Experts & advocates on renewable energy, mining, land rights discuss JFI’s report on mining
Prompted by JFI Lead Independent Researcher Francis Tseng’s highly comprehensive report on the future of mining and renewable energy, JFI convened a live Twitter conversation between experts and advocates in renewable energy, economics, geology, indigenous rights, land rights, and related issues. The Twitter chat hosted Francis alongside Thea Riofrancos, Daniel Aldana Cohen, Professor Julie Klinger, Ingrid Burrington, Frederico Freitas, Kathryn Goodenough, Jamie Kneen with Rabble Canada and Mining Watch.
Francis’s report, “Inside Out,” examines the relationship between a transition to renewable energy infrastructure and the myriad harms of mining. As the Trump Administration issued an executive order in April encouraging private US mineral extraction in space, and the State Department staked a claim to other rare earth minerals in March, the piece provides a timely look at the future of mining and issues of outsourced harm that such mining can entail. Read a summary of the piece here.
Our discussion on Twitter garnered vital attention to the issues of mineral supply, potential harms of extraction, and larger economic and humanitarian trends relevant to a renewable energy transition. An archive of the discussion is below, ordered by theme. You can also search #JFIMiningChat on Twitter to view the Twitter chat record there. Thank you to our core Twitter chat participants for the incredible discussion that left us with more great resources on the issue and key perspectives to bear in mind.
Outsourced Harm, Geographies of Pollution/Extraction
The report underscores the ubiquitous nature of mining and pollution’s impacts for the rare earth minerals that are necessary for alternative energy sources. This is a core consideration in the report: what are the ways mining impacts the environment and people alike, and what are pathways to mitigate that impact? Thea Riofrancos and Daniel Aldana-Cohen, co-authors of A Planet to Win: The case for a Green New Deal, discussed how class, race, and geography determine who suffers the harms of extraction. Mining Watch pointed out how copper and lithium extraction reveal unequal relationships between the Global North and South, and the potential for new areas of conflict related to mining. Ingrid Burrington and Professor Julie Klinger discussed individual versus structural foci for change:
Water contamination is a key concern. The contamination-from chemicals used in extraction, from improperly stored waste waste, from acid mine drainage-impacts communities in the extractive zone the most. But water systems carries contaminants beyond the immediate area 1/
— Thea Riofrancos (@triofrancos) June 11, 2020
I’ve written about these coalitions in @DissentMag, drawing on my research and excellent work of Rose Spalding. Grassroots coalitions that transcend immediate sites of extractive are politically powerful, from blockading projects to passing national leg 3/ https://t.co/XJuv90fO57
— Thea Riofrancos (@triofrancos) June 11, 2020
highly recommended read! https://t.co/bOK5jUaA1S
— Francis Tseng (@frnsys) June 11, 2020
1/ I’d step back and say one of the most important concepts we have is environmental privilege—the fact that the affluent, and often the white, don’t suffer the pollution that’s required to make them prosperous
It is very, very common to miss the full geographies of pollution
— Daniel Aldana Cohen (@aldatweets) June 11, 2020
This is a critical concept. Also applies over time, as mining damage can take decades or centuries to recover, and mine wastes remain hazardous for millennia. Meanwhile the benefits have already been discarded, pushing for more extraction. #JFIMiningChat https://t.co/1V6kKFdX94
— rabble.ca (@rabbleca) June 11, 2020
2/ The whole idea of “sustainable cities” is premised on ignoring that pollution, by only counting the environmental harms that occur within municipal limits@dwachsmuth @hiangelo + I have written about this in Naturehttps://t.co/B3UIUa0n92
— Daniel Aldana Cohen (@aldatweets) June 11, 2020
