Spring 2026

Building the Energy Transition Without Undermining Nature

By Tim Verslycke, Ph.D., and Sarah M. Zahn, M.S.

Critical mineral mining can potentially affect ecosystems through land-use change and habitat loss, waste generation, dust emissions, and impacts to surface water and groundwater.  As demand for critical minerals accelerates to support the renewable energy transition (e.g., energy storage, solar and wind power, electric vehicles), concerns over ecological impacts are increasing – especially where climate change and loss of biodiversity may be amplifying mining-related impacts.  These concerns have stimulated research on the ecological impacts of critical mineral mining, resulting in an increased focus of the mining industry on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles to prevent and manage ecological impacts.

One such area of research is identifying key knowledge gaps, as information on environmental occurrence and distribution, mobility, bioavailability, and ecological toxicity remains limited for many critical minerals.  For example, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Mineral Resources Program is addressing these information gaps through laboratory-based studies, modeling, and targeted field studies (USGS, 2026).  In 2024, USGS scientists published a prioritization approach for environmental research on critical minerals based on geochemical, biological, and toxicological considerations (White et al., 2024).  To illustrate the approach, they identified the critical mineral indium as a higher research priority than zinc because of the data gap difference between the two minerals.  Generating high-quality bioavailability, bioaccumulation, and ecotoxicity data for critical minerals is essential to support robust ecological risk assessments for new and existing mining projects.

It has been estimated that at least 16 percent of the world’s land-based critical mineral mines, deposits, and districts are located in areas facing high water stress.”

Mining can be associated with habitat loss and degradation, increasing pressure on biodiversity.  As a result, research is focusing increasingly on mapping mining-related threats and identifying where risks overlap with high-value conservation targets, such as key biodiversity areas (KBAs).  KBAs are sites that contribute significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity and are designated using quantitative thresholds applied consistently across regions (IUCN, 2016).  Spatial overlap of KBAs (see Figure 1) with global mining operations highlights why biodiversity considerations need to be integrated into decisions about expanding mineral extraction (WWF, 2025).  For new mining projects, cumulative biodiversity impact assessments at larger scales have been recommended (e.g., watershed or ecoregion) (National Wildlife Federation, 2026; Sonter et al., 2020).  In addition, researchers emphasize applying the mitigation hierarchy framework (Arlidge et al., 2018), discussed later in this article, that prioritizes avoiding impacts where feasible.

Number of Operating Mines That Overlap with KBAs, by Ecoregion, Across All Projects

Ecological impacts from critical mineral mining may be amplified by climate change and loss of biodiversity driven by non-mining related activities.  Habitat loss, whether caused by mining or other land-use changes, can contribute to increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide, reinforcing climate pressures that affect critical species and biodiversity.  Further, water-related impacts need to be evaluated in conjunction with climate change impacts (e.g., shifting precipitation patterns, more frequent droughts).  It has been estimated that at least 16 percent of the world’s land-based critical mineral mines, deposits, and districts are located in areas facing high water stress (see Figure 2) (Lakshman, 2024).  The increase in water demand from these mining projects can further strain local water supplies that plants and wildlife depend on.  Overall, careful strategic planning is needed to ensure that mining-related threats to ecological resources associated with renewable energy production do not surpass the threats averted through climate change mitigation and efforts to slow fossil fuel extraction and use (Sonter et al., 2020).

Critical Mineral Mines, Deposits, and Districts Located in Water-Stressed Areas

Moreover, industry practices are evolving in ways that can reduce critical mineral mining-related impacts.  Globally, mining companies are adopting increasingly complex and stringent ESG programs that explicitly consider impacts from emissions, water stress, and biodiversity loss.  Technological developments and lower-impact mining techniques are central to this shift because they can reduce ecological impacts while maintaining economic viability.  For example, dust deposition effects on plants and wildlife can be reduced through engineering controls, operational practices, and fugitive dust management.  Mitigation and management of mining-influenced water can occur through avoidance, natural attenuation, active or passive treatment, or in situ treatment (Wolkersdorfer and Mugova, 2022).  More broadly, adoption of the four-step mitigation hierarchy framework for nature conservation – avoid, minimize, restore, and offset – provides a structured decision framework that prioritizes actions that prevent ecological impacts before considering higher-uncertainty measures (Arlidge et al., 2018).  Avoidance may include nature-positive spatial planning that excludes development in KBAs and prevents harm to listed species (Arlidge et al., 2018).  Minimization can be supported by continuous monitoring of ecological integrity beyond the mine footprint, comparisons to reference sites, and targeted field studies that can inform operational decisions before and during development (Arlidge et al., 2018; Victurine et al., 2024).  Restoration and rewilding approaches can deliver biodiversity gains and support species recovery (Victurine et al., 2024).  Generally, offsetting is the least preferred and, typically, is considered only when significant residual impacts remain and are compensated elsewhere (Arlidge et al., 2018).

Mining for critical minerals is expected to expand rapidly as the renewable energy transition accelerates.  Closing the most consequential data gaps – especially those related to bioavailability, bioaccumulation, and ecological toxicity – should be a shared priority for all stakeholders, so that expansion can proceed in an ecologically sustainable manner.  With deliberate planning and ESG commitments, the mining sector can proactively reduce risks to water resources, habitat, and biodiversity while meeting critical supply goals.