1130 market scrutiny make operational decarbonization a competitiveness issue [6], [7]. Industry commitments and implications for the mining decarbonization agenda and powersystem context. Major international mining companies operating in Peru have publicly announced medium‑ and long‑term climate targets, including substantial emissions reductions by 2030 and commitments to achieve net‑zero emissions by mid‑century. These commitments increase the urgency of deploying effective mitigation measures within this decade, with a practical focus on reducing Scope 2 emissions through low‑carbon electricity sourcing and addressing Scope 1 emissions from fuel‑intensive operations, particularly heavy‑duty mobile equipment. In this context, Peru’s power‑system outlook provides a supportive enabling framework: according to COES long‑term planning assumptions for the SEIN, the generation dispatch mix in 2026 is dominated by hydropower and natural gas (approximately 48% and 39%, respectively), with wind and solar representing about 13%, while toward 2036 the share of wind and solar increases materially (to roughly 39%) as hydropower and natural gas decline to around 36% and 25% (11). This evolution reinforces the near‑term relevance of renewable electricity sourcing mechanisms (such as PPAs and attributes) for mining Scope 2 decarbonization, while maintaining system reliability as variable renewables scale. 2. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE The objectives of this paper are: i. To identify the principal energy‑related sources of GHG emissions in mining operations relevant to the Peruvian context. ii. To assess the alignment of mining decarbonization options with Peru’s climate policy and reporting framework, including national GHG inventory practices and recent policy developments related to low‑emissions energy carriers. iii. To evaluate a portfolio of decarbonization solutions based on renewable electricity, renewable fuels and renewable hydrogen, considering technology readiness and operational applicability to mining environments. The scope of the analysis focuses on operational emissions associated with energy and fuel use. While the relevance of upstream and downstream emissions is acknowledged, the paper concentrates on mitigation options directly applicable at the mining operation level. 3. METHODOLOGY OF APPROACH The methodology combines three layers: (i) global 1.5C-aligned pathways (IPCC/IEA) to define boundary conditions [1], [2]; (ii) Peru-specific public sources (World Bank CCDR background note and Peru’s UNFCCC inventory) to ground the case study [6]–[8]; and (iii) an integrated energy-system perspective to compare portfolios of renewable electricity, renewable fuels and renewable hydrogen under mining constraints. Solutions are differentiated by maturity: near-term measures emphasize renewable electricity sourcing, efficiency, and drop-in renewable fuels, while medium- to long-term options include hydrogenbased solutions for heavy-duty applications, aligned with Peru’s emerging policy framework [9], [10]. 4. KEY RESULTS AND INSIGHTS 4.1 Operational emissions drivers and technical prioritization In mining, the main controllable operational emissions typically come from: (i) liquid-fuel combustion in heavy-duty mobile equipment (haul trucks, loaders, drills), (ii) stationary generation where grid access is constrained, and (iii) electricity demand for processing, ventilation, pumping and auxiliaries. Because heavy-duty fleets combine high energy throughput with long asset lifetimes, they are a high-leverage target for near-term abatement in Peru’s context [6], [7].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2