4/4 So to me, we have to focus on the geographies of mining from multiple angles. We can’t treat the mines as snowglobes and only look for pollution there. Nor can we treat cities as snowglobes, and only look for pollution there. We need a *planetary* approach, cc @UrbanTheoryLab
— Daniel Aldana Cohen (@aldatweets) June 11, 2020
That’s a really helpful framing, thank you! I find with a lot of media coverage on this topic the “snowglobes” approach really limits the capacity for a systemic analysis (how did we get here, etc) and is more “how do the guilty white consumers fix the bad in their phones”
— Ingrid Burrington (@lifewinning) June 11, 2020
Guilt plays an interesting role, but by and large it seems to be disempowering because it focuses on you the individual, and deflects attention from the structural changes we can make, together, so our phones don’t break as often, for example 🙂 https://t.co/4oxMSv5zJd
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
Ideally the conversation would move away from resource depletion, which really isn’t the issue, to consider how we will extract these metals in an efficient way that minimises damages to the environment and society – and indeed, maximises benefit to communities #JFIminingchat
— Dr Kathryn Goodenough (@kmgoodenough) June 11, 2020
@Frnsys’s report, much like work by @triofrancos @aldatweets @Prof_Klinger & others mentions that proposals for a #GND must mitigate both the current costs of the climate crisis & the future costs of renewable energy on communities affected most by extraction. #JFIminingChat — 2/
— JAIN FAMILY INSTITUTE (@jainfamilyinst) June 11, 2020
Martin Arboleda’s Planetary Mine has already been invoked once in this conversation but it seems relevant here also–a “right” way of mining isn’t just about what happens around the rocks, it’s an entire system and supply chain that needs reckoning too #JFIminingChat https://t.co/xXksZE6mM9
— Ingrid Burrington (@lifewinning) June 11, 2020
Can’t be said enough. Reading Cowen’s /Deadly Life of Logistics/ reinforces the point, as those corporate supply chains are deeply imbricated with systems of militarized security, border enforcement, labor repression – an entire ‘geoeconomics’ + global, racialized class hierarchy
— Thea Riofrancos (@triofrancos) June 11, 2020
This is complex: still lots of demand for copper, but lithium & graphite extraction etc. open up new areas & new conflicts. The challenge for resource-dependent economies, rich and poor, is diversification & sustainability, building skills & knowledge @rabbleca #JFIMiningChat https://t.co/ukAesdQXAc
— MiningWatch Canada (@MiningWatch) June 11, 2020
For many poorer countries, the challenges are even deeper: war, poverty, pillage. Mining is often sold are the way out of poverty when in fact it’s often the path to deeper poverty, or at best, continued pillage of resources. Corruption is often blamed… /2 https://t.co/Yvd5rkragy
— MiningWatch Canada (@MiningWatch) June 11, 2020
but it’s the foreign investors who pay the bribes, and the World Bank & IMF who make the loans, guaranteeing the cycle of poverty & plunder continues. As @jasonhickel puts it, we are told: /3 https://t.co/GhKcrgTGz3
— MiningWatch Canada (@MiningWatch) June 11, 2020
“The plunder of cheap labour and resources from the global South is necessary for the global South to develop.” This is absurd, yet lots of NGOs, not just governments, persist in selling this idea. https://t.co/Dyqcpj4Ht3 #JFIminingChat https://t.co/mFcMT10h00
— MiningWatch Canada (@MiningWatch) June 11, 2020
Rethinking Scarcity and Consumption Frameworks
A transition away from fossil fuels will increase global demand for metals, including rare earth minerals. The report outlines potential supply concerns under future renewable energy transition scenarios, but shifts the focus from scarcity to the question of “environmental and human” burdens of extraction. Professor Julie Klinger, author of Rare Earth Frontiers, a vital research work on this topic, emphasized the distinction between “actual” scarcity and structural, or social, scarcity. Daniel Aldana Cohen argued that global consumption patterns in a green future ought to change from prioritizing private consumption to prioritizing collective consumption.
