete benefit
from it, and not to speculate with a linear and fragmented model of business. It became obscene to promote in the infinite extraction frame on our planet. Extraction must be based
on waste zero by design. Nature only works in physical, chemical, and biological equilibrium.

Technological issues are vital to mining design according to time, which means expired technologies must be eradicated because they are producing high dilution, high generation
of wastes, highly contaminant, highly pollutant, highly system in the production of disequilibrium, fragmented from digging to shipping frame, inefficiency in the consumption of
water and energy do not benefit nature. Geomimic is an important alternative to implement in every stage of the extraction of minerals because it would be the technology of nature.
Again, mining waste must be designed to benefit nature. It is no longer acceptable for mine waste materials to be transferred to the next generation of miners to be fixed.

Mining engineering must design the waste at the outset and should not be optimized as goals in mining because it is only permissible to optimize some of mistakes and errors
considered in the initial design; well design does not need optimization. The obsession of optimizing cost and increasing values of assets in the short term is ¡Il—mannered and
must be eradicated in mining. ln practice. this is a manifestation of exhausted thinking. The vacuum theory in mining could be considered as a factor to inset in mine closure and
also to consider the mine as big crusher in order to consume less energy and water (dry mining) and opening and closing mine in conjunction with those strategies applied in mining.
we could transform in some ways the essence of operation and will be able to present mining with conflict—free by design to the next generation of miners.

At the end of the day. the philosophy of entrepreneurship must be replaced by new thinking in mining including communities as shareholders because the model of entrepreneurship
has reached its maximum level of validation; therefore, it needs to be reengineered. The role of the academy is in society, mining has the only refugee of reengineering in the
academy, therefore, mining engineering requires a different professional profile, in which by formation would be equipped with many mental tools to think differently. Only in this
way can we achieve different results in mining. These subjects are presented to be addressed for intense academic research. ln Fig 3, see the flow of mining project. [1]

Usage of Minerals
Minerals cannot be exposed to denigrate and destroyed as we did in the past. The manufacture of things using minerals has an important characteristic of being unsustainable;
therefore, its handling must be with respect to nature. The substitute and other conditions in manufacturing should not underestimate the minerals. By doing an inventory of metals
from the beginning of human usage, we will discover a deficiency because many artefacts and usages of metals were without an equivalent in nature. High quantities and qualities
of metals were discarded in unrecoverable situations. The usage of minerals must have a DESIGN TO BE RECYCLED, reused, and restored in order to keep some mineral reserves
for future generations. The future directly involves mining for the next generation. which is the balance between the extractions with the wise consumption of minerals resources.
We have only one planet and it has well defined limitations.

Nature
After and during mining nature is being reduced to complete disequilibrium. it is not admissible to have nature in a state of unrest. Mining must not treat nature as it has in the past.
The consequence of any future mistreatment of nature by mining is extinction. We need to ask ourselves just how much extraction will nature be able to support? What is capacity
of disequilibrium of nature? Can we get another planet for future generations? What does nature require to maintain its equilibrium? Nature has its own technology that was_
perfected _many geological years ago without human interference. It is our mission to listen to nature. GEOMIMIC is the vision for mining. Geomimicis a good starting point in
funding the technology able to satisfy natures needs.

Mining still deals with socio—environmental liabilities as un the past. It is not admissible that exploiting laws to save tax regulations with unrest nature. They are useless tools
Of “human entertainment” because to change the legality of mining is not a solution to nature’s demands. Nature is nature.

DISCUSSION
As we expressed, mining creates division of attitudes, in one side, those who are part of the future, and the other side, those who are part to resist the future. At this point, we must
address those important arguments over changing mining. People know that is hard to make predictions, but we are sure that those present results in mining cannot continue in the
next generation. It is our concern to deal with the problems created by mining today rather than tomorrow because later could may be too late. i would rather to be vocal and wrong
in my predictions than to remain silent now and have the worst case scenario actually come to pass. We present those predictions to contradict the traditional wisdom that says the
future is impossible to predict because it's not here yet. ln saying “the best way to predict the future is to invent it," we may alter the reasonable conditions to bring great mining
explanations that they did not exist before. The measure of success is in contradiction to what is appropriate to the equilibrium in nature during and after mining with the continuation
of unrest nature. It is important to ask ourselves, not only, is what the future of mining but what is the future of nature? What cost of productivity is sustainable? Is nature cost the
answer? How much of this mining is harmful to humans? In the future, to what extent when we are mining will we be able to restore equilibrium as nature requires. We cannot have
other way because nature cannot continue in imbalance state forever, which break all rules of the universe.

The hypothesis that mining has no social issues, neither economic nor environmental issues but technological issue will be addressed this discussion. Mining cannot remain in its
economic and political scenarios. Technological matters will be admissible in new thinking on achievable goals under equilibrium would result in a model in equivalent of nature's
values. What kind of mining are we leaving to the next generation? What is in the social, in the nature, in the economic, in the technological matters? Around the world, we use the
same technology that generates socio—environmental liabilities. Nothing is new because that technology predicted the results in accumulation of monuments of imperfections as
can be confirmed in any mining area. Our focus is on a new value for applied technology in mining.

And also, to provide solutions by orienting information toward professionals on how we can shape responses to mining problems based on a multidisciplinary approach. Mining
has generated a lot of data that we do not know how to use, yet. What is the limit of data in developing an intelligent mine? The irony in this exercise is that we call it an intelligent
mine with no humans at the helm. It's all automated. To develop more discussion on the subject, we present a statement that: the MBA as profession in the mining industry is a
“waste of intelligence", because they tend to postulate: higher production at low cost to infinite protit8with limited minerals that are unsustainable in a finite planet. This reality is
absurd in mining. It requires update or reengineering. We must generate a new core of mining business in the future.

Academic mining is relevant for mining in the future because it is Implicitly assigned to provide the tools of the trade to think differently in mining and to satisfy nature. We cannot
deny the creation of new mining to the next generation. Why do we want to leave a mining with liabilities to next generation when we are responsible for those liabilities? We do
not want to upset traditional preconceptions because it will lead to the reality supported by present facts that mining cannot continue constructing monument of imperfection as in
the past. Therefore, we present invitation to address our industry about nature concerns; we live in an ecosystem but not in an economy system. Research on technological mining
must consider that innovation costs money and creativity is free. The future of mining would make your offering obsolete rather than mining in the future that we are developing
creativity and turn it quickly into innovation for the benefit of nature equilibrium by technologically solution. The mining academic would brain storm ideas to achieve the harmony
in nature through research of technology and accomplish its role in society as creator of knowledge.

Sharing the entrepreneurship with mining communities is the deal of the future model of entrepreneurship. It is remarkable that mining companies are such as, when having mines,
otherwise they are only companies. They must have the mines to represent mining companies. It is a well—defined trend in communities that accept its participation in the shares
of the companies; otherwise, mining companies will be rejected from their territories. The conditions of mining in time have been changed; therefore, mining companies must
change too. How many people the earth supposed to have, in order to have balance between extraction and consumption of minerals resources?

CONCLUSION
Human evolution was truncated by the ambition for power to control nature. Mankind in itself is the host of multiple bacterial in balance, similar condition supposed to do in its
surrounding, nature. Our interpretation of balance is relegated to mining, in spite of our own balances and nature's laws of equilibrium. How do we interpret and respect nature in
relation to mining will reflect on our identity as a species for the next generation - should we not mine ourselves into extinction before then.