 |
| OECD |
Experts and indigenous peoples’ leaders have called for an end to rights abuses and environmental destruction driven by the growing global demand for critical minerals.
Critical Mineral Mining Under Fire Ahead of OECD Forum for Fueling Conflict, Deforestation, and Indigenous Rights Violations
At a briefing held in Paris on April 30, ahead of this week’s OECD Forum on Responsible Mineral Supply Chains, Indigenous leaders and environmental advocates raised grave concerns about the global push for critical minerals—such as nickel, lithium, cobalt, and copper—warning that their extraction is accelerating deforestation and threatening Indigenous rights.
The event was co-hosted by Securing Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in the Green Economy (SIRGE), a coalition of Indigenous-led and allied organizations, and Fern, a European environmental nonprofit. Both groups stressed that the expected surge in demand—up to three billion tons by 2050—is not only driven by the energy transition, but increasingly by military manufacturing, with minerals used in weapons systems deployed in conflict zones.
Dr. Julie Klinger, associate professor at the University of Delaware, warned that “defense contractors absorbing these minerals under the guise of national security is undermining climate goals and prolonging war.” Klinger also noted that current conflict mineral legislation, including the OECD’s, fails to account for minerals used outside extraction zones, especially in military contexts. She called for robust, new policies to ensure that supply chains serve a livable future, not continued conflict.
Speakers argued for stronger protections for Indigenous peoples’ land rights, emphasizing that violating these rights can lead to project delays and increased costs. SIRGE Executive Director Galina Angarova warned that extractive projects ignoring Indigenous consent could face millions in unexpected costs, asserting, “Mining companies can’t afford to ignore us.”
New Study Warns EU EV Plans Risk Mass Deforestation Without Urgent Reforms
Coinciding with the forum, a new study commissioned by Fern and Rainforest Foundation Norway, titled "Driving change, not deforestation", presented stark findings. Carried out by researchers from négaWatt and WU Vienna, the study is the first to model deforestation risks linked to future EU electric vehicle (EV) mineral demand through 2050.
Findings show that under a business-as-usual scenario, Europe’s EV metal demand—expected to reach 24.5 million tonnes annually by 2030—could cause 118,000 hectares of deforestation, equivalent to 18 football fields of forest lost every day for 25 years.
However, the report proposes an alternative “CLEVER scenario,” based on shared mobility, smaller vehicles, and reduced travel distances, combined with a shift to lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries. This model could cut projected deforestation by 82%, down to 21,300 hectares, while also reducing copper and cobalt demand by 43% compared to business-as-usual projections.
The study also analyzes three sourcing strategies. The worst-case “Forest at Risk” scenario—relying on high-deforestation countries—could increase impacts by up to 266%. Conversely, a “Forest and Peoples Protection” scenario, which prioritizes metals from low-deforestation countries, could cut impacts by 41%.
Indonesia and Brazil were identified as top deforestation hotspots across all scenarios.
Djalma Ramalho Gonçalves, a writer and Indigenous leader from Brazil’s Aranã Caboclo community, criticized the EV industry’s hidden costs. “Paris has Europe’s largest EV fleet, powered by lithium mined in sacrifice zones in Brazil, Chile, and Bolivia. Every EV car is powered by Indigenous blood,” he said. “We are not against technology—we are against a predatory model that violates rights and destroys the land.”
Tags
RAREMETAL