1/ From my perspective, the big challenge is reducing the consumption of the rich a lot, and shrinking the private consumption of goods we don’t really need, in favor of increased *collective* consumption of public services, quality housing, leisurehttps://t.co/dD0dixE1ZA
— Daniel Aldana Cohen (@aldatweets) June 11, 2020
3/ It’s theoritically possible that one day we’ll have good enough green technology that we can achieve a truly “circular” economy, and renewable energy will be almost infinitely abundant. But it would be reckless to plan for that. So we need to dematerialize prosperity
— Daniel Aldana Cohen (@aldatweets) June 11, 2020
5/ We also need to understand parallels between class struggle across countries, as all countries have very rich super-consumers, and struggling poor and working class communities. In urban settings, I’ve suggested the Right to the City framework https://t.co/MVljjnCQd4 pic.twitter.com/T8TahthHxm
— Daniel Aldana Cohen (@aldatweets) June 11, 2020
I’m not sure the answer here is solely consumption patterns–design and product lifecycles are also relevant, no? Like changing product design to make recycling easier/decoupling recycling from commodity prices would probably help. #JFIminingChat
— Ingrid Burrington (@lifewinning) June 11, 2020
definitely, designing things to last longer or be repairable would help a lot. and also changing things to deprioritize the constant circulation of goods in general, such that disposability is not economically rational #JFIminingChat https://t.co/JYaAJ7j0El
— Francis Tseng (@frnsys) June 11, 2020
“Rare earth elements” are a group of elements, many of which are not particularly rare. We know how to find the deposits; the issue is in identifying responsible, sustainable, economically feasible ways to get them out of the ground. #JFIMiningChat
— Dr Kathryn Goodenough (@kmgoodenough) June 11, 2020
It is so important to understand that resources and reserves of minerals are dynamic, not static. There’s a nice description by @BritGeoSurvey https://t.co/o4Hg4LlUGX. As demand increases, more resources will be identified.
— Dr Kathryn Goodenough (@kmgoodenough) June 11, 2020
Professor Julie Klinger’s analysis of scarcity arguments was particularly informative of the various operative frames used in arguing for greater mineral extraction that underscore a status quo of exorbitant energy consumption patterns at a structural level.
Concerns around supply often fail to differentiate between actual vs. structural scarcity.
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
this thread also reminds me that we tend to emphasize the scarcity of material rather than the “scarcity” of capacity for ecological systems to withstand the effects of things like mining. the amount that the environment can safely absorb is extremely limited https://t.co/nnyQsWZv5h
— Francis Tseng (@frnsys) June 11, 2020
Absolutely – most of the metals we need for low-carbon technologies are not rare in the Earth’s crust. Actual scarcity is not the issue. #JFIMiningChat.
— Dr Kathryn Goodenough (@kmgoodenough) June 11, 2020
Structural scarcity means that we have limited the means through which we access these materials, like there aren’t enough areas under production, or more importantly, we’re throwing away tech bearing these metals after a single use. 2/
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
So when people are worried about scarcity of metals and materials needed to de-carbonize our economy and society, they often get confused between actual scarcity of these things in the Earth’s crust, and our ability to organize ourselves away from scarcity 4/
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
The good news is, we can do something about structural scarcity (because this is about social organization, and it really is up to us to determine how we organize ourselves) 6/
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
Great points. I would add, drawing on your work & Tim Mitchell and others, that “scarcity” as a discursive frame is often deployed by firms and/or states to justify the expansion of extraction, the securitization of supply chains and/or downplay socio-enviro harm.
— Thea Riofrancos (@triofrancos) June 11, 2020
Odd, isn’t it, that it’s the poor, Indigenous peoples, and the global South who are called to make (or be) sacrifices to the “greater good” of the wealthy. https://t.co/BpN1Tw4xny
— rabble.ca (@rabbleca) June 11, 2020
We can start by turning down the scarcity paranoia–this is hard because the basis for mainstream Econ theory is scarcity–and learn to recognize the abundance around us 8/
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
To me, such views constitute a failure of the imagination, more than anything else. There are plenty of awesome reasons to explore space and the ocean floor. Scarcity, in our present way of understanding it, is not one of them 10/
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
We can make e-waste obsolete. We can redesign products to extend their life. We can de-condition our over-conditioned emphasis on hyper consumerism. These will be part of a truly green & sustainable future, and lots of good people in lots of places are already working on this 11/
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
Metal Mining and Indigenous Rights
Francis’ report details how expanding extractivist regimes continue to encroach on Indigenous lands to mine the metals used in low-carbon technologies. We asked: How can we prevent attacks on Indigenous rights from escalating with the increasing demand for metals in a renewable energy transition? Frederico Freitas, Assistant Professor of Latin American history and environmental policy at North Carolina State University explained how both large-scale and small-scale mining harm local Indigenous populations, especially in “gold rush” environments. Thea Riofrancos envisioned a green trade regime founded on respecting Indigenous sovereignty and labor rights, as outlined in A Planet to Win: Why We Need a Green New Deal.
