Lithium Mining: Coming Soon to a Desert near You
The high-altitude Atacama Desert, in northern Chile, lies in a double “rain shadow” whilst experiencing extreme temperature fluctuation and intense solar radiation, making it the driest non-polar desert in the world. It is remote, sparsely populated, dessicated. Some river beds are believed to have been dry for 120,000 years, yet beneath the ground vast reserves of lithium-rich brine have been collecting for millennia under its salt flats. Pumped into evaporation ponds, the same intense solar radiation further concentrates the brine until it can be shipped and processed into lithium carbonate, and later into lithium metal oxides used in the rechargeable batteries needed to end our reliance on fossil fuels. From this lonely, lunar landscape, we are extracting the material foundations of a zero-carbon world.
The Atacama region has been continually inhabited for 12,000 years and is today home to 350,000 people, including 20,000 indigenous Lickanantai people. The region is famous for its pink flamingoes, as well as at least 200 species of flowering plants, and many endemic species of plants, animals and microorganisms. Many local people are supported by a booming tourist industry, while others live off the land, using traditional methods of irrigation that make the most of the little water available to cultivate pomegranate, maize and grapes, and sustain their herds. This way of life and the unique biodiversity of a poly-extreme habitat are threatened by lithium extraction. Local communities believe that as the brine is pumped from the salt flats it creates a subsidence around the salt flats, into which flows the fresh water from the aquifers that should sustain them.
Who is served by alternate framings of a landscape? Who controls access to the data on the environmental impacts of mining? Who gets to decide which places are worth protecting? Should it matter if the place you are trying to protect sits on top of resources that could be used to help reduce the worst impacts of climate change?
These are just some of the questions posed by the emergence of lithium as a key ingredient for the electrification of transport and the incorporation of more renewable sources into our energy supply. An extra layer of complexity is added to this situation by the fact that the amount of lithium being extracted will be unlikely to keep up with the demands of entailed by rise of EVs and the needs of renewable energy sectors; resource scarcity is driving geopolitical competition.
In Extraction: The Frontiers of Green Capitalism Thea Riofrancos takes us around the world from the Atacama Desert to Brussels to Portugal to Nevada and back to Chile to tease out the connections between environmental and indigenous activism, corporate power, the legacies of colonialism, and the great power struggle that is looming between China and the USA over lithium.
The green capitalism of the title does not turn out to be an environmentally responsible form of capitalism, but rather refers to the creation of new supply chains that are being labelled green because of their supposed role in addressing the climate crisis. Mining is one of the most environmentally costly sets of practices in which humans engage, yet the climate crisis is providing new opportunities for mining companies to shore up their reputations and present themselves as climate saviours. When the American multinational Albermarle describes itself as a company that has “come together to move the world toward a better, safer, more sustainable future,” it could be easy to miss the fact that it is a mining company with a history of corruption and malpractice. Wind turbines will need 350 million tons more iron by 2050. Solar panels are projected to require 200 million tons of material: mostly aluminium and copper. The supply chains of green capitalism are long and technologically complex, but they all start with spades in the ground and they all require huge investments of fossil fuel energy.
The role that lithium ought to play in fighting climate change is highly debatable, but mining companies are wasting no time using their newfound green credentials to ameliorate their reputations, advertising the crucial role they might play in achieving net-zero. The International Council on Mining and Minerals (ICMM), a group of the world’s largest mining companies, describes its mission as, “avoiding, minimising and mitigating environmental impacts, respecting human rights, ensuring worker safety, engaging with communities, and fostering long-term social and economic development.” If the mining companies are beginning to sound rather like the environmental NGOs that oppose them, that’s not an accident. Riofrancos’ research suggests there is a revolving door between environmental NGOs, who seek to raise awareness of corporate malpractice, and environmental consultants, who are employed to smooth away communities’ concerns about the harms of mining. Bodies such as the Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance (IRMA) claim to raise standards within the mining sector, but activists see them as much more effective as ‘green-washing’ than at minimising harm.
