To help meet the needs of the energy transition, global demand for copper – a mineral critical for making electric vehicles, wind turbines and solar panels – is set to rise more than 40% by 2040, fuelling concern over the risks its extraction poses to the environment and human rights, new data shows.
In its latest Global Trade Update, UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD) projected this week that 80 new copper mines and $250 billion in investment would be required by 2030 to meet demand and avoid a looming shortfall that could stall the world’s shift to clean energy and digital infrastructure.
The report called copper the “new strategic raw material” for the green and digital economy – and a test case for how global trade systems handle resource pressures under strain.
“Copper is no longer just a commodity – it’s a strategic asset,” Luz María de la Mora, director of UNCTAD’s Division on International Trade and Commodities, said in a statement.
“Its market exposes the power asymmetries that still shape global trade. That’s why we need to invest in local value addition, scale up recycling and remove trade barriers that limit opportunity.”
A separate new study, meanwhile, has warned that ramping up copper production could come at a human and environmental cost.
In its Transition Minerals Tracker published on Wednesday, the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC), a global research and advocacy group, singled out copper as associated with 513 allegations of human rights abuses recorded between 2010 and 2024, accounting for about 60% of a total of 835 cases linked to the mining of transition minerals.
The tracker monitors abuses associated with the extraction of eight key transition minerals – copper, bauxite, cobalt, lithium, manganese, nickel, zinc and iron ore.
These minerals, used to produce technologies such as solar panels, wind turbines and electric vehicles, have become more sought after in the global push towards clean energy and electrification.
But Caroline Avan, head of just transition and natural resources at BHRRC, warned that the urgency of the energy transition should not be used to “justify an unprincipled scramble for transition minerals” that is driving widespread human rights abuses, environmental destruction and growing community conflict.
A transition built on exploitative minerals supply chains “is not simply unjust – it is unstable, unpredictable, and ultimately unsustainable”, she said, adding that “the path to net zero cannot be paved with more injustice and global inequality”.
Hidden cost of copper extraction
With copper reserves concentrated in five countries – Chile, Peru, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Australia and Russia – the researchers found that the highest number of allegations in the 15-year period occurred in three of those countries, including 14% of the total in Peru, 11% in Chile and 10% in the DRC.
In 2024 alone, more than half of the 156 abuse allegations linked to minerals projects and mines were associated with copper extraction, which over the years has faced significant operational threats as a result of conflicts with communities and associated legal challenges, the researchers said.
Central and South America featured as hotspots for copper-related legal cases. The researchers also found that 52% of copper mines located in high water stress areas had impacts on water access and/or pollution.
Ending poverty and gangs: How Zambia seeks to cash in on the global drive for EVs
This year, four copper mining companies operating in Zambia, including one British and three Chinese firms, have been accused of releasing toxic mining waste into the Kafue River’s watershed in one of the country’s worst environmental disasters.
The most devastating spill occurred in February, when the tailings dam holding mining waste from Chinese company Sino-Metals Leach Zambia burst its walls and released acidic effluent into the river.
The pollution killed fish, burned maize and groundnut crops and led to the deaths of livestock, wiping out livelihoods and causing the water supply to the nearby town of Kitwe to be shut down.
Indigenous peoples on the frontline
The alleged abuses in BHRRC’s Transition Minerals Tracker usually affect individuals and families living near mining sites and their environment, with three in five involving local communities and another 77 infringing on Indigenous Peoples’ rights, including violation of their right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) about projects.
Edson Krenak, Brazil cultural survival lead, wrote in a forward to the research: “Rushing to extract more minerals without reducing consumption or showing true respect for our rights is not only reckless – it is unjust and unfair,” adding that the world must listen more to Indigenous voices.
In her contribution, Annabella Rosemberg, senior advisor on just transition with Climate Action Network (CAN) International, called for “a rights-based approach throughout renewable energy value chains, where all human rights are respected, where workers are treated fairly – and where the opportunities of this extraordinary and unprecedented global effort are harnessed to build shared prosperity”.
Mining firms lack human rights policies
The researchers found that just 20 companies have been associated with 60% of allegations and attacks since 2010, with the top five companies for 2024 listed as Georgian American Alloys, China Minmetals, Codelco, Grupo México and Sinomine Resource Group.
Additionally, the tracker documented 157 attacks against human rights and environmental defenders, accounting for one in five of the total abuse allegations recorded.
