The Green Energy Movement Lost the Plot
Investigating the narratives of the “green” energy transition
This is the first case-study of the series: “Greenwashing Unearthed: how greenwashing has become a core tactic of empire.”
In the last decade, we have witnessed an unprecedented movement against the fossil fuel industry and towards a “green” energy transition. A 2014 rally saw over 300,000 protestors in the streets of Manhattan, the largest climate protest in U.S. history. Ten years later, a global week of action moved millions of people across 54 countries to organize and attend climate protests.
These protests, and thousands of others, have had mostly aligned goals:1 phasing out fossil fuels to create a renewable energy system.2 This is the underlying premise of the “green” energy transition: decarbonization via electrification. In other words, to mitigate carbon emissions and solve the climate crisis, the global energy system must transform away from fossil fuels and towards renewable energy, which can produce “carbon-free” electricity.
As discussed in the series intro, the “green” energy transition is more complicated than this narrative illustrates. Electric vehicle batteries, solar panels, and other “green” technologies require a monumental supply of minerals, including lithium, cobalt and nickel.3 Industry insiders claim that we need hundreds of additional mines to transition away from fossil fuels.
Even in the early stages of this transition, “green” mining is desecrating environments and human life. Lithium mining is an incredibly water-intensive industry that is being scaled as the climate crisis exacerbates water scarcity. 114 billion gallons of water was consumed from one lithium project alone in Chile. Cobalt mining has one of the most heinous track records in the world, due to cobalt’s toxicity and corporate exploitation of child labor in places like Congo. Nickel and copper mines are two forms of sulfide mining, which produce a byproduct of sulfuric acid and have a 100% failure rate. Nevertheless, companies are planning nickel and copper mines at the Mississippi River headwaters, which provides drinking water to millions.
Greenwashing has been a crucial tactic for mining companies to deflect from the harm caused by their operations. Despite posing substantial ecological and human rights threats, mining companies targeting “critical” minerals for the energy transition are calling themselves “green.”
The “green” energy transition is a convenient narrative for the ruling class. If solving the climate crisis is as simple as ‘fossil fuels bad, renewables good,’ then there is no reason to challenge broader structures. Instead of questioning the mechanisms of neoliberal capitalism–unfettered, unequal growth–which caused the climate crisis, we can simply “go green.” Greenwashing attempts to lull people, and the climate movement, into complacency with false solutions and diminish momentum for radical change.
Indigenous Peoples, who are on the frontlines of the expanding mining industry, are leading the struggle to defend their homes and challenge this premise. In the United States, 97% of nickel, 89% of copper, 79% of lithium and 68% of cobalt reserves and resources in the U.S. are located within 35 miles of Native American reservations. The expansion of the mining industry and destruction of Indigenous lands continues the legacy of colonialism.
The remainder of this piece are snapshots of greenwashing by mining companies, industry-backed think tanks and the federal government.
Mining corporation greenwashing
Mining companies4 are co-opting people’s demand for climate action by crafting deceptive narratives to position themselves as the beneficiaries of the “green” energy transition.
Resolution Copper is a contentious copper mine planned jointly by multinational mining companies Rio Tinto and BHP. The mine is proposed in Arizona’s Tonto National Forest, and if built, would create a two-mile-wide, 1,000-foot-deep crater as tall as the Eiffel Tower. The mine’s footprint includes Oak Flat, a sacred site where Apache people have visited their deities for centuries. Resolution Copper uses greenwashing to gain the support of the government. Despite BHP and Rio Tinto’s horrific track records, Resolution Copper says that environmental stewardship is of the utmost importance to them. Their website claims: “Copper is key to climate action and a low-carbon world.” This rhetoric culminated in a 2014 Congressional decision to swap parcels of land owned by the San Carlos Apache Tribe for land owned privately by the mining corporations, effectively handing Resolution Copper private ownership of Oak Flat.
“At Resolution Copper, we believe in building a sustainable future—one where mining and environmental stewardship go hand in hand.” (source)
Industry think-tank greenwashing
The Energy Transitions Commission (ETC) is a think-tank of executives from fossil fuel, banks and mining companies (including Rio Tinto). In 2023, ETC published a report titled: “Materials and Resource Requirements for the Energy Transition,” which presents itself as a holistic guide for fulfilling the energy transition. It outlines precisely how we get there: by scaling up global mining operations, rolling back regulations and streamlining permitting. Essentially, we need to leave mining corporations alone and let them cook.5
But don’t fret, they care deeply for the environment. In arguing for “green” mining, the ETC includes graphs comparing the relative land use and water consumption required by fossil fuels versus “clean” energy. Look at how tiny the increase is, you can barely even see the difference between the red (fossil fuels) and blue (clean energy) lines.
Except this graph is remarkably deceptive. You might wonder: why does the green ‘agriculture’ line appear on this chart when agriculture is not mentioned anywhere else in the report? Because this datapoint acts as a red herring, making the land use and water consumption difference between clean energy and fossil fuels appear miniscule. Without the agriculture bar, the graph would look like this–a much more noticeable difference.
