Tag Archive for: Energy transition

,

Irresponsible Mining: One Month After the Glacier Law Reform

The reform to the Glacier Law approved on April 7 did more than weaken a law. It set a troubling precedent: environmental protection standards can be rolled back when they come into conflict with large-scale economic interests. This not only compromises the present, but also undermines the State’s ability to guarantee rights in the future, putting new generations at risk.

From a regulatory perspective, mining activities operate within a framework that combines outdated historical legislation —such as the Mining Code of 1885— with investment promotion regimes —such as Law 24,196— and new economic incentive mechanisms like the Large Investment Incentive Regime (RIGI).

Combined with the weakening of political, regulatory, and institutional environmental protection tools, this creates a scenario that prioritizes attracting investment over protecting common goods and fundamental rights.

The Last Straw

This reform represents a substantial alteration to Argentina’s current environmental protection system, particularly regarding the protection of water as a strategic legal asset.

The existing framework, based on scientific and technical standards and the precautionary principle, had made it possible to establish reasonable common limits on extractive activities in highly fragile ecosystems.

To better understand what is at stake, it is important to recognize that large-scale metal mining, as it currently operates in the country, has a structural dependence on water resources. Large-scale mining depends on water in order to exist and expand. The communities living in these areas do as well. And water is far from an infinite resource.

According to information disclosed in environmental assessment instruments, projects such as Alumbrera in the province of Catamarca —now entering a new reopening phase with estimated extraction levels lower than during its peak years— project water consumption between 3 and 5 million liters per day in their upcoming stages.

If we calculate an —already excessive— consumption of 150 liters of drinking water per person per day, then even in the best-case scenario this project would consume, every single day, the amount of water needed by the entire population of towns such as Agua de Oro in Córdoba, Lago Puelo in Chubut, or Tafí Viejo in Tucumán.

Meanwhile, ongoing operations such as Veladero report water consumption levels close to 9 million liters per day — three times that amount.

Moreover, these levels of use must be analyzed in light of their location: arid or semi-arid regions where water is scarce and strategically critical.

This, and nothing else, explains why disputes over water have existed for decades. Examples include Famatina, Esquel, Andalgalá, Chubut, and Mendoza. Local communities, aware of the importance of this resource for both present survival and future development, organize, educate themselves, and sustain resistance strategies over many years. Because water is essential not only for the survival of communities, but also for sustaining regional microeconomies.

These environmental defenders protect not only water, but also a way of life and a development model that successive governments continue to ignore. Anyone reading this would do the same in their place, because this is about defending their own survival and that of the place where they live.

As resistance grows stronger, the social license required for mining development becomes an increasingly difficult aspiration for companies to achieve.

Irresponsible Mining

Water, essential for the lives of communities, is being made available to the mining agenda promoted by the national government and several provincial governments, which present it as the only development alternative for especially arid regions of the country.

Those defending the reform promise responsible mining and legal certainty for corporations. But what kind of “responsible mining” are we talking about? Which companies are behind this reform?

As is already well known, this reform is the result of mining lobbying by multinational corporations that dominate the sector, including Glencore, Barrick, BHP, and First Quantum Minerals.

Glencore, linked to projects such as MARA in Catamarca and El Pachón in the province of San Juan —and backed by the hedge fund BlackRock— has been criminally convicted for corruption in jurisdictions such as the United States and the United Kingdom. The company also faces multiple proceedings over socio-environmental impacts not only in Argentina but in different parts of the world, including the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Philippines, and Peru. These allegations range from water contamination to the killing of environmental defenders.

Barrick Gold, for its part, has faced allegations related to human rights and environmental violations, including reports of sexual violence in Papua New Guinea and deaths and violent repression in Tanzania. In 2018, the company received a ruling that included the permanent closure of the Pascua Lama project in Chile after serious breaches involving water resource protection and glacier environments were confirmed.

Likewise, BHP, involved in the development of the Vicuña project, has faced allegations of violations of Indigenous rights and labor rights abuses. The company was responsible for the collapse of the Samarco tailings dam in Brazil in 2015, considered one of the most significant environmental disasters in the region and currently the subject of major international litigation.

Similarly, First Quantum Minerals, promoter of the Taca Taca project in Salta, was involved in a judicial process in Panama that culminated in 2023 when that country’s Supreme Court declared the mining contract unconstitutional for violating multiple constitutional provisions, including environmental protection principles and fundamental rights.

These records cannot be treated as isolated incidents. They are part of a global pattern in which extractive expansion often occurs at the expense of fragile ecosystems, strategic water sources, and community rights.

Faced with companies that dominate the global industry, exert enormous pressure, and relentlessly pursue natural resources, it is impossible to believe that provinces already overwhelmed by economic crisis can effectively protect glaciers, water resources, or build truly sustainable development.

Legal Uncertainty

For these reasons, the debate surrounding the Glacier Law reform was never merely a technical or sector-specific discussion.

