Global demand for minerals is rising fast. This is being driven by the shift to renewable energy and electric vehicles, and increasingly by the rapid growth of artificial intelligence (AI) and data centres. Minerals such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt are essential for these technologies, but extracting them often comes at a high cost to people and planet.
Amnesty International’s research, spanning more than a decade and many countries, shows that communities at the frontlines of so-called “critical minerals” extraction experience serious human rights and environmental abuses. These include health-harming pollution, forced evictions, dangerous working conditions, loss of livelihoods and violations of Indigenous Peoples’ rights to self-determination. From the Philippines to the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the USA, the pattern is clear: too often, the demand for minerals happens at the expense of human rights and the environment.
What are critical minerals?
“Critical minerals” are raw materials such as **lithium, nickel, cobalt, copper and rare earth elements. **They are considered “critical” because they are essential for modern technologies such as electric vehicle batteries, AI hardware and infrastructure, wind turbines, power grids and smartphones.
Governments and companies often describe these minerals as “critical” to justify continued extraction of natural resources in the name of green energy, technological progress, defence, and national security. The climate crisis indeed requires urgent action. But while these minerals play an important role in the urgent transition to renewable energy, increased extraction carries serious risks for human rights and the environment. A rights-respecting transition must therefore also focus on reducing overall demand for new mining, by measures such as reducing car dependence, increasing energy efficiency, decreasing electric vehicle battery sizes and maximizing battery recycling and reuse.
Why is demand for these minerals growing so quickly?** **
The energy transition is the biggest driver of demand. Electric vehicles and renewable energy systems, particularly lithium-ion batteries, rely on large amounts of minerals. According to the International Energy Agency, demand for minerals used in batteries is expected to increase dramatically over the coming decades.
At the same time, the rapid expansion of AI and data centres is adding new pressure. Data centres need constant, reliable electricity and often rely on huge back-up systems, including batteries and on-site power generation. In many contexts, this electricity demand is being met through carbon-intensive forms of energy, including coal and liquified natural gas. AI also depends on advanced computer chips, which require mineral-intensive semiconductor manufacturing.
Geopolitical competition and escalating military conflicts mean that for some governments, mineral security has evolved from an economic strategy to a matter of national security. This approach is increasingly leading states to deregulate and fast-track mining projects, at the expense of human rights and environmental protections.
Why does Amnesty link the extraction of these minerals to human rights?
Extracting minerals often damages land, water, health and livelihoods, especially where regulatory safeguards are weak or poorly enforced. For Indigenous Peoples and other land-dependent groups, mining can threaten their cultural survival. The right of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination, including the right to decide what happens on their lands, is frequently violated by host governments to allow mining projects to proceed.
Amnesty strongly supports climate action and the urgent shift to renewable energy, but we are concerned about how minerals are being obtained, who bears the costs, and the governmental preference for maximizing extraction rather than investing in efficiency. A just energy transition must respect human rights and the environment.
**Why are Indigenous Peoples and marginalized groups disproportionately affected by ****mining? **
Many mineral-rich areas overlap with lands and territories of Indigenous Peoples and marginalized communities. More than half of the minerals required for the energy transition are located on or near the lands of Indigenous Peoples and peasant communities.
Today’s extractive systems, whether for critical minerals or for fossil fuels, reflect colonial patterns of land dispossession and wealth extraction, where resources are removed with minimal processing before export, and economic benefits accrue elsewhere – frequently to multinational companies headquartered in high-income countries.
Similar dynamics can also be seen in large-scale renewable energy infrastructure. These projects are often imposed on Indigenous Peoples and marginalized communities, concentrating land use and environmental and human rights harms locally, while profits accumulate elsewhere.
At the same time, Indigenous Peoples often face discrimination, weak legal protections and limited access to justice, making it easier for extraction to proceed on their lands without their consent. Indigenous and other environmental human rights defenders who challenge these projects frequently face stigma, criminalization and physical insecurity. These harms reflect long-standing patterns of dispossession seen across large-scale resource extraction.
Case Study: USA’s lithium boom** **
In the USA, the government is fast-tracking so-called critical mineral projects at the expense of environmental and human rights protections. In Nevada, huge lithium mines are advancing without the free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) of affected Indigenous Peoples. These projects pose significant risks to their lands, water sources, health, culture and the environment.
“The mine is going to destroy our homelands, our way of living… we and generations of our descendants are being sacrificed for green energy – why does it have to be to the detriment of Indigenous People? We are people, we matter, just as much as anybody else.”
Shelley Harjo, member of the Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribe
What are ‘sacrifice zones’ and environmental racism?
Extractive, land-intensive projects such as mining can create pollution hotspots with serious health impacts. UN experts describe such hotspots as “ sacrifice zones”. When racialized people are disproportionately exposed to pollution, environmental degradation and
climate changebecause of laws, policies or practices – intentionally or not – this is known as environmental racism. Many sacrifice zones can be more accurately described as “racial sacrifice zones”, as these harms are disproportionately concentrated in neighbourhoods, regions and countries populated by racialized people and other marginalized communities.
Case Study: Nickel mining in the Philippines** **
The Philippines is the world’s largest exporter of nickel. Amnesty has documented FPIC violations affecting Indigenous Peoples, and serious environmental damage to land and water. Rural communities and Indigenous Peoples have seen their rights to water, health and livelihoods harmed, while people who speak out against mining face intimidation and other risks.