Despite the problems recorded, less than half of all mines associated with at least one allegation in the tracker are covered by a corporate human rights policy. And fewer than 30 mines are associated with 50% of allegations, demonstrating that while human rights issues are widespread in the sector, some mines have become a focus for allegations of abuses and conflict.
Rosemberg of CAN International wrote in the report that the enormous impacts of “unchecked mining” on the world’s most marginalised groups – already disproportionately affected by climate change – should not be left out of climate conversations.
“Conversely, we need to be clear that extracting more minerals, at all costs, and without a serious look at reducing energy and material demand, notably in the richest countries, will not answer the climate crisis nor the hopes of economic prosperity in resource-rich countries,” she added.
The post Rising copper demand fuels concern over pollution and rights abuses appeared first on Climate Home News.
Rising copper demand fuels concern over pollution and rights abuses
SYDNEY, Thursday 30 October 2026 — In response to reports that the Albanese government is set to introduce draft legislation this year that would seek to ban data centres in Australia’s suburbs, Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:
“These reports are a testament to the growing community opposition to these completely inappropriate AI factories that have sprung up across our suburbs, and Big Tech corporations should take heed — the data centre build-out must not happen without the endorsement of the Australian people.
“But the government can’t simply ship this problem out to regional Australia without addressing the fundamental issues with this extractive new industry.
“We’re already seeing a trend of AI data centre proposals moving to the regions, in areas that are more water-scarce, more environmentally sensitive, and next to sources of fracked and coal seam gas to support their massive BYO gas-fired power plans — a pattern we’ve seen play out in the United States.
“From the Beetaloo Basin in the NT to the Western Downs in Qld, we’re seeing a wave of AI data centre proposals that would see new gas fast-tracked to support their massive energy demand, and threaten to completely derail Australia’s energy transition.
“Just as suburban Australians are asking, “what for?”, regional communities like Berry Springs and Dalby do not want dirty data centres setting up shop with absolutely no benefit to their communities. Greenpeace is calling for a moratorium on AI data centre developments until strict and enforceable safeguards are in place to protect our climate and our communities.”
-ENDS-
Media contact
Kate O’Callaghan on +61 406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
AI data centre ban in suburbs would not address fundamental issues: Greenpeace
In the thick of the COP29 climate summit in Azerbaijan in 2024, the UN climate talks were rattled by what can only be described as a major PR disaster. The BBC, Reuters and The Guardian all carried headlines, attributed to leading climate policy experts, that the COPs were “no longer fit for purpose”.
The articles outlined a series of reforms called for in an open letter signed by 22 eminent scientists and politicians, including a former UN secretary-general and previous UN climate chief, with a further 150 lending their support. The headlines shook confidence in the COP process, just as governments were wrestling over a new climate finance goal.
The Club of Rome – which handled the media relations for the letter – hurried to say that its “constructive, supportive ideas” had been “misinterpreted”. Negotiators kept calm(ish) and carried on, in the end landing the finance goal after some high-stakes drama on the final day.
-
Early speakers’ list suggests few powerful leaders will attend COP31
Just 77 heads of state or government are scheduled to address the COP31 climate summit in Antalya, a third less than the COP28 peak -
Africa wants adaptation finance on COP31 agenda, raising risk of a fight
The African Group wants dedicated space on tripling adaptation finance, the Green Climate Fund and trade, setting up a possible clash
To my surprise, when I went back this week to read the letter again, I could not find the offending line about the COPs not being fit for purpose. The Club of Rome has yet to respond to my query about its disappearance.
Whatever happened to the wording, that sentiment has been widely shared. COPs have ballooned in size while the importance of their outcomes seems to have diminished since the 2015 Paris Agreement (with the exception of the 2023 COP in Dubai where countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems).
The same on the surface
Two years on from those painful headlines in Baku, has anything changed for the better? You might be forgiven for thinking not. Official decisions are still made by consensus rather than the majority voting some have called for to stop blockers.
Tens of thousands of officials, activists and business execs still scurry around the halls to an ever-growing list of side events, roundtables and dialogues, while deals still come down to rows, all-nighters and jargon-filled texts adopted to rounds of applause.
But it would not be true to say that COPs have completely failed to respond to the very real need to translate the words of the Paris Agreement into action in the outside world.