This became evident in the massive social mobilization preceding the legislative debate and in the more than 100,000 people registered for the Public Hearing — a hearing that failed to comply with existing regulations and minimum democratic standards.

Furthermore, the reform violated both the principle of progressivity and the precautionary principle, constituting a clearly unconstitutional regression that is likely to trigger dozens of legal actions, ultimately undermining the promised “legal certainty.”

In light of these precedents, claiming that weakening the Glacier Law will pave the way for “responsible” mining is highly questionable. Without strict environmental standards, effective oversight, and genuine community participation, risks do not decrease — they increase.

Continuing to defend the Glacier Law is not opposing development. It is affirming that development cannot be built at the expense of water, territories, and communities.

Author: María Laura Carrizo, Fundeps
Contact: lauracarrizo@fundeps.org

,

Argentina and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank: Characteristics of the First Loan Approved in the Country

This report, prepared by FARN, Fundeps, and Fundación CAUCE, analyzes the first financing approved by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) in Argentina and its socio-environmental implications. Drawing on the case of the wind power project in Tierra del Fuego, the document is key to understanding the challenges of international financing for the energy transition, as well as the importance of ensuring transparency, citizen participation, and adequate environmental standards.

Descargar Documento / Download File

Communities and civil society advocate to influence the BID meeting in Chile

At the BID’s 2025 Annual Meetings in Chile, organizations and communities affected by projects financed by the institution are demanding greater transparency, participation, and respect for human rights and the environment, in response to the impacts of megaprojects in the region.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

Chile is hosting the sixty-fifth Annual Meeting of the Boards of Governors of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and IDB Invest. The event began on March 20 in Punta Arenas, Magallanes, as part of the Investment Forum and the meeting of authorities, and continues in Santiago until March 30. It brings together the Ministers of Economy, Treasury, and Finance of the Bank’s 48 member countries, who define the main financing policies and strategies for the region.

In this context, communities affected by IDB-financed projects and civil society organizations are organizing to present our demands and highlight the resistance to the development model promoted by the institution.

The main demands include:

  • Full and understandable access to information about projects and their impacts
  • Effective participation of affected communities in decision-making
  • Protection of human rights and nature defenders to avoid retaliation
  • Financing aligned with climate justice and human rights
  • Guaranteeing the prevention, mitigation, and reparation of harm caused by their investments, through policies or frameworks for remediation and responsible exit

For years, resistance networks have denounced the harmful effects of projects financed by the BID and other Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs). Wind farms, lithium and copper mines, and mega-infrastructure projects have transformed ecosystems and ways of life without consultation or consent from affected communities. In Punta Arenas, the site of pre-Annual Meetings activities, opposition is growing to green hydrogen mega-projects, promoted without real public debate or consideration of Indigenous and local rights.

The BID Working Group, a network of civil society organizations of which we are a part, has been key in opening up advocacy spaces within the Annual Meetings. Thanks to their pressure, the Bank committed to reintroducing civil society participation in 2023, having eliminated it in 2013. The 2025 edition in Chile is a crucial opportunity to strengthen coordination among affected communities and reinforce advocacy strategies to challenge the BID’s role in the region.

The Voice of Communities and Organizations

  • On a Just Energy Transition and the Protection of Indigenous Peoples and the Environment:

“They need to study the places where they promote projects and who lives there. They should take the time to understand local customs and ways of life. It is not right for them to arrive in a place and disrupt communities that are used to living in peace, caring for and protecting nature and biodiversity.” — Spokesperson for the Chango People, Antofagasta (requested anonymity)

  • On the IDB’s Access to Information Policy:

“The BID must ensure effective and timely access to information about the projects it finances so that affected communities and populations can fully understand the status of a given project and participate in decision-making in an informed manner.” — Gonzalo Roza, Coordinator of the Global Governance Area, FUNDEPS (Argentina)

  • On the Protection of Civic Space:

“Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) have a responsibility to respect human rights in their operations and to use their influence to ensure that their clients—governments and companies—create and maintain an enabling and safe environment for the exercise and defense of those rights. The BID Group must guarantee the effective implementation of its policies and improve its practices to fulfill this responsibility, ensuring they are systematically enforced.” — Suhayla Bazbaz, Director, Community Cohesion and Social Innovation–CCIS (Mexico)

  • On Remedy and Responsible Exit:

“Repairing the harm caused by the projects it finances must be a priority for the BID Group. It is time for the Bank to be at the forefront of best practices and policies, following the example of other development banks. The International Finance Corporation (the private sector arm of the World Bank) has already published its Responsible Exit Principles and is about to approve the Remedy Framework—two instruments aimed at preventing, mitigating, and repairing the harm caused by its investments. Like any financial institution, the IDB has the responsibility to remedy the harm inflicted on communities and the planet.” — Luisa Gómez, Senior Attorney, Center for International Environmental Law–CIEL (United States)

 

Agenda for Resistance and Advocacy in Chile

Civil society organizations and affected communities have outlined an action plan that includes:

  • Workshops and meetings in Santiago and Punta Arenas with local organizations, affected communities, and strategic allies to analyze the IDB’s impact on the energy transition and development financing.

