UN may set new course on ‘critical’ transition minerals

Claudia Velarde is co-director of the Ecosystems Program at the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), Stephanie Weiss is a project coordinator at AIDA and Jessica Solórzano is an economics specialist at AIDA.

The global push to use renewable energy sources to reduce climate-damaging emissions has exposed how the environmental and social costs of extracting the minerals needed to do so fall disproportionately on local communities and ecosystems.

Many argue that electromobility and renewable energy technologies will help mitigate climate change – but their wide-scale implementation would require a significant increase in the extraction of minerals such as lithium that are key to their development.

According to World BankExtracting 3 billion tonnes of minerals over the next 30 years is crucial to powering the global energy transformation. International Energy Agency It also plans to quadruple the extraction of mineral resources by 2040 to achieve climate goals.

Yet the rush to extract these so-called “critical” minerals threatens to exacerbate the crises they are meant to help solve, deepening ecological degradation and perpetuating socioeconomic injustice in the global South.

Q&A: What you need to know about clean energy and critical minerals supply chains

Simply labeling these transition minerals as “critical” creates a false sense of urgency by reinforcing the current harmful mining system and failing to consider the protection of communities, ecosystems and species in areas of extraction.

While mainstream strategies emphasize technological solutions, a deeper analysis reveals that without addressing the broader implications of mineral extraction, the pursuit of a greener future may only deepen existing human rights and environmental abuses.

Principles supported by the UN

The UN Secretary-General’s Panel on Critical Mineral Resources for the Energy Transition was established in April this year to identify common and voluntary principles to help developing countries benefit from the fair, equitable and sustainable management of these minerals.

The panel is an odd bedfellow – not least China and the US – and will need to work hard to build consensus to set principles and recommendations for governments, companies, investors and the international community on human rights, environmental protection, equity and equality in value chains, benefit-sharing, responsible investment, transparency and international cooperation. It needs to raise its level of ambition and listen directly to civil society organisations and rights holders, including local communities.

Our reflection on what the Panel cannot ignore points to three elements: AND current state approach to “development”, high levels of technological optimism regarding mining, and a lack of urgency regarding the limits of ecosystems and community rights.

Indonesia is changing traditional indigenous land to the nickel industrial zone

First, We are aware that the Panel is under pressure from influential entities, but it will have to counter the claims that mining always contributes to the economic growth and prosperity of nations. This status quo perspective reinforces the idea of ​​unlimited natural resources for human consumption, echoing the promises of economic development made in the early 20th century.t 1990s, which contributed to the current climate crisis.

Dashboard can’t fail consider the possibility of degrowth or imposing restrictions on mining activities that could lead to reduced material and energy consumption. Neither should this be neglected? other forms of traditional and local knowledge that may create opportunities for alternative development.

Then, when it comes to the impacts, pollution and other disruptions to ecosystems caused by mining, it is consistently stated that assessments and analyses are necessary – and that they can help to preserve ecosystem integrity.

The panel must recognize the irreversibility of certain effects of mining on ecosystems that are already visible. This contradicts the optimistic view that all mining problems can be solved by technology, which is both false and unrealistic. Furthermore, it undermines the precautionary principle, which calls for protective actions to be taken when harm is suspected, even before it is scientifically confirmed.

Finally, in the dominant narrative, transition minerals are found in “empty” places, considered devoid of life, where only the resources that can be extracted count. This ignores both biodiversity and the traditional communities that inhabit these areas.

Indigenous rights at risk

More than half of the minerals needed for the energy transformation are found nearby indigenous territorieswhich are already struggling with the effects of the climate and ecological crisis, such as extreme drought, chronic water scarcity and limited water availability.

These impacts may be exacerbated by pressure from mining projects and extraction activities that are already struggling with the effects of the climatic and ecological crisis, such as extreme aridity, chronic water scarcity or limited water availability.

It is essential to ensure that indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination is respected; to obtain their free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) before projects begin; to conduct human rights and environmental due diligence; and to ensure not only that damage is remedied but that local people are able to maintain their own cultural, social, economic and political life.

Tug of war of lithium:USA and China compete for Argentina’s white gold

Furthermore, current plans for the extraction of transition minerals are limited to the scale of a given mining concession, do not take into account the cumulative impacts of other entities operating in the same area, and ignore the socio-economic activities that are already taking place in these ecosystems.

Instead, it is necessary to ensure the biocapacity of ecosystems to maintain their life-supporting functions and the diversity of uses by communities in territories, not only industrial ones. Decisions on mineral extraction should not be made solely on the basis of market demand, but also on the biophysical limits of ecosystems and, more sensibly, on the sustainability of water systems.

The UN Panel was created at a time when we can apply the lessons learned from the historical impacts of mining around the world. This requires the Panel to raise the level of ambition of its work by generating and promoting binding guidelines and mechanisms.

The Panel, meeting in Nairobi this week, is working to set the rules of the game, defining principles and recommendations that will be formally presented at the UN General Assembly in September. It has a unique opportunity to oversee a significant change in the global energy system—one that we cannot afford to miss.