First, sovereignty-territorial, cultural, political-must be respected. The right to free, prior & informed consultation, enshrined in ILO 169, UN Dec, & nat’l constitutions, is rarely enforced. @tuliafa discuss this dynamic in Bolivia & Ecuador here https://t.co/epRzwsmJwP
— Thea Riofrancos (@triofrancos) June 11, 2020
#FPIC is central to this; the #UNDRIP is a key tool, but overall respecting land rights, the right to say ‘no’ and even respecting existing legal and treaty requirements (eg. like Canada refuses to do) are critical. #JFIMiningChat https://t.co/b8bzLU2cMz
— rabble.ca (@rabbleca) June 11, 2020
And, in our policy memo, @aldatweets and I find that there is public support for just such a green, fair trade regime. https://t.co/YAYeqEzyqu
— Thea Riofrancos (@triofrancos) June 11, 2020
It is also necessary to further transnational collaboration between affected groups at different parts of the chain of production. 2/2
— Frederico Freitas (@ffreff) June 11, 2020
This is specially acute in gold-rush situations such as many examples in the Amazon rainforest in recent years, where an influx of miners into indigenous communities can lead to disastrous consequences 2/2
— Frederico Freitas (@ffreff) June 11, 2020
Agreed. Rights to land are fundamental, and it is especially clear that we can’t talk about protecting communities without talking about reparations. The parallel struggles across N. and S. America make this especially vivid https://t.co/E82oEU4BQq
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
Mining also can bring harm to communities that have engaged in it for centuries. E.g., he case of the two tailgate dam accidents in Brazil in 2015 and 2019. The area had been a mining region for the last 200 years. https://t.co/2hwkz2m43A
— Frederico Freitas (@ffreff) June 11, 2020
Here, the difference between large scale mining and small scale mining is crucial. @MarcenaHunter has done important work on this
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
“The safest tailings facility is the one that is not built.” – from an upcoming report…
— MiningWatch Canada (@MiningWatch) June 11, 2020
Racial Justice and Renewable Energy Futures
Daniel Aldana Cohen drew attention to the complex links between environmental and racial justice, and introduced eco-apartheid, or “a regime of greening affluence for the few at the expense of the many,” as a potential analytical lens. Professor Julie Klinger argued for a Green New Deal grounded in a “reparations sensibility,” centering Black lives and racial justice.
As worldwide calls for divestment from police and related police-state infrastructure increase, what is the importance of renewable energy transition for issues of racial justice? How is racial justice connected to a #GND or other renewable energy proposals? #JFIminingChat
— JAIN FAMILY INSTITUTE (@jainfamilyinst) June 11, 2020
ED Sam Grant of @MN_350 said: “Police violence is an aspect of a broader pattern of structural violence, which the climate crisis is a manifestation of,” he said. “Healing structural violence is actually in the best interest of all human beings.”https://t.co/yFqmgJtYRJ
— JAIN FAMILY INSTITUTE (@jainfamilyinst) June 11, 2020
2/ Broken record here, but I think we have to move to a materialist systems analysis and resist playing “whack-a-mole” with issue topics, as there are racial disparities everywhere, form rooftop solar to tree cover to good-paying energy jobs, etc
— Daniel Aldana Cohen (@aldatweets) June 11, 2020
4/4 Here I’ll just note that in A Planet to Win, we talk about the lessons of Du Bois’s Black Reconstruction—you cannot make progress at the expense of Black radicalisms. On the contrary, we must work w Black radicalism. And we don’t start w answers, but questions and commitments
— Daniel Aldana Cohen (@aldatweets) June 11, 2020
Yes! One that is global, yet grounded. A #GreenNewDeal whose innovations are driven by a reparations sensibility.https://t.co/eO2TDC8BS4
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020
And hopefully we can learn more from, and work more with, Black internationalisms past and present, which are a lot more relevant to building power across borders than arid UN meetings (much as some of those have real impacts)
— Daniel Aldana Cohen (@aldatweets) June 11, 2020
Retweeting this to high heaven. It’s a great podcast!
— Dr. J M Klinger (@Prof_Klinger) June 11, 2020