  • A public discussion on the role of development banks in a just energy transition, as well as Chile’s case in the green hydrogen and mining industries.

  • Advocacy activities during the Annual Meetings aimed at creating spaces for dialogue with BID representatives and other key stakeholders.

  • Engagement with local and international networks to strengthen resistance strategies and globally highlight the impacts of projects promoted by the Bank.

The fight of communities against extractivist projects promoted by the BID is not new, but in a context where financing for strategic sectors such as energy and mining is expanding, amplifying our voices and demanding a just energy transition is more urgent than ever—one that prioritizes community rights and territorial protection.

Contact
Gonzalo Roza, gon.roza@fundeps.org

,

Necessary debates: Fundeps held a discussion on the Energy Transition in Argentina

The event organized by Fundeps (Foundation for the Development of Sustainable Policies), CAUCE Foundation (Environmental Culture – Ecological Cause), FARN (Environment and Natural Resources Foundation) and Siglo 21 University, held on November 11, was a meeting of analysis and debate on the main challenges facing Argentina in the context of the global energy transition.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

The event, which was held in a discussion format, was organized into thematic panels, one of which was: “The role of China, multilateral banking and transnational corporations in the Argentine energy transition” with the participation of Dr. Virginia Busilli and Lic. Maitén Fuma (UCC), Valeria Enderle (CAUCE Foundation), Francisco Zanichelli (UNC) and Carolina Juaneda (Bank Information Center), moderated by Matías Cena Trebucq (FARN). The second panel, “The challenges of lithium exploitation in Argentina in a context of investment incentives and environmental deregulation”, was hosted by Edgardo Litvinoff (Red RUIDO), María Laura Carrizo Morales (Fundeps), Leandro Gómez (FARN), Federico Trebucq (UES21, CONICET), moderated by Paula Hernández (Fundeps).

On this occasion, Fundeps also presented the report “The exploitation of lithium in the high Andean salt flats: a socio-environmental analysis based on the Argentine case”, which aims to comprehensively address the different conceptual, legislative and discursive perspectives and components that intervene in this context of global energy transition. It also addresses the consequent acceleration in the demand for lithium in our country and region for an informed discussion.

Not every energy transition is a fair energy transition

The race to control the supply chain of so-called critical minerals, or minerals for the energy transition, opens a new chapter in the global geopolitical dispute. Countries in North America, Europe, and Asia, particularly China, are competing not only to dominate the technologies of the final products, but also for access to the deposits of these minerals. At the same time, it is evident that the search for developing “green solutions” is the politically correct narrative today, but is there really progress towards a fair energy transition in social and environmental terms? What roles do the global south and the global north adopt in this new “green” dynamic? What place do communities have in this process? These were some of the questions addressed in the discussion.

Argentina is today the world’s fourth largest producer of lithium and has approximately 50 projects in different phases. With the focus on generating foreign currency required to repay the external debt, provincial and national governments prioritize these investments without carrying out the corresponding studies to determine whether the operations can be carried out without causing irreversible damage to the environment and the communities that have lived there for hundreds of years. The loss of biodiversity, ways of life, knowledge and Andean cultures not only turns these territories into sacrifice zones for the hyper-consumerist model of the Global North, which does not seek to reduce its demand for minerals and nature, but also reinforces existing inequalities and blocks the possibility of thinking about a paradigm shift that places the care of the lives of people and ecosystems at the center, and that teaches us to live within planetary limits.

Undoubtedly, the consequences of the increased demand for lithium extraction and production in this “green race” generate debates of a social, environmental, legal, discursive and ideological nature, as the different meanings and objectives of the different actors involved come into dispute. During the more than two hours that the discussion lasted, experts and representatives of civil society, academia and journalists from Córdoba and other provinces debated and exchanged their opinions on the impact of lithium mining on the environment, the economy and local communities, making it clear that not every energy transition is a fair energy transition and that the extractivist logic reproduces the historical roles of the countries of the Global North and South and also replicates extractivist practices and human rights violations of local and indigenous communities, while reinforcing the vicious cycle of continuing to exploit nature.

 

More Information

 

Contact

Gonzalo Roza, gon.roza@fundeps.org

, , ,

Lithium and Transparency in Argentina

Throughout this report we will discuss, first of all, a series of data on the current situation of Argentina in relation to lithium production that places it in a central role within the world concert. Then we will focus on the mining governance system, stating the laws that configure it, its main elements and those points that merit further analysis. Subsequently, we will address, from some indicators suggested by the Standard, the two projects that are in the lithium production stage in Argentina: the Fénix Project in the Hombre Muerto salt flat and Sales de Jujuy in the Olaroz-Cauchari salt flat. In particular, regarding whether or not to publicize their contracts, as a fundamental link in terms of publicity and transparency in the development of these projects.

Descargar Documento / Download File