While Europe often prides itself on having some of the highest environmental and social standards globally, its mining waste regulations do not reflect this reputation, according to a recent legal analysis commissioned by the European NGO Transport & Environment (T&E). As the continent looks to open new mines to meet the 10% mining target set by the Critical Raw Materials Act, T&E evaluated whether current regulations are adequate for this purpose.
Despite Europe’s high environmental standards being cited as a safeguard against the detrimental impacts of mining activities, including those involving critical raw materials like lithium, T&E’s analysis reveals significant gaps. Europe’s mining sector has been in decline for decades, leading to outdated regulations that, in some cases, are less stringent than those in countries such as Brazil and China.
In light of a Memorandum of Understanding on sustainable raw materials signed between Serbia and the EU, Maroš Šefčovič, Vice President of the European Commission, had previously asserted that the EU boasts the most comprehensive and stringent regulatory framework for sustainable development and environmental protection globally.
One of the key projects under scrutiny is Rio Tinto’s Jadar lithium project. However, T&E’s commissioned legal analysis of the 2006 EU Extractive Waste Directive (EWD), conducted by the Netherlands-based environmental law firm Hörchner Advocaten, has identified several shortcomings.
The analysis highlights the following issues with the EWD:
- Inadequate technology standards: The directive does not mandate the adoption of the safest and most advanced mining waste technologies.
- Insufficient environmental and community protection: Current provisions do not offer adequate protection for the environment or local communities affected by mining activities.
- Mine closure risks: There are concerns about the safety of mine closures, with potential risks of disaster if proper protocols are not followed.
- Unclear responsibilities and timelines: The directive lacks clarity regarding responsibilities in the event of accidents or damage and does not specify the required strength or frequency of prevention and monitoring plans.
T&E warns of a significant risk of fragmentation in the directive’s implementation, with many critical provisions left ambiguous and subject to the discretion of individual member states. The NGO emphasizes the need for clearer guidelines on accountability and preventative measures.
In response to these findings, T&E has called for a revision of the EWD and provided recommendations to address these gaps and ensure that Europe’s mining waste regulations meet the standards expected for new mining projects.