“Nickel mining is a curse on our community. We depend a lot on the mountains for our lives, our water and traditional medicines. Now they are being destroyed.”
Romeo Melnocan, member of the Pala’wan Indigenous People
How are AI data centres connected to mineral supply chains?
AI infrastructure relies on energy grids, semiconductor chips, large-scale cooling systems and backup power systems, which can include batteries. These systems require large amounts of minerals, energy and water. As AI technologies and large-scale data centres expand rapidly around the world, they drive increasing demands not only for minerals such lithium, cobalt, copper and rare earth elements, but also for energy and water used to power and cool these facilities. These demands place additional pressure on land, ecosystems and nearby communities.
AI infrastructure also has a significant climate footprint. Data centres and semi-conductor manufacturing both consume vast amounts of electricity, often increasing demand for new generation and grid expansion, which can increase greenhouse gas emissions. For example, in 2025 Google reported a 51% increase in its greenhouse gas emissions since 2019, largely driven by increased electricity use in data centres and higher supply chain emissions.
From mineral extraction to high-intensity water and energy use in semiconductor manufacturing and large-scale data centres, the physical infrastructure behind AI reproduces many of the same human rights and environmental risks seen across the energy transition. AI infrastructure is built on systems that generate a number of environmental and human rights risks, including:
Massive water use
Increased drought and water stress in already affected regions
Increased air pollution from coal and gas-powered electricity generation
Electricity inequality(when rising demand puts pressure on energy grids and can divert energy away from local communities, contributing to outages, blackouts and rising costs)
Competition for land and resources, including agricultural land uses
Added heat burdens in already hot regions, where large-scale data centres and cooling systems can contribute to localized warming
Hazardous chemical byproducts and wastes from semiconductor manufacturing that can cause air and water pollution
Health harms for workers and communities, including from air and water pollution, noise pollution, heat stress, water scarcity and potential exposure to toxic substances
Case Study: Mining in the Democratic Republic of the C****ongo
Amnesty has documented serious abuses linked to mining for cobalt and copper in the Democratic Republic of Congo, from forced evictions of communities living near industrial mining sites to child labour and hazardous working conditions for artisanal miners.
“(It was) around 8:30 in the morning, I was surprised by children who told me: ‘Dad, come see, they are burning houses.”
Ernest Miji, Mukumbi’s neighbourhood chief
Why are environmental and Indigenous defenders often targeted?
People who defend land, water and the environment often stand in the way of mining and other extractive projects moving forward. By demanding consent or exposing harm, they can delay approvals and challenge powerful interests. As a result, industry and government allies seek to silence and discredit defenders, using measures such as pushing stigmatizing narratives and passing restrictive laws. Indigenous defenders, who often live in territories rich in natural resources, face heightened risks of threats, repression and violence from corporate actors, paramilitary groups and state police or militaries.
One study found that Indigenous Peoples are affected in at least 34% of all documented environmental conflicts worldwide, despite comprising only 6.2% of the world’s population. Mining was identified as the largest driver of these conflicts, followed by fossil fuels, dams, and the agriculture, forestry, fisheries and livestock sector.
Case study: Energy transition projects in Finland, Norway and Sweden
In Finland, Norway and Sweden, Amnesty has investigated energy transition and extractive projects affecting Sámi Peoples’ lands. These projects are proceeding without FPIC, violating Sámi Peoples’ rights to self-determination and threatening their culture and livelihoods.
“We are dependent on life in these lands, and if I am going to be able to pass on my culture to my children, then I will do it here.”
Marie Persson Njajta, founder of Stop Rönnbäck Nickel Mining Project in Ume River
What is Amnesty calling on governments and companies to do?
**A just energy transition must respect human rights. **Governments must protect rights by requiring companies to respect human rights and the environment. They must ensure meaningful community participation (including FPIC of Indigenous Peoples). Governments must also investigate corporate human rights abuses and environmental harm which may also amount to crimes, hold companies and business leaders involved in those abuses to account, and ensure access to remedy for those who have been harmed.
Companies must make sure that their operations and business relationships do not harm human rights or the environment. They must engage with affected communities in good faith and enable meaningful participation in decision-making. Where Indigenous Peoples are affected, they should not proceed with projects where consent has not been obtained.
What can you do?** **
You can** support a just energy transition that refuses to sacrifice people, the environment and the climate for corporate profit. **
Promote the to push governments and companies to prioritize a rights-respecting transition; advocate for laws and regulation that would operationalize these principlesPowering Change Principles
See Amnesty International’sEnergy Transitionpage: for more resources and case studies.
Call for stronger corporate accountability laws: urge your government to introduce and enforce laws that require companies to prevent harm and be held accountable when abuses occur across their supply chains and business relationships; demand strong conflict of interest and transparency regulations that would ensure corporations are not able to lobby for laws that would undermine human rights
Demand your government aligns its energy transition goals with its human rights obligations in practice, including protecting Indigenous Peoples’ rights and ensuring FPIC
Stand with environmental and Indigenous human rights defenders to support those on the frontlines resisting harmful projects
Say no to the use of public money to support projects, including mines, AI data centres and energy infrastructure, that will harm human rights
Learn more and take our human rights courses on theenergy transitionandclimate change and human rights