IRMA is not just a boon to miners, but also to governments concerned about the impact of community resistance on supply chain security. The race is on to gain control over a secure supply of lithium. There are many minerals needed to bring about energy transition, but the international energy agency (IEA) predicts that lithium will see the biggest increase in demand, with 2050 demand estimated to be ten times that of 2023. Between 59 and 74 new lithium mines would need to be fully operational to meet global demand by 2035, according to Benchmark Minerals. Then, take into consideration that on average it takes over 15 years from the discovery of a deposit to the opening of a new mine. The positive PR that comes with IRMA membership helps keep investors’ cash flowing and is an important plank of the social licence to mine that is essential for extractive industries in democratic contexts. (Of the four largest lithium producers - Australia, Chile, China, Argentina - only China is not a democracy.)
The frontiers of lithium extraction are multiplying and shifting at the same time. Conflict between communities, corporations and governments is increasing accordingly. The designation of lithium as a critical mineral signals the addition of the logic of national security to this equation. Major economic powers are looking to secure control over the supply chains of green capitalism by bringing extraction close to home. The quest for ‘green dominance,’ much like the movement for energy independence that followed the rise of OPEC in the 1970s, looks set to see the US become a major producer. Over 100 potential new lithium mines are being explored in the western United States alone. In Nevada, local ranchers have made an unlikely pact with environmental and indigenous activists to oppose a lithium mine that threatens their access to water. In Spain, Portugal and Serbia significant lithium deposits have been identified. The EU has ambitions of becoming a major producer of ‘sustainable’ batteries, but requires Chinese investment to get things off the ground. In Serbia, thousands took to the streets in 2021 to object to object to a proposed lithium mine that locals believed would affect the supply of water to agricultural land and contaminate the Jadar river. Even Novak Djokovic got involved to tweet his opposition to the mine, but after securing reelection the Serbian regime gave the green light. Northern Portugal has seen devastating forest fires in recent years as a hot, dry climate is exacerbated by climate change, and now four open-pit lithium mines are being developed, with a huge water footprint. Locals say their region is being made a “sacrifice zone.” In all cases, Riofrancos finds that it is the lack of transparency and consultation with communities which is the source of the most outrage.
The ‘Lithium Triangle’ is a region of South America rich in lithium deposits, encompassing regions of Chile, Bolivia and Argentina.
Some would have you believe that green energy technology is a panacea and that mining is therefore now an environmentally responsible activity, that the ends justify the means. This kind of thinking suggests that there’s a zero-sum game between decarbonisation and resistance to mining, and makes those who object to the means vulnerable to the accusation of NIMBY-ism. The emerging logic of green energy independence entails that frontline communities can now also be considered a threat to national security. Even those advocating for the expansion of lithium mining often admit to Riofrancos that the costs for some communities will be high. Riofrancos predicts that wherever mining takes place the most marginalised in society will bear the heaviest cost of new mines, but also acknowledges the “onshoring” of extraction presents new opportunities for consumers in western societies to see up close the impacts of mining and to develop new links of solidarity between affected communities across borders. It is with these “vibrant” communities on the frontiers of extraction that Riofrancos rightly starts and finishes her journey. For, if democracies in the Global North are to insist on an energy transition that does not come at the expense of the health and well-being of communities in the Global South, they must know what the costs of mining look like.
Riofrancos has a hopeful outlook that focuses on best-case outcomes, but of course there is a risk that the transition does not lead to a reduction in carbon emissions. Petroleum overtook coal as the dominant global fuel source in the mid-1960s, yet coal use has continued to increase since that transition. Most of the growth in coal consumption has taken place in China where it is burned to make the products on which the rest of the world relies. As one right-wing journalist feeling bullish about the prospects of the oil industry recently put it, “we haven’t even reached Peak Wood yet.” Energy transition could amount to energy addition. Lithium may be needed to electrify transport, but Riofrancos’ research suggests that in the US the amount of virgin lithium needed for this purpose by 2050 could be reduced by as much as 92% with plausible adjustments to vehicle size, mass transit and the built environment.
In short, if the rush to electrify transport and decarbonize western economies further entrenches unsustainable habits of consumption, exploitative extractive practices and neo-colonial power relations, green energy transition will do huge, unnecessary harm to communities and the planet. Extraction is an important book because it complicates the idea of a zero-sum game, showing that those seeking to hold mining corporations to account should have common cause with those who desire climate action.
A proposed lithium mine at Thacker Pass in Nevada has met with fierce resistance.