Global warming is projected to be around 1.3C lower this century than it would have been if the world had not committed to tackle the climate crisis under that accord. Developing countries have a valued space at COPs in which their voices have equal weight in decision-making, unlike in many other international fora. And most importantly, perhaps, there has been a subtle shift, tipping the balance away from negotiating towards doing.
Brazil branded last year’s summit in Belém as the “COP of Implementation”, corralling the sprawling Action Agenda into six axes. This was a bid to impose some structure on the mushrooming efforts between governments, UN agencies, cities, businesses and civil society to set targets and spur faster results on their pet issues, from methane emissions to health and adaptation in conflict zones. COP30 alone saw the launch of 120 “plans to accelerate solutions”.
COP30 roadmaps off the cuff
Meanwhile, as the formal negotiations drew to a close, it was clear that consensus decision-making was evolving into something a little more improvised.
With only around half of all countries on board with the idea of a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels, COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago announced his team would put one together over the coming year, along with another on how to meet a global goal to halt deforestation by 2030. Those roadmaps will be launched next week, presented and discussed at COP31, though it’s still unclear whether or how they’ll be incorporated into the formal negotiating agenda.
Some leading policy-makers don’t think that matters too much. Speaking to journalists before the Antalya summit, COP30 CEO Ana Toni and Dutch climate minister Stientje van Veldhoven said “coalitions of the willing” can move ahead without needing consensus from the COPs. This, they said, was evident this year at the first global conference on TAFF, co-chaired by van Veldhoven and attended by 60 countries.
“Consensus or no-consensus in the general COP doesn’t make a difference for the choices I have to make in my country to get my country to phase out fossil fuels,” said the Dutch minister. The Netherlands recently became one of the first to publish a national TAFF plan.
COP31 banks on flagship voluntary initiatives
This thinking has permeated the management and expected outcomes of this year’s COP too. Earlier this year, Türkiye, supported by international energy agencies, floated the idea of a voluntary goal to boost electrification to 35% of the world’s final energy consumption by 2035 – and this is now being touted as one of the main results to be expected from Antalya.
Türkiye is also championing a pledge on AI and climate, while co-host Australia is pushing to ease access to climate finance for least developed countries and small island states.
COP31 presidency announces AI pledge as UN climate chief says Big Tech ‘on thin ice’
None of these needs consensus. But with a political cover decision already in the works, as trailed by the COP presidents, they – and perhaps the fossil fuel roadmap – may find a home in the official text if language acceptable to most can be found, giving them them additional weight.
UNFCCC reform process in the shadows
Formal reform is underway too, if quietly. UN climate chief Simon Stiell is leading a review informed by ongoing consultations with a group of 15 well-respected climate policy experts, three of whom signed the open letter in 2024.
Among them is leading Swedish climate and sustainability scientist Johan Rockström who has strong ideas about how to make COPs function better, including a switch to majority voting. He told the same press briefing nothing stands in the way of this, because the rules of procedure for making decisions at COPs have never been formally agreed.
Still, to get away from the default setting of consensus would require agreement on a new system that may be impossible to achieve given the rise in bullying tactics by fossil fuel heavyweights.
Comment: The UN climate process was built for negotiation – now it must support implementation
The deliberations with the high-level policy gurus, as reflected in a summary of June’s session in Bonn, largely echo what’s already happening organically, calling for stronger partnerships and accountability both in and between the Action Agenda and negotiations. It doesn’t mention voting.
A general overview of the reform exercise says that “improving and optimizing the [UN climate] process over the medium to long term… will be critical to fostering trust, enhancing collaboration, and catalyzing increased ambition”.
In the short term, don’t hold your breath for anything concrete on reform at COP31 but watch for signs in what ends up dominating the headlines from Türkiye.
The post Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines appeared first on Climate Home News.
Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines
With the COP31 climate summit in Turkey looming, all eyes are on China to see what the country will push for in the negotiations.
At COP30 last year, China helped to secure a “dialogue” on climate-related “unilateral trade measures”, as well as a two-year “work programme” concerning climate finance.
The nation also championed south-south cooperation throughout the conference and co-led a summit on methane, alongside Brazil and the UK.
In a recent press conference, China’s environment vice-minister Li Gao noted the need to “uphold multilateralism” and send a “clear political signal” that the global community is united around climate action.