We are told that mineral extraction\u2019s countless environmental harms \u2014 the streams contaminated by toxic runoff, the razed forests, the degraded air quality, the dying wildlife \u2014 are the necessary costs of the transition to renewable energy.<\/p>\n
![\"Lithium](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/Piletas-768x512.jpg\")
Lithium pools in Salinas Grandes, Argentina. Image by Pedro J Pacheco via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0 DEED)<\/p>\n
But as we at the Oakland Institute show in a new report<\/a>, \u201ctransition minerals\u201d are misnamed<\/a>. The vast majority are used in industries that are either unrelated \u2014 or in direct opposition \u2014 to the clean energy transition. This trend shows no signs of changing: artificial intelligence and heightened military spending are, in fact, increasing<\/a> the demand for these minerals in industries driving ecological destruction.<\/p>\n Scaling up mining as recommended by international organizations would enact unprecedented violence, dispossession of Indigenous and local communities, and environmental devastation. The narrative serves only to misinform the public, laundering harmful practices of the mining industry into an ostensible social and environmental good. To truly secure a sustainable future, we must interrogate and ultimately undo this lie.<\/p>\n Building global acceptance for mining<\/p>\n A 2023 GlobeScan survey<\/a> spanning 32 countries found that the public consistently rates mining as the economic sector with the worst impact on society. Faced with this widespread rejection, mining firms have sought to turn the climate crisis into a branding opportunity, promoting themselves as indispensable to the green transition while burying their decades of environmental and social harm.<\/p>\n Thus, the energy transition narrative has become a useful tool, creating a unique situation in which international institutions mandated to defend the common good appear to be in vehement alignment with those planning to destroy it.<\/p>\n Take, for example, the World Bank\u2019s Climate Smart Mining Initiative, which claims<\/a> to ensure that mining is managed in a way that \u201cminimizes the environmental and climate footprint.\u201d Among its members is Rio Tinto, the mining behemoth responsible for decades<\/a> of environmental and human rights abuses. Still, in its annual report, Rio Tinto asserts<\/a>, \u201cThe world needs mining, and it needs mining done the right way \u2026 we\u2019re committed to providing these materials safely, sustainably, and in a capital disciplined way.\u201d Whereas it was accused<\/a> just months ago of contaminating Madagascar\u2019s water with uranium and other radioactive elements, Rio Tinto retains the World Bank\u2019s stamp of approval.<\/p>\n In Madagascar, Rio Tinto\u2019s actions have severely harmed surrounding villagers. \u201cIt\u2019s killing our children and killing everything around the mine,\u201d one fisherman told<\/a> the Financial Times. This disproportionate toll on local communities can be observed in mining operations across the globe: an estimated 69%<\/a> of current transition mineral projects are located on or near Indigenous or local communities\u2019 lands in the Global South.<\/p>\n The consequences have been devastating. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, mineral extraction has fueled<\/a> the deadliest conflict since World War II; in Chile\u2019s Salar de Atacama, lithium mining has consumed<\/a> more than 65% of the region\u2019s water supply. It is this record of violence and environmental destruction that Rio Tinto\u2019s branding, and the World Bank\u2019s legitimization, obscure.<\/p>\n This greenwashing effort is in no way unique to Rio Tinto. Every major mining corporation has dressed up its endless pursuit of control over other peoples\u2019 land in the language of sustainability, and the effort appears to be working: In 2025, the largest 50 mining firms saw<\/a> a jump of close to $900 billion in their capitalization, a 70% increase in only one year.<\/p>\n Reframing the narrative<\/p>\n The world does not need to increase mineral mining to secure a green future. Our analysis<\/a> of the International Energy Agency (IEA) data<\/a> reveals that more than 70% of all critical minerals<\/a> end up in products and infrastructure wholly unrelated to the green transition. We find that only one-fifth of projected mineral demand is actually needed to scale up wind, solar, and energy storage for a net-zero future. Intelligent policy choices would reduce this already small need: a 2023 University of California, Davis, report<\/a> found that, if widely implemented, transit- and recycling-focused policies could reduce U.S. lithium demand by 92% by 2050.<\/p>\n While many defend the expansion of mineral extraction in the name of the energy transition, the Trump Administration in the U.S. has stripped away that pretense. In remarks during its February 2026 critical minerals ministerial, Secretary of State Marco Rubio asserted<\/a> that \u201ccritical minerals are vital to the devices that we use every single day. They power our infrastructure, our industry, and our national defense.\u201d Jacob Helberg, undersecretary of state for economic affairs, expanded on that, saying, \u201cThe AI revolution we\u2019re living through is leading to record historic demand for \u2026 virtually every element on the periodic table.\u201d<\/p>\n During the opening remarks of that ministerial \u2014 a major summit that brought together representatives from more than 50 countries<\/a> and launched a $10 billion U.S.-led critical minerals initiative<\/a> \u2014 neither sustainability nor the energy transition were mentioned a single time.<\/p>\n When U.S. leaders admit that they intend to pillage the world\u2019s lands and contaminate its waters for industry, national defense, and artificial intelligence, we should take their word for it. When mining corporations and international institutions continue to maintain the false justification of environmental necessity, we must not let them.<\/p>\n Nothing good can come of a lie. If we truly hope for a livable planet and a sustainable future, debunking this false narrative is among the most urgent tasks of our time.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Shaan Sood is a political science major at Vassar College and an intern scholar at the Oakland Institute, a U.S.-based think tank.<\/p>\n Banner image: An artisanal miner holds up a fragment of copper-bearing ore. Image by Leo Klemm via Flickr (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0).<\/p>\n See related coverage:<\/p>\n Philippines fast-tracks critical minerals, raising Indigenous, environmental concerns<\/a><\/p>\n Consent and costs are key questions on extraction of \u2018energy transition\u2019 minerals<\/a><\/p>\n U.S. defense spending on critical minerals surges in the last decade<\/a><\/p>\n Citation:<\/p>\n Owen,\u00a0J.\u00a0R., Kemp,\u00a0D., Lechner,\u00a0A.\u00a0M., Harris,\u00a0J., Zhang,\u00a0R., & L\u00e8bre,\u00a0\u00c9. (2022). Energy transition minerals and their intersection with land-connected peoples.\u00a0Nature Sustainability,\u00a06(2), 203-211. doi:10.1038\/s41893-022-00994-6<\/a><\/p>\n Cite this articleShaan Sood (2026). On renewable energy, it\u2019s time to debunk the \u2018transition minerals\u2019 narrative (commentary). Mongabay Conservation news. DOI: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.66709\/news-328582<\/a> <\/p>\n ![\"Women](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/AP24145699021576-768x512.jpeg\")
Women work at an Illegal tin mining site in Jos, Nigeria, Wednesday, April 3, 2024. Image courtesy of Sunday Alamba\/AP Photo.<\/p>\n![\"Oakland](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/Oakland-Institute-graph-on-critical-mineral-use.png\")
Critical mineral use by sector based on International Energy Agency (IEA) data. Image courtesy of Oakland Institute.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/af12bf65d24c9b6677fa5125044ed939da883258caf322b3fed185af87dcf4ab.png\")
<\/p>\n