The ETC graphs are quintessential greenwashing: making a 5.5 trillion gallon increase of annual water consumption from fossil fuels to “clean energy” appear like a drop in the bucket. And there’s no context about how water scarcity will become increasingly prevalent as the climate crisis worsens.
These metrics are fraught to begin with. Focusing on water consumption and land use broadly leaves out crucial questions: Who will face water scarcity; whose land is being encroached upon; what is the historical context of corporate oligarchs carving up the world to build mines and “save us” from the climate crisis?
One Minnesota think tank is at the cutting edge of greenwashing. Mining Minnesota, a local coalition of pro-mining interests has coined the slogans: “Mining drives a sustainable future” and “our renewable future starts here.” The executive director of Mining Minnesota, Julie Lucas, gave a TEDTALK titled: “Climate Change Solutions from the Ground Up.” She starts with an intriguing point about how societies are constructed to depend on extraction:
“As we transition away from a fossil fuel based system to a minerals based system of clean energy, we are finally waking up to the fact that our lives have consequences. Clean energy is minerals dependent energy. Every step requires metals.”
Rather than facilitating a robust discussion on the ramifications of this systemic issue, she pivots to her pro-mining agenda.
“Importantly, we also have industry-leading companies exploring [mining] projects in our state. NewRange Copper Nickel, Twin Metals Minnesota, Talon Metals Corporation… are companies driven and committed to responsible, sustainable mining practices.”
Lucas repeats the phrase “boots on the ground” to describe everyday people’s role in tackling climate change. But she isn’t talking about grassroots movements, fighting for environmental protections, or altering the status quo. She is talking about how we should get our boots on the ground of a mine pit and start mining, mining, mining. She even pays lip service to a false sense of racial justice, saying that the Indigenous voices are “critical voices” that must “lead this conversation.” Yet there is no mention of how the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa opposes NewRange Copper Nickel or the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe is resisting the Talon Mine.
Federal government greenwashing
The Biden Administration was a willing partner in abetting the mineral plunder by mining companies. In 2022, Biden’s Department of Interior published a list of “critical minerals,” including lithium, nickel and cobalt, which the American government considers a priority to extract. The Department of Energy followed this up with a report titled “Critical Minerals Assessment,” claiming: “The global effort to curb carbon emissions is accelerating demand for clean energy technologies and… increasing mining operations in the United States and around the world.”
These administrative reports were backed by legislation: Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure, considered the biggest-ever climate bills, which allocated billions to mining corporations. Companies such as Resolution Copper and Talon Metals capitalized on federal subsidies by greenwashing their operations, positioning themselves as “green mining companies” extracting minerals for the sake of the climate.
If you live in the United States, you may be thinking: who cares, Trump is President now! Greenwashing to receive federal subsidies may become temporarily obsolete in America, but Trump’s energy policy characterized by deregulation does not necessarily hinder the mining industry.
Greenwashing is not just relevant to one political party or one country; it is part of global systems that shape the world as we know it. Trump’s presidency will shift the tides, unmasking greenwashing for what it is: a facade. Under a Trump regime, companies that once touted “green” mining will pivot to “patriotic” or “military” mining. These companies were never concerned with climate change; their only motivation is extracting shareholder value from the entrails of the Earth. And their greenwashing rhetoric will remain a core tactic, driving a wedge between Indigenous/rural people on the frontline of mining extraction and environmental groups whose support for the energy transition aligns with mining companies.
A sober assessment of the “green” energy transition
Climate change does pose an existential threat and we do need a transition. But there is no neatly packaged solution. The “green” energy transition proposes a future predicated on crossing our fingers and hoping that this new energy system won’t create its own host of ecological crises. And it entrusts corporations to act with benevolence. Fossil fuels got us here and the myth of “green” mining will not save us. Under the current order of global capitalism, I do not believe it is possible to avoid further catastrophe.
Any climate solution that doesn’t address the roots of the climate crisis rings hollow. This is a radicalizing predicament, because it requires a focus on re-organizing the world. And here’s the thing: I’m not actually against mining as a concept. To state the obvious, modern technology, which relies on some level of extraction, can benefit society. There is a world in which Indigenous Peoples have sovereignty to decide when/where/how/if we mine. In this world, governance structures rely on people’s consent to dictate what is acceptable. Maybe we do have solar panels and wind turbines in this world. But first, we develop radically different ways of relating to the places we live, the ecosystems that sustain us, and to each other.
With profit as the motive of economic activity, this world will never come to fruition. It isn’t possible.
You can subscribe for free to be notified when I share new writing.
If you’re able to financially support my work, paid subscriptions allow me to spend more hours writing! Free subscriptions and sharing with friends is also helpful and I am appreciative of each and every one of you.
According to the organizers of the 2014 People’s Climate March, the protests’ goal was achieving: "a prosperous, low-carbon future… by a rapid scale-up of low carbon energy and technology."
There are many notable exceptions of protests that have had their eyes on the prize: battling fossil fuels within an anti-capitalist and anti-colonial framework.
Future case studies will focus on greenwashing and resistance to extraction for projects targeting each of these minerals.
(The next three editions of this series are a deep dive on greenwashing by another mining company, Talon Metals).
Destroying a national forest in the name of “green energy” is insane. Forest is sacred